ATFL Eastern: (2) Narigo vs. (7) MisterHibachi

[CaliBullsFan]

With Bobby Jones on Melo and Cooper on Wade I think Hibachi will have a lot of trouble scoring. You can also conserve MJ on D by putting him on Marion. Wallace isn't going to keep Moses of the boards but its about as close as you are going to get.

Advantage Narigo.

[Narigo]

I will most likely make a post about my strategy tomorrow night or Friday.

[Quotatious]

Hibachi's team is more talented, he has more guys who were considered superstars in their primes, and the fit between them is also rather decent...That being said, Narigo's group fits extremely well together, and he has a lot of role players who would complement the stars (mainly MJ, Marques and Sikma) very well, while also being able to slow down some of the opponent's best players (Hinrich on Deron, Cooper on Wade/Melo, Jones on LMA and Big Ben on Moses - these are very nice matchups from Narigo's perspective). That said, guys like Wade, Melo and Moses were still able to get their fair share of points, no matter what kind of defense you put on them...If I were Mr. Hibachi, I'd give Moses and Wade the clear-cut leadership role here, in terms of FGA, because they're the most dependable and consistent offensive performers on his team. With so many great defenders on the opposing team, you have to establish two strong scoring threats pretty much from the tip off. Sikma, while a pretty good man defender, would have problems with Moses' physicality and ferocious will to overwhelm his opponent inside, and I could see Sikma getting into foul trouble pretty quickly in the first quarter. Hibachi would be smart to pound the ball to Moses in a first few possessions and try to draw some fouls.
The thing is, Narigo would still have Ben Wallace off the bench, who could also limit Moses' efficiency.

Just as ardee said, it's really insanely close, and honestly I don't know who I'd go with. I guess we have to wait to see Narigo's gameplan. I think him and Sagittaron have built really nice teams around the two greatest perimeter players ever - Jordan and Magic, and they're really the underdogs here, but one that really has a chance to upset more talented teams.
Hibachi has a really great superstar tandem with Moses and Wade tho, so it's also hard to go against him. This matchup SCREAMS 7 game series to me.

[O_6]

I spent too much time on my matchup to really look at this, but one thing I find interesting is the Melo/Marion/Moses dynamic on defense.

I think Marion/Melo is actually a fantastic fit together, I actually love it. It's like a modern day version of Bird/McHale (not comparing them as players, just the way they were used) where McHale's quickness allowed him to basically guard the tougher cover whether it was the PF or the SF. Marion gives Melo that same option. Marion/LeBron/Rodman are probably the most versatile defenders of the past 35 years, and with all due respect to LeBron only Marion/Rodman could legitimately guard 1-5.

But in a league like this where every single player is very good, it's harder to "hide" a guy on defense. If you switch Marion onto a SF, Melo/Moses as the two interior defenders on the team could spell trouble. Especially against the opposing team that just so happens to have Michael Jordan. Your perimeter D would be need to shut down MJ before he could attack the paint. But it's tough for perimeter defenders to totally shut a guy down in today's league.

But that being said, even if Jordan has an epic 35/7/7 on 60% TS type of series I could see MisterHibachi still winning this series if Wade plays well enough. I'm not gonna vote yet but this is an intriguing series.

Ben Wallace vs. Moses Malone is an individual matchup I'd pay to see. I know Big Ben is a better help defender than man defender, but just watching those two bang bodies in the post fighting for boards and position would be classic.

[Laimbeer]

Ben Wallace vs. Moses Malone is an individual matchup I'd pay to see. I know Big Ben is a better help defender than man defender, but just watching those two bang bodies in the post fighting for boards and position would be classic.

Love Ben, but he isn't good against big, physical centers. He had big problems with Shaq. Moses isn't Shaq, but same concept. He's not very big and his greatness on defense is largely as a help defender. Sikma also doesn't strike me as a guy that would be particularly effective against a really physical center. Moses is trouble for that team.

[MisterHibachi]

If I were Mr. Hibachi, I'd give Moses and Wade the clear-cut leadership role here, in terms of FGA, because they're the most dependable and consistent offensive performers on his team. With so many great defenders on the opposing team, you have to establish two strong scoring threats pretty much from the tip off. Sikma, while a pretty good man defender, would have problems with Moses' physicality and ferocious will to overwhelm his opponent inside, and I could see Sikma getting into foul trouble pretty quickly in the first quarter. Hibachi would be smart to pound the ball to Moses in a first few possessions and try to draw some fouls.
The thing is, Narigo would still have Ben Wallace off the bench, who could also limit Moses' efficiency.

I did do that. Wade is 1st option, Moses 2nd. And Ben coming into the game only helps me I feel, because it'll kill Narigo's offensive spacing. But anyway, I think I'll stop commenting now until Narigo puts his strategy forward lol

[Texas Chuck]

Hate the plan to put Wade on Mike primarily. Hate it hate it hate it. I think Wade absolutely has to be the number 1 offensive weapon and no way he can do that and guard Mike and do it to the level needed to win this series. Beyond that, Mike is going to take it personally, as only he can, that Wade is guarding him while also being the main scorer while also playing SG. We all know how Mike works. I have all the respect in the world for Wade, but he isnt Mike and I dont want the game to be all about who wins that matchup because Mike will win it essentially every time. Wade is great in the PS. Jordan is Legend.

Would much rather see Marion(or Iggy) start. I'd personally pull Melo for reasons Ill detail in a moment, but you could pull Deron and let Wade be the primary ball-handler(in this case Id be more likely to put Iggy instead of Marion). I dont want Wade guarding Mike except in small stretches. Both Marion and Iggy would be happy to guard him and not worry a lick about touches at the other end. You can keep them in and out and fresh to guard Mike. Everything needs to be about how to deal with Mike or you are in trouble. Against most guys you can let them get theirs and stop everyone else, but this is Michael Freaking Jordan. You have to make him work.

And I hate the idea of using Melo as primarily a spot-up shooter. If you are doing that you could have drafted any number of guys who could do that better plus bring something more to the table in other areas. Seems like the best use of him is to limit his minutes but when he's on the court use him at what he does best--let him score. Go-to guy on the 2nd unit seems perfect for him.

I just think Narigo did a really good job of building a strong team around Mike. I know a lot of people are down on the lack of sexy names on his team as a result of picking at the end of rounds 2-4, but I like his choices and think the team fits well together. I think Hibachi has the pieces to give them a good series, but I question his strategy. Mike is obviously the difference here and I hate his plan to put such a heavy load on Wade and to give Mike any additional motivation.

Vote: Narigo and it doesnt go past 6.

[MisterHibachi]

Well, I don't think there's any match up MJ wouldn't taken offense to. He might be offended that his own match up, Wade, isn't guarding him. I can't worry about MJ's mindset, because I expect him to go god-mode every game and play as he usually does. Wade will guard him at the beginning of the game, but when Iggy comes in, he guards him. Respect your vote tho Texas Chuck, Mike is the great equalizer and I expected quite a few votes to be swung just because of his presence and that's understandable.

[therealbig3]

This is REALLY hard to judge imo. MH's team is an offensive juggernaut, but I don't think much of that team's defense, even though he has some nice wing defenders (Wade, Iggy, and Marion) and a good defensive big man (Eaton).

Narigo has Michael Jordan and a bunch of good defenders. He also has LMA, finally giving Jordan a LEGIT offensive big man. Sikma is a nice offensive big man too.

Meanwhile, MH also has Moses, who can really bully around anyone on the inside...except for maybe Ben Wallace? That would be an INSANE battle, Wallace vs Moses. But playing Wallace means you really have to play some great offensive players in order to counteract that. Jordan is a good start, but you could also roll with LMA at PF and provide a little bit of spacing to offset the Ben Wallace effect.

At a closer look though, the offense around MJ in Narigo's team is better than I thought. Yeah, Ben Wallace is an offensive negative, and Bobby Jones wasn't a good offensive player either...but he's got legit shooting on his team, especially from his big men: LMA, Sikma, Hinrich, Cooper, Korver, and Scott. And he's got great defenders. And he's got the most important factor of all: Michael Jordan.

MH's team though...damn, I don't see anyone stopping them: Deron, Melo, Wade, Marion, iggy, Richardson...that team in transition would be GOD-like, and they don't have any issues in the half court either. Like I said, the only problem is their defense...which isn't even that bad, when you have Moses, athletic wing defenders, and Eaton off the bench...the only reason why I hesitate is because of Eaton's slow foot speed, and that no wing defender in the world is capable of stopping Jordan without adequate big man help, and I think you would need more of a Kevin Garnett, mobile defensive anchor instead of Eaton for that.

I'm going to give Narigo the slight edge and go with him, but damn, MH's team really has me doubting my decision:

Vote: Narigo

[bastillon]

I won't make my vote just yet. but there are some things that need to be cleared. two things:

1) Marion is getting insanely overrated as a man defender. his strength was always help defense, being all over the place, hustling etc. as a man defender he is great against perimeter players. that is where Marion's strengths absolutely and positively end defensively. using Marion as a PF on defense is exactly the reason why Suns were getting so abused in the postseason, both on the offensive glass (Marion gets a lot of rebounds but he was never able to box out opposing PFs) and as a post defender. I have seen the likes of Lamar Odom torch Marion like crazy in the post. Lamar freaking Odom, Mr. Inconsistency (back when he was supposed to be the Lakers 2nd option). Elton Brand had a career series against Marion. Dirk Nowitzki scored a career high against Marion (50 pts in G6 of 2006 WCF). Kevin Garnet scored a career high against Marion (2006 RS - 48 pts). Duncan was doing whatever he wanted against Marion. make no mistake Marion is a HORRENDOUS post defender. Marion's overall defense is a huge positive because of how excellent he was as a help defender and perimeter defender. but putting him at the PF position is a huge coaching mistake imo, and one that can cost this team this series. Marion has showed absolutely nothing in his career to believe that he would be able to contain Aldridge in any way. it's just a mismatch. Phoenix Suns were a post defender away from winning a title. I have seen even an excellent poster like O_6 make a comment that Marion can guard 1-5. that is easily your worst post on realGM. I love reading your posts but this one is just false. no, Marion cannot hope to guard a legitimate post player. and if you don't believe me, there are plenty of Suns 2005-2007 games to prove you wrong.

2) Marques Johnson somehow got both underrated and misrepresented. underrated because he is not considered a legitimate superstar here, and he clearly was a superstar in his prime (when it counted he was playing on the level of MVP Dr J). misrepresented because he is being pictured as a point forward which he was clearly not. Paul Pressey was the first point forward in the NBA's history (that's why he is called ORIGINAL point forward). since this was already the subject of some great posts on realGM I will just quote them:

As for all the names being tosser around, I want to discuss the next 4 on my radar outside of Lanier:

Bill Walton - obviously tough to place. For me, I'm giving him a little benefit of the doubt that if I draft him, I can handle his health better than Portland and that modern medicine gives him at least another year or so (even if it isn't peak).

Ray Allen - By extension, think about my comparison earlier between Ray and Reggie when someone (Mufasa?) asked about them. It really just comes down to longevity (don't forget Ray had 07 surgery) and durability. Otherwise they are fairly close - as I said, I don't have the distance between them being too great.

Marques Johnson - The guy has an awesome peak and nice 5-year prime in which he often went toe to toe with the best forwards in the game (Erving, Bird) and hung with them or outplayed them. He's better than Moncrief IMO, and I think he's historically hurt for 2 huge reasons:

(1) the flameout
(2) Milwaukee wasn't good when he arrived. He was the key star for years as they improved...then he left as they really got good and that just let him fade into the distance, but as I've (hopefully) demonstrated there is a huge body of evidence suggesting the Bucks TEAM just got stacked in the mid 80s and it wasn't an issue of Moncrief being a better player.

I do know in 1982, I have 19 games without Marques and Mil was +3.2 without him, +6.2 with him (+3.0 net). Here's my last Marques post for a refresher:

It's time for Marques Johnson. During the RPOY, TrueLA referred to him as “the forgotten star” and I don't think anything could be more accurate. From 1978-1981, Marques was a stud. Then an injured 1982 campaign (still worth of All-Star level play) and a solid 1983 before fading away.

In his rookie year, particularly by the end of the season, Marques was already a top-12 player in the league. He joined a Bucks team that was -3.0 SRS the year before that lost Bobby Dandridge, came in and played both forward spots and averaged 19.5 ppg and 10.6 rpg as a rookie. He was a stellar, versatile defender as well. We don't have splits then, but we do know that he led the team in the postseason with 24 ppg and 12.4 rpg (!) on 60% TS (.280 WS/48). Up from 56% in the RS...and as a ridiculously low TOV player, that produced a 124 Ortg, if that's your thing.

In the playoffs against Phoenix, Johnson scored 15 consecutive 3rd Q points en route to a career-high 33 to close out Phoenix in the mini series.

Then against Denver, down 2-0 after being overwhelmed in Colorado, Johnson exploded for 35, including 10 in a 40-point 3rd quarter for Milwaukee to answer back. This, by the way, being guarded by the venerable Bobby Jones. After a big David Thompson performance (34 points) in G4, the Bucks faced elimination in Denver in G5 and Marques fueled a 4th-quarter rally to stay alive, scoring 34 points 17 rebounds on 13-22 FG to overcome a 10-point deficit in the final period. Johnson grabbed 17 boards in G6 again.

In G7, Thompson scored 37 and helped open a 57-44 lead Milwaukee never overcame. Marques had 22.

In 1979, the Bucks improved even more to +2.1 SRS, but failed to make the PS. Marques led the team in scoring (25.6 pg), shooting (55% FG, 59% TS) and rebounding again (7.6 rpg). Again, a 117 Ortg and .211 WS/48 for those interested...the Bucks jumped from 8th in Ortg to 6th in 79. They still lacked substance in the middle (although I supposed Kent Benson helped) and were outrebounded by 139, almost the exact same deficit they saw in 78.

In 1980, two key members arrived: rookie Moncrief and aging Bob Lanier. Marques led the team in rebounding again, but this time Milwaukee almost broke even on the glass. Johnson, byt this point, was also considered arguably the best all-around player in the game, providing excellent defense and nearly 4 apg.

With the additions of Lanier and Squid, the Bucks jumped to the 8th best defensive team in the league and posted a +3.7 SRS. They lost game 1 to defend champ Seattle when Dennis Johnson hit a 26-footer with 1 second left. Johnson only had 17 and 15 (7-17) in the first two games, split in OT. Then 16 and 10 (7-16, 2-4) in G3 as Mil won.

In G4, Johnson popped off for 32-7-4 (13-22, 5-7). For some perspective on normal rookie contributions, Moncrief had 6 points in the game in 21 minutes. The Seattle guards were merely too strong – combining for 27-41 shooting.

In the pivotal G5, Marques had 16-8-3 (6-16, 4-6) but the Bucks lost Dave Meyers (knee) and Junior Bridgeman (back). Harvey Catchings was already out with bone spurs, which left 8 Mil players in uniform.

In G6, shorthanded, Johnson had 22-6-3 (7-16, 8-8) to lead Milwaukee, who lost 86-85. G7 Johnson led Mil again with 22-5-5 (9-25, 4-5) but no one could stop Gus Williams and his 33 points (13-20 shooting).

In 1981, with a mature Moncrief, Mil posted a 7.1 SRS. Marques finished 6th in MVP voting (behind Gervin, Moses, Kareem, Bird and Doctor J). He averaged 20-7-5 on 58% TS and in November SI implied he is generally conceded to be the best all-around player in the game.

In 1981, five months after that SI feature, Marques arguably outplayed MVP Julius Erving in their seven game playoff battle. In game 4, he started 7-7, and finished with 35 points and seven offensive rebounds. In game 5 he was saddled with back spasms, but recovered by game 7 to pour in 36 while playing the entire game. He averaged 25-9-5 on 58% TS for the series.

In 1982, Marques held out at the start of the year. The Bucks played +2.8 MOV basketball before Marques joined, then +6.2 MOV the rest of the way (I can only find 1 of Johnson's 4 remaining DNPs). And that was with Marques having a down year statistically.

In 1983, Lanier missed more than half the year and again Milwaukee's D regressed a bit probably due to rebounding (-74 differential). Marques averaged 21-7-5 on 54% TS, second to leading scorer Moncrief.

In the PS he was prominent in overwhelming the Celtics in a first round sweep. His athleticism, along with Sidney Moncrief, created serious problems for Boston and even Larry Bird. As Moncrief said after Johnson popped off for 33 points 9 rebounds and 6 assists in the closing game, “it was Marques and Marques tonight.” In the next round against the champion 76ers, Marques again outplayed Erving and was arguably the best player in a series involving MVP Moses Malone. Johnson averaged 28-7-3 on 60.9% TS in the first two games and had 19-10-8 in the lone series win.

For the statistically inclined, Marques was 6th in Win Shares in that 78-83 stretch:
Kareem 77
Moses 76
Julius 68
Gilmore 65
Gervin 65
Marques 63

Finally, Sam Jones. This is one of the 60s players I'm very high on and have always felt he was CLEARLY the second-best Celtic of that period. He was critical to the offense and just about their only non-gunning scorer of the period. Old reports constantly talk about (a) how the team suffered without him and (b) how big/clutch he was in critical periods of offense.

After Russell, Wilt, Oscar, West, Pettit and Baylor I'm not sure who was better from the 60s. Never a super-high peak player, but 5th in my RPOY ballot in 65, 66 and 6th in 67. I would actually like to hear an anti-Jones argument from someone, because I've never really heard one. And if we look at Jones prime (62-68) using our old Win Shares method as a ballpark, he was 7th (ahead of Greer).

Lets' look at this Milwaukee narrative that ElGee is putting out --

Starting in 1976 with the trade of Kareem, core of Bridgeman/Winters/Dandridge
1976 38-44 (15th offensive/12th defensive)
1977 30-52 (12 off/21 def) Brought in Don Nelson to take over as coach

Marques Johnson drafted and instant star (Dandridge leaves after accusations he was dogging it)
1978 44-38 (8 off/ 18 def) strong improvement in Nelson's first full season (still a negative SRS)
1979 38-44 (6off/16 def) actually better SRS and ratings despite record

Sidney Moncrief drafted to add to outside core of Johnson/Bridgeman/Winters/Buckner. In ElGee's narrative shouldn't make much difference as only a part time player in a deep outside rotation; in my narrative, his defensive intensity picks up the team defense and should improve team performance
1980 49-33 (5off/8def) offense still strong, sudden jump defensively
1981 60-22 (2off/3def) Moncrief's first full time year, another defensive jump
1982 55-27 (9off/1def) Marques injured 22 games, Moncrief leads in scoring; defense best in league
1983 51-31 (10off/6def) both healthy but Dave Cowens joins team then quits halfway into year
1984 50-32 (12off/2def) last year together as they are still 1A/1B offensively (Moncrief scores .2ppg more)

Now the team deals Marques Johnson to Clippers for post-surgery Terry Cummings. In ElGee's narrative there should be a dropoff if Marques is the clear best Buck; in mine not so if Sidney is the star
1985 59-23 (6off/2def) no dropoff
1986 57-25 (4off/2def) still no dropoff

Sidney Moncrief gets injured, Milwaukee is still deep on the wings with Paul Pressey and Ricky Pierce who step up -- this hurts Moncrief's case as there is no huge dropoff as he misses 50 games
1987 50-32 (7off/4def)
1988 42-40 (11off/13def) Moncrief comes back as a much slower 25mpg player and now the dropoff
1989 49-33 (10off/6def) Moncrief still a 25mpg player though team makes strong comeback

Moncrief leaves team; replaces by former fellow Razerback DPOY Alvin Robinson
1990 44-38 (17/14)
1991 48-23 (10/11)

In ElGee's narrative, Marques comes in and leads Milwaukee to new heights -- and he does lead Milwaukee to a strong improvement, particularly offensively. In my narrative, Milwaukee has good offensive talent (even before Marques) but Sidney comes in and inspires a defensive mindset which leads them to a strong of elite defensive years while improving the already good offense to elite -- and in my defense, this goes on even when Marques leaves the team. On the other hand, Milwaukee has one good year left after Sidney's injury then declines despite adding Alvin Robertson in his place. From the yearly results, however, it looks to me like Moncrief's effect on the team is stronger than Marques's.

And, their 3 ECF finishes were in 83/84 (with both) and 86 (after Marques leaves). Looking at their big playoff wins those years . . . in 83, Marques declined to an 18PER, Sid to a 15.3 but in the playoff sweep of the Celtics, while Bird had a 20PER (not great), Sidney abused Danny Ainge defensively holding him to an 8.5PER (not a typo). In 84, it was Moncreif with the 18PER and Marques with the 15 and in their semifinal win over the Nets, Sidney abused NJ's leading scorer Otis Birdsong (1984 playoff PER of 10.7). In 86, Marques was gone and Sid was injured. But it sure looks like Moncrief's defense was a key factor in the Bucks's biggest playoff runs of the Nellie years.

What are you suggesting? That my "narrative" is false?

This is what I've written about the team in those early years:

The Bucks were a -3 SRS team when Marques was drafted. His rookie year they were ~.500.

77 primaries to 78 primaries:
Winters (2700 mp) --> Winters (2800)
Dandridge (2500) --> Marques (2800)
Bridgeman (2400) --> Bridgeman (1900)
Buckner (2100) --> Buckner (2100)
Nater (2000) --> Gianelli (2300)
Meyers (1300) --> Meyers (2400)
Restani (1100) --> English (1600)
Lloyd (1000) --> Benson (1300)

A young Alex English is in the rotation and they go from Lloyd to Benson and Nater to Gianelli. Yet by replacing a prime Bob Dandridge they improve ALMOST as much as Unseld's Bullets in his rookie year. Only Wes didn't replace an all-star level player...

In 79 the Bucks improve again to +2.2. It's basically the same team as listed above, only (1) Marques is better (2) Grunfeld has an expanded role (3) A player already nominated, English, left and (4) George Johnson plays 1200 minutes.

And just to be clear, Milwaukee by SRS post Kareem:

76 -1.6
77 -3.0
78 -0.6 (Marques' rookie year)
79 2.1
80 3.6

Then, you go on to say in "your narrative" Moncrief is the key to the "sudden" defensive jump. To be clear, they went from a 0.2 Drtg team to a -2.4 one in 1980.

79 --> 80 MP primaries
Marques 2800 mp --> Marques 2700
Winters 2600 --> Winters 2600
Benson 2100 --> Benson 1400 + Lanier 700 (trade)
Gianelli 2100 --> Meyers 2200
Bridgeman 2000 --> Bridgmeman 2300
Grunfeld 1800 --> Moncrief 1600
Buckner 1800 --> Buckner 1700

Meyers, Moncrief and the Lanier trade are notable changes. Penbeast apparently wants you to believe that in 20 mpg, rookie Sidney Moncrief was moving a team's defense 2.5 points/100. Ilardi's 6-year APM study has the following defensive players having the greatest impact on the game:

Garnett -5.0
B. Wallace -3.4
Duncan -3.2
Artest -3.2
Bogut -3.0

For Moncrief to be the primary driver of that change, in 20 mpg's off the bench, he'd have to be impacting the defense at a rate of ~-5 per 40 minutes played. Or, in 100 possessions played, single-handedly shifting the defense ~6 points.

I'll let the reader decide if that sounds plausible.

But wait, there's one more thing about the 80 team, which is Lanier's 26 games. Milwaukee gave up 104.9, down from 106.7 before the trade. If we assume pace remained the same (a fair but not sturdy assumption), that means the DRtg before and after the trade would look like:

Before: 104.2
After: 102.4

Which means before the trade, they were -1.1 defensively. So again, you decide if

in my narrative, his defensive intensity picks up the team defense and should improve team performance
1980 49-33 (5off/8def) offense still strong, sudden jump defensively

is actually what happened...

Then we jump to 1982, when Marques was indeed injured and Moncrief did indeed lead the team in those categories. Then what happened in the playoffs?

Moncrief RS averages: 20-7-5 (37 mpg) on 60% TS
Moncrief PS averages 15-5-4 (42 mpg) on 51% TS

The final part of Beast's "narrative" is Moncrief's defense and how it faded when he left, implying strong causality. But we've examined this before and I don't see how that fits the data:

In 1987, Sidney Moncrief starts 30 games.

Mil 1986 -4.5 Drtg
Mil 1987 -2.7 Drtg

86-->87 Bucks
Cummings 2700 --> Cummings 2800
Moncrief 2600 --> Moncrief 900
Pressey 2700 --> Pressey 2100
Pierce 2100 --> Pierce 2500
Lister 1800 --> Sikma 2500
Breuer 1800 --> Breuer 1500
Hodgers 1700 --> Hodges 2200

John Lucas picks up 1400 mp too. So is the Lister for old Sikma swap and injury time to Pressey possibly something that also changed the defense?

And for the record, in 1988 they regress defensively (-0.4) with Moncrief playing 56 games (1400 mp) but heavy injuries to Pierce and Hodges. And again, we can look at with/without within seasons:

1987 (43g)
with Moncrief: +4.1 (108.5 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +3.8 (104.7 ppg against)

1986 (9g)
with Moncrief: +9.0 (105.9 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +9.8 (101.8 ppg against)

1985 (9g)
with Moncrief: +6.8 (104.7 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +7.3 (98.3 ppg against)

To me, it's clear this was a loaded, athletic, multipolar team with some excellent coaching. (Interestingly, that was also it's reputation.)

But I don't know how to look at those years, look at Moncrief fade in the PS, look at the team without him and think he was all that excellent. Of course, that's what my eyes tell me too as I evaluate his contributions on film. And Marques Johnson was on some excellent Bucks teams too (as I've outlined, starting with the 1980 season), so it's not like he should get all sorts of credit. But it's paramount to understand that these guys, are at worst case scenario, close. Only Marques is more praised by SI, by local journalism, has better PS numbers and to me, looks better on film.

In the year he was injured, 1982, I have all but 2 of the games:

w/Marques: +6.6
w/out Marques: +3.2

So again, in summary:

Chris Paul has little evidence of impact within seasons he missed time in either. Only with Paul, there's a bevy of other evidence, including the eye test, and including some of his postseason games, that indicate a major-impact player. Those positive counterpoints just don't exist with Moncrief. And again, at the end of the day, I like the guy's defense and contributions.

But what is the argument for him over Marques? A player who, yes, unarguably was at the forefront of the Buck's escape from the doldrums and was (rightfully) considered the most versatile and complete forward for the late 70s/early 80s.

I got this from http://www.apbr.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3496

Marques Johnson
Johnson, a teammate of Pressey who got to Milwaukee and to Nelson five years before him, remembers the derivation of "point forward" differently. Winters had retired prior to 1983-84 and Tiny Archibald, finishing up with the Bucks at age 35, got shut down by a bum hamstring in a backcourt light on ballhandlers.

"At the start of the playoffs, Don Nelson came up with the idea to initiate the offense through me at small forward," Johnson said. "So after we went through how we were going to make the adjustments to different plays, my response to Nellie was, 'OK, so instead of a point guard, I'm a point forward.' I remember his response clear as mud, like it was yesterday, saying back to me, 'Yeah. I like that. You're my point forward.' Junior Bridgeman was there -- you can ask him."

When contacted, Bridgeman, the former Bucks sixth man turned successful restaurateur, remembered the role and the results more than the label. Johnson, who averaged 21 points a game in seven Milwaukee seasons before his 1984 trade to the Clippers, chipped in 4.6 assists in 1980-81 (second to Quinn Buckner's 4.7) and led the Bucks with 4.5 apg in 1982-83. In the 1984 postseason, Moncrief actually topped their team with 68 assists, with Johnson and Bob Lanier tied at 55.

In the clincher of Milwaukee's playoff series victory over New Jersey in 1984, the Associated Press game story chronicled Johnson's work as a playmaker and quoted Nelson about the strategy -- without ever mentioning the term 'point forward.' That fall, in the story about Pressey as the team's "point forward," Nelson said: "Both Marques and Press have done a good job at it, but Press has a better feel for the position. ... [Marques] didn't feel confident being a point guard. So when he advanced the ball, we could only run a couple of offensive sets. With Press, we an run any of our sets."

Said Johnson: "I'm not so hung up on the whole deal to think that I'm the original point forward. Rick Barry played the position for Golden State when he ran their offense when Jamaal Wilkes was a rookie. Johnny Johnson, we played Seattle in the playoffs in '79-80 and he was the one who would bring the ball up the floor while Gus Johnson and DJ [Dennis Johnson] would curl off screens. But my claim to fame is just coming up with 'point forward.' The coinage of the term."

Harris disagreed, politely but firmly. "I wouldn't want to call Marques a liar," the longtime coach said, "but when he saw what Paul was doing, he probably said, 'I used to go up there and make plays. I was a point forward.' But he was never called that because I remember Nellie's reaction when I told him about it."

As for Pressey -- the first Bucks player to be referred to in media accounts as a "point forward" -- he seems to enjoy his status as the prototype in many folks' minds. "They're trying to steal my thunder," he said, laughing. "Don't let them steal my thunder!"

So essentially, at the start of the playoffs in 84 - the last month of Marques run in Milwaukee and real relevance - it's an experimental change for Nelson to make him the initiator and pseudo point - and he later says he wasn't confident at it compared to Pressey who would put up 7apg in 85. His teammate claims he was never called point forward. Can't be any more clear that Marques was not a Drexler/Hill

[bastillon]

I'll make another post because that last one was too long. given what's been said about Marques, given the video footage available (watch DavidStern's YouTube clips of his game: http://youtu.be/x2AW-AKgLiY part 1 and http://youtu.be/IAcOny_AanA part 2) he was an absolute stud, definitely on the level of 80-82 Julius Erving. his man defense is just spectacular. those who think Melo would be good playing isos on him are kinda crazy. to me Melo would be in a lot trouble because Marques is the perfect matchup to defend Melo. not only would he make him struggle, I think Marques would dominate Melo defensively. Melo's game is based on his strength. I think Marques was significantly stronger than Melo. from what I've seen Marques could outmuscle PFs, and this was back when PF position was still legit. the guy has the strength of a big man, and not just some small ball bigs, I'm talking about legitimate post bangers. he was one of the strongest SFs in the NBA's history without a doubt. look at those clips how easily he scores in the paint or on the offensive glass. to me, he looks like a SF version of Clyde Drexler. can post up and drive a little bit, not much shot creation skills, tremendous athlete, scores a ton in transition, attacks the offensive glass etc. he was a much better defender than Drexler though. Melo has no business isolating against him, unless you wanna sabotage your offense.

another point that I'd like to make is how Moses is getting very overrated with his impact. he has significant issues defensively and you can't run the offense through him. this is what people thought of Moses in 81 (Complete handbook of basketball, courtesy of TrueLAFan):

“A lot of people thought he should have been the league's MVP last season. He was the No. 1 rebounder and No. 2 scorer ... Possesses an overabundance of talent, but there will always be the nagging question marks: he is quite average as a defensive rebounder, he is annually in the top five in turnovers, he does not run plays well, he's average in catching and passing the ball ... With all of those negatives however, he still may be the league's best, because of his overwhelming enthusiasm for the game and his dominance of the categories he does well, offensive rebounding and scoring.”

for more about his weaknesses look at my posts here (first post is the description, then I made another 2 posts quoting a bunch of people from our most valuable Moses threads): viewtopic.php?p=38323917#p38323917

there are all kinds of concerns when it comes to Moses, mostly with his team defense which I think was between mediocre to bad. this is why I think Narigo's team shouldn't worry about the offense much. they are going to abuse the defense anchored by Moses. it's just that simple. he just doesn't help out a lot defensively. he's too focused on camping in the paint getting rebounds. his defensive rebounding is still surprisingly weak though, particularly if you're looking at team impact (his teams were often bad defensive rebounding teams) which suggests he wasn't very good at boxing out and that is also what my eye test of Moses game tells me.

what happens if Jordan starts playing pick and rolls with whoever is there? Moses help defense is really bad here and wasn't as exposed in the 80s because of the lack of offensive guards during Moses prime (Gus Johnson was probably the best slasher in the league and he's not even on the level of Tony Parker) and because of team offenses that were focused on post offense and played less pick and rolls than today's guards. but with MJ running them? I cannot imagine a team with Moses defending them succesfully. it's that simple. what's particularly annoying about Moses offense is that you will rarely if ever see him contest a shot. he either tries to go for the block (gambles for blocks which is good for stats not so good for your team), or doesn't contest a shot at all (most of the time) camping for rebounds instead. to me Moses is a bad defensive big in terms of team defense. let me be clear: as a post defender he was quite good. didn't let guys push him around and just played hard nosed defense. but as a team defender he looks clueless. a net negative defensively to me and I have no doubt about it.

Mark Eaton was quite probably the worst offensive player in the history of the NBA. yeah, I think so. THE worst. Kwame Brown is an artist compared to Mark Eaton. it was absolutely painful to watch him play on offense. even John Stockton didn't help him. he was an all time great defensively but I don't think he was a net positive given how repugnant he was on offense. absolute atrocity.

[O_6]

I have seen even an excellent poster like O_6 make a comment that Marion can guard 1-5. that is easily your worst post on realGM. I love reading your posts but this one is just false.

Ha well thanks for that compliment atleast.

I agree that Marion's true strength on D was his ability to guard perimeter players. The fact that he's a legit defensive option against Michael friggin' Jordan is all you need to know about how good he was as a perimeter defender. And I agree that Marion wasn't a stud low post defender, guarding guys like Duncan or Garnett was not his strength. As a pure Big defender, I would grade him as nothing special.

But I think you underrate his post defense when you talk about how the Suns D couldn't stop anybody inside. Amare Stoudemire, Boris Diaw, and Tim Thomas. Those guys are not exactly strong post defenders to put it lightly, and they all played significant minutes for the Suns in a frontcourt position. An old Kurt Thomas may have been the best low post defender Marion played with on the Suns. Marion may have been nothing special as a low post defender but I don't think he was awful either.

Plus, I didn't say he was an All-NBA caliber defender 1-5. I said he was capable of guarding 1-5. I stand by that claim of versatility, even if he was clearly better guarding 1-3 than 4-5.

I know for a fact that Shawn Marion has guarded Chris Paul and he has guarded Yao Ming. There aren't many players in NBA history who are capable doing that, Rodman is the only obvious one. That's all I meant with the 1-5 comment. He's actually done it. Putting him on a Center would be foolish but he just brings a lot of versatility to the table on D.

[MisterWestside]

Moses Malone couldn't rebound on defense? Only 13 players out rebounded him in DREB% from '75-'90 (out of all players with 10k minutes played).

Hibachi's team is loaded with perimeter defense, and also features several versatile defenders with length and athleticism. Heck, that's exactly the kind of team that Malone would fit well into. You don't need to feature a classic rim protector when you can blitz your opponent with speed from wing to wing. Plus he can bring two players off the bench to fill that traditional rim protector role.

[bastillon]

I know Suns had all kinds of problems against post defenders but I wasn't talking about their team defense but Marion's individual post defense. he used to get punked in the low post. it's that simple. KG, Duncan, Dirk, Brand, everybody, Lamar Odom was dominating Marion in '06 playoffs so much that Phil didn't let Kobe shoot too much (they wanted to play through the post to slow down the Suns transition game). those career highs happened with Marion defending them. Marion just doesn't have the strength the stay in front of the post player and not get backed down too easily. as for Yao comment, I think you got it mixed up, Marion was defending Yao by fronting. everybody knows how vulnerable Yao is to fronting. Al Harrington defended Yao by fronting as well. fronting takes a team effort though and it had more to do with Rockets lacking a high-low threat and Yao's offensive weaknesses. as far as Marion guarding centers, to me, personally experiencing the pain of watching Suns get abused on the glass and inside, and Marion personally getting dominated by tons of PFs, I can't even imagine Marion trying to guard a legit center without some team strategy like fronting.

I freakin love Shawn Marion as a perimeter defender but he doesn't have physical tools to play defense in the post. Marion guarding PFs is a mismatch, unless you have a PF that doesn't really post-up (say, Horace Grant), but then defensive rebounding is still a problem. Marion's defensive versatility is 1-3. he cannot guard either big man. LeBron's versatility is better imo, he can guard some PFs (though again, this is a mismatch as well, David West would dominate LeBron if left to bang 1 vs 1). the only guy who could really say that he can guard anybody is Dennis Rodman. he guarded Shaq and Michael Jordan succesfully. this is insane. KG is probably 2nd. he guarded pretty much every prime big with success (Shaq would be the exception though you would rather use fronting then and this could actually work with today's rules) and he was chasing guys like Kobe and T-Mac in his younger days which is amazing. I know Hakeem was also incredible on mismatches and Rockets PGs were always bragging about how they could just switch onto centers because Hakeem could legitimately guard their man.

[MisterWestside]

But you also admitted that Malone could play post defense, so why demand that from Marion? Stick Malone on the team's opposing low post guy and let the wings swarm/cross-match as necessary.

[bastillon]

But you also admitted that Malone could play post defense, so why demand that from Marion? Stick Malone on the team's opposing low post guy and let the wings swarm/cross-match as necessary.

I wasn't demanding anything. I was clearing things up. Shawn Marion absolutely and positively cannot guard LMA and not get abused. it's a complete mismatch and LMA would have a field day against Marion just like everybody else did in '05-'07.

Moses Malone couldn't rebound on defense? Only 13 players out rebounded him in DREB% from '75-'90 (out of all players with 10k minutes played).

Hibachi's team is loaded with perimeter defense, and also features several versatile defenders with length and athleticism. Heck, that's exactly the kind of team that Malone would fit well into. You don't need to feature a classic rim protector when you can blitz your opponent with speed from wing to wing.

well, again, this came from people who saw him play live. they thought he's a contender for league's MVP and yet acknowledged defensive rebounding as his weakness. watching Malone's footage I think it could be because his teams would often get punked on the defensive glass, he just wasn't all that good at boxing out. even when Sixers acquired Barkley through draft, imagine that '86 Moses & Barkley were 17/23 in defensive rebonding as a team (team DRB%). they were also below average in 83-85 (actually one of the worst in the league in 84, 18/23) and ranged from average to terrible as a defensive rebounding team in 78-82 (as low as 20/22 in '80). I would certainly expect more dominant team performance on the glass from a guy who is supposedly one of the best rebounders ever, and who is considered the best rebounding center ever by many. it seems like Moses was racking up those stats individually but couldn't even keep opponents from hurting his teams on the offensive glass. Moses teams were not rebounding well so you have to wonder about his impact.

[MisterWestside]

I got you about your Marion post. Thanks for clarifying.

Well on defense, you just need somebody to snatch the rebound. It isn't as variable (or skill-inclined) as offensive rebounding. Marion and Iggy are more than capable rebounders, and Wade is also above-average for guards. Plenty of rebounding there.

[bastillon]

Well on defense, you just need somebody to snatch the rebound. It isn't as variable (or skill-inclined) as offensive rebounding. Marion and Iggy are more than capable rebounders, and Wade is also above-average for guards. Plenty of rebounding there.

first of all, I wasn't referring to this team but to Moses in general. his rebounding impact seems be absurdly exaggerated. look at a guy like Rodman. wherever he went, teams started destroying opposition on the glass. Rodman was dominating the glass in such a way that his teams were outrebounding the opposition. that was not the case with Moses. they were getting punked on their defensive glass. Moses put up stast but didn't make as big an impact as his numbers would suggest. he was nothing special as a defensive rebounder.

in this matchup he is facing one of the most terrifying fro's ever in Ben Wallace and personally I think he could get dominated on his own glass. that is less important though, given the huge mismatch that MH is going to have at PF position. Shawn Marion, as I pointed out, is a mismatch on the glass. if he wants Marion to play PF, he'll get punked. if he plays Melo at the 4, Melo absolutely cannot boxout LMA. then you have a guy like Marques who was an absolute beast on the offensive glass and could outmuscle any SF ever (few exceptions). Jordan is also a great offensive rebounding guard. so seeing those guys, you are right they would be a capable rebounding team in the NBA. but this is all-time league. I think Narigo would pound MH on the offensive glass. perimeter rebounding is nice but a little bit offset by perimeter rebounding from Jordan's team... however the real problem is that their 2 big men are not great defensive rebounders and one is facing Ben Wallace and the other is facing a mismatch.

so once again, I think this is another huge coaching blunder by MH. small ball with those players is a bad idea to me.

now that I've analysed this matchup thoroughly, I can vote. I'm quite certain it's Narigo's team. Jordan would be doing his 35 ppg thing, Marques could chip in with another 20+, LMA could go for 25 if they're guarding him with a mismatch. they have some shooters as well. it's gonna be enough offense for this team because MH has a poor big man defense (Moses at C is one of the worst defenders of this tournament, and he has a mismatch at PF). bigs are too crucial defensively to be able to hide them anywhere. I think they will get exposed and perimeter defense, although nice, isn't enough to make up for Moses shortcomings and a PF mismatch.

defensively Melo stretching the floor is pretty good for their spacing but I don't see how they would be working as a team. Wade is gonna run pnr with Moses? Moses was known to have stone hands and tunell vision once he caught the ball. you can just trap Wade on every screen. LMA and Ben Wallace are easily one of the best pnr duo defenders in this tournament.

I have some issues with Narigo's team because its offense could be better and they have some weaknesses you could expose, but they matchup very well against MH. LMA vs Melo/Marion matchup is particularly good for them. you can guard Marion with LMA and put Marques on Melo which would give him trouble. on top of that you have a huge helpD hole in Moses and Jordan could just get open with Ben Wallace screen and drain midrange jumpshots all game because Moses wasn't really helping his teammates defensively a lot. despite low potential offensively, I actually see this Narigo team as dominating MH's defense. matchups are just so favorable.

[Doctor MJ]

Hate Melo on MH's team.

I actually really like the plan for Melo, but I'm not sold on Deron's role. To me moving Wade off-ball is something that only makes sense if you've got LeBron in there, and if he's on-ball, then what is Deron doing out there?

[therealbig3]

Hate Melo on MH's team.

I actually really like the plan for Melo, but I'm not sold on Deron's role. To me moving Wade off-ball is something that only makes sense if you've got LeBron in there, and if he's on-ball, then what is Deron doing out there?

I don't see this as an issue, because Deron is an excellent off-ball guard. He actually prefers it at times.

And it's not like Wade ALWAYS played on-ball during his prime...he's an excellent cutter, and used to be a very good midrange shooter and would run off screens at times.