RealGM Top 100 List #18

[DannyNoonan1221]

Down to Barkley, Robinson, Nash, and Wade for me here with the first 2 looking more favorable. Pettit looks interesting too given where he finished in MVP voting, shooting ability, rebounding, but I hardly know anything about the guy beyond that.

Pettit looks interesting but no mention of Moses? Moses is the better rebounder (for reasons I have mentioned a few times now) and I am also not sure how you can mention his MVP shares and still leave out Moses. MVP shares are not a big evaluation tool for me, but fine if you use them- but why do Pettit's MVP shares suddenly jump Moses?

[The Infamous1]

From previous thread:

The peak of the Jazz came as they turned to Malone over Stockton more and more.

Actually that's a myth.

Code: Select all

SEASON   SRS   JS MPG   KM MPG
2002-03   2,8   27,7   36,2
2001-02   1,2   31,3   38,0
2000-01   5,0   29,2   35,7
1999-00   4,5   29,7   35,9
1998-99   5,5   28,2   37,4
1997-98   5,7   29,0   37,4
1996-97   8,0   35,3   36,6
1995-96   6,2   35,5   38,0
1994-95   7,8   35,0   38,1
1993-94   4,1   36,2   40,6
1992-93   1,7   34,9   37,8
1991-92   5,7   36,6   37,7
1990-91   3,2   37,8   40,3
1989-90   4,8   37,4   38,1
1988-89   4,0   38,7   39,1
1987-88   3,0   34,7   39,0
1986-87   0,1   22,7   34,8
1985-86   -0,7   23,6   30,6
1984-85   -0,3   18,2   0,0


So peak Jazz came in 1997, the last year of Stockton's prime and the last season, when he played 35 MPG. After that Jazz drop off dramatically by -2.3 SRS points.

Jazz also improved a lot in 1988, when John had become full time starter and his minutes increased by 12 per game. Malone also played more, but just by 3.2 MPG.

What year would you say johns prime started

[penbeast0]

Down to Barkley, Robinson, Nash, and Wade for me here with the first 2 looking more favorable. Pettit looks interesting too given where he finished in MVP voting, shooting ability, rebounding, but I hardly know anything about the guy beyond that.

Pettit looks interesting but no mention of Moses? Moses is the better rebounder (for reasons I have mentioned a few times now) and I am also not sure how you can mention his MVP shares and still leave out Moses. MVP shares are not a big evaluation tool for me, but fine if you use them- but why do Pettit's MVP shares suddenly jump Moses?

Pettit was the league's best player in the period between when Mikan retired and Russell/Wilt/Oscar/West came in. He had modern size (6'10 and Kevin McHale type build) and both a solid but basic post game and good range out to past the foul line. In terms of impact, he was a Karl Malone type, every year he would give you 25/15 with some MVP years -- never had an off year or a serious injury until his final year when he missed half the season then retired. His final year was also the only year he was not named 1st team All-NBA (still named 2nd team) and he retired with 2 MVPs as the NBA's scoring and rebounding leader (quickly passed by Wilt though).

Two other things to mention about him. The 50s, when he first came in, were a very white league still dominated by hook shooting big men and set shooting guards. His team, St. Louis Hawks, was the last team to integrate though Pettit was credited by Lenny Wilkens as the guy that was his mentor and protector during the integration process. If he was just a 50s star, though, he'd be far less important but he stayed at that level through his retirement in 1966, competing with Elgin Baylor for the best forward in the league every year (they were as obvious a choice every year as West and Robertson at guard). Less explosive than Baylor, he has advantages in rebounding and defense -- Elliot Kalb interviewing his contemporaries said that the word that came up most was "relentless."

His playoff numbers aren't particularly good, they show a real drop off (and teammate Cliff Hagan is one of those who show a consistent improvement -- possibly playoff defenses focused more on Pettit like they did on Wilt?) but he has a rep for clutch stardom built largely on one of the great finals performances ever. With Russell injured, St. Louis had an elimination game against the Celtics. The Celtics were up 86-84 into the 4th when Pettit took over. He ended up scoring 50 points that game, including 18 of the Hawks final 21 points, and tapped in the final basket off a rebound for the Hawks only title to this day (and one of only 2 times the Celtics didn't win a title in Russell's career).

One more thing he was particularly known for was his foul draw. He was like Dwyane Wade in that he made his living on the line. Everyone respected him as a person and a player, even the refs. Tommy Heinsohn said that once he started complaining about a foul called against him on Pettit and the ref told him to "stop bothering Mr. Pettit." If he had a flaw, it was that he was neither particularly quick nor a particularly creative passer. Solid and smart, gave the effort, consistent and classy. I'd hesitate to take him over Mikan in terms of dominance but he should go in before Baylor or Havlicek.

[Jim Naismith]

This picture is absolutely fascinating to me. For one...where are the two kids next to Moses looking? Homeboy on the right looks scared as hell, and homeboy on the right has the skeeziest snarl going on. And look...err...underneath Moses...what a creepy place to have put someone's face.

A more natural-looking photo:

[ThaRegul8r]

I don't have a problem voting for a player who isn't as good as the players who are already voted in. So David Robinson's struggles vs Shaq, Hakeem and Karl don't detract from him for me.

This really needs to be posted again:

Admiral vs Dream in the RS:

30-12 w/l in favor of Robinson which is staggering and cannot and should not be overlooked.

Dream 21.9/11.2/2.8 3.4 blocks 1.9 steals 2.9 TOs 44% FG 5.4 FTA 20.0 FGA
David 19.6/11.2/2.9 3.3 2.2 3.0 49% FG 7.7 FTA 14.3 FGA

So Admiral outplays Dream pretty clearly in the RS with his team winning more than 70% of the games and Dream's only real advantage is scoring 2.3 more ppg on 5.7 more shots. Robinson is considerably more efficient.

We have got to stop basing everything on one series. No question Dream got the better of Admiral in the one time they met in the PS, but the RS tells a different story.

So do you have Robinson over Hakeem? As I've posted before, Robinson had more All-NBA First Team selections than Hakeem before the injury, and also did better in the MVP voting. You had Hakeem a full six spots above Robinson before the project.

People who prefer the regular season due to larger sample size (not saying you're one of them) should rank Robinson above Hakeem in order to remain consistent. Otherwise they are basing their ranking on the smaller sample size.

[Texas Chuck]

No I don't have Admiral over Dream. When I look at both guys career in total I think Dream needs to be ranked higher. I just felt like we have this myth going that Dreams owns Admiral H2H and its simply not true.

[ThaRegul8r]

Since no one addressed this concern:

I've brought up some concerns I had with Malone, and there were some that were raised with Robinson that I never saw mentioned again:

Spoiler:

Can we put this into perspective though, since i think it's giving Payton a boost up people's ballots.

The regular season is 82 games. That's over 6,000 possessions for Payton. In the playoffs he played ~1,500 more possessions. He didn't guard Jordan for all of these games...they had Hawkins on him and even Schrempf at times. So this is, what, 150 defensive possessions? Within that series alone, Payton didn't even play that well.

Now, I think it's perfectly fair to look at that as being reflective of something bigger, and perhaps even use it as a tiebreaker or something. He did play Jordan wonderfully. I just get the feeling people are rocketing Payton up their boards because of these few games and his team's success. I'm fairly confident in saying that Payton was better in 1998 and better in 2000 than he was in 1996.

Finally, you have to ask yourself how big of an impact Payton's defense had on the game. For a point guard, I think it was huge. Compared to a wing, very good. But short of a big. Just watch the games -- he's not having the same impact defensively as Scottie Pippen, let alone the handful of elite bigs ahead of him. In the games against Jordan, Payton's having great defensive games relative to Michael, but it's not like his defensive line is:

2 charges, 5 forced turnovers, 2 basket saves (on help blocks/strips), 2 points against, 2 shooting fouls, no defensive errors, 17% FG's against, 5 defensive rebounds and the general disruption of dribble penetration from the PG.

I only mention that line because it approximates the last Scottie Pippen game I graded defensively.

Well, part of the perspective is that Gary Payton was Defensive Player of the Year. And in this case, part of the perspective is that a player being brought up frequently—David Robinson—had poor defensive play in the playoffs, and it cost his team.

I’ve got Pippen in my top 7 for the season, so I’ve got nothing bad to say about Scottie. But the points being made about postseason play with other players are, IMO, valid; they’re also one of the main reasons why this topic exists. MVP voting is done before the postseason. Several players that had earned regular season MVPs struggled in the playoffs, and a part of what we consider—as others have noted—is whether this would/should have had an effect on the MVP voting in a season. Now, the question of how much emphasis to put on post season play is relative. Some people give it a ton; some people rate it more or less equally with regular season play. As usual, I’m in the middle about this. Considering that David Robinson had a much better regular season than Gary Payton. He was also worse on both offense and defense than Payton in the playoffs. Is that enough to elevate Payton over Drob? For some it is. For me, it isn’t—although it makes it close.

Spoiler:

TrueLAFan made a point about David Robinson's defensive impact in the playoffs. Indeed, there seems to be some validity to that, if we believe that Robinson has a major influence on their defense as the anchor.

Here are the Spurs DRtg in his 93-96 stretch compared with regular season performance. The opponents ORtg is weighted by games played vs. team (eg a 6 game series counts twice as much as a 3 game series).

1996 111.5 ( 8.0 vs. regular season) 4.7 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 112.1
1995 103.1 (-2.3 vs. regular season) -7.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 109.3
1994 110.3 ( 5.7 vs. regular season) 5.3 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 108.6
1993 107.0 ( 0.2 vs. regular season) -0.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 111.3

So it seems there is something to what TrueLAFan is saying. Perhaps with the exception of 1995's first 2 rounds...but we know what happened after that.

My general problem with Robinson, like everyone else, is his playoff performances. It's not that I viewed him as some sort of choker, just that he faired much better much better in a regular season style and against weaker competition. Which isn't too damning (we shouldn't overstate the unfortunate fact that he ran into Malone and Hakeem at the worst time). His regular seasons still count. I just know what type of contribution I'm getting toward a championship (he's a little too subject to certain styles and matchups, and when he runs into them there's a larger drop off then we see from other stars.)

1993 struggled against Duckworth/Williams vs. Portland. Then a better series against Phoenix (but a bad game 7).
1994 ran into Utah. Struggled.
1995 He DESTROYED LA (Dviac and Campbell) a round before playing Hakeem.
1996 great against Phoenix. Then Utah again...

That's something that I'll take into account, in general, for all of his prime seasons.

Spoiler:

Here's the Spurs' DRating under Robinson in the playoffs:

91: 4-game series against the Warriors, who had a 111.9 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 111.7 (-0.2).

93: 4-game series against the Blazers, who had a 108.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 107.7 (-0.6).

6-game series against the Suns, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.9 (-3.4).

94: 4-game series against the Jazz, who had a 108.6 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 2.0).

95: 3-game series against the Nuggets, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 103.1 (-6.0).

6-game series against the Lakers, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 101.3 (-7.8).

6-game series against the Rockets, who had a 109.7 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 0.9).

96: 4-game series against the Suns, who had a 110.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.3 (-1.0).

6-games series against the Jazz, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 114.1 ( 0.8).

As you can see, although the Spurs had some nice defensive series (a couple in 95, and one in 93), they had mostly mediocre defensive series, in which they allowed opposing teams to either score their averages against them, or even do better offensively. An elite defensive team like the Spurs shouldn't allow that...in general, they should hold their opponents to well under their averages.

[...]

So, with the Spurs, you have an elite defensive team dropping to above average levels. And considering how guys like Barkley, Malone, and especially Hakeem had some great series against D-Rob and the Spurs, I think you can conclude that Robinson as the defensive anchor got worse defensively in the playoffs, by quite a bit.

If Robinson's scoring fell off in the postseason and he also got worse as a defensive anchor during his prime, that's quite a big deal, as in that case, what positive value would he be bringing if he became a worse defensive anchor as well? I need to investigate this further, and if any Robinson supporters could address this, that would go a long ways toward aiding me in my decision.

I'll presume it's because there was no possible response and thus it was more advantageous not to touch it for voting purposes. I'll look into it more myself when I have the opportunity, and it will be factored in.

[penbeast0]

By request: Walt Frazier



Why Frazier is better than Dwyane Wade -- Defense, reliability, and portability. Wade is a very good defender, Frazier is a great one. Wade is more explosive but Frazier is injured less and has no seasons where his team imploded. Frazier also can be successful in a PG dominant system, in a triangle system, has an excellent long to midrange game as well as being a very good postup PG; generally a player with no weaknesses.

I'm still not buying the Frazier argument over Wade. Wade is clearly the better offensive player when he was healthy, saying he's "just more explosive" is making it sound like all he does is score. Defense i'll give him that but it's not enough to make him better. And i don't think portability can really be proven against Wade.

Peak is very clearly Wade, Walt didn't have a season anywhere near Wade's 09 campaign. And not convinced any of his playoff runs were as good as Wade's 06 playoffs. And it's not like the longevity is there, both don't have great longevity. Frazier does seem a little more durable though. As for the team implosion, if you're talking about 2008, Wade was hurt all year long i think it's dumb to hold that against him.

Wade>Frazier.

Let's look at tools then. Handles? No edge (maybe Frazier relative to era because Wade loses his dribble more). Passing? Frazier (though it's close and maybe Wade gets the edge relative to other 2 guards where Frazier is being compared to 1s) . Outside shooting? Frazier clearly has the more reliable midrange (no reason to shoot a 3 in his career). 1st step and finishing at rim? Wade (this is what I mean by explosiveness to some degree). Post-up game? Frazier. Open court? No edge (both deadly, Wade more likely to take it in, Frazier to find the open trailer). Rebounding? No edge (Frazier had the bigger rebounding seasons but they were pace inflated and his rebounding trailed off as he aged more than Wade's). Man defense? Frazier. Help defense? No edge (both excellent). Intangibles/leadership? Frazier (though Wade is a class act and terrific locker room guy). Clutch? No edge (both superb playoff and finals performers known for turning it on in key situations)

Frazier is the better standstill shooter both from range and from the post. Frazier is more the playmaker and the more efficient passer. Frazier is the better defender and there's not a major rebounding edge, so . . .

What skills do you think Wade has over Frazier other than his explosiveness (1st step, finishing, general quickness/leaping type skills) -- not that those aren't serious advantages since they are what made Michael Jordan and Julius Erving all time greats?

Wade 09 30/5/7.5 @ .574ts% in an offense designed to showcase him
Playoffs 29/5/5.3 @ .565 in 1st round playoff loss to Hawks

Frazier 72 23/7/6 @ .576ts% in a balanced offense with 5 scorers
Playoffs 24/7/6 on .586 led team to NBA finals

Wade does score more; otherwise, not more dominant particularly defensively where Frazier did a terrific job on Jerry West in the finals loss. I can see favoring Wade, but having seen a lot of both and with Wade's style of play leaving him more vulnerable to injuries, I think you win more rings on a contending team with Frazier.

[Texas Chuck]

@ TheRegular

I did address some of that. I have posted several comparisons of Admiral against the best bigs of his era in the RS and he seems to get the better of most of them and holds his own against the rest. I didn't come across a single guy who dominates him. So that addresses the idea that he is feasting on weaker competition in the RS and can't handle the better players in the PS.

I didn't take the time to go back and look at all his playoff series and see how I thought the Spurs defense fared in each matchup. I'll trust the research others already did in that regard. It was more laziness than expecting to find no answers. And also Im a guy who puts less stock in relative performance as opposed to actual performance. If the Spurs defense doesn't perform up to their own RS standards(and this seems reasonable considering you play better teams) but is still better than the defenses of some of the other bigs on the list already or under consideration, I guess Im not sure why we are penalizing Admiral extra?

His playoff resume is a problem for me to be sure and it and his longevity are the main reasons he's not on the list yet. Every player left has some flaws and some questions and these are his.

[ushvinder88]

David Robinson's win lose edge in the regular season is also inflated by the fact that from 1998-2002 the spurs were a much better team than the rockets. I wouldnt say d-rob's individual numbers from 1990-1999 in thier head to head matchups are any better. Playoff resume is very one sided in hakeem's favour, he also has a 4-5 year longevity edge.

This actually makes robinson more overrated IMO. From 1990-1996, the regular season head to head numbers between hakeem and david were essentially a wash, except spurs finished 20-12 in thier 32 meetigs between 1990-1996, which would suggest spurs were the better team. Yet he vastly underperforms in the playoff run between 1990-1998.

[Clyde Frazier]

Honestly have no clue who i'm voting for yet. Probably down to moses, robinson and barkley at this point. Robinson's post prime championship years are pretty interesting as he doesn't blow you away with stats, but he clearly had a solid impact in those runs. Pettit really needs to strongly be considered after these guys get in as far as i'm concerned.

[Basketballefan]

By request: Walt Frazier



Why Frazier is better than Dwyane Wade -- Defense, reliability, and portability. Wade is a very good defender, Frazier is a great one. Wade is more explosive but Frazier is injured less and has no seasons where his team imploded. Frazier also can be successful in a PG dominant system, in a triangle system, has an excellent long to midrange game as well as being a very good postup PG; generally a player with no weaknesses.

I'm still not buying the Frazier argument over Wade. Wade is clearly the better offensive player when he was healthy, saying he's "just more explosive" is making it sound like all he does is score. Defense i'll give him that but it's not enough to make him better. And i don't think portability can really be proven against Wade.

Peak is very clearly Wade, Walt didn't have a season anywhere near Wade's 09 campaign. And not convinced any of his playoff runs were as good as Wade's 06 playoffs. And it's not like the longevity is there, both don't have great longevity. Frazier does seem a little more durable though. As for the team implosion, if you're talking about 2008, Wade was hurt all year long i think it's dumb to hold that against him.

Wade>Frazier.

Let's look at tools then. Handles? No edge (maybe Frazier relative to era because Wade loses his dribble more). Passing? Frazier (though it's close and maybe Wade gets the edge relative to other 2 guards where Frazier is being compared to 1s) . Outside shooting? Frazier clearly has the more reliable midrange (no reason to shoot a 3 in his career). 1st step and finishing at rim? Wade (this is what I mean by explosiveness to some degree). Post-up game? Frazier. Open court? No edge (both deadly, Wade more likely to take it in, Frazier to find the open trailer). Rebounding? No edge (Frazier had the bigger rebounding seasons but they were pace inflated and his rebounding trailed off as he aged more than Wade's). Man defense? Frazier. Help defense? No edge (both excellent). Intangibles/leadership? Frazier (though Wade is a class act and terrific locker room guy). Clutch? No edge (both superb playoff and finals performers known for turning it on in key situations)

Frazier is the better standstill shooter both from range and from the post. Frazier is more the playmaker and the more efficient passer. Frazier is the better defender and there's not a major rebounding edge, so . . .

What skills do you think Wade has over Frazier other than his explosiveness (1st step, finishing, general quickness/leaping type skills)?

I feel you're focusing too much on how they are putting the ball in the bucket. If a player puts up far more points on similar efficiency it doesn't matter to me how it's done. Let's take a look at their best season/playoff run.

I'm going to assume that '72 is Walt's peak, at least statistically: so we'll compare

'72 Walt: 23 7 6 .576 TS% 22 PER
09 Wade 30 5 8 .574 TS% 30 PER

So like i said clear edge to Wade here, and Wade was very elite at defense himself that year so Walt's small edge in that department can't make up the huge gap in offense(more assists, much more ppg on the same efficiency).

Best title runs:

06 Wade: 28 6 6 59 TS% 27 PER
73 Walt: 22 7 6 56 TS% 20 PER

So as i said, Wade is far and away the better scorer arguably even more efficient as well, and according to PER he's more efficient all around by a considerable gap.

If you want to being up Walt somehow being a better finals performer that also is very doubtful. (No advanced stats for Walt)
Walt 70 finals 18 8 10
Walt 72 finals: 23 8 8(in a losing effort)
Walt 73 finals: 17 7 5

It's not coincidence that Reed got both FMVPS.

Wade 06 finals: 35 7 4
Wade 11 Finals: 27 7 5(in a losing effort)

I don't see any evidence to suggest Walt was a better leader, Wade has been a terrific leader his entire career, it's not by accident he led them to their 1st ever title in dominant fashion in his 3rd season. Then also recruited 2 great players in LBJ and Bosh to come to his team, while he took a paycut. As for shooting i do not care about it, as i said if you are scoring efficiently it doesn't matter how it's done. So what i take away from this, Walt is the better defender and shooter, well he's better at those than Magic Johnson does that make him a better player? Of course not.


So again, i take Wade simply because he was clearly better at his regular season and playoff peaks. I think the case can easily be made that Wade's top 4 seasons are better than any of Walt's. I don't see enough longevity to compensate, it's simply my take though.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

I'm still not sure why so many people are hesitant at picking Moses Malone.
I understand he had some limitations, his defense was not on par with the best big men, but he didn't have those limitations he'd be contending for the Top5, not for the #18 spot.
I feel people believe that he was not as good as his MVP's and other personal accolades suggest, and that makes him underrated.

For now, I'm voting for Moses Malone

[penbeast0]

...

I would guess that it's not simply your take; I'd guess that Wade is going to win a majority of votes here in any comparison with Frazier -- if I hadn't watched so much of each, I'd probably agree since Frazier also has issues of weaker era and faster pace to contend with. I mainly give Frazier the edge based on eye test; he just always looked in control of the games (hated him as a Bullets fan, btw -- up there with Jordan and LeBron as guys I hated to have the Bullets/Wizards face) whereas Wade dominates his individual matchups more and scores more but just doesn't seem to affect the team game as strongly -- as I said, mainly eye test impression.

I feel like some of the Dirk posters earlier. Frazier, like Dirk, seemed to warp the court in ways that aren't statistically obvious because his gifts are a bit unusual. The opponents would try to generate their offense through a different player or play an unusual lineup or . . . something, and Clyde's team would benefit without it showing up in his box score.

[batmana]

My vote goes to Moses Malone.


Out of the remaining players he was the one (along with Walton) who led a team to a title and who could completely change the way a team plays, he was a player to build your team around. His playoff heroics against the Lakers on a sub-.500 team and him leading the Sixers to one of the most convincing title runs in playoff history impress me a lot. Unfortunately, he didn't always have such a great impact and it's probably because of his attitude towards defense. I could totally rank him higher as I don't consider his FG% to be such a big problem.

I tried comparing Moses to Barkley and The Admiral who I will probably consider next, as well as to the 50s stars (Pettit and Mikan). While the latter two have question marks about their opposition and inflated numbers, Barkley and Robinson were legitimate stars in a modern era. I think Barkley is very similar to Moses as a player, an offensive superstar who could score inside using his physicality often against bigger opponents, a tremendous rebounder and a questionable defender who could nevertheless play very good defense at times (when he put his mind to it?); Robinson was a different case, he was a player who owned the boxscore and could give you a quadruple-double, lead the league in scoring and be the Defensive Player of the Year but he was unlucky to have a shorter career (started later, then the injury) and during his prime didn't have a team as stacked as Moses. Still, I look at The Admiral's struggles in the playoffs and I can't put him above Moses. I still don't know how I'll separate him from Barkley but that's something I will think of next. For now, I am convinced Moses is above those two.

[Basketballefan]

Let's look at tools then. Handles? No edge (maybe Frazier relative to era because Wade loses his dribble more). Passing? Frazier (though it's close and maybe Wade gets the edge relative to other 2 guards where Frazier is being compared to 1s) . Outside shooting? Frazier clearly has the more reliable midrange (no reason to shoot a 3 in his career). 1st step and finishing at rim? Wade (this is what I mean by explosiveness to some degree). Post-up game? Frazier. Open court? No edge (both deadly, Wade more likely to take it in, Frazier to find the open trailer). Rebounding? No edge (Frazier had the bigger rebounding seasons but they were pace inflated and his rebounding trailed off as he aged more than Wade's). Man defense? Frazier. Help defense? No edge (both excellent). Intangibles/leadership? Frazier (though Wade is a class act and terrific locker room guy). Clutch? No edge (both superb playoff and finals performers known for turning it on in key situations)

Frazier is the better standstill shooter both from range and from the post. Frazier is more the playmaker and the more efficient passer. Frazier is the better defender and there's not a major rebounding edge, so . . .

What skills do you think Wade has over Frazier other than his explosiveness (1st step, finishing, general quickness/leaping type skills)?

I feel you're focusing too much on how they are putting the ball in the bucket. If a player puts up far more points on similar efficiency it doesn't matter to me how it's done. Let's take a look at their best season/playoff run.

I'm going to assume that '72 is Walt's peak, at least statistically: so we'll compare

'72 Walt: 23 7 6 .576 TS% 22 PER
09 Wade 30 5 8 .574 TS% 30 PER

So like i said clear edge to Wade here, and Wade was very elite at defense himself that year so Walt's small edge in that department can't make up the huge gap in offense(more assists, much more ppg on the same efficiency).

Best title runs:

06 Wade: 28 6 6 59 TS% 27 PER
73 Walt: 22 7 6 56 TS% 20 PER

So as i said, Wade is far and away the better scorer arguably even more efficient as well, and according to PER he's more efficient all around by a considerable gap.

If you want to being up Walt somehow being a better finals performer that also is very doubtful. (No advanced stats for Walt)
Walt 70 finals 18 8 10
Walt 72 finals: 23 8 8(in a losing effort)
Walt 73 finals: 17 7 5

It's not coincidence that Reed got both FMVPS.

Wade 06 finals: 35 7 4
Wade 11 Finals: 27 7 5(in a losing effort)

I don't see any evidence to suggest Walt was a better leader, Wade has been a terrific leader his entire career, it's not by accident he led them to their 1st ever title in dominant fashion in his 3rd season. Then also recruited 2 great players in LBJ and Bosh to come to his team, while he took a paycut. As for shooting i do not care about it, as i said if you are scoring efficiently it doesn't matter how it's done. So what i take away from this, Walt is the better defender and shooter, well he's better at those than Magic Johnson does that make him a better player? Of course not.


So again, i take Wade simply because he was clearly better at his regular season and playoff peaks. I think the case can easily be made that Wade's top 4 seasons are better than any of Walt's. I don't see enough longevity to compensate, it's simply my take though.

I would guess that it's not simply your take; I'd guess that Wade is going to win a majority of votes here in any comparison -- if I hadn't watched so much of each, I'd probably agree since Frazier also has issues of weaker era and faster pace to contend with. I mainly give Frazier the edge based on eye test; he just always looked in control of the games (hated him as a Bullets fan, btw -- up there with Jordan and LeBron as guys I hated to have the Bullets/Wizards face) whereas Wade dominates his individual matchups more and scores more but just doesn't seem to affect the team game as strongly -- as I said, mainly eye test impression.

Well i wasn't alive when Frazier played, so honestly i only have stats, impact and success to go off of. And Wade appears to take those imo.

Think about it like this, if you plug Walt into the league when Wade played, do you really think he'd be neck and neck with Lbj, Kobe, Dirk etc like Wade was in his healthy years?

[G35]

I don't have a problem voting for a player who isn't as good as the players who are already voted in. So David Robinson's struggles vs Shaq, Hakeem and Karl don't detract from him for me.

This really needs to be posted again:

Admiral vs Dream in the RS:

30-12 w/l in favor of Robinson which is staggering and cannot and should not be overlooked.

Dream 21.9/11.2/2.8 3.4 blocks 1.9 steals 2.9 TOs 44% FG 5.4 FTA 20.0 FGA
David 19.6/11.2/2.9 3.3 2.2 3.0 49% FG 7.7 FTA 14.3 FGA

So Admiral outplays Dream pretty clearly in the RS with his team winning more than 70% of the games and Dream's only real advantage is scoring 2.3 more ppg on 5.7 more shots. Robinson is considerably more efficient.

We have got to stop basing everything on one series. No question Dream got the better of Admiral in the one time they met in the PS, but the RS tells a different story.

So do you have Robinson over Hakeem? As I've posted before, Robinson had more All-NBA First Team selections than Hakeem before the injury, and also did better in the MVP voting. You had Hakeem a full six spots above Robinson before the project.

People who prefer the regular season due to larger sample size (not saying you're one of them) should rank Robinson above Hakeem in order to remain consistent. Otherwise they are basing their ranking on the smaller sample size.

This is a great point, say it all the time. Of course, Hakeem's claim to the top 10 is his "prime" run from 93-95 when he went nuts, particularly in the playoff's. I do weight to the playoff's since you are playing against the upper echelon teams (at least in the WC) night after night. Plus the further you go in the playoff's the greater the competition. Hakeem also did go through several HoF centers/PF (DRob, Shaq, Ewing, Barkely, Malone) on his way to winning two rings.

The difference between Hakeem and DRob, is Hakeem was able raise his peak performance on the offensive end. I still think they were fairly equal on the defensive end with DRob having a length advantage. Hakeem was actually more of a volume shooting center, perhaps the Kobe/MJ of centers as far as shooting volume. From 1994-1996 Hakeem averaged 21.2 FGA in the regular season; in the playoffs over that same time Hakeem averaged 22.3 FGA per game. To me this means Hakeem was far more capable of getting a quality shot off vs playoff defenses, whereas that was a problem for many big men like Robinson, especially since Robinson did not have the shooters the Rockets had to space the floor.....

[drza]

I didn't take the time to go back and look at all his playoff series and see how I thought the Spurs defense fared in each matchup. I'll trust the research others already did in that regard. It was more laziness than expecting to find no answers. And also Im a guy who puts less stock in relative performance as opposed to actual performance. If the Spurs defense doesn't perform up to their own RS standards(and this seems reasonable considering you play better teams) but is still better than the defenses of some of the other bigs on the list already or under consideration, I guess Im not sure why we are penalizing Admiral extra?

His playoff resume is a problem for me to be sure and it and his longevity are the main reasons he's not on the list yet. Every player left has some flaws and some questions and these are his.

You said something similar (to the underlined) to me last thread when we briefly discussed Robinson's postseason defense, which I didn't reply to at the time. I didn't do the actual postseason research that you referenced (I think Lorak and therealbig3 did, along with maybe ElGee?), but if I understand their methodology correctly your underlined statement isn't correct. The numbers that I saw weren't comparing Robinson (or the Spurs' defense) to themselves for a relative measure, they were just looking at their performance based on the competition's performance.

For example, the 1994 Jazz had an O-Rating in the regular season of 108.6. They had an O-Rtg of 110. 3 against the Spurs in 1994 Their O-Rtg in their other 12 playoff games against the Nuggets and Rockets was 106. Thus, in that example, the Spurs defense would be said to have underperformed on defense against the Jazz that year...not in comparison to themselves, but just as an absolute based on what the Jazz's offense was capable of and how they performed in the rest of the postseason.

And the end result of analysis like this tends to be that the SPurs' defense in the 91 - 96 period didn't do much to limit most of their opponents, and those numbers looked worse than when a similar analysis was done for the Timberwolves' team defenses under Garnett. I didn't engage you further on this last thread because I didn't want to end up too far into another Robinson vs KG comp, which isn't really the point at this part of the project. But I did want to clarify that the numbers that people are putting up about the Spurs' postseason defense aren't meant to show Robinson underperforming vs himself...they're meant to show the Spurs' defense performing at an average at best level in general (with the follow-up assumption that therefore Robinson's postseason defense isn't the strength to the extent that we normally credit him with). I'm not fully convinced that there's enough granularity there to indict Robinson (as Owly pointed out last thread, the data isn't complete enough for that) but it does tie into the Robinson postseason struggles narrative that continues to linger.

All of that said...I'd have still voted Robinson in a few threads ago because I think his positive far outweigh the questions that are being raised, especially in comparison to the other players that are currently under consideration. His struggles against the Jazz were particularly problematic when he was matched up with Karl Malone, but now that Malone is in I don't see it being as much of an issue against Moses and Barkley. Plus, we do have Robinson's defensive performance in the Duncan era to show that he could have a great defensive impact in the post-season. Said another way, both the regular season and the post-98 Robinson years still count, which helps mitigate some of these defensive postseason questions. Unless someone turns my head with some unforeseen analysis on the other candidates, Robinson is likely to get my vote again here.

[ronnymac2]

Since no one addressed this concern:

I've brought up some concerns I had with Malone, and there were some that were raised with Robinson that I never saw mentioned again:

Spoiler:

Well, part of the perspective is that Gary Payton was Defensive Player of the Year. And in this case, part of the perspective is that a player being brought up frequently—David Robinson—had poor defensive play in the playoffs, and it cost his team.

I’ve got Pippen in my top 7 for the season, so I’ve got nothing bad to say about Scottie. But the points being made about postseason play with other players are, IMO, valid; they’re also one of the main reasons why this topic exists. MVP voting is done before the postseason. Several players that had earned regular season MVPs struggled in the playoffs, and a part of what we consider—as others have noted—is whether this would/should have had an effect on the MVP voting in a season. Now, the question of how much emphasis to put on post season play is relative. Some people give it a ton; some people rate it more or less equally with regular season play. As usual, I’m in the middle about this. Considering that David Robinson had a much better regular season than Gary Payton. He was also worse on both offense and defense than Payton in the playoffs. Is that enough to elevate Payton over Drob? For some it is. For me, it isn’t—although it makes it close.

Spoiler:

TrueLAFan made a point about David Robinson's defensive impact in the playoffs. Indeed, there seems to be some validity to that, if we believe that Robinson has a major influence on their defense as the anchor.

Here are the Spurs DRtg in his 93-96 stretch compared with regular season performance. The opponents ORtg is weighted by games played vs. team (eg a 6 game series counts twice as much as a 3 game series).

1996 111.5 ( 8.0 vs. regular season) 4.7 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 112.1
1995 103.1 (-2.3 vs. regular season) -7.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 109.3
1994 110.3 ( 5.7 vs. regular season) 5.3 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 108.6
1993 107.0 ( 0.2 vs. regular season) -0.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 111.3

So it seems there is something to what TrueLAFan is saying. Perhaps with the exception of 1995's first 2 rounds...but we know what happened after that.

My general problem with Robinson, like everyone else, is his playoff performances. It's not that I viewed him as some sort of choker, just that he faired much better much better in a regular season style and against weaker competition. Which isn't too damning (we shouldn't overstate the unfortunate fact that he ran into Malone and Hakeem at the worst time). His regular seasons still count. I just know what type of contribution I'm getting toward a championship (he's a little too subject to certain styles and matchups, and when he runs into them there's a larger drop off then we see from other stars.)

1993 struggled against Duckworth/Williams vs. Portland. Then a better series against Phoenix (but a bad game 7).
1994 ran into Utah. Struggled.
1995 He DESTROYED LA (Dviac and Campbell) a round before playing Hakeem.
1996 great against Phoenix. Then Utah again...

That's something that I'll take into account, in general, for all of his prime seasons.

Spoiler:

Here's the Spurs' DRating under Robinson in the playoffs:

91: 4-game series against the Warriors, who had a 111.9 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 111.7 (-0.2).

93: 4-game series against the Blazers, who had a 108.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 107.7 (-0.6).

6-game series against the Suns, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.9 (-3.4).

94: 4-game series against the Jazz, who had a 108.6 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 2.0).

95: 3-game series against the Nuggets, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 103.1 (-6.0).

6-game series against the Lakers, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 101.3 (-7.8).

6-game series against the Rockets, who had a 109.7 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 0.9).

96: 4-game series against the Suns, who had a 110.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.3 (-1.0).

6-games series against the Jazz, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 114.1 ( 0.8).

As you can see, although the Spurs had some nice defensive series (a couple in 95, and one in 93), they had mostly mediocre defensive series, in which they allowed opposing teams to either score their averages against them, or even do better offensively. An elite defensive team like the Spurs shouldn't allow that...in general, they should hold their opponents to well under their averages.

[...]

So, with the Spurs, you have an elite defensive team dropping to above average levels. And considering how guys like Barkley, Malone, and especially Hakeem had some great series against D-Rob and the Spurs, I think you can conclude that Robinson as the defensive anchor got worse defensively in the playoffs, by quite a bit.

If Robinson's scoring fell off in the postseason and he also got worse as a defensive anchor during his prime, that's quite a big deal, as in that case, what positive value would he be bringing if he became a worse defensive anchor as well? I need to investigate this further, and if any Robinson supporters could address this, that would go a long ways toward aiding me in my decision.

I'll presume it's because there was no possible response and thus it was more advantageous not to touch it for voting purposes. I'll look into it more myself when I have the opportunity, and it will be factored in.

I'd like the whole "Robinson's defense got worse in the playoffs" addressed, too. As much as I rail against Robinson's playoff offense, I don't see a defensive decline in the playoffs, and I don't think any shortcomings of the Spur's D in the playoffs should automatically be attributed to Robinson.

Somebody would have to explain why Robinson's defense doesn't hold up in the playoffs. I can see why his offense declined: not elite range, no back-to-the-basket low post game, handles weren't great, face-up game could be squashed. But what on-court aspects of Robinson's game were flawed? I don't see it.

[john248]

Down to Barkley, Robinson, Nash, and Wade for me here with the first 2 looking more favorable. Pettit looks interesting too given where he finished in MVP voting, shooting ability, rebounding, but I hardly know anything about the guy beyond that.

Pettit looks interesting but no mention of Moses? Moses is the better rebounder (for reasons I have mentioned a few times now) and I am also not sure how you can mention his MVP shares and still leave out Moses. MVP shares are not a big evaluation tool for me, but fine if you use them- but why do Pettit's MVP shares suddenly jump Moses?

The 1st 4 are the ones I'm considering. Pettit was a name that I threw out there for the sake of more information which pennbeast later wrote up informational stuff about him. Bringing up Pettit's MVP voting is more the function of asking why he was up there during his time. There's far less info or familiarity about him, from what I can tell, than there is about Moses. Really what I wrote in regards to Pettit is exactly what I said...just to put it another way, "hey Pettit looks interesting and this is what little I know about him; please tell me more." Not a slight to Moses in any way.