Re: RealGM Top 100 List #39

[Basketballefan]

Vote: Dikembe Mutombo

Well, this is hard for me. I've been voting for Mutombo the last 5 spots or so, but right now my favourite player (Isiah) is being championed at this spot. Still, the points still stand.

-Dikembe is more capable of carring a good defense than Isiah is of carring a good offense, despite having way worse support. Huge dRAPM numbers confirm this as well.

Spoiler:

Isiah's relevant offenses (all strong casts):

('81 without Isiah: 23th of 23)
'82: 17th of 23

'84: 1st of 23
'88: 6th of 23
'89: 7th of 25

'93: 18th of 27
'94: 23rd of 27 (decline)
('95 without Isiah: 24th of 27)

Mutombo's relevant defenses:

('91 Denver without Deke: 27th of 27)
'92: 13th of 27
'94: 5th of 27

('96 Atlanta without Deke: 16th of 29)
'97: 3rd of 29
'99: 2nd of 29

'02: 4th of 29
'03: 1st of 29 (strong cast)

-Isiah is a strong playoff performer, but Mutombo is too:

Spoiler:

'94 playoffs: 13.3 points, 12.0 rebounds, 5.8 blocks, upset the #1 seed and take the Karl/Stock Utah to 7 games.
'97 playoffs: 15.4 points, 12.3 rebounds, 2.6 blocks on 67.4 TS%, Jordan (50.6 TS%) and Pippen (52.4 TS%) couldn't score in the paint).
'01 playoffs: 13.9 points, 13.7 rebounds, 3.1 blocks, -14.1 defensive on/off, gets destroyed by Shaq on the peak of his powers.

-Longevity: 1196 games (997 as a starter), against Thomas' 979 (921 without the '94 season).

-Way more portable impact, can fit on nearly every team.

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

[Jaivl]

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the same way. '94 to '01 are all arguably top 10-15 seasons for me. I mean, I don't know how you could argue him not being top 10 in '94.

[Basketballefan]

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think the same way. '94 to '01 are all arguably top 10-15 seasons for me. I mean, I don't know how you could argue him not being top 10 in '94.

Fair enough i suppose. To me i'm not convinced he had enough impact offensively to be this high.

Outside of longevity what makes you put him over Dwight?

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: Reggie Miller

Feel like I'm at a lull where it doesn't make much sense to try to persuade people of things as I just kind of assumed Isiah had it last time, and hence if it isn't his this time, it's because people are going to pile on in choosing whoever else gets in the runoff.

I'm not criticizing anyone here. I'm just seeing where opinions are, and thinking this will continue until Isiah's in, and so I kinda hope he gets in, although I'll probably be one of those guys switching to whoever's in the runoff against him.

Giving it the old college try here with a "vs Isiah" focus:

It strikes me with these guys how similar the common narrative actually is between them:

These are both guys lacking a bit in traditional stats, who up their games in the playoff achieving legendary moments along the way.

It strikes me that if there's anyone who thinks that Isiah is getting underrated here, they should probably be happy that Reggie is getting the respect he is. Not that they can't think Isiah's better, but the same type of stuff seems like it should work for both.

I wonder if Indiana had won 1 of those titles, how much of the narrative would have changed for him? Isiah's case is ostensibly how much he brought it in the playoffs, but I think we all know that he could have played the same level with a lesser defense around him and he'd never have won those titles...and were that the case I really think he'd be viewed completely differently by anyone whose been supporting him.

I'll note that if we look in all-in-one stats, Isiah & Reggie look pretty comparable in terms of prime PER, both in the regular season and in the playoffs - and that's a stat that overrates the value in scoring volume rather than efficiency. And then of course Reggie has the massive longevity advantage. When I compare Reggie to other guys that I typically feel the need to champion Reggie over, I typically have to explain why Reggie's better when other guys have the better box socre stats...but I don't actually need to do this with Isiah, because Isiah doesn't really have that edge here, especially once you figure in the longevity.

And then of course there's the matter that when you start giving efficiency it's due, particularly for a guy like Reggie whose efficiency wasn't simply a matter of him being unable or unwilling to scale, he starts getting a real edge.

So yeah, Reggie over Isiah is a clear thing for me. If it isn't for you, cool, but I would at least hope that anyone big on Isiah also sees Reggie as something special.

[Doctor MJ]

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

No one is voting for Mutombo right now who thinks he was never a Top 10 player.
You need to step back from your assumptions a bit.

[Basketballefan]

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

No one is voting for Mutombo right now who thinks he was never a Top 10 player.
You need to step back from your assumptions a bit.

I would like to see evidence suggesting that he was ever clear cut top 10.

[Basketballefan]

Vote: Reggie Miller

Feel like I'm at a lull where it doesn't make much sense to try to persuade people of things as I just kind of assumed Isiah had it last time, and hence if it isn't his this time, it's because people are going to pile on in choosing whoever else gets in the runoff.

I'm not criticizing anyone here. I'm just seeing where opinions are, and thinking this will continue until Isiah's in, and so I kinda hope he gets in, although I'll probably be one of those guys switching to whoever's in the runoff against him.

Giving it the old college try here with a "vs Isiah" focus:

It strikes me with these guys how similar the common narrative actually is between them:

These are both guys lacking a bit in traditional stats, who up their games in the playoff achieving legendary moments along the way.

It strikes me that if there's anyone who thinks that Isiah is getting underrated here, they should probably be happy that Reggie is getting the respect he is. Not that they can't think Isiah's better, but the same type of stuff seems like it should work for both.

I wonder if Indiana had won 1 of those titles, how much of the narrative would have changed for him? Isiah's case is ostensibly how much he brought it in the playoffs, but I think we all know that he could have played the same level with a lesser defense around him and he'd never have won those titles...and were that the case I really think he'd be viewed completely differently by anyone whose been supporting him.

I'll note that if we look in all-in-one stats, Isiah & Reggie look pretty comparable in terms of prime PER, both in the regular season and in the playoffs - and that's a stat that overrates the value in scoring volume rather than efficiency. And then of course Reggie has the massive longevity advantage. When I compare Reggie to other guys that I typically feel the need to champion Reggie over, I typically have to explain why Reggie's better when other guys have the better box socre stats...but I don't actually need to do this with Isiah, because Isiah doesn't really have that edge here, especially once you figure in the longevity.

And then of course there's the matter that when you start giving efficiency it's due, particularly for a guy like Reggie whose efficiency wasn't simply a matter of him being unable or unwilling to scale, he starts getting a real edge.

So yeah, Reggie over Isiah is a clear thing for me. If it isn't for you, cool, but I would at least hope that anyone big on Isiah also sees Reggie as something special.

But didn't the pacers have a pretty good defense as well?

So what is Reggie's excuse for not winning any titles? I still think if he had more of an all around game maybe thigs could be different.

[Chicago76]

But didn't the pacers have a pretty good defense as well?

So what is Reggie's excuse for not winning any titles? I still think if he had more of an all around game maybe thigs could be different.

They had a good defense, but nowhere near the D of Detroit. The difference between the conference finalist Pacers and the champion Pistons was just all around quality top bottom

Rodman's defensive versatility > McKey's
Laimbeer and Smits are fairly equal (one more of a physical and rebounding presence while the other had money spots on the floor to score from)
Aguirre/Dantley > Rose or any other SF type
The Davises were both defensive and rebounding forces, but the front line committee approach by DET was just as effective.
Thomas > Mark Jackson

The only position where the Pacers would have an advantage is Miller over Dumars, and Dumars is a pretty darn good player. He's probably the 4th best player from among all of the Pistons and Pacers of their respective eras (behind Miller, Thomas, and Rodman...although I'd argue he was more important and better than Rodman at the point at which DET was contending).

There is just no comparison. DET was just do well rounded and one guy didn't need to be the mainstay defender, scorer, distributor, rebounder, etc.

[Jaivl]

Fair enough i suppose. To me i'm not convinced he had enough impact offensively to be this high.

Outside of longevity what makes you put him over Dwight?

Well, he didn't have offensive impact, at all. But his defensive impact is 1) Colossal. Certainly better than everyone else who isn't in the list yet 2) Duplicable in 95% of the teams in the league (unless you do some weird Mike D'Antoni stuff) 3) Durable (played until 41/42, and until his mid-late 30s in a high defensive level, yes he started late but it's still significant).

Howard is a much better offensive player than Deke. But Zeke is two steps ahead of Howard as a defender. He is just a longer, more intelligent player. Howard is the better #1 option, and peak vs peak I take Dwight, but Mutombo has played 450 more games than him.

You have to consider Howard's mental issues too. Drama, didn't accept his role at times, etc. You could take Mutombo at any time in his career and plug him into a 7th man role and wouldn't create problems.

Still, right now you have a myriad of options and I wouldn't be disgusted by any of them (Thomas, McHale, Miller, Pierce, Reed, etc).

[Doctor MJ]

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

No one is voting for Mutombo right now who thinks he was never a Top 10 player.
You need to step back from your assumptions a bit.

I would like to see evidence suggesting that he was ever clear cut top 10.

Well first to be clear: I'm not the one who made the statement you responded to. I'm just the one explaining something about what they said. And I suppose that means I should also say "I could be wrong but..."

But evidence? Well, Mutombo was Top 10 in Win Shares a couple times. Do you find that convincing?

If not, what is it exactly you're looking for?

[Doctor MJ]

But didn't the pacers have a pretty good defense as well?

So what is Reggie's excuse for not winning any titles? I still think if he had more of an all around game maybe thigs could be different.

I'm taken aback by how quickly you brush past the first point. Essentially "Both had pretty good defenses playing with them, so we can ignore that as a factor." No we can't. We have to figure out how good those defenses are of course if we're going to dismiss that.

I don't have time to do an exhaustive analysis of it, but it's always seemed pretty clear to me that the Bad Boy Pistons were one of the great playoff defenses of all time. From '88 to '90, they had the best DRtg of all the teams in the playoffs each playoff, and even in '87 if you limit the comparison to teams that played at least 2 rounds the Pistons come out on top.

There's added adjustments I'd like to make to pinpoint it further, but sufficed to say: No team has had a streak of such consistent #1 domination in playoff defense other than Russell's Celtics. I see no reason to look at the Pacer defense as anything like that.

(Also of note that some are mentioning Sam Jones, given the benefit he had being on the Celtics. Same deal there.
And that analysis I gave before asking how likely it was that a player would score 30 in a playoff game?

Sam Jones 10%, about 1/3rd as likely as Miller. So yeah, Jones was a guy not nearly as likely to explode as Miller while playing on a team winning through defense? No, I don't consider him to be a serious threat to Miller in my book either.)

[DQuinn1575]

Vote: Dikembe Mutombo

Well, this is hard for me. I've been voting for Mutombo the last 5 spots or so, but right now my favourite player (Isiah) is being championed at this spot. Still, the points still stand.

-Dikembe is more capable of carring a good defense than Isiah is of carring a good offense, despite having way worse support. Huge dRAPM numbers confirm this as well.

Spoiler:

Isiah's relevant offenses (all strong casts):

('81 without Isiah: 23th of 23)
'82: 17th of 23

'84: 1st of 23
'88: 6th of 23
'89: 7th of 25

'93: 18th of 27
'94: 23rd of 27 (decline)
('95 without Isiah: 24th of 27)

Mutombo's relevant defenses:

('91 Denver without Deke: 27th of 27)
'92: 13th of 27
'94: 5th of 27

('96 Atlanta without Deke: 16th of 29)
'97: 3rd of 29
'99: 2nd of 29

'02: 4th of 29
'03: 1st of 29 (strong cast)

-Isiah is a strong playoff performer, but Mutombo is too:

Spoiler:

'94 playoffs: 13.3 points, 12.0 rebounds, 5.8 blocks, upset the #1 seed and take the Karl/Stock Utah to 7 games.
'97 playoffs: 15.4 points, 12.3 rebounds, 2.6 blocks on 67.4 TS%, Jordan (50.6 TS%) and Pippen (52.4 TS%) couldn't score in the paint).
'01 playoffs: 13.9 points, 13.7 rebounds, 3.1 blocks, -14.1 defensive on/off, gets destroyed by Shaq on the peak of his powers.

-Longevity: 1196 games (997 as a starter), against Thomas' 979 (921 without the '94 season).

-Way more portable impact, can fit on nearly every team.

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

Okay a player at his best 10th in the league and generally ranging 10-15 during his prime?

I just don't see that as top 40 all-time


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ronnymac2]

Can anybody explain Nate Thurmond's offense? He was inefficient as a scorer, but what kind of shots was he taking? Seems his foul draw was pretty good. Was Thurmond in the Elvin Hayes/Jermaine O'Neal category where he had to take too many shots and because his go-to was an inefficient mid-range shot, his efficiency looks poor? What role is optimal for him? Can he scale down and improve efficiency? Was he a guy whose passing, offensive rebounding, and total USG% in combination made him a valuable offensive player, or was he hurting the team?

[Texas Chuck]

Okay a player at his best 10th in the league and generally ranging 10-15 during his prime?

I just don't see that as top 40 all-time

Im a Deke guy and I get feeling that way. The thing is I think Deke might still be stronger in this category than Truth or Reggie who are both getting even more traction. If it's a problem for Deke, its a problem for the other 2 as well.

[penbeast0]

Can anybody explain Nate Thurmond's offense? He was inefficient as a scorer, but what kind of shots was he taking? Seems his foul draw was pretty good. Was Thurmond in the Elvin Hayes/Jermaine O'Neal category where he had to take too many shots and because his go-to was an inefficient mid-range shot, his efficiency looks poor? What role is optimal for him? Can he scale down and improve efficiency? Was he a guy whose passing, offensive rebounding, and total USG% in combination made him a valuable offensive player, or was he hurting the team?

He wasn't as consistent as Hayes, more like a bad version of JO offensively. Rebounding and defense were outstanding, the less you have him shoot the better; turnover prone passing from the post as I remember too. Not sure if he demanded the shots or if his coaches were trying to turn him into the next Wilt; probably a bit of both, but unlikely he would willingly scale down enough to be a positive offensive player during his prime.

[Basketballefan]

Vote: Dikembe Mutombo

Well, this is hard for me. I've been voting for Mutombo the last 5 spots or so, but right now my favourite player (Isiah) is being championed at this spot. Still, the points still stand.

-Dikembe is more capable of carring a good defense than Isiah is of carring a good offense, despite having way worse support. Huge dRAPM numbers confirm this as well.

Spoiler:

Isiah's relevant offenses (all strong casts):

('81 without Isiah: 23th of 23)
'82: 17th of 23

'84: 1st of 23
'88: 6th of 23
'89: 7th of 25

'93: 18th of 27
'94: 23rd of 27 (decline)
('95 without Isiah: 24th of 27)

Mutombo's relevant defenses:

('91 Denver without Deke: 27th of 27)
'92: 13th of 27
'94: 5th of 27

('96 Atlanta without Deke: 16th of 29)
'97: 3rd of 29
'99: 2nd of 29

'02: 4th of 29
'03: 1st of 29 (strong cast)

-Isiah is a strong playoff performer, but Mutombo is too:

Spoiler:

'94 playoffs: 13.3 points, 12.0 rebounds, 5.8 blocks, upset the #1 seed and take the Karl/Stock Utah to 7 games.
'97 playoffs: 15.4 points, 12.3 rebounds, 2.6 blocks on 67.4 TS%, Jordan (50.6 TS%) and Pippen (52.4 TS%) couldn't score in the paint).
'01 playoffs: 13.9 points, 13.7 rebounds, 3.1 blocks, -14.1 defensive on/off, gets destroyed by Shaq on the peak of his powers.

-Longevity: 1196 games (997 as a starter), against Thomas' 979 (921 without the '94 season).

-Way more portable impact, can fit on nearly every team.

Is it even fair to vote Mutumbo here considering he was never even a top 10 player in the league?

Okay a player at his best 10th in the league and generally ranging 10-15 during his prime?

I just don't see that as top 40 all-time


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

If one puts a heavy emphasis on defense alone then i could see the argument. But to me i can't put a defense only guy this high, Bill Russell is an obvious exception.

[Basketballefan]

Okay a player at his best 10th in the league and generally ranging 10-15 during his prime?

I just don't see that as top 40 all-time

Im a Deke guy and I get feeling that way. The thing is I think Deke might still be stronger in this category than Truth or Reggie who are both getting even more traction. If it's a problem for Deke, its a problem for the other 2 as well.

But isn't elite scoring generally more valuable than defense?

[Jaivl]

But isn't elite scoring generally more valuable than defense?

If you substitute "elite scoring" for "elite offense", yeah, it usually is.

But you are not comparing a very good offensive player to a very good defensive player... you are comparing very good offensive players (Pierce, Thomas) to one of the best defensive players ever (in our opinion).

[penbeast0]

Dwight Howard v. Alonzo Mourning v. Kevin McHale v. Dikembe Mutombo

Howard 10 years, 768 games, 35.9minute per game
18.7reb 2.2ast 4.5to 26.5pts per 100 possessions @ .599ts%
18.7 2.0 4.9 28.3 @.613 for his playoff career
3xDPOY, 4x All-Defense 1st, 1x All-Defense 2nd

Mourning 10 years (+5 injury riddled ones) 31.0 mpg
14.5reb 1.9ast 4.5to 29.1pts per 100 possessions @ .583ts%
14.1 1.7 4.9 27.3 @ .570 for playoffs
2x DPOY, 2x All-Defense 1st (never even made 2nd any other year)

McHale 12 years 31.0mpg
11.4reb 2.7ast 3.0to 27.8pts per 100 possessions @ .605ts%
10.9 2.4 2.8 27.6 @ .618 for playoffs
3x1st All-Defense, 2x 2nd All-Defense

Motombo 16 years (+2 partials) 30.8mpg
17.6reb 1.8ast 3.1to 16.7pts per 100 possessions @ .573ts%
17.2 1.4 2.7 16.4 @ .587 for playoffs
4x DPOY 4x1st All-Defense 3x2nd All-Defense

Just wanted to put the box score numbers up. Except for longevity, Dwight Howard seems to have the edge, Mutombo certainly has the edge there. Howard also played the most minutes during his prime. He did have a system tailored to maximize his impact in Orlando and really ugly A/T numbers (Zo is even worse!), but also plays in an era where the rules have been slanted more to favor perimeter players. Deke had some nice playoff series but Dwight carried less talent farther. I do have some maturity concerns with Dwight that do not exist for any of the others but overall I favor Dwight of these 4 despite the passing which really hurts him.

Looking at the prime candidates, Howard for the bigs, Isiah for the guards, or maybe Pierce or Reggie, I think about what it would take to get to a title with them on the team and I have to favor Howard.

Vote: Dwight Howard

[Doctor MJ]

Okay a player at his best 10th in the league and generally ranging 10-15 during his prime?

I just don't see that as top 40 all-time

Im a Deke guy and I get feeling that way. The thing is I think Deke might still be stronger in this category than Truth or Reggie who are both getting even more traction. If it's a problem for Deke, its a problem for the other 2 as well.

Interesting.

Okay well first, as a guy championing Miller here, let's note that Miller's longevity is much better than Mutombo's. That doesn't make the question moot for Miller, but I'm rather in agreement with any who have a concern based on a non-Top 10 guy with only adequate longevity being up to a certain level. I think Mutombo tends to make us "feel" like he's was that good for so long it overcomes that, but he really didn't.

I'll also add that Miller was Top 10 in Win Shares 7 times compared to Deke's 2 times (and Pierce made it 4 times). I reference that because I already brought it up, though again I'm not saying WS are the holy grail.

Last I'll add in something for Miller and Deke:

There is a bit of a bonus I give for being consistently, extremely good at something that falls under the portability blanket. With Deke for example, who doesn't want an all-world defensive big? Only team's who already have that guy. Pretty much any other team sees that as something that could really take them to the next level.

By contrast with Pierce to some degree, or Isiah to a larger one: These are guys who have to be the offensive lead if they are going to give you impact in proportion to their stature, so you're going to get them, you have to be ready to hand the ball over to them.

And I think a point of confusion, and hence disagreement, is in seeing this like it's a GOOD thing. It's not a good thing that these guys need heavy primacy to have an impact that matches those other guys who don't need the primacy. It makes them less portable.