RealGM Top 100 List #81

[HeartBreakKid]

A few months ago, I would have said Tony Parker without thinking much hesitation, but objectively speaking, I think Webber was probably a better player.

Parker had a really good peak imo, I thought he ran SA's system perfectly. It's still hard to look away that Parker has come up pretty short in the playoffs, and never really carried the Spurs. Webber was an overrated player when it came to carrying too, but Parker's reputation is heavily skewered by him winning so much.

I think one has to go with Webber here. Scoring wise, I actually like Parker a bit more, but offensively, I think Webber was probably Parker's equivilant, as he was a very good playmaker (Parker also became a pretty good quarterback himself).

Defensively, I think it is a blow out in Webber's favor. Parker has always been pretty meh defensively, sometimes even down right awful. Webber was soft in the paint, but there were aspects of his defensive game which were quite valuable, he was very long and was pretty quick which helped.

My vote goes to Chris Webber.

I'm going to change my vote to Tony Parker. I think Tony can fit in more systems than Webber, thus making him more portable. Webber is too much of a ball stopper.

[Quotatious]

What do you think about Dave DeBusschere, guys? Is it too early for him, or did we all just forget about him? He looks mediocre in terms of advanced stats, but so does Dave Cowens, and he's in since #52...I see DeBusschere as a SF/PF version of Cowens, basically. Very smart player (became player-coach at age 24...), unselfish, extremely competitive, very versatile (could handle the ball a bit, shoot from outside, rebound, defend different positions, pretty good passer from I've seen, and he had some of the best intangibles in NBA history). He also seems to have slightly better longevity than Cowens (Dave still averaged almost 18/11/4, and had the best scoring season of his career, in his last campaign, playing 38 mpg, so I think that he could've played two or three more seasons on a high level).

[trex_8063]

Run-off vote: Tony Parker

I really don't feel confident voting for Parker. I think it's very close, and both guys would rank very high on my list of "players who look better when I watch them play, than they look on paper". I couldn't decide who I should vote for until I looked at 97-14 RAPM numbers (obviously it doesn't take Webber's first three seasons into account, but it still consists of almost his entire prime, and most of his career) - Parker is ranked 68th, Webber 185th...that's a significant gap.

Although Parker is my first choice---so I'm def not trying to turn you here, although this run-off feels win-win to me, as I'd be happy with either one getting in---I did want to point at an alternate way of viewing this.

And fwiw, colts18 did some manner of regression with the raw +/- data for '94 thru '96. I don't know how reliable his method is, but their does appear to be some RAPM data available for those seasons. I'm at work right now; when I get home I can post the links.

I've not scrutinized total career rank for RAPM (which it sounds like what you're referring to above); I'll state my usual method below. Adding in those years would likely improve Webber's rank only marginally. According to colts18's data, Webber's variance adjusted RAPM for those years are:

'94: +2.01
'95: -1.76
'96: na (played only 15 games that season)

But anyway, the way I tend to look at things is comparing their respective best 3 years, best 5 years, and so on (and just comparing the RAPM numbers straight up, not their respective ranks). Below is what that looks like:

Best 3 years RAPM
Parker: +8.91
Webber: +9.58

Best 5 years
Parker: +14.44
Webber: +15.17

Best 7 years
Parker: +18.47
Webber: +19.28

Best 10 years
Parker: +23.34
Webber: +21.03


So comparing them this way, and the RAPM gap doesn't appear anywhere near as much as you imply. In fact, depending on the time-frame focused on, one might give a tiny edge to Webber. He's actually got the marginal lead for the 3, 5, and 7-year periods. Tony suddenly comes out with a small but clear edge at the 10-year mark (which imo is telling of the gap in longevity which I spoke about in reply to penbeast0's assessment).

Anyway, just fyi....

EDIT: Agree regarding how well they fit roles. Neither is particularly well-suited to being the #1 guy on a good team, though Webber's probably closer. But then, as you said, Webber's less likely to adjust or adapt to being the #2 guy, if that's what is best for the team. Parker, otoh, fits very very comfortably into such a role.

[afox]

CWebb should be a lot closer to 50 than 80!!

[trex_8063]

What do you think about Dave DeBusschere, guys? Is it too early for him, or did we all just forget about him? He looks mediocre in terms of advanced stats, but so does Dave Cowens, and he's in since #52...I see DeBusschere as a SF/PF version of Cowens, basically. Very smart player (became player-coach at age 24...), unselfish, extremely competitive, very versatile (could handle the ball a bit, shoot from outside, rebound, defend different positions, pretty good passer from I've seen, and he had some of the best intangibles in NBA history). He also seems to have slightly better longevity than Cowens (Dave still averaged almost 18/11/4, and had the best scoring season of his career, in his last campaign, playing 38 mpg, so I think that he could've played two or three more seasons on a high level).

I think he'd be valid really any time now. Speaking for myself, I'd like to see Parker, Webber, Issel, and probably Bosh voted in first. And tbh, I'd probably be inclined to support Melo prior to DeBusschere, too.
But after that, DeBusschere's right there with guys like Jerry Lucas, Billy Cunningham, and Jack Sikma (for me).

[penbeast0]

Well, it looks like Tony Parker wins this.

[KilloJoeX]

Then we get to the clutch play. Carmelo separates himself from a perceived clutch player like kobe by actually hitting several clutch shots on impressive efficiency (not my intention to set off any kobe fan bat signal here… yes, he’s hit plenty of clutch shots in his career). 82games.com looked at shot data from 04-09 in the reg season + 04-08 in the post season. Carmelo was 6th in the league in makes, but #1 in the league by far in FG% at 48.1% (kobe was at 25% having made 1 more shot).

lmao perceived? look at kobe's numbers in the last 5 min of close games during his prime season on 82games.com
they were amazing. hardly just a ''perception'
not to mention hes one of the best playoff performers ever while melo is one of the most disappointing. thats the real measure of "cutch play' and kobe blows melo away as a playoff performer.
why even bring up bryant? you didn't need to make your point. its clear you dont what you're talking about.

Although I'm not a Melo advocate, I thought this post needed to be addressed since it's quite misleading.

SideshowBob compiled and shared clutch (last 5 min w/in 5 pts) RS data from 97-13 on several notable players. The clutch efficiency stats for Kobe and Melo are actually comparable.

except kobe's overall numbers in the last 5 min of close games during his prime seasons are still better, and his playoff (the real test of clutchness) numbers in his prime are easily superior. so no there's nothing misleading about i said. try responding to the actual points next time.