Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#21 » by pandrade83 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:20 am

penbeast0 wrote:
drza wrote:... The Pistons team offense was extremely consistent from 1984 - 1990 (O-Rtg around 110 every year), but over that time period all of the moving parts changed...except Zeke. By the late 80s the Pistons offense had become much more ensemble, and another guard in Dumars was stepping forward to take more responsibility. But the common thread in all of those offenses was still Zeke, and when Zeke started fading was when the Pistons' offenses started sliding.

A similar trend, but in reverse, happens on the defense ... The defense, converse to the offense, went from ensemble to unipoloar...but the common thread in all of those elite defenses was Rodman.


The Worm is one of the players I am most interested to see when he starts getting traction and when he actually gets in (if he gets in). Since those Pistons teams won titles primarily with defense, it might be that Rodman, not Isiah, should be the GOAT Bad Boy. He, Russell, and Ben Wallace are probably the three most unipolar defenders that have a shot at the top 100 (Thurmond too but he scored a lot and people rate that as offensive ability despite his volume scoring probably hurting his team more than helping it). I am looking forward to those discussions even though I despised Rodman's antics and attitude in San Antonio (and to a lesser degree elsewhere) and dock him strongly for them.


Rodman will be getting a vote from me at some point.
JoeMalburg
Pro Prospect
Posts: 885
And1: 520
Joined: May 23, 2015
     

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#22 » by JoeMalburg » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:11 am

penbeast0 wrote:
drza wrote:The Worm is one of the players I am most interested to see when he starts getting traction and when he actually gets in (if he gets in). Since those Pistons teams won titles primarily with defense, it might be that Rodman, not Isiah, should be the GOAT Bad Boy.


Absolutely not. People are really using revisionist history on the bad boy Pistons if they believe Rodman was in a primary role (at least until 1990)

A quick review

In 1987 he was a rookie and played the fewest minutes of any rotation player on the Pistons in the regular season and playoffs. He had some really great flashes, being an older rookie helped him acclimate to the league quicker I think, but he was clearly out of his element at times.

In 1988 the Pistons reached the Finals, Rodman was the teams second leading rebounder in about 26 mpg, but those minutes declined to 20 in the postseason, 7th out of nine rotation players and third among bench players. Until the Finals that year, only twice did Rodman play at least 24 minutes in a playoff game.

In 1989 Rodman really started to come into his own, especially leading up to and after the Dantley trade. Rodman was amazing in February of 1989, I'm convinced his play is why they pulled the trigger on the trade as much as Isiah's pushing to add Aguirre. From late January thru February Rodman played 32 mpg, averaged 12 points and 14 rebounds and shot 66% from the field. Laimbeer and Dennis finished neck in neck in rebounds, both just under 10 a game. Dennis got all-defensive recognition and rightly so. But he started to wear down late in the season. His minutes in the playoffs dropped from 27 to 24 a game. He was hobbled during the Chicago and LA series, only playing above 30 twice all postseason and frequently sitting out the fourth quarter with back spasms.

In 1990 Rodman supplanted Aguirre in the starting line-up and he promptly won the Defensive player of the year. He was third on the team in minutes that season and clearly a major part of what they were doing and the success they had. Still, again he wore down considerably and was very much a non-factor during most of the Pistons two most crucial series. Against Chicago he had one brilliant game out of seven, going for 20 and 20 in a game for loss at Chicago. But only one other time did he eclipse 10 rebounds and by the time the Finals rolled around he was useless. He had 6 points and 9 rebounds in game one and couldn't cover Williams or Kersey with his body failing him. In game two, Daly made the poor decision to put in ailing Rodman in on the final defensive play and with his back tightening up, he grabs and fouls Drexler giving Portland the game. Then Rodman misses all of games three and four (Piston wins in Portland with Isiah dominating crunchtime) and plays a minor role in game five with 2 points and 5 rebounds in 31 minutes.

With all due respect to someone who clearly knows his NBA, Rodman has zero argument for being the MVP of the Bad-Boy Pistons.

And with that in mind my vote this round will be for Isiah Thomas. It pains me to see the likes of Stockton, Nash and Paul above him. Only because I respect the opinions of guys a lot of the guys here who voted for them, and yet they are so, so wrong. But at the end of the day, Isiah has two more rings than all three combined, has been to more Finals than all three combined and has the narrative argument in the bag, despite the statistical one really painting him in an inferior light.

So to borrow a strategy used by those endorsing Ewing, and to follow-up on a superb post by drza, let's take a look at how Isiah Thomas impacted the Pistons offense.

Here's the Pistons offensive rating by year:
1981: Last in the league 23 of 23; the year before Isiah arrives

1982: Still bad 17th of 23; Isiah arrives, along with Kelly T., and they trade for Vinnie Johnson (17 mpg) from Seattle and Bill Laimbeer (31 mpg) from Cleveland mid-season (though Kenny Carr was the piece they coveted in that trade)

1983: Notable improvement to 11th of 23; Vinnie supplants John Long as the second guard, Isiah and Kelly T assume primacy of the offense.

1984: Best in the league. 1st of 23; Daly becomes head coach, Vinnie moves to sixth man but gets crunch time tick, Isiah takes on larger role, leads team in scoring and fga for the first time.

1985: 9th of 23; The defense begins to improve by design as GM Jack McCloskey trades for Dan Roundfield (oops) and the Pistons give the reigns to Isiah completely. Kelly T missed 27 games, Roundfield 26, Long 18, making it difficult on an already thin rotation. First season the defense is top 10 (#9)

1986: 7th of 23; the defense regresses (15th) and so does the team overall. Dumars is drafted and takes over for Long permanently as a starter before mid-season. Rick Mahorn is acquired and moves into rotation but Benson remains starter at PF with Roundfield gone.

1987: 9th of 23; the defense becomes top five as Dumars has a full season as starter and Mahorn supplants Benson and Sidney Green at the PF. Pistons trade Kelly T for Adrian Dantley which gives Detroit a much needed post scorer, though offense does regress slightly overall. Big move is drafting John Salley and Dennis Rodman who provide athletic front court depth which will be key to title runs.

1988: 6th of 23; The defense has become elite by now (2nd overall with a 105.3 rtg) and the starting line-up is recognizable for fans of the title years. Laimbeer, Mahorn, Dumars, Dantley and Isiah. Vinnie, Rodman, Salley and by years end, James Edwards off the bench. Despite Laimbeer regressing offensively, moving to Mahorn at PF, the least offensively gifted player of any who started at that position for the 80's Pistons, Dumars being a downgrade on offense from Long and the two major young players (Worm and Spider) being defensive guys, the offense gets better because Isiah figures out his formula.

1st quarter: Get everyone involved
2nd quarter: Feed the hot hand
3rd quarter: Look for opportunities to score or create
4th quarter: ride the hot hand until I have to get hot and finish the last six minutes

1989: 7th of 25; The Dantley trade fixes chemistry issues and Pistons go 44-6 afterwards en route to title. Aguirre plays less minutes, takes fewer shots, Dumars role grows noticeably on offense and offense improves down the stretch for Detroit which goes 15-2 in postseason.

1990: 11th of 27; Laimbeer and VJ really start to regress, minutes and production drop. Aguirre declines further, by playoffs he's last in eight man rotation. Edwards has resurgent season as starting PF. Mahorn is lost to expansion draft, rotation tightens to eight. Dumars has come into his own by now. Rodman and Salley have career years but their impact is primarily on defense.
Isiah adds three-point shot over the course of the season, shoots 40% over last quarter of the season and 47% in the playoffs on nearly 4 attempts per game, a very high total for the era. Pistons offense is excellent in the playoffs scoring over 100 points per game in 14 of 20 games and going 5-1 when they were held under 100, indicating the game was played at their pace.

The Pistons won with defense because they sacraficed superior offensive players for superior defensive ones and bvecause they had Isiah, it hardly hurt their offense and they were still elite in crunchtime of close games. That's why they won titles. One man can have a much greater impact of offense than he can on defense unless that man is William Felton Russell.

In addition to all the nice things I say about Isiah in my case for Thomas post, I will reemphasize this clip between Zeke and Salley after the 1989 title. "You did this ****. You're the **** man. You made it happen."

That's what the game is all about.

https://youtu.be/2eDWR_zgaNw?t=1h49m15s


Second vote: Kevin Durant
euroleague
General Manager
Posts: 8,448
And1: 1,871
Joined: Mar 26, 2014
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#23 » by euroleague » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:43 am

Outside wrote:
Winsome Gerbil wrote:P.S. this list is just underscoring Jordan's greatness if he ran off 6 titles in 8 years leading one of the GOAT teams, and the second best player on his team is barely going to crack the Top 30, if that.

By that logic, Russell should be higher than Jordan because he ran off 11 titles in 13 seasons and his teammates are struggling to gain any traction. But you can get in trouble going down that road, or else you'll decide that Bird was better than Magic because he didn't have another top-10 talent on his team.

There have been a LOT of really great players. Pippen not being voted in yet is more a reflection of that than a commentary about how great Jordan was.


His whole team (russell's) is outperforming that era, whereas the 90s are getting tons of guys in. Stockton/Malone are both in already, and that team didn't win a ring (I disagree with using rings as a benchmark, just from this logic that would be reasonable).

My vote remains:
Cousy
Alt: Hondo
HM: Curry, Baylor

oldies getting no respect in this voting scheme. Their impact in the early days of the game went far beyond stats. Can't imagine Pettit/Mikan getting so much better positioning than Cousy. Cousy impacted generations of PG, and his play and strategies are what define the position to this day.

Cousy is a legend of basketball, and that supersedes stats. He wasn't an effective scorer, and apg weren't counted so freely in his day, but the passing schemes he propagated and the styles he put into play effectively are an essential part of the game.

Hondo was the captain of the Celtics, and the best player on multiple (arguably 3) championships. He didn't get all-nba nods, but that shouldn't diminish his impact and accomplishments. Copy paste from past thread:

Spoiler:
PG: Curry, Cousey, Isiah Thomas
SF: Baylor, Durant

HM: Dominique Wilkins, Ewing

These are the players I'm considering at this position, who have accomplished great things and won in great ways (excepting durant).

Baylor was an elite player, who was in active military service in the middle of an nba season and still led his team in many ways. People saying Jerry West had a far more dominant edge in impact is obviously flawed - Baylor joined the Lakers when they were in last place, and led them to the NBA Finals his rookie year...
The knicks played better without Ewing, and Jerry West was a good leader during Baylor's absence. But Baylor had done amazing things without West already...

Cousey's passing influenced the way the game was played hugely, and he did so in an unconventional way that didn't gain any unfair advantage a la goaltending. He won an MVP as his prime was ending, and his offensive style lives on far past his retirement and beyond his success leading the Celtics pre-Russell (questionable how Russell's passing would've developed without Cousey).

Curry - GOAT level regular season in 2016, derailed by injuries in the post-season. Judging by 2017 when Durant was injured, and the winning streak even without harrison barnes, Curry still is a favorite for best player in the game. Broke many records in dominance both individual and team, don't need to say too much more - huge peak.

Durant - played at an MVP level for many years, should've won in 2016 after Curry was injured except the refs didn't suspend Green for his antics against Steven Adams until the finals against the cavs - so the cavs won for Green's cheap shot on Adams. Thunder were up 3-1 on warriors. Warriors were up 3-1 on cavs. Thunder crushed the spurs with athleticism. Cavs, with KLove/JR Smith, aren't the most athletic. Seems the thunder would be favorites. That would be a legacy changing victory for durant, and propel him much higher than he currently is.

Isiah Thomas may be the most underrated player here. He was challenging the Celtics in 86/87 with a Pistons team that was clearly less talented than the Lakers, and arguably pushed them far harder. Pistons should've 3peated except for a wrong foul call against Kareem in 88. Legendary 55 point performance, had impacts on offense and defense far above his basic stats or even advanced stats. Beat the Celtics, beat the Lakers, beat the Bulls for what should've been 3 straight years in almost all of those teams primes - but still, no recognition. His teammates were Laimbeer, Rodman, etc. with Dumars as his number 2. MJ needed Pippen in his prime to overcome Isiah with Dumars. Bird had McHale, Magic had Worthy and Kareem. People talk about the Pistons as a team, but seem to forget Isiah's role in it.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,068
And1: 9,714
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#24 » by penbeast0 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:17 am

euroleague wrote:...

His whole team (russell's) is outperforming that era....


Who on Russell's team is outperforming that era?

PG? Bob Cousy was inefficient in the regular season (though he generated lots of assists, it didn't seem to help team efficiency) and grossly inefficient in the postseason. His era was the pre-Russell 50s. KC Jones? KC was a terrible offensive player. Cousy may have been inefficient but KC didn't shoot well, didn't pass well, basically was a defensive specialist; the team was even worse offensively with KC and they were worst in the league at times with Cousy.
SG? Bill Sharman was a bit above average in efficiency but didn't provide much beyond shooting. Frank Ramsey off the bench was not a great regular season player but had a few spectacular runs in the offseason. Sam Jones replaced Sharman and yes, he did actually outperform the league; generally considered the 2nd best SG behind Hal Greer for that era.
SF? Lotscutoff wasn't much, Havlicek had a great motor which helped more on defense than on offense as he wasn't a particularly good shooter yet (one of the few player who improved significantly between 25 and 30),solid playmaker for a wing, below average rebounder. If he outperformed that era it was defensively and yet the team didn't improve defensively when he played more minutes; it was weak when Russell came in, dominated during his career, and fell apart defensively when Russell left (only to rebound when Dave Cowens came in; Havlicek didn't seem to have a great defensive impact though his offensive improved in the late 60s and into the 70s). Havlicek was a good player for the 60s, not a great one; comparable to Chet Walker (a bit more playmaking, less rebounding) or Lou Hudson (better defense, not as good a shooter) and a bit behind Cliff Hagan, but with more minutes. Elgin Baylor was the clear contemporary favorite. Hondo's moments of greatness came more in the early 70s.
PF? Heinsohn was an inefficient volume scorer who wasn't a good rebounder or defender; the exact kind of player that gets grossly overrated. To me he's a below average player for his position especially as a PF. Sanders was a defensive specialist who didn't rebound or score well, certainly not "outperforming the league." Bailey Howell, who Red got at the end (not that impressed with Red the coach but Red the GM may have been the all-time GOAT!) was a good, if undersized, post scorer and very solid player. But this position as a whole certainly does not outperform the league during the Russell years.

The Celtics, if you watched them or if you look at the numbers, were an inefficient offensive team and a great defensive team. They were a great defensive team with mediocre defensive players (Cousy, Sharman, Ramsey, Lotscutoff, Heinsohn) around Russell. They were a great defensive team with generally good (KC, Sam Jones, Havlicek, Sanders, Howell) around Russell. They won with great defense and poor offenses playing at a high pace which inflated their scoring (and Russell's rebounding). Hard to believe if you actually look at the players during this era (rather than the mid-50s where Cousy and Sharman were the best guard in the league) or 70s (where Havlicek took his game up a level) that the team around Russell was outperforming the league except for the effect of Bill Russell.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Lou Fan
Pro Prospect
Posts: 790
And1: 711
Joined: Jul 21, 2017
     

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#25 » by Lou Fan » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:20 am

Contenders for this spot: Kidd, Payton, Curry, Durant, Drexler, Pippen, Baylor, Ewing, Gilmore.

Kidd: I'm really considering him here because of drza's post. He's an elite defender and rebounder at his position and obviously an ATG player/passer on the fastbreak. He took the Nets to back to back Finals while leading the team in points, assists, and steals. The big drawback for Kidd is his lack of a pull up jumper. He just never learned how to score off the dribble, except layups/dunks, and that really hurt his teams in the halfcourt. 87% of his 3s were assisted on which clearly shows he wasn't creating his own jumpers. I do value his championship as a valuable starter on the Macs. He's my number 1 guard after Curry

Payton: I can't put him here quite yet because of playoff fails particularly the Denver series, but he is really underrated and deserves a mention.

Baylor: Same as Payton. His low efficiency and his taking shots from West docks him even more.

Drexler: I can't put him over Durant because he has similar longevity but with a lower prime/peak imo.

Durant: I have some bias against him for going to the Warriors so that sways my opinion a little bit. The RAPM numbers really concern me and his efficiency numbers and box score stats are a little inflated especially this year having played with Curry. I watch him play and the eye test tells me this as well. His box score overstates his value.

Pippen: He was the perfect Robin. He is one of the greatest if not the greatest wing defender ever and a great rebounder as well. He was one of the original point forwards his 8 assists per 100 possessions for his career is extremely impressive. He was just the perfect compliment to Michael Jordan. His athleticism allowed him to physically dominate matchups and get some pretty awesome posterizers. I have no doubt he could have been a good number 1 on a team (His Portland teams were good and his one year as the man on the Bulls was great) but I'm not sure if he could win one as the man. This might be a little too early for the greatest number 2 of all time but if now now very soon.

Gilmore: Impressive prime but not enough team success to overtake Ewing who was just a better more impactful player.

Ewing: One of the greatest defensive anchors ever with a very good offensive game. Great floor-raiser and likely would have won at least one championship if he had more help. He almost one the 94 Finals as the only star and if he does there is no doubt in my mind he'd already be selected. People are too harsh on Ewing and I think he probably already should have been selected. For more look at trex's posts they are amazing.

Steph Curry is the choice for me here because his 3 year peak 2015-now has been unbelievable. He started a dynasty won multiple MVPs and his impact stats are ridiculous. Top 5 peak all time with 5 seasons of prime that have all been very good. His 2016 season was off the charts amazing and he should have won the ring without the bogus draymond suspension and all the injuries they had including the one to Curry's knee. His last 3 seasons have gone ring, 73 wins, ring. His gravity on the court is ATG. His gravity is probably second to only Shaq and Wilt. I value peak over longevity. My reasoning is would you rather have a guy who was the capability to be an MVP/top5 player in the league and be the best player on champ for 5 years (ie Curry) or someone who can lead you to the playoffs every year and probably can't lead a team to the finals for 12 years (ie someone like Bob Cousy).
Example of Gravity
Image
1st Vote: Curry
Trex swayed me 2nd Vote: Ewing
smartyz456 wrote:Duncan would be a better defending jahlil okafor in todays nba
euroleague
General Manager
Posts: 8,448
And1: 1,871
Joined: Mar 26, 2014
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#26 » by euroleague » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:56 am

penbeast0 wrote:
euroleague wrote:...

His whole team (russell's) is outperforming that era....


Who on Russell's team is outperforming that era?

PG? Bob Cousy was inefficient in the regular season (though he generated lots of assists, it didn't seem to help team efficiency) and grossly inefficient in the postseason. His era was the pre-Russell 50s. KC Jones? KC was a terrible offensive player. Cousy may have been inefficient but KC didn't shoot well, didn't pass well, basically was a defensive specialist; the team was even worse offensively with KC and they were worst in the league at times with Cousy.
SG? Bill Sharman was a bit below average in efficiency but not terrible. Frank Ramsey off the bench was not a great regular season player but had a few spectacular runs in the offseason. Sam Jones replaced Sharman and yes, he did actually outperform the league; generally considered the 2nd best SG behind Hal Greer for that era.
SF? Lotscutoff wasn't much, Havlicek had a great motor which helped more on defense than on offense as he wasn't a particularly good shooter yet (one of the few player who improved significantly between 25 and 30),solid playmaker for a wing, below average rebounder. If he outperformed that era it was defensively and yet the team didn't improve defensively when he played more minutes; it was weak when Russell came in, dominated during his career, and fell apart defensively when Russell left (only to rebound when Dave Cowens came in; Havlicek didn't seem to have a great defensive impact though his offensive improved in the late 60s and into the 70s). Havlicek was a good player for the 60s, not a great one; comparable to Chet Walker (a bit more playmaking, less rebounding) or Lou Hudson (better defense, not as good a shooter) and a bit behind Cliff Hagan, but with more minutes. Elgin Baylor was the clear contemporary favorite. Hondo's moments of greatness came more in the early 70s.
PF? Heinsohn was an inefficient volume scorer who wasn't a good rebounder or defender; the exact kind of player that gets grossly overrated. To me he's a below average player for his position especially as a PF. Sanders was a defensive specialist who didn't rebound or score well, certainly not "outperforming the league." Bailey Howell, who Red got at the end (not that impressed with Red the coach but Red the GM may have been the all-time GOAT!) was a good, if undersized, post scorer and very solid player. But this position as a whole certainly does not outperform the league during the Russell years.

The Celtics, if you watched them or if you look at the numbers, were an inefficient offensive team and a great defensive team. They were a great defensive team with mediocre defensive players (Cousy, Sharman, Ramsey, Lotscutoff, Heinsohn) around Russell. They were a great defensive team with generally good (KC, Sam Jones, Havlicek, Sanders, Howell) around Russell. They won with great defense and poor offenses playing at a high pace which inflated their scoring (and Russell's rebounding). Hard to believe if you actually look at the players during this era (rather than the mid-50s where Cousy and Sharman were the best guard in the league) or 70s (where Havlicek took his game up a level) that the team around Russell was outperforming the league except for the effect of Bill Russell.


Hondo, Cousey, Heinsohn, Hondo, Sam Jones, KC Jones, Frank Ramsay were all - at one point in time- great at their position with Russell.

Particularly, Hondo won without Russell as the lead guy. Hondo is what kept the Celtics in the game late 60s.

Hondo led the league in points and assists for the 1968 playoffs. That's not a 1 dimensional/below par player. He also was huge defensively, and took on key defensive assignments as he was in his prime. He dominated offensively (considering the celtics had no other threats) and defensively. The only reason he wasn't all-nba was because no players wanted to vote 100 celtics players onto the all-nba teams.

Sure, in 1966 Russell was the best player on the Celtics. But in 67-69, Hondo was far superior and WS/PER/Results after Russell leave all show that to be true. He was the best player on arguably 4 championship teams.

Bailey Howell was a mult-time all-star before he was traded, and after. Hondo was a 13-time all-star. Cousy was an MVP and 10x all-nba player. Heinsohn was a 6x all-star. Do you know any other in nba history team 2 MVPs and so many other all-stars?


But, you actually missed my point.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,068
And1: 9,714
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#27 » by penbeast0 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:56 am

euroleague wrote:...
But, you actually missed my point.


No, I think you missed mine. My point was, ignoring the accolades which are inflated because of winning bias (to me winning based on Bill Russell's defensive impact) and pace inflation, how good actually are the players around Russell? You see a bunch of all-stars. I see a bunch of low percentage chuckers (Cousy, Heinsohn, early Havlicek) or weak offensive players (KC Jones, Lotscutoff, Sanders) and a few solid All-Stars (3 seasons of early Sharman then Sam Jones up through 68, a few seasons of late -- still inefficient -- Havlicek, 3 seasons of Bailey Howell).

With Sharman, Ed Macauley (a very good player) and Cousy shooting at league average and not failing in the playoffs as he did after Russell, the Celtics were a treadmill team finishing 2/4, 3/4, 3/4, and 2/4 in their conference in the four years before Russell. Without Russell but with Havlicek having a career year (and his first year of his career with a ts% over .500, a mark he didn't slide under again in the 70s until 76) plus a down year from Bailey Howell, the Celtics in 1970 finished 6th out of 7 in their conference. Celtics also still had Satch Sanders (31 and having a typical year), Don Nelson who was most efficient scorer, and PGs Larry Siegfried and Em Bryant all one season past being the NBA champions. Only at center was there a major change with reserve Hank Finkel taking Russell's place and the team fell apart. That doesn't sound like a team that, apart from Russell, outperformed their era.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Gibson22
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,918
And1: 909
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#28 » by Gibson22 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:31 pm

lol cp3 over kd
scrabbarista
RealGM
Posts: 20,193
And1: 17,864
Joined: May 31, 2015

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#29 » by scrabbarista » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:42 pm

27. Kevin Durant

28. Patrick Ewing


I have these two at 22nd and 25th.

I. Durant has a very balanced resume. What stands out most is that he is first among remaining players in my MVP voting metric and ranks above six or seven players who are already on the list.

(ugh... Nash... 15 spots too high, imo...)
All human life on the earth is like grass, and all human glory is like a flower in a field. The grass dries up and its flower falls off, but the Lord’s word endures forever.
weekend_warrior
Pro Prospect
Posts: 865
And1: 358
Joined: Dec 02, 2014

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#30 » by weekend_warrior » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:13 pm

lebron3-14-3 wrote:lol cp3 over kd


Your reasoning is not really compelling but I have to admit that I come to a similar conclusion. The CP3 ranking is the only one that really irks me so far. Imho he has no business being voted in before a couple of guys that are still missing.

One of this guys that need to be voted in very soon to maintain some consistency is indeed KD. I just want to point out that CP3 has played a total of 1900 more career minutes than KD in RS and POs combined. This is something like 50 games and KD has the higher peak, better prime and the accolades on his side.

Other than that I just want to say: Keep up the great work, I enjoy following this project.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,599
And1: 24,921
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#31 » by 70sFan » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:18 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
euroleague wrote:...
But, you actually missed my point.


No, I think you missed mine. My point was, ignoring the accolades which are inflated because of winning bias (to me winning based on Bill Russell's defensive impact) and pace inflation, how good actually are the players around Russell? You see a bunch of all-stars. I see a bunch of low percentage chuckers (Cousy, Heinsohn, early Havlicek) or weak offensive players (KC Jones, Lotscutoff, Sanders) and a few solid All-Stars (3 seasons of early Sharman then Sam Jones up through 68, a few seasons of late -- still inefficient -- Havlicek, 3 seasons of Bailey Howell).

With Sharman, Ed Macauley (a very good player) and Cousy shooting at league average and not failing in the playoffs as he did after Russell, the Celtics were a treadmill team finishing 2/4, 3/4, 3/4, and 2/4 in their conference in the four years before Russell. Without Russell but with Havlicek having a career year (and his first year of his career with a ts% over .500, a mark he didn't slide under again in the 70s until 76) plus a down year from Bailey Howell, the Celtics in 1970 finished 6th out of 7 in their conference. Celtics also still had Satch Sanders (31 and having a typical year), Don Nelson who was most efficient scorer, and PGs Larry Siegfried and Em Bryant all one season past being the NBA champions. Only at center was there a major change with reserve Hank Finkel taking Russell's place and the team fell apart. That doesn't sound like a team that, apart from Russell, outperformed their era.


Although I agree in general with your point, you underrate Bill Sharman. He was always above average scorer in terms of efficiency and wasn't bad defender either.
User avatar
Laimbeer
RealGM
Posts: 42,829
And1: 15,037
Joined: Aug 12, 2009
Location: Cabin Creek
     

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#32 » by Laimbeer » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:11 pm

Spoiler:
drza wrote:I re-posted one of my older Isiah Thomas posts in the last thread ( viewtopic.php?p=58100054#p58100054 ). Here is the post that followed that one, in 2011, where I further made the case that his impact was strong (at a time when we didn't have much in the way of impact measures outside of WOWY, and Isiah didn't miss all that many games in his prime):

Isiah Thomas 2 (from 2011...w/ a bit of Dennis Rodman thrown in). Continuing conversation with then DavidStern (now Lorak)

DavidStern wrote:
Laimbeer wrote:Some here will will disagree, but it's pretty clear to me Isiah was the most important player on those Piston teams, both strategically and emotionally. We've entertained significant evidence on behalf of guys like Russell that's basically narrative based, and I see no reason not to with Isiah.


There's clear connection between Russell's impact and Celtics defensive dominance. On the other hand there's no such connection between Isiah's impact and Pistons defensive dominance.
Well, maybe Bill Laimbeer was more valuable to Bad Boys than Thomas?


I know you were being somewhat flippant with your last sentence, but after really taking them to the lab more last night the pattern of those Pistons really seems clearer to me. And one thing that I noticed was that Laimbeer was NOT the lynchpin for that defense. Essentially, it seems to me that the 2 units for the Pistons developed in opposite ways: The offense was more unipolar early then grew to more ensemble later, while the defense was more ensemble early and grew to unipolar later. And in both cases, when there was a more unipolar period, the main figure was pretty clear: Zeke on offense, and Rodman on defense.

I go back to those ORtg and DRtg lists that you posted at the top of pg 2 of this thread as evidence. Offensively, you don't show 1981 (year before Zeke), but the first huge jump for the Pistons was from 1981 to 1982 when Zeke (and Tripucka) were the primary new additions. The next big jump was from '83 to '84, when Daly came in as coach and Zeke/Tripucka were still the main 2 options. You mentioned in that post that "With Dantley and Augirre Pistons had two of three best offenses during Isiah career", but let's be more specific and check out the Pistons' top 6 offenses in that period:

1) 1984 - Main options Isiah, Tripucka (+3.9)
2) 1989 - Main options Isiah, the Dantley/Aguirre combo, Dumars (+3.0)
3) 1988 - Main options Isiah, Dantley (+2.5)
4) 1986 - Main options Isiah, Tripucka, Laimbeer (+1.8)
5) 1990 - Main options Isiah, Dumars (+1.8)
6) 1985 - Main options Isiah, Laimbeer, Tripucka (injured a lot) (+1.7)

See, "In/out" is only one way to do rough "impact" measurement when we don't have access to +/-. Another way to estimate impact over time is through "common thread" analysis. The Pistons team offense was extremely consistent from 1984 - 1990 (O-Rtg around 110 every year), but over that time period all of the moving parts changed...except Zeke. By the late 80s the Pistons offense had become much more ensemble, and another guard in Dumars was stepping forward to take more responsibility. But the common thread in all of those offenses was still Zeke, and when Zeke started fading was when the Pistons' offenses started sliding.

A similar trend, but in reverse, happens on the defense. I won't go into as much detail, but it certainly appears that Laimbeer was NOT the factor. He was there for 4 years from '83 - 86 while the team defense was average or slightly below. In fact, to my memory, in those early days Laimbeer was more of an offense guy than a defender. In '86 Mahorn joined him in the rotation, but the defense was still slightly below average. It wasn't until '87, when Sidney Green, Salley and Rodman joined the mix, that we see the Pistons defense ratings/rankings/relative-to-average-marks really improve. In '87 it was an ensemble (Laimbeer, Green, Salley, Mahorn and Rodman all saw minutes in the big man rotation) but by '90 Green and Mahorn were gone and Rodman had clearly become the defensive leader (that was his first DPoY season). The defense, converse to the offense, went from ensemble to unipoloar...but the common thread in all of those elite defenses was Rodman.


I'm not a participant, but since I was pinged I'll put in a plug for Isiah.

I just don't buy the logic that the Pistons' best asset was their defense, therefore no one but an elite defender can be considered their most important player. It's like saying Derrick Rose couldn't be the most important player on those excellent Bulls teams. If you've got a number of excellent defenders who are limited offensively, just the opposite may be true.

I'd add that Isiah was an excellent defender. In fact, I think it was penbeast who said he considered him a better defender than Stockton.

And finally there's the gulf between how players and coaches from his era rank him and how he's ranked here. Do they really just have a blind spot or should it give us some pause? I'm not one to write off testimonials from peers.
Comments to rationalize bad contracts -
1) It's less than the MLE
2) He can be traded later
3) It's only __% of the cap
4) The cap is going up
5) It's only __ years
6) He's a good mentor/locker room guy
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,068
And1: 9,714
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#33 » by penbeast0 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:44 pm

70sFan wrote:
Although I agree in general with your point, you underrate Bill Sharman. He was always above average scorer in terms of efficiency and wasn't bad defender either.


Yes, I did and I fixed it. He was an all-star level performer (20 ppg scorer at above league level efficiency -- it's always a bit freaky to think of .485 ts% scorer as well above average but that was the 50s) for the first 3 years, still above average but lower volume (and/or minutes) in his last two.

Still, compare to Kareem/Magic supporting cast in LA, or Bird's in Bos, or LeBron's in Miami or his second Cleveland stint and Russell's supporting class looks deep but pedestrian. Even Jordan's supporting cast in Chicago was more effective in his baseball hiatus than Russell's were before or after him until the addition of Dave Cowens (despite Ed Macauley being a relatively legit 50s HOFer as well rather than just a Pete Myers type).
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,068
And1: 9,714
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#34 » by penbeast0 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:48 pm

Laimbeer wrote:...

I'd add that Isiah was an excellent defender. In fact, I think it was penbeast who said he considered him a better defender than Stockton.


I see him as a better man defender, Stockton was better in the passing lanes, depends on what you need. Good defensive PG though, yes. And yes, I consider him more valuable to the Pistons than the Worm. Just the prior post's analysis of the championship teams showed a move away from Isiah's primary offensive role that had helped elevate the Pistons to contender and toward a primary role for Rodman defensively that coincided with the two rings.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
mikejames23
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,602
And1: 745
Joined: Nov 28, 2012
         

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#35 » by mikejames23 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:50 pm

Laimbeer wrote:
And finally there's the gulf between how players and coaches from his era rank him and how he's ranked here. Do they really just have a blind spot or should it give us some pause? I'm not one to write off testimonials from peers.


The more I look into this as a method of evaluation, the more I am convinced it's the worst way of doing things, on par with PER and absurd metrics of the sort.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,512
And1: 8,154
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#36 » by trex_8063 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:57 pm

Fundamentals21 wrote:
Laimbeer wrote:
And finally there's the gulf between how players and coaches from his era rank him and how he's ranked here. Do they really just have a blind spot or should it give us some pause? I'm not one to write off testimonials from peers.


The more I look into this as a method of evaluation, the more I am convinced it's the worst way of doing things, on par with PER and absurd metrics of the sort.


fwiw, I don't think Laimbeer (or anyone else) is suggesting we use peer testimonial as the only methodology, or even necessarily as a primary consideration. He's just saying we shouldn't write it off completely (and I would generally agree).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,068
And1: 9,714
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#37 » by penbeast0 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:59 pm

Fundamentals21 wrote:
Laimbeer wrote:
And finally there's the gulf between how players and coaches from his era rank him and how he's ranked here. Do they really just have a blind spot or should it give us some pause? I'm not one to write off testimonials from peers.


The more I look into this as a method of evaluation, the more I am convinced it's the worst way of doing things, on par with PER and absurd metrics of the sort.


But is Isiah considered that outstanding by contemporaries? He never finished above 5th in MVP voting and wasn't even All-NBA the years the Pistons won their titles (though he was an All-Star and has a finals MVP). He's a great player but his accolades don't match up with some of the other guys being considered (Cousy, Durant, arguably even Curry)
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
mischievous
General Manager
Posts: 7,675
And1: 3,485
Joined: Apr 18, 2015

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#38 » by mischievous » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:16 pm

weekend_warrior wrote:
lebron3-14-3 wrote:lol cp3 over kd


Your reasoning is not really compelling but I have to admit that I come to a similar conclusion. The CP3 ranking is the only one that really irks me so far. Imho he has no business being voted in before a couple of guys that are still missing.

One of this guys that need to be voted in very soon to maintain some consistency is indeed KD. I just want to point out that CP3 has played a total of 1900 more career minutes than KD in RS and POs combined. This is something like 50 games and KD has the higher peak, better prime and the accolades on his side.

Other than that I just want to say: Keep up the great work, I enjoy following this project.

Thing about Kd vs Cp3, is that every season that their primes overlap, Kd was pretty widely considered better. 2012-2014 with little room for debate, then 16-17. 15 doesn't count due to injury. Even 2011 they were comparable except that wasn't really Kd's prime yet. I'd say Kd was cleary better over the 10-17 span, and I don't really think Paul's 08 and 09 seasons make up for that.
Pablo Novi
Senior
Posts: 683
And1: 233
Joined: Dec 11, 2015
Location: Mexico City, Mexico
Contact:
   

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#39 » by Pablo Novi » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:03 pm

From the "Top 25 players of all time by MVP Shares" thread:
Post#43 » by Pablo Novi » 15 minutes ago

penbeast0 wrote:
Do you think this creates a better GOAT list than the MVP award shares?

Pablo Novi wrote:
Elsewhere I've tried to make the case for why ALL-League selections are much more valuable than MVPs an thus a much better criteria for building a GOAT list. (The two main points: The ALL-League selection process is much, much broader AND deals with players by "position": Guards, Forwards, Center; and, historically speaking, I believe the MVP award has been flawed a number of times; whereas I've never had any BIG problems with the ALL-League selections over the last 58 years.


[ penbeast0 wrote:]
By 1st team awards (total awards, then 2nd team as tiebreakers):
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Karl Malone
3. LeBron James
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
5. TIm Duncan
6 (tie). Bob Cousy
6 (tie). Jerry West
8 (tie). Michael Jordan
8 (tie). Bob Pettit
10. Elgin Baylor
11. Oscar Robertson
12 (tie). Larry Bird
12 (tie). Magic Johnson
14. Shaquille O'Neal
15. Wilt Chamberlain
16. Dolph Schayes
17. Hakeem Olujawon
18. George Mikan
19. Julius Erving
20. Charles Barkley
21. Rick Barry
22. George Gervin
23. Dwight Howard
24. Kevin Durant
25. Jason Kidd

clyde21 wrote:
Image

[ Pablo Novi wrote:]
The ONE "slight" problem with your top list is that it does NOT represent MY METHODOLOGY.
I don't use ONLY 1st-Team selections; I also include (to a lesser extent; about 60% historically) 2nd-Team selections (and to a lesser extent still: about 60% historically) 3rd-Team selections. Throw in my adjustments for the ever-increasing DEPTH of Top Players (and over-all play of course) and you get:

Column 1: My INITIAL (ALL-League selections-based) Ranking: Column 2: "PTS" (mostly 5 "Pts" for 1st-Team; 3 "Pts" for 2nd-Team ... Column 3: "#" = INITIAL GOAT RANK BY POSITION. Column 4: Player Name

# ! ! PTS ! POS # ! P L A Y E R
1 ! ! 64.5 ! 1 ! Abdul-Jabbar, Kareem
2 ! ! 63.9 ! 1 ! Bryant, Kobe
3 ! ! 62.6 ! 1 ! Duncan, Tim
4 ! ! 62.6 ! 2 ! Malone, Karl
5 ! ! 61 ! 1 ! James, LeBron
6 ! ! 55 ! 2 ! West, Jerry
7 ! ! 53 ! 2 ! Erving, Julius
8 ! ! 53 ! 3 ! Jordan, Michael
9 ! ! 51.5 ! 2 ! O'Neal, Shaquille
10 ! ! 50 ! 1 ! Robertson, Oscar
11 ! ! 49 ! 2 ! Johnson, Magic
12 ! ! 48 ! 3 ! Bird, Larry
13 ! ! 46.2 ! 4 ! Baylor, Elgin
14 ! ! 44.5 ! 3 ! Pettit, Bob
15 ! ! 43.9 ! 3 ! Olajuwon, Hakeem
16 ! ! 42.5 ! 4 ! Chamberlain, Wilt
17 ! ! 42.5 ! 5 ! Barry, Rick
18 ! ! 41.3 ! 4 ! Barkley, Charles
19 ! ! 40.5 ! 3 ! Cousy, Bob
20 ! ! 39.9 ! 5 ! Nowitzki, Dirk
21 ! ! 33 ! 5 ! Malone, Moses
22 ! ! 31.9 ! 4 ! Stockton, John
23 ! ! 31.9 ! 6 ! Garnett, Kevin
24 ! ! 31.7 ! 6 ! Robinson, David
25 ! ! 31.4 ! 7 ! Howard, Dwight
26 ! ! 31.3 ! 4 ! Gervin, George
27 ! ! 31 ! 6 ! Durant, Kevin
28 ! ! 30.8 ! 5 ! Paul, Chris
29 ! ! 30.5 ! 8 ! Russell, Bill
30 ! ! 28.2 ! 7 ! Schayes, Dolph
31 ! ! 28 ! 6 ! Kidd, Jason
32 ! ! 27.9 ! 7 ! Payton, Gary
33 ! ! 25.6 ! 8 ! Iverson, Allen
34 ! ! 24.2 ! 5 ! Wade, Dwyane
35 ! ! 24.1 ! 9 ! Nash, Steve
36 ! ! 23.6 ! 7 ! Pippen, Scottie
37 ! ! 23 ! 9 ! Ewing, Patrick
38 ! ! 22.5 ! 10 ! Frazier, Walt
39 ! ! 22.1 ! 8 ! McGrady, Tracy
40 ! ! 22 ! 11 ! Thomas, Isiah
41 ! ! 22 ! 12 ! Westbrook, Russell
42 ! ! 20 ! 10 ! Gilmore, Artis
43 ! ! 19.5 ! 13 ! Sharman, Bill
44 ! ! 19.3 ! 9 ! Wilkins, Dominique
45 ! ! 19.0 ! 11 ! Mikan, George
46 ! ! 18.5 ! 14 ! Archibald, Nate "Tiny"
47 ! ! 18 ! 6 ! Moncrief, Sidney
48 ! ! 17.5 ! 8 ! Lucas, Jerry
49 ! ! 17.5 ! 7 ! Greer, Hal
50 ! ! 17.5 ! 8 ! Westphal, Paul

To me, for an INITIAL DRAFT - this is one very good list!
Now, keep in mind that I ALWAYS have included two more steps; with the 2nd Step addressing ALL other non-ALL-League selection factors; and the 3rd Step "allowing" for the movement of any player up or down my GOAT list by approximately 1 positional-ranking* - and I think it's a darned good system; producing "worthy" results.

The two most important examples of "1 up or down GOAT-positional shifts": MJ lists here at SG#3 (with my assumption that Jerry West is an SG). But his "Points" total is about the same as West's - so taking all the non ALL-League selection factors into account - MJ jumps past Kobe and my GOAT Top 3 SGs are:
MJ then Kobe then Jerry West.

Wilt is just behind Hakeem. So, Wilt jumping up past Shaq as GOAT #2 Center is "allowed" under my system. MY GOAT Centers then are:
KAJ, Wilt, Shaq, Bill Russell **, Hakeem

Bill Russell is THE ONE case where it MIGHT APPEAR that I allow myself a more than 1-positional-ranking shift. But as a HUGE part of Step 2, those 11 Chips in 13 years say he should pass the following Centers ahead of him on my INITIAL GOAT List: DHoward, DRob & Moses (in ascending order).

Btw, my INTENT has always been to do an INITIAL GOAT list based on "ALL-League" selection "Shares" - to see how that might look; but I can't find the actual voting (as opposed to the results of that voting) for most of the years prior to the 1986 season).
Pablo Novi
Senior
Posts: 683
And1: 233
Joined: Dec 11, 2015
Location: Mexico City, Mexico
Contact:
   

Re: Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #27 

Post#40 » by Pablo Novi » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:08 pm

VOTE: Elgin Baylor (revolutionized his position, dominated his position more than any other remaining player except Cousy) 10 ALL-NBA 1st-Team selections. 8 Finals (making the Finals but losing there is better than not making the Finals).

ALT: Cousy (revolutionized his position, dominated his position more than any other remaining player) 10 ALL-NBA 1st-Team selections plus 2 2nd-Team selections. N.B. On my GOAT list, I have Cousy (as the All-Time PG #3 (with Jerry West counting as a SG for me); just ahead of Elgin Baylor (as the ALL-Time SF #4. BUT, Cousy's been getting even less traction than Baylor so far - and while, "objectively" my system ranks Cousy a bit higher; Elgin was one of my two favorite players ever (along with Jerry West) so if Elgin goes before Cousy, that's ok by me.

HM. Rick Barry (9 ALL-League 1st-Team selections (should have been 10 but NBA legally robbed him of a Peak season) plus 1 2nd-Team selection - after Cousy & Baylor, the player with the most "Great Years" remaining.

Return to Player Comparisons