RealGM 2017 Top 100 #86 (Horace Grant)

[Outside]

Grant clearly has the edge as a defender.

The disparity in scoring is huge -- Carmelo career 24.4 RS and 25.7 PS vs 11.2 RS and 11.2 PS for Grant.

Efficiency -- Carmelo RS 54.3 TS% and 10.8 TOV% (low for a guy who has the ball as much as he does), PS 51.3 TS% and 10.4 TOV%. Grant RS 54.0 TS% and 9.8 TOV%, PS 56.5 TS% and 9.8 TOV%. Carmelo's efficiency isn't great, but I'd expect Grant's to be significantly better considering that he was a low volume scorer who should be taking open shots most of the time. Even though he was a big guy, he took quite a few mid-range shots. We only have shooting data for his last four seasons, but for those seasons, the largest chunk of shots he took were long twos, and that falls in line with how I recall his earlier years (though maybe not as extreme as those four seasons show).

Rebounding -- Carmelo RS 6.6 TRB and 10.3 TRB% and PS 7.3 TRB and 10.9 TRB%, Grant RS 8.1 TRB and 14.1 TRB% and PS 8.6 TRB and 14.1 TRB%. This is closer than I expected. Grant has the edge in numbers, but given the positional, size, and role difference between the two, I consider this a push.

Longevity -- RS about the same, huge PS advantage to Grant in both games and minutes. Grant clearly had the advantage of being on better teams.

Runoff vote: Carmelo Anthony

[Doctor MJ]

Runoff Vote: Horace Grant

If I want to build a serious contender for the title, Grant is a piece I'd like to have.

[Owly]

Grant clearly has the edge as a defender.

The disparity in scoring is huge -- Carmelo career 24.4 RS and 25.7 PS vs 11.2 RS and 11.2 PS for Grant.

Efficiency -- Carmelo RS 54.3 TS% and 10.8 TOV% (low for a guy who has the ball as much as he does), PS 51.3 TS% and 10.4 TOV%. Grant RS 54.0 TS% and 9.8 TOV%, PS 56.5 TS% and 9.8 TOV%. Carmelo's efficiency isn't great, but I'd expect Grant's to be significantly better considering that he was a low volume scorer who should be taking open shots most of the time. Even though he was a big guy, he took quite a few mid-range shots. We only have shooting data for his last four seasons, but for those seasons, the largest chunk of shots he took were long twos, and that falls in line with how I recall his earlier years (though maybe not as extreme as those four seasons show).

Rebounding -- Carmelo RS 6.6 TRB and 10.3 TRB% and PS 7.3 TRB and 10.9 TRB%, Grant RS 8.1 TRB and 14.1 TRB% and PS 8.6 TRB and 14.1 TRB%. This is closer than I expected. Grant has the edge in numbers, but given the positional, size, and role difference between the two, I consider this a push.

Longevity -- RS about the same, huge PS advantage to Grant in both games and minutes. Grant clearly had the advantage of being on better teams.

Runoff vote: Carmelo Anthony

On the bolded...
As stated, this appears to misunderstand what turnover percentage is. It's the percentage of possessions that the player used/ended that result in a turnover.

TOV%
Turnover Percentage (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); the formula is 100 * TOV / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV). Turnover percentage is an estimate of turnovers per 100 plays.

As such stating that turnover percentage is "low for a guy who has the ball as much as he does" is a misnomer. His using the ball as much as he does is baked in. You could argue that it is low in absolute terms. However if anything there's an argument that players who risk turnovers (for the team's benefit) without a high prospect of getting the ball (e.g. off-ball pick setters) are the ones who warrant a caveat. Other than a small handful of spot up shooters, usage doesn't look like something that prevents or drives good turnover percentage glancing at the top guys - (top - http://bkref.com/tiny/VNyf3) the guys with the worst seem to be mainly lower usage (also often pg's who create for others) (bottom - http://bkref.com/tiny/neOlp).

[Outside]

Grant clearly has the edge as a defender.

The disparity in scoring is huge -- Carmelo career 24.4 RS and 25.7 PS vs 11.2 RS and 11.2 PS for Grant.

Efficiency -- Carmelo RS 54.3 TS% and 10.8 TOV% (low for a guy who has the ball as much as he does), PS 51.3 TS% and 10.4 TOV%. Grant RS 54.0 TS% and 9.8 TOV%, PS 56.5 TS% and 9.8 TOV%. Carmelo's efficiency isn't great, but I'd expect Grant's to be significantly better considering that he was a low volume scorer who should be taking open shots most of the time. Even though he was a big guy, he took quite a few mid-range shots. We only have shooting data for his last four seasons, but for those seasons, the largest chunk of shots he took were long twos, and that falls in line with how I recall his earlier years (though maybe not as extreme as those four seasons show).

Rebounding -- Carmelo RS 6.6 TRB and 10.3 TRB% and PS 7.3 TRB and 10.9 TRB%, Grant RS 8.1 TRB and 14.1 TRB% and PS 8.6 TRB and 14.1 TRB%. This is closer than I expected. Grant has the edge in numbers, but given the positional, size, and role difference between the two, I consider this a push.

Longevity -- RS about the same, huge PS advantage to Grant in both games and minutes. Grant clearly had the advantage of being on better teams.

Runoff vote: Carmelo Anthony

On the bolded...
As stated, this appears to misunderstand what turnover percentage is. It's the percentage of possessions that the player used/ended that result in a turnover.

TOV%
Turnover Percentage (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); the formula is 100 * TOV / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV). Turnover percentage is an estimate of turnovers per 100 plays.

As such stating that turnover percentage is "low for a guy who has the ball as much as he does" is a misnomer. His using the ball as much as he does is baked in. You could argue that it is low in absolute terms. However if anything there's an argument that players who risk turnovers (for the team's benefit) without a high prospect of getting the ball (e.g. off-ball pick setters) are the ones who warrant a caveat. Other than a small handful of spot up shooters, usage doesn't look like something that prevents or drives good turnover percentage glancing at the top guys - (top - http://bkref.com/tiny/VNyf3) the guys with the worst seem to be mainly lower usage (also often pg's who create for others) (bottom - http://bkref.com/tiny/neOlp).

I understand how TOV% works. What I was trying to get at is that his TOV% is low compared to other high usage players. This is what I was referring to:

http://bkref.com/tiny/Xaa9X

I just added 30 USG% to the criteria of your query. Of 13 players with career 30 USG%, Carmelo has the third lowest TOV%. If I lower the USG% to 25, he's 23rd of 107.

He also happens to have a low TOV% compared to everyone -- he's 188th of 1,280 in the query you ran -- but the point was to say where he ranks in TOV% compared to his high-usage peers, which I thought was more relevant than comparing him to everyone overall. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[SactoKingsFan]

Runoff vote: Horace Grant

Don't see a very good case for Melo. I have Grant peaking higher with the better average prime season. Also have more confidence in Grant moving the needle on a contender.

Sent from my ONEPLUS 3T using Tapatalk

[pandrade83]

I’m taking Melo.

Horace grant is a really nice player. But I don’t see him as the best player on a 2 seed (like Melo was).

We also saw prime Melo get to the wcf as the 2nd best player in a harder conference than Horace grant did in the one year he was the 2nd best player on a team.

If I have a goat caliber team like the 91 or 92 bulls, I’d rather have grant based on nba performance only but Melo has a nice international track record that suggests he can integrate nicely into a loaded squad (different rules, so no guarantees) and should make you think twice if you’re picking grant as a ceiling raiser.

In short, there’s just more team context settings I’d take Melo.

Typing on my phone sorry for the lack of bold font

[trex_8063]

Thru post #26:

Horace Grant - 5 (SactoKingsFan, penbeast0, Doctor MJ, dhsilv2, trex_8063)
Carmelo Anthony - 3 (pandrade83, Clyde Frazier, Outside)


Calling it for Grant. Will have the next up in a moment.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[Owly]

I’m taking Melo.

Horace grant is a really nice player. But I don’t see him as the best player on a 2 seed (like Melo was).

We also saw prime Melo get to the wcf as the 2nd best player in a harder conference than Horace grant did in the one year he was the 2nd best player on a team.

If I have a goat caliber team like the 91 or 92 bulls, I’d rather have grant based on nba performance only but Melo has a nice international track record that suggests he can integrate nicely into a loaded squad (different rules, so no guarantees) and should make you think twice if you’re picking grant as a ceiling raiser.

In short, there’s just more team context settings I’d take Melo.

Typing on my phone sorry for the lack of bold font

I'm wondering what about Carmelo's international record makes you think he can integrate nicely into a loaded squad.

My first guess would be 2012 Olympics. And whilst he played well, and I wouldn't have any qualms with his play in general, as proof he integrates with (better) players ... he was taking clearly the most shots (https://basketball.realgm.com/national/tournament/1/Olympic-Games/1/stats/2012/Advanced_Stats/All/usg_pct/All/desc). And he made them (as did Love, Durant, James, Davis, Paul ...), so no complaints there. But has he integrated his game or have others adapted for him? And long term would you want Anthony being the leading shooter on that team? Is it anything that would make you "think twice" versus Grant who consistently scored strongly in (total) plus-minus 94-96 including leading the team in 1994 despite a lower minutes total than Pippen? Carmelo, meanwhile has rarely led his team in plus/minus per 100 possessions (i.e. maybe once in 2015 [Knicks with a -9.49 SRS that year], if you count Melo playing 1428 minutes over 40 games, but not Amar'e playing 865 over 32 - 2009 stands out as a time he was close).

It's now moot as Grant got in since I started composing this but Grant is a sure thing as an impact player on great and very good teams. There's nothing in Carmelo's history that gives me any hint of a second thought about Carmelo competing in that regard.