Single season peak of this great scorers in the '80s

[Dutchball97]

I expected Dantley to be at the bottom but honestly he's probably at the top. Led the league in Total Points, PPG, PER, ORTG, OWS, WS, WS/48 and OBPM. I'm usually not that high on using advanced stats over actual accomplishments but when you lead the league in pretty much everything offense, you're making a good case for yourself amidst other guys with great offense and next to no defense.

[70sFan]

Dantley was always used as an example of someone not as good as his raw stats suggest. It went too far to the point when people call him even negative impact player. The worst thing about it is that most people didn't actually see prime Dantley games. There are so many misconceptions about his game. I agree with penbeast, he wasn't nearly as ball-stopper as some claim here. His role in Pistons was quite different than how he played in Jazz, or Lakers for that matter.

[E-Balla]

I don't get how can you take Nique over Dantley.

Nique was 2nd in MVP voting before. Dantley led a +1.4 ORTG team with good offensive support and his teams routinely performed at the same level whether or not he was in the lineup.

As for Owly's post George Gervin didn't miss anywhere enough games for WOWY to even be reliable. From 78-82 he only missed 9 games, that's hardly as reliable a without sample as the 113 games Dantley missed from 80-86.

I know that he was 2nd in 1986, he didn't deserve that though. Nique led Hawks team to +0.7 rORtg with Doc Rivers, Randy Wittman and Kevin Willis. This is weak result with decent supporting cast.

Dantley didn't have good offensive help in 1984. He had nice player in Griffiths and decent playmaker in Richie Green but he also played with the worst offensive starter in the league (Mark Eaton) and weak bench. That's nothing to dream about.

Doc, Wittman, and Willis were not at all a decent offensive supporting cast and you forgot to mention John Drew off the bench for Utah.

Doc missed half the season and was a 11/3/8 3rd year player in 86. They went 36-17 with Doc (56 win pace) and 14-15 without him.

Wittman was a 13/2/4 guy (career highs) and Kevin Willis was a 12/8 2nd year player.

It's absurd to pretend they were a good offensive supporting cast, they were a good defensive supporting cast and because of that they were the 6th best defense and 4th in SRS in 86.

[E-Balla]

Dantley was always used as an example of someone not as good as his raw stats suggest. It went too far to the point when people call him even negative impact player. The worst thing about it is that most people didn't actually see prime Dantley games. There are so many misconceptions about his game. I agree with penbeast, he wasn't nearly as ball-stopper as some claim here. His role in Pistons was quite different than how he played in Jazz, or Lakers for that matter.

No one will say he's a negative. Just at the best worst than Mark Aguirre who would never be included in these comparisons.

[70sFan]

Nique was 2nd in MVP voting before. Dantley led a +1.4 ORTG team with good offensive support and his teams routinely performed at the same level whether or not he was in the lineup.

As for Owly's post George Gervin didn't miss anywhere enough games for WOWY to even be reliable. From 78-82 he only missed 9 games, that's hardly as reliable a without sample as the 113 games Dantley missed from 80-86.

I know that he was 2nd in 1986, he didn't deserve that though. Nique led Hawks team to +0.7 rORtg with Doc Rivers, Randy Wittman and Kevin Willis. This is weak result with decent supporting cast.

Dantley didn't have good offensive help in 1984. He had nice player in Griffiths and decent playmaker in Richie Green but he also played with the worst offensive starter in the league (Mark Eaton) and weak bench. That's nothing to dream about.

Doc, Wittman, and Willis were not at all a decent offensive supporting cast and you forgot to mention John Drew off the bench for Utah.

Doc missed half the season and was a 11/3/8 3rd year player in 86. They went 36-17 with Doc (56 win pace) and 14-15 without him.

Wittman was a 13/2/4 guy (career highs) and Kevin Willis was a 12/8 2nd year player.

It's absurd to pretend they were a good offensive supporting cast, they were a good defensive supporting cast and because of that they were the 6th best defense and 4th in SRS in 86.

John Drew was a headache at this point of his career, I certainly wouldn't call him a good support.

[70sFan]

Dantley was always used as an example of someone not as good as his raw stats suggest. It went too far to the point when people call him even negative impact player. The worst thing about it is that most people didn't actually see prime Dantley games. There are so many misconceptions about his game. I agree with penbeast, he wasn't nearly as ball-stopper as some claim here. His role in Pistons was quite different than how he played in Jazz, or Lakers for that matter.

No one will say he's a negative. Just at the best worst than Mark Aguirre who would never be included in these comparisons.

What exactly suggest that Aguirre is better? Their Pistons careers? Dantley was way past his prime in 1989 and the difference in record with him and without him could be related to Pistons getting better in mid-season even before trade. Let's not act like Dantley didn't have success with Pistons in 1987 and 1988. Do you really believe that Pistons wouldn't beat Lakers without Magic without this trade? Or that Aguirre in place of Dantley would make them win a title in 1988?

[penbeast0]

For that matter, do you really have Aguirre behind Bernard King in career value? Scoring is almost equal per minute with King having a slight efficiency edge, Aguirre was a better passer, neither were known for working hard on the defensive end, King played more minutes/game, Aguirre more total minutes. King played in New York which magnified his rep a bit and he had that one peak season, Aguirre had more consistent team success and the rings with the Pistons.

He actually fits in here just fine.

[E-Balla]

I know that he was 2nd in 1986, he didn't deserve that though. Nique led Hawks team to +0.7 rORtg with Doc Rivers, Randy Wittman and Kevin Willis. This is weak result with decent supporting cast.

Dantley didn't have good offensive help in 1984. He had nice player in Griffiths and decent playmaker in Richie Green but he also played with the worst offensive starter in the league (Mark Eaton) and weak bench. That's nothing to dream about.

Doc, Wittman, and Willis were not at all a decent offensive supporting cast and you forgot to mention John Drew off the bench for Utah.

Doc missed half the season and was a 11/3/8 3rd year player in 86. They went 36-17 with Doc (56 win pace) and 14-15 without him.

Wittman was a 13/2/4 guy (career highs) and Kevin Willis was a 12/8 2nd year player.

It's absurd to pretend they were a good offensive supporting cast, they were a good defensive supporting cast and because of that they were the 6th best defense and 4th in SRS in 86.

John Drew was a headache at this point of his career, I certainly wouldn't call him a good support.

He was undeniably good offensive help. John Drew is arguably the greatest bench scorer ever and he averaged 29 points per 36 that year on above average efficiency.

What exactly suggest that Aguirre is better? Their Pistons careers?

I mean they were traded for each other, and not only did Detroit improve but Dallas got worse. Dallas was 25-19 with Mark Aguirre and 11-20 with Dantley. Not to mention the types of offenses and teams Dallas had with him, Harper, and Blackmon vs Dantley's lack of success with a team that seemed to get along just fine without him.

Dantley was way past his prime in 1989

Aguirre was just as past his prime as Dantley. Just to go off basic boxscore I'll use PER here. Aguirre had a 21.5 PER from 83 to 88 and a 16.4 in 89. Dantley had a 19.2 PER his first 2 years in Detroit and a 18.2 before he was traded in 89. Unless we're pretending Dantley's prime magically ended the second he got on a good offense with Isiah I'm not buying the argument that he was past his prime in 89. He was only slightly worse than he was in 87 that year, his production just fell apart in Dallas when he was separated from Isiah (he had a 61.3 TS% in Detroit and a 54.6 TS% in Dallas).

and the difference in record with him and without him could be related to Pistons getting better in mid-season even before trade.

They started the season 14-3 and went 11-3 in the 14 games before shipping Dantley out. It's not like the 32-13 Pistons were bad with Dantley, they were just streaky. They were streaky in 87 and 88 too when they went 52-30 and 54-28. Traded him straight up for Aguirre and they go 31-6 the rest of the year. No reason to believe they could've done that with Dantley and they never did.

Let's not act like Dantley didn't have success with Pistons in 1987 and 1988. Do you really believe that Pistons wouldn't beat Lakers without Magic without this trade?

I mean of course they do but with Aguirre they swept everyone but Jordan. They 89 Pistons had one of the most dominant postseasons ever.

Or that Aguirre in place of Dantley would make them win a title in 1988?

Yeah I think they win in 88 with Aguirre.

For that matter, do you really have Aguirre behind Bernard King in career value? Scoring is almost equal per minute with King having a slight efficiency edge, Aguirre was a better passer, neither were known for working hard on the defensive end, King played more minutes/game, Aguirre more total minutes. King played in New York which magnified his rep a bit and he had that one peak season, Aguirre had more consistent team success and the rings with the Pistons.

He actually fits in here just fine.

These are peaks not career. Career wise of course he's over King, but I'm not mentioning him with peak King and I don't think King without injuries would be close to Aguirre.

[70sFan]

1989 Pistons played one of the weakest competition among title teams ever. Bird-less Celtics, limited Bulls team and Magic-less Lakers.

I don't see any reason to pick 1988 Pistons with Aguirre instead of Dantley. Dantley was excellent in the finals.

[Galloisdaman]

I'm curious why you used Bernards peak season as 83-84. Is it because he was injured the next season? He was the last guy to lead the NBA in scoring before Jordan. He was at 32.9ppg in 84-85.

[Galloisdaman]

Bernard came in second for MVP. He also had back to back all nba first teams. Not sure the other guys got that kind of praise.

[O_6]

(1) When I watch Dantley, he isn't holding the ball for long stretches, he looks like about as much of a ball stopper as Dwyane Wade . . . an extra fake or juke more than the average high scorer but not like a Charles Barkley pounding the ball or backing his man down for serious seconds off the shot clock.

(2) When you look statistically at average time to get off a shot in prime Dantley offense (didn't do this myself, read it on APBR post from someone who had done the work), his offenses were generally quick hitting and high scoring. The average shot clock time was less than Nique or King's offense (though longer than English in that Denver setup).

I know it's "accepted wisdom," I just think people say it without having looked into it and then adding "without looking at more than the stats." What stats do you have showing Dantley to be a "ball stopper" to an extent greater than Bernard King who like to get into that midpost and bump his defenders before shooting?

Now, I don't have hard numbers but I have seen a bunch of King New York highlights and a couple of games and Dantley Detroit highlights/games. I've been able to catch old school King games on MSG since I'm in the NYC area and I've seen old school Pistons games with Dantley on NBA TV. So I do have a small feel of what the players brought to the table outside of just the numbers.

King was far more decisive with the ball than Dantley in Detroit. The majority of his scoring came on post-ups where he had an unstoppable turnaround jumper that he generally went to very quickly after receiving the ball and 1 dribble pull-up jumpers that he also went to very quickly after received the ball. I reviewed Bernard King's 60pt game against the Nets, and I counted that he dribbled the ball 16 times on the 18 made field goals in the video. Only a couple of those made field goals were "slow" plays.

Dantley in Detroit went ISO-ball significantly more often. There are some very Harden-esque offensive sets where the rest of the Pistons basically all clear out to the other side of the court and let Dantley go to work. That doesn't mean Dantley didn't do a lot of the same things King did, he was great at getting position down low. The threat of Dantley driving also led to defenders conceding semi-open set shot jumpers from him. Dantley scored often with 0 or 1 dribble just like King, although even on those plays he hesitated more. But Dantley in Detroit had significantly more plays where he took 5+ dribbles and pounds the rock or simply just holds onto it and surveys the defense without moving for 3+ secs from what I've seen.

After rewatching a few more King/Dantley videos, I don't know maybe I was underrating Dantley based on other peoples' opinions. A couple of things stand out. Dantley seemed to be doubled more and was good at hitting the open man, although King made some nice passes too. I think King with his turnaround/pull-up jumper being able to rise above double teams vs. Dantley's slow set shot made it easier for defenders to take away Dantley's outside shot by doubling.

Another thing that stood out is that Utah Dantley and Detroit Dantley seemed to play a little differently. Whereas my perception of Dantley's style is based mostly off of his Detroit days, he seemed to be much quicker with his decisions in Utah with a lot less ISO-ball. Although I also noticed him leaking out into transition early very often, combine that with his limited ability on defense and you can almost guarantee that he was a very low impact defender (clearly worse than King). I just wish there were more videos of Utah Dantley.

I also think Mark Eaton being such a historically unique player (GOAT level at protecting the rim + all-time bad offense) makes it hard to identify impact that his Utah teammates made, especially if you're only looking at stats. Eaton's presence just made it seem like the Jazz were playing a different game than everybody else.

Overall, maybe I'm wrong on Peak King vs. Peak Dantley. I think it's fair to assume that NYC vs. SLC being a huge advantage in terms of market + King having a much more aesthetically pleasing game involving more above-the-rim dunks may have been a reason why King finished 2nd in the MVP voting in '84 and Dantley finished 7th despite similar records. It might be closer than I originally thought because Utah Dantley seems to be less like Detroit Dantley than what I first thought, but I'd still go with the Peak version of King over the Peak version of Dantley because he just looks harder to guard due to his ability to rise over a defense + his defense might not be good but it still seems to be clearly better than what Dantley provided.

[penbeast0]

AS I said, I probably go with peak King out of all the seasons here, I just never saw him as that much of a ball stopper, just a guy who used more head and body fakes than the average scorer (which is why I referenced Wade).

The real strange one is all the people (and there are a lot) who rank him below Nique do seem to be going off aesthetics a lot because Nique's game was so pretty. Dantley is so ridiculously more efficient with his scoring, much more resilient in the playoffs, and even a better passer; ranking Nique higher seems to be saying that style is more important than results.

[70sFan]

(1) When I watch Dantley, he isn't holding the ball for long stretches, he looks like about as much of a ball stopper as Dwyane Wade . . . an extra fake or juke more than the average high scorer but not like a Charles Barkley pounding the ball or backing his man down for serious seconds off the shot clock.

(2) When you look statistically at average time to get off a shot in prime Dantley offense (didn't do this myself, read it on APBR post from someone who had done the work), his offenses were generally quick hitting and high scoring. The average shot clock time was less than Nique or King's offense (though longer than English in that Denver setup).

I know it's "accepted wisdom," I just think people say it without having looked into it and then adding "without looking at more than the stats." What stats do you have showing Dantley to be a "ball stopper" to an extent greater than Bernard King who like to get into that midpost and bump his defenders before shooting?

Now, I don't have hard numbers but I have seen a bunch of King New York highlights and a couple of games and Dantley Detroit highlights/games. I've been able to catch old school King games on MSG since I'm in the NYC area and I've seen old school Pistons games with Dantley on NBA TV. So I do have a small feel of what the players brought to the table outside of just the numbers.

King was far more decisive with the ball than Dantley in Detroit. The majority of his scoring came on post-ups where he had an unstoppable turnaround jumper that he generally went to very quickly after receiving the ball and 1 dribble pull-up jumpers that he also went to very quickly after received the ball. I reviewed Bernard King's 60pt game against the Nets, and I counted that he dribbled the ball 16 times on the 18 made field goals in the video. Only a couple of those made field goals were "slow" plays.

Dantley in Detroit went ISO-ball significantly more often. There are some very Harden-esque offensive sets where the rest of the Pistons basically all clear out to the other side of the court and let Dantley go to work. That doesn't mean Dantley didn't do a lot of the same things King did, he was great at getting position down low. The threat of Dantley driving also led to defenders conceding semi-open set shot jumpers from him. Dantley scored often with 0 or 1 dribble just like King, although even on those plays he hesitated more. But Dantley in Detroit had significantly more plays where he took 5+ dribbles and pounds the rock or simply just holds onto it and surveys the defense without moving for 3+ secs from what I've seen.

After rewatching a few more King/Dantley videos, I don't know maybe I was underrating Dantley based on other peoples' opinions. A couple of things stand out. Dantley seemed to be doubled more and was good at hitting the open man, although King made some nice passes too. I think King with his turnaround/pull-up jumper being able to rise above double teams vs. Dantley's slow set shot made it easier for defenders to take away Dantley's outside shot by doubling.

Another thing that stood out is that Utah Dantley and Detroit Dantley seemed to play a little differently. Whereas my perception of Dantley's style is based mostly off of his Detroit days, he seemed to be much quicker with his decisions in Utah with a lot less ISO-ball. Although I also noticed him leaking out into transition early very often, combine that with his limited ability on defense and you can almost guarantee that he was a very low impact defender (clearly worse than King). I just wish there were more videos of Utah Dantley.

I also think Mark Eaton being such a historically unique player (GOAT level at protecting the rim + all-time bad offense) makes it hard to identify impact that his Utah teammates made, especially if you're only looking at stats. Eaton's presence just made it seem like the Jazz were playing a different game than everybody else.

Overall, maybe I'm wrong on Peak King vs. Peak Dantley. I think it's fair to assume that NYC vs. SLC being a huge advantage in terms of market + King having a much more aesthetically pleasing game involving more above-the-rim dunks may have been a reason why King finished 2nd in the MVP voting in '84 and Dantley finished 7th despite similar records. It might be closer than I originally thought because Utah Dantley seems to be less like Detroit Dantley than what I first thought, but I'd still go with the Peak version of King over the Peak version of Dantley because he just looks harder to guard due to his ability to rise over a defense + his defense might not be good but it still seems to be clearly better than what Dantley provided.

This is true, Dantley didn't play the same slow ISO basketball in Utah, he was much more of a postup player and he was more dynamic with the ball in his hands. I have over 10 Utah games from 1980-86 period with Dantley and I believe that Chuck Daly wanted Dantley to play the way he did in Pistons.

[Odinn21]

I think I'm going to go;

1. 1979 Gervin
He led his team to the best SRS and xW in the season, and also +3.3 ORtg.
In the playoffs he went toe to toe with Erving, 26.1 ppg on +7.3 rts in the series.
Then he dropped 31.0 ppg (+9.2 rts) on Dandridge, took the defending champs to a game 7.
Though it was interesting to remember that the Spurs were outscored by the Sixers but they won the series. And they outscored the Bullets and lost the series.

2. 1984 King
TBH, going aspect by aspect, Dantley is better in most. I just don't think Dantley matched King's level in 1984 playoffs at any point. Dantley was craftier, I never thought him as a ball-stopper, if he played today coaches/teams would be devising systems to utilize his iso scoring abilities. He'd be "more" ball-stopper if he played today.

3. 1984 Dantley
Already explained so much about him.

4. 1985 English
He was very good. Just not as good as the others. Though he was very consistent. 9 consecutive seasons with 25+ ppg. But I don't think it would help his case about his peak.

5. 1988 Wilkins
Surely the most famous one of the lot. His second place in 1986 MVP race can be taken out of context though. Bird was nearly a uMVP. Nique wasn't an actual MVP candidate. If anything, I'd rate his success in that race similar to Paul George's situation in 2019.
One major thing about Wilkins is that, he wasn't nearly as efficient. He got those scoring points mostly shooting way more.
Here's how they did;
1979 Gervin 29.6 ppg on .591 ts in r. season and 28.6 ppg on .587 ts
1984 King 26.3 ppg on .619 ts in r. season and 34.8 ppg on .620 ts (he was 30.1 ppg on .631 ts after all-star break)
1984 Dantley 30.6 ppg .652 ts in r. season and 32.2 ppg on .604 ts
1985 English 27.9 ppg on .561 ts in r. season and 30.2 ppg on .601 ts
1988 Wilkins 30.7 ppg on .534 ts in r. season and 31.2 ppg on .527 ts
And mind you, his .527 ts is his best in the playoffs by some margin before he ruptured his achilles. His efficiency wasn't remotely close.

[Owly]

[but Dallas got worse. Dallas was 25-19 with Mark Aguirre and 11-20 with Dantley.

Pretty dubious use here.
Dallas with Aguirre is Dallas with Donaldson and with a competent Schrempf, with more Tarpley proportionally.

Dallas with Dantley is Dallas 13 home versus 18 road game, mostly without Donaldson (together for 2 games) with an awful* version of Herb Williams (acquired for Schrempf before Dantley reported), Wennington and Blab's mpg each near doubles and become more likely to play (versus DNP).

It's a garbage sample and I can barely fathom anyone thinking they can get through the noise to meaning and certainly can't believe anyone who knew the noise there would pass it off without contextualizing.

*

Spoiler:

Herb Williams level of awful? 8.6 PER, 0.25WS/48 for 30.1mpg in his Dallas spell that year (30 games).
Full seasons either a little better, even or worse by both metrics whilst playing 28mpg.
http://bkref.com/tiny/aMcMf
theres 39
4 are in the present, still maybe active season
13 didn't play double digit games