RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #44 (Elgin Baylor)

[MiamiBulls]

You think a superstar requesting a trade because his best teammate after 8 seasons is Ryan Anderson is worse than a guy in an impossibly good situation costing his team a title by targeting people's crotches multiple times in the same postseason, sucker punching a max contract teammate, and bullying another teammate who happened to be a reigning 2x FMVP out of town? Gonna have to disagree with that. The Dwight thing is incidental; the Draymond thing is quintessential.

It's crazy to think that Draymond's defensive impact wouldn't be affected if he were expected to produce on offense what Dwight was.

Calling what Howard did a trade request is very much not accurate. The threat was of him leaving in free agency, and it wasn't something where Howard sat idly by and just said "Hey, I'm going to leave in free agency". Howard, much like LeBron previously, was pushing the Magic to "do something or I might leave". The Magic of course had been top tier contenders already so it wasn't a question of "how to make the team competitive", it was just trying to figure out what would make Howard happy. They traded away Marcin Gortat and Rashard Lewis - arguably their two best non-Howard players - as part of this, which then made the team worse.

Further, Howard tried to get Van Gundy fired as coach, which is astonishing because we can now look back and know with a certainty that not only was Van Gundy doing great work, he was doing work ahead of his time with spacing.

So basically I would say that Howard had a situation that was as near to perfect as he could possibly expect, he didn't recognize it, and eventually his actions ruined what the Magic had.

And then of course he went to team after team after that and just couldn't ever seem to fit in with other talent with him playing any kind of secondary starring role. He would go almost a decade before finding a niche he could do decently - bench player - and even there teams didn't want to keep him from year to year.

If you want to say that what Green did is MORE immoral/unethical that's plausible, but I'm not talking about dinging a guy for morality points. What I'm talking about is building teams that can win titles, and ideally dynasties. You can do this with Green...but with Howard, I'm not so sure. Yeah they could have plausibly won a title if the right opponents got hurt, but in Howard you had an extremely immature basketball player who really didn't understand the dynamics of basketball teams and as a result wanted things that just weren't possible - such as to prove he could do post-up volume scoring like Shaq - in the name of his own star stature rather than what was best for the team.

Re: Draymond's defensive impact would be affected by being asked to do more on offense. That's not contradicting anything I said.

You're not sure if prime Dwight could have won several titles with Curry, Klay, and KD on his team? If Dwight was in a "near-perfect" situation, what do you call Draymond's situation? "Beyond" perfect? What would Draymond have looked like if he had played on those teams that Dwight did? You're in for a long season if Draymond is legitimately your team's best player. They each have their foibles, but you're going to blame a physically compromised Dwight for butting heads with a curmudgeonly Kobe and James "the grass is always greener" Harden when Draymond demonstrably could not have played nice even if becoming the best team of all-time depended on it? Dwight was at least partially a victim of circumstance, whereas Draymond is a perpetrator of circumstance - a ticking time bomb of inevitable self-sabotage. It's just who he is. I have more doubt that Draymond ever in a million years could stay in line than I do that a young Dwight could have gotten with the program had he been lucky enough to play with multiple docile HoF offensive players simultaneously, at their peaks, in a culture that books will be written about.

That absolutely contradicts what you implied. You said that Dwight shouldn't be given credit for his offensive responsibilities because they shouldn't really have affected his defense. A corollary of that is that an increase in Draymond's offensive responsibilities shouldn't have marginalized his defense.

Not a particular fan in using Draymond Green off-court interpersonal quirks & deficiencies as means to detract from him as a player especially as a way to buffer Dwight Howard. Dwight Howard had functional limitations in terms of his Basketball IQ where it caused dissension in every locker room he played in from LA to Washington. Howard legitimately didn't understand what he did well & what he didn't perform well at.

Dwight wanted to run an inside-out Offense in LA while having a steadfast refusal to operate as a Roll Man in the PnR with Steve Nash. Left LA to bark & command for all the Post Touches he wants while being the least efficient High Volume Post Players in the entire NBA in his 1st year in Houston at 0.77 Points Per Possession, ranked 138th in NBA & simultaneously being one of the most Turnover Prone in the Post.


This article provides a long elaborate case against Dwight as a teammate & more importantly as someone who has functionally limited understanding of basketball. The type of player who is heavily reliant on exceptional athleticism to get by.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/7/25/17613910/dwight-howard-hate-wizards-magic-lakers-rockets-hawks-hornets

[Doctor MJ]

You think a superstar requesting a trade because his best teammate after 8 seasons is Ryan Anderson is worse than a guy in an impossibly good situation costing his team a title by targeting people's crotches multiple times in the same postseason, sucker punching a max contract teammate, and bullying another teammate who happened to be a reigning 2x FMVP out of town? Gonna have to disagree with that. The Dwight thing is incidental; the Draymond thing is quintessential.

It's crazy to think that Draymond's defensive impact wouldn't be affected if he were expected to produce on offense what Dwight was.

Calling what Howard did a trade request is very much not accurate. The threat was of him leaving in free agency, and it wasn't something where Howard sat idly by and just said "Hey, I'm going to leave in free agency". Howard, much like LeBron previously, was pushing the Magic to "do something or I might leave". The Magic of course had been top tier contenders already so it wasn't a question of "how to make the team competitive", it was just trying to figure out what would make Howard happy. They traded away Marcin Gortat and Rashard Lewis - arguably their two best non-Howard players - as part of this, which then made the team worse.

Further, Howard tried to get Van Gundy fired as coach, which is astonishing because we can now look back and know with a certainty that not only was Van Gundy doing great work, he was doing work ahead of his time with spacing.

So basically I would say that Howard had a situation that was as near to perfect as he could possibly expect, he didn't recognize it, and eventually his actions ruined what the Magic had.

And then of course he went to team after team after that and just couldn't ever seem to fit in with other talent with him playing any kind of secondary starring role. He would go almost a decade before finding a niche he could do decently - bench player - and even there teams didn't want to keep him from year to year.

If you want to say that what Green did is MORE immoral/unethical that's plausible, but I'm not talking about dinging a guy for morality points. What I'm talking about is building teams that can win titles, and ideally dynasties. You can do this with Green...but with Howard, I'm not so sure. Yeah they could have plausibly won a title if the right opponents got hurt, but in Howard you had an extremely immature basketball player who really didn't understand the dynamics of basketball teams and as a result wanted things that just weren't possible - such as to prove he could do post-up volume scoring like Shaq - in the name of his own star stature rather than what was best for the team.

Re: Draymond's defensive impact would be affected by being asked to do more on offense. That's not contradicting anything I said.

You're not sure if prime Dwight could have won several titles with Curry, Klay, and KD on his team? If Dwight was in a "near-perfect" situation, what do you call Draymond's situation? "Beyond" perfect? What would Draymond have looked like if he had played on those teams that Dwight did? You're in for a long season if Draymond is legitimately your team's best player. They each have their foibles, but you're going to blame a physically compromised Dwight for butting heads with a curmudgeonly Kobe and James "the grass is always greener" Harden when Draymond demonstrably could not have played nice even if becoming the best team of all-time depended on it? Dwight was at least partially a victim of circumstance, whereas Draymond is a perpetrator of circumstance - a ticking time bomb of inevitable self-sabotage. It's just who he is. I have more doubt that Draymond ever in a million years could stay in line than I do that a young Dwight could have gotten with the program had he been lucky enough to play with multiple docile HoF offensive players simultaneously, at their peaks, in a culture that books will be written about.

That absolutely contradicts what you implied. You said that Dwight shouldn't be given credit for his offensive responsibilities because they shouldn't really have affected his defense. A corollary of that is that an increase in Draymond's offensive responsibilities shouldn't have marginalized his defense.

I'm saying Dwight had a near perfect situation for a team to be built around him as the star and he threw it away.

I do get the argument of saying "Imagine how much they could win if Dwight was just a secondary star!", but:

1. That's not what Dwight wanted in Orlando.
2. That's not something Dwight took to well after Orlando.

So what you're doing here - aside from changing what's being talked about - is assuming an adaptable mindset to Howard which we not only don't have evidence for, but runs 180 degrees counter to everything we witnessed with Howard until he was long past his prime and just happy to get an NBA gig.

Beyond this, while I'm not going to say it's a given that Dwight couldn't have been a secondary star on a great team if he'd simply recognized that everyone around him knew what was best for him better than himself, I do think it's worth considering what exactly we think Howard would have brought to Golden State in place of Draymond.

Defensively, the entirety of what the Warriors do runs through Green being smarter than everyone else on the floor. He sees what's going to happen before everyone else, moves as if clairvoyant, and communicates to his mentally-slower teammates what they should be doing. The result has been an outstanding defense. Howard could not play Green's role simply because he doesn't have Green's brain.

Offensively, Green plays a role of facilitator for his outstanding shooting teammates. Once again his BBIQ is absolutely essential to what he does...which means Howard could do nothing of the sort.

You can of course argue that some completely different approach based around Howard's talents would have led to as good or better of an overall team, but it's an argument that needs to be presented, and it begins with a statement of "First, throw out everything that Steve Kerr thought was a good idea, because even though it was brilliant and essential for the Warriors to move from a non-contender to a dynasty, Howard can't play that way."

Re: how would Dray look on Dwight's teams? I don't think Green can do Dwight as well as Dwight so I'd expect the team to be worse. And certainly this is a feather in Dwight's cap over Dray.

Re: really going to blame Dwight for butting head with Kobe, Harden? ... Dude, you're trying to knock Green for butting heads with Jordan Poole. You're really going to hold Poole in higher esteem than those other guys?

Re: Dwight victim of circumstance, Dray perpetrator. Dwight's a guy who has been given up on countless teams on his way to never winning a title. Dray is a guy who has been one of two critical pieces for a franchise core with 4 chips and 6 finals appearances. I think talking as if Dwight's a "victim" hear is a bit much.

Re: "ticking timebomb of self-sabotage". Again, only one of these guys has worn out his welcome over and over again on teams. Green deserves some criticism on this front, but not next to Howard.

Re: "young Dwight could have gotten with the program". I think it's important to realize that Dray wasn't just getting with the program, he's been one the leaders of the program. If you think that Warrior culture was a good thing, you should understand that Dray is a critical part of it.

You see Green's intensity as if it's simply a bad thing, but the reality is that it is a galvanizing force for his teams. I'm skeptical that Curry or Klay could have done much to get Howard's head on straight to be honest, but Draymond might have been the mentor Dwight and get him to be something other than the source of cultural erosion he became.

Re: "You said that Dwight shouldn't be given credit for his offensive responsibilities because they shouldn't really have affected his defense." No I didn't. I responded to you putting forth the idea that Howard could have had more defensive impact if he didn't have to focus energy on offense by saying that I don't think this would be the case, and giving reasons as to why.

Listen, Howard has an argument over Green here, no doubt about it, so by all means present it and have back & forths on it... but if you can't tell the difference between someone literally responding to your own assertion and them making a ridiculous assertion "You said Dwight should get credit for what he did on offense!" that obviously no one would be foolish enough to believe, you're not going to get anywhere.

[Doctor MJ]

Not a particular fan in using Draymond Green off-court interpersonal quirks & deficiencies as means to detract from him as a player especially as a way to buffer Dwight Howard. Dwight Howard had functional limitations in terms of his Basketball IQ where it caused dissension in every locker room he played in from LA to Washington. Howard legitimately didn't understand what he did well & what he didn't perform well at.

Dwight wanted to run an inside-out Offense in LA while having a steadfast refusal to operate as a Roll Man in the PnR with Steve Nash. Left LA to bark & command for all the Post Touches he wants while being the least efficient High Volume Post Players in the entire NBA in his 1st year in Houston at 0.77 Points Per Possession, ranked 138th in NBA & simultaneously being one of the most Turnover Prone in the Post.


This article provides a long elaborate case against Dwight as a teammate & more importantly as someone who has functionally limited understanding of basketball. The type of player who is heavily reliant on exceptional athleticism to get by.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/7/25/17613910/dwight-howard-hate-wizards-magic-lakers-rockets-hawks-hornets

Well said.

People have this tendency to assume that alphas could be amazing betas or role players if they just were asked to do less, and this is rarely so. When it is true, the player in question has to be someone a) focused primarily on the team rather than their own ego, and b) they have to have good intuition about the subtle ways in which teams function.

A guy who was a superstar as a young guy and then couldn't find a way to stick with teams again and again and again is very clearly not of this sort, and this would be clear even if we didn't have all of the other stories of Howard pushing back against what better basketball brains asked him to do and not taking care of his body.

[Mogspan]

Like clockwork, basketball genius Draymond Green tries to commit patricide against Gobert. It’s almost like he timed the suspension so that he doesn’t have to play without Steph. Replace Green with Tayshaun Prince in 2015 and they win 5 titles. Or did Tayshaun not have the tremendous basketball IQ necessary to be officiated more leniently than every player in league history and to dribble and throw a round ball in the general direction of Steph Curry and Klay Thompson?

[Clyde Frazier]

The point about draymond's on court (and off court in the case of Poole) antics is definitely worth bringing up. As a duo with curry he provides all time great impact, and yet may have cost his team a championship because he couldn't control himself.

I don't know how you parse that out (especially since it wasn't an isolated incident), but it should affect his ranking somehow. It even comes into question is this guy a dirty player? I think "reckless" is more apt, but that's still a negative to me.

And this is coming from someone who respects how important his role has been in the warriors' title runs. I've always thought of him as "the straw that stirs the drink." That's what makes his volatility all the more frustrating.

Read on Twitter

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Mogspan]

The point about draymond's on court (and off court in the case of Poole) antics is definitely worth bringing up. As a duo with curry he provides all time great impact, and yet may have cost his team a championship because he couldn't control himself.

I don't know how you parse that out (especially since it wasn't an isolated incident), but it should affect his ranking somehow. It even comes into question is this guy a dirty player? I think "reckless" is more apt, but that's still a negative to me.

And this is coming from someone who respects how important his role has been in the warriors' title runs. I've always thought of him as "the straw that stirs the drink." That's what makes his volatility all the more frustrating.

Read on Twitter

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You’re so unsophisticated. Draymond may have attempted to sterilize and asphyxiate his opponents on at least 4 occasions, but Dwight Howard didn’t get along with Kobe Bryant! Draymond just processes the game on such a deep level that the above clip actually helps the dubs. No one else would have had the brainpower to make such an astute decision to benefit his team. The man is operating on a higher level and totally would have lasted more than three years in the league had he been on any other squad.

[Clyde Frazier]

--

Please don't use this thread to just hate on draymond. Not the point of the discussion and you're already on the edge of a derailing warning with the last 2 posts. Thanks.

[Djoker]

It's way too early for Draymond at this point IMHO. Using his plus-minus numbers also ignores the potentially huge multicollinearity problem between him and Steph. Dray at his best (like 2016 and 2017) was a fringe top 10 player in the league which is way too low to have him at #40 something all-time. We still have guys who were league MVP's (Unseld, Reed, McAdoo, Walton, Westbrook) or led their teams to title (Arizin, again Walton) who haven't gotten in yet vs. Draymond who only made one All-NBA 2nd Team and one All-NBA 3rd Team in his career. And a long list of guys who were actually considered better than Draymond in their primes.

[Mogspan]

It's way too early for Draymond at this point IMHO. Using his plus-minus numbers also ignores the potentially huge multicollinearity problem between him and Steph. Dray at his best (like 2016 and 2017) was a fringe top 10 player in the league which is way too low to have him at #40 something all-time. We still have guys who were league MVP's (Unseld, Reed, McAdoo, Walton, Westbrook) or led their teams to title (Arizin, again Walton) who haven't gotten in yet vs. Draymond who only made one All-NBA 2nd Team and one All-NBA 3rd Team in his career. And a long list of guys who were actually considered better than Draymond in their primes.

Nah Draymond was legitimately playing at a weak MVP level when he was hitting threes and in DPOY form. I'd take peak Draymond over all of those guys except Walton and maybe Westbrook, who I didn't even notice was still a nominee because I thought there were only 5.

I am however highly suspicious of what his career would have looked like on a "normal" team. It does seem like he makes a concerted effort to not play whenever Steph is out, and I'm apparently not the only one who's noticed.

[MrLurker]

--

Please don't use this thread to just hate on draymond. Not the point of the discussion and you're already on the edge of a derailing warning with the last 2 posts. Thanks.

For the sake of future conduct - I would prefer not to cross any lines - would you be willing to offer some clarification here?

Green looks like a plausible inductee. Is negative commentary regarding a candidate seen as derailing?

[Mogspan]

--

Please don't use this thread to just hate on draymond. Not the point of the discussion and you're already on the edge of a derailing warning with the last 2 posts. Thanks.

For the sake of future conduct - I would prefer not to cross any lines - would you be willing to offer some clarification here?

Green looks like a plausible inductee. Is negative commentary regarding a candidate seen as derailing?

Tbf I was being a little “extra.” I’m a Wolves fan and had a few IPAs in me

[Clyde Frazier]

--

Please don't use this thread to just hate on draymond. Not the point of the discussion and you're already on the edge of a derailing warning with the last 2 posts. Thanks.

For the sake of future conduct - I would prefer not to cross any lines - would you be willing to offer some clarification here?

Green looks like a plausible inductee. Is negative commentary regarding a candidate seen as derailing?

Of course not. Mogspan's initial post in the thread re: Draymond was fine. Their last 2 posts prior to my warning were unnecessary in arguing against draymond. Not hard to see the clear difference.

Here's their initial post: viewtopic.php?p=109219180#p109219180

[sp6r=underrated]

I'm not in this project but FWIW I would take Green over Howard.

That said if Green was only as good at basketball as Howard he would have been kicked out of the NBA years ago.

[Doctor MJ]

It's way too early for Draymond at this point IMHO. Using his plus-minus numbers also ignores the potentially huge multicollinearity problem between him and Steph. Dray at his best (like 2016 and 2017) was a fringe top 10 player in the league which is way too low to have him at #40 something all-time. We still have guys who were league MVP's (Unseld, Reed, McAdoo, Walton, Westbrook) or led their teams to title (Arizin, again Walton) who haven't gotten in yet vs. Draymond who only made one All-NBA 2nd Team and one All-NBA 3rd Team in his career. And a long list of guys who were actually considered better than Draymond in their primes.

Hmm. Can you elaborate on the "potentially huge multicollinearity problem"? I fear you're just looking at the fact that the two are teammates and Green looks better with the stat than you think he should, hence "multicollinearity".

Key things to understand:

1. Multicollinearity isn't something that we talk about because it makes regression stats treat all teammates the same. That's what happens with raw +/- data, but when you use regression multicollinearity issues tend to make the difference between teammates look absurdly extreme. The classic basketball case here involved the '00s Pistons where you had a team utterly ride a 5-man lineup (Billups/Hamilton/Prince/Wallace/Wallace) to great success, but APM made it look like some of those 5 were gods and others were terrible, because it was basing so much on the small sample where the guys played separately.

RAPM handles these issues better - one of the reasons why RAPM is preferred by most - but regardless, those issues are not really the same sort of issue you fear here involving Curry & Green.

2. In general it makes sense to question how good the #2 guy really is when he plays a lot with the #1, but there's a really helpful thing in this case:

Curry's the offensive star. Green's the defensive star.

We have ORAPM and DRAPM. The former favors Curry by a lot, the latter favors Green by a lot.

I'm not really sure what reason there is to doubt Green's DRAPM. We know the Warriors' have mostly had great defenses during this run. We know that Green has generally been the big-minute big. We know that he makes all sorts of heady plays. We know that he quarterbacks the team's defense actively communicating with his teammates. So what exactly is the concern?

Re: Dray at his best fringe Top 10. I disagree. I have Green as a Top 5 player for the seasons from '14-15 to '16-17. No reason why opinion should sway you, but you assert your statement like it's something everyone agrees on, and I don't agree.

Re: Guys who have won MVPs. This is an accolade decided by people's opinions. Of the group you list, the only one I would rank as my POY is Walton, and Walton's issues involving longevity are known and are the reason I didn't start voting him long ago.

Re: Arizin. Glad you mention him as he's a guy I'm high on and I'm currently nominating. Similar to Walton, he gets held back by longevity.

Now as I say that, that might be something you and others want to push back on and I'm here for that. Arizin played more regular season minutes than Green and was an all-star from start to finish. Maybe he should be ahead of Green. On my POY Shares list, he ranks higher than Green, so why am I voting Green first?

Well, just to speak to the process I used - warts and all:

Among contemporaries, I placed Arizin below Schayes.
Across eras, I placed Schayes below Green.

I've been pretty up front over time about the Arizin vs Schayes debate. Arizin was better at basketball, but his career is all broken up by circumstances. Arizin had only one prime year (where he was the clear cut best offensive player in the world) before being called off to military duty, then it seemed to take him a year to get his groove back, you can generously award him 4 more years of prime before Wilt comes, and then with Wilt while Arizin puts up solid numbers, the team doesn't remotely play up to its talent level (for reasons that I think are mostly about Wilt, but it is what it is).

All of this has meant that I eventually was convinced by the pro-Schayes side of the argument and put him first due to his longevity.

What about Schayes vs Green? Well, I'm literally more impressed with Green as a basketball player than I am Schayes. I'd say Schayes would be viewed very differently if his team hadn't won that single title, and to say that that title run wasn't Schayes' finest moment is an understatement. The Nationals won that title with defense, and Schayes was the weak link of that defense. In the Finals Game 7, Schayes wasn't even one of the 5 main players for the Nats (though he did still shoot more than any of his teammates - a horrific 4-18 - even in limited minutes).

Of course, I still gave my Vote 2 to Schayes last thread so I'm not as low on him as I could possibly be. In comparison to Baylor, Howard & Westbrook, Schayes can claim to be someone who remained a positive value for a long time, whereas all the other guys peaked early based on athleticism and played sub-optimally given their limitations afterward. That was enough for me to give the nod to Schayes over them, but not over a guy like Green who I see as being the best defensive player of a decade and an absolutely critical member of a dynasty.

[iggymcfrack]

Vote: Russell Westbrook
Best player left by a mile. Insane 6 year prime. Even better single year peak in 2017. All-time box stats and very underrated impact stats too.

Alternate: Clyde Drexler
Good long prime with 12 seasons with a BPM over 4. Surprisingly good on/off numbers his last couple seasons when it became available.

[iggymcfrack]

Not a lot of votes so far. I have the current vote count at:

Baylor 2
Westbrook 1
Dwight 1
Draymond 1

[Djoker]

Hmm. Can you elaborate on the "potentially huge multicollinearity problem"? I fear you're just looking at the fact that the two are teammates and Green looks better with the stat than you think he should, hence "multicollinearity".

Key things to understand:

1. Multicollinearity isn't something that we talk about because it makes regression stats treat all teammates the same. That's what happens with raw +/- data, but when you use regression multicollinearity issues tend to make the difference between teammates look absurdly extreme. The classic basketball case here involved the '00s Pistons where you had a team utterly ride a 5-man lineup (Billups/Hamilton/Prince/Wallace/Wallace) to great success, but APM made it look like some of those 5 were gods and others were terrible, because it was basing so much on the small sample where the guys played separately.

RAPM handles these issues better - one of the reasons why RAPM is preferred by most - but regardless, those issues are not really the same sort of issue you fear here involving Curry & Green.

2. In general it makes sense to question how good the #2 guy really is when he plays a lot with the #1, but there's a really helpful thing in this case:

Curry's the offensive star. Green's the defensive star.

We have ORAPM and DRAPM. The former favors Curry by a lot, the latter favors Green by a lot.

I'm not really sure what reason there is to doubt Green's DRAPM. We know the Warriors' have mostly had great defenses during this run. We know that Green has generally been the big-minute big. We know that he makes all sorts of heady plays. We know that he quarterbacks the team's defense actively communicating with his teammates. So what exactly is the concern?

Re: Dray at his best fringe Top 10. I disagree. I have Green as a Top 5 player for the seasons from '14-15 to '16-17. No reason why opinion should sway you, but you assert your statement like it's something everyone agrees on, and I don't agree.

Re: Guys who have won MVPs. This is an accolade decided by people's opinions. Of the group you list, the only one I would rank as my POY is Walton, and Walton's issues involving longevity are known and are the reason I didn't start voting him long ago.

Re: Arizin. Glad you mention him as he's a guy I'm high on and I'm currently nominating. Similar to Walton, he gets held back by longevity.

Now as I say that, that might be something you and others want to push back on and I'm here for that. Arizin played more regular season minutes than Green and was an all-star from start to finish. Maybe he should be ahead of Green. On my POY Shares list, he ranks higher than Green, so why am I voting Green first?

Well, just to speak to the process I used - warts and all:

Among contemporaries, I placed Arizin below Schayes.
Across eras, I placed Schayes below Green.

I've been pretty up front over time about the Arizin vs Schayes debate. Arizin was better at basketball, but his career is all broken up by circumstances. Arizin had only one prime year (where he was the clear cut best offensive player in the world) before being called off to military duty, then it seemed to take him a year to get his groove back, you can generously award him 4 more years of prime before Wilt comes, and then with Wilt while Arizin puts up solid numbers, the team doesn't remotely play up to its talent level (for reasons that I think are mostly about Wilt, but it is what it is).

All of this has meant that I eventually was convinced by the pro-Schayes side of the argument and put him first due to his longevity.

What about Schayes vs Green? Well, I'm literally more impressed with Green as a basketball player than I am Schayes. I'd say Schayes would be viewed very differently if his team hadn't won that single title, and to say that that title run wasn't Schayes' finest moment is an understatement. The Nationals won that title with defense, and Schayes was the weak link of that defense. In the Finals Game 7, Schayes wasn't even one of the 5 main players for the Nats (though he did still shoot more than any of his teammates - a horrific 4-18 - even in limited minutes).

Of course, I still gave my Vote 2 to Schayes last thread so I'm not as low on him as I could possibly be. In comparison to Baylor, Howard & Westbrook, Schayes can claim to be someone who remained a positive value for a long time, whereas all the other guys peaked early based on athleticism and played sub-optimally given their limitations afterward. That was enough for me to give the nod to Schayes over them, but not over a guy like Green who I see as being the best defensive player of a decade and an absolutely critical member of a dynasty.

A lot of your post is quite fair but I have a few disagreements.

I think saying Curry is the offensive star and Green the defensive star is a huge oversimplification and overrates Green.

Curry was by far the biggest offensive lifter on that team but the Warriors had many excellent defensive contributors. Bogut looks fantastic on defense, Igoudala is an all-time great perimeter defender, Klay is a very good defender, even Curry is above average. All of these guys are making some serious impact on defense. Green is just one (albeit the most important) piece of the defensive puzzle but Warriors given their roster still look like a defensive force without Green.

Speaking of Curry, Green is probably a perfect example of a player that historically benefitted from playing with another great. Green's skillset of great defense and passing makes him valuable on high level teams but not valuable on low level teams. Other examples historically are Rodman and Ben Wallace. They need someone else to build the foundation and then they solidify it but I consider players that build foundations in much higher esteem because they are doing what is a more difficult task.

Hopefully I was clear enough and you get what I'm trying to say.

Top 5 in 2015? Despite not missing practically any games, Green wasn't even an all-star that year. Even in 2016 which is undoubtedly his peak, I would easily take Lebron, Curry, Durant, Westbrook, Kawhi, Davis, and CP3 over him. Like I don't know what argument he has over any of them. They are all massive impact guys so best case to me he's the 8th best player.

The more I look at it, the more I can see the parallels between Unseld and Draymond. Both undersized bigs who excelled at defense, both excellent passers, both limited scorers... with Unseld the better rebounder and having better prime longevity. Unseld was super overrated getting that MVP while Green is probably a slight bit underrated but again what makes Green better than Unseld... Unseld was probably a bit better player and for longer. We not having impact data from that era doesn't mean we should automatically put Unseld lower? And he never played on a powerhouse like the Warriors alongside an offensive monster like Curry.

Consider another guy who probably won't even be nominated for another 20 spots... Kevin McHale. He's obviously a better basketball player than Draymond. He was the most impactful defender of the GOAT 80's Celtics and a beast offensively giving you 24 pts/75 on +10 rTS for years at a time.

Walton is a no-brainer better than Draymond.

Reed, McAdoo, and Westbrook all peaked higher. MVP's are obviously media awards but Draymond was never even given consideration. That tells me we are talking about different caliber of player.

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote 1 - Clyde Drexler
Vote 2 - Elgin Baylor
Nomination 1 - George Gervin
Nomination 2 - Willis Reed

Drexler was a uniquely talented player at the SG position, using his combination of size and athleticism to his advantage on both ends of the floor. Combine that with an excellent basketball IQ, and he was one of the more complete and versatile players we've seen in this league.

I've heard drexler get criticized here and there for not being able to get over the hump in his first 2 finals appearances. However, he went up against the defensive juggernaut pistons and all time great bulls, holding his own in both series. When he went on the improbable championship run with no HCA in houston, he played a major role in their success. It was even more impressive to see him perform at that level toward the end of his prime (year 12). See finals production here:

'90 (5 games) - 26.4 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 6.2 APG, 1.8 SPG, 59.8% TS, 118 ORtg

'92 (6 games) - 24.8 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 52.2% TS, 113 ORtg

'95 (4 games) - 21.5 PPG, 9.5 RPG, 6.8 APG, 1 SPG, 56% TS, 126 ORtg

[Doctor MJ]

A lot of your post is quite fair but I have a few disagreements.

Sounds fair.

I think saying Curry is the offensive star and Green the defensive star is a huge oversimplification and overrates Green.

Curry was by far the biggest offensive lifter on that team but the Warriors had many excellent defensive contributors. Bogut looks fantastic on defense, Igoudala is an all-time great perimeter defender, Klay is a very good defender, even Curry is above average. All of these guys are making some serious impact on defense. Green is just one (albeit the most important) piece of the defensive puzzle but Warriors given their roster still look like a defensive force without Green.

Speaking of Curry, Green is probably a perfect example of a player that historically benefitted from playing with another great. Green's skillset of great defense and passing makes him valuable on high level teams but not valuable on low level teams. Other examples historically are Rodman and Ben Wallace. They need someone else to build the foundation and then they solidify it but I consider players that build foundations in much higher esteem because they are doing what is a more difficult task.

Hopefully I was clear enough and you get what I'm trying to say.

I'd agree that language implying a perfect symmetry underrates Curry and overrates Green. While I've tried to keep an open mind to the possibility of Green being more valuable than Curry, I've never seriously been tempted to rank Green higher.

Re: Green's skillset of great defense and passing make him good on good teams, not so good on bad teams. I'm not sure if I agree with the fundamental principle here, but I get the thinking and will say that in practice this is Green's track record. It's then a question of how much this concerns you.

Re: Rodman & Wallace. I think it's fine to debate these 3 guys.

On Rodman, while I get the theory of him being ultra-impactful, I don't really see it in the data. Also, while part of Rodman's value is offensive rebounding and that is certainly legit impact, on defense we're really just talking about a man defender rather than defensive anchor or quarterback. I don't think his defense is as impressive as Green's.

On Wallace, here we have an era distinction. In an era with less spacing, Wallace is the more valuable defender. More spacing, Green is. I'm trying not to pick sides between eras, but what I will say is that Wallace had something of a perfect impact peak in '03-04 where he really was the MVP of a champion team and arguably having as good of a year as anyone other than KG. However, in the years around this, I'd say the data seems to suggest that he wasn't necessarily more valuable than a guy like Tayshaun Prince, let alone Chauncey Billups.

While Wallace is in my Top 100 and Prince is not, I don't see Wallace as having the same singular, reliable elite impact across many years that Green has had.

That said, I'm not sure I'd say Wallace needed everyone else in order to have his impact. He needed them to make the team good enough that he got the attention he eventually got, but that's not quite the same thing.

Top 5 in 2015? Despite not missing practically any games, Green wasn't even an all-star that year. Even in 2016 which is undoubtedly his peak, I would easily take Lebron, Curry, Durant, Westbrook, Kawhi, Davis, and CP3 over him. Like I don't know what argument he has over any of them. They are all massive impact guys so best case to me he's the 8th best player.

Re: didn't make all-star that year. I mean, they were just plain wrong in their assessment, and not in any mysterious way. Klay got named all-star, Dray did not, because Klay is a scorer that was hoped to be a future all-star and Dray was someone not expected to even start. Nevertheless, Dray was most valuable than Klay then, and he's been more valuable perpetually ever since.

Re: arguments over...

So 2 groups here here that Green could possibly be put over:

1. Team-clueless - that is players who are hurt by virtue of the fact that basketball is not a one-on-one game:
Durant, Westbrook, Kawhi
2. Team-injured - that is players who are hurt by being hurt:
Davis, Paul

I have LeBron, Curry & Durant over Dray there, and I debate vs Kawhi.
I'll also say that I think there's a debate to be had between KD & Westbrook, but would chafe at putting both above Green.

The more I look at it, the more I can see the parallels between Unseld and Draymond. Both undersized bigs who excelled at defense, both excellent passers, both limited scorers... with Unseld the better rebounder and having better prime longevity. Unseld was super overrated getting that MVP while Green is probably a slight bit underrated but again what makes Green better than Unseld... Unseld was probably a bit better player and for longer. We not having impact data from that era doesn't mean we should automatically put Unseld lower? And he never played on a powerhouse like the Warriors alongside an offensive monster like Curry.

Unseld was not considered a top tier defender like Green. I'm someone who tends to favor Unseld over Hayes because of how damaging I think Hayes chucking was, but I see no reason to disagree with the consensus that Hayes was the defensive MVP.

To be fair to Wes: It's not that he wasn't a tough man defender, but he wasn't a defensive anchor as we know them as.

Consider another guy who probably won't even be nominated for another 20 spots... Kevin McHale. He's obviously a better basketball player than Draymond. He was the most impactful defender of the GOAT 80's Celtics and a beast offensively giving you 24 pts/75 on +10 rTS for years at a time.

I can definitely see the argument for McHale over Green and voted for him as a nominee. I don't believe he ever had the clear cut best-defender-on-team status that Green has had, and offensively we're largely just talking about post-up offense. He's not a guy having the same type of team-aware impact as Green.

Walton is a no-brainer better than Draymond.

As I've said, I have peak Walton as POY over Kareem, but have Kareem ahead of Walton for career because of longevity. The same is true for many, many other guys, including Green.

Reed, McAdoo, and Westbrook all peaked higher. MVP's are obviously media awards but Draymond was never even given consideration. That tells me we are talking about different caliber of player.

So the reasoning you're giving is again just pointing to the opinions of others.
And as I've said, such "others" can be very, very wrong.

[Owly]

Re: really going to blame Dwight for butting head with Kobe, Harden? ... Dude, you're trying to knock Green for butting heads with Jordan Poole. You're really going to hold Poole in higher esteem than those other guys?

I don't know of reporting on Poole as a person/professional.

I do think the phrasing here is pretty loaded, because it's ambiguous whether one is talking about "how easy is this person to get along with" or "how highly do you regard them as a basketball player". And those are very different things. And one can hold Bryant and Harden in very high regard as basketball players and regard them as difficult teammates ... and one also simultaneously to those things hold Howard in lower regard as a teammate and perhaps also as primarily at fault in those particular locations.