RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1

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

drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,861
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#201 » by drza » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:48 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
drza wrote:.


Spoiler:
Wanted to touch base wrt to the per 100 possession comparisons of Kareem/Duncan/(Garnett), and add in the relative TS% (as I believe Joao Saraiva had suggested).
As you noted, per 100 possessions is not a perfect leveler across eras; increased pace will not have a linear relationship to scoring opportunities for the high usage/iso-heavy stars (and perhaps especially for iso-heavy BIGS).

Likewise, I'll acknowledge rTS% is not a perfect leveler. I don't believe, for instance, that Oscar Robertson would be scoring at ~63-65% TS year after year in the modern era (because that's what his rTS% would suggest). He was just a bit ahead of the curve in how well he could convert from the mid and close ranges. I think his rTS% probably goes down a bit in the modern era (but his pts/100 possessions probably go up a little).
Kareem was simply a bit ahead of the curve, too (and now some of the rest of the league has caught up). So perhaps his rTS% goes down marginally in a later era; however, his pts/100 possessions likely take a small step up in some contexts (especially in an era such as the 1990's). ****Although for the purposes of this comparison, league avg TS% barely matters, as in the early 2000's (around Duncan/Garnett's peak) it fell to lower than what it was in the late 1970's.****

Was re-watching some of the 1974 NBA finals, as well as a rs Laker game from '80, and I'm noting there are some aspects of his life (as a low-post scorer) which would get easier in later eras. In '74, he can hardly even bring the ball down to heart-level after catching an entry pass, because the guy guarding the entry passer sags down and is swiping. There's often so little room for him to work in the absence of outside shooters or a 3pt line. Anyway, just putting that out there before moving on to the comparisons. I'll use some of the same years you had, but add in a couple others (I have per 100 estimates for pre-1974 player seasons, btw). Mostly wanting to focus on the scoring aspect, as you were sort of singling that out, but will include some of the other stats, too....

Year 1
'70 Kareem per 100 poss: 27.7 pts, 14.0 reb, 4.0 ast @ +4.14% rTS in 43.1 mpg
'98 Duncan per 100 poss: 29.3 pts, 16.6 reb, 3.8 ast, *3.5 blk, *4.7 tov @ +5.38% rTS in 39.1 mpg
*Kareem avg >3.5 blk/100 every year from '74-'82, collectively averaging 3.9; Kareem never----in any of the years it was recorded----averaged as many as 4.7 turnovers (his highest was 4.4, avg 3.9 from '78-'86)......I mention these by way of possible proxy for here and in years below.

Year 18
'87 Kareem per 100 poss: 26.4 pts, 10.1 reb, 3.9 ast, 1.9 blk, 3.6 tov @ +5.92% rTS in 31.3 mpg (now into league avg TS% that are completely comparable to modern/recent era, too, btw)
'15 Duncan per 100 poss: 24.6 pts, 16.2 reb, 5.3 ast, 3.5 blk, 3.0 tov @ +2.55% rTS in 28.9 mpg
'13 Garnett per 100 poss: 26.0 pts, 13.7 reb, 4.1 ast, 2.0 stl, 1.6 blk, 2.8 tov @ +0.03% rTS in 29.7 mpg

Peak(ish) Scoring Years ('02 is Duncan's single-best season as scorer, by clear margin)
'02 Duncan per 100 poss: 33.5 pts, 16.7 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.3 blk, 4.2 tov @ +5.60% rTS in 40.6 mpg
'03 Duncan per 100 poss: 31.6 pts, 17.5 reb, 5.3 ast, 4.0 blk, 4.2 tov @ +4.43% rTS in 39.3 mpg
'04 Garnett per 100 poss: 33.2 pts, 19.0 reb, 6.8 ast, 3.0 blk, 3.5 tov @ +3.10% rTS in 39.4 mpg
'77 Kareem per 100 poss: 32.7 pts, 16.6 reb, 4.8 ast, 4.0 blk @ +9.76% rTS in in 36.8 mpg
'71 Kareem per 100 poss: 33.4 pts, 16.9 reb, 3.5 ast @ +10.57% rTS in in 40.1 mpg
'72 Kareem per 100 poss: 34.0 pts, 16.2 reb, 4.5 ast @ +9.83% rTS in in 44.2 mpg


Gonna cherry-pick some other years for greater spotlight on the middle years, so we're not just looking at peakish seasons and some book-ends......

Year 9
'06 Duncan per 100 poss: 28.9 pts, 17.2 reb, 4.9 ast, 1.4 stl, 3.2 blk, 3.9 tov @ -1.25% rTS in 34.8 mpg
'78 Kareem per 100 poss: 32.0 pts, 16.0 reb, 5.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 3.7 blk, 4.2 tov @ +7.40% rTS in 36.5 mpg

Year 14
'11 Duncan per 100 poss: 26.4 pts, 16.4 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.5 blk, 2.9 tov @ -0.41% rTS in 28.4 mpg
'83 Kareem per 100 poss: 31.2 pts, 10.7 reb, 3.6 ast, 3.1 blk, 3.6 tov @ +8.75% rTS in 32.3 mpg

Year 15
'12 Duncan per 100 poss: 28.3 pts, 16.4 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.5 blk, 2.9 tov @ +0.40% rTS in 28.4 mpg
'84 Kareem per 100 poss: 30.3 pts, 10.4 reb, 3.7 ast, 2.5 blk, 3.9 tov @ +6.54% rTS in 32.8 mpg
'10 Garnett per 100 poss: 25.2 pts, 12.9 reb, 4.7 ast, 1.7 stl, 1.4 blk, 2.6 tov @ +2.66% rTS in 29.9 mpg


Obviously I'm not going to try to argue Kareem's defense or rebounding in his later years vs. that of Duncan or Garnett (though you can see in his peak physical years, he wasn't THAT far behind in rebounding, and was a more than capable defender).
Passing/playmaking too I think he's probably 3rd of the three (though again not a huge gap imo, as it's a much under-appreciated aspect of his game, partially evidenced by the assist rates above; saw him make some fantastic interior passes to cutters in that '80 Lakers game I was watching today).
But when we include the rTS% Kareem clearly emerges as the significantly superior scorer (particularly over Garnett), even though I think Duncan's prowess as a scorer is at times criminally under-credited. Note Kareem was typically playing slightly more mpg in most of those analogous seasons, too.

I know I've singled out a couple seasons above in which Duncan was struggling a bit with nagging injuries (plantar fasciitis one year, iirc); but I did so on purpose to better illustrate Kareem's remarkable durability and consistency (as it all sort of falls under the broad umbrella of longevity to me).
Kareem only missed 80 rs games TOTAL in a 20-year career, and didn't really have seasons (to my knowledge) where he was being significantly hindered by nagging injuries; only missed 1 playoff game in 20 seasons.
Duncan missed 118 rs games in a 19-year career (despite two hold-out seasons: if those had been full length, I think it's fair to assume he'd have missed at least a few more), missed the entire playoffs in '00 (which is significant as it instantly turned SA from contender to 1st-round fodder), and had a couple other seasons where he was less than 100%. KG missed 214 rs games in a 21-year career (though most of them in his post-prime); missed all of the '09 playoffs.



Anyway, I think I'll stop there. The above was all just to illustrate that yes, I think Kareem was a significantly better scorer than Duncan or Garnett, and yes, his longevity (+ durability/consistency) was better as well.


Couple quick things.

1) Can we please come up with a way for you to get me those per-100 numbers for Kareem, and any others that you have for the pre-1974 era (Wilt? Oscar? West? Russ? etc.). Do you have it in spreadsheet form? Could it be a public Google Doc? Or a PM for an e-mail? Just let me know if you're cool with it, and we'll figure out how to get it don

2) On your last line, I'm not sure that you established all of that with your post. It looks like you were able to fill out the year-by-year comp of Kareem and Duncan/Garnett that I started (but only had time to populate a few years of), so that's great. And yes, I think you clearly established that Kareem was a more efficient scorer by quite a bit (which, to be fair, I would have stipulated even before the TS% era adjustment). But their scoring volumes were often similar, and more importantly...

A) In the later years you cited, Duncan (and Garnett, where you added him) stomped Kareem in rebounding. And, though it isn't fully reflected in the box scores, we know that late-career Duncan and late-career Garnett were both absolutely elite as defenders. Like, yearly inner-circle top of the league impact defenders on a per-minute basis, and up through year 18 both were having that kind of defensive impact on about 30 minutes per game, similar to year 18 Kareem.

B) The research that I've seen suggests that, especially for volume scorers, assists correlate with higher offensive impacts than scoring efficiency does. Similarly, for big men, elite defense correlates more with higher overall impact than volume scoring does, even at high efficiency. I'm aware that Kareem is an absolute outlier as a scorer, and he was also a strong passer for a center and (in his prime) appears to be a strong defender as well. But I'm not quite sure that I default to that combo (elite, high efficiency scoring + good passing + good defense) being higher impact in prime than what Duncan and/or Garnett brought to the table in their primes.

And in their later years, where Kareem was still the much more efficient scorer but Duncan and Garnett seemed to be dramatically better on defense (subjectively, at this point, as I don't remember Kareem as a great late-career defender and haven't seen anything in the boxscores or shared anecdotes in this thread to change my mind) and on the glass...I'm very unconvinced that Kareem was having even as much impact as them, let alone more, out to year 18
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz
drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,861
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#202 » by drza » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:58 pm

Senior wrote:I think we subconsciously value the rarer combination of talent/position more than the conventional positions - we actually had some discussion on this with Jokic's playmaking from C this year. I do believe that the combo of talent/position does create some unique benefits - mismatches against more conventional players being most prominent. However, I don't necessarily believe that the rarer talent is better since that kind of size will lead to some drawbacks compared to the conventional talent in the typical position.

For example, Kidd's rebounding as a guard is definitely unusual and valuable, but it's not necessarily MORE valuable than a C's rebounding...since he's probably not as good a rebounder. Durant's rim protection is definitely useful for his team...but he's not a better rim protector than someone like D-Rob or Hakeem. I feel similarly about Dirk's offense vs your typical offensive anchor - despite Dirk's offensive gravity/spacing/etc effects, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's BETTER than your Nash, Kobe, Lebron, etc. He might be, but his unique benefits from PF may not overcome the typical benefits a lead guard could give you - namely ballhandling, court vision, ability to get to the rim, etc.


I would be interested in looking more closely at each of those non-conventional contribution types, to see if there's any sort of correlation between them and positive impact. I'm not sure for most, such as guard rebounding or wing rim protection.

But, I DO know there's clear, reasonable and mounting evidence that non-point guard playmaking DOES, in fact, correlate with bigger than expected offensive impact. And that this is especially true for big men. This is part-and-parcel why players from Bill Walton to Draymond Green routinely show up with way larger than expected impact, beyond even what their elite defense would suggest. Because their playmaking from the big man position just has way more positive impact than most expect. And it doesn't tend to be reflected in the boxscores, outside of nice assist numbers, but it's a thing. Your Jokic example of monster offensive impact was a thing for a reason...it fit right in with the historical pattern.
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz
drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,861
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#203 » by drza » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:05 pm

I haven't had the time to get on here today like I'd like, and I have to head home now. I'm not sure what time the thread is going to close. If I able, I'm very likely to vote Russell. I believe his in-era impact to be unprecedented; I believe (and have, in the past, made the case) that even in this era his defensive impact could very realistically place him at the top of the league in impact as measured by a stat like RAPM (wish I could find that post; or, conversely, that I have the time to make a new one).

After Russell, not sure who would be in the second slot. Jordan or LeBron obviously have a case. Kareem seems to be the other consensus candidate being measured, but as I'm sure is clear from my posts in this thread I'm not at all convinced that Kareem is better than either Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett. So, I'm pretty sure my 2nd slot wouldn't be Kareem. But...

Anyway. I hope I get back in here before the vote closes. But, I must admit, I kind of feel less pressure if I'm unable to, because at a rough count it appears pretty clear that Jordan has a strong lead and his closest competitor, Kareem, won't be on my ballot anyway so I'm not sure my vote would really affect things all that much anyway.

ETA: It's looking less like I'm going to have the time to do the type of in-depth analysis I'd like to do for Russell, Jordan and Abdul-Jabbar in this thread. It's already after midnight here, and at the moment I'm most involved in looking more in-depth at Kareem, who as I mentioned I'm unlikely to vote for here. So, to get an official vote on the board, if TRex is willing to accept the brief blurb above as my support in the meantime:

Vote: Bill Russell
2nd: Michael Jordan
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz
User avatar
PCProductions
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,763
And1: 3,989
Joined: Apr 18, 2012
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#204 » by PCProductions » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:47 pm

ElGee wrote:This is not to say LeBron's negative moments haven't been worse. He is unjustly crucified for the 11 Finals, but he did have a number of subpar games (for whatever reason) including a 3-11, 8 point game. As I've argued before, I'm not sure how much worse his series was than Nowitzki's though -- if we're results oriented, a few horrible shooting games on high volume will rarely render any kind of "positive" value; people just aren't as quick to demean it.

I find it interesting how forgiving you are of Lebron's 2011 Finals when you were uniquely aware of his intensely negative impact in it, especially defensively. Has your mind changed on this? I remember your measure of In/Out and defensive errors measures made James look really, really bad.
ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,207
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#205 » by ElGee » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:49 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
ElGee wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Excellent points (nice that it's fairly concise with concrete examples, too). Thanks for taking the time.

btw, since you're participating anyway, are you sure you wouldn't care to be added to the panel and cast some votes, too? Not to lay on the flattery too heavily, but I feel the credibility of the list/project as a whole only increases for having your name attached to it.


Thanks for the invite and appreciate the compliment. :) Unfortunately, I have inconsistent availability.


If you're refining your GOAT-list and don't feel comfortable enough with your rankings to contribute by way of voting, that's your call. But fwiw, inconsistent availability doesn't change my opinion at all wrt wanting your involvement (whenever you're able).


I'll interject when I can as I'm trying to keep up with the thread. I have to say as a consumer of the conversation -- which is really high quality -- I'd hope you'd leave the opening thread open for additional days versus hours. I can tell you from just judging an ATL that the first step is the hardest as everyone is organizing No. 1. Other thoughts:

-"Scarcity" is baked in to portability to me. Again, the concept wasn't about "diversity" per se but about how skills are still additive (or super-additive) in certain settings. Drza's point about scarcity wrt to defense is why I de-facto consider good defense "high" portability and now only analyze offensive portability.

-Pace adjustment. Here's the short of it: Pace strongly correlates with box stats. It is not a perfect 1:1. Thus, you have to adjust, but it's not linear/constant across all players. (Box numbers shouldn't be viewed so rigidly anyway IMO; change a meaningful teammate at the box numbers change.)

-Love seeing No. 1 votes for guys like Duncan, even if I don't agree. I actually think Hakeem has the best dark horse GOAT argument, focusing on the Winning Bias that keeps him down.

-I love how exploratory Micah's novels are, but his dive into era-translation exposes why it's such a problem for me. At this point, I'm starting to view it as an entirely different and untenable ranking method. Why? You can't time-machine someone, because they learned the game per their time's rules, and if you don't do that, then you have to make them born in that time, so even leaving out developmental psychology you're still left with...how that person's brain would have adapted to the time. (Physical skills being neurological motor patterns and all.)

You can't time machine Kobe back to 1960 and give him have a game he patented after Oscar and Jordan, just without palming and no 3-point line. He would have had to learn based on his coaches, his limited views of NBA ball in person, and the rules at the time. His dad wouldn't have his experience to share with him, he'd have to deal with racism differently, etc. It's just a mess trying to even figure out if these people would have the same profession, let alone how they'd develop different nuances because the environment is so different generations apart.
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,207
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#206 » by ElGee » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:59 pm

PCProductions wrote:
ElGee wrote:This is not to say LeBron's negative moments haven't been worse. He is unjustly crucified for the 11 Finals, but he did have a number of subpar games (for whatever reason) including a 3-11, 8 point game. As I've argued before, I'm not sure how much worse his series was than Nowitzki's though -- if we're results oriented, a few horrible shooting games on high volume will rarely render any kind of "positive" value; people just aren't as quick to demean it.

I find it interesting how forgiving you are of Lebron's 2011 Finals when you were uniquely aware of his intensely negative impact in it, especially defensively. Has your mind changed on this? I remember your measure of In/Out and defensive errors measures made James look really, really bad.


Well, his defense wasn't very good (don't think his errors were that plentiful), but I view it as a bad series coming off 2 really good series. Let's use some fuzzy numbers and say a good series for someone like him is usually like +10. Let's say that series was a -2. Even if you assume that he's always going to play poorly in the Finals due to (a) fatigue, (b) pressure (2011 Heatles) and (c) excellent WC opponent then his 2011 PS is something like +12, +12, -2. That's still a whole lot more helpful to helping a team win a title than playing baseball for a year.

Of course, I don't assume he'll go -2 every time there. Context matters. Teammates matter. I didn't expect Durant to have trouble this year, but boy was he crucified for hitting a wall last year in last 3-4 games of the WCFs. I wonder what changed. ;) I do view 2011 as a nadir in LBJ's 09-14 run, but it's still in the ballpark of this amazing 9-year window he's sustained.
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
User avatar
THKNKG
Pro Prospect
Posts: 994
And1: 368
Joined: Sep 11, 2016
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#207 » by THKNKG » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:05 pm

ElGee wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
ElGee wrote:
Thanks for the invite and appreciate the compliment. :) Unfortunately, I have inconsistent availability.


If you're refining your GOAT-list and don't feel comfortable enough with your rankings to contribute by way of voting, that's your call. But fwiw, inconsistent availability doesn't change my opinion at all wrt wanting your involvement (whenever you're able).


I'll interject when I can as I'm trying to keep up with the thread. I have to say as a consumer of the conversation -- which is really high quality -- I'd hope you'd leave the opening thread open for additional days versus hours. I can tell you from just judging an ATL that the first step is the hardest as everyone is organizing No. 1. Other thoughts:

-"Scarcity" is baked in to portability to me. Again, the concept wasn't about "diversity" per se but about how skills are still additive (or super-additive) in certain settings. Drza's point about scarcity wrt to defense is why I de-facto consider good defense "high" portability and now only analyze offensive portability.

-Pace adjustment. Here's the short of it: Pace strongly correlates with box stats. It is not a perfect 1:1. Thus, you have to adjust, but it's not linear/constant across all players. (Box numbers shouldn't be viewed so rigidly anyway IMO; change a meaningful teammate at the box numbers change.)

-Love seeing No. 1 votes for guys like Duncan, even if I don't agree. I actually think Hakeem has the best dark horse GOAT argument, focusing on the Winning Bias that keeps him down.

-I love how exploratory Micah's novels are, but his dive into era-translation exposes why it's such a problem for me. At this point, I'm starting to view it as an entirely different and untenable ranking method. Why? You can't time-machine someone, because they learned the game per their time's rules, and if you don't do that, then you have to make them born in that time, so even leaving out developmental psychology you're still left with...how that person's brain would have adapted to the time. (Physical skills being neurological motor patterns and all.)

You can't time machine Kobe back to 1960 and give him have a game he patented after Oscar and Jordan, just without palming and no 3-point line. He would have had to learn based on his coaches, his limited views of NBA ball in person, and the rules at the time. His dad wouldn't have his experience to share with him, he'd have to deal with racism differently, etc. It's just a mess trying to even figure out if these people would have the same profession, let alone how they'd develop different nuances because the environment is so different generations apart.


I guess I should have clarified this part of what I was saying. I don't view all of those things I explored equally. The things that I value are intangibles, in era impact, skill, portability/scalability. As much as it could seem that the era translation plays a big part in my thinking, it doesn't. Practically zero, in fact, beyond being an exploratory exercise as you said. It definitely didn't have an impact on determining my rankings. Hope that explains a bit.

Other side note, it's interesting that you bring up Hakeem, because I have a note in my phone that says "Hakeem > Duncan but Duncan > Hakeem?" It basically means that I could argue for Hakeem over Duncan offensively and defensively, and Hakeem doesn't have bad longevity either. It seems like an inconsistency, but if I were choosing in a vacuum the "best" player I would pick Hakeem, and if the player to start to build a team around, it'd be Duncan. I suppose much of his greatness to me is tied to his leadership/intangibles/etc.
All-Time Fantasy Draft Team (90 FGA)

PG: Maurice Cheeks / Giannis
SG: Reggie Miller / Jordan
SF: Michael Jordan / Bruce Bowen
PF: Giannis / Marvin Williams
C: Artis Gilmore / Chris Anderson
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,652
And1: 8,298
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#208 » by trex_8063 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:17 am

drza wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
drza wrote:.


Spoiler:
Wanted to touch base wrt to the per 100 possession comparisons of Kareem/Duncan/(Garnett), and add in the relative TS% (as I believe Joao Saraiva had suggested).
As you noted, per 100 possessions is not a perfect leveler across eras; increased pace will not have a linear relationship to scoring opportunities for the high usage/iso-heavy stars (and perhaps especially for iso-heavy BIGS).

Likewise, I'll acknowledge rTS% is not a perfect leveler. I don't believe, for instance, that Oscar Robertson would be scoring at ~63-65% TS year after year in the modern era (because that's what his rTS% would suggest). He was just a bit ahead of the curve in how well he could convert from the mid and close ranges. I think his rTS% probably goes down a bit in the modern era (but his pts/100 possessions probably go up a little).
Kareem was simply a bit ahead of the curve, too (and now some of the rest of the league has caught up). So perhaps his rTS% goes down marginally in a later era; however, his pts/100 possessions likely take a small step up in some contexts (especially in an era such as the 1990's). ****Although for the purposes of this comparison, league avg TS% barely matters, as in the early 2000's (around Duncan/Garnett's peak) it fell to lower than what it was in the late 1970's.****

Was re-watching some of the 1974 NBA finals, as well as a rs Laker game from '80, and I'm noting there are some aspects of his life (as a low-post scorer) which would get easier in later eras. In '74, he can hardly even bring the ball down to heart-level after catching an entry pass, because the guy guarding the entry passer sags down and is swiping. There's often so little room for him to work in the absence of outside shooters or a 3pt line. Anyway, just putting that out there before moving on to the comparisons. I'll use some of the same years you had, but add in a couple others (I have per 100 estimates for pre-1974 player seasons, btw). Mostly wanting to focus on the scoring aspect, as you were sort of singling that out, but will include some of the other stats, too....

Year 1
'70 Kareem per 100 poss: 27.7 pts, 14.0 reb, 4.0 ast @ +4.14% rTS in 43.1 mpg
'98 Duncan per 100 poss: 29.3 pts, 16.6 reb, 3.8 ast, *3.5 blk, *4.7 tov @ +5.38% rTS in 39.1 mpg
*Kareem avg >3.5 blk/100 every year from '74-'82, collectively averaging 3.9; Kareem never----in any of the years it was recorded----averaged as many as 4.7 turnovers (his highest was 4.4, avg 3.9 from '78-'86)......I mention these by way of possible proxy for here and in years below.

Year 18
'87 Kareem per 100 poss: 26.4 pts, 10.1 reb, 3.9 ast, 1.9 blk, 3.6 tov @ +5.92% rTS in 31.3 mpg (now into league avg TS% that are completely comparable to modern/recent era, too, btw)
'15 Duncan per 100 poss: 24.6 pts, 16.2 reb, 5.3 ast, 3.5 blk, 3.0 tov @ +2.55% rTS in 28.9 mpg
'13 Garnett per 100 poss: 26.0 pts, 13.7 reb, 4.1 ast, 2.0 stl, 1.6 blk, 2.8 tov @ +0.03% rTS in 29.7 mpg

Peak(ish) Scoring Years ('02 is Duncan's single-best season as scorer, by clear margin)
'02 Duncan per 100 poss: 33.5 pts, 16.7 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.3 blk, 4.2 tov @ +5.60% rTS in 40.6 mpg
'03 Duncan per 100 poss: 31.6 pts, 17.5 reb, 5.3 ast, 4.0 blk, 4.2 tov @ +4.43% rTS in 39.3 mpg
'04 Garnett per 100 poss: 33.2 pts, 19.0 reb, 6.8 ast, 3.0 blk, 3.5 tov @ +3.10% rTS in 39.4 mpg
'77 Kareem per 100 poss: 32.7 pts, 16.6 reb, 4.8 ast, 4.0 blk @ +9.76% rTS in in 36.8 mpg
'71 Kareem per 100 poss: 33.4 pts, 16.9 reb, 3.5 ast @ +10.57% rTS in in 40.1 mpg
'72 Kareem per 100 poss: 34.0 pts, 16.2 reb, 4.5 ast @ +9.83% rTS in in 44.2 mpg


Gonna cherry-pick some other years for greater spotlight on the middle years, so we're not just looking at peakish seasons and some book-ends......

Year 9
'06 Duncan per 100 poss: 28.9 pts, 17.2 reb, 4.9 ast, 1.4 stl, 3.2 blk, 3.9 tov @ -1.25% rTS in 34.8 mpg
'78 Kareem per 100 poss: 32.0 pts, 16.0 reb, 5.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 3.7 blk, 4.2 tov @ +7.40% rTS in 36.5 mpg

Year 14
'11 Duncan per 100 poss: 26.4 pts, 16.4 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.5 blk, 2.9 tov @ -0.41% rTS in 28.4 mpg
'83 Kareem per 100 poss: 31.2 pts, 10.7 reb, 3.6 ast, 3.1 blk, 3.6 tov @ +8.75% rTS in 32.3 mpg

Year 15
'12 Duncan per 100 poss: 28.3 pts, 16.4 reb, 4.9 ast, 3.5 blk, 2.9 tov @ +0.40% rTS in 28.4 mpg
'84 Kareem per 100 poss: 30.3 pts, 10.4 reb, 3.7 ast, 2.5 blk, 3.9 tov @ +6.54% rTS in 32.8 mpg
'10 Garnett per 100 poss: 25.2 pts, 12.9 reb, 4.7 ast, 1.7 stl, 1.4 blk, 2.6 tov @ +2.66% rTS in 29.9 mpg


Obviously I'm not going to try to argue Kareem's defense or rebounding in his later years vs. that of Duncan or Garnett (though you can see in his peak physical years, he wasn't THAT far behind in rebounding, and was a more than capable defender).
Passing/playmaking too I think he's probably 3rd of the three (though again not a huge gap imo, as it's a much under-appreciated aspect of his game, partially evidenced by the assist rates above; saw him make some fantastic interior passes to cutters in that '80 Lakers game I was watching today).
But when we include the rTS% Kareem clearly emerges as the significantly superior scorer (particularly over Garnett), even though I think Duncan's prowess as a scorer is at times criminally under-credited. Note Kareem was typically playing slightly more mpg in most of those analogous seasons, too.

I know I've singled out a couple seasons above in which Duncan was struggling a bit with nagging injuries (plantar fasciitis one year, iirc); but I did so on purpose to better illustrate Kareem's remarkable durability and consistency (as it all sort of falls under the broad umbrella of longevity to me).
Kareem only missed 80 rs games TOTAL in a 20-year career, and didn't really have seasons (to my knowledge) where he was being significantly hindered by nagging injuries; only missed 1 playoff game in 20 seasons.
Duncan missed 118 rs games in a 19-year career (despite two hold-out seasons: if those had been full length, I think it's fair to assume he'd have missed at least a few more), missed the entire playoffs in '00 (which is significant as it instantly turned SA from contender to 1st-round fodder), and had a couple other seasons where he was less than 100%. KG missed 214 rs games in a 21-year career (though most of them in his post-prime); missed all of the '09 playoffs.



Anyway, I think I'll stop there. The above was all just to illustrate that yes, I think Kareem was a significantly better scorer than Duncan or Garnett, and yes, his longevity (+ durability/consistency) was better as well.


Couple quick things.

1) Can we please come up with a way for you to get me those per-100 numbers for Kareem, and any others that you have for the pre-1974 era (Wilt? Oscar? West? Russ? etc.). Do you have it in spreadsheet form? Could it be a public Google Doc? Or a PM for an e-mail? Just let me know if you're cool with it, and we'll figure out how to get it don


Per 100 Possession estimates for pre-1974 player seasons
*note the tabs at the bottom (RS and Playoffs); have fairly extensively done up RS, not figured up very many seasons for playoffs

drza wrote:2) On your last line, I'm not sure that you established all of that with your post. It looks like you were able to fill out the year-by-year comp of Kareem and Duncan/Garnett that I started (but only had time to populate a few years of), so that's great. And yes, I think you clearly established that Kareem was a more efficient scorer by quite a bit (which, to be fair, I would have stipulated even before the TS% era adjustment). But their scoring volumes were often similar...


But their respective rTS% not at all similar. Their rookie seasons is the one year in which Duncan appears the better scorer by a small margin (in the rs; rookie Kareem destroyed it in the playoffs). Otherwise.....
If, for example, one guy is scoring ~31-33 pts/100 on +4-5.5% rTS and another guy is scoring 32-34 pts/100 (nearly the same, yes), but on +9.5-10.5% rTS......who would you [in a vacuum] conclude is the superior individual scorer?

That's the rough picture of Duncan vs. Kareem during their respective best scoring years. The gap in most other years of their primes is somewhat similar: same(ish) volume per 100 possessions, but Duncan on anywhere from +/- 0% to just under +4% rTS, while Kareem was +6-10% rTS.

And then there were a few years (which I cherry-picked above) where the gap bordered on massive: Year 9 (Kareem +3.1 pts per 100 possessions and +8.65% rTS relative to TD, while playing marginally more mpg, too), Year 14 (Kareem +4.8 pts/100 and +9.16% rTS on TD while also playing +3.9 mpg===>that's a massive scoring edge), Year 15 (Kareem +2.0 pts/100 and +6.14% rTS while playing +4.4 mpg). The gap in those years is not remotely close.

I'd also like to see what Kareem might have been capable of facing more single coverage (maybe in a scenario like Hakeem in mid-90's Rockets, with shooters all around).


drza wrote:A) In the later years you cited, Duncan (and Garnett, where you added him) stomped Kareem in rebounding. And, though it isn't fully reflected in the box scores, we know that late-career Duncan and late-career Garnett were both absolutely elite as defenders.


You'll note I acknowledged this directly in the post you've quoted: Kareem doesn't compare at all as a rebounder or defender in late years of respective careers. In earlier portions of career however (age 30 and younger), he was consistently averaging >15 reb/100 (usually >16), peaking at 18.2: this is almost negligibly behind what Duncan was doing for the bulk of his career. It's after '80 that the rebounding gap becomes substantial.
Defensively, Kareem was never as dominant as Duncan (or KG), but was pretty darn good for most of his career, totally respectable into the mid-80's.



drza wrote:B) The research that I've seen suggests that, especially for volume scorers, assists correlate with higher offensive impacts than scoring efficiency does.


Fair enough. Though fwiw, Kareem for his career avg 4.5 ast/100 possessions (working in the estimates for '70-'73), peaking at 6.2 and having SEVEN seasons at >/= 5.0. Duncan's career per 100 possession average is 4.7, peaking at 5.7 while playing in an era with vastly better spacing. Turnovers, Duncan career average at 3.8 tov/100, Kareem's probably about 4.0 tov/100 (assuming some proxies for years they weren't recorded).


drza wrote:Similarly, for big men, elite defense correlates more with higher overall impact than volume scoring does, even at high efficiency. I'm aware that Kareem is an absolute outlier as a scorer, and he was also a strong passer for a center and (in his prime) appears to be a strong defender as well. But I'm not quite sure that I default to that combo (elite, high efficiency scoring + good passing + good defense) being higher impact in prime than what Duncan and/or Garnett brought to the table in their primes.

And in their later years, where Kareem was still the much more efficient scorer but Duncan and Garnett seemed to be dramatically better on defense (subjectively, at this point, as I don't remember Kareem as a great late-career defender and haven't seen anything in the boxscores or shared anecdotes in this thread to change my mind) and on the glass...I'm very unconvinced that Kareem was having even as much impact as them, let alone more, out to year 18


Fair enough again. Though I assume Kareem may have had similar (potentially even marginally superior, sporadically) impact in earlier years during which he was a similar-tiered passer, similar tiered-rebounder, not as far behind defensively, and significantly better scorer.
And impact only occurs while on the court, right? Kareem was on the court more: both in terms of mpg [usually], and also not missing time (as I noted above). In his first 19 seasons, Kareem played 55,751 minutes. Considering the hold-out years ('99 and '12), let's give Duncan a boost of over 1,600 minutes......that still puts him at ~49,000 career minutes: that difference is like two full non-injured star-level minute seasons. It's not insignificant, imo.

I won't argue Kareem's defense or rebounding against Duncan or KG; they were better (very small gap during first half of his career, more moderate gap during 3rd quarter of his career, large gap in final quarter of his career). But Kareem was imo a superior offensive big for nearly all of their respective careers (and by a substantial margin in a few years), while being more durable and consistent and generally playing larger minutes, too.

And fwiw, direct impact on winning (and however one goes about trying to measure that) is not the sole consideration in my criteria. Anyway, it's not at all a large gap for me in their total career value (Kareem vs. Duncan, I mean; I have a few more question marks wrt Garnett), but that's largely where I'm coming from.
"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
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,652
And1: 8,298
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#209 » by trex_8063 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:55 am

Some of you were [I thought] eager for this project to get underway. Thread #1 has been open for about 59 hours now; not sure how much longer I will leave it open (possibly till tomorrow morning, but no longer). If you wish to be heard in the selection for #1 all-time, please do so very soon.

@ drza - you've been quite active itt, but unless I somehow missed it (bolding picks really helps, guys), I don't think you've actually stated your picks.

@ Dr Spaceman - You've stated your #1 pick, but you did not specify your 2nd pick (and it's looking like it is going to come down to 2nd picks). So please clear that up (and let me know when you do so).

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Quotatious wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbini wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

PockyCandy wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.
"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
Blackmill
Senior
Posts: 666
And1: 721
Joined: May 03, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#210 » by Blackmill » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:55 am

Because of the early start, there is a lot I couldn't include, so here's a much abbreviated post on my thoughts. I may add some more later this evening.

_______________________________Film Study: Kareem's Defense_______________________________

    Image

I'm starting with Kareem's defense because opinions on it vary from he was a lazy defender to he was an all time great defender. I think Kareem, at his best, was an all time great defender. Take a look at the play above. There's a couple components to it.

    1. Kareem shows on the PnR so Bing can't pull up.
    2. Kareem quickly recovers to his man (Hayes).
    3. On the second PnR, Kareem strongly contests Havlicek's pull up, forcing a pass.
    4. Kareem moves to the strongside, but because of miscommunication, Havlicek is left open.
    5. Kareem runs Havlicek off his jumper, and though Kareem seems beat on the drive, his length lets him to alter the shot.

What Kareem does in this play is nothing short of exceptional. He has the quickness to show on the PnR and recover, something that has become all the more important with the three point line, but many bigs can't do. And while smaller centers could, they wouldn't be able to salvage the miscommunication, stopping both the spot up and the drive through sheer length and size.

You may notice that this is not a regular season game. This is the 1976 NBA All Star Game, which I will tell you, is one of the most important games we have of Kareem's career. From the mid- to late-70's, we only have four full games, which are of Kareem's 1977 playoff run and the 1976 All Star Game. Comparatively, the 1976 All Star Game is especially important for several reasons:

    1. We see Kareem guarding the PnR more in this game than any other.
    2. We see Kareem defending in a much more spaced offensive environment than usual.
    3. With capable teammates, Kareem was able to be much more active on help defense.

The last point is particularly important. It can be observed in the 1977 playoffs that the Lakers routinely failed to help the helper when Kareem rotated. Samurai, a poster who you may know for his insights and having watched much of Kareem's career, made this observation several years ago:

[...]Washington gave LA the big power forward to battle someone like Lucas and give Kareem an enforcer in much the same way that Lucas helped Walton. KAJ could be more active in help defense, switch off, and chase bigs who could shoot outside because he knew that Kermit was there to grab the rebound.[...]


Hopefully it's clear now why the 1976 All Star Game is of particular importance. I will now go through several of Kareem's of defensive plays this game. First, let's look at four clips which show Kareem's understanding of passing angles, a crucial trait of any good help defender.

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


In the first play we see Kareem sag back as he sees the cutter about the flash across the lane. Then we see several clips of Kareem anticipating the pass and deflecting it. The last clip is an example where there's no player to help the helper, which Kareem is very aware of, and positions his body to prevent the pass to his man while using his great length to disrupt the drive.

Kareem's defensive awareness, when in position to be a help defender, was often superb. Now, let's look at his PnR defense, which is special for a player his size.

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


One thing we see in all these clips is Kareem's willingness to show or switch on the PnR and that he can effectively recover. In the first clip we see Havlicek trying to attack Kareem when he shows, since Kareem had been stopping him from pulling up off the screen, but Kareem has the speed to stay with him and the block the layup. In the last clip Kareem does a lot:

    1. He shadows Frazier, who has a step on his defender, forcing the ball to kicked out.
    2. He closes out on Hayes, stays in front on the drive attempt, and forces a tough jumper.
    3. The East gets the offensive rebound, and Kareem seems out of the play, but his length lets him get an improbable block.
    4. Kareem also gets the rebound.

Now, I do want to spend some time on Kareem's defense during the 1977 playoffs, even though he had limited freedom to help. One thing I've mentioned about some of the previous clips is how Kareem can appear out of the play but still alter or block the shot because of his length and mobility. This carried into the 1977 playoffs with plays like these:

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


The last play really show off Kareem's length. He blocks Walton's dunk, standing to the right of the basket, while Walton attempted it from left of the basket. Kareem still displayed a willingness to show or switch on the PnR too (thought not as often):

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


You'll find many other possessions like the ones I've shown in the 1976 All Star Game. These are just a couple. As Kareem exited his defensive prime, he was distinctly less active defensively, but still a force at the rim and able to briefly switch onto smaller players. For lack of time, I only have footage from the 1980 finals, but that should paint a fair picture. At 32, Kareem was still a great rim protector:

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


Kareem's interior presence was enough to influence shots without needing to contest. Often, layups attempted near him were done hastily, and missed as a result. Even wide open ones.

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


He prevented many shots from even being attempted as driving players would kick out the ball if he was close.

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


And, as mentioned, he still would switch onto smaller defenders though far less frequently:

    Spoiler:
    Image


Finally, I want to address what I'm guessing causes some people to think Kareem was a lazy defender. Occasionally he would make no effort to contest the outside shot. For instance,

    Spoiler:
    Image


Now, while this looks bad, it is very much the opposite. We regularly see how poor three point shooters are sometimes allowed the shot in order to cover more dangerous players. The Spurs just about gave Lebron any open jumper in Game 7 of the 2013 Finals. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but what matters is the dice roll is in your favor. In three games of the 1980 Finals, and three games of the 1977 Playoffs, I counted Kareem making no effort to contest the outside shot 21 times. The opposition converted 33%. When the jumper was attempted closer to the basket, Kareem was much more focused on contesting it, as we see Kareem go over a screen to contest Walton's short jumper:

    Spoiler:
    Image


Kareem not contesting long jumpers, by players not known for shooting, was neither uncommon nor incorrect.

What I hope's apparent from all this is that Kareem, in his defensive prime and with the liberty to help, was constantly aware, moving, and disrupting the defense with his combination of length, height, and quickness. He was nothing short of a tremendous defender who could compete with the all time greats. After his defensive prime, he was still exceptional at preventing shots near the rim, and more mobile than your typical seven-footer.

_______________________________Film Study: Kareem's Offense_______________________________

    Image

I think we're all familiar with Kareem's sky hook. You can see it above. What do you think Kareem shot on sky hooks? Below 50%? Better? In the games I've recorded, Kareem shot better than 65%, with a sample of over 60 sky hooks. This shot is one of the primary reasons I consider Kareem the GOAT, and thus, I will spend some time discussing it.

I would argue the sky hook makes Kareem the most resilient scorer to have played in the NBA. By most resilient, I mean defense and team composition have the least affect on his efficiency and volume. Just consider how efficient remained as he aged. Despite becoming slower and weaker, which in effect is like the defense become stronger and faster, his efficiency endured.

The only shots of comparable efficiency are at the rim or behind the arc. To get to the rim, though, is much harder than to receive the ball at the low or mid post. This is especially true on team's lacking shooters to keep the defense honest. As for the three, it's harder to stop than a drive, but often relies on off-ball movement. While this isn't bad, holding players off-ball has always gone uncalled, particularly in the playoffs, and that's precisely why the Warriors abandoned their vaunted, off-ball movement for the Durant & Curry PnR in Game 5. We see this in the next few clips how the defense can have no holes and Kareem can still take the sky hook.

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


Kareem could also take the sky hook from the mid post where aggressive double teams would be unacceptably compromising to the defense:

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


The sky hook was practically a cheat. There's no other shot where defense matters so little. Aside from being a scorer that few can compare to, Kareem was also an exceptional passer, and could operate from both the low and mid post. His mid post passing was particularly impressive and, at times, reminiscent of Walton's play:

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


From the low post Kareem could would often pass to the baseline:

    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


    Spoiler:
    Image


but was also capable of passing to players cutting down the middle:

    Spoiler:
    Image


(It's too bad I didn't have time to go through my footage of his later years. He had some extraordinary bounce passes against the Celtics and Mavs in the mid 80s.)

Kareem's offense is an unusual combination of superb passing and scoring. We rarely see these players, and when we do they tend to be guards, but Kareem was a center with the mind and body to warrant comparison with the all time great defensive players. I think he's singular in having a case as a top ten offensive player and defensive player. He gets my vote as the GOAT.

First Vote: Kareem
Second Vote: Duncan
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,153
And1: 25,431
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#211 » by 70sFan » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:56 am

How much time have I to post my choice? If there is not too late, I'd try to make my post in next ~8 hours.
User avatar
wojoaderge
Analyst
Posts: 3,100
And1: 1,682
Joined: Jul 27, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#212 » by wojoaderge » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:33 am

Blackmill wrote:I think we're all familiar with Kareem's sky hook. You can see it above. What do you think Kareem shot on sky hooks? Below 50%? Better? In the games I've recorded, Kareem shot better than 65%, with a sample of over 60 sky hooks.

That doesn't surprise me at all.
"Coach, why don't you just relax? We're not good enough to beat the Lakers. We've had a great year, why don't you just relax and cool down?"
User avatar
RSCD3_
RealGM
Posts: 13,932
And1: 7,342
Joined: Oct 05, 2013
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#213 » by RSCD3_ » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:04 am

Dr spaceman wrote:<>
I haven't heard you mention it yet but how did you consider the fact that limited driving ability due to enforcing travels at much higher rates would greatly give the defensive player more speed and thus impact as defenders would be at even more of an advantage in those days?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
I came here to do two things: get lost and slice **** up & I'm all out of directions.

Butler removing rearview mirror in his car as a symbol to never look back

Peja Stojakovic wrote:Jimmy butler, with no regard for human life
User avatar
Alphabet
Sophomore
Posts: 117
And1: 86
Joined: Feb 19, 2016
         

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#214 » by Alphabet » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:08 am

Love the discussions on all players so far, especially Kareem and Duncan. I'm not participating but would just like to give my quick two cents:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - by far the greatest basketball player of all-time
, if you start from his high school dominance and end all the way to his NBA retirement. Don't think I will ever see another player that will ever match his excellence when taking Kareem's entire basketball career into account. Dominance at each level (HS, College, NBA) with extreme longevity and the most unstoppable shot of all-time.

Michael Jordan - best NBA career of all-time, most iconic figure in basketball. Took the league by storm the moment he entered the league and dominated in a flash. Those who factor in career value will use this to knock points off Jordan, but I always considered Jordan's consistent greatness to be the most impressive part about him. Consider the fact he only played 11 full seasons as a Chicago Bull, and obtained: 6 championships (two three-peats), 6 FMVP, 5 MVP, DPOY, ROY, 10 All-NBA First Team, All-NBA Second Team, 9 All-Defensive First Team, ROY, 10x Scoring Champ, 3x Steals leader...then consider his stats, athleticism, grace, competitive nature (work ethic), narratives (signature moments), branding (took the league to soaring heights, Jordan Brand is still extremely successful), and his flawless game as a guard (i dont consider his 3-point shooting to be a flaw)...all of this wraps up to define the most perfect career in NBA history.

Bill Russell - by far the most successful and dominant basketball player of all-time
. I dont think much needs to be said here, as most people know the extent of which he dominated the game during his era. From high school to the end of his NBA career, he won a total of 15 championships and an Olympic gold medal, as well as 5 MVPs (4 in 5 years). 11 rings in 13 seasons, including 8 straight, is unfathomable to me. And finally, the Finals MVP is named after him. Again, I don't think I will ever see another player like Bill Russell in my lifetime.

LeBron James - the greatest athlete in the history of basketball. Wilt, Shaq, DRob, and Jordan each have a case (these 4 with LeBron also own the boxscore numbers), but LeBron's size, speed, and durability (none of these players have been able to sustain their prime as consistently as LeBron) along with his unique skillsets (perimeter and post skills on both sides of the floor) make him the GOAT athlete to me. His career numbers (regular season and playoffs) are staggering, and hes only 32.

Magic, Duncan, Hakeem, and Wilt all have arguments to be made as well.
User avatar
RSCD3_
RealGM
Posts: 13,932
And1: 7,342
Joined: Oct 05, 2013
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#215 » by RSCD3_ » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:26 am

ElGee wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
ElGee wrote:
Thanks for the invite and appreciate the compliment. :) Unfortunately, I have inconsistent availability.


If you're refining your GOAT-list and don't feel comfortable enough with your rankings to contribute by way of voting, that's your call. But fwiw, inconsistent availability doesn't change my opinion at all wrt wanting your involvement (whenever you're able).


I'll interject when I can as I'm trying to keep up with the thread. I have to say as a consumer of the conversation -- which is really high quality -- I'd hope you'd leave the opening thread open for additional days versus hours. I can tell you from just judging an ATL that the first step is the hardest as everyone is organizing No. 1. Other thoughts:

-"Scarcity" is baked in to portability to me. Again, the concept wasn't about "diversity" per se but about how skills are still additive (or super-additive) in certain settings. Drza's point about scarcity wrt to defense is why I de-facto consider good defense "high" portability and now only analyze offensive portability.

-Pace adjustment. Here's the short of it: Pace strongly correlates with box stats. It is not a perfect 1:1. Thus, you have to adjust, but it's not linear/constant across all players. (Box numbers shouldn't be viewed so rigidly anyway IMO; change a meaningful teammate at the box numbers change.)

-Love seeing No. 1 votes for guys like Duncan, even if I don't agree. I actually think Hakeem has the best dark horse GOAT argument, focusing on the Winning Bias that keeps him down.

-I love how exploratory Micah's novels are, but his dive into era-translation exposes why it's such a problem for me. At this point, I'm starting to view it as an entirely different and untenable ranking method. Why? You can't time-machine someone, because they learned the game per their time's rules, and if you don't do that, then you have to make them born in that time, so even leaving out developmental psychology you're still left with...how that person's brain would have adapted to the time. (Physical skills being neurological motor patterns and all.)

You can't time machine Kobe back to 1960 and give him have a game he patented after Oscar and Jordan, just without palming and no 3-point line. He would have had to learn based on his coaches, his limited views of NBA ball in person, and the rules at the time. His dad wouldn't have his experience to share with him, he'd have to deal with racism differently, etc. It's just a mess trying to even figure out if these people would have the same profession, let alone how they'd develop different nuances because the environment is so different generations apart.


Elgee I hate to bother you if you are busy but I proposed an idea why lebron's bad games are more likely to hurt his team than Jordan's in a vacuum in another post ( I believe I quoted you ) and I was wondering if you read it and how you would weigh passivity vs chuckery.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app
I came here to do two things: get lost and slice **** up & I'm all out of directions.

Butler removing rearview mirror in his car as a symbol to never look back

Peja Stojakovic wrote:Jimmy butler, with no regard for human life
ThaRegul8r
Head Coach
Posts: 6,448
And1: 3,037
Joined: Jan 12, 2006
   

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#216 » by ThaRegul8r » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:45 am

wojoaderge wrote:
Blackmill wrote:I think we're all familiar with Kareem's sky hook. You can see it above. What do you think Kareem shot on sky hooks? Below 50%? Better? In the games I've recorded, Kareem shot better than 65%, with a sample of over 60 sky hooks.

That doesn't surprise me at all.


Me neither.

Sixty percent actually would have been my initial guess.
I remember your posts from the RPOY project, you consistently brought it. Please continue to do so, sir. This board needs guys like you to counteract ... worthless posters


Retirement isn’t the end of the road, but just a turn in the road. – Unknown
Blackmill
Senior
Posts: 666
And1: 721
Joined: May 03, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#217 » by Blackmill » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:23 am

Apologies to any one who had trouble reading my post (or other's posts) because of all of the gifs. I've put most of them in spoilers which hopefully prevents any further issues.
User avatar
MisterHibachi
RealGM
Posts: 18,657
And1: 19,075
Joined: Oct 06, 2013
Location: Toronto
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#218 » by MisterHibachi » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:32 am

I'll try to expand on this a little more if I have time tmrw morning which I should and if this thread stays open.

My method of ranking players might be simple, and obviously subjective, but I think it works for me: prime x peak x longevity. I group players by prime, tie breaker with peak, then a further tie breaker with longevity. I think wing players are more valuable on offense than big men, and for most of NBA history, big men are more valuable than wings on defense. I think the latter might be changing in the current NBA. For players who were considered superstars in their league, I consider their years as a championship caliber anchor to be their prime seasons, and longevity outside of that only counts if it was a positive for their teams.

I think Shaq/LeBron/MJ/Hakeem/Wilt/Kareem all have a similar peak level, so I'll go with Kareem for the top spot as he has the best longevity. I'll be honest, I try to imagine how they would play in the 2010 era, so it does color how I view them, but I try not to let it affect my rankings too much.

Vote:

1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 20 years of excellence. Amazing stats, passes the smell test, good argument for greatest peak in NBA history combined with insane longevity, ability to play with superstars and carry a load on a bad team. He was an elite defensive player for most of his career, and he's one of two big men who have an argument against the top wing guys as an offensive force. Clearly had the skill set to be a superstar today. Championship caliber anchor from his rookie season (!!!) to about '85 probably. That's ridiculous.

2. Shaquille O'Neal: arguably the most dominant ever. Championship caliber from about 93-05.
"He looked like Batman coming out of nowhere"
drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,861
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#219 » by drza » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:52 am

trex_8063 wrote:Some of you were [I thought] eager for this project to get underway. Thread #1 has been open for about 59 hours now; not sure how much longer I will leave it open (possibly till tomorrow morning, but no longer). If you wish to be heard in the selection for #1 all-time, please do so very soon.

@ drza - you've been quite active itt, but unless I somehow missed it (bolding picks really helps, guys), I don't think you've actually stated your picks.


Went back and made my Russell pick official, with MJ at the 2 slot so my vote can be counted. I edited it in a previous post, and bolded both picks. Really hoping to get to dig into this Kareem/Duncan comp further, because the more I look, the more I'm convinced that Duncan may just have the better peak AND better functional longevity. I really hope to finish and get that in the world while both are still on the board
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz
Blackmill
Senior
Posts: 666
And1: 721
Joined: May 03, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #1 

Post#220 » by Blackmill » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:44 am

drza wrote:Went back and made my Russell pick official, with MJ at the 2 slot so my vote can be counted. I edited it in a previous post, and bolded both picks. Really hoping to get to dig into this Kareem/Duncan comp further, because the more I look, the more I'm convinced that Duncan may just have the better peak AND better functional longevity. I really hope to finish and get that in the world while both are still on the board


About functional longevity, I do think Duncan wins in this regard.

I've watched a whole lot of Magic since I think he's a very interesting player, and as early as his rookie season, you see his role in the offense changes whenever Kareem went to the bench. Now, we somewhat expect this, since without Kareem there's a large hole to fill. But with Magic it's not just doing more of everything he had been doing while Kareem was on the court. Rather, how Magic played changed dramatically.

This becomes much more obvious by 1985, when Magic had developed a good outside shot, and the Lakers had a couple forwards who could work the PnR. With Kareem on the court they rarely ran PnR for Magic, but as soon as he went to the bench, you could count on seeing it. For instance, in G6 of the 1987 NBA finals, Magic was struggling and Kareem went to the bench with maybe eight minutes in the third. As soon as he does, Magic runs PnR with Thompson about six or seven times, and generates a bunch of buckets on passes, drives, and pull ups.

Some of this I blame on the coaching. The spacing wouldn't have been ideal, but Worthy could have played PnR with Magic while Kareem was on the court, and Magic would have made that potent. And they did sometimes but not often enough. However, at least after 1985, if Kareem was on the court he needed to be a part of the offense since his defense had declined further and he wasn't spacing the floor. Some opportunity cost was necessary. I just wonder if it could have been less.

Obviously, given my vote, I still think Kareem had the better prime. It's only one game, but in that game I think Kareem's defense was very close to Duncan's in 03 and 07, and there's a lot of evidence suggesting that's how Kareem played when he could afford to help.

Return to Player Comparisons