(#1) Best Defensive Shooting Guard of all time - The ten best defenders in each position project

[trex_8063]

For me, this spot likely comes down to a battle of the Michaels (Cooper and Jordan).
I already went over, in detail, why I'm not voting for Moncrief here.
I like Tony Allen a lot, and I think maybe---looking at his entire career---there isn't another SG who equaled him in per-minute defensive impact over their careers. But Allen's been a small-minute defensive specialist his whole career and only has a pinch over 18k minutes. It's hard for me to take that over guys with substantially larger sums.

I feel like Cooper is more or less on Moncrief's level as a man defender, and certainly has the versatility (I mean, we can find footage of him guarding MJ one game, Bird another), in part due to his outstanding reach (at 6'5" he likely had the wingspan of a guy standing 6'8"). He's also a superior help defender to Moncrief (career 2.1 stl and 1.0 blk per 100 possessions; Moncrief averaged just 2.0 and 0.4 even in his 5-year prime), and he's got similar [marginally more] career minutes.

But then there's Jordan, who perhaps isn't as consistently a marvelous man defender (did take the occasional possession off), but mostly was (at least by the 90's). 6'6" and strong, no one was abusing him in the post (I even remember him being put on Vlade for a brief stretch in the '91 Finals), and he had great lateral quickness and long arms. While he gambled a lot early in his career, he still had excellent steal/block numbers later in his career when he'd curtailed most of those bad habits. And his averages of 3.3 stl and 1.2 blk per 100 possessions while in a Bulls uniform is remarkable for a guy who's also [mostly] playing solid half-court D, too.

His '97 NPI DRAPM was +1.90, PI DRAPM in '98 was still +1.72. And fwiw, his rs APM in '96 was #1 in the league (a solid 13.2% above DRob, who was #2); hard to believe he managed that without a positive defensive split.

And his career minutes (>41k, nearly 36k in the Bulls uniform) blow Cooper, Allen, and Moncrief away.

Yeah, I don't see how I can't vote for him. Vote: Michael Jordan.

[Gibson22]

Okay, finally I have time to elaborate my opinion. I'm not sure about my vote.

First of all I think that Don Chaney, Bill Sharman and Jerry Sloan should get consideration for this top ten. Unfortunately I don't know about them, but based from what they say about th I think they should get consideration.

Another thing that I noticed, is that in my opinion, when I think about it, the quality of defense of the SFs is way higher than the defense of PGs and SGs. In fact, a lot of the guys in this list that can permor that type of defense, are close to being SFs.

To continue with my toughts: I do think that I find it difficult to rate the good defenders of the period pre 1985-1990 or something like that at the same level of the ones that came from that period on. In fact, when yesterday I gave a tought, for the FIRST SPOT, I wanna look at a guy who has it all.

I don't think it is easy to find players at the 1 and 2 position who are extremely good defenders in every aspect. For the Point Guards my guy was Nate Mcmillan. Just because: I don't know pre 80s guys enough, I found walt frazier's defense overrated and disappointing, I consider him a better defender than his teammate gary, I think that stockton, cp3, kidd, those type of guys, with their own differences, are a level below him. His size, his steals, his on man defense etc.. Basically I think he was the closest to those on ball pests a là blaylock or gary WHILE being basically above average size even for a Shooting Guard, and therefore having the qualities of intimidation, shot contesting etc. of a guy of that size

When I look at a guy to vote for the #1 spot, I don't wanna have someone that has to struggle to defend well. I want someone for whom (I don't think "for whom" is right ) defending well comes naturally. And I don't want somebody who can guard max 6'4" tall players.

I tried to scan trought the list and, just some toughts:

- If Andre Roberson fully recovers from his injury and has a decently long career, he may be considered the best or certainly a contender for the #1 spot, that's how good I think he is. I think him and kawhi are by far the best non bigs defenders in the league. He has the perfect build for a defender: tall, long arms, very quick, light enough to have that quickness but big enough to not be backed down or manhandled (well, almost by nobody) etc.. I think that if we didn't consider longevity, I'd take him in consideration even for the first spots

- There's no doubt (Well, that's exaggerating, in fact, If somebody thinks otherwise, I would be more than open to hear their opinion) in my mind, that Michael Jordan has the best defensive powers, the best tools to defend well, of any shooting guard ever. Basically, I think than one of the reasons that lead to MJ being over mythicized, is the fact that he was a player from the future, in... every aspect. In this list, there's not one player who is not either way smaller than him, way worse at on ball defense, way less athletic (well, that's obvious) etc.

- As I was saying, I want a defender who is extremely good in every aspect. In this list, the height range basically goes from 6'3" to 6'5.5", with a couple of exceptions like stacey augmon, butler.. the are just a few guys taller than that MJ, Kobe height (both listed at 6'6" but really 6'5"), and they are stacey, butler, probably majerle was a little taller, andre roberson, butler. I don't want somebody who can only guard small guards, I mean, a player like avery bradley isn't worse than anybody as far as on man defense etc, but his size limites him a lot, I don't want not very athletic players on my list, and most importantly I don't want somebody who has to always try to find ways to disturb his attacker to be effective, I want somebody big but still quick enough to be effective without always having to disturb the dribble, poke the ball etc. (I re-read it and it seems like disturbing the dribble etc is a negative, I hope it is clear what I was trying to say)

Considering the guys I think that are real candidates, I would slim down the list to 7 players + 2 (that I know nobody would consider as of now, I hope he will get consideration later) excluding pre 80s player.
-One is Michael Cooper (6'4.5")
- Moncrief (6'3")
- Jordan (6'5")
- Dumars (6'3")
- Alvin (6'3")
- Doug Christie (6'5.5")
- Tony Allen (6'3.5")

Then there are two guys who to me are candidates but I don't wanna start voting the same guy forever, and they are Mitch Richmond and.. Jimmy Butler.
Thabo sefolosha and fat lever are two of the best guys that don't make the cut.

I will continue with my toughts and finish my post later

Continue: Anyway, I'm not sure about alvin, but all the other guys were certainly able to guard bigger players. Noone of these players struggled to guard players at least 6'6", some of these guys are notorious for their defense of jordan, Cooper was as slim as an athlete can get but could guard 6'9" Bird, Doug Christie was very long so that's not an issue, Tony Allen is not small (he's about an inch shorter than kobe) and he certainly is notorious for defending players way bigger than he is.

Anyway, I think that there's a difference between finding a way to disturb a bigger player and actually being a great defender because you have the right body to be one.

I never tought that Michael Jordan is the best Defensive shooting guard of all time, because I didn't ever think that throughout his career he was the best at defending. I always tought at MJ's defense as extremely good but just one tiny bit worse than enough to be one of these guys in contention for the best defender of all time.

So, when I look at the field of the candidates, I want a guy:
-who is athletic
-who is not short
-who is a better on ball defender than MJ is
- Who can at least guard SFs
- Whose defense is legendary, where they actually built something with their defense
- Who can actually consistenly contest shots, meaning that it is actually difficult to get a shot off against them, not just because they will disturb your dribble etc
- Who has in general a God-Tier defense, like, MJ even had always perfect defensive stance (when he wanted to stop you), he was super quick, had huge wingspan and hands etc, he was a technically perfect defender. To me, the god-tier defenders in this list are, like I said MJ, Moncrief, Cooper, Tony Allen
- Whose defense remained at a great level for many many seasons


Now, Moncrief and Cooper are two defenders that everybody knows they are in contention for the title of best defenders ever in their position. They are two of the four players that have won DPOY. They were perfect defenders, cooper did it in a great team which is always a + in my opinion. They did at a great great level every aspect of defense. I don't think you have to break it down the defense of Michael Jordan, Cooper and Moncrief, they just did everything great.

I think that Moncrief is the best pure defender out of the three. He was very fast, moncrief was a great athlete. Not MJ obviously but he had great athletical tools for defense. Without taking it too long, I would say that if moncrief was like 1.5 inches taller I would be sure about voting him. If I say that height limited him it sounds incorrect, because moncrief isn't someone that I think being in anyway limited on defense, but still, I want to say that a bit more height would have made a big difference for him.

Anyway, taking another look at those 4 guys. Moncrief, and Michael Jordan declined on defense and had a number of normal defensive seasons.
Michael Cooper and Tony Allen didn't.
As I said, to be considered a better defender than Michael Jordan, it is necessary that you played great defense more often than MJ ( and that would obviously be because MJ had to attack like he did) and you need to be a better on-ball defender than Michael Jordan.
I think that Tony Allen is better than anybody in this aspect, I think that moncrief is one of the best in this aspect but not as good as MJ but his ability to prevent you from receiving the ball, and those type of things made him better than MJ at making the life of that single player that he guarded difficult, but he certainly wasn't as good as some of these guys at help defense. His minuses are height and the fact that not all of his defensive seasons are great. As I said, I think that if moncrief was 6'5", he would have been the best.

Michael Cooper was almost as good as MJ in terms of man defense (with man defense I mean, who I absolutely don't want to be the guy who I gotta score on, who I have to get past, to back down, to get open from etc) but he was better as an help defender and left his man open even more rarely than MJ. To summarize, I would say that MJ and cooper were almost tied on defense, they were similar defenders, Mj had more average defensive seasons and games, but at the same time he has 15k more minutes than him, so it's difficult.

In my opinion, the reason why I stated that we have to consider the enitre career of the players, longevity is important in the ranking etc, but still I always voted for nate mcmillan for the PGs, is that there's a difference between not having too many minutes because you weren't that good and actually declining on defense.
Between nate mcmillan and gary payton, gary may have more minutes of good defense than nate, but still, I think that gary declined and played more than a few average defensive seasons, even if he probably has more minutes than nate at a high level than him, there's a practical difference. That's why I tend to prefer the fact that you played the majority of your career at a high level on D to having more longevity because you just was better and played longer.

So, between those 3, I would say. Sidney would have been the best with a bit more height, and should have played more seasons at his best on D to take the first place.
Michael Cooper and Michael Jordan are tied, with Cooper having a higher percentage of great defensive seasons, Michael Jordan having a lot more minutes.
Another thing, I think that Sidney was really great at moving on defense, he wasn't athletic as MJ but he was great at that, better than cooper in this, in fact, when I tried to look for guys who have athletics abilities FOR defense as good as MJ, excluding modern players (jimmy butler), the best one is sidney moncrief,

So, getting back to what I said, to be better than MJ, I want a guy:

I want a guy:
-who is athletic: Sidney Moncrief is my guy, Cooper is athletic too
-who is not short: Michael Cooper is long
-who is a better on ball defender than MJ is: As I said, in my opinion Sid was better than both those guys at creating trouble for his guy
- Who can at least guard SFs: Michael Cooper was better than MJ at guarding bigger players, he's definitely one of the best at this between SG. Moncrief could guard MJ to an extent but his height is a factor
- Whose defense is legendary, where they actually built something: This is something I like a lot: all of these 3 guys built something with their defense. They are iconic defenders
- Who can actually consistenly contest shots, meaning that it is actually difficult to get a shot off against them, not just because they will disturb your dribble etc: Michael Cooper is my guy, sidney is not, MJ is the best out of these 3
- Who has in general a God-Tier defense, like, MJ even had always perfect defensive stance (when he wanted to stop you), he was super quick, had huge wingspan and hands etc, he was a technically perfect defender. To me, the god-tier defenders in this list are, like I said MJ, Moncrief, Cooper, Tony Allen
- Whose defense remained at a great level for many many seasons Michael Cooper is definitely my guy


Now, I repeat what are the factors for me: size and height to not have to struggle to contest your opponent's shot, ability to guard bigger players, building something with your defense, defensive techinque, consistence throughout the game and the season to play great level of D.

Tony Allen is the best on ball defender of all time between 1s and 2s. He's the best ever at defending his guy, I think there actually is a gap even between him and MJ.
Tony Allen is a very good athlete, his type of athletism was perfect for defense, but he didn't have the leaping ability and the strength of mj (or any of his athletic qualities for that matter) but he is a great athlete.
He is super quick.
He is legendary for his abilities to guard bigger players, and he's good at contesting shots of players up to 6'7". I know that he guarded well players even much taller, but he defended them in another way.
Like I said, I like to take into consideration when players have built something with their defense. MJ, Pippen and Rodman are legendary for how they defended. Well, not just for that, especially MJ, but I mean to say that the defense of those 3 guys are one of the main things of the 90s bulls, and, therefore, of the 90s basketball.
The bucks in the early and mid 80s had an exceptionally good defense and they were a really good team, a big reason of this being sidney.
Michael Cooper won 5 championships, and while he wasn't in the same category as Magic, Kareem and James Worthy, his defense was one of the main things of a team who can be considered the best of all time.
Tony Allen won a ring with his defense being a factor, but most importantly he built something in memphis, with a team that is remembered for his defense. I think that's the team you think about when talking about defensive teams of the recent years.
He is notorious for guarding well great players.
He was good at contesting shots, not as good as Coop or MJ (or jimmy B) but better than moncrief and the majority of the candidates.
He was better than anybody but moncrief at denying you the ball.
A big advantage on moncrief and MJ, is that he never stopped being a great defender.
A big advantage on MJ is that he took 0 plays off.
A big disadvantage on Mj and a tiny disadvantage on a lof of candidates is that he has just 18k minutes.

At the end, I would say that he is worse than MJ and cooper as an help defender, but on average he's just the best defender of all time between Shooting Guards, and, while it's necessary to consider that he played just 18k minutes (RS), I think he was on average the best defender of all time + he doesn't have not great defensive seasons.

My vote goes to Tony Allen

[penbeast0]

... For all the talk of Jordan not putting 100% effort on defense because of his offense, was Moncrief not doing the same? I don't know what makes people think Moncrief was capable of All NBA calibre offense while playing with Tony Allen's defensive intensity for up to 39 minutes a game


....The lack of any mentions of Paul Pressey when crediting Moncrief for Milwaukee's defensive success is also concerning.

Vote: Michael Jordan

(a) Jordan and Moncrief were different personalitites. Jordan was a guy who thrived on conflict and adrenaline. When he was fully locked in, I think he was better than Sid (mainly because he had less "tunnel vision" of focusing to lock down his man and would make spectacular plays in the passing lanes too); but when it was a midseason game with a weak team, he would sleepwalk defensively far more. Moncrief's engine ran on pride rather than ego. For him it was about doing his job at 100% all the time so he was much more consistent with his defensive energy but didn't get the adrenaline surge that Jordan did to overrev for short stretches.

(b) The year before Pressey joined the Bucks, they were already the #1 defensive team in the league led by Moncrief, Quinn Buckner, and Mickey Johnson with an offense/defense platoon of Lanier and Catchings at center (and offensive star Marques Johnson). Sid's rookie year they jumped from 15th to 8th then to 3rd when they moved him to full time. And you could see the difference in the defense, all of a sudden they were overplaying,picking up their men earlier, making them work harder, it was something a lot of people commented on and Moncrief was the acknowledge defensive leader, a role he took pride in and kept even after becoming part of their 1-2 offensive punch first with Marques Johnson then with Terry Cummings. The team took on his personality and stayed outstanding the year he was injured before gradually tailing back to mediocrity as he was crippled and unable to play big minutes or use a lot of the athleticism that made him great. I think you would credit Catchings and Lister as much as Pressey except for that one post-Moncrief year where he moved into the Moncrief role and had a career year.

[trex_8063]

(b) The year before Pressey joined the Bucks, they were already the #1 defensive team in the league led by Moncrief, Quinn Buckner, and Mickey Johnson with an offense/defense platoon of Lanier and Catchings at center (and offensive star Marques Johnson).

I'd also add in Alton Lister. He was around the year before Pressey got there; though only playing 15 mpg in '82 (likely because of foul-trouble, overzealously going for too many plays/blocks--->9.7 PF/100 poss), he was averaging a monster 4.8 blk/100 poss (and 11.3 DReb/100, too). His minutes would rise over the next few years, and he always struck me as a really solid defensive center.

[penbeast0]

I always liked him too, could be a good interview too.

[Gibson22]

I will elaborate more on this in the next thread, but for now:

-I already tried to explain my opinion on the importance of athletic/phisical abilities and how gifted mj was and how gifted should you be to be better or equal to MJ on Defense, and I tried my best to compare Moncrief and Cooper to MJ, but you have to consider that they were 6-7 years older than him, and, even if that may not seem too much, the difference in athletic abilities between guys born around 1955 and guys born in 1966 or something like that is huge. Those are 11 years and not 7, but Mj was a precursor in terms of physique, like erving (born in 1950) was, like lebron is now. The athleticism of the league was increasing at an high pace, you have to take this in consideration.

Why in my opinion you should consider tony allen and JIMMY BUTLER very early. Well, for tony allen it would be the fact that he's on average the best of all time.

In the many years I read basketball discussions, handchecking is one of the words I read the most, but I think that what really makes it difficult for defenders of these days is the number of screens that are going on in a game. I don't think it is clear for many people that something as simple as a screen is very effective and makes it way harder for a player to defend. Not that screens were invented yesterday, but there a lot more nowadays. When somebody manages to overcome a screen and remains close to his man and contests his shots or blocks it from behind, he's doing something really impressive, and, a part from that, I just wanna say that in general you just should consider how difficult it is to defend with all those screens. Basically every time someone is trying to keep up with his man, there's a screen coming. And that's the value of wingspan btw.

That's why in my opinions you should already consider jimmy butler and tony (but again, it's obvious for him).

Now one or two things about those two:

-I don't think GP is the best point guard defender of all time, but he would be in my top 7/8 PGs AND SGs. Tony allen as a defender is similar to gary payton, just better. Not slightly better. Tony is a gary payton 2.0 (it would be exaggerating to call him a rich man's gary payton). He defends like him but he can disrupt even better, he is quicker, he's a bit taller, he can contest shots better, he's better at guarding bigger players, he has more consistency troughout the season. A gary payton better in every aspect

-Jimmy Butler: he has just 15k minutes, but, beside from that, why would you not consider him for the top 5. In general, I think people don't praise him enough for his defense. It is probably the fact that since he became an all-star, he seems a bit iffy as a player and as a leader. Or the fact that he was considered a lebron stopper and he hasn't been effective on him for the last few years, so people notice that, I don't know, but I don't think there are "scientific" reasons why people seem to have started to undervalue his defense.

Going back to what I said about what you need to be as good as MJ on defense, Butler is the perfect profile (and again, we go back at the phisical abilities of players troughout the years).

He doesn't take plays off
He always had great defensive seasons (in fact, all-defensive 4/7 seasons)
He's VERY athletic
He's the physicaly strongest player in the list
He's the tallest between real candidates (butler is 1 inch taller than kobe and mj), he can guard 4s.
He's a very good on ball defender.
His stance is always perfect
He has that type of physique that when he doesn't have the quickness to follow you, he can slow you down with his chest, that's something he does often
He's one of the best at contesting shots

Watch on YouTube

;t=119s look at this video to see the phisicality.

https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=49 this is a great play, look at how he moves his feet, it was not easy to jump here
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=84 look at the footwork
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=154 doesn't back down
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=175 the quickness to close down on kobe
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=188 fight through the screen, and he recovers on harden but that's easy (a lot of defensive plays look difficult but they really are not), but then it's amazing the almost steal+ shot contesting
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs stopping the fastbreak
https://youtu.be/Xz5LhrjnbDs?t=329 amazing defense on harden

etc. You guys should consider more tha ability to contest shots, in my opinion. Jimmy, if he had longer arms, would really be the epitome of the perfect defender. Obviously he can't have the quickness of mj, tony allen etc but he is still quick

[Gibson22]

Defensive accolades are almost always overrated and it seems to be the case even on this board. I feel like Moncrief has gone from underrated to overrated and wouldn't be in contention here if it wasn't for the 2 DPOYs. Tony Allen is rightfully penalized for his limited minutes yet Moncrief's longevity is getting a pass even though he didn't play for much longer.

Total minutes
36k Bulls Jordan
22k Bucks Moncrief
18k Tony Allen

Not all of those minutes were when they were playing elite defense but an argument for Moncrief at #1 would need to show he was like 50% more impactful on a per possession basis than Jordan over the course of their prime. A defensive specialist like Tony Allen actually has a case since he was ridiculously dominant in his limited minutes (+4.3 DRAPM in JE's 15 year RAPM) but Moncrief wasn't a defense only player like Allen who could commit all his energy to defense. For all the talk of Jordan not putting 100% effort on defense because of his offense, was Moncrief not doing the same? I don't know what makes people think Moncrief was capable of All NBA calibre offense while playing with Tony Allen's defensive intensity for up to 39 minutes a game.

Allen has the best per possession defensive peak but even as a regular Tony Allen supporter on here, I would have to say Jordan is the GOAT SG defender for career because he could stay on the court for much longer. Not sure how Moncrief factors into this conversation when he doesn't have the longevity of Jordan and wasn't playing at the intensity of Allen due to his offensive load. The lack of any mentions of Paul Pressey when crediting Moncrief for Milwaukee's defensive success is also concerning.

Vote: Michael Jordan

But, are they? I feel like all traditional ways to measure things (like in this case steals and blocks, accolades) are strarting to get underrated.. I mean, sidney, cooper and MJ, 3 of the 4 DPOY, don't they belong in the top 5? And isn't alvin at least a top 10? Don Chaney and jerry sloan, aren't they two of the best from the era since the introduction of the all-defensive teams-pre80s, aren't Joe dumars (x5 and x4 all-def) two of the best and at least in consideration for the top 10? Jimmy B is the one who has the most all-def teams between sgs drafted post 2010 and in my opinion he is the best, wade and tony allen same thing but for players drafted after 2000 and before 2010 etc. I mean, beside from kobe I think that, at least for the SG spot, defensive accolades do a good job at depicting reality.


Anyway, the results as of now

Michael Jordan 10 (Dr Positivity, OdomFan, BAMBA5, lost92bricks, kendogg, anglewings, LAbird, electricmayhem, knickfan33, trex)
Tony Allen 4 (Luigi, KTM_2813, Heartbreakkid, lebron3-14-3)
Sidney Moncrief 8 (penbeast0, Johnny Firpo, iggymcfrack, Samurai, PistolPeteJr, SinceGatlingWasaRookie, cecilthesheep, pandrade83)

[Gibson22]

Hi guys, do you wanna vote before the deadline?

Spoiler:

a

a

a

a

.

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

[GeorgeMarcus]

Torn between Allen and Moncrief... I vote Moncrief. The minutes argument has merit.

[homecourtloss]

Tony Allen.

[LA Bird]

(a) Jordan and Moncrief were different personalitites. Jordan was a guy who thrived on conflict and adrenaline. When he was fully locked in, I think he was better than Sid (mainly because he had less "tunnel vision" of focusing to lock down his man and would make spectacular plays in the passing lanes too); but when it was a midseason game with a weak team, he would sleepwalk defensively far more. Moncrief's engine ran on pride rather than ego. For him it was about doing his job at 100% all the time so he was much more consistent with his defensive energy but didn't get the adrenaline surge that Jordan did to overrev for short stretches.

(b) The year before Pressey joined the Bucks, they were already the #1 defensive team in the league led by Moncrief, Quinn Buckner, and Mickey Johnson with an offense/defense platoon of Lanier and Catchings at center (and offensive star Marques Johnson). Sid's rookie year they jumped from 15th to 8th then to 3rd when they moved him to full time. And you could see the difference in the defense, all of a sudden they were overplaying,picking up their men earlier, making them work harder, it was something a lot of people commented on and Moncrief was the acknowledge defensive leader, a role he took pride in and kept even after becoming part of their 1-2 offensive punch first with Marques Johnson then with Terry Cummings. The team took on his personality and stayed outstanding the year he was injured before gradually tailing back to mediocrity as he was crippled and unable to play big minutes or use a lot of the athleticism that made him great. I think you would credit Catchings and Lister as much as Pressey except for that one post-Moncrief year where he moved into the Moncrief role and had a career year.

(a) Personalities don't factor into my evaluation unless there is evidence it helped/hindered their on court performance. I know some people love or hate Duncan/KG for their opposite personalities but all that matters to me is the on court impact, irrespective of how they got there.

(b) Milwaukee's defensive success was not a one man effort. Going from Moncrief's first season, the mid-season trade of Lanier was what jumpstarted Milwaukee's success in the 80s, not rookie Sid playing 20 minutes a game. ElGee had the Bucks at an average +0.9 SRS without Lanier but +8.8 SRS with him after trade. Also that season, Bucks traded Gianelli (1.2 blocks per 36) for a much better shot blocker in Catchings (3.5 blocks per 36). The ~2.5 rDRtg jump was mostly attributed to a decrease in opponent eFG%, a factor which was more correlated with strong interior presence than guard defense, at least according to GotBuckets' FFAPM back when it was still available. They also had an All-Defensive guard in Quinn Buckner (3.0 steals per 36) who had already led the Bucks to being a top 5 team in forcing turnovers before the arrival of Moncrief. Then in 1981, the Bucks drafted Alton Lister (3.0 blocks per 36) which combined with Catchings minutes gave the Bucks a center rotation of 3+ blocks every game. All these factors contributed to the Bucks' defense which, as shown in trex_8063's (small sample) WOWY numbers, were still great even without Moncrief. And FWIW, elite guard defense is usually most correlated with forcing turnovers yet the Bucks were below average in that area in the 2 years between Buckner's trade and Pressey becoming a starter (coincidentally, Moncrief won DPOY in both these seasons). As for Pressey, we have some evidence of the Bucks defense performing much worse during his absence.

1987~89 Pressey WOWY
With (203 G): 105.0 ppg against
Without (43 G): 109.2 ppg against

He had poor career longevity but Pressey was probably the more impactful defensive player from the mid 80s onward. Moncrief was one of the best defensive SG of all time but the 2 DPOYs make people overlook several weakness in his argument as GOAT defensive guard. His defensive effort is not questioned like Jordan, despite him also playing heavy minutes as an offensive star during his prime. His longevity is not penalized, despite his career not being much longer than Tony Allen's. And finally, the quality of his defensive support is too often underplayed or completely ignored, even though it was probably one of the better defensive supporting casts for the 80s.

[penbeast0]

I enjoy your take on this even if I don't agree. You have a much stronger grasp on statistical evidence than I do although I think the defensive numbers are weaker and less probative than the offensive ones. I do think people penalize him on any all-time list for his short career; I don't think they penalize him for not creating turnovers . . . maybe they should. For me, my main evidence is watching Sid, MJ, and Tony Allen and how they played; I think Lanier improved Milwaukee's offense and Catchings was a very nice defensive player (Buckner was good but not as impressive as his All-D selections might indicate; rookie Lister jumped at everything and his blocks overstate his value quite a bit) and that team always had a very deep bench and used it for energy which matters a lot defensively too. But from watching them a lot, it was Sid that led that defense, at least from his second year on. They keyed off him as the Grit and Grind crew did off Tony Allen, low minutes or not. All these players are great players; if it's a key playoff game, I'd take Sid defensively if the opponent's top shooter is a jump shooting guard like a Ray Allen or Vince Carter, one of the turnover creators like MJ or Tony if the opponents key off a big man like Larry Bird or Shaq. To me, that spells Moncrief although the longevity argument is an important one.

[Sixersftw]

Vote Jordan

[Gibson22]

3 hours

[Gibson22]

Hi guys, if you want to partecipate, read what it is at the start and express your vote before the deadline (2 hours)

Spoiler:

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

[PigsOnTheWing]

Is impact and talent the same in basketball? No, at least not in my opinion. Impact is based on talent but also on role, coaching, system, teammates etc...
So what do we have to rank here? The player talent or his impact on the team? I prefer using the latter because of the simple assumption that if I had to build a team, I'd rather start by choosing the most impactful player and then choose the other components to suit him at best.

I needed to ask me these qustions because in this spot I feel there's a large difference between impact and talent (or skill) for the main candidates for #1. In particular Michael Jordan was someone whose defensive talent was somewhat hindered by the role he needed to adopt in the Bulls squad. The Bulls offense, in particular before the arrival of Phil Jackson, was completely centered around him and so it is likely he couldn't give his best on defense. With the introduction of the triangle, his offensive load lightened up but Pippen had already emerged as an exceptional defender so MJ have never really had the opportunity or the will to reserve his best for D, though he shares this fate with pretty much any offensive dynamo ever.

So how can we compare Jordan with someone like Tony Allen, who has had a carrer in the NBA just because of his god-like defense? On a per-minute basis, Allen dwarfs Jordan value but he hasn't played enough because of his abysmal offensive game. So my ranking will we contamined by the other side of the court even though the purpose is to put down a list of players ranked only for their D. However, I think it's fair, mainly because it counteracts the difference in role.
As for Moncrief, I don't think his impact is good enough to overcome the longevity disavantage he has against MJ (and the same can be said for Allen, btw).

I have not enough time to support my vote with metrics this time, but I'm fairly comfortable with giving my vote to Michael Jordan, which is pretty unbelievable considering I would have done the same if we were talking about offense.

[trex_8063]

I think MJ's taking this spot. I'll probably be looking at Michael Cooper as my principle candidate for #2, though will give Tony Allen some consideration (or potentially Moncrief if someone can provide the perfect counterpoint to all the concerns I'd raised in prior post).
Those likely will be my top 4; after that it sort of opens up again. Jimmy Butler will likely be near the top of the next tier for me (would be higher if he had more solid years to his credit); will also be looking at Joe Dumars, DWade, Don Chaney, maybe Kobe, maybe Doug Christie. Am I forgetting anyone? EDIT: Alvin Robertson, too. EDIT2: tbh, I could potentially see myself giving support to someone like Dumars (or Butler) before Moncrief unless someone can better convince me of Moncrief's supreme defensive value (though I doubt Moncrief will still be on the table by that point anyway).

Probably not quite ready for Andre Roberson in the midway section of the list, though I could see potentially giving him some love at the end of the list, even with his skimpy 6,651 career minutes ('cause he's a defensive beast).

[Gibson22]

I'm late. MJ won this.

Michael Jordan 12 (Dr Positivity, OdomFan, BAMBA5, lost92bricks, kendogg, anglewings, LAbird, electricmayhem, knickfan33, trex, sixersftw, Bounce_9)
Tony Allen 5 (Luigi, KTM_2813, Heartbreakkid, lebron3-14-3, homecourtloss)
Sidney Moncrief 9 (penbeast0, Johnny Firpo, iggymcfrack, Samurai, PistolPeteJr, SinceGatlingWasaRookie, cecilthesheep, pandrade83, superdario)

[bledredwine]

I’m impressed with the comments. There are a lot of knowledgeable posters commenting here.

I vote Jordan because he had insane quickness, picked passes, stole the ball and blocked shots like no other SG that we’ve seen, and whenever he put his mind to it, he could lock down even the quickest of guards (example Payton in the 1996 finals when he held him to 1 point in the second half of a pivotal game, I forget which).

He also had more blocks than half of the centers in (I believe) 87 or 88. Someone look into this because I forgot which year.

Jordan was not only a tremendous lock-down defender but also made smart, albeit risky defensive plays (Malone steal and championship winner being an example of something he did multiple times, usually to block the shots of centers). When defense was needed to win a game, he always did his part, which is part of the reason that Pippen said that when they were within six points heading to the forth, he knew that they’d win the game (Pipp quote).

What’s amazing is he often had 30-40 points to go along with these games.

[trex_8063]

For anyone reading, discussion pertaining to Michael Jordan continues in the #2 thread.