RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #64 (Alonzo Mourning)

[Hal14]

With the exception of Westphal, these are really good players.

How dare you...

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

[sansterre]

With the exception of Westphal, these are really good players.

How dare you...

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

Ahhh! That's clever! You make a humorous joke by pretending to call another contributor ignorant!

I don't know if it's analysis, but that kind of humor definitely adds to the discussion. I wish I'd thought of it . . .

And out of curiosity, why 1995?

[Cavsfansince84]

64. Alonzo Mourning
-Prime that even with the kidney/injury issues lasted 8 years with some years after that where he was still very effective in a reduced role. Peak years where he was top 3 in mvp voting twice and was averaging 20-22/10-12 on extremely good efficiency. Very good defender/rim protector.

65. Nate Thurmond
-Accolades were hard to come by for him due to playing alongside Wilt and Russell and then Kareem for his entire career but I can't help but think that relative to era, much like Russell that his impact was quite large which I think shows up in him being top 10 in mvp voting 5x. He's obviously a great combination of size, strength, rebounding and defense with a prime that lasted 9-10 years. 5x all defense once that started in 1969. 5 straight years over 20pppg.

66. Alex English
-Nice combo of size, athleticism and scoring skills. Good length of prime and leading or co leading teams that were somewhat competitive(usually 1st or 2nd rd exits). 3x all nba 2nd team. 6x top 15 in mvp voting. 23rd all time scorer on 103 ts+ for career(1.5% above league average).

67. Greer
68. Iverson
69. Wilkins
70. Tmac
71. Jones
72. Giannis
73. Unseld
74. Parker
75. McAdoo
76. Lucas
77. Worthy
78. Dumars
79. Cheeks
80. Rodman
81. DeBusschere
82. Hill
83. Johnston
84. Carter
85. Nance
86. Issel
87. KJ
88. Wallace
89. Mullin
90. Cunningham
91. Jokic
92. Silas
93. Moncrief
94. Price
95. Rasheed
96. Aldridge
97. Bosh
98. Green
99. McGinnis
100. Laimbeer

[70sFan]

With the exception of Westphal, these are really good players.

How dare you...

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

Stansterre has plenty of knowledge, but more importantly he's willing to gain new information about older eras. I highly appreciate his contribution - he's the best "new" poster in a long time!

[trex_8063]

Where could the RAPM numbers be accessed?

for '97-'00
(in the blog index on right: '97 is in the Oct. 2013 folder, titled "Introducing 1990's RAPM"; '99 and '00 are in the March, 2014 folder)

'01-'13
(author is Jeremias Engelmann for these)

'14
I had previous sources, but one site went kaput, and I lost the other. I'm actually not sure who the author of this one is.

'15
(I believe J.E. is also the author of these datasets for '15-'19, btw)

'16 (PI)
(I also have an NPI version for this year)

'17

'18 (rs only, NPI)

'19 (rs only, NPI)

There's also this site for RAPM (I think PI, but not for sure) for both rs and playoffs [split, never full year together] '97-'19. However, there were just enough dubious results that made me question the source/methodology.....so I don't often use this one.

[trex_8063]

With the exception of Westphal, these are really good players.

How dare you...

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

It's very easy to hurl insults or insinuations at other posters [founded or otherwise]; it's harder to provide consistent and reasoned content. Please try to do the latter, and not the former.

I'll quote a message that's played over the intercom at my local supermarket after thanking you for wearing a mask: "Remember: in these difficult times, a little kindness goes a long way."

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote 1 - Allen Iverson
Vote 2 - Alex English
Vote 3 - Tracy McGrady

The Rest

Mourning
Thurmond
Unseld
Bobby Jones
Parker
Giannis
Moncrief
Rasheed
Jokic
Walton

At this point in the project, Iverson's durability is pretty impressive to look at. He played 40+ MPG in 11 of his first 12 seasons, leading the league in MPG 7 times in that span. From 99-08 he got to the line 9.8 times per game with a FT rate of .417. His body really took a beating and it didn't deter him from attacking the rim consistently. His middling playoff success certainly falls on him some, but those sixers teams didn't feature world beater rosters either. The fit with melo later in his career was less than ideal.

Iverson has to be one of the best examples of a player who would've benefited from playing more recently. It isn't a coincidence that his most efficient seasons came at the end of his prime when hand checking rules changed. Form 05-08 he put up 29.1 PPG on 54.6% TS, posting above league avg TS% in each of those 4 seasons. He added 3.3 RPG, 7.4 APG and 2.1 SPG in that span. His shooting from 16-23' during his first 5 seasons (42.3%) also suggests he'd be able to adapt to volume 3PT shooting in this era. Add in better spacing and more friendly officiating for the offense and you can see iverson thriving in today's game.

[Hal14]

How dare you...

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

It's very easy to hurl insults or insinuations at other posters [founded or otherwise]; it's harder to provide consistent and reasoned content. Please try to do the latter, and not the former.

Calling someone a loser or a moron - that's an insult. I'm simply pointing out that a certain poster showed a complete lack of knowledge about Paul Westphal - then when he was called out he later responded with "I just looked it up, he was better than I thought" which implies he simply looked up Westphal's stats on basketball reference and still has not shown that he's ever actually seen Westphal play....how can you have any credibility if you've never seen Paul Westphal play? He is not only a hall of famer, but he was arguably the best player on the court during what is arguably the greatest pro basketball game of all time - game 5 of the 1976 NBA finals, the triple-OT thriller.

[sansterre]

It shouldn't surprise you - it's pretty obvious that sansterre doesn't know much about players from pre-1995..

It's very easy to hurl insults or insinuations at other posters [founded or otherwise]; it's harder to provide consistent and reasoned content. Please try to do the latter, and not the former.

Calling someone a loser or a moron - that's an insult. I'm simply pointing out that a certain poster showed a complete lack of knowledge about Paul Westphal - then when he was called out he later responded with "I just looked it up, he was better than I thought" which implies he simply looked up Westphal's stats on basketball reference and still has not shown that he's ever actually seen Westphal play....how can you have any credibility if you've never seen Paul Westphal play? He is not only a hall of famer, but he was arguably the best player on the court during what is arguably the greatest pro basketball game of all time - game 5 of the 1976 NBA finals, the triple-OT thriller.

And, to be clear, if by "doesn't know much about players from pre-1995" you meant "barely watched basketball before 1995" then you're right. To be honest, I pretty much didn't watch basketball until 2012. And from there I only really watched the Finals some years. Film study is *not* my thing*. I think it's hugely important and I learn a lot from people who can break down film at a high level, but if all you meant was "he didn't watch any basketball before 1995" then not only is that true, but I take no offense.

I'd like to think that, in my write-ups of earlier teams (like the '67 Sixers) I compensate for this lack of film study with other things, but it is what it is.

*To be clear, I love film study. But the amount of time to break down and understand well everything that happened in a single game is so disproportionately high that it's simply way easier to rely on the observations of others. And I do believe that there is a firm place for data in all of this. You may have never seen Ted Williams' beautiful swing, or had any knowledge of his surly relationships with the press, but if took on look at his BBR page you'd correctly conclude "Ah, one of the best three hitters ever, lost years in his peak to both WW2 and Korea, what a stud!" And I know people that are stats-atheistic who believed that DiMaggio was the better player, even though there is no remote way that's true. It's sort of like the "Kobe is a better scorer than LeBron" argument. If you want to argue that he's more *skilled* I think there is a lot of film evidence for that (at least once you get away from the rim). If your criteria is "Who is better at making stupidly hard shots away from the rim" then the answer is obviously Kobe. And yet, there is a pretty unassailable amount of evidence that LeBron was the more effective scorer (relative to league average). And without stats I think most people would still assume Kobe. So there's a place for everything. And perhaps most importantly I am very open about what I don't know. When 70F brought up Westphal I didn't go "Clearly you don't know anything about basketball nub, he was a weak player on weak teams", I went and looked him up, saw a small streak of +4 BPM seasons and thought "Ah, so he actually had quite a strong peak for the late 70s, he just didn't keep it going that long. Given how short the late 70s was on non-Kareem studs, it would surprise me if he was one of the better players in the league in those years. Good to know." And then I apologized and changed the post. Nobody knows everything.

[Baski]

1.Alonzo Mourning
This guy would follow Mutombo if I had my way. Peaked way higher due to being roughly in the same tier (or a bit lower) defensively and leagues better offensively, but age and kidneys limited what could've been a top 40-50 career well above Dike's.

I compared Dike to Bill Russell offensively, but Zo is a lot better scoring wise. A legit 20 ppg scorer with consistently elite high 50s TS% throughout his 1st 8 years. Gametape showed he was solid in the post, like legitimately good enough to dump it down to, but was really amazing in the Dwight role and then some with the midrange shot, which is way more than I can say for the other two. His passing was bad though, which limited him, but not to the extent Russell's poor scoring affected his team's offense so there's that.

His was a defensive monster: 6th in career blocks per game and 11th in total blocks, of course validated by 2 DPOYs, 2 All D 1st teams, league leading defenses and once capturing the No. 1 seed in the East all on the back of his play on both ends and 2 top-3 MVP finishes. I noticed he really lacks individual accolades compared to his peers in the mid-late 90s, but those peers were pretty damn amazing and are all in already.

The kidney issue abruptly turned him into a role player, but one that was still highly valuable (when he could play) as he showed with the 2006 run where he led the Heat in Block% and all pace adjusted Block stats, Drtg and Net rtg for both the RS and PS. 2nd to Wade in WS/48 for both too. And he was 35. The stats I'm using are all over the place, but point is Zo at his peak got shafted by injury and disease but still managed to retain a lot of value, which I like to attribute to his portable offensive skillset and enduring defensive acumen.
The mental fortitude to come back from the ordeal and intangibles in accepting his new role as an aging legend and mentor for the 2nd Heat stint is pretty commendable as well.

2.Dominique Wilkins
3. Alex English

Order of preference:
Tony Parker
Allen Iverson
Giannis Antetokoumpo (I also think it's strange AD's ring has catapulted him so far beyond Giannis when prior to it it was clear Giannis' trajectory was going to have him as the superior guy by career's end)
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond
TMac
Walton
Jokic
Sidney Moncrief
Bobby Jones

[sansterre]

Also, ESPN's RAPM suddenly goes all the way back to '97.

2001: McGrady is 3rd (behind Shaq and Dirk), Iverson is 16th
2002: McGrady is 5th (behind Duncan, Eddie Jones, Shaq and Pierce), Iverson is 17th
2003: McGrady is 4th (behind KG, Dirk, Duncan)
2004: McGrady is 8th
2005: McGrady is 3rd (behind LeBron and Dirk)

It's not perfect, but it's more evidence that McGrady was, for that five-year span, one of the very best players in the league.

[LA Bird]

1. Alonzo Mourning
2. Vince Carter
3. Nate Thurmond

Preference among candidates with some traction: McGrady > Iverson > English > Giannis > Walton

Mourning - this board seems to not like two way defensive centers much nowadays but Mourning is top 50 all time for me (along with Howard). His prime was cut short but he still had a 8 year prime and I rank his 99/00 as one of the highest two year peaks left when considering availability (sorry Walton). Mourning returned in a smaller role to help the Heat win a title and he was still one of the league leading shot blockers at 2.3 bpg from 05-08 ahead of prime Duncan and Ben Wallace.

Carter - posterized Mourning with the GOAT NBA dunk. On a serious note though, he has played for so long that I think people kind of just forgot about him. His scoring numbers at his peak in 01 were identical to Kobe's that season (36.7 pp100 on +3.3 rTS% vs 36.4 pp100 on +3.4 rTS%), he can shoot 3s, pass and handle well for a 6'6 wing and he is a solid defender. He had a surprisingly good post-prime career after his athleticism declined and I consider his 13 season to be a strong contender for 6MOY that year. Overall, Carter has consistently rated well in +/- stats and he still has the most double digit on/off seasons of any player in the last 25 years besides LeBron and Garnett.

Thurmond - GOAT man defender. I believe the Warriors 10+ SRS decline in 67/68 without him rates as the highest two year WOWY run behind only 77/78 Walton which is crazy since Walton was elite on both ends and Thurmond was a negative on offense. He improved as a passer over his career but unfortunately never stopped shooting too many inefficient jumpers. Thurmond's defense locked down prime Kareem in consecutive playoffs so badly that he is basically the reason Bucks Kareem doesn't really gets the respect it deserves as a GOAT 4 year stretch.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #52:

Alonzo Mourning - 4 (Baski, Cavsfansince84, LA Bird, Odinn21)
Allen Iverson - 3 (Clyde Frazier, Dutchball97, trex_8063)
Bill Walton - 2 (euroleague, HeartBreakKid)
Nate Thurmond - 1 (Hal14)
Tracy McGrady - 1 (sansterre)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)


12 votes [great turnout for this stage!], requires 7 for a majority.
Those bottom three are first eliminated, which transfers one to Iverson, ghosts the other two.....

Zo - 4
Iverson - 4
Walton - 2
(ghosted) - 2

So Walton is chopped next, both votes are ghosted.....

Zo - 4
Iverson - 4
(ghosted) - 4

So we have to go to Condorcet to settle it between Zo and Iverson [and if it yields a tie, we'll go to a runoff].
I THINK Iverson trails Mourning 4-8*---which would make Mourning the victor---although there are two* included in that "8" that I'm not 100% sure about because they have not explicitly listed Iverson in their ordering of additional players: penbeast0 and euroleague.

pen, you didn't list Iverson, but your wording would seem to imply those players listed [of which Iverson is NOT one] are the guys you intend to support next.......also, I'm not sure I've ever heard you say anything complimentary about Iverson. So I'm about 99.99% sure you're among Zo's camp in this head-to-head; please let me know if I am in error.

euroleague, I also included you in Zo's camp here, but I'm less sure than I am with penbeast0. You have similarly used language that implies those players listed [again, with no Iverson] are the ones you intend to support next. Though periodically you've popped new players into your listings out of the blue, or NOT supported the next guy you'd listed when a spot opens up in your top 3; so I've not been sure if that's actually your extended list, or if you're just providing a list of tractioned players which has NOT been updated [to include Iverson].
Again, please let me know if I am in error in assuming you'd favour Mourning in this H2H.

TENTATIVELY [because I'm nearly positive about pen], I'm going to call Mourning the winner and get the next thread up. We'll have to abort if both of these guys get back to me and state they're in Iverson's camp.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

Also, ESPN's RAPM suddenly goes all the way back to '97.

2001: McGrady is 3rd (behind Shaq and Dirk), Iverson is 16th
2002: McGrady is 5th (behind Duncan, Eddie Jones, Shaq and Pierce), Iverson is 17th
2003: McGrady is 4th (behind KG, Dirk, Duncan)
2004: McGrady is 8th
2005: McGrady is 3rd (behind LeBron and Dirk)

It's not perfect, but it's more evidence that McGrady was, for that five-year span, one of the very best players in the league.

I didn't think espn had RAPM. I see their RPM [which goes back '97], but that's not quite the same (I mean RPM is basically xRAPM, which is partially informed by the box-score, whereas "pure" RAPM is not).

Am I missing the links to RAPM?

[sansterre]

Also, ESPN's RAPM suddenly goes all the way back to '97.

2001: McGrady is 3rd (behind Shaq and Dirk), Iverson is 16th
2002: McGrady is 5th (behind Duncan, Eddie Jones, Shaq and Pierce), Iverson is 17th
2003: McGrady is 4th (behind KG, Dirk, Duncan)
2004: McGrady is 8th
2005: McGrady is 3rd (behind LeBron and Dirk)

It's not perfect, but it's more evidence that McGrady was, for that five-year span, one of the very best players in the league.

I didn't think espn had RAPM. I see their RPM [which goes back '97], but that's not quite the same (I mean RPM is basically xRAPM, which is partially informed by the box-score, whereas "pure" RAPM is not).

Am I missing the links to RAPM?

No . . . I could swear that when I came upon this it was Real Adjusted Plus Minus but now it only shows RPM . . . I'm sorry for mis-stating the stat.

Wow - the contrast between RAPM and RPM for McGrady is bonkers.

[penbeast0]

You are right,Iverson's not even a top 100 player on my list. When I say complimentary things about him, it's usually about him at Georgetown, where I liked him a lot, or his raw talent rather than what he actually accomplished, or his entertainment value. To me, he was not a guy who would accept a role where he would be a positive on a legit NBA champion, he had to play HIS way and his way was not a way particularly conducive to winning at the highest levels.

[trex_8063]

Also, ESPN's RAPM suddenly goes all the way back to '97.

2001: McGrady is 3rd (behind Shaq and Dirk), Iverson is 16th
2002: McGrady is 5th (behind Duncan, Eddie Jones, Shaq and Pierce), Iverson is 17th
2003: McGrady is 4th (behind KG, Dirk, Duncan)
2004: McGrady is 8th
2005: McGrady is 3rd (behind LeBron and Dirk)

It's not perfect, but it's more evidence that McGrady was, for that five-year span, one of the very best players in the league.

I didn't think espn had RAPM. I see their RPM [which goes back '97], but that's not quite the same (I mean RPM is basically xRAPM, which is partially informed by the box-score, whereas "pure" RAPM is not).

Am I missing the links to RAPM?

No . . . I could swear that when I came upon this it was Real Adjusted Plus Minus but now it only shows RPM . . . I'm sorry for mis-stating the stat.

Wow - the contrast between RAPM and RPM for McGrady is bonkers.

Yeah, and I'll admit I've had reservations regarding the math involved, even though this is the guy for RAPM.

If you look at '03, as an example......
McGrady's PI RAPM is a relatively pedestrian +1.1 that year, while his teammate Andrew DeClercq is +3.2 (12th in the league).

In the rs TMac has the team-best [by a long shot] +13.0 in raw on/off; DeClercq is a distant 2nd at +7.0.
But in the playoffs, McGrady was a -4.8 in on/off, while DeClercq was a +13.6.
But this was a one-series sample: TMac was only off the floor 27 minutes TOTAL.

Thus, I would say that this playoff sample shouldn't be weighted all that heavily [noise in such a tiny sample will be HUGE]. But even allowing for some influence based on line-up differences, it seems *obvious [*to me, though I admit I only have modest knowledge of the mathematical process] that it IS weighted rather heavily to put DeClercq so substantially ahead.

[Odinn21]

McGrady's PI RAPM is a relatively pedestrian +1.1 that year, while his teammate Andrew DeClercq is +3.2 (12th in the league).

This is the thing to consider. I always take +/- data with on court production in mind. These points, rebounds or +/- numbers do not appear out of thin air. How I see these numbers is;
"Then XXX player is this impactful while being this productive on court"

If a player can afford to be less productive, he's likely to be more impactful. It's like scoring volume, if needed scoring volume goes down, it's much more likely that his efficiency will go up.

[euroleague]

Thru post #52:

Alonzo Mourning - 4 (Baski, Cavsfansince84, LA Bird, Odinn21)
Allen Iverson - 3 (Clyde Frazier, Dutchball97, trex_8063)
Bill Walton - 2 (euroleague, HeartBreakKid)
Nate Thurmond - 1 (Hal14)
Tracy McGrady - 1 (sansterre)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)


12 votes [great turnout for this stage!], requires 7 for a majority.
Those bottom three are first eliminated, which transfers one to Iverson, ghosts the other two.....

Zo - 4
Iverson - 4
Walton - 2
(ghosted) - 2

So Walton is chopped next, both votes are ghosted.....

Zo - 4
Iverson - 4
(ghosted) - 4

So we have to go to Condorcet to settle it between Zo and Iverson [and if it yields a tie, we'll go to a runoff].
I THINK Iverson trails Mourning 4-8*---which would make Mourning the victor---although there are two* included in that "8" that I'm not 100% sure about because they have not explicitly listed Iverson in their ordering of additional players: penbeast0 and euroleague.

pen, you didn't list Iverson, but your wording would seem to imply those players listed [of which Iverson is NOT one] are the guys you intend to support next.......also, I'm not sure I've ever heard you say anything complimentary about Iverson. So I'm about 99.99% sure you're among Zo's camp in this head-to-head; please let me know if I am in error.

euroleague, I also included you in Zo's camp here, but I'm less sure than I am with penbeast0. You have similarly used language that implies those players listed [again, with no Iverson] are the ones you intend to support next. Though periodically you've popped new players into your listings out of the blue, or NOT supported the next guy you'd listed when a spot opens up in your top 3; so I've not been sure if that's actually your extended list, or if you're just providing a list of tractioned players which has NOT been updated [to include Iverson].
Again, please let me know if I am in error in assuming you'd favour Mourning in this H2H.

TENTATIVELY [because I'm nearly positive about pen], I'm going to call Mourning the winner and get the next thread up. We'll have to abort if both of these guys get back to me and state they're in Iverson's camp.
]

If you scroll to the bottom of my original post, you can see Alonzo mourning is ranked over AI...

Not sure why I should bother doing rankings if you won’t read them?

[trex_8063]

If you scroll to the bottom of my original post, you can see Alonzo mourning is ranked over AI...

I have had that listing noted for some time, thank you.
But he isn't technically listed "over AI", because AI isn't shown at all.....which is why I double-check.

As stated:

euroleague, I also included you in Zo's camp here, but I'm less sure than I am with penbeast0. You have similarly used language that implies those players listed [again, with no Iverson] are the ones you intend to support next. Though periodically you've popped new players into your listings out of the blue, or NOT supported the next guy you'd listed when a spot opens up in your top 3; so I've not been sure if that's actually your extended list, or if you're just providing a list of tractioned players which has NOT been updated [to include Iverson].
Again, please let me know if I am in error in assuming you'd favour Mourning in this H2H.

"....are in order of my rankings" implies "these are the next guys I'd support", but could also mean "this is the order I'd go with among those guys being mentioned" (and just not updated to include Iverson, among others).

Not sure why I should bother doing rankings if you won’t read them?

Yeah, sort of feeling the same way.