RealGM Top 100 List #26

[Laimbeer]

Good analogies, but McGinnis was a better rebounder than Doc.

[ElGee]

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Wow, I'm shocked. Really Baylor was more valuable than Ewing? Didn't you in your "Pippen vs Ewing" post said that they (Pip and Ewing) were very close?
What's the value of Baylor? Negative on defense and not so great on offense, when Ewing was all time great on defense and above average on offense.
And Baylor almost every year missed a lot of games. He played 80 only one time and 75 or more 3 other times. Also for ~half of his career he was ineffective scorer and his team played better without him.

Games doesn't resonate with me that much...the serious injuries do. If a guy gives you 80-90% of a RS and 100% of the playoffs healthy, that can be sufficient.

I said I have Pippen clearly for the other reasons I outlined. I suppose they are close, in the sense that this vote for me is literally either Ewing and Baylor...and that's way closer. As in, I could go either way. I'm leaning toward Baylor, giving him a slight mental curve for things like playing in an era with worse medicine/courts and being run into the ground by coaches. Other than that, I would vote Ewing...so I'm really trying to decide what to parse on the fine line for this slot.

In general, the stuff about his value is confusing. The team WAS a good offensive team with him in there. They WERE competitive without West...

In his 3-year SIO run, Baylor posts a 2.4
In 4 years, Ewing posts a 2.6

But that includes 66 (post injury) for Baylor. His raw in/out in 61 (6g) was +6.4 (-6.0 without him) and in 1962,+4.5 bringing LA to a +4.0 MOV team. That fits right in with a sub-MVP, all-nba elite level impact to me.

And just to add something to the West-Baylor discussion, it should be noted that in a game Elgin missed in 1962, sophomore West was the first guard in NBA history to score 60 points. Impressive, but they clearly weren't the same team without pre-injury Baylor. I also don't agree with Doc's characterizations of Baylor's role entirely - the knee injury HAS to be considered in that evaluation IMO.

As a sophomore in '62 West increased his role but baylor, playing only on leave days, understandably would want to put on a show on his precious few free days and i'm sure west obliged in feeding him the ball.

Strange to me that people are voting without reading all of the posts. I understand that can be a challenge, so no big deal, but this has been addressed. Baylor didn't "only play on leave days." He was stationed after the new year...42 games into the season...and took 3 weekend leaves to play in 6 games.

Good arguments both for and against Baylor/Nique.

I continue not to be much impressed by defensive rebounding stats, because the team is supposed to get them, and it's a team scheme choice as to which player is supposed to get them. Still, as with most stats, if a guy gets a whole lot of something, then perhaps it's at least a little more than what a more ordinary player might have accomplished.

There was a BBR post that showed, of the offensive stats, OREB% changes the least when players change roles/teams/etc. It *could* be totally different on defense, but I don't think it is as different as you're suggesting by reducing DREB to "team scheme."

Rebounding, IMO is part of defense. It's the ending of the position - the completion of forcing a team to miss an attempt. And it comes from good defensive position in the whole possession. If you let your man get between you and the hoop, he may score...or he may grab a rebound. Coverage, positioning, a nose for the ball - they are all part of defense whether it's in the air or not. When you scramble the D (ie the D breaks down, usually starting with a single individual), you're defensive rebounding numbers decrease. So, like everything seemingly in the sport, it's interactive on the team/5-variable level, but individuals certainly have strengths/weaknesses that can be felt with great impact.

[ElGee]

Quickly on Nique: Have him ~42...not far off from McGrady/Pierce/Hondo crowd. I think he was passed over recently by Howard, Paul and Pierce. Always thought he was better than Worthy.

HIS PS statistics are impressive in that they don't fall off one bit really: http://www.backpicks.com/2011/08/15/adj ... ger-stars/

He totally had the Iverson, unipolar scoring role on many teams: http://www.backpicks.com/2011/02/12/var ... s-part-ii/ And yet, like Iverson, I think he was helping the offense enough that you get the ORtgs TMAC posted...and certainly the reverence from observers at the time. (eg He was 6th in MVP in the hectic 1988 vote and in 86, against the transcendent Bird season (69-win Celtics too) he was the only player to nab first place votes with 5.)

[TMACFORMVP]

Re: Moncrief. He certainly deserves some mention, and has an argument, but the "Moncrief/Bucks" consistently outperforming the Hawks during his prime is a bit mis-leading. Moncrief's five year prime was from 82-86. Nique wasn't recognized, or didn't hit his prime until that '86 season, so it's arguable their best teams never coincided with each other. And besides in that season, as great as Moncrief was, his teams were better too; Cummings was always a 19-22 PPG guy with 8+ boards and good positional man defense, Pressey was a homeless mans version of Pippen, and Lister/Pierce were terrific players off the bench. If it's worth anything, that Bucks team got swept by the '86 Celtics, while the '86 Hawks managed to steal one game, lol. I love Moncrief, but I don't think that is a particularly strong argument for him.

I see that Nique/Carter comparison all the time, but I just don't get it. Aside from the spectacular in game/all-star game dunking, they're not similar in any way. "Nique got the accolades because he was the Vince Carter of his day." I don't know if people realize this but Carter has made two, count em, two All-NBA teams, and never finished within the Top 10 of MVP Voting - so clearly despite being a flashy/hyped player, Carter has never consistently ever been recognized as one of the top players in the game. We talk about how Pierce was robbed of All-NBA teams, and what not, well Carter was never one of those players that actually robbed Pierce of that sort of accolade (even though he's so commonly referred to as doing so).

Nique made the All-NBA teams, because he was consistently among the top scorers in the NBA, an above average rebounder, anchored the better half of the leagues offenses, didn't turn it over, and for the most part led his team to the playoffs, only losing to better teams, much like the argument we have with Moncrief only losing to the Sixers/Celtics. I agree however with the point that Moncrief is a more unique player, I'm just not sure that still translates to being ranked higher on this list. Certainly a compelling argument, however.

@Laimbeer, "It indicates he has value, of course," is exactly what I was getting at. I don't think it really addresses the crowd that posts in here, but alot of people have the misconceived perception that Nique was just a scorer on bad teams with no real impact towards winning or losing (e.g. Adrian Dantley).

btw, same as last time for me.

Vote: Ewing
Nominate: Kidd

[drza]

I'm still marinating, but unless some great posts come in this evening and change my mind, I'm going to go with:

Vote: Elgin Baylor
Nominate: Jason Kidd

[penbeast0]

Re: Moncrief. He certainly deserves some mention, and has an argument, but the "Moncrief/Bucks" consistently outperforming the Hawks during his prime is a bit mis-leading. Moncrief's five year prime was from 82-86. Nique wasn't recognized, or didn't hit his prime until that '86 season, so it's arguable their best teams never coincided with each other. And besides in that season, as great as Moncrief was, his teams were better too; Cummings was always a 19-22 PPG guy with 8+ boards and good positional man defense, Pressey was a homeless mans version of Pippen, and Lister/Pierce were terrific players off the bench. If it's worth anything, that Bucks team got swept by the '86 Celtics, while the '86 Hawks managed to steal one game, lol. I love Moncrief, but I don't think that is a particularly strong argument for him.

I see that Nique/Carter comparison all the time, but I just don't get it. Aside from the spectacular in game/all-star game dunking, they're not similar in any way. "Nique got the accolades because he was the Vince Carter of his day." I don't know if people realize this but Carter has made two, count em, two All-NBA teams, and never finished within the Top 10 of MVP Voting - so clearly despite being a flashy/hyped player, Carter has never consistently ever been recognized as one of the top players in the game. We talk about how Pierce was robbed of All-NBA teams, and what not, well Carter was never one of those players that actually robbed Pierce of that sort of accolade (even though he's so commonly referred to as doing so).

Nique made the All-NBA teams, because he was consistently among the top scorers in the NBA, an above average rebounder, anchored the better half of the leagues offenses, didn't turn it over, and for the most part led his team to the playoffs, only losing to better teams, much like the argument we have with Moncrief only losing to the Sixers/Celtics. I agree however with the point that Moncrief is a more unique player, I'm just not sure that still translates to being ranked higher on this list. Certainly a compelling argument, however.

@Laimbeer, "It indicates he has value, of course," is exactly what I was getting at. I don't think it really addresses the crowd that posts in here, but alot of people have the misconceived perception that Nique was just a scorer on bad teams with no real impact towards winning or losing (e.g. Adrian Dantley).

btw, same as last time for me.

Vote: Ewing
Nominate: Kidd

You are right, Nique only hit his peak in 85/86 (only got All-NBA in 86 but he averaged 27.4ppg in 85) when Moncrief was finishing his 5 year run. And, yeah, Amare or maybe even Melo would be a better match for getting the accolades for one dimensional flashy scoring (Melo's D has improved).

As for the two, I'd certainly take Moncrief's peak but could see an argument for Nique based on longevity.

[colts18]

Here are the SRS of Pierce's team pre-Big 3:

99: -1.75 (22nd)
00: -1.00 (20th)
01: -2.40 (22nd)
02: 1.75 (9th)
03: -0.74 (19th)
04: -1.99 (20th)
05: 0.34 (14th)
06: -1.59 (20th)
07: won't count it because he was injured

So the average ranking is 18.3 and average SRS was -0.92. We punish McGrady because of his lack of team success, but Pierce barely had any success pre Big 3 except for a ECF in the worst conference in history. He put up big numbers on losing teams

[therealbig3]

Here are the SRS of Pierce's team pre-Big 3:

99: -1.75 (22nd)
00: -1.00 (20th)
01: -2.40 (22nd)
02: 1.75 (9th)
03: -0.74 (19th)
04: -1.99 (20th)
05: 0.34 (14th)
06: -1.59 (20th)
07: won't count it because he was injured

So the average ranking is 18.3 and average SRS was -0.92. We punish McGrady because of his lack of team success, but Pierce barely had any success pre Big 3 except for a ECF in the worst conference in history. He put up big numbers on losing teams

Who was punishing McGrady for poor team success? Nobody mentioned that...they mentioned his lack of longevity and durability, and his overall low scoring efficiency (at least I did).

But even so, Pierce did have a bad team in Boston before 08. T-Mac in Houston had a good team.

[Laimbeer]

Vote count anyone?

[therealbig3]

My count:

Vote:

Baylor-7 (Jerky Way, JordansBulls, mysticbb, penbeast0, ElGee, pancakes3, drza)

Ewing-6 (Dr Mufasa, DavidStern, therealbig3, Gongxi, fatal9, TMACFORMVP)

Havlicek-2 (Fencer reregistered, Sedale Threatt)

Barry-1 (ronnymac2)



Nomination:

Kidd-5 (mysticbb, drza, DavidStern, ronnymac2, TMACFORMVP)

Pierce-3 (Dr Mufasa, Fencer reregistered, therealbig3)

Walton-1 (JordansBulls)

Hayes-1 (Jerky Way)

Howard-1 (penbeast0)

McGrady-1 (ElGee)

McHale-1 (fatal9)

Cousy-1 (Sedale Threatt)

[Fencer reregistered]

Thanks for the count. I'll switch to Baylor.

My count:

Vote:

Baylor-7 (Jerky Way, JordansBulls, mysticbb, penbeast0, ElGee, pancakes3, drza)

Ewing-6 (Dr Mufasa, DavidStern, therealbig3, Gongxi, fatal9, TMACFORMVP)

Havlicek-2 (Fencer reregistered, Sedale Threatt)

Barry-1 (ronnymac2)



Nomination:

Kidd-5 (mysticbb, drza, DavidStern, ronnymac2, TMACFORMVP)

Pierce-3 (Dr Mufasa, Fencer reregistered, therealbig3)

Walton-1 (JordansBulls)

Hayes-1 (Jerky Way)

Howard-1 (penbeast0)

McGrady-1 (ElGee)

McHale-1 (fatal9)

Cousy-1 (Sedale Threatt)

[Doctor MJ]

Okay,

Vote: John Havlicek

The comparison with Ewing is still a tough one for me, so could change my mind in the future.

Oh, and if we end up with a tie and my vote would break the tie between Baylor & Ewing, I'll change my vote to Ewing.

Nomination: Bob McAdoo

I'm seriously struggling with my nominations right now, finding it very difficult to reach any point of certainty, but McAdoo is someone on my mind I haven't seen discussed. Of those yet to be nominated, he is the one who figures most prominently in my top 5's.

[Laimbeer]

It's come down to Baylor and Ewing - that's Baylor for sure.

Cousy is a glaring omission, but no chance yet. Kidd is reasonable, waaaaay to early for Pierce.

Vote: Baylor
Nominate: Kidd

[penbeast0]

Doc, if you want to switch, you have to post that switch formally in the next hour rather than just post contingency votes.