RealGM Top 100 List #48

[Moonbeam]

And yes, I'm aboard the "D Nice should be an eligible voter" train.

[trex_8063]

Run-off vote: Tracy McGrady.

I'm not convinced Mutombo has a place this high.
Could he be the best defensive player left out there? Yes, he may well be. Could it be that he had a bigger defensive impact than anyone else in his era? Perhaps. Though that impact wasn't anywhere near the defensive impact that say Bill Russell had, for instance. That Mutombo wasn't able to inflict that level of impact (or even near it) may be as much (if not more) a function of the era as it is of the man. But it is what it is. As I made clear in all the discussion wrt Dolph Schayes: I'm more interested in in-era dominance than in speculating on era portability.

And by virtually any measure you care to go with, it's generally questionable as to whether Mutombo was ever a top 10 player in the league (much less consistently so):
*Only once figured into the MVP voting (at 13th).
*His name does not appear in the RealGM RPoY project at all (which went 6-11 deep every year of his prime).
*Never top 10 in league in PER.
*Only once top 10 in WS/48 (at 9th, in '99).
*For devotees of RAPM, he was once #3 in the league (in '00) in PI RAPM; had a monster DRAPM that year (+6.61), which ironically is not reflected at all in the team defensive result: Hawks were 25th of 29 teams defensively that year. To me, this is one of many results that keeps me skeptical of the infallibility of RAPM, and reluctant to put too many eggs into that particular basket.
And at any rate, he was never higher than 14th in the league in RAPM in any other year (and was generally not even in the top 20).
*In shutupandjam's Estimated Impact, he had one top 10 finish (9th in '99), and only four times in the top 20 in the league (17th in '94, 20th in '97, 20th in '98).

So he's on the all-time short list of great defenders, no question. I'd describe him as a "merely adequate" offensive player though (at times a small negative). And while I value longevity a lot, his longevity is decent (pretty good), but not elite or excellent. In short, not enough for me to want to put him in the immediate vicinity of McGrady, who peaked MUCH higher, and who had a minimum of four seasons (imo) which were better than ANY year Mutombo put forth.

[Notanoob]

Run off vote: Tracy McGrady

Incredible skill set. Beautiful handle, nice shot, fantastic playmaking. Very high peak; his 2003 season was on par with that of Wade.

It's a real shame that Orlando couldn't give him any support. It would have been nice to see how he'd look if he didn't have to shoulder such an offensive load- he was a defensive specialist in Toronto IIRC.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

If i was a GM who wanted to win a championship I would rather have 10 years of Mutombo than 10 years of McGrady.

I never like McGrady that much. I thought he could be defended if you needed to defend him in a playoff series.

It is hard to find a defensive center like Mutombo. I would rather have Mutombo and a 2nd rate off guard than have McGrady and a 2nd rate defensive center.

My vote is for Mutombo.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Edit, duplicate post.
Mutombo is the more valuable player

[Moonbeam]

I'm going with Mutombo here. McGrady certainly had a higher peak, but Mutombo was a great player for longer, was far more durable, and had a lot more impact on playoff success, though I agree that McGrady was generally a very good playoff performer.

[HeartBreakKid]

I favor peak play a lot, and McGrady kills Mutumbo here.

I love Mutumbo, his offense is overlooked, and the guy shows up for big games. McGrady though was just in another class to me. McGrady was pretty much as good as Kobe Bryant was certain years.

McGrady has about what, 7 seasons where he is a superstar? I'm not big on guys who play selfish ball, but McGrady's scoring is hard to deny, and the guy had awesome vision on top of that.

My vote goes to Tracy McGrady

[The Infamous1]

I favor peak play a lot, and McGrady kills Mutumbo here.

I love Mutumbo, his offense is overlooked, and the guy shows up for big games. McGrady though was just in another class to me. McGrady was pretty much as good as Kobe Bryant was certain years.

McGrady has about what, 7 seasons where he is a superstar? I'm not big on guys who play selfish ball, but McGrady's scoring is hard to deny, and the guy had awesome vision on top of that.

My vote goes to Tracy McGrady

7 superstar seasons?

[penbeast0]

Tracy McGrady - ronnymac2, E-Balla, DQuinn1575, Basketballefan, trex_8063, Notanoob, HeartbreakKid


Dikembe Mutombo - Chuck Texas, Doctor MJ, tsherkin, Moonbeam,



For those asking about participants joining us, (a) they have to ask, then (b) they have to have been active for 3 or 4 consecutive threads. DNice, Gatling, or other posters are certainly welcome.

[trex_8063]

Tracy McGrady - ronnymac2, E-Balla, DQuinn1575, Basketballefan, trex_8063, Notanoob, HeartbreakKid


Dikembe Mutombo - Chuck Texas, Doctor MJ, tsherkin, Moonbeam,



For those asking about participants joining us, (a) they have to ask, then (b) they have to have been active for 3 or 4 consecutive threads. DNice, Gatling, or other posters are certainly welcome.

fwiw, Joao Saraiva just formally asked if he could join in the Metathinking thread. Not sure if he's been active 3-4 consecutive threads, but he's been periodically active in the discussion of this project pretty much since the beginning.

[Doctor MJ]

I favor peak play a lot, and McGrady kills Mutumbo here.

I love Mutumbo, his offense is overlooked, and the guy shows up for big games. McGrady though was just in another class to me. McGrady was pretty much as good as Kobe Bryant was certain years.

McGrady has about what, 7 seasons where he is a superstar? I'm not big on guys who play selfish ball, but McGrady's scoring is hard to deny, and the guy had awesome vision on top of that.

My vote goes to Tracy McGrady

7 superstar seasons?

It's amazing to me how people end up "rounding" these things.

McGrady was a semi-serious MVP candidate only twice, and had quality shooting efficiency precisely once, but he scored 24 PPG or more 7 times, so he's a superstar for 7 seasons?

I feel like to some degree people look to essentially define a player based on his absolute peak and then associate that level for the entirety of the time he was still attempting to play the same way. People seem to forget what an afterthough McGrady was in Houston, and that it's most known for the fact that he and Yao couldn't actually manage to come together and lift the team to another level while the world waited with bated breath on "the new Shaq-Kobe" to start a dynasty.

[Doctor MJ]

With regards to Mutombo vs Thurmond, that's a good one to consider. My initial thing is this:

I think Thurmond's offensive career is basically there for us to know how NOT to strategize on offense. I see Mutombo's approach as far more reasonable, and here's the kicker: When Mutombo came into the league, the "stupid big man volume scorer" offense still existed. It was actually noteworthy the way Mutombo went in the other direction to what I'd now call a modern approach to the game after his rookie year. I tend to see that as a real factor in Mutombo's favor.

Perhaps I shouldn't.

Mutombo was inherently limited offensively, though. It wasn't really an approach he had from a strategic standpoint. He just wasn't as talented offensively as other centers. I understand your being critical of running an offense at a volume level through a big, but I can't see giving him a boost simply because he wasn't capable of doing that. And when I look at guys like hakeem, robinson and ewing, none of them had a teammate of penny's caliber like shaq did. They were forced into that volume role, with varying levels of success.

Yeah…this line of thinking makes 0 sense to me. A guy being bad/mediocre at something does not make him better than a guy who is pretty good at the same thing (all else being equal). At best you could argue it keeps a coach from trying to “jam a square peg into a round hole” by adopting a sub-optimal approach, but when comparing the players as individuals I do not see how being less capable in one or several makes that person better or more impactful/useful.

But Thurmond wasn't "pretty good", he was bad. He was ineffective, and his team's offense was ineffective with that strategy, and the team reached it's heyday once they ditched Thurmond altogether.

That's unfair of course, because there are a lot of factors here, but there's no reason at all to think that letting Thurmond shoot is something any capable strategist would do, it's really only a question of whether you choose to ignore the negative offensive impact he was having based on the theory that the coach should be blamed for letting Thurmond play that way.

[therealbig3]

Low TS% does not define Tracy McGrady to me, nor does it disqualify him as a superstar. He was not the most efficient shot-maker, no...but he had a ridiculously low TO rate for a wing that was asked to create as much as he did, especially on a bad team. People are seriously overlooking that, and how valuable that is. I'd rather have a guy who turns the ball over less and makes less shots than the reverse. A TO is worse than a missed shot.

I would say T-Mac was a legit superstar every year from 01-05. So not 7 seasons...I'd say 5 seasons. But he was still a very good player in 07 and 08.

As for the T-Mac/Yao thing...the reason they didn't do much was because of injuries. Had nothing to do with them being unable to fit. ElGee has run the numbers before, they were a pretty awesome team actually when both T-Mac and Yao were healthy.

And they only had 1 season when both of them were healthy and in their primes at the same time: 05. And I'm not sure what else T-Mac was supposed to do that year.

[D Nice]

Mutombo was inherently limited offensively, though. It wasn't really an approach he had from a strategic standpoint. He just wasn't as talented offensively as other centers. I understand your being critical of running an offense at a volume level through a big, but I can't see giving him a boost simply because he wasn't capable of doing that. And when I look at guys like hakeem, robinson and ewing, none of them had a teammate of penny's caliber like shaq did. They were forced into that volume role, with varying levels of success.

Yeah…this line of thinking makes 0 sense to me. A guy being bad/mediocre at something does not make him better than a guy who is pretty good at the same thing (all else being equal). At best you could argue it keeps a coach from trying to “jam a square peg into a round hole” by adopting a sub-optimal approach, but when comparing the players as individuals I do not see how being less capable in one or several makes that person better or more impactful/useful.

But Thurmond wasn't "pretty good", he was bad. He was ineffective, and his team's offense was ineffective with that strategy, and the team reached it's heyday once they ditched Thurmond altogether.

That's unfair of course, because there are a lot of factors here, but there's no reason at all to think that letting Thurmond shoot is something any capable strategist would do, it's really only a question of whether you choose to ignore the negative offensive impact he was having based on the theory that the coach should be blamed for letting Thurmond play that way.

I wasn't actually saying Thurmond was > Deke, I don't believe that to have been the case, I was contesting the theoretical supposition that being a mediocre-at-best offensive player somehow made Deke inherently better/more valuable, because that makes no sense to me. Clyde was doing the same thing, which is why he referenced Ewing and co in his post and not Nate.

And yes, I'm aboard the "D Nice should be an eligible voter" train.

That ship has sailed I'm completely fine dropping in and out, prefer discussion over vote-tallying.

[D Nice]

I favor peak play a lot, and McGrady kills Mutumbo here.

I love Mutumbo, his offense is overlooked, and the guy shows up for big games. McGrady though was just in another class to me. McGrady was pretty much as good as Kobe Bryant was certain years.

McGrady has about what, 7 seasons where he is a superstar? I'm not big on guys who play selfish ball, but McGrady's scoring is hard to deny, and the guy had awesome vision on top of that.

My vote goes to Tracy McGrady

7 superstar seasons?

It's amazing to me how people end up "rounding" these things.

McGrady was a semi-serious MVP candidate only twice, and had quality shooting efficiency precisely once, but he scored 24 PPG or more 7 times, so he's a superstar for 7 seasons?

I feel like to some degree people look to essentially define a player based on his absolute peak and then associate that level for the entirety of the time he was still attempting to play the same way.

Haven't seen anyone peg his non-'03 years as being on the same level as his '03 campaign. What I HAVE seen is people refuse to actually debunk the classification of him as a top 5-7 player for 4 consecutive years. If he didn't match 2003 in other seasons, but was still one of the 5-7 best players on the planet (when Shaq/Dirk/Kobe/KG/Duncan...all top 20 players, were in their primes or close to it) these are still incredibly valuable seasons. And again, his "poor" efficiency was a myth. Adjusting for positional league averages he's about 1TS% point behind Wade (2TS% at the most) while taking infinitely better care of the ball.

As for the T-Mac/Yao thing...the reason they didn't do much was because of injuries. Had nothing to do with them being unable to fit. ElGee has run the numbers before, they were a pretty awesome team actually when both T-Mac and Yao were healthy.

And they only had 1 season when both of them were healthy and in their primes at the same time: 05. And I'm not sure what else T-Mac was supposed to do that year.

Not really. Even if RS record was stymied due to injury both were completely healthy and playing good ball heading into the playoffs in both 2005 and 2007. 2 first round exists is unacceptable - both must be held accountable for this, but since it's Mac and not Yao being discussed, he's going to take some heat for it. Teams with 2 top 10 talents and a guy like Shane Battier need to do better, it's no different than the heat Harden/Dwight took for last year and will take moving forward if they keep exiting the first round. It's not like the 2005 Mavs or 2007 Jazz were buzzsaw-level opponents.

[therealbig3]

Not really. Even if RS record was stymied due to injury both were completely healthy and playing good ball heading into the playoffs in both 2005 and 2007. 2 first round exists is unacceptable - both must be held accountable for this, but since it's Mac and not Yao being discussed, he's going to take some heat for it. Teams with 2 top 10 talents and a guy like Shane Battier need to do better, it's no different than the heat Harden/Dwight took for last year and will take moving forward if they keep exiting the first round. It's not like the 2005 Mavs or 2007 Jazz were buzzsaw-level opponents.

But even in 05...T-Mac had a monster series. Hard to really blame him for that series loss. His defense on Dirk was also widely noted as being pretty outstanding. That's kind of what I mean by what else could T-Mac have done? He played great on both sides of the ball, and his team went 7 games against a pretty strong Mavs team.

07, I agree and I do put most of the blame on T-Mac. That was a 7-game series, and he didn't play well at all. Houston needed a better performance from him.

And outside of those 2 years...when could you say T-Mac let his team down? 08? Yao was hurt, T-Mac was already declined at that point as well. I don't think losing from 01-03 in the 1st round is anything to hold against T-Mac either.

[Texas Chuck]

. His defense on Dirk was also widely noted as being pretty outstanding. That's kind of what I mean by what else could T-Mac have done? He played great on both sides of the ball, and his team went 7 games against a pretty strong Mavs team.

I don't know what credit to give TMac here. Obviously Van Gundy had a good plan against Dirk, who had his worst series ever, but guarding him was done in waves with little used Ryan Bowen getting a lot of credit for the job he did on Dirk as well. Dirk also was far less of a factor on the glass than usual. TMac certainly deserves some credit, but the narrative that he was responsible for Dirk's poor series isn't 100% accurate.

[trex_8063]

I favor peak play a lot, and McGrady kills Mutumbo here.

I love Mutumbo, his offense is overlooked, and the guy shows up for big games. McGrady though was just in another class to me. McGrady was pretty much as good as Kobe Bryant was certain years.

McGrady has about what, 7 seasons where he is a superstar? I'm not big on guys who play selfish ball, but McGrady's scoring is hard to deny, and the guy had awesome vision on top of that.

My vote goes to Tracy McGrady

7 superstar seasons?

It's amazing to me how people end up "rounding" these things.

McGrady was a semi-serious MVP candidate only twice, and had quality shooting efficiency precisely once, ......

Shooting efficiency is not the only measure of offensive efficiency.

McGrady in his prime ('01-'07) had a usage of 32.9%, yet only 9.4% TOV%, giving him a USG%/TOV% ratio of 3.50.
That's better than the USG%/TOV% from the primes of: Dominique Wilkins (3.45), Kobe Bryant (2.94), Allen Iverson (2.88), Alex English (2.67), Lebron James (2.61), George Gervin (2.58), Kevin Durant (2.53), and pretty far and away better than that of Dwyane Wade (2.43), Ray Allen (2.39), Clyde Drexler (2.29), Adrian Dantley (2.24), Reggie Miller (2.20) Chris Mullin (1.96), and James Harden (1.79).

And there was this little thing I mentioned about him in the #45 thread:

fyi, I'd looked at scoring and scoring efficiency measures for a variety of modern/semi-modern era (mostly perimeter) players (30 of them to be exact: all the REALLY big names, plus guys like Manu, Tony Parker, Reggie, Ray, English, Isiah, Kidd, Iverson, Joe Johnson, Vinsanity, Derrick Rose, Nique, Paul Pierce, etc.....McGrady, too).

In TS% he ranked 27th of 30 (27th of 30 in relative TS%, too).
In Pts/Missed FGA he was 28th of 30.

So it looks bad, right?

But then in Pts/turnover he was 7th of 30.
In (Pts+Ast)/turnover he was 5th of 30.

[Moonbeam]

7 superstar seasons?

It's amazing to me how people end up "rounding" these things.

McGrady was a semi-serious MVP candidate only twice, and had quality shooting efficiency precisely once, ......

Shooting efficiency is not the only measure of offensive efficiency.

McGrady in his prime ('01-'07) had a usage of 32.9%, yet only 9.4% TOV%, giving him a USG%/TOV% ratio of 3.50.
That's better than the USG%/TOV% from the primes of: Dominique Wilkins (3.45), Kobe Bryant (2.94), Allen Iverson (2.88), Alex English (2.67), Lebron James (2.61), George Gervin (2.58), Kevin Durant (2.53), and pretty far and away better than that of Dwyane Wade (2.43), Ray Allen (2.39), Clyde Drexler (2.29), Adrian Dantley (2.24), Reggie Miller (2.20) Chris Mullin (1.96), and James Harden (1.79).

And there was this little thing I mentioned about him in the #45 thread:

fyi, I'd looked at scoring and scoring efficiency measures for a variety of modern/semi-modern era (mostly perimeter) players (30 of them to be exact: all the REALLY big names, plus guys like Manu, Tony Parker, Reggie, Ray, English, Isiah, Kidd, Iverson, Joe Johnson, Vinsanity, Derrick Rose, Nique, Paul Pierce, etc.....McGrady, too).

In TS% he ranked 27th of 30 (27th of 30 in relative TS%, too).
In Pts/Missed FGA he was 28th of 30.

So it looks bad, right?

But then in Pts/turnover he was 7th of 30.
In (Pts+Ast)/turnover he was 5th of 30.

Have you posted these statistics (and the others you've looked at) for all 30 players anywhere? It would be very interesting to have a look!

[JordansBulls]

Run off Vote: Dikembe Mutombo

4x DPOY and beat out some stiff competition at the same time in Prime Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Alonzo, Ewing. Also Dikembe actually was the lead guy on the squad that upset a #1 seed for the first time ever in Round 1.