RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #93 (Terry Porter)

[prolific passer]

But you're making a peak-driven argument. I sure as heck would take peak Kemp over peak Grant. But if I could have one career or the other? I'd take Grant and not look back. You need to appreciate that some voters don't vote Top 3 years vs Top 3 years.

Kemp had a 10 year stretch that is HOF worthy.
Grant was a 3rd option at his best.

If Grant being a 3rd option is a deal-breaker for you why isn't it a deal-breaker for DJ?

DJ had a hof career.

[sansterre]

Kemp had a 10 year stretch that is HOF worthy.
Grant was a 3rd option at his best.

If Grant being a 3rd option is a deal-breaker for you why isn't it a deal-breaker for DJ?

DJ had a hof career.

So your argument against Grant isn't that he's a 3rd option, it's that he isn't in the Hall?

[prolific passer]

If Grant being a 3rd option is a deal-breaker for you why isn't it a deal-breaker for DJ?

DJ had a hof career.

So your argument against Grant isn't that he's a 3rd option, it's that he isn't in the Hall?

Grant doesn't have the accolades that DJ has.

[Doctor MJ]

Gus Williams had 29/4/4 and Sikma had 16/15/2 with 3 blocks per game as well in the 79 Finals. I don't see anything suggesting DJ was much more important to that title than Gus and Sikma, if at all.

You mean other than the fact that those watching it live chose DJ as best? I don't think you should dismiss that lightly.

Re: Iggy's Finals MVP. I do disrespect this one, but that's because I'm 100% confident I know what happened and will not hesitate to say that I and most everyone else knew better. What happened there was that the voters thought LeBron was best but felt a pressure to give it to the winning team, and rather than give it to a rival of LeBron's in Curry, they gave it to someone else. It was wrong. It was a violation of the philosophy of the Finals MVP begun with Jerry West getting the first award. But it's also something I'm not aware of any other voters doing.

Also Re: Iggy. ftr, I think he's a legit Top 100 candidate. I don't see myself championing him, but I respect his case.

I don't use accolades in my evaluation, it tends to distort more than it helps imo.

Okay, but that makes me want to make a distinction.

I do not build accolades into my evaluation as if my assessment were simply an algorithm, but I do always try to first understand what those who were around at the time were thinking and to try to be very clear why I diverge from the consensus when I do.

So I could write a book on why many from the '60s overrated Wilt, but for less prominent players, well, I've not put the time in to write such a book.

All this amounts to me saying that if you've done a lot of analysis on those Sonics teams and have concluded specifically that DJ was overrated, then I think you should rank those players based on what you've concluded...but when you're mostly just listing out PRA I can't help but think, "Contemporary observers saw and understood those stats too so you're not bringing in anything new to the argument by those alone."

Again, not assuming that in your own analysis you haven't gone far deeper, but, well, oftentimes people don't go deeper. I was just in a Wilt/Russell debate on the GB board like this where it sure seemed like folks thought that because they could see Wilt's box score stats game-by-game, they knew better than folks from the '60s, as if folks from the '60s didn't realize Wilt scored a lot of points.

[prolific passer]

You mean other than the fact that those watching it live chose DJ as best? I don't think you should dismiss that lightly.

Re: Iggy's Finals MVP. I do disrespect this one, but that's because I'm 100% confident I know what happened and will not hesitate to say that I and most everyone else knew better. What happened there was that the voters thought LeBron was best but felt a pressure to give it to the winning team, and rather than give it to a rival of LeBron's in Curry, they gave it to someone else. It was wrong. It was a violation of the philosophy of the Finals MVP begun with Jerry West getting the first award. But it's also something I'm not aware of any other voters doing.

Also Re: Iggy. ftr, I think he's a legit Top 100 candidate. I don't see myself championing him, but I respect his case.

I don't use accolades in my evaluation, it tends to distort more than it helps imo.

Okay, but that makes me want to make a distinction.

I do not build accolades into my evaluation as if my assessment were simply an algorithm, but I do always try to first understand what those who were around at the time were thinking and to try to be very clear why I diverge from the consensus when I do.

So I could write a book on why many from the '60s overrated Wilt, but for less prominent players, well, I've not put the time in to write such a book.

All this amounts to me saying that if you've done a lot of analysis on those Sonics teams and have concluded specifically that DJ was overrated, then I think you should rank those players based on what you've concluded...but when you're mostly just listing out PRA I can't help but think, "Contemporary observers saw and understood those stats too so you're not bringing in anything new to the argument by those alone."

Again, not assuming that in your own analysis you haven't gone far deeper, but, well, oftentimes people don't go deeper. I was just in a Wilt/Russell debate on the GB board like this where it sure seemed like folks thought that because they could see Wilt's box score stats game-by-game, they knew better than folks from the '60s, as if folks from the '60s didn't realize Wilt scored a lot of points.

Meh @ Wilt and Russell. Pettit is better than both those guys anyway.

[Hal14]

Dennis Johnson was better than Porter in the post-season based on what?
Um, maybe based on blocking 7 shots in a single NBA finals game (1978) or did I somehow sleep through Porter doing that?

Maybe based on winning NBA finals MVP (1979). Or did I somehow sleep through Porter doing that?

Maybe based on hitting the first game winning 3-pointer in NBA playoff history, or did I somehow sleep through Porter doing that?

Maybe based on hitting 2 of the most clutch shots in NBA playoff history (game winning jumper to beat the Lakers in game 4 of the 1985 NBA finals and coming out of nowhere, busting his a%% and sprinting in to give Bird someone to pass to, making the game winning layup in traffic to beat the Pistons in game 5 of the 1987 eastern conference finals) or did I somehow miss Porter doing that?

Fair.

Counterpoint; you did basically just say that DJ's case is built around six games (one game in '78 and one series in '79) and three plays.

And it's worth mentioning that while DJ did play well in Game 4 of the '85 Finals (and nail that shot) he also went 28 of 82 (34%) from the floor in the other five games of the series.

If you think the right six games and three plays is enough to make a case here . . . there's not much I can say to that.

And if you take away game 3 of the 1990 NBA finals, Porter only shot 37% that series.

DJ played his best in the big moments, when it mattered the most. Perhaps that's why Bird said that DJ was the best teammate he ever played with. Bird is a smart guy, with more basketball knowledge than pretty much anybody. If DJ was a bum outside of just those 2 plays, do you honestly think Bird would have said that? What does Bird gain from saying that? Nothing. He's always been on good terms with both Parish and McHale.

And it's not like Bird is the only one saying it. Earlier in this thread I linked to just a handful of articles/videos which talk about how great and underrated DJ was. One of those articles even had DJ ranked no. 45 all-time. Sometimes you have to look beyond just the stats and look at things like intangibles, how good of a teammate they were, the clutch gene, the eye test, winning, legacy, what their peers thought of them, etc. Not everything can be determined with a formula or algorithm.

[prolific passer]

I just seen Porter shot 23% from 3 in the 92 finals with John Paxson guarding him most of the time.

[Odinn21]

DJ played his best in the big moments, when it mattered the most.

DJ was the leading reason why it took full 7 games for the Sonics to beat the Bucks in 1980 playoffs.
It does not appear in box score but his questionable decisions in the 2nd half were the reasons why the Suns lost to the Kings in game 3 in 1981, which later translated into a series loss for the Suns against a far far worse team. He had a good game 7 but if he played his big moments properly, he would not put his team to in that situation to begin with.
In 1983, he had 2 horrible games which resulted in the Suns losing to a clearly worse team once again in a bo3. Opened the series strong and he scored 26 points under 40% ts in the last 2 games in total.
He had 7 god awful performances in 1984 playoffs. He was the reason why it went to a game 7 against the Knicks.
In 3 of 4 losses against the Lakers in 1985 Finals, DJ was awful.
In 1986 playoffs, he was awful in one third of the games and it flew under the radar because the Celtics were just too dominant.
In 1987 playoffs, he had a good series against the Lakers despite the series loss. But if it weren't for Bird's heroics against the Bad Boys, there wouldn't be a Finals series to play well in for DJ because he was on the verge of costing another series victory to his team.

DJ definitely had his good moments. But he had far too many bad moments, too. He did not deserve such claim that is suggesting he had heroics more so than bad performances.

---

I think some of the arguments being made are going overboard to provide/prove a counter point.

[prolific passer]

DJ played his best in the big moments, when it mattered the most.

DJ was the leading reason why it took full 7 games for the Sonics to beat the Bucks in 1980 playoffs.
It does not appear in box score but his questionable decisions in the 2nd half were the reasons why the Suns lost to the Kings in game 3 in 1981, which later translated into a series loss for the Suns against a far far worse team. He had a good game 7 but if he played his big moments properly, he would not put his team to in that situation to begin with.
In 1983, he had 2 horrible games which resulted in the Suns losing to a clearly worse team once again in a bo3. Opened the series strong and he scored 26 points under 40% ts in the last 2 games in total.
He had 7 god awful performances in 1984 playoffs. He was the reason why it went to a game 7 against the Knicks.
In 3 of 4 losses against the Lakers in 1985 Finals, DJ was awful.
In 1986 playoffs, he was awful in one third of the games and it flew under the radar because the Celtics were just too dominant.
In 1987 playoffs, he had a good series against the Lakers despite the series loss. But if it weren't for Bird's heroics against the Bad Boys, there wouldn't be a Finals series to play well in for DJ because he was on the verge of costing another series victory to his team.

DJ definitely had his good moments. But he had far too many bad moments, too. He did not deserve such claim that is suggesting he had heroics more so than bad performances.

---

I think some of the arguments being made are going overboard to provide/prove a counter point.

Despite all his bad moments. Does that put Terry Porter over him?

[penbeast0]

I remember DJ as a smart classy pro in Boston, though his defense wasn't what it was in those Seattle finalists when he was super high motor. I also remember him whining his way out of Seattle and then being unhappy in Phoenix as well. It's not just the stats and if you are making an argument based on intangibles that he's got a huge advantage on Terry Porter (who was also always a classy pro from everything I've ever heard), I think you have to take the non-stat, non-award/reputation issues into account as well. It's a lot easier to be happy on an ATG team like the Bird Celtics.

[prolific passer]

So how did Hornacek make the list? Is it because of his hot daughter?

[sansterre]

So how did Hornacek make the list? Is it because of his hot daughter?

Oh, I didn't realize!

If you just wanna give us the correct Top 100 list, the rest of us can stop the drudgery of research and discussion and go out for beers instead

[Clyde Frazier]

So how did Hornacek make the list? Is it because of his hot daughter?

Because enough people voted for him. There are still 7 spots left. trex would have to approve but your time would be better spent having an impact on the results than this.

[Hal14]

But you're making a peak-driven argument. I sure as heck would take peak Kemp over peak Grant. But if I could have one career or the other? I'd take Grant and not look back. You need to appreciate that some voters don't vote Top 3 years vs Top 3 years.

Kemp had a 10 year stretch that is HOF worthy.
Grant was a 3rd option at his best.

If Grant being a 3rd option is a deal-breaker for you why isn't it a deal-breaker for DJ?

DJ was 2nd option (and by far team's best defender) on the Sonics 79 championship team.....when DJ was finals MVP that year

DJ was a better defender than Grant (considered by most to be top 10, maybe even top 5 defensive guard of all time) and was overall had many more clutch moments (7 blocks in a single finals game, game winning shot to beat Lakers in 85, game winning layup off Bird steal to beat Pistons, first ever game winning 3 in a playoff game in 1980)...Grant had the nice block to win the game in the finals vs the Suns and that's it. 5 all star games for DJ to 1 for Grant.

Grant also made a self move, a move that was "me-first" rather than "team-first" by jumping ship and leaving the Bulls in the middle of their dynasty to go to Orlando. Meanwhile, DJ was part of a dynasty in Boston - he stayed in Boston until he retired.

[trex_8063]

I'm not knocking Porter as he was he a very good player but would you really take him over a prime Hagan, DJ, and/or Tiny?

I seen Horace Grant is on the list but would anybody take a prime Grant over a prime Kemp?

Would I take prime version of Porter over prime DJ? tbh....probably, yeah.
Over prime Hagan? Depends on circumstance, though would probably err toward Hagan [and for example would DEFINITELY take Hagan in any pre-3pt line circumstance].
Over prime Tiny? No, definitely not.

Would I take the typical prime Horace Grant season over a typical Shawn Kemp prime year? No (though it's closer for me than I wager it is for you).


But for many [for ME], the question does not boil down to "who was better in their respective best 3-5 years?"
If you ask whose CAREER do I think was better? Who generated more TOTAL career value [over replacement level]? (or insert similar question)......then yes to Porter and Grant for me.

Although side-note: Shawn Kemp is someone I think should be in the discussion for these last few spots, fellas.

[Hal14]

DJ played his best in the big moments, when it mattered the most.

DJ was the leading reason why it took full 7 games for the Sonics to beat the Bucks in 1980 playoffs.
It does not appear in box score but his questionable decisions in the 2nd half were the reasons why the Suns lost to the Kings in game 3 in 1981, which later translated into a series loss for the Suns against a far far worse team. He had a good game 7 but if he played his big moments properly, he would not put his team to in that situation to begin with.
In 1983, he had 2 horrible games which resulted in the Suns losing to a clearly worse team once again in a bo3. Opened the series strong and he scored 26 points under 40% ts in the last 2 games in total.
He had 7 god awful performances in 1984 playoffs. He was the reason why it went to a game 7 against the Knicks.
In 3 of 4 losses against the Lakers in 1985 Finals, DJ was awful.
In 1986 playoffs, he was awful in one third of the games and it flew under the radar because the Celtics were just too dominant.
In 1987 playoffs, he had a good series against the Lakers despite the series loss. But if it weren't for Bird's heroics against the Bad Boys, there wouldn't be a Finals series to play well in for DJ because he was on the verge of costing another series victory to his team.

DJ definitely had his good moments. But he had far too many bad moments, too. He did not deserve such claim that is suggesting he had heroics more so than bad performances.

---

I think some of the arguments being made are going overboard to provide/prove a counter point.

I'm sure I could do the same nit-picking job about LeBron. And he went no. 1 in this poll...this is the no. 93 spot, LOL

My point is, when you look at Johnson blocking 7 shots in a single playoff game (78), Johnson winning finals MVP (79), Johnson hitting the first ever game winning 3 in NBA playoff history (80), the Celtics going from being swept in the 2nd round in 83, acquiring Johnson that summer and then turning around and beating the Lakers with prime Kareem and prime Magic in the finals (84), hitting the game winning to beat the lakers (85), making the game winning layup to beat the Pistons (87)...meanwhile, Terry Porter did what exactly?

[prolific passer]

Well as much as discussing these legends the guy who should be on there is Jokic. First guy since Wilt to average 20ppg 10rpg and 7apg for a season. Wilt did it 2 straight times. Jokic is about to do it 3 straight times. Not many people can pass Wilt in anything but Jokic is one of them that passes him up in this.

[trex_8063]

...meanwhile, Terry Porter did what exactly?

'90 WCSF against an upstart Spurs team with rookie Robinson.....
The series goes 7 games in no small part because Drexler was a bit of a shrinking violet: 21.1 ppg @ 49.4% TS [that's like -4.3% rTS], 7.3 rpg, 8.4 apg, and 3.7 topg (also allowing his man [Willie Anderson] to go off [relatively] for 18/5 [52.3% TS; his reserve David Wingate shot 56.9% TS] in the series).

No worries though, because Porter has a magnificent 23.4 ppg @ 68.4% TS [note that's +19% relative to Clyde], 6.6 apg, 2.9 topg, while holding Rod Strickland to 45.5% TS. In particular, during game 7 [a tight 3-pt win for Portland], Porter scored a game-high 36 pts on 71.9% TS.

In the next round, Clyde rebounds well, but again sort of struggles offensively: 20.2 ppg @ 48.4% TS, 6.3 apg, 3.0 topg.
Porter, otoh, again shows up big with 18.5 ppg @ 61.0% TS, 8.3 apg, with only 1.5 topg, as the Blazers prevail in six. And in particular: their series-closing game 6---->Clyde was awful with 23 pts on 43.2% TS, 10 reb, 7 ast, but also 5 turnovers (and again the opposing SG's go off for huge games [Hornacek scores 36 on 63.9% TS, Majerle goes off for 22 on 62.4% TS]; Porter showed up big with 23 pts @ 80.3% TS, 7 ast, 3 turnovers.

So for two consecutive series's, one has to ask [if being intellectually honest] if the Blazers would have been in the finals AT ALL if not for the play of Terry Porter.


In the '92 WCF [which the Blazers won in six], Clyde is good (23.7 ppg @ 55.3% TS, 5.3 rpg, 7.7 apg, 2.8 topg), but Porter is GREAT (26.0 ppg @ 72.4% TS, 4.0 rpg, 8.3 apg, only 1.3 topg---->he has a 25.0 GameScore for crying out loud [that's like Lebron/MJ territory]).
In their narrowest win: Game 5 (win by 6 pts)--->Porter has 24 pts [matching Clyde] on a much better 77.3% TS, 11 ast, only 1 turnover.


I'm sure we can find more; he was a pretty good playoff performer.

[prolific passer]

Here's a question. Terry Porter or Mark Price? Who is better?

[sansterre]

Here's a question. Terry Porter or Mark Price? Who is better?

Price definitely peaked higher.

But Porter destroys him on longevity.