New Engelmann Career RAPM (1997–2024)

[homecourtloss]

Spoiler:

~New Career RAPM~

I just saw this post (https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/1aextmx/new_lifetime_rapm_rankings_1997_includes_playoffs/), which mentioned Engelmann has shared some new career RAPM!

Full data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bg8KxzagN7D0O16EmUO9_kCyXwthEUjKywlrWPQUQt8/edit#gid=0

OG tweet:

Read on Twitter

RAPM is RS + PS
"Please note
- the possession parser hasn't yet been fully debugged
- 'season' is the only adjustment
- it's missing rubber-band and age adjustments, both of which would heavily infl. e.g. Jordan's rating"
This is especially exciting, since neither of the traditional RAPM sources (Goldstein or Engelmann) have published RAPM for the recent seasons.

Some notable ranks in Total RAPM:
[spoiler]1. Nikola Jokic +9.7
2. LeBron James +9.3
3. Chris Paul +9
4. Kevin Garnett +8.6
5. Draymond Green +8.3
6. Paul George +8
7. Jayson Tatum +7.9
8. Stephen Curry +7.8
9. Tim Duncan +7.7
10. Joel Embiid +7.6
11. Manu Ginobili +7.5
12. John Stockton +7.5
13. Shaquille O'Neal +7.2
14. Michael Jordan +7.1
15. Damian Lillard +7
16. Kevin Durant +6.9
17. Dirk Nowitzki +6.9
18. Jrue Holiday +6.6
19. Kawhi Leonard +6.5
20. Jeff Hornacek +6.4
21. James Harden +6.3
...
25. Jimmy Butler +5.8
...
29. Rudy Gobert +5.8
...
33. Alex Caruso +5.5
34. Ja Morant +5.5
...
36. Karl-Anthony Towns +5.5
37. Dikembe Mutombo +5.5
38. Giannis Antetokounmpo +5.4
...
40. Alonzo Mourning +5.4
41. David Robinson +5.4
42. Reggie Miller +5.3
...
47. Steve Nash +5.2
...
52. Jason Kidd +5.0
...
60. Ben Wallace +4.8
...
64. Ray Allen +4.6
...
87. Anthony Davis +4.3
...
89. Tracy McGrady +4.2
...
95. Luka Doncic +4.1
...
106. Kyrie Irving +3.9
107. Dwyane Wade +3.9
...
112. Kobe Bryant +3.8
...
134. Dwight Howard + 3.5
...
154. Charles Barkley +3.2
...
167. Scottie Pippen +3.1
...
224. Karl Malone +2.6
...
257. Klay Thompson +2.4
...
428. Patrick Ewing +1.6
429. Hakeem Olajuwon +1.6

Some notable ranks in Offensive RAPM:

Spoiler:

1. Nikola Jokic +7.5
2. Stephen Curry +7.3
3. Damian Lillard +7.3
4. James Harden +6.6
5. LeBron James +6.5
6. Karl-Anthony Towns +6.2
7. Chris Paul +5.9
8. Kevin Durant +5.7
9. Dirk Nowitzki +5.6
10. Trae Young +5.5
11. John Stockton +5.3
12. Michael Jordan +5.2
13. Jayson Tatum +5.1
14. Steve Nash +5.1
15. Ray Allen +5
16. Devin Booker +5
17. Ja Morant +4.9
18. Kyrie Irving +4.9
19. Manu Ginobili +4.8
20. Luka Doncic +4.8
21. Kobe Bryant +4.8
22. Kawhi Leonard +4.7
23. Shaquille O'Neal +4.6
...
27. Reggie Miller +4.5
...
36 Tracy McGrady +4.2
37. Charles Barkley +4.1
38. Jrue Holiday +4.0
...
42. Dwyane Wade +3.8
...
50. Jimmy Butler +3.6
...
62. Paul George +3.4
...
83. Klay Thompson +3.2
...
86. Draymond Green +3.1
...
98. Joel Embiid +3.0
99. Giannis Antetokounmpo +3.0
...
139. Tim Duncan +2.6
...
173. Kevin Garnett +2.3
...
221. Anthony Davis +2.0

Some notable ranks in Defensive RAPM:

Spoiler:

1. Kevin Garnett -6.3
2. Dikembe Mutombo -6
3. Alex Caruso -5.4
4. Alonzo Mourning -5.4
5. Draymond Green -5.2
6. Tim Duncan -5.1
7. Rudy Gobert -5.1
8. Shawn Bradley -5.1
9. Ben Wallace -5
10. Paul George -4.6
11. Joel Embiid -4.6
12. Nene -4.5
13. David Robinson -4.4
14. Arvydas Sabonis -4.4
15. Andrew Bogut -4.4
16. Bo Outlaw -4.3
17. Rasheed Wallace -4.2
18. Jason Collins -4.2
19. Vlade Divac -4
20. Immanuel Quickley -3.9
21. Andre Roberson -3.8
22. Tony Allen -3.8
...
25. Yao Ming -3.6
26. Andre Iguodala -3.5
...
36. Chris Paul -3.1
...
40. Metta World Peace -3.1
...
54. Bam Adebayo -2.9
...
58. LeBron James -2.8
59. Jayson Tatum -2.8
...
65. Manu Ginobili -2.7
...
69. Patrick Ewing -2.7
70. Hakeem Olajuwon -2.7
...
72. Shaquille O'Neal -2.6
73. Jrue Holiday -2.6
74. Marc Gasol -2.6
...
83. Dwight Howard -2.5
...
87. Matisse Thybulle -2.5
88. Giannis Antetokounmpo -2.4
...
97. Anthony Davis -2.3
...
108. Nikola Jokic -2.2
109. John Stockton
...
111. Jimmy Butler -2.2
...
113. Jason Kidd -2.2
...
135. Andrei Kirilenko -2.0
...
140. Marcus Smart -2.0
...
159. Michael Jordan -1.9
...
168. Jaren Jackson Jr. -1.9
...
173. Kawhi Leonard -1.8
...
175. Chris Bosh -1.8
176. Jarrett Allen -1.8
...
286. Dirk Nowitzki
...
320. Kevin Durant -1.2
...
325. Scottie Pippen -1.2
...
1036. Dwyane Wade -0.1
...
2223. Kobe Bryant +1.0

Reminders: these are career RAPM numbers, so players with a different percentage of non-prime years will affect these rankings greatly. Players who are mid-prime now (no post-prime years yet) might be overrated, players who are missing prime years before 1997 might be underrated. This also treats the player as a single flat value over their career, so information on season to season changes (e.g. if a player is much better in prime, much worse in non-prime years) gets averaged out.

Some Random Observations:
-Jokic #1 makes some sense. Hyper-valuable player with strong peak, #1 in offense, somewhat surprisingly high defense, and no post-peak seasons to drag his average down.

-LeBron #2 also makes sense given how strong his impact is. GOAT-tier stuff from him considering how long he's been doing it. Offensively, he's just in the Top 5.

Offensive highlights:
-Curry 8th overall and 2nd offensively (just behind Jokic) is also pretty impressive, consistent with him being GOAT level offensively considering how many more non-peak years he has than Jokic.
-Chris Paul is 3rd overall and 7th offensively, continues to be loved by impact metrics.
-James Harden 4th offensively and 21st overall, solid.
-KAT at 6th offensively is a bit surprising.
-Durant 8th offensively but 16th overall, and Dirk just behind at 9th offensively and 17th overall.
-Nash at #14th offensively and #47th overall, seems a bit low compared to his reputation here.

Defensive highlights:
-Garnett's defense is #1, enough to boost him to #4 overall. Impact metrics alway love him, but seeing his defense that far above the crowd even with his non-prime years is a bit new for me. His offense is proportionally lower at #173, keeping him from looking best overall in this new stat.
-Old Mutombo is #2 defensively, with some separation after. I wonder if I've been underrating his defense.
-Caruso a bit surprising at #3 defensively, and Paul George at number 10 defensively... the top defenders are obviously dominated by big men, but a few perimeter players do sneak in. Andre Roberson, Tony Allen, and Iguodala are some of the other top perimeter defenders, though they're a tier down between #20–#30. Some of these players are lower-minute defensive specialists, but Paul George specifically is pretty high minutes player. I wonder if his defensive reputation compared to the other recent defensive wings underrates him.
-Draymond Green (5th overall, 5th defensively), continues to be loved by impact metrics.
-Duncan is 6th defensively and 9th overall. Great stuff. A bit below Garnett (as often is the case in impact metrics), but unlike some of the guys I mention below, both Garnett and Duncan don't seem to have their career value cratered that much by their post-prime years (note for DocMJ: Manu is 11th overall, so he's right behind Duncan, and supports your argument that he's underrated)
-Gobert, Ben Wallace, and old Robinson are all also in the top 15, as expected

-Some surprisingly lower ranks:
-Kawhi Leonard at #19 overall and #22 offensively is still pretty good, but a defensive rank of 173 is way lower than his reputation.
-Giannis Antetokounmpo at 38th overall is definitely lower than expected, particularly since his impact metrics in 19/20 were so good and we're also mid peak/prime for him too. Both his defense and offense are out of the top 50.
-Anthony Davis and Luka Doncic at 88th and 95th overall are also a bit low. Doncic's reputation of having worse plus/minus numbers continues.
-Dwyane Wade and Kobe Bryant are out of the top 100 overall. Wow! Kobe's 22nd offensively, right in line with some of the other Top 20 overall players, Wade's a bit worse at 42nd offensively. It's their defense that's disappointing... Wade's neutral and Kobe's a negative defender. One wonders how much non-prime years are lowering their ranking here. Kobe's reputation as having slightly worse impact metrics continues. For the Kobe fans: Kobe has an unusual number of non-prime games in his career (e.g. 266 RS games pre-age 22 when Wade was drafted, 325 RS games at age 32+ in 2011–2016, 50 + 22 PS games in those age ranges, for 663 total. For comparison, Wade has 0 games pre-age 22, 389 games after age 32+ in 2014–2019 RS, 45 PS games in those age ranges, for 434 total. Based on this, and considering their overall rank is right near each other, there is an argument that Kobe might end up looking better than Wade in say ~10 year prime RAPM, though neither are probably valuable enough in RAPM to crack the top tier based on how low their total career is).

Older players: These are the guys with a major portion of their career missing (pre-1997).
-Jordan 14th overall, and 12th offensively is GOAT-tier stuff, considering ~40% of his sample comes from his Wizards years at age 38–39, and there were nagging injuries in the 1998 regular season. His defense is 159, which is definitely isn't high, but at the same time it's right around the level of Marcus Smart, Jaren Jackson Jr., Kawhi, Jarrett Allen, so not exactly terrible.
-Shaq 13 overall is a touch town from the other modern bigs in Duncan/Garnett, but we're missing 93–96 which includes several prime years. His offense at #23 is strong but not quite as high as expected, but his defense is better than his reputation at 72.
-Old Stockton (12 overall) >> Old Malone (224 overall)
-Old Ewing and old Hakeem are disappointing, both out of the Top 400 overall (69th/70th defensively), at least compared to old Mutombo and Mourning and Barkley and Robinson.

Other Current players: these are some other guys for whom we only have young/prime seasons. We might expect their ranks to drop over time if they're mid-peak now and haven't had any post-prime seasons to drag them down.
-Tatum at 7th overall is obviously great, propped up by being Top 15 offensively
-Embiid 10th overall is also great. He seems much more valuable defensively[/spoiler].

Original spreadsheet won’t open; I wonder if there were some significant changes in possession data.

[AEnigma]

My focus on Stockton comes mainly from being a Jazz fan and the amount of controversy around him on these boards. This RAPM data always makes me think about what ways he was providing value; like does guard screen setting impact the game significantly more than we thought?

I think screening is a good way of adding value, yes. In that GOAT skills thread I gave some brief thought to the best guard screeners, and the names which came to mind were Stockton, Lowry, Jrue, Paul… I assume you can see the connection to this thread.

Are we still underrating the value of steals?

Like assists, I think it depends more on the type of steal. Generally speaking, I would say Stockton was smart with his.

Was Stockton a great communicator?

Not sure I would go that far — much more a strength of Paul or Lowry I think — but he was great at running and executing whatever Sloan wanted the team to do.

Or was his backup just really bad?

Yes.

So much of RAPM is tied to lineup circumstance. This is my go-to example:

Player 1 — +6.38 on-court, 19.19/3.04/10.44 on 110 TS+ with 1.32 “stocks” and 3.36 turnovers per game at an on-court pace of 93.2.
Player 2 — +6.04 on-court, 19.33/3.84/10.47 on 106+ TS+ with 1.47 “stocks” and 3.28 turnovers per game at an on-court pace of 94.1.

They share the same coach and seven of their respective top eight on-court teammates.

Which player is better?

Now what if you learned that when one of those players went to the bench, the team played at a +5.99 rate, and when the other went to the bench, the team played at a +0.85 rate. Would that significantly change your opinion? Because it certainly changes the RAPM output for those two seasons.

I know with Manu we often talk about him playing against bench units in limited minutes, was later career Stockton deployed similarly?

So I will be clear that a major reason why Stockton looks great here is because he is consistently winning his minutes without Malone on the court. I would also say that skews more to him specifically playing against bench units, but yes, he is winning those matchups very comfortably.

However, this is a “Malone off” sample of… ~2600 minutes. Basically the amount of one season. It is just not a lot for me to weigh too seriously as a point of assessment, especially when we see reasonably similar results from guys like Chris Paul and Kyle Lowry when they run their benches (and Karl Malone is not exactly Demar Derozan ).

[Special_Puppy]

As always the guy who stands out to me is Stockton. The +/- data is extremely strong. The +/- data is overwhelming that Stockton was a generational top 10 All time level player. Super high peak and played forever. That's a top 10 player all time.

And yet his team's offenses reached their highest level when his role was downgraded. When the offenses were built around him the clubs were fairly pedestrian. In the mid to late 90s the Jazz reached their heighest level. In the eyes of most who watched them live in the mid-late 90s, myself included they became more Malone centric.

And when he retired the +/- data said the team should have imploded but they only suffered a minor drop off. Again the +/- data is overwhelmingly strong but I can't grasp it.

It genuinely seems nuts to me to think Stockton was far better than Kobe but that's what the +/- data says. I'm not a +/- fundamentalist like some so I can ignore it. But the box score also says Stockton was a top 10 player all time level guy.

His career combined with the arc of Jazz success just doesn't make sense to me.

Stockton Peaks from 1988-1992
Malone Peaks from 1996-1998
The average collective WAR of the Non-Stockton-Malone Jazz was around 9 in Stockton's peak years of 1988 to 1992.
The average Collective WAR of the Non-Stockton-Malone Jazz was around 26 in Malone's peak years of 1996 to 1998

(This is based on RAPTOR Data)

Makes sense that the Jazz would reach its heights around Malone's peak given the vastly superior supporting cast.

As for the Jazz only experiencing a minor dip. I'm not sure I agree. The Jazz were on a 48 win pace in 2003 and dipped to a 37 win pace after the 40+ year old Stockton retired and Malone left. This is despite Andrei Kirilenko having a career year.

[AEnigma]

I can think of one other notable departure from the 2003 Jazz.

[Special_Puppy]

I can think of one other notable departure from the 2003 Jazz.

Corrected it

[eminence]

Man, ‘04 AK was a monster

[sp6r=underrated]

Stockton Peaks from 1988-1992
Malone Peaks from 1996-1998
The average collective WAR of the Non-Stockton-Malone Jazz was around 9 in Stockton's peak years of 1988 to 1992.
The average Collective WAR of the Non-Stockton-Malone Jazz was around 26 in Malone's peak years of 1996 to 1998

(This is based on RAPTOR Data)


Makes sense that the Jazz would reach its heights around Malone's peak given the vastly superior supporting cast.

I want to state I fully recognize the data supports your contention. It isn't just plus/minus data but also the box score. And yet I just have a hard time figuring it out. Take the Jazz from 1988-1989. They were the best defense in the NBA. Stockton grades out as a better offensive player than Steve Nash!

If the box score and RAPM data was right about how great Stockton was I don't know that team isn't playing at a legit title contending level. You have elite defense, a top 10 player all-time in Stockton and a solid secondary star Malone. If the data is right about Stockton that's a title contending club. And they don't look anything like it.

As for the Jazz only experiencing a minor dip. I'm not sure I agree. The Jazz were on a 48 win pace in 2003 and dipped to a 37 win pace after the 40+ year old Stockton retired and Malone left. This is despite Andrei Kirilenko having a career year.

Again I want to state up front I fully recognize that the box score and +/- data says John Stockton was a top ten player all time. It says I would be a fool to take someone like Kobe over him. But I just have a hard time following that the perfect step of events happened:

1. Jazz support is putrid when Stockton is at his peak.
2. Jazz get better and become legitimate championship contenders when Stockton role downgrades due to a significant influx of talent overwhelming the loss of peak Stockton.
3. Jazz, who based on losing Stockton should have collapsed suffer a minor drop off.
4. It is just a coincidence that the same coach manages to rebuild a team that looks quite similar to the peak Stockton era Jazz in a couple of years.
5. Everyone who observed Stockton in the 90s missed how dominant he was.

Again I want to concede I fully recognize the data shows that is what happened. I don't think any one of these 5 points is implausible. I can come up with example of players who suffered through a couple of these points.

But all 5 happening to the same player is weird to me.

[sp6r=underrated]

As always the guy who stands out to me is Stockton. The +/- data is extremely strong. The +/- data is overwhelming that Stockton was a generational top 10 All time level player. Super high peak and played forever. That's a top 10 player all time.

And yet his team's offenses reached their highest level when his role was downgraded. When the offenses were built around him the clubs were fairly pedestrian. In the mid to late 90s the Jazz reached their heighest level. In the eyes of most who watched them live in the mid-late 90s, myself included they became more Malone centric.

And when he retired the +/- data said the team should have imploded but they only suffered a minor drop off. Again the +/- data is overwhelmingly strong but I can't grasp it.

It genuinely seems nuts to me to think Stockton was far better than Kobe but that's what the +/- data says. I'm not a +/- fundamentalist like some so I can ignore it. But the box score also says Stockton was a top 10 player all time level guy.

His career combined with the arc of Jazz success just doesn't make sense to me.

This is exactly how I feel. Heck, you could make a statistically backed Goat case for Stockton

Yup. You can make a very good case purely on the numbers that Stockton was a top 5 player all time. This makes me feel uncomfortable because I'm dismissing a ton of data that supports that stance but I just can't buy it.

[trex_8063]

-Some surprisingly lower ranks:
-Kawhi Leonard at #19 overall and #22 offensively is still pretty good, but a defensive rank of 173 is way lower than his reputation.
-Giannis Antetokounmpo at 38th overall is definitely lower than expected, particularly since his impact metrics in 19/20 were so good and we're also mid peak/prime for him too. Both his defense and offense are out of the top 50.
-Anthony Davis and Luka Doncic at 88th and 95th overall are also a bit low. Doncic's reputation of having worse plus/minus numbers continues.
-Dwyane Wade and Kobe Bryant are out of the top 100 overall. Wow! Kobe's 22nd offensively, right in line with some of the other Top 20 overall players, Wade's a bit worse at 42nd offensively. It's their defense that's disappointing... Wade's neutral and Kobe's a negative defender. One wonders how much non-prime years are lowering their ranking here. Kobe's reputation as having slightly worse impact metrics continues. For the Kobe fans: Kobe has an unusual number of non-prime games in his career (e.g. 266 RS games pre-age 22 when Wade was drafted, 325 RS games at age 32+ in 2011–2016, 50 + 22 PS games in those age ranges, for 663 total. For comparison, Wade has 0 games pre-age 22, 389 games after age 32+ in 2014–2019 RS, 45 PS games in those age ranges, for 434 total. Based on this, and considering their overall rank is right near each other, there is an argument that Kobe might end up looking better than Wade in say ~10 year prime RAPM, though neither are probably valuable enough in RAPM to crack the top tier based on how low their total career is).

I'm only marginally surprised by Kawhi's defensive rank: he's been mailing it in all through the rs from '17 onward. I would guess if we looked only at '12-'16, it would look pretty awesome.

Regarding the Kobe/Wade discussion:
I don't think looking at pre-22/post-32 is an effective or accurate means of distinguishing a player's prime, nor is looking any sort of best 10 years sample. Some [most?] players have a prime that is shorter than 10 years; some even have full careers that are shorter. Meanwhile some guys have primes that are clearly LONGER than 10 years (e.g. Karl Malone or LeBron or KAJ).

I definitely do NOT consider rookie Wade to be prime Wade (but it is considered so by this methodology).
Nor would I consider '11 (and arguably '12-'13 and maybe '00 [it's hard for me to call a 27/6/6 season for a winning team (and 8th-rated offense) "non-prime", at least definitively]) non-prime for Kobe.

Personally, I'd gauge Wade to have probably 550 (of 1,054) rs games and 56 [of 177] playoff games that are non-prime--->for a total of 606.
And Kobe I'd gauge to have maybe 373 (of 1,346) rs games and 50 [of 220] playoff games that are non-prime--->total of 423.

-Old Stockton (12 overall) >> Old Malone (224 overall)
-Old Ewing and old Hakeem are disappointing, both out of the Top 400 overall (69th/70th defensively), at least compared to old Mutombo and Mourning and Barkley and Robinson.

Stockton is indeed a monster. I believe him to be seriously underrated in MOST circles.
Old Ewing and old Hakeem were just that: old. This likely contains only one season for each which might be called [late] prime.

That said, I recall Hakeem's rs on/off (and associated AuPM) for '94-'96 to be disappointing as well. This is part of why I think his greatness gets overinflated at times, based upon his playoff heroics and narrative.......but he never strung together a full season that's remotely close to GOAT-tier. I don't know if that means his playoff samples might be a pinch flukey, or if he was deliberately mailing it in all rs (why would you do that, saddling yourself with a #6-seed when you have a chance to contend?), but anyway.

Other Current players: these are some other guys for whom we only have young/prime seasons. We might expect their ranks to drop over time if they're mid-peak now and haven't had any post-prime seasons to drag them down.
-Tatum at 7th overall is obviously great, propped up by being Top 15 offensively
-Embiid 10th overall is also great. He seems much more valuable defensively.

Chris Paul is legit beastly too.

[AEnigma]

I continue to not rate players higher or lower based on the quality of their primary backup.

[MrVorp]

Looks like he ruined it with the adjustment for coaching. What his analysis implies is that the Trailblazers would be a solid playoff team if they switched Billups for Thibs, which also implies a massive market inefficiency as Thibs should be getting about 5 times as what he’s making now. Also the creator of DARKO has also run “Coaching RAPM” and did not get nearly the same results.

[Doctor MJ]

New Version that adjusts for the Rubber band effect, coaches, and age. LeBron way out in front. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pGTFzq0eE85AP5wW8v8yFzRiJn_lfSCAzh7hd4czQI4/edit#gid=0

So, this is the thing that Engelmann has always been prone to do that makes the stuff he likes best less useful.

All of us looking at the original spreadsheet can get a sense of how things like longevity are playing in here and mentally adjust in our heads, but once he incorporates aging in the black box it becomes much harder to parse out what's happening.

Similarly RAPM just doesn't work with coaches. You can't judge a coach game to game based on whether he's on the sideline or not, let alone possession by possession.

[colts18]

And yet his team's offenses reached their highest level when his role was downgraded. When the offenses were built around him the clubs were fairly pedestrian. In the mid to late 90s the Jazz reached their heighest level. In the eyes of most who watched them live in the mid-late 90s, myself included they became more Malone centric.

Stockton's role didn't downgrade when the Jazz started their run. He was basically operating at 98% of his 88-92 peak in terms of ball handling and assists.

95: 14.7 PPG, 12.3 APG
96: 14.7 PPG, 11.2 APG
97: 14.4 PPG, 10.5 APG
98: 12.0 PPG, 8.5 APG

1995: 7.76 SRS (2nd), 114.3 O Rating (4th)
1996: 6.25 SRS (3rd), 113.3 O Rating (2nd)
1997: 7.97 SRS (2nd), 113.6 O Rating (2nd)
1998: 5.73 SRS (5th), 112.7 O Rating (1st)

The Jazz's ascent didn't correlate with Stockton's numbers going down. Stockton still had insane numbers in 95-97. The only reason why his numbers look down is because the Jazz played at a slower pace those 3 years (90-93 Pace) compared to 88-92 where they played between 95-100 pace. Stockton's Usage% went down 1% between those periods and his Assist% went from 55% to 50%. Not much of a downgrade. Stockton's role only downgraded in 1998 after his injury. His minutes went from 35 MPG to 29 MPG.

Do you want to know why the Jazz offense was not as good from 1988-1993 compared to afterwards? The #1 reason is Mark Eaton. Eaton was maybe the worst Offensive player in history. He forced the Jazz to play 4 on 5 on Offense. Even a stiff Gregg Ostertag was a huge upgrade from Eaton. Here is the list of worst points per 100 possession scoring numbers for a center who played 2,000+ minutes in a season. Mark Eaton has 6 of the 12 worst. 5 of those 6 seasons came in the 1988-1992 span with Stockton/Malone. He was playing 31 MPG and missed just 3 games in that time so he was constant drag on the Jazz offense.

[Doctor MJ]

The Jazz's ascent didn't correlate with Stockton's numbers going down. Stockton still had insane numbers in 95-97. The only reason why his numbers look down is because the Jazz played at a slower pace those 3 years (90-93 Pace) compared to 88-92 where they played between 95-100 pace.]

It isn't true that there isn't inverse correlation. Fine to say it's not as big as it superficially looks, but the reality is that both Stockton's raw assists and assists per 100 went down from peak as the Jazz became contenders, and this happened while Malone's respective numbers went up.

I do think you can make the case that this shouldn't be used against Stockton in evaluation, but it's always noteworthy when a player's team success doesn't peak at the same time as his individual data peaks.

[kcktiny]

You can make a very good case purely on the numbers that Stockton was a top 5 player all time.

Stockton is indeed a monster. I believe him to be seriously underrated in MOST circles.

There are two other current open threads on him, one entitled "How did he get so many assists" where there are those actually questioning the validity of his home vs. away assists, and the other "What held him back from being a legitimate GOAT PG" with numerous reasons stated for why he was not one of the all-time best PGs. Some mention because he never won a title he's not a GOAT PG candidate, or because he was never the best player in the league, not an MVP. Etc., etc. Every excuse.

I'm willing to best most that posted in these threads never saw him play in even one complete game.

Everyone who observed Stockton in the 90s missed how dominant he was.

Those of us that watched him over his entire career know how great he was, a clear GOAT PG candidate, because when he played he was routinely mentioned by NBA coaches and commentators and most magazines as an all-time great. He has the awards to prove it, and his statistics are mind-boggling. Far more assists than anyone else, far more steals, especially during the time he played. Rarely missed games. Eleven all-NBA nominations, five all-defensive team nominations. Geez.

I wrote this in one of those threads:

Stockton was the starting PG on the Utah Jazz for 16 consecutive seasons, and over that time they averaged 54 wins a season and never had a season below .500. That's damn impressive.

From one of those threads:

I've been defending Stockton but I do agree, he didn't give you enough of anything other than playmaking to be an actual GOAT PG candidate.

Where I replied:

Stockton's first 11 years as a starter for the Jazz (ages 25-36), 1987-88 to 1997-98, he was:

- the best shooting PG in the league with an eFG% of 56.0% - among PGs he shot the best on 2s at 55.4%, shot a high 39.4% on 3s, 83% FT%. That's a long time to be the best shooting PG.

- had far more steals than any other player (2177, 340 more than any other player)

- attempted the 2nd most FTAs among all PGs (that's a lot of fouls that he drew on opponents)

- was clearly one of the very best if not the best defensive PG in the league during that stretch of 11 seasons (all-defensive 2nd team 5 times). He's right up their with Gary Payton, Mookie Blaylock, Nate McMillan - and who else?

All this while averaging throwing for 1100+ assists/season, some 3400+ more assists than any other player threw for.

He didn't give enough of anything other to be considered a GOAT PG candidate? Who you kidding?

[falcolombardi]

The Jazz's ascent didn't correlate with Stockton's numbers going down. Stockton still had insane numbers in 95-97. The only reason why his numbers look down is because the Jazz played at a slower pace those 3 years (90-93 Pace) compared to 88-92 where they played between 95-100 pace.]

It isn't true that there isn't inverse correlation. Fine to say it's not as big as it superficially looks, but the reality is that both Stockton's raw assists and assists per 100 went down from peak as the Jazz became contenders, and this happened while Malone's respective numbers went up.

I do think you can make the case that this shouldn't be used against Stockton in evaluation, but it's always noteworthy when a player's team success doesn't peak at the same time as his individual data peaks.

Players usually do more the worst their teams are so i would expect stockton to reduce his role as more talent came to his team, this is not always the case as sometimes the teams adjust as they add talent around their top offense players (think phil jackson reducing jordan minutes but maintaining his shot rate for the most part)

In this case the noteworthy element is that the more stockton reliant versions of the jazz failed to floor raise to a high level offense which would point to the same limitations stockton had as a top 2 scorer on a team

Brilliant team player and adds value in lots of ways but whether it was limitations or reluctance, was not a consistent source of self created scoring/creation which is one of the thinghs that players like paul, magic or nash have he didnt

[Doctor MJ]

The Jazz's ascent didn't correlate with Stockton's numbers going down. Stockton still had insane numbers in 95-97. The only reason why his numbers look down is because the Jazz played at a slower pace those 3 years (90-93 Pace) compared to 88-92 where they played between 95-100 pace.]

It isn't true that there isn't inverse correlation. Fine to say it's not as big as it superficially looks, but the reality is that both Stockton's raw assists and assists per 100 went down from peak as the Jazz became contenders, and this happened while Malone's respective numbers went up.

I do think you can make the case that this shouldn't be used against Stockton in evaluation, but it's always noteworthy when a player's team success doesn't peak at the same time as his individual data peaks.

Players usually do more the worst their teams are so i would expect stockton to reduce his role as more talent came to his team, this is not always the case as sometimes the teams adjust as they add talent around their top offense players (think phil jackson reducing jordan minutes but maintaining his shot rate for the most part)

In this case the noteworthy element is that the more stockton reliant versions of the jazz failed to floor raise to a high level offense which would point to the same limitations stockton had as a top 2 scorer on a team

Brilliant team player and adds value in lots of ways but whether it was limitations or reluctance, was not a consistent source of self created scoring/creation which is one of the thinghs that players like paul, magic or nash have he didnt

Uh, but Malone did MORE as the team did better. Surely you're not looking to suggest that that's a sign of him being worse than Stockton.

[eminence]

It isn't true that there isn't inverse correlation. Fine to say it's not as big as it superficially looks, but the reality is that both Stockton's raw assists and assists per 100 went down from peak as the Jazz became contenders, and this happened while Malone's respective numbers went up.

I do think you can make the case that this shouldn't be used against Stockton in evaluation, but it's always noteworthy when a player's team success doesn't peak at the same time as his individual data peaks.

Players usually do more the worst their teams are so i would expect stockton to reduce his role as more talent came to his team, this is not always the case as sometimes the teams adjust as they add talent around their top offense players (think phil jackson reducing jordan minutes but maintaining his shot rate for the most part)

In this case the noteworthy element is that the more stockton reliant versions of the jazz failed to floor raise to a high level offense which would point to the same limitations stockton had as a top 2 scorer on a team

Brilliant team player and adds value in lots of ways but whether it was limitations or reluctance, was not a consistent source of self created scoring/creation which is one of the thinghs that players like paul, magic or nash have he didnt

Uh, but Malone did MORE as the team did better. Surely you're not looking to suggest that that's a sign of him being worse than Stockton.

Did he? Or did he do more things that were tracked by the box-score.

Malone's minutes fell more from earlier years through '97 than Stocktons did (obviously post injury onwards Stockton fell off considerably more).

Though neither really dropped considerably.

Stockton '92-'94 avg minutes/season: 2945
Stockton '95-'97: 2893

Malone '92-'94: 3161
Malone '95-'97: 3079

[Doctor MJ]

Players usually do more the worst their teams are so i would expect stockton to reduce his role as more talent came to his team, this is not always the case as sometimes the teams adjust as they add talent around their top offense players (think phil jackson reducing jordan minutes but maintaining his shot rate for the most part)

In this case the noteworthy element is that the more stockton reliant versions of the jazz failed to floor raise to a high level offense which would point to the same limitations stockton had as a top 2 scorer on a team

Brilliant team player and adds value in lots of ways but whether it was limitations or reluctance, was not a consistent source of self created scoring/creation which is one of the thinghs that players like paul, magic or nash have he didnt

Uh, but Malone did MORE as the team did better. Surely you're not looking to suggest that that's a sign of him being worse than Stockton.

Did he? Or did he do more things that were tracked by the box-score.

Malone's minutes fell more from earlier years through '97 than Stocktons did (obviously post injury onwards Stockton fell off considerably more).

Though neither really dropped considerably.

Stockton '92-'94 avg minutes/season: 2945
Stockton '95-'97: 2893

Malone '92-'94: 3161
Malone '95-'97: 3079

Hmm. I think the point about box score vs total action is interesting in general, but when we're talking about a guy playing the most minutes on his team it's hard for me to make a case like "Sure he takes the shots and getting more assists than before, but others are doing the really hard work."

[rk2023]

Man, ‘04 AK was a monster

He walked so Cooper Flagg can run