RealGM's Top 100 Players of All Time (2026) - #20 (Kevin Durant) and #21 (Chris Paul)

[f4p]

Since we're on CP3 vs. Durant, I thought I'd see who leads in different advanced stats each year. Going to use EPM, xRAPM, 3 year RAPM (counting middle season), and DARKO

2008: Paul by all metrics
2009: Paul by all metrics
2010: Paul by all metrics
2011: Paul by all metrics
2012: Paul by EPM, xRAPM, and DARKO, Durant by RAPM
2013: Paul by all metrics
2014: Paul by all metrics
2015: Paul by all metrics
2016: Paul by xRAPM, RAPM, and DARKO, Durant by EPM
2017: Paul by all metrics
2018: Paul by all metrics
2019: Paul by xRAPM, RAPM, and DARKO, Durant by EPM
2020: Paul by EPM, xRAPM, and DARKO, Durant by RAPM
2021: Paul by xRAPM, Durant by EPM, RAPM, and DARKO
2022: Durant by all metrics
2023: Durant by all metrics
2024: Durant by all metrics
2025: Durant by all metrics

That's a pretty huge advanced stats lead for Paul in their primes. Paul's age 35 season is the first one where KD has the majority of the metrics and that's a season where KD misses most of the season injured while Paul leads his team to the Finals. DARKO has Paul ahead of KD for each of Durant's first 14 years in the league. When the top metrics are that overwhelming on one guy over another, I tend to trust them.

Yes, this is pretty stark—CP3 also has impact cases against players voted in ahead of him. On KD’s side is playoff impact in which is among the very elite.


Vote:

20. CP3
21. KD

Will add more later

Yeah that's a common problem. Where people argue player A is better than player B at something. Except they're also better than player C, D, E, Z... who were already recognized.

[f4p]

The other thing is that even if Westbrook was a big factor, there’s an element to which making the business end of the playoffs is just more significant from a greatness perspective, even if team quality was a major factor. An equally good player that achieves more because he was on a better team will be ranked higher by me (and most people, I think),

it's just weird to see someone admit they're ranking players based on how good their teammates are. Wouldn't this be more appropriate for a team ranking? Is ranking a player's teammates even allowed per the project rules?

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Charles Barkley is someone I really want to rank highly. I’ve always liked him. But I just find the impact case for him pretty dubious. His play-by-play era RAPM makes him look great from an offensive perspective but genuinely bad on defense, and the result is that the overall RAPM is good but not great. Granted, that’s in not in his best years, so those numbers actually are not bad. But then Squared’s RAPM also has him as an elite offensive player whose negative defensive impact holds him back a lot. Okay, but that’s just a partial RAPM. But for Barkley we actually have his on-off for his entire 76ers career—which includes a lot of his best years. And we also have his on-off for 1994-1996 from the Pollack stuff. And it’s not particularly great. It’s certainly not bad and is consistent with a very good player who had a significantly positive impact. But it’s not indicative of an elite impact player either. Barkley was a playoff riser and that mitigates this some, but it’s just hard for me to put him this high.

I would humbly argue that the on/off and RAPM underrate his impact when you look at team WOWY.

In 1991, when he missed 15 games with the Sixers, they were 39-28(.582) with him and 5-10(.333) without him. And he dragged that roster to the second round of the playoffs and took a game off the Bulls(something he also did the year before in 1990).

In 1993, upon joining the Suns, they were already a good team, but he did provide some lift, going from 53 wins and 5.68 SRS to 62 wins and 6.27 SRS. Also, looking at the context, that was a season where KJ missed nearly half the season too. There wasn't really any falloff without him(37-12(.755) with KJ, and 25-8(.758) without), but when Barkley missed 6 games, they went 1-5.

In 1994, they were 48-17 with Barkley and 8-9 without. In 1996, they were 38-33 with him and 3-8 without.

1995 was the only year of his Phoenix tenure where they looked ok without him - 49-19 with and 10-4 without.

It is also worth noting the degree to which the Suns collapsed after he was traded to Houston: in 1996-97, they started 0-13 and were 17-32 at the deadline(though for clarity sake, KJ did miss some time early in the season too) when they traded for Jason Kidd, himself an impact monster that turned their year around as they went 23-10 the rest of the way.

Upon Barkley's arrival in Houston, they went from 48 wins and 1.63 SRS in 95-96 to 57 wins and 3.85 SRS in 96-97. Barkley played 53 games that year, and the team went 41-12 with him and 16-13 without. Drexler also missed a chunk of time(with some overlap) where they went 46-16 with and 11-9 without. Parsing it, they went 6-3 with Barkley/without Drexler, and 11-7 with Drexler/without Barkley.

In 1997-98, the Rockets were 36-32 with Barkley and 5-9 without, with Hakeem missing nearly half the season.

In this respect, I think he showed consistent positive impact.

I also want to circle back to this real quick:

But then Squared’s RAPM also has him as an elite offensive player whose negative defensive impact holds him back a lot.

Not just an elite offensive player. On a quick scan, I believe he has the #3 O-RAPM on the entire list, meaning by Squared's data, he was the most impactful offensive player of 85-96 not named Michael or Magic.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

[lessthanjake]

The other thing is that even if Westbrook was a big factor, there’s an element to which making the business end of the playoffs is just more significant from a greatness perspective, even if team quality was a major factor. An equally good player that achieves more because he was on a better team will be ranked higher by me (and most people, I think),

it's just weird to see someone admit they're ranking players based on how good their teammates are. Wouldn't this be more appropriate for a team ranking? Is ranking a player's teammates even allowed per the project rules?

I think how much team success a player has is important to assessing their greatness in the context of a team sport. I think that’s the view taken to at least some degree by virtually every single basketball fan. It’s not a controversial viewpoint at all. And ultimately, trying to fully extract a player from the teams they actually played on inherently involves speculative white-room exercises. What happened is what happened, and it does matter if one player achieved more at a team level than another player. Team achievement isn’t the *only* thing that matters, and I think it’s not at all a good faith reading of my posts in this project to suggest that that’s been my sole criteria (indeed, see the “an equally good player” qualifier in what you quoted here). It’s obviously not the sole criteria. But yeah, team achievement matters.

[lessthanjake]

Charles Barkley is someone I really want to rank highly. I’ve always liked him. But I just find the impact case for him pretty dubious. His play-by-play era RAPM makes him look great from an offensive perspective but genuinely bad on defense, and the result is that the overall RAPM is good but not great. Granted, that’s in not in his best years, so those numbers actually are not bad. But then Squared’s RAPM also has him as an elite offensive player whose negative defensive impact holds him back a lot. Okay, but that’s just a partial RAPM. But for Barkley we actually have his on-off for his entire 76ers career—which includes a lot of his best years. And we also have his on-off for 1994-1996 from the Pollack stuff. And it’s not particularly great. It’s certainly not bad and is consistent with a very good player who had a significantly positive impact. But it’s not indicative of an elite impact player either. Barkley was a playoff riser and that mitigates this some, but it’s just hard for me to put him this high.

I would humbly argue that the on/off and RAPM underrate his impact when you look at team WOWY.

In 1991, when he missed 15 games with the Sixers, they were 39-28(.582) with him and 5-10(.333) without him. And he dragged that roster to the second round of the playoffs and took a game off the Bulls(something he also did the year before in 1990).

In 1993, upon joining the Suns, they were already a good team, but he did provide some lift, going from 53 wins and 5.68 SRS to 62 wins and 6.27 SRS. Also, looking at the context, that was a season where KJ missed nearly half the season too. There wasn't really any falloff without him(37-12(.755) with KJ, and 25-8(.758) without), but when Barkley missed 6 games, they went 1-5.

In 1994, they were 48-17 with Barkley and 8-9 without. In 1996, they were 38-33 with him and 3-8 without.

1995 was the only year of his Phoenix tenure where they looked ok without him - 49-19 with and 10-4 without.

It is also worth noting the degree to which the Suns collapsed after he was traded to Houston: in 1996-97, they started 0-13 and were 17-32 at the deadline(though for clarity sake, KJ did miss some time early in the season too) when they traded for Jason Kidd, himself an impact monster that turned their year around as they went 23-10 the rest of the way.

Upon Barkley's arrival in Houston, they went from 48 wins and 1.63 SRS in 95-96 to 57 wins and 3.85 SRS in 96-97. Barkley played 53 games that year, and the team went 41-12 with him and 16-13 without. Drexler also missed a chunk of time(with some overlap) where they went 46-16 with and 11-9 without. Parsing it, they went 6-3 with Barkley/without Drexler, and 11-7 with Drexler/without Barkley.

In 1997-98, the Rockets were 36-32 with Barkley and 5-9 without, with Hakeem missing nearly half the season.

In this respect, I think he showed consistent positive impact.

So this is a good pushback. At the same time, though, WOWYR isn’t super high on Barkley, though he does grade out well there (23rd all time—though that’s old and some newer players might edge ahead if WOWYR were run again). It’s something to think about. Nash is the only current candidate who is above Barkley in WOWYR (though I think Giannis, Durant, and Harden weren’t included in the ranking). So yeah, WOWY stuff portrays him better than RAPM does. Not sure I find that completely compelling, but it’s definitely a fair point and does improve my view of him somewhat actually.

I also want to circle back to this real quick:

But then Squared’s RAPM also has him as an elite offensive player whose negative defensive impact holds him back a lot.

Not just an elite offensive player. On a quick scan, I believe he has the #3 O-RAPM on the entire list, meaning by Squared's data, he was the most impactful offensive player of 85-96 not named Michael or Magic.

Yeah, when I said “elite” I meant really elite. I think RAPM portrays Barkley as one of the best offensive players ever. I can see him as near the bottom of the top 10 in terms of offensive players in history. The issue is just that RAPM also portrays his defense as very bad, and that eats away a lot of the overall impact.

[homecourtloss]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

I don’t know—I think he never really had the right pieces around him other than in 2018 but ran into the best team ever. A very high defensive impact point guard who is also highly efficient, who can score and create for others, and does not turn the ball over at all is a type of player who’s very easy to build around.

I would have loved to see him play with an elite defender (especially an elite defensive big), but we never got to see that. Tyson Chandler wasn’t at that level before 2011 and DeAndre Jordan has fraudulent all nba defensive first teams in 2015 and 2016 (what else is new when it comes to all nba defenders voting). In most of his seasons, CP3 was the best defender on his team. I wonder what him paired with an elite defensive big could have produced. Those clippers teams really weren’t all that talented to get to the +12 and +13 on court number is that he had. You had a front office who never address the fact that someone like Jamal Crawford had become one of the worst defenders in the NBA and every time he came into the game, he was giving up points on the defense event and not really getting them back on the offensive end with his chucking. Blake Griffin was nice but largely overrated. Now obviously players at this level should be able to take different types of casts to elite height, and this is a knock on him and I think really a knock on the position that he plays or players of his size play, but I don’t think we ever saw him with a close to ideal situation other than in Houston

[Dutchball97]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

I don’t know—I think he never really had the right pieces around him other than in 2018 but ran into the best team ever. A very high defensive impact point guard who is also highly efficient, who can score and create for others, and does not turn the ball over at all is a type of player who’s very easy to build around.

I would have loved to see him play with an elite defender (especially an elite defensive big), but we never got to see that. Tyson Chandler wasn’t at that level before 2011 and DeAndre Jordan has fraudulent all nba defensive first teams in 2015 and 2016 (what else is new when it comes to all nba defenders voting). In most of his seasons, CP3 was the best defender on his team. I wonder what him paired with an elite defensive big could have produced. Those clippers teams really weren’t all that talented to get to the +12 and +13 on court number is that he had. You had a front office who never address the fact that someone like Jamal Crawford had become one of the worst defenders in the NBA and every time he came into the game, he was giving up points on the defense event and not really getting them back on the offensive end with his chucking. Blake Griffin was nice but largely overrated. Now obviously players at this level should be able to take different types of casts to elite height, and this is a knock on him and I think really a knock on the position that he plays or players of his size play, but I don’t think we ever saw him with a close to ideal situation other than in Houston

The framing of Paul finally getting the right pieces around him in 2018 sounds a bit strange to me when he joins James Harden in Houston, the man who leads the team in PPG, APG and SPG, the man who is league best in BPM, WS/48 and PER, the man who wins MVP. Maybe even more telling is that Harden leads the team in minutes, while Chris Paul is 6th on that list both in the regular season and play-offs.

I honestly think saying KD finally got the right pieces around him in 2017 holds more water. As they actually went on to win titles, KD won 2 Finals MVPs and was by most metrics closer to Curry than Paul was to Harden. I guess if RAPM is the leading stat to someone maybe you'd look at this differently but I think that only goes to show the limits of individual player evaluation by RAPM. Are we really going to put CP3 over KD in 2018 because the spreadsheet says so? In a year Paul wasn't an All-Star, while KD was All-NBA 1st team?

[OldSchoolNoBull]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

I don’t know—I think he never really had the right pieces around him other than in 2018 but ran into the best team ever. A very high defensive impact point guard who is also highly efficient, who can score and create for others, and does not turn the ball over at all is a type of player who’s very easy to build around.

I would have loved to see him play with an elite defender (especially an elite defensive big), but we never got to see that. Tyson Chandler wasn’t at that level before 2011 and DeAndre Jordan has fraudulent all nba defensive first teams in 2015 and 2016 (what else is new when it comes to all nba defenders voting). In most of his seasons, CP3 was the best defender on his team. I wonder what him paired with an elite defensive big could have produced. Those clippers teams really weren’t all that talented to get to the +12 and +13 on court number is that he had. You had a front office who never address the fact that someone like Jamal Crawford had become one of the worst defenders in the NBA and every time he came into the game, he was giving up points on the defense event and not really getting them back on the offensive end with his chucking. Blake Griffin was nice but largely overrated. Now obviously players at this level should be able to take different types of casts to elite height, and this is a knock on him and I think really a knock on the position that he plays or players of his size play, but I don’t think we ever saw him with a close to ideal situation other than in Houston

He wasn't playing with scrubs either, though.

I mean, even in New Orleans...you say Tyson wasn't 'at that level' yet, but in 2007-08 they won 56 games with a 5.46 SRS with Tyson playing 79 games. The following season, they won 49 games with a 1.41 SRS with Tyson playing 45 games. They went 30-15 with him and 19-18 without. Then after trading him away, in 2009-10, they won 37 games with a -2.27 SRS. They also went from 7th and 9th ranked defenses in 08 and 09 to a 21st ranked defense in 10. I'd say the numbers suggest his impact was already there.

Between him, David West, and Peja, it's a solid roster. There isn't another star, but did Giannis, for example, really have so much more when he won his ring? Did Moses have so much more when he took the Rockets to the Finals in 1981?

And ditto for the Clippers, though they did have a legitimate glaring hole in that they had no dependable wings, it was all bigs and guards.

Heck, in 2009 and 2010, Wade took rosters that were probably worse than most CP3 ever played on and got them to the playoffs with 40+ wins.

And in 2006, with no Amare, and Marion as his #2, Nash took a lineup that included Boris Diaw, Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas to within two games of the Finals.

[iggymcfrack]

Hey, where’s the Pollack on/off data from the Sixers years? I was looking for it and I couldn’t find it.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Hey, where’s the Pollack on/off data from the Sixers years? I was looking for it and I couldn’t find it.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZxRM9p2dFil5w6s21VEB4HnQZJymEY8_2vej-jREuUo/edit?gid=1591305361#gid=1591305361

[iggymcfrack]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

It's not really Paul's fault he didn't have more team success.

In 2008, he led the entire playoffs in PER, WS/48, and BPM. Beats Dirk's Mavs 4-1 in the first round. In the 2nd round against the Spurs, he was +11.

In 2011, he led the playoffs in PER, WS/48, and BPM again and had an on/off of +22.6, but they still lost to the Lakers in 6.

In 2013, he led the playoffs in PER again. With the series tied 2-2, he put up 35 points on .607 TS% with 1 turnover for a 12.8 BPM in Game 5 and had 28 points on .701 TS% with 0 turnovers for a 12.2 BPM in Game 6. Clippers lost both.

In 2014, he beats Steph Curry in Round 1. In Round 2 against OKC, he puts up BPMs of 32.5, 10.3, 13.6, 8.4, 5.1, and 10.7. The Clippers are +47 with him on the floor for the series. Down 3-2 with Game 6 tied going into the 4th, he shoots 6/7 in the final period. They lose again.

That's 4 completely unimpeachable postseasons before he ever misses a single playoff game injured. Stockton doesn't peak that high where he regularly looks like he might be the best player in the entire playoffs when they lose. Still though, if Stockton were nominated right now, he'd be fighting with Giannis for my #2 spot. I think he's very underrated as well.

[Dutchball97]

#20 Vote: Kevin Durant
I feel like KD has become a bit underrated over the years. His 2014 post-season being disappointing is, well, a bit disappointing. However, that shouldn't mean we completely forget what he did in 2012, 2013 or even the 2014 regular season when he was the second best player in the league during that time behind only peak LeBron. His rings get fairly criticized for not being nearly as difficult to achieve as say Hakeem's 2 rings but that shouldn't mean we're suddenly discounting 3 seasons where he was one of the top players in the entire league once again. After the Warriors, KD's contributions became more sporadic but as someone on the wrong side of 30 coming off an Achilles injury what he was able to achieve was impressive. Especially his 2021 run seems improbably high level for someone just coming back from such a serious injury. We're looking at a legit MVP-level player with a lot of impact in the play-offs.

I think Durant has a meaningful advantage in terms of how many post-season runs he has with over 1 VORP. Totally fair if someone finds this an arbitrary cut-off but with at least 1 VORP you can be assured they're not just good performances in early losses or mediocre performances in deeper runs. It's at least showing something. Either way KD has 9 such seasons. Dr J is closest with 6 (although if VORP was available for 1972 it'd be 7). Paul, Wade, Harden and Karl Malone have 5 each. Barkley and Giannis are on 3, while Moses and Nash have 2 each.

#21 Vote: Julius Erving
Dr J doesn't have the easy to follow bell curve career that I like to see (ramping up as a young guy, ramping down in your 30s and a strong consistent prime inbetween) but just about none of the remaining candidates fit that profile at this point. That said, like I just explained for Durant, even with some inconsistency during his prime there is still a lot of elite seasons in multiple situations. In 76 Dr J was straight up the best player in basketball, which counts for a lot. His late 70s NBA seasons aren't even bad and the drop is understandable considering the different ruleset and less than ideal team construction. In 1977 Dr J almost ended up leading them to a title either way. Then in the early 80s he was in the running for best player in the league again before taking on a lesser role in 83 to bring home one of the most dominant titles we've ever seen.

[homecourtloss]

I said it before, but I just have a hard time getting excited about CP3 at this point. Like, I respect the hell out of him, high IQ, competitor, few holes in his game, and was even rooting for him to win his ring in 2021, but I just think there's probably 10-15 players still on the board(so more than just the current nominees) that I'd rather build a team around in their prime.

I understand that winning isn't everything for everyone, but he didn't have any notable team success until late in his career with Harden and then in Phoenix, and I'm not even convinced he was truly the best player on that Suns team given that Booker averaged 25/4/4 on 58% TS/103 TS+ with a marginally higher on/off(and a much higher on/off in the PO, where CP3 has a negative on/off)...seems like it might've been more a 1A/1B situation.

If the case is really consistently high impact metrics+longevity, then why isn't Stockton being voted in(#13 on both nbarapm 5-year RAPM peaks and Squared 85-96 RAPM, 19 years, ironman), considering he had notably more team success and was significantly more durable?

I don’t know—I think he never really had the right pieces around him other than in 2018 but ran into the best team ever. A very high defensive impact point guard who is also highly efficient, who can score and create for others, and does not turn the ball over at all is a type of player who’s very easy to build around.

I would have loved to see him play with an elite defender (especially an elite defensive big), but we never got to see that. Tyson Chandler wasn’t at that level before 2011 and DeAndre Jordan has fraudulent all nba defensive first teams in 2015 and 2016 (what else is new when it comes to all nba defenders voting). In most of his seasons, CP3 was the best defender on his team. I wonder what him paired with an elite defensive big could have produced. Those clippers teams really weren’t all that talented to get to the +12 and +13 on court number is that he had. You had a front office who never address the fact that someone like Jamal Crawford had become one of the worst defenders in the NBA and every time he came into the game, he was giving up points on the defense event and not really getting them back on the offensive end with his chucking. Blake Griffin was nice but largely overrated. Now obviously players at this level should be able to take different types of casts to elite height, and this is a knock on him and I think really a knock on the position that he plays or players of his size play, but I don’t think we ever saw him with a close to ideal situation other than in Houston

He wasn't playing with scrubs either, though.

I mean, even in New Orleans...you say Tyson wasn't 'at that level' yet, but in 2007-08 they won 56 games with a 5.46 SRS with Tyson playing 79 games. The following season, they won 49 games with a 1.41 SRS with Tyson playing 45 games. They went 30-15 with him and 19-18 without. Then after trading him away, in 2009-10, they won 37 games with a -2.27 SRS. They also went from 7th and 9th ranked defenses in 08 and 09 to a 21st ranked defense in 10. I'd say the numbers suggest his impact was already there.

Between him, David West, and Peja, it's a solid roster. There isn't another star, but did Giannis, for example, really have so much more when he won his ring? Did Moses have so much more when he took the Rockets to the Finals in 1981?

And ditto for the Clippers, though they did have a legitimate glaring hole in that they had no dependable wings, it was all bigs and guards.

Heck, in 2009 and 2010, Wade took rosters that were probably worse than most CP3 ever played on and got them to the playoffs with 40+ wins.

And in 2006, with no Amare, and Marion as his #2, Nash took a lineup that included Boris Diaw, Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas to within two games of the Finals.

I was talking about defensively in my post, i.e., CP3 didn’t play with elite defensive talent—someone was like Chandler was good, but didn’t go to that next level until he left the NOH. A 6 foot point guard being his team’s most impactful defender in like 80% of his seasons or whatever seems like a wasted opportunity to see something amazing.

[eminence]

The evidence isn't really there for Paul being great defensively until midway through his Clippers tenure. Chandler was more than likely a more impactful defender than him in New Orleans.

Then there's some discussion on whether to count turnover avoidance as offense or defense. CP3 was a very good defender, certainly among ATG lead guards. Imo he wasn't ahead of good wing defenders or just decent defensive bigs.

[Owly]

Basing my assessment of their defense mainly on eye test from having watched both of them for years. Malone was the better man defender, moved better in space, was better at using angles and positioning, and better at switching and focus. Barkley was quicker and when he was working hard at that end, made more spectacular plays. Neither were at all shy about mixing it up, Karl Malone more frequently threw the extra elbow.

A fair assessment, with the qualifier that "when he [Barkley] was working hard at that end" was, in fact, not all that often [most years].

Mailman was also arguably the GOAT at "pulling the chair" in the post, imo.


Crazy [to me] that Karl Malone may end up outside the top 20. Though I'm heavy on longevity.
Still......if the Jazz had won the title in '98, which they very likely would have done if not for two egregiously horrible shot-clock calls in game 6---missed calls which would literally be impossibly in today's league, btw---I'm confident Malone would have been voted top 15-16 [at worst].
It would remove this "can't win with him as your #1" narrative that dogs him, holding him back on these lists.

Very likely probably a touch generous. Still have to win that last game. It's in Utah and Pippen is probably hurting but ... looking to see if "very likely" has an accepted associated probability and the results are coming back with something like circa 90% or above 90% (not saying that's an absolute truth, but that's what I've seen). Which seems bullish in terms of how much better you'd expect them to be to have those odds in a single game.


Fwiw I'm inclined that Stockton was the better player.

Alternately though I'm not certain that Kobe was better.

[Owly]

Stockton tops them both(especially Cheeks) in assists PER 100:

Cheeks 10.2
KJ 13.1
Stockton 16.8

Also, Barkley didn't have Cheeks for his last three years in Philly(and 90 and 91 in fact ended up being his two most successful years in Philly post Dr. J in terms of playoff success)

Malone didn't just have Stockton. They're inextricably linked. Because they played together for so long, because they both missed so few games, because they were on opposite ends of most plays(Stockton making the pass, Malone receiving it) to the point where, as good as the team was for so long, it was almost a running joke that they ran the same play over and over again, they are probably the most inextricable case of collinearity of any two teammates in the history of the game. I mean, Stockton is the all time assist leader and Malone is the #3 all time scorer. That says it all.

Ya but to me too much is made of it. You can't bring up Malone having Stockton without also mentioning Barkley having Cheeks/KJ even with Cheeks not being there for all his Philly years. tbh, I'm not even sure if you are arguing Barkley over Malone or what right now and I tend to be pretty high on both relative to the board. Though I think Malone got in at like 14 in the last one which seems way too high. I also think that Malone being able to seal off his man in the post and be a great shooter from his spot near the corner for many years made things easier for Stockton than vice versa.

While it's to some degree a Barkley>Malone argument(and I would certainly take Barkley over Malone), it's mostly an argument that the two of them are not 6-9 spots apart like they've been on previous Top 100s, and that if you're not prepared to vote for Barkley in the next round or two, then don't vote for Malone yet. That they should be within no more than a few spots of each other regardless of which one is higher or lower.

As ever "spots" isn't a constant unit of measure. And surely they should be however many apart people rank them. If I rank them at a career value of 191 units of value and 190 ... if I happen to have 10 players in that greater than 190, less than 191 range then, even if absolutely very close, I should put the players in between, in between. I understand certain comparisons feel available (Bird-Magic, Robertson-West, Malone-Barkley) and if you thought of them as broadly equivalent at the time there's an appeal to that but ultimately I'd argue one should land wherever your full, proper process takes you.

[Owly]

As opposed to Cheeks and KJ? I mean ya he had Stockton for all 13 years of his prime but Barkley wasn't exactly playing with scrubs.

Stockton tops them both(especially Cheeks) in assists PER 100:

Cheeks 10.2
KJ 13.1
Stockton 16.8

Also, Barkley didn't have Cheeks for his last three years in Philly(and 90 and 91 in fact ended up being his two most successful years in Philly post Dr. J in terms of playoff success)

Malone didn't just have Stockton. They're inextricably linked. Because they played together for so long, because they both missed so few games, because they were on opposite ends of most plays(Stockton making the pass, Malone receiving it) to the point where, as good as the team was for so long, it was almost a running joke that they ran the same play over and over again, they are probably the most inextricable case of collinearity of any two teammates in the history of the game. I mean, Stockton is the all time assist leader and Malone is the #3 all time scorer. That says it all.

Stockton averaged more assists because he so often passed the ball when shooting would’ve been the correct play. Teams would dare him to shoot, but he’d throw it down to Malone instead (usually a basic entry pass anyone could make). Malone would score over two guys, and Stockton would get the assist. I always felt his pursuit of assists was a little selfish; you don’t average 14 apg by accident

I'm open to being wrong but do you have examples/footage of teams daring Stockton to shoot or teams daring Stockton to shoot and Malone scoring over two guys.

[Owly]

20. Julius Erving. Admittedly this is a fan vote as Dr. J was one of my favorite players to watch. His 75/76 season was clearly an elite season; led the league in points/game, fifth in rebounds/game, seventh in assists/game, third in steals/game, seventh in blocks/game, and even sixth in 3-point percentage. Was also RS MVP, Playoffs MVP and All-defensive team. Overall a 4-time MVP (3 in the ABA and once in NBA). Understand the point about penalizing him for the diluted talent of the ABA and NBA, although by 75 I think the difference in talent between the two leagues was minor. In 76 finals, he averaged 37.7 pts/game, 14.2 rebounds/game, 5.3 assists/game, 3 steals and 2.2 blocks/game on 59% shooting. Sadly I didn't get to see that since it wasn't televised then . But at least I did get to watch him in the 77 Finals against Portland and he again played phenomenally albeit in a losing effort; Portland's depth was too much for the Sixers but the eye test said that the Doctor played the best ball in that series.

21. Chris Paul. Admittedly I was never a huge fan of his playstyle, but can't deny his all-around greatness. While he wasn't a great volume scorer, he was an effective and efficient shooter. An elite FT shooter with a very good FTr in his prime. Outstanding quarterback leading the league in assists/game 5 times and finishing in the top 20 seventeen times. And while his lack of height could be a factor on defense, he still had nine All-Defensive team honors and led the league in steals/game six times.

Given "phenomenal" I'll note notional primary matchup Gross 17.3 ppg in 27.7mpg on .667 fg% (Gross also shot well from the line, but that can't really be on Erving). I haven't watched it back in a long time, defense is a team endeavor etc...

[Owly]

When Moses made his first all defense appearance, his team had the second worst defensive rating in the league (3.9 rdrtg ). His entire time in Houston the team was worse than league average.

Okay, but that fact wasn’t lost on voters at the time. They didn’t know DRTGs back then, but the Rockets were also amongst the worst in the league in terms of points given up per game too. And Moses Malone was still voted to the all-defensive second team.

ppg against
Clipper (worst) 114.9
Rockets 112.4
Lg avg 110.3

Drtg
Clippers (worst) 107.9
Rockets 107.7
Lg avg 103.8

Points per game against looks closer to average than to league-worst. Drtg looks league-worst adjacent.

all per: https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1979.html