RealGM

Criteria: Take into account both peak and career play, era dominance, impact on the game of basketball, and how well their style of play and skills would transcend onto different eras. To be more exact, how great they were at playing the game of basketball.

Voting Will End In 2 Days at 10PM EST

Please vote and nominate

Newest addition:

Dominique Wilkins

Hall of Fame (2006)
1x All-NBA 1st Team
4x All-NBA 2nd Team
2x All-NBA 3rd Team
9x All-Star

Kevin McHale

Hall of Fame 1999
3 NBA Championship Teams
1 All NBA 1st Team
3 All-Defense 1st Team
3 All-Defense 2nd Team
2 Sixth Man of the Year Awards


Tracy McGrady/b]

Most Improved (2001)
2x1st Team All-NBA
3x2nd Team All-NBA
2x3rd Team All-NBA
7xAll-Star

[b]Paul Pierce

NBA Champion 2008
2008 NBA Finals MVP
1x All-NBA2ndt Team
3x All-NBA 3rd Team
9x All-STar



Dwight Howard

4x All-NBA 1st Team
1x All-NBA 3rd Team
3x NBA DEFENSIVE PLAYER OF THE YEAR
3x NBA All-Defensive 1st Team
1x NBA All-Defensive 2nd Team
5x All-STar



Jason Kidd

NBA Champion 2011
5x All-NBA 1st Team
1x All-NBA 2nd Team
4x All-Defense 1st Team
5x All-Defense 2nd Team
10x All-Star
Rookie of the Year 1995


George Gervin

5x All-NBA 1st team
2x All-NBA 2nd team
2x All-ABA 2nd Team
12x All-Star (3 ABA, 9 NBA)
All-Star MVP (1980)
Hall of Fame (1996)


Clyde Drexler

* NBA Champion 1994
* 1x 1st All-NBA
* 2x 2nd All-NBA
* 2x 3rd All-NBA
* 10x All-Star


Gary Payton

NBA Champion (2006)
2× All-NBA First Team Selection
5× All-NBA Second Team Selection
2x All-NBA Third Team Selections
NBA Defensive Player of the Year (1996)
9x 1st Team All-Defense
9× All-Star


Artis Gilmore

ABA MVP 1972
ABA Champion 1975
ABA Playoff MVP 1975
5x All-ABA 1st Team
4x ABA All-Defense 1st Team
1x NBA All-Defense 2nd Team
ABA All-Star Game MVP 1974
5xABA All-Star
6xNBA All-Star
ABA Rookie of the Year 1972
Hall of Fame 2011

clyde vs gervin vs gilmore

Voting Candidates
The PGs: Gary Payton is arguably the GOAT defensive PG and will give you 20ppg and the ability to be the star of a great offense during his prime.

Among the wings, there are no top defenders although Gervin and Barry were unusually offense oriented. Gervin didn't pass the way all the others did but is the best scorer of the bunch and that's the main attribute for each of them. Advanced numbers support Gervin or Pierce who is surprisingly strong. Accolades indicate that contemporary observers were less impressed with Pierce and support Gervin or Barry as the most dominant. I'm not a huge fan of Gervin as a piece of a championship team (although I never thought Kobe could win twice with that Laker team either) but the RPOY project has him surprisingly strong whereas Barry outside that one great run disappoints especially if you think Nate Thurmond is a top 50 caliber player (Barry did win an ABA title but that was despite him, not because of him, since he went down halfway into the year and the team didn't skip a beat. Nique is in here too early, he brings little but scoring and that is relatively inefficient. All 4 of the other wings and maybe 5-8 others not yet nominated bring more to the table.

REGULAR SEASON – Gervin is the best scorer but doesn’t have the playmaking
Barry 6.6 reb 4.6ast 24.2pts .525ts%
Drexler 6.5reb 5.9ast 21.7pts .548ts%
Gervin 5.8reb 2.8ast 27.1pts .566ts%
Pierce 5.9reb 3.7ast 21.6pts .569ts%


PLAYOFFS – All perform at a similar or even better rate in their playoffs (in 38-41 mpg)
Barry 6.8 reb 4.5ast 28.7pts .518ts%
Drexler 7.1reb 6.4ast 21.0pts .534ts%
Gervin 7.0reb 2.9ast 27.1pts .560ts%
Pierce 6.5reb 4.0ast 21.4pts .559ts%

ADJUSTED (pace adjusted points and efg adjusted ts%) -- Pierce really is helped by the pace adjustment
Barry (league average 110.2) = 21.9adj ppg (.455 league efg) ..575 adj ts%
Drexler (league average 106.5) = 20.2adj ppg (.491 league efg) .556adj ts%
Gervin (league average 109.2) =24.7adj ppg (.482 league efg) .585 adj ts%
Pierce (league average 97.0) = 22.0adj ppg (.485 league efg) .584 adj ts%

ACCOLADES -- Havlicek didn't even have All-Def his whole career
Barry – 5x1st, 1x2nd All-NBA, 4x1st All-ABA, Finals MVP, .592 (4th in 75, 4th in 76)
Drexler – 1x1st, 2x2nd, 2x3rd All-NBA, .778 MVP Shares (2nd in 1992)
Gervin – 5x1st, 2x2nd All-NBA, 2x2nd All-ABA, .991 MVP Shares (2nd in 78 and 79, 3rd in 80)
Pierce – 1980 Finals MVP, 1x2nd, 3x3rd All-NBA, .040 MVP Shares (best is 7th in 09)



I still prefer Artis Gilmore to any of the other big men out there despite the various posts on him (almost all of which ignore his ABA prime to focus on his NBA years). Although his NBA career isn't overwhelming for anything but scoring efficiently, still a 20ppg scorer who it the MOST EFFICIENT PLAYER IN NBA HISTORY is pretty damned intriguing. Dwight Howard is also a damn good candidate here but with peak not as impressive as Gilmore's ABA peak (though in a tougher environment to dominate as a center) and Gilmore has a solid, if not equally spectacular, NBA career in addition.

So, for peak, it's Gilmore and Howard with Gilmore having a long solid career that Howard hasn't yet matched (though I think he will given health). Both are best in league centers for a solid 5 year peak (Gilmore in ABA) with incredible athleticism and strong efficienct scoring to go with dominant defense. For sustained excellence it's Payton, Hayes, and Gervin; however I think it would be easier to build a champion around Payton's 2-way game than Gervin's isolation scoring.

VOTE Artis Gilmore

For the nomination:

PG -- It is between the great playmaking but inefficient even for his era (especially in playoffs) Bob Cousy, and the young gun with 2 great years but only 5 1/2 years total, Chris Paul. Other candidates include the injury prone Kevin Johnson, the surprisingly efficient Chauncey Billups, and possibly Lenny Wilkens from the 60s or the purely offensive Nate Archibald or Pete Maravich from the 70s. Of them, I'd lean to Billups for the efficiency, the defense, and for helping kick the superstar laden Shaq/Kobe/KMalone/Payton Lakers in the ass; if KJ had won with that Phoenix team it would be him easily. Paul and Archibald are superb but only for a short time and that isn't always translating into team success.

Wings -- On the wings, there are still great scorers left . . . I like Alex English's consistency and all around play over the more spectacular but less consistent Bernard King, Mark Aquirre, or David Thompson, or the statistically most efficient Adrian Dantley. Not sure where to rank Hal Greer or Sam Jones's early 60s play and Ray Allen or Reggie Miller's may be the best offensive weapons of them all -- I am open to persuasion on this. Defensively, I love Moncrief (and Dumars and Bobby Jones have a shot too but Moncrief was the most dominant at his peak) though the shortness of his peak (5 years then a major falloff) is a big issue. Still, we voted Wade in based on the same, and not even consecutive, peak . . .

Alex English v. Dominique Wilkins
Longevity peak (10 years with Denver, call it 8 year peak v. 11 years with ATL, call it 9 year peak) even
Scoring Volume -- peak never under 25 peaked at 29.8 v. 8 years in a fast paced balanced motion offense v. peak never under 25 peaked at 30.7 in a slow paced isolation offense featuring him -- even
Scoring Efficiency -- English consistently had a shooting efficiency about 30pts higher -- ENGLISH
Playmaking -- English was a more willing passer with better assist/turnover rates -- ENGLISH
Rebounding -- English started out even or better but slipped while Nique stayed strong -- WILKINS
Defense -- Nique often didn't care, English was above average -- ENGLISH
Intangibles -- Both had reps as classy men and good team leaders -- even
Team Impact -- As offensive stars, the team ORTGs (which ignore pace) averaged 4.0 for Denver during English's 8 year peak, 8.67 for Atlanta during NIque's 9 year peak -- ENGLISH
Accolades -- Contemporaries clearly favored the Human Highlight Film -- WILKINS
To me, both were classy offensive machines but the efficiency, defense and passing give it to English

Big Men -- The bigs left all have some issue with their games. Zo had health issues and was always a step behind the best like Shaq/Robinson/Duncan/etc. Willis Reed and Wes Unseld weren't as individually dominant and broke down faster too, while Neil Johnston and Mel Daniels played against inferior competition during their primes and were more limited besides. Dave Cowens was an inefficient scorer and not a great help defender though a super hustle guy. Bob McAdoo while his 5 year peak is spectacular, didn't play big man defense and his teams didn't dominate; Bob Lanier and Walt Bellamy had nice numbers but their teams weren't that much either and Detroit with Lanier sucked defensively for 9 of Lanier's 10 prime years which I consider pretty bad. Finally there is Dikembe Mutombo who was a great shot blocker and consistent player for years. Finally, Bill Walton had one great year (not that much better than Wes Unseld's MVP year) but every other year he broke down and left the Portland and San Diego teams which had built around him destroyed until he made another 1 year comeback as a top reserve. I wouldn't choose a one in eight shot at catching lightning in a bottle at the expense of a virtually guaranteed team crash the other seven over most of the above named players.

At PF, Hayes scores, rebounds, and plays defense but was inefficient and a jerk, and Bobby Jones and Dennis Rodman may be the greatest pair of defensive forwards but Jones, while extremely efficient, didn't score or rebound that much while Rodman had no offense and for 1/2 his career, left his man at times to pad his rebounding stats at the team's expense. Hayes led his team to 3 finals and a title with Wes Unseld beside him and probably was the best overall though I love Bobby Jones on almost any team.

So, Billups v. Moncrief v. English v. Hayes or Bobby Jones v. Unseld or Zo . . . For consistent dominance, it is Hayes or English, for peak I love Moncrief; for now I will go with

NOMINATION: Sidney Moncrief

vote: Payton
nominate: CP

DavidStern wrote:vote: Payton
nominate: CP

You had some evidence that Allen Iverson wasn't as bad a defender as most of his haters think, correct?

Vote: Payton
Nominate: KJ

I read great arguments for Paul, but I'm not wholly convinced. I still see KJ as having a "close enough" impact for longer, so I'll go with him.

I think a PG like KJ (who, if he had a longer and healthier prime, I could easily see him ahead of Payton, Kidd, and Stockton) is more impactful than Mourning, McAdoo, Miller, or Nique.

As ElGee said about Payton, KJ may not be a traditional point (more of a scorer), but who cares? He was still a fantastic player with a big impact. He always ran an elite offense, and he was a bona fide 20/10 PG.

From a list, mysticbb selects

VOTE: Artis Gilmore

NOMINATE: Reggie Miller

therealbig3 wrote:Vote: Payton
Nominate: KJ

I read great arguments for Paul, but I'm not wholly convinced. I still see KJ as having a "close enough" impact for longer, so I'll go with him.

I think a PG like KJ (who, if he had a longer and healthier prime, I could easily see him ahead of Payton, Kidd, and Stockton) is more impactful than Mourning, McAdoo, Miller, or Nique.

As ElGee said about Payton, KJ may not be a traditional point (more of a scorer), but who cares? He was still a fantastic player with a big impact. He always ran an elite offense, and he was a bona fide 20/10 PG.

*Whispers*Look at peak McAdoo more!

ronnymac2 wrote:

DavidStern wrote:vote: Payton
nominate: CP

You had some evidence that Allen Iverson wasn't as bad a defender as most of his haters think, correct?

I only know he didn't hurt his team defense in 2001:
Phila 2001
with AI 99.4 drtg
without AI 102.0 drtg

However I didn't check other his years yet.
And of course Nuggets 2009 with Billups (who have good defensive reputation) in place of AI didn't improved much defensively (-1.5 drtg in 2009, -1.2 drtg in 2008). I would say that slightly improvement is connected with Andersen who played in place of undersized Najera.

Vote Pierce

Nominate McAdoo

Same as last time

I "agree with" Iverson's WS numbers:

98 - 9.0
99 - 7.2
00 - 6.9
01 - 11.8
02 - 6.9
03 - 9.2
04 - 2.8 ... w/ injury
05 - 9.0
06 - 10.6
07 - 6.2 total, 2 teams
08 - 11.6
09 - 2.9

I would defend Iverson, to the extent that I feel he was a perenniel all-star positive impact player and probably on the level of the Nique, Miller, Allen, English tier, when he's at his full value. We'll call it the 9-12 WS level, I don't know if they're actually worth 9 to 12 Ws, but it can't be far off. But I think his career is less consistent than those guys due to injury and shooting inconsistency, so I'd place him however many spots below

ronnymac2 wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:Vote: Payton
Nominate: KJ

I read great arguments for Paul, but I'm not wholly convinced. I still see KJ as having a "close enough" impact for longer, so I'll go with him.

I think a PG like KJ (who, if he had a longer and healthier prime, I could easily see him ahead of Payton, Kidd, and Stockton) is more impactful than Mourning, McAdoo, Miller, or Nique.

As ElGee said about Payton, KJ may not be a traditional point (more of a scorer), but who cares? He was still a fantastic player with a big impact. He always ran an elite offense, and he was a bona fide 20/10 PG.

*Whispers*Look at peak McAdoo more!

Well, I actually haven't seen too much of a McAdoo argument, and when I see his stats, he put up dominant stats early on (for 7 years), and then he put up good role player production after that. And from 74-76, his 3 best years, his team never won 50 games, despite having what seems like other good players on the team, in a very weak league. I don't like judging players off team results, but McAdoo just seems like a guy who put up big stats on a mediocre team in a weak league...and then he didn't really do much after that.

Sounds harsh, but that's just my initial feelings about McAdoo...I'd like to hear a pro-McAdoo argument, because his stats do jump out at me.

With KJ, in his prime, you're getting a legit franchise PG (at least imo), and that's a big deal.

therealbig3 wrote:Well, I actually haven't seen too much of a McAdoo argument, and when I see his stats, he put up dominant stats early on (for 7 years), and then he put up good role player production after that. And from 74-76, his 3 best years, his team never won 50 games, despite having what seems like other good players on the team, in a very weak league. I don't like judging players off team results, but McAdoo just seems like a guy who put up big stats on a mediocre team in a weak league...and then he didn't really do much after that.

Sounds harsh, but that's just my initial feelings about McAdoo...I'd like to hear a pro-McAdoo argument, because his stats do jump out at me.

With KJ, in his prime, you're getting a legit franchise PG (at least imo), and that's a big deal.

Eh, take a look at the franchise index for the Braves/Clippers:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/

When McAdoo morphed into a stat monster, the Braves improved massively. There are very few instances in history of a team having a guy on the team already, and then seeing an 8+ SRS improvement basically just based on his improvement. (And I mean, the #2 guy on the team was Jim McMillan)

Re: McAdoo and Mourning

I actually wrote the following post a few threads back, comparing McAdoo with both Howard and Mourning. But I never really saw a counter-argument, so for me the following logic still holds: once adjusting for the high scoring/high pace of the 70s, I see very little to differentiate McAdoo's offensive impact from Mourning's. But on defense, the difference is massive in Mourning's favor. I actually would like to nominate a 70s player here just because we haven't in awhile, but I just don't see why I would vote for McAdoo over Mourning.

McAdoo vs Howard vs Mourning

After DocMJ's post earlier (aside: Doc, you're 6-9? Really?) I wanted to take a closer look at Howard vs McAdoo. Then, after some consideration, I added Mourning to the mix as well. And it breaks down pretty evenly longevity-wise, with Howard having 7 seasons in the league, 'Doo' falling off after his 7th season, and Mourning running into his kidney ailment after his 8th season. As a quick stats back-drop, here's a link to a B-R comp of Howard and McAdoo's first 7 seasons and Mourning's first 8:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y3=2000

Stylistically, Howard and Mourning share a lot of similarities. Both are solid scorers but poor passers from the center slot, relying on buckets in the paint and athleticism (rather than shooting ability or touch) to get their points. McAdoo, on the other hand, has often been described as an ancestor of Dirk on offense...a good jump-shot coupled with a strong face-up game as well as ability to score at the rim. McAdoo, therefore, could theoretically provide the type of spacing that has become a buzz word around here lately. On the other hand, Howard and Mourning provide spacing in a different way by drawing defensive attention that opens things up for the perimeter players. Mourning and Howard also did a better job of drawing fouls, averaging about 2 more FT attempts per game than McAdoo. McAdoo wasn't an especially prolific passer himself, averaging more turnovers than assists, though his ratio was still much better than his counterparts.

Statistically, though, on offense the three were about a wash in the boxscores. Much of McAdoo's scoring advantage can be attributed to pace and higher scoring teams, as Mourning actually sported a higher usage percentage than Mac with Howard not far behind. Their PER's were 22.3, 22.3 and 22.4 and Howard had the highest O-Rtg (111), followed by Mourning (109) and McAdoo (106). Presumably, Howard and Mourning's shooting efficiency and offensive rebounds were enough to counteract their turnovers in these particular efficiency stats.

I can buy that McAdoo could have still been the more potent offensive performer of the three due to his higher volume on still excellent efficiency and (relatively) better passing, but it seems that on offense their net benefits are at least comparable.

On defense, they aren't.

Once adjusted for pace, McAdoo's rebounding falls back to Mourning's pace, which is pretty significantly behind Howard who measures out as the dominant rebounder of the trio. On the flip side, Mourning is clearly the best shot-blocker in the group. Both Howard and Mourning won multiple Defensive Player of the Year awards. McAdoo is blown out of the water at this end.

As such, at the moment I'd have both Howard and Mourning over McAdoo. Defensive anchor big men, like floor general PGs, tend to have larger impacts than the box scores measure. I'd estimate that both Howard and Mourning were having larger total impacts than McAdoo was over similar time periods. Of course, both Mourning and McAdoo's careers extended beyond those prime seasons, and both were able to adapt to their situations and become super-sub role players on champions. Maybe they could earn a tidge of longevity here, but the meat of all of their values are in those first 7 - 8 years.

So, at least among these 3, I currently have Howard and Mourning battling it out with McAdoo a step behind.

As for the vote itself, I voted Kidd last thread but I'm very willing to be convinced on Gilmore. In fact, I could even see myself leaning that direction if someone can give me a nudge.

For nominee, I'll go for whichever of Unseld, Cousy, or Cowens has the most traction. I.e., I think we're at the point where guys with resumes like that, if the aforementioned resume is not misleading, deserve nomination and discussion. Indeed, I would have been content with any of them being nominated before Barry was.

As I posted last thread, Cousy has exceptional intangibles, of unusual kinds. Simply put, I think he's the single white player who most contributed to racial integration. I also give him bonus points for being the innovator of a pretty major aspect of the game.

Unseld has excellent intangibles of the more common "does the dirty work, sublimates his ego, earns all the hockey assists, inhibits what would otherwise be high-efficiency offense" types. The most unique aspects of that probably are that the defense is widebody rather than shotblocking, and that the hockey assists are in transition rather than halfcourt.

Upon review, I wouldn't necessarily rate Cowens' intangibles better than "fine". He would have been an outstanding example had his teammates followed -- but toward the end of his career they didn't, and earlier I don't know why he'd get a particularly large share of the credit. And he did have that weird "quit basketball/drive a taxi" stuff.

Cowens got his MVP and one of his rings the same year. Cousy's MVP was pretty close to his first ring. Unseld's were pretty far apart. I mention that as a rough measure of "Proven to be very valuable peak".

So my choice of the three is:

Nominate: Cousy

For the vote, Pierce is my choice among the choices at wing, for reasons I laid out repeatedly when he was up for nomination. I give him more defensive credit than many do, because I've seen him shut down just everybody in crunch time (e.g. prime TMac, Wizards Jordan), and generally look very good on defensive eye tests. I further note that Pierce was part of a pretty good defense under O'Brien despite having some abysmal defensive teammates. And late career he's of course part of an elite defense.

On offense, there definitely are wings nominated who were very good playmakers, while Pierce is workmanlike in that regard. On the other hand, he's outstanding at burying his 3s, and the alternatives weren't. (Can you even conceive of any of them winning the 3-point shootout?) And we've reviewed Pierce's longevity and efficiency advantages vs., most especially, TMac.

The argument for Gilmore looks a lot like the argument for Robert Parish, and nobody's even suggesting nominating Parish yet.

Payton and Kidd both have pretty strong arguments vs. Pierce. I'm inclined to take Pierce over Kidd, but I think it's close. I don't think Payton over Kidd is as close. So I'll go

Vote: Payton

Vote: Drexler
Nominate: Mourning (I know I nominated McAdoo last thread, feel like voting for Mourning now, especially since Dwight is already in)