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 -- Please vote and nominate

Newest addition:

Dikembe Mutombo Mpolondo Mukamba Jean-Jacques Wamutombo

1x All-NBA 2nd Team
2x All-NBA 3rd Team
4x Defensive Player of the Year
4x All-Defense 1st Team
3x All-Defense 2nd Team
8x All-Star

Vince Carter

1x All-NBA 2nd team
1x All-NBA 3rd team
8x All-Star
Rookie of Year

Nate Thurmond

Hall of Fame 1985
2x All-Def 1st Team
3x All-Def 2nd Team

Penny Hardaway

2x 1st team All-NBA
1x 3rd team All-NBA
4x All-Star

Robert Parish

Hall of Fame 2003
1x 2nd team All-NBA
1x 3rd team All-NBA
4x NBA Champion (once as deep bench with Bulls)
9x All-Star

Pau Gasol

1x All-NBA 2nd team
2x All-NBA 3rd team
2x NBA Champion
4x All-Star

Bernard King

2x All-NBA 1st team
1x All-NBA 2nd team
1x All-NBA 3rd team
4x All-Star


Dennis Rodman

2x All-NBA 3rd Team
5x NBA Champion
2x Defensive Player of the Year
7x All-Defense 1st Team
1x All-Defense 2nd Team
2x All-Star


Grant Hill

1x 1st Team All-NBA
3x 2nd Team All-NBA
7x All-Star
Rookie of the Year

On the wings we have Grant, Bernard, Penny, and Vince . . . of them, Bernard King was the most dominant, Grant Hill the most well rounded, and Vince had the longest career. If anyone wants to put together a good comp, I might change my mind but right now I rank them:
1 GHill
2 BKing
3 VCarter
4 AHardaway


For the bigs, Parish has the consistency, Rodman the rings, and Thurmond the best defense, but Pau Gasol has the best all-around game.
1 Gasol
2 Rodman
3 Parish
4 Thurmond
5 Mutombo

Hill and Gasol are both well rounded players but Gasol has the rings which set him apart.

VOTE Pau Gasol

Point Guards -- I like Billups's consistency and efficiency, not up for any of the others
Chauncey Billups
Nate Archibald
Tim Hardaway
Mark Price
Dennis Johnson ? Mookie Blaylock?

Shooting Guards -- Not really feeling any of the top guys yet but here's who I'm thinking about
David Thompson
Joe Dumars
Bill Sharman ?
Chris Mullin
Hal Greer

Shooting Forward -- a top of great candidate left, in no particular order
Adrian Dantley
Billy Cunningham
James Worthy
Shawn Marion
Connie Hawkins

Power Forward -- I really can't see Shawn Kemp with all the outstanding forwards left, he was immature, foul prone, had a low basketball IQ and really wasn't that dominant. Heck, I'd think long and hard about bangers like Paul Silas or Buck Williams before Kemp. Schayes had all sorts of awards but like Cousy, I just don't see the numbers standing up although he was the greatest free throw shooting big ever -- better than Dirk or Bird even. Elton Brand was injured several times and was more a big numbers on weak teams guy but I'd consider him -- but I'd still rather have a consistent two way presence like Bobby Jones, Larry Nance, or Shawn Marion:

Bobby Jones
Jerry Lucas
Larry Nance
Amare Stoudamire
Terry Cummings

Centers: starting to run a little short here
Dikembe Mutombo
Mel Daniels
----------?
Walt Bellamy
Neil Johnston
Yao Ming

NOMINATE BOBBY JONES
-- arguably the most consistent and versatile defender outside of the dominant centers ever . . . 10 1st team All-Defense in his first 10 years is unmatched by anyone, ever and an efficient and heady offensive player with great intangibles.

After that . . .
2. Chauncey Billups?
3. OPEN TO ARGUMENTS

From Lists:

Vote:
Bernard King -- ronnymac2

Nominate:
Dolph Schayes -- Fencer
Billy Cunningham -- ronnymac2

Vote: King

Still don't know who to nominate...I really do like Brand, although I do understand the concern about him not having much playoff experience.

But I have to listen to more arguments.

Vote: Penny Hardaway
Nominate: Shawn Kemp

Put me down for:

Vote: Pau Gasol

Nomination is wide open in my mind.

Nominate: Shawn Marion

Just getting his name out there. I'm not really seeing Worthy over Marion, to be honest. Does Worthy really do anything better? Marion was a much better defender and rebounder, and like Worthy, has his most efficient scoring seasons playing next to one of the greatest floor generals of all time.

Why you guys vote for Gasol?
I think he's the product of the system/Kobe (yes, Bryant makes his teammates look better) and before Lakers he never looks so good. Food for though: Gasol with/without net (team efficiency differential) in Mermhis:
2005 -1.4 (!), 26 games missed
2007 -1.6 (!), 23 games missed

That's awful, worse than Dantley when he was on his own (Jazz).

Gasol's RAPM:
2002 -0.3 (221st place)
2003 -0.8 (250th)
2004 -0.2 (150th)
2005 +0.2 (137th)
2006 +1.1 (83rd)
2007 -1.3 (313rd)
2008 +2.3 (38th)
2009 +2.6 (35th)
2010 +1.3 (70th)
2011 +3.8 (12th)

So again - before LA his not even top100 during those seasons ;] and he improved when joined Lakers but except of one year (2011) he wasn't too impressive.

DavidStern wrote:Why you guys vote for Gasol?
I think he's the product of the system/Kobe (yes, Bryant makes his teammates look better) and before Lakers he never looks so good. Food for though: Gasol with/without net (team efficiency differential) in Mermhis:
2005 -1.4 (!), 26 games missed
2007 -1.6 (!), 23 games missed

That's awful, worse than Dantley when he was on his own (Jazz).

Gasol's RAPM:
2002 -0.3 (221st place)
2003 -0.8 (250th)
2004 -0.2 (150th)
2005 +0.2 (137th)
2006 +1.1 (83rd)
2007 -1.3 (313rd)
2008 +2.3 (38th)
2009 +2.6 (35th)
2010 +1.3 (70th)
2011 +3.8 (12th)

So again - before LA his not even top100 during those seasons ;] and he improved when joined Lakers but except of one year (2011) he wasn't too impressive.

Well see this is where I think it's important to look at a variety of studies before jumping to any huge conclusions.

In Ilardi's plain APM '03-04 to '08-09, Gasol ranks 20th in the league, and on an earlier version of Engelmann's 6-year list Gasol ranked 29th.

Engelmann's study now has him at 51st so clearly Engelmann's done some new tinkering that has really ended up pushing Gasol down, and I'm skeptical about it all. The whole basis behind RAPM is essentially adding in some neutral data to soften extreme values, but the larger the sample size the less it makes sense to do that. I trust multi-year studies so much more than 1 year studies precisely because I think the sample size gives it a lot more credibility, and I tend to treat the 6-year study of APM with at least as much respect as anything I get from Engelmann.

Let's also note that by ranking Gasol in the 20s, we're not actually talking about anything that bold. This isn't saying "Treat Gasol like a megastar", just that there is APM evidence that Gasol had solid impact and thus there's no good reason to reject general opinion of him as long as it's in that same ballpark (which it is).

Beyond that, I have feel like you're falling into the same "system player" trap so many other people do with Nash.

Again, a system player is not someone who becomes extremely valuable when used a certain way by a system but rather someone whose stats skyrocket simply because he plays in a system where people playing his role tend to have huge stats. A system player is about being far more replaceable than the box score stats say...and that by definition basically means a player who isn't racking up good APM numbers.

Even the numbers you're using to damn Gasol make quite clear that he's been pretty hard to replace in LA, which makes the idea that he's a product of Kobe a bit of a non-starter. After all, if Kobe had a track record of making big's look really good, Gasol wouldn't have gotten so much attention. When you remember that Gasol had really huge numbers for a good part of this year with and without Kobe, it starts looking even sillier to dismiss Gasol.

So yeah, I think you're using a specific group of +/- stats that I don't consider to be the most accurate even among the +/- stats to come to an extreme conclusion deviating from what most other things tell us, and I think that's exactly what I try to make sure I avoid doing.

Vote:
Bernard King.
One of the best swingman of history. Only his bad luck with injuries stop him to have a name like Wilkins or English.
He missed almost 2 seasons when he was in his peak, and awesome peak of 33ppg, 6 rpg and 3.7 apg with ridicolous fg% in all his years.
Still he had the fire to come back with several 20 ppg seasons, including a 28 ppg with 34 years,
You only have to watch when he made the 1st nba team who were his all nba teammates:
KAJ, Bird, Magic, Isiah in 84 and Moses, Bird, Magic and Isiah in 85. All legends.

Nomination Worthy:
He was good enough to be a 20 ppg in a team who featured KAJ, Magic and Scott, among another great role players. One of the best player in the fast break, plus an MVP finals and one of the best 50 players in 1996.

Doctor MJ wrote:
Well see this is where I think it's important to look at a variety of studies before jumping to any huge conclusions.

I'm using two different data sources: with/without (what is often used during that project and now you want to disrespect it...) and RAPM (the best APM possible, also often used by you, but now - again - you want to devalue it).
And with/without tells us that Gasol as a leader was pretty bad. RAPM tells similar story. Even his box score stats aren't too impressive before Lakers.

Now, once he joined LA he clearly improved - and also all data suggest that. But how much of that was due to play with Kobe (Nash effect)? How really good was Gasol, what was his value? What is pro Gasol argument? 6 and half seasons as not even all star level player + 3 and half seasons as all star level player = all time top 100?

DavidStern wrote:I'm using two different data sources: with/without (what is often used during that project and now you want to disrespect it...) and RAPM (the best APM possible, also often used by you, but now - again - you want to devalue it).
And with/without tells us that Gasol as a leader was pretty bad. RAPM tells similar story. Even his box score stats aren't too impressive before Lakers.

Now, once he joined LA he clearly improved - and also all data suggest that. But how much of that was due to play with Kobe (Nash effect)? How really good was Gasol, what was his value? What is pro Gasol argument? 6 and half seasons as not even all star level player + 3 and half seasons as all star level player = all time top 100?

I can use sources and still be cautious about the usage.

With/without is something I take with a very large grain of salt, and it's not something I've ever really used as a counterargument against the more fine-tuned +/-. For players in previous generations, it provides a different perspective than we can get anywhere else, and so it is valuable.

I certainly use RAPM, but if you were familiar with my opinions on the subject, you'd know that by no means do I consider it the best possible APM. If I'm looking at a single year sample size, I tend to favor RAPM over APM by a bit, but I still look at basketballvalue's APM numbers and even 82games' more raw numbers. And I also understand the deal with the devil RAPM makes to make itself more reliable over small sample sizes. The bottom line is that if sample sizes are sufficient, the regularization process is a bad thing to do to the data as it distorts the validity. From what I've seen it doesn't distort things enough that I need to toss the results out, but by no means do I have reason to give RAPM the absolute credibility edge in a many year study.

Re: Nash effect. Notice that the Nash effect does not extend to APM, which is part of the reason the stat is so cool. It helps tease apart who the team really lives and dies by, and Amare & Marion have never looked like MVP candidates by it. So Gasol looking better by APM on the Lakers, while it is related to the role he's playing is by no means something that should be chalked up to simply playing with/for someone else.

Ok Doc, maybe I'll try this way - how do you explain that Gasol is so much better since he joined Lakers? And really 3 and a half all star level seasons are enough to be top 100 all time?

I think you're looking too much at pointless stats with Gasol and too little at how impactful he has visually been throughout his career.

Yes he did nothing with Memphis, but I'd put more weight on his team-mates than Pau - he was still day in day out a 19 points 10 rebounds 2 blocks player - with good passing and solid defence.

He took that to the Lakers with him, where his volume of scoring didn't increase but his efficiency and effectiveness did. It's a clear cut example of the difference between good and bad team-mates.

To further support his credentials, he's arguably the most successful international player too. One could argue Dirk's the better player, but Pau has racked up FIBA Golds, MVP and World Player of the Year awards, all as the man on that Spanish team. His pre-NBA career at club level in Spain was also littered with success.

Look at this list:

2× NBA Champion (2009–2010)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2002)
4× NBA All-Star (2006, 2009–2011)
All-NBA Second Team (2011)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2009–2010)
NBA All-Rookie First Team (2002)
FIBA World Championship MVP (2006)
EuroBasket MVP (2009)
Spanish King's Cup MVP (2001)
Spanish League Finals MVP (2001)
All-Euroleague Second Team (2001)
7× European Player of the Year
2× FIBA Europe Player of the Year (2008–2009)
2× Mister Europa Player of the Year (2004, 2009)
3× Euroscar Player of the Year (2008–2010)
Summer Olympics - Silver - 2008
FIBA World Championship - Gold - 2006
FIBA European Championship - Bronze - 2001
FIBA European Championship - Silver - 2003
FIBA European Championship - Silver - 2007
FIBA European Championship - Gold - 2009
FIBA European Championship - Gold - 2011

^
Euro stuff is irrelevant here, isn't it? And BTW, Spain once won gold medal without Gasol in final game... That's in some way consistent with what happened in Memhis, when they played as good (or better) without him as with him (so I don't know why are you talking about his teammates, when they played the same level without Pau).

Yes, Euro stuff is irrelevant. I sort of fell into Gasol because no one else was jumping out. Basic thinking is that his stats were good but not great however his value seems higher than his stats. Why? Because the Lakers per-Gasol were not very good despite Kobe, Odom, Fisher et al then suddenly became a multiple year champion (which is a very powerful team . . . once can be a fluke, two in a row is not). Kobe was the same, he wasn't injured before, Odom is inconsistent and always has been, Fisher is declining, and the SF position has never been impressive (I'm not an Artest fan) . . . so, unless the often injured and immature Andrew Bynum is carrying the team with Kobe, the improvement should be at least significantly attributed to Gasol's impact and when I watched the playoffs, he was very impressive -- not Russell/Kareem, but Kevin McHale type impressive.

But not really sold on him so listening to your arguments with care -- before this project, I had him rated lower, people's arguments here moved him up on my list.

Vote Gasol

Nominate Melo

penbeast0 wrote:Yes, Euro stuff is irrelevant. I sort of fell into Gasol because no one else was jumping out. Basic thinking is that his stats were good but not great however his value seems higher than his stats. Why? Because the Lakers per-Gasol were not very good despite Kobe, Odom, Fisher et al then suddenly became a multiple year champion (which is a very powerful team . . . once can be a fluke, two in a row is not). Kobe was the same, he wasn't injured before, Odom is inconsistent and always has been, Fisher is declining, and the SF position has never been impressive (I'm not an Artest fan) . . . so, unless the often injured and immature Andrew Bynum is carrying the team with Kobe, the improvement should be at least significantly attributed to Gasol's impact and when I watched the playoffs, he was very impressive -- not Russell/Kareem, but Kevin McHale type impressive.

Well, I think Gasol was Finals MVP in 2009, so I kind of agree with you about him in playoffs during LA years (BTW, I also think Rodman should won in 1996 ). But what people often forgot, and what Lakers fans could better explain than me, is that Lakers during 2007/08 season were already very good team before Gasol trade:

2006/07 .512 W-L%, 0.0 efficiency differential
2007/08 before Gasol .636 (!) W-L%, +5.3 efficiency differential

So they improved drastically without Gasol. Of course when he joined team they improved even more, but my point is why he was so bad during 6 and half seasons in Memhis and what happened that in LA he improved so much he seems now to be top 100 player of all time, when before LA he didn't get single MVP vote, All NBA selection or general recognition as one of the best PF/C in the game? (data we have also suggest he was not so good player in Memhis: with/without or RAPM)

The first half of 08's improvement was all on Bynum's breakout and all-star C caliber play, IIRC as soon as he got injured the Lakers looked like on the verge of a collapse back to mediocrity before the Gasol trade. They were definitely better in the 2nd half of the year though