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:

Bill Laimbeer

2x NBA Champion
4x All-Star


Mel Daniels

2x ABA MVP
4x 1st Team All-ABA
1x 2nd Team All-ABA
3x ABA Champion
ABA Rookie of the Year 1969
7x ABA All-Star


Deron Williams

2x 2nd team All-NBA
2x All-Star


Elton Brand

Rookie of the Year 00
2x All-Star


Brad Daugherty

1x NBA 3rd Team
5x All-Star


Larry Nance

1x NBA All-Def 1st team
2x NBA All-Def 2nd team
3x All-Star


Bill Sharman

Hall of Fame 1976
4x All-NBA 1st team
3x All-NBA 2nd team
4x NBA Champion
8x All-Star


Jerry Lucas

3x All-NBA 1st team
2x All-NBA 2nd team
1 NBA Championship 1973
Rookie of the Year 1964
7x All-Star


Adrian Dantley

Hall of Fame 2008
2x All-NBA 2nd Team
Rookie of the Year 1977
6x All-Star

VOTE:

Lots of Bigs: Jerry Lucas and Brad Daugherty were high efficiency/weak defense bigs. Daugherty was a terrific post passer as well while Lucas had stretch the floor range, was one of the best rebounding forwards ever, and had great court intelligence. When their contemporaries were voting for HOF, Lucas went in over Willis Reed who didn't make the cut.

Elton Brand and Larry Nance were high efficiency/good defense bigs. Brand had some injury concerns and has played most of his career for bad teams; Nance is the greatest non-center shotblocker of all time and the NBA's 1st dunk champion (over Dr. J among others) but didn't get many accolades in his day for whatever reason.

Mel Daniels and Bill Laimbeer were winners and . . . well . . . thugs. Two of the most physical guys to ever play. Daniels was a 2 time MVP and 3 time champion in the ABA whose career was over by age 30. Laimbeer a 2 time champion whose dirty tricks and whining to the refs made him the most hated man in the NBA. Both terrific rebounders, Daniels scored up to 20/g usually from within 10 feet; Laimbeer scored a lot less but spread the floor with his range.

But, if we are talking about scoring, Adrian Dantley was one of the greatest scorers ever. High volume at efficiency only approached by the Charles Barkley/Reggie Miller's of the world. That's it though, as his defense and team ethos were frequently questioned.

At guard, Bill Sharman was the prototype spot up shooter for the early Celtics and extremely efficient for his day. Deron Williams is a modern prototype PG, good shooting/passing/defense.

By the numbers AND by accolades, it's clearly Lucas, Dantley, and Sharman. In terms of peak play, to me it's probably Daniels, Nance, or Deron.

For the moment though, I will vote for JERRY LUCAS.

Point Guards -- a lot of solid players but no one who leaps out
Tim Hardaway
Lenny Wilkens
Dennis Johnson
Tony Parker?
Gus Williams?
Norm Van Lier?

Shooting Guards -- Dumars needs to go soon
Joe Dumars
Earl Monroe
Chris Mullin
Mitch Richmond
Paul Westphal?
Walter Davis?

Shooting Forward -- Probably the deepest spot left:
Shawn Marion
Cliff Hagan
Carmelo Anthony
Bob Dandridge
Jamaal Wilkes?
Willie Wise?

Power Forward -- Not sure how much to value Paul Silas/BuckWilliams/Bill Bridges types
Terry Cummings
Elton Brand
Amare Stoudamire
Paul Silas/Dave DeBusschere/Maurice Lucas/Buck Williams -- the bangers

Centers: Getting a bit thin
Jack Sikma -- longevity
Neil Johnston -- accolades
Walt Bellamy -- statistical peak
Yao Ming -- the best modern center left

Looking at the candidates -- Joe Dumars, Shawn Marion, Terry Cummings and maybe Jack Sikma and Cliff Hagan are leading my short list. All good defenders, all good offensive players. Cummings, Sikma, and Hagan are hurt by long periods of post-injury role player status after starting out as sure fire HOF candidates, though Cummings did have 9 top flight years.

Love to see more analysis of THardaway v. LWilkens, GWilliams v. DJohnson, Dumars v. Monroe, Mullins v. Richmond, Hagan v. Dandridge, Marion v. Carmelo, Silas v. DeBusschere, TCummings v. EBrand,

Looking at Shawn Marion and Terry Cummings through their 20s (9 seasons):
T. Cummings 34.5min 8.6reb 2.5ast 21.7pts .528ts% (9/2/22 .554 playoffs)
Shawn Marion 37.8min 10.1reb 2.0ast 18.3pts .548ts% (11/1/17 .530 playoffs) in a slower paced league

Very close. Marion's rebounding edge is his clear advantage, Cummings picked up his playoff pace. Marion played mainly 3, Cummings mainly 4, Marion also adds a bit of 3 point range.

NOMINATE Shawn Marion

why isn't Rasheed on your radar ? better longetivity than any of the guys in question and probably the best defense as well, despite low rebounding numbers.

Vote: Brad Daughery
Nominate: Mitch Richmond

Wait what!!!??? How the hell did Laimbeer get in!!?? DId anybody explain why they nominated Laimbeer or chose Laimbeer over Jack SIkma, a clearly superior individual player in the same mold as Laimbeer (seriously, it's like taking Kevin Martin over prime Ray Allen)?

Uggghhh...



Vote: Adrian Dantley

Nominate: Gus Williams

bastillon wrote:why isn't Rasheed on your radar ? better longetivity than any of the guys in question and probably the best defense as well, despite low rebounding numbers.

Strike one: Low rebounding as you mention which is very important in a big
Strike two: Low efficiency although partially mitigated by his ability to stretch the floor -- people talk about how great his low post game was but he just found it easier to float out and shoot 3's just like it was easier not to fight for the tough rebounds
Strike three: Major butthead. More techs than any player I can remember, whiny, not a guy you can count on in the locker room.

One or two strikes and you can still get a hit; three strikes and you are out. Give me Buck Williams (the same choice Portland made) or Paul Silas and I'll find scoring elsewhere.

AS for Laimbeer; that's what happens with a plurality vote when people don't rally around one or two candidates . . . doesn't mean he's getting in necessarily. Heck, Laimbeer didn't even vote for him.

ElGee might get annoyed again, but I did think the picture was perfect

Vote: Sharman
Nominate: Hardaway

Pretty high on Hardaway, I do still have him ahead of Deron Williams.

Vote Deron

Nominate Gus Williams

Laimbeer vs Sikma
Laimbeer was a better offensive rebounder, had more range, and played way better post defense. Sikma was also a part of very good defensive teams but didn't have as much impact and his teams weren't historically great like Bad Boys. Sikma was a better offensive player though, despite Laimbeer edging him in efficiency. to me it's a matter of preference, Sikma has a case (longetivity in particular) but Laimbeer's impact on defense is just a little bit more.

Rasheed
rebounding is probably the most important part of the game, but Sheed's not as bad as numbers suggest. I was actually arguing about that on another board and this dude made a research that showed Sheed with positive influence on team rebounding. Sheed does tons of boxing out and that's why you'll rarely see him dominated on the glass. you know, he could be more like Jerry Lucas or Troy Murphy who never boxed out but always chased rebounds from their teammates... but what's the point ?

more importantly, rebounding mostly makes sense if that affects his defense, but Sheed has proven to be a great defender so what's the problem here ? clearly he has a lot of impact on the defensive end even with rebounding shortcomings. consider that Sheed was one of the best defenders in 04-09 APM studies and that's PAST HIS PRIME defensively.

offensively I have no problem because that's essentially giving up offensive rebounding for transition defense and spacing, which is what elite defenders did as well (KG comes to mind). it's not necessarily a bad thing. it let Ben Wallace not only chase offensive rebounds but also contest outlet passes without worrying about transition defense one bit. he was able to do so because of Sheed's skillset that could compliment him very well.

Sheed was actually one of the most efficient big men in Portland, he clearly regressed in Detroit but again - that has more to do with that system rather than Sheed's skills. Ben Wallace being the player that he was, Sheed had to step out and create spacing inside because teams were already roaming off of Big Ben and you wanted others to get involved on offense. you mention spacing but I don't think anyone really appreciates how much that affected Detroit's offense. Pistons were the only team in 00s that consistently posted up players 1-3. Billups, Hamilton, Prince, Corliss Williamson... I mean they were the only team in the league that did that on a regular basis. how crucial was that ? you can check out 2005 finals vs Spurs. what happened is that Pop switched the defensive matchups so that Bowen would guard Hamilton because Manu was their only efficient offensive player (Duncan totally ineffective 1 on 1 vs Sheed !) and he didn't want him to be tired. that created mismatch for Prince to go to work in the low post against Manu. that's not happening with midrange jumpshot. to really appreciate Sheed's value you have to look way beyond the boxscore and in 2005 finals it was perfectly visible.

I'm in the group that values intangibles really high, but I define intangibles differently than most posters here. to me intangibles is "impact not measured in boxscore", not that leadership crap most people refer to. IMO leadership is overrated and it has low impact on the floor. what I see as intangibles is:

shot creation
spacing/defensive attention
easy pts created
boxing out
help defense/rotations/pick and roll D
intimidation/interior defense
man defense

if you think about it, Sheed can create shot for himself on a consistent basis, especially in his prime (watch 00 WCFs or 02 PS), he's great spacing the floor, he's one of the best at boxing out, he's top notch defender whether in the pick and roll situations, in rotations or as a man defender. I regard Sheed as a guy who isn't particularly productive in terms of raw stats, but whose impact goes way beyond the boxscore. I think he contributes a lot both on offense and on defense. the thing that really gets my attention is how well he performs in APM based metrics that capture non-boxscore impact well enough. in 04-09 study Sheed was already one of the top performers despite that period being actually PAST his prime. then I looked at his games as a Blazer and I was impressed even more. just a very skilled and impactful player who didn't gather a lot of stats.

the headcase argument is the one that should be considered, definitely, but on the other hand he never came close to the Rodman drama and yet Dennis was voted in long time ago and Sheed might not make the top100.

in the end I think all of his flaws are exaggerated. I used to think of him the same way but after analysing his impact that made no sense anymore so I just jumped on Sheed bandwagon and even though I'm in the minority I'm enjoying this because I'm starting to see basketball in different light seeing (and understanding) how poor boxscore performer can affect his teams and come up big in the APM metrics.

Wow Carmelo Anthony hasn't even been nominated yet?

Vote Dantley. 10 .600 TS% seasons, 8 20+ PER seasons.

Nominate: Chris Mullin. In his prime (88-95), he averaged 24-5-4, .594 TS% and 20.2 PER. In that span he averaged 25-6-4, .608 TS% in the playoffs In his 5 year peak, he averaged 26-6-4-2 stls, .602 TS%, 21.1 PER, he made 4 All-NBA teams (including 1 1st team), 5 all-stars,

vote Dantley
nominate Schrempf

Dantley takes an early lead in the voting with the nomination again spread into singles except for 2 votes for Gus Williams

VOTE

Lucas – penbeast0

Daugherty -- JordansBulls

Dantley – ronnymac2, colts18, DavidStern

Sharman – therealbig3

Deron – Dr Mufasa

NOMINATE

Marion – penbeast0

Richmond – JordansBulls

GWilliams – ronnymac2, Dr Mufasa

THardaway – therealbig3

Mullin – colts18

Schrempf -- DavidStern

vote Nance
nominate Sheed