RealGM

Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/

RealGM Top 100 List #89

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1376979

Page 1 of 2

RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 12:47 am
by penbeast0
PG: Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, and maybe Mookie Blaylock are the players I'm looking at . . . should mention Penny Hardaway though he never impressed me as much as he did the TV guys of his day.

Forwards: Marques Johnson and Chris Mullin would be the main scorers; maybe Carmelo Anthony though between his season of discontent in Denver and his playoff numbers, I'd have to be persuaded. Billy Cunningham, Bob Dandridge, and Chet Walker also come to mind.

Bigs: Mel Daniels has 2 MVPs and 3 rings, albeit in a weaker league; similarly Neil Johnston has the best raw numbers in an even weaker league than Daniels. Amare Stoudamire and Jerry Lucas bring great scoring and rebounding respectively but defensive questions (Johnston is defensively questionable too); for defense, I would go with Paul Silas or Buck Williams. Bill Walton has the highest peak (though that's it for true career value -- 1 year then failed to stay healthy to the playoffs the next and 1 year as a reserve role player). Maybe Yao Ming should get a mention too.

There are a lot of other good players but as we are into the last quarter, that's my short list.

Chris Mullin v. Carmelo Anthony v. Marques Johnson; Mel Daniels v. Neil Johnston v. Yao Ming; Tim Hardaway v. Mark Price v. Mookie Blaylock; Jerry Lucas v. Billy Cunningham v. Dave DeBusschere; DeBusschere v. Paul Silas; those are the other comps I am looking at and would love feedback on.


VOTE Mel Daniels. Do I go for a good player with a long career, or a dominant player with a shorter one. If my goal is to win titles, I think I go for the best 5 year peak. In this case, that's Mel Daniels. 2 time MVP with 3 titles, rebounding titles, physical defense, that's a combination that is very portable and able to be a key component of title winning teams more easily than anyone else except Bill Walton whose run as a key championship component is just too short (1 year).

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 1:23 am
by Be the Best
How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?

I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.

Easily top 80 imo.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 1:28 am
by trex_8063
Vote for #89: Carmelo Anthony

I know scoring isn't the ONLY part of the game.....but it is pretty necessary. And he's a very very good scorer. In him we have a guy who once led the league in scoring while shooting 56.0% ts (+2.54% to league avg) for a team that was 2nd in the conference. Using SactoKingsFan's criteria from the last thread of >30 pts/100 @ 55+% ts (where Richmond has 5 qualifying seasons): Carmelo has 6.

If we change that criteria just slightly to >31 pts/100 @ 55.5+% ts: Carmelo has 5 qualifying seasons vs. 3 for Richmond.

If we change it to >33 pts/100 @ 56+% ts: Melo has 4 qualifying seasons vs. just 1 for Richmond.


Melo's defense is lacking, though no candidate is perfect at this point. He's a reasonably good rebounding SF, and a decent passer, too (probably better than his assist numbers by my eye-test; his turnover numbers are really pretty good considering the usage and scoring load he's shouldered). His longevity is reasonably good at this point, too. Clyde posted some relevant stuff above regarding his playoff career.

Richmond just got in......while impact data rate Richmond more favorably than it does Carmelo, I don't think we can say with any certainty that Melo ever had a supporting cast better than Richmond had in '91 (a team that went 44-38, 1.72 SRS, 2nd round exit); might be some supporting casts between '06 and '13 which were roughly "as good".
Of those eight seasons with supporting casts which were perhaps "as good", Melo's team....
*had a better rs record 7 of 8 seasons (and tied with 44 wins in the other year)
*had a higher SRS in 6 of 8 seasons
And had one season where they went deeper in the playoffs.

Boxscore metrics rate him very favorably compared to (that is: often better than) other available candidates around this stage of the project.
Impact data admittedly does not rate him overly well, though it does rate him better than individuals such as Amar'e Stoudemire, Stephon Marbury, and Joakim Noah, as well as post-1993 Joe Dumars. His best 7 years added are better than Kevin Durant's, too.

As a matter of internal consistency, too: ton of parallel between him and Dominique Wilkins, imo. I'd rate Nique a marginally better player overall, and Nique's still got a slight longevity case over him, too. But given Nique was voted in 28 places ago........would seem pretty inconsistent if Melo doesn't get in soon (seems a bit inconsistent already).

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 3:09 am
by ronnymac2
Vote: Carmelo Anthony

Willing to change my vote.

Since 2009, Melo has definitely been on that Dominique tier as a super volume scorer with good offensive rebounding and fairly low turnovers. In 2013 and 2014, Melo's defense was decent, too. He's got a very good peak. Like Nique, he's had some big performances in the playoffs mixed with a few duds.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 5:53 am
by Clyde Frazier
Vote for #89 - Carmelo Anthony

My argument from past threads:

Spoiler:
- 12 year career
- 6x all NBA (2 2nd, 4 3rd)
- 1 top 3 and 1 top 10 MVP finish
- 1x scoring champ

REG SEASON 06-14

26.3 PPG, 6.7 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, .5 BPG, 46.1% FG, 35.3% 3PT, 81.7% FT, 55.4% TS, .149 WS/48, 110 ORTG, 10.9% TO

PLAYOFFS 06-13

27 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 2.8 APG, 1.3 SPG, .4 BPG, 42.1% FG, 32.9% 3PT, 82.8% FT, 51.9% TS, .124 WS/48, 107 ORTG, 9.9% TO

Peak carmelo developed into one of the best offensive players in the league. The “iso melo” stigma really became an outdated narrative as you saw all he really needed was a decent PG rotation to keep the ball moving (a little different, but billups certainly got the best out of him in denver). He became one of the better off the ball players in 12-13, actually shooting more efficiently and on higher volume than durant in catch and shoot situations. His transition to a great 3 pt shooter also opened up his game, and he stepped into transition 3s about as well as anyone in the league.

He’s obviously known for his great post up and face up game, but not acknowledged as much for being a great offensive rebounder for his position. He has a deceptively quick 2nd jump and soft touch around the rim for put backs. He also possesses a unique rolling spin move to the hoop i’m not sure anyone else in the league has. The one thing he’s really average at is finishing at the rim, and i’d say that partially has to do with him not being able to take advantage of the way the game is called these days. He isn’t a freak show athlete like lebron, and he doesn’t have those long strides like durant / harden where they know the angles and draw fouls as easily as they do.

And yes, carmelo has lingering knee issues this year, but it’s a lost season, and i’d at least apply some some context to the situation. If he were in a playoff push, maybe this would’ve been dealt with earlier, or he would’ve been playing through it it anyway. I expect him to come back healthy next season.

Carmelo had the full repertoire going with his career high 62 pts against charlotte last season (they ranked 5th in DRTG):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeYmRC0hFJc

I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #61, and I think a 20+ spot gap between the two is pushing it. Take a look at how they compare over their first 11 seasons (dominique actually comes off as worse if you look at his whole career):

http://bkref.com/tiny/KSWoH

They’re very comparable in most areas, and carmelo actually comes out as the better postseason performer, something wilkins was well criticized for, but still managed to get voted in much earlier.

I think carmelo would’ve fit in about as well as bosh had he come together with lebron and wade in 2010. The only difference would be focusing a little more on signing centers to bolster the interior D (which was lacking anyway in the 2013 + 2014 finals). Again, I don’t see carmelo having an issue with playing more off the ball and spreading the floor at the 4 instead of running the offense through him. He's also shown chemistry specifically with lebron over the years, and their friendship certainly wouldn't hurt, either.

There always seemed to be this all or nothing evaluation of carmelo where he’d be expected to be as good as lebron / durant (which he obviously isn’t), or he’s barely a top 20 player in the league. You may want to fault him for forcing his way to NY, but let’s not pretend like many players voted in already haven’t done the same.

ronnymac brings up a good point about low turnovers being a plus for high usage players. Below are are 20+ PPG scorers in the playoffs (excluding centers) sorted by TO% (best to worst):

http://bkref.com/tiny/HO11E

Of course there are guys at the “bottom” who were very successful, but the lower TO% can help offset some of the decrease in efficiency we see with carmelo in the playoffs. 25 of the 34 players on this list have already been voted in, and only 1 of those players (gus williams) has played in more playoff games then carmelo, so I think he has a good case for this spot.

As an aside, I think it’s pretty interesting to see guys like jordan and iverson with such low TO%s in the playoffs. Also would’ve never known ben gordon was a 20 PPG scorer in the playoffs for his career :lol:

Then we get to the clutch play. 82games.com looked at shot data from 04-09 in the reg season + 04-08 in the post season. Carmelo was 6th in the league in game winners, but #1 in the league by far in FG% on game winners at 48.1%:

http://82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

By 2011, he already had enough game winners to choose from to create a top 10 for his career:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0vMD_CTYY

For clutch data from 2000-2012, carmelo was 7th in the league in FG%, and 50% of his FGs were assisted, which is interesting to note for being criticized for holding the ball too long.

http://bit.ly/1wnySdJ

[I’d obviously prefer eFG% or TS% for these figures, but they weren’t available here]

I’m aware that he hasn’t been quite as clutch over the last few seasons, but i attribute some of that to fatigue (he led the league in MPG last season) and the makeup of his teams. He’s still had his fair share of clutch moments since coming to NY, and hit multiple game winners during his first season here. He did give us this gem in 2012, as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9neM8by1SQ

Carmelo gets a decent amount of flack for his playoff resume, and I think it’s a little overstated, so I’d like to provide some context for each season. It also seems to get pushed aside that making the playoffs 10 seasons in a row is no big deal or something, especially when the majority of them came out west. Below is carmelo’s team SRS rank and the opponent’s SRS rank that he lost to in the playoffs.

CARMELO SRS RANK / OPPONENT SRS RANK

04 - 11th / 2nd
05 - 10th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
06 - 15th / 9th
07 - 9th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
08 - 11th / 2nd
09 - 8th / 3rd (eventual NBA champion lakers)
10 - 8th / 3rd
11 - 15th / 6th
12 - 11th / 4th (eventual NBA champion heat)
13 - 7th / 9th

Aside from 2013, the team he lost to has always been favored in SRS, with 4 of the 10 series losses coming to the eventual NBA champs. To me, this doesn’t reflect a player who’s come up short when he’s been expected to go farther in the playoffs. You can make the argument that if he was a better player, he may have been favored in more series, but that only goes so far. It’s clear that he hasn’t been as fortunate as some other players as far as who he’s played with. Some more details on his recent playoff loses:

09 - This run to the WCF almost gets glossed over at times. Nuggets were 2 wins away from the finals, losing to the eventual NBA champion lakers, who were just flat out the better team. He had some great performances during that run.

11 - Billups gets hurt in game 1 against boston (out for rest of series), then amare gets hurt in game 2 only playing 17 min. First 2 games are decided by 2 and 3 points respectively. Tony douglas forced to play PG for the rest of the series, basically putting it out of reach.

12 - Disastrous # of injuries. Tyson chandler finishes off a DPOY season, and of course gets the flu as soon as the playoffs start. Lin doesn’t come back for the playoffs, shumpert and douglas only play 1 game a piece, baron davis eventually goes down, and the knicks are only left with 33 yr old mike bibby to run the point, who already had 1 foot in retirement.

13 - First time since carmelo came to the knicks that they really looked like a team who could make a run to the finals. PG play was always an issue prior to this season, and felton came up big in the 1st round against boston. Ball movement flowing with kidd and prigioni as well. Then in the 2nd round against indiana, chandler again doesn’t look himself, which would later be revealed that he had an “undisclosed illness” during the series. I think there’s a good chance they beat the pacers with a healthy chandler, and who knows what happens from there.

Here are the best players carmelo’s played with over the course of his career: andre miller (first few seasons of carmelo's career), kenyon martin (often injured), post 30s iverson, camby (often injured), JR smith, nene (often injured), billups, afflalo, amare (often injured), tyson chandler (often injured), kidd in his last season and an in shape felton. Outside of iverson, that’s a collection of good players, but nothing that screams "consistent second option", or even "consistent first option" if you want to push carmelo down a notch. Fit is clearly important, too, and while iverson and carmelo never had "problems" with each other, it wasn't working. It’s not an accident that carmelo’s best seasons came with billups running the show in 09 and a knicks team in 2013 which focused heavily on keeping the ball moving and quick decision making.

With regards to how carmelo’s career is perceived, I always go back to pierce before garnett and allen came along. Even if we agree that pierce is the better player, he had only been to the conf finals once before that trade, and i’m not sure how his career progresses without those trades being made. Does he stick with it in boston and not make anymore playoff runs? Does he eventually go to another team? I just wonder how carmelo would be looked at had he been fortunate enough to play with teammates of that caliber.

I also have one comment on the generalization that carmelo came back to NY "solely for the money and his brand". I don't think it's out of the question to venture that his wife and son (who's grown up up in NY) played a big role in his decision. It could very well be their wanting to stay in NY superseded his being tempted to play in houston / chicago. I had already prepared for him to leave this past summer, and was surprised he came back. I know stuff like this hasn't come up much in the project, but I felt the need to say it due to some of the stigma he's gotten.

I don’t think you can fall on the criticism of him not being able to fit with better players. International play doesn’t equal the NBA, but he’s always shined in that role. If he really had a problem with making that adjustment, he wouldn’t have been a key player on the last 2 olympic teams. And yes, few players get to play with say lebron or chris paul, but there’s little doubt in my mind that carmelo would thrive in a situation like that.


Plus a few additional notes from the last thread:

Spoiler:
Carmelo's career BPM is 1.4. Players already voted in with only slightly higher BPM figures:

Gervin - 1.5 (voted in at 38)
King - 1.7 (voted in at 70)
English - 1.7 (voted in at 54)
Worthy - 1.7 (voted in at 75)
WIlkins - 1.8 (voted in at 61)

* Havlicek is also at 1.4, but this only counts the last 5 seasons of his career
* Richmond's career BPM is only .9

While not perfect, take a look at how the below SFs have performed against carmelo vs. their career averages. Sure, camrelo may not have been guarding them the whole time, but it's a large enough sample size to at least uncover any red flags.

    (TS% or eFG% not available for head to head data)

    Durant - 27.9 PPG on 43/41/87 (career 27.3 PPG on 48/38/88)

    LeBron - 25.9 PPG on 49/27/70 (career 27.4 PPG on 50/34/75)

    Gay - 18.6 PPG on 44/22/72 (career 18.4 PPG on 45/34/79)

    George - 15.1 PPG on 45/34/77 (career 15.3 PPG on 43/36/83)

    Pierce - 23.1 PPG on 50/41/80 (career 20.9 PPG on 45/37/81)

    Granger - 16.6 PPG on 45/39/88 (career 16.8 PPG on 43/38/85)

    Caron Butler - 12.4 PPG on 43/38/84 (career 14.5 PPG on 43/34/85)

    McGrady - 19.6 PPG on 45/44/82 (career 19.6 PPG on 44/34/75)

    Deng - 17.1 PPG on 45/36/83 (career 16.9 PPG on 46/33/77)

    Josh Howard - 12.7 PPG on 44/31/79 (career 14.3 PPG on 45/33/77)

    Richard Jefferson - 14.2 PPG on 51/43/66 (career 14 PPG on 47/38/77)

    Stephen Jackson - 17.4 PPG on 35/33/86 (career 15.1 PPG on 41/33/80)

Of the 12 players, 6 scored the same or less than their career averages against carmelo. Those that scored more were only by marginal amounts. Efficiency ranges from lower to somewhat higher. No red flags here.

One last observation: durant's defensive rep has improved over the last few seasons. For their careers, durant's teams allow 3 more points per 100 for his career when he's on the court. Carmelo's teams only allow 1.7 more per 100. Also, last season the knicks actually allowed 2.9 less points per 100 when he was on the floor.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 11:56 am
by penbeast0
Be the Best wrote:How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?

I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.

Easily top 80 imo.


Because virtually any team with enough talent to have legit championship hopes would rather have guys like Shawn Marion or Elton Brand as they fit better into any role OTHER than primary scoer.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 6:25 pm
by Owly
trex_8063 wrote:Vote for #89: Carmelo Anthony

I know scoring isn't the ONLY part of the game.....but it is pretty necessary. And he's a very very good scorer. In him we have a guy who once led the league in scoring while shooting 56.0% ts (+2.54% to league avg) for a team that was 2nd in the conference. As noted in my above response, using SactoKingsFan's criteria of >30 pts/100 @ 55+% ts (where Richmond has 5 qualifying seasons): Carmelo has 6.

If we change that criteria just slightly to >31 pts/100 @ 55.5+% ts: Carmelo has 5 qualifying seasons vs. 3 for Richmond.

If we change it to >33 pts/100 @ 56+% ts: Melo has 4 qualifying seasons vs. just 1 for Richmond.


Melo's defense is lacking, though no candidate is perfect at this point. He's a reasonably good rebounding SF, and a decent passer, too (probably better than his assist numbers by my eye-test; his turnover numbers are really pretty good considering the usage and scoring load he's shouldered). His longevity is reasonably good at this point, too. Clyde posted some relevant stuff above regarding his playoff career.

Richmond just got in......while impact data rate Richmond more favorably than it does Carmelo, I don't think we can say with any certainty that Melo ever had a supporting cast better than Richmond had in '91 (a team that went 44-38, 1.72 SRS, 2nd round exit); might be some supporting casts between '06 and '13 which were roughly "as good".
Of those eight seasons with supporting casts which were perhaps "as good", Melo's team....
*had a better rs record 7 of 8 seasons (and tied with 44 wins in the other year)
*had a higher SRS in 6 of 8 seasons
And had one season where they went deeper in the playoffs.

Boxscore metrics rate him very favorably compared to (that is: often better than) other available candidates around this stage of the project.
Impact data, admittedly does not rate him overly well, though it does rate him better than individuals such as Amar'e Stoudemire, Stephon Marbury, and Joakim Noah, as well as post-1993 Joe Dumars. His best 7 years added are better than Kevin Durant's, too.

As a matter of internal consistency, too: ton of parallel between him and Dominique Wilkins, imo. I'd rate Nique a marginally better player overall, and Nique's still got a slight longevity case over him, too. But given Nique was voted in 28 places ago........would seem pretty inconsistent if Melo doesn't get in soon (seems a bit inconsistent already).

I wouldn't go along with the analysis on '91 as a comparison of Richmond and Melo. Richmond being in (and thus not the bar, except for internal consistency reasons but then Isiah - Gus Williams) aside ...

1) I think you're looking at "talent" (i.e. offense, especially scoring, perhaps star name value) rather than more rounded contributions and fit. The '91 Warriors bigs are a mess. Young raw, rebounding only Tyrone Hill, aging ineffective Alton Lister and then an assorted collection of stiffs (Mokeski, Jepsen, Smrek, Tolbert anyone?) or playing someone out of position. To ram this home the first "big" when the team is sorted by PER Smrek (5th, playing 25 minutes in total over the season) then Lister at 9th (7th amongst those playing more than 100 minutes) on 10.7.

In this context Billups, peak Nene, Ty Lawson, Chris Andersen, Kenyon Martin and JR Smith ('10 Nuggets) for instance seem a better cast for a scoring wing than do Mullin, Hardaway, 50 games of Marciulionis and then the rest.

2) Taking a non-peak year for Richmond and saying how many years Melo (or more specifically his teams) have better is an odd line of argumentation. Besides Richmond not being the competition and all the team factors that complicate things, a non-peak year seems an odd bar.

3) There's underlying issues with implying team impact without thoroughly assessing what is teammates. I suspect the larger hurdle than Richmond (or whomever comes next) for Melo is the manner he wasn't missed in Denver.

fwiw, from in the notes it's easier to advance through 2010's East (where Melo has peaked) than through the '91 Spurs and Lakers.

I'm fine with whomever at this point because value changes quite a lot depending on context and with the margins narrowing as we move away from the elite and of course criteria varying of course there will be different choices. I'm just saying why this isn't persuasive to me with regard to Melo.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Mon Mar 9, 2015 10:45 pm
by trex_8063
Owly wrote:I wouldn't go along with the analysis on '91 as a comparison of Richmond and Melo. Richmond being in (and thus not the bar, except for internal consistency reasons but then Isiah - Gus Williams) aside ...

1) I think you're looking at "talent" (i.e. offense, especially scoring, perhaps star name value) rather than more rounded contributions and fit. The '91 Warriors bigs are a mess. Young raw, rebounding only Tyrone Hill, aging ineffective Alton Lister and then an assorted collection of stiffs (Mokeski, Jepsen, Smrek, Tolbert anyone?) or playing someone out of position. To ram this home the first "big" when the team is sorted by PER Smrek (5th, playing 25 minutes in total over the season) then Lister at 9th (7th amongst those playing more than 100 minutes) on 10.7.

In this context Billups, peak Nene, Ty Lawson, Chris Andersen, Kenyon Martin and JR Smith ('10 Nuggets) for instance seem a better cast for a scoring wing than do Mullin, Hardaway, 50 games of Marciulionis and then the rest.

2) Taking a non-peak year for Richmond and saying how many years Melo (or more specifically his teams) have better is an odd line of argumentation. Besides Richmond not being the competition and all the team factors that complicate things, a non-peak year seems an odd bar.

3) There's underlying issues with implying team impact without thoroughly assessing what is teammates. I suspect the larger hurdle than Richmond (or whomever comes next) for Melo is the manner he wasn't missed in Denver.

fwiw, from in the notes it's easier to advance through 2010's East (where Melo has peaked) than through the '91 Spurs and Lakers.

I'm fine with whomever at this point because value changes quite a lot depending on context and with the margins narrowing as we move away from the elite and of course criteria varying of course there will be different choices. I'm just saying why this isn't persuasive to me with regard to Melo.



Re: #1--->Fair enough regarding the line-up fit in GS; no question there's a bit of redundancy in some areas and gaps in others. So perhaps Melo did have some slightly better supporting casts.....and as should then be expected: he managed better team outcomes. So from this perspective I'd say at the least he did "no less" than Richmond.

Re: #2--->Not sure what the issue with taking a non-peak year is. It's not as though I was comparing it to peak Melo only; I compared it to the bulk of Melo's entire prime. And '91 can be considered a prime year for Richmond (and if not, then his prime is indeed pretty short, and that meh longevity should have worked against him in the last thread).

Re: #3--->The way Mitch wasn't missed in GS (indeed, they appear to get a bit better) is (or rather: should have been) a hurdle for Richmond, too. (i.e. if it didn't hold Richmond back in this project, it shouldn't hold Melo back)
Also, the one year Melo advanced further than any season of Richmond's prime wasn't in the 2010's East, it was in an awfully tough Western Conference ('09).


The continued comparison to Richmond is both about internal consistency (comparison to Wilkins is even more about internal consistency), but also to imply Melo is "right there" with someone (or someones) already voted in.....figuring placing him with that kind of company makes him look like a more viable candidate.
btw--Out of curiosity, where do you place Isiah Thomas all-time. Understand if you'd rather not reply here (could derail things).

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:05 am
by Doctor MJ
Be the Best wrote:How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?

I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.

Easily top 80 imo.


Realistically at this stage in the game it's very difficult to have any kind of consensus. When I look at, say, the Bottom 20 of our Top 100 lists I essentially lump them all together as "guys who made it".

For me none of those guys would be on my Top 100...although I'd still have no problem with Marion or Brand ahead of Melo. Melo's failure to impact for much of his career has been frankly astonishing.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:49 pm
by Quotatious
I'm okay with Melo getting in (actually, I would've voted for him over Mitch in the previous thread, just missed the run-off, for some reason...), but for now, I'm still going with the same guy as I did at 88.

Vote: Dave DeBusschere

Very versatile player - could score (not very efficiently - just about league average TS% in the 60s, but he had a pretty good range on his jumper - I saw him make 20-23 footers a lot of times, and even some shots from today's 3-point land), rebound (11 rebounds per game for his career as a 6'6'' or 6'7'', 220-225 lbs forward), quite possibly the best non-center defender of his era, good passer, very unselfish, smart, played with tremendous effort every game, and had some of the best "intangibles" of any player in NBA history. Excellent athlete, too (played in two pro leagues - NBA and briefly also in the MLB). Pretty good longevity - 10 year prime, and there are indications that he could've played a few more years on a high level, if he wanted to - in his last season, '73-'74, he averaged almost 18/11/4, and had probably the best scoring season of his career.

His advanced metrics are really mediocre, but he seems to be one of those guys who's impact goes beyond boxscore numbers. He was just a workhorse out there on the court, and he really reminds me of John Havlicek and especially Dave Cowens (Hondo is in since #30, Cowens since #52).
Also, how about the fact that DeBusschere became a player-coach at age 24? Speaks volumes about his basketball acumen and leadership qualities.

Let's take a look at the '68-'69 Knicks, as an example of DeBusschere's impact - before the Bellamy/DeBusschere trade, Knicks were 18-16, 52.9% W (with Bellamy), after the trade, they were 36-11, 76.6% W (with DeBusschere). Considering that New York didn't make any other changes to their roster (well, they also lost their backup point guard Howard Komives, who was traded to Detroit along with Bellamy), that's instant impact personified, right there.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:32 pm
by penbeast0
Quotatious wrote:I'm okay with Melo getting in (actually, I would've voted for him over Mitch in the previous thread, just missed the run-off, for some reason...), but for now, I'm still going with the same guy as I did at 88.

Vote: Dave DeBusschere

Very versatile player - could score (not very efficiently - just about league average TS% in the 60s, but he had a pretty good range on his jumper - I saw him make 20-23 footers a lot of times, and even some shots from today's 3-point land), rebound (11 rebounds per game for his career as a 6'6'' or 6'7'', 220-225 lbs forward), quite possibly the best non-center defender of his era, good passer, very unselfish, smart, played with tremendous effort every game, and had some of the best "intangibles" of any player in NBA history. Excellent athlete, too (played in two pro leagues - NBA and briefly also in the MLB). Pretty good longevity - 10 year prime, and there are indications that he could've played a few more years on a high level, if he wanted to - in his last season, '73-'74, he averaged almost 18/11/4, and had probably the best scoring season of his career.

His advanced metrics are really mediocre, but he seems to be one of those guys who's impact goes beyond boxscore numbers. He was just a workhorse out there on the court, and he really reminds me of John Havlicek and especially Dave Cowens (Hondo is in since #30, Cowens since #52).
Also, how about the fact that DeBusschere became a player-coach at age 24? Speaks volumes about his basketball acumen and leadership qualities.

Let's take a look at the '68-'69 Knicks, as an example of DeBusschere's impact - before the Bellamy/DeBusschere trade, Knicks were 18-16, 52.9% W (with Bellamy), after the trade, they were 36-11, 76.6% W (with DeBusschere). Considering that New York didn't make any other changes to their roster (well, they also lost their backup point guard Howard Komives, who was traded to Detroit along with Bellamy), that's instant impact personified, right there.


Why DeBusschere over Silas? Silas seemed to have the same sort of impact . . . in Boston, then in Seattle. He was a bit less of a scorer, a bit more of a rebounder, a bit better as a passer, and better at the main defensive demand put on them which was post defense though DeBusschere was better out on the floor. Silas also had more of a leadership rep.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 4:05 pm
by Quotatious
penbeast0 wrote:Why DeBusschere over Silas? Silas seemed to have the same sort of impact . . . in Boston, then in Seattle. He was a bit less of a scorer, a bit more of a rebounder, a bit better as a passer, and better at the main defensive demand put on them which was post defense though DeBusschere was better out on the floor. Silas also had more of a leadership rep.

Honestly, I didn't even look at Silas up close, but it's a good mention. Still, I think that DeBusschere was more capable and versatile offensively, more of a star (FWIW, 8 All-Star appearances to just 2 for Silas), more versatile defensively (he could guard basically every position - one of the most versatile man defenders in NBA history), and just has better numbers across the board.

I'd probably take Buck Williams and Otis Thorpe over Silas, too.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 5:16 pm
by ceiling raiser
Does Dennis Johnnson have a case for one of these last 12 spots?

EDIT: Typo.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 5:35 pm
by Quotatious
fpliii wrote:Does Dennis Johnnson have case for one of these last 12 spots?

I'm pretty sure he does. Ironman, pretty good longevity, played on strong teams his entire career (only one team he played on had a losing record - that's the '77 Sonics, who finished 40-42, so they weren't really bad, and DJ played less than 21 minutes per game that year), excellent defender (his reputation is terrific - I mean, he's widely considered one of the best perimeter defenders of all-time), lots of accolades (not that I really care, but it shows that he was held in high regard during his career), solid all-around player...The thing is, nothing about his numbers really stands out - he's mediocre statistically (both raw and advanced) compared to most of the other candidates right now (to be fair, though, I'm voting for DeBusschere, who isn't exactly a world beater in this regard, but like DJ, he's more of an "intangibles" guy).

We don't have impact stats (on/off or RAPM) for his career, and he rarely missed games, so it's hard to compare how his team played with and without him.

Anyway, considering that Maurice Cheeks went in at 83, and Johnson doesn't seem to be that much worse, I think he has a good shot to make the top 100 (but probably just between 95 and 100, as nobody seems to have him on their shortlist of candidates at the moment). Cheeks was a much more efficient scorer (although his volume was generally lower), and his boxscore looks a bit more impressive than DJ's. Both are terrific defenders.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:42 pm
by penbeast0
That and Cheeks was a true playmaker; DJ was not which is one of the main reasons Cheeks is going in. DJ was really more of a 2 than a PG.

How does DJ compare offensively to roughly equivalent defenders like Bob Dandridge or Mookie Blaylock (Blaylock was probably better at defending quick PGs but not nearly as versatile)? Or even to his former teammates Gus Williams and Jack Sikma, both of whom I valued more than DJ on that Sonics title team.

Again, a lot of players (probably another hundred) with at least some argument for the top 100 spot.

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89

Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 1:41 am
by trex_8063
Thru post #15, and by my count we are less than 2 hrs from the 48-hour mark (from when the sudden death for #88 ended):

Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0

Carmelo Anthony (3) - trex_8063, ronnymac2, Clyde Frazier

Dave DeBusschere (1) - Quotatious

Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 2:09 am
by SactoKingsFan
I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.

Vote: Shawn Kemp

Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker for a big. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.

6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP

Prime Kemp (92-99):

Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg

21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48

Re:

Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 2:50 am
by Clyde Frazier
SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.

Vote: Shawn Kemp

Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.

6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP

Prime Kemp (92-99):

Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg

21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48


Actual #s from 92-99:

18.3 PPG, 10.4 RPG, 2.1 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 3.2 TOPG

I was a huge fan of kemp back then, and those are certainly 8 solid seasons, but i think the fact that he fell off a cliff at 30 years old hurts him here. He simply became unreliable due to his weight gain and drug / alcohol abuse. He was a little too TO prone, too averaging more TOs than assists along with a TO% of 16.9% (and 17.4% in the playoffs) during that span. Carmelo from 06-14 is only at 10.9% (and actually drops to 9.9% in the playoffs). A PF like webber who handled the ball a lot was only at 12.1% from 96-05. Current PFs like aldridge and blake hover around 8-12%. I think this is a concern for kemp.

Re: Re: Re:

Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:10 am
by SactoKingsFan
Clyde Frazier wrote:
SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.

Vote: Shawn Kemp

Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.

6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP

Prime Kemp (92-99):

Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg

21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48


Actual #s from 92-99:

18.3 PPG, 10.4 RPG, 2.1 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 3.2 TOPG

I was a huge fan of kemp back then, and those are certainly 8 solid seasons, but i think the fact that he fell off a cliff at 30 years old hurts him here. He simply became unreliable due to his weight gain and drug / alcohol abuse. He was a little too TO prone, too averaging more TOs than assists along with a TO% of 16.9% (and 17.4% in the playoffs) during that span. Carmelo from 06-14 is only at 10.9% (and actually drops to 9.9% in the playoffs). A PF like webber who handled the ball a lot was only at 12.1% from 96-05. Current PFs like aldridge and blake hover around 8-12%. I think this is a concern for kemp.


Yeah, I added per 100 before you responded to the post. His prime would be quite a bit more impressive if those were per game stats. Kemp's turnover problem is a concern, but I think he more than made up for it with his scoring, rebounding and defense. When it comes to the quality of his post prime seasons, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Still had an impressive 8 year prime, was a good prime playoff performer and had decent longevity even if you throw out his post prime seasons.

Re:

Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:22 am
by penbeast0
SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.

Vote: Shawn Kemp

Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker for a big. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.

6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP

Prime Kemp (92-99):

Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg

21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48


Kemp v. Mel Daniels

Scoring -- both primarily inside scorers. Kemp the superior athlete and finisher on the break, Daniels the more reliable post game where Kemp just tried to jump over everyone. Scoring average per 36 is almost identical, Daniels has the minutes advantage, Kemp the pace advantage. Kemp is a better FT shooter and draws more FT giving him a significant efficiency advantage as well and that advantage gets even stronger in the playoffs. Neither really good enough to be suited to the role of first option on a contender.

Rebounding -- Daniels is the better rebounder, total/per 36/per 100 poss/rebound rate. Although not the leaper that Kemp was, Daniels was much superior at the rebounding skills of boxing out and anticipating where the ball would come off.

Playmaking -- both finishers, neither passed particularly well though Kemp thought of himself as more of a playmaker and had a higher assist rate, he also had a higher turnover rate and a worse assist/turnover ratio.

Defense -- Again, Kemp far more athletic, Daniels more positional. Daniels was better at keeping post scorers off their sweet spots, Kemp at gambling for steals and slightly superior at shot blocking as well. Kemp didn't always make good decisions in the passing lanes either creating more easy buckets for his opponents.

Durability -- Clear advantage Kemp; Daniels had a shorter prime and far less time as a role player though not sure whether you really wanted Kemp on your team post prime.

Intangibles -- Clear advantage Daniels; Kemp was a foul prone immature jerk, Daniels was more of an intimidator who liked to throw his weight around but was well liked by his teammates and is still popular in Indiana.

If you wanted to live with his immaturity, Kemp had a higher ceiling though 2 MVPs implies that Daniels was still a pretty high ceiling player. If you wanted consistency and effort, Daniels should be your preferred choice. If I want to win a ring, I go with Daniels pretty easily for most teams.
All times are UTC
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/