RealGM

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. Bailey Howell, Billy Cunningham, Jamaal Wilkes, Bob Dandridge, and Chet Walker also come to mind. Maybe Dave DeBusschere for defensive impact.

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). 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.

In terms of short timers, I like Daniels's game better than that of Yao Ming; Marques Johnson better than Penny Hardaway. Longtimers, leaning toward Chris Mullin, though I'm waiting for the promised Mookie Blaylock post. Amare and Lucas should go in as well. Others I can be convinced of.

There are a lot of other good players but as we are into the last 10, that's my short list.



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).

Vote: Shawn Kemp

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

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

Prime Kemp RS (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6  STL + BLK, 5.0 TOV, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg

21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 16.9 TOV%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48

Prime Kemp PS (92-98):
Per 100: 28.5 PTS, 15.9 REB, 3.1 AST, 4.6 STL + BLK, 5.1 TOV, 113 ORtg, 104 DRtg

21.8 PER, .594 TS%, .605 FTr, 18.0 TRB%, 10.7 AST%, 4.0 BLK%, 1.9 STL%, 17.4 TOV%, .171 WS/48

Daniels is similar to Kemp in that he was a big, physical player though more groundbound; better rebounder than Kemp, not as good a scorer, Kemp passes more but commits more turnovers. Kemp is more efficient and had better durability; the main difference is that while Kemp was an unpopular, immature jerk, Daniels was a widely respected star who won 2 ABA MVPS and 3 rings. Which would you rather have on your team?

Vote: Mel Daniels

Prefer Daniels over Kemp. Daniels is more likely to stay on the floor longer and not hurt my offense. Kemp is the better defender, but not to the point where I'd take the more reliable player. I also think Kemp can end up hurting your offense in far too many games.

ronnymac2 wrote:Vote: Mel Daniels

Prefer Daniels over Kemp. Daniels is more likely to stay on the floor longer and not hurt my offense. Kemp is the better defender, but not to the point where I'd take the more reliable player. I also think Kemp can end up hurting your offense in far too many games.

Respectfully, I have to say I largely disagree with your player assessment in this comparison.

While you could argue Kemp tried to "do too much" on offense, I think it's fairly clear he was a superior offensive player to Daniels. Even Daniels' biggest supporter (penbeast0) isn't trying to argue that.

Kemp was turnover-prone, but hardly more so than Dwight Howard, fwiw. And in exchange for those turnovers.......around his peak he was producing about 29-30 pts/100 possessions at >60% ts (as high as 63.1%) with ~3 ast/100 poss. That's basically the same pts/100 poss and shooting efficiency we saw from peak Dwight Howard; he also averaged about +1 ast/100 possessions relative to Howard (though also around +0.5-1 tov/100 possessions). ORtg and rORtg during his peak is pretty well spot-on with what peak Howard was doing, too. Statistically, at his peak he comes out really d*** close to peak Howard offensively. Daniels never approached anything even close to that.

And although we don't have the data for some of his prime, what we do have shows Kemp had a pretty consistently positive oRAPM, sometimes fairly significantly so (which damages the notion that he will "hurt your offense").

And then wrt defense.....I'm not sure he was the better defender. He was solid defensively, but idk about better than Daniels in that regard (I'm sure penbeast0 would contend that's not the case).


Speaking for myself, I think the things Daniels is likely better at are defense and rebounding (edge in rebounding likely not all that large, particularly relative to positional expectation; perhaps the edge defensively isn't that big either). Kemp clearly the better offensive player though, imo. Daniels gets the edge for intangibles, Kemp has a pretty substantial edge in longevity (no small factor as far as I'm concerned). I also have less question regarding Kemp given he's proven in a reasonably tough era (relative to the late 60's/early 70's ABA).

I'm not high enough on either to lend them first-ballot support at this point, but between the two I rank Kemp higher (longevity being the largest reason why).

Will try to write more tomorrow, but the top candidates I'm considering are all some old-school chaps: Billy Cunningham, Jack Sikma, Jerry Lucas, and Dave DeBusschere are the primary guys I'm considering. Could also get behind Walt Bellamy or George McGinnis if the support was there.

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.

I think both Kemp and Daniels are positives on offense, despite the turnovers. Kemp is more efficient, more spectacular, and more problematic but both are low post threats that draw attention. Although Kemp was more efficient, the early ABA was a "80 fights in 80 days" league with relatively tough low post defense since the 3 pointer had not yet opened up the lanes. Kemp had his peak in the shortened 3 point line which really opened out the lane. Doesn't make up the whole difference in scoring but lessen it certainly.

Vote for #90 - Billy Cunningham

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ibi01.html

- 11 year career
- 1x NBA champion
- 4x all NBA (3 1st, 1 2nd), 1x all ABA 1st team
- 1x ABA MVP, 1 top 3 and 1 top 5 NBA MVP finishes

Pretty surprised in my pushing for carmelo throughout the 80s voting that cunningham was barely mentioned.

Reminds me a lot of cowens (voted in at 52) with his frenetic style of play and above average court vision for a big man. Nicknamed "the kangaroo kid", he was athletic and made a living on drives to the hoop.

Per John Havlicek:

"Anytime he wants a shot, he can get one. He's so quick and can jump so well that it's impossible to stay with him. And he's a good team player, passes off well. You can realize it when you play against him, and in the all-star game when you're playing with him."

He played a key role in only his second season helping the 67 sixers to the title, putting up the following #s in the finals:

19.7 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 3 APG, 44.9% FG, 53.7% FT (6.8 FTAs per game)

After 7 productive seasons with the sixers, he jumped to the ABA and had an immediate impact on the league, winning MVP in his first season with the following #s:

24.1 PPG, 12 RPG, 6.3 APG, 2.6 SPG, 54.9% TS (league avg 52.7%)

If we dial it down to last season’s average pace, the #s still look solid: 20.7 PPG, 10.3 RPG, 5.2 APG, 2.2 SPG

He would lead the cougars to a 57-27 record (they finished 35-49 in the season prior). The sixers loss of cunningham was felt even further, as they’d go on to finish with the infamous record of 9-73 the following year.

As the future of the ABA waned, cunningham would return to the sixers to finish out his career, which ultimately ended due to injury. Still, he had decent durability for the majority of his career, as well as longevity relative to his era. When you look at his skill set and what he accomplished in his career, I think he’s more than deserving here.

I'm not rock-solid in who I want to lend support to, but was kinda leaning toward Cunningham; and since Clyde Frazier just broke the ice on Cunningham, I think I'll pitch in with him.

Vote for #90: Billy Cunningham.

A very effective scorer ("instant offense", I recall some of his former teammates calling him), who didn't have a bad reputation defensively, either. While his shooting efficiency isn't overly special, I have trouble holding that against him too much when a) the time period was not too focused on finding "a good shot", in order to maintain the pace; and b) he was someone who was called upon to create in isolation with some regularity.
Was a fantastic rebounder for playing primarily the SF, too: the LOWEST reb/100 possession of his entire career was 10.3 (and that in the twilight of his career). He averaged as high as ~13.8 reb/100 possessions in the ABA ('73), as high as 13.1 reb/100 possessions in the NBA ('72).

Was a 19.3 PER and .151 WS/48 in about 27 mpg for what might be the greatest team ever. Consistently provided similar on even bigger minutes in later years for lesser teams. Jumped ship to the ABA late in his prime and immediately won the league's MVP (despite the presence of prime Julius Erving, Artis Gilmore, Dan Issel, and Mel Daniels).

And really his longevity is decent (especially for the era), when we consider he was in his prime and an all-star by his 2nd season, and never stopped being so until his final season (injury).

EDIT: tbh, I fear we're probably underrating him at #90.

Loved the Cunningham MVP team in the ABA. Larry Brown took a team that shouldn't have worked (two slashing wings at forward, two undersized players at guard, and a solid journeyman center) and turned them into the best offensive team in the ABA with spacing and one of the first great isolation offenses. When I first fell in love with Brown's coaching.

Then he took his game to Denver and did the same with Bobby Jones, Ralph Sampson, Mike Green, and the Nuggets. Both teams were better than their talent (possibly why they came up short in the postseason) and Jones had followed Cunningham at North Carolina and even inherited his Kangaroo Kid nickname on campus (though Cunningham is still the guy most of us thought of by that moniker).

Cunningham, Daniels, Haywood, Hawkins,(All ABA MVPs), Walton, and Derrick Rose (single season NBA stars) are the only MVPs not on our list. I think all but Rose have some case for the top 100.

Vote: David DeBusschere
Q outlined the reasons pretty well. Top notch rebounding, defense and intangibles. Very intelligent, scored efficiently, decade long career. Local boy for me too. Really, given his all around production, I fear he's being a touch underrated here, he seems like the best glue-guy ever. What couldn't this guy do?

Thru post #12:

Mel Daniels (2) - penbeast0, ronnymac2

Dave DeBusschere (2) - Quotatious, Notanoob

Billy Cunningham (2) - Clyde Frazier, trex_8063

Shawn Kemp (1) - SactoKingsFan

One other thing I'll add about Billy Cunningham......

I'd mentioned he was a pretty fantastic rebounding SF; from the admittedly limited video of him I've seen, it seems like he was a pretty good outlet passer, too (at least he was aware and quick about it). Anyone who's seen a lot of him able to confirm that?

Notanoob wrote:Vote: David DeBusschere
Q outlined the reasons pretty well. Top notch rebounding, defense and intangibles. Very intelligent, scored efficiently, decade long career. Local boy for me too. Really, given his all around production, I fear he's being a touch underrated here, he seems like the best glue-guy ever. What couldn't this guy do?

Actually he didn't score efficiently. His efficiency was pretty mediocre, below average for his position (PF). Above average rebounder, not dominant. If he goes in here, which he well might, it's for his defense which was very good.

Vote: Billy Cunningham

This is a refreshing thread. I like Cunningham, DeBuss, and Daniels quite a bit, and think all are Top 100 worthy.

Of the 3 though, Cunningham is a bit of a revelation. A guy with a great brain, great motor, great touch, with the size to both be a well-used playmaker and glass hound. Longevity is an issue, but still, I could have voted him in long ago.

Doctor MJ wrote:Vote: Billy Cunningham

This is a refreshing thread. I like Cunningham, DeBuss, and Daniels quite a bit, and think all are Top 100 worthy.

Of the 3 though, Cunningham is a bit of a revelation. A guy with a great brain, great motor, great touch, with the size to both be a well-used playmaker and glass hound. Longevity is an issue, but still, I could have voted him in long ago.

I actually don't think his longevity is much of an issue. We had a basically prime-level Cunningham by his second season, and he continued to play at a prime level thru '75.......that's 9 seasons, encompassing 670 rs games. That's really not too bad, particularly in this era of terrible shoes and relatively meh sports medicine. Granted we don't have much in the way of "role player" years, but still....

Thought I'd provide some Per 100 Possessions and relative TS% (rTS) for each of the top three candidates here....

Billy Cunningham
'66: 20.9 pts, 11.0 reb, 3.8 ast @ -1.27% rTS
'67: 26.9 pts, 10.6 reb, 3.7 ast @ +1.99% rTS
'68: 26.0 pts, 10.5 reb, 3.5 ast @ +0.15% rTS
'69: 24.2 pts, 12.5 reb, 3.4 ast @ +0.11% rTS
'70: 26.3 pts, 13.7 reb, 4.4 ast @ +1.28% rTS
'71: 25.0 pts, 12.7 reb, 5.3 ast @ +1.87% rTS
'72: 23.3 pts, 13.1 reb, 6.3 ast @ +1.08% rTS
'73: 27.6 pts, 13.8 reb, 7.2 ast, 2.9 stl, 5.2 tov @ +2.21% rTS (ABA)
'74: 25.5 pts, 12.9 reb, 5.8 ast, 2.3 stl, 0.8 blk, 4.9 tov @ +2.08% rTS (ABA)
'75: 25.4 pts, 11.8 reb, 7.2 ast, 1.5 stl, 0.6 blk @ -1.92% rTS
'76: 19.1 pts, 10.3 reb, 7.5 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.7 blk @ -3.08% rTS

Mel Daniels
'68: 26.4 pts, 18.5 reb, 1.7 ast, 3.5 tov @ -3.66% rTS
'69: 26.8 pts, 18.4 reb, 1.7 ast, 4.0 tov @ +0.83% rTS
'70: 23.0 pts, 21.6 reb, 1.9 ast, 4.5 tov @ +0.89% rTS
'71: 24.1 pts, 20.7 reb, 2.5 ast, 3.2 tov @ +3.61% rTS
'72: 22.1 pts, 18.9 reb, 2.6 ast, 3.5 tov @ +2.80% rTS
'73: 20.5 pts, 17.1 reb, 2.4 ast, 2.2 blk, 3.8 tov @ +0.24% rTS
'74: 22.0 pts, 16.6 reb, 2.2 ast, 1.0 stl, 1.7 blk, 3.9 tov @ -2.58% rTS
'75: 20.4 pts, 18.7 reb, 3.7 ast, 1.2 stl, 3.0 blk, 4.1 tov @ -4.00% rTS

Dave DeBusschere
'63: 17.3 pts, 11.8 reb, 3.5 ast @ -1.69% rts
'64: 17.6 pts, 14.3 reb, 3.1 ast @ -6.02% rts (15-game sample)
'65: 19.2 pts, 12.7 reb, 3.7 ast @ -0.28% rts
'66: 18.7 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.0 ast @ -3.95% rts
'67: 19.4 pts, 12.6 reb, 2.9 ast @ -2.00% rts
'68: 18.1 pts, 13.6 reb, 2.3 ast @ -1.51% rts
'69: 17.8 pts, 12.7 reb, 2.7 ast @ -0.76% rts
'70: 18.4 pts, 12.6 reb, 3.1 ast @ -2.88% rts
'71: 18.7 pts, 13.3 reb, 3.3 ast @ -4.26% rts
'72: 17.8 pts, 13.0 reb, 4.2 ast @ -4.25% rts
'73: 20.2 pts, 12.6 reb, 4.2 ast @ -2.81% rts
'74: 22.0 pts, 13.0 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.2 stl, 0.7 blk @ -2.56% rts

As penbeast0 said, DeBusschere clearly NOT an efficient scorer. He is a guy I think would benefit a lot from a 3pt line, though. He had range out to 20 feet or so even though pre-3pt line; and I recall many shots taken quick like curling around the high post, etc.....not exactly easy shots. Coming up in a modern setting, I think he'd have had very nice accuracy spotting up behind the line.
And though he's the least impressive statistically, he's got a lot of non-boxscore impact defensively.

trex_8063 wrote:Thought I'd provide some Per 100 Possessions and relative TS% (rTS) for each of the top three candidates here....

Billy Cunningham
'66: 20.9 pts, 11.0 reb, 3.8 ast @ -1.27% rTS
'67: 26.9 pts, 10.6 reb, 3.7 ast @ +1.99% rTS
'68: 26.0 pts, 10.5 reb, 3.5 ast @ +0.15% rTS
'69: 24.2 pts, 12.5 reb, 3.4 ast @ +0.11% rTS
'70: 26.3 pts, 13.7 reb, 4.4 ast @ +1.28% rTS
'71: 25.0 pts, 12.7 reb, 5.3 ast @ +1.87% rTS
'72: 23.3 pts, 13.1 reb, 6.3 ast @ +1.08% rTS
'73: 27.6 pts, 13.8 reb, 7.2 ast, 2.9 stl, 5.2 tov @ +2.21% rTS (ABA)
'74: 25.5 pts, 12.9 reb, 5.8 ast, 2.3 stl, 0.8 blk, 4.9 tov @ +2.08% rTS (ABA)
'75: 25.4 pts, 11.8 reb, 7.2 ast, 1.5 stl, 0.6 blk @ -1.92% rTS
'76: 19.1 pts, 10.3 reb, 7.5 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.7 blk @ -3.08% rTS

Mel Daniels
'68: 26.4 pts, 18.5 reb, 1.7 ast, 3.5 tov @ -3.66% rTS
'69: 26.8 pts, 18.4 reb, 1.7 ast, 4.0 tov @ +0.83% rTS
'70: 23.0 pts, 21.6 reb, 1.9 ast, 4.5 tov @ +0.89% rTS
'71: 24.1 pts, 20.7 reb, 2.5 ast, 3.2 tov @ +3.61% rTS
'72: 22.1 pts, 18.9 reb, 2.6 ast, 3.5 tov @ +2.80% rTS
'73: 20.5 pts, 17.1 reb, 2.4 ast, 2.2 blk, 3.8 tov @ +0.24% rTS
'74: 22.0 pts, 16.6 reb, 2.2 ast, 1.0 stl, 1.7 blk, 3.9 tov @ -2.58% rTS
'75: 20.4 pts, 18.7 reb, 3.7 ast, 1.2 stl, 3.0 blk, 4.1 tov @ -4.00% rTS

Dave DeBusschere
'63: 17.3 pts, 11.8 reb, 3.5 ast @ -1.69% rts
'64: 17.6 pts, 14.3 reb, 3.1 ast @ -6.02% rts (15-game sample)
'65: 19.2 pts, 12.7 reb, 3.7 ast @ -0.28% rts
'66: 18.7 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.0 ast @ -3.95% rts
'67: 19.4 pts, 12.6 reb, 2.9 ast @ -2.00% rts
'68: 18.1 pts, 13.6 reb, 2.3 ast @ -1.51% rts
'69: 17.8 pts, 12.7 reb, 2.7 ast @ -0.76% rts
'70: 18.4 pts, 12.6 reb, 3.1 ast @ -2.88% rts
'71: 18.7 pts, 13.3 reb, 3.3 ast @ -4.26% rts
'72: 17.8 pts, 13.0 reb, 4.2 ast @ -4.25% rts
'73: 20.2 pts, 12.6 reb, 4.2 ast @ -2.81% rts
'74: 22.0 pts, 13.0 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.2 stl, 0.7 blk @ -2.56% rts

As penbeast0 said, DeBusschere clearly NOT an efficient scorer. He is a guy I think would benefit a lot from a 3pt line, though. He had range out to 20 feet or so even though pre-3pt line; and I recall many shots taken quick like curling around the high post, etc.....not exactly easy shots. Coming up in a modern setting, I think he'd have had very nice accuracy spotting up behind the line.
And though he's the least impressive statistically, he's got a lot of non-boxscore impact defensively.

Of course, so did Daniels, and to a lesser extent Cunningham who was a pretty hardnosed defender too. While DeBusschere is the one who is the best defender for his position, I would guess that Daniels, in that era of post scoring domination, would actually be the biggest difference maker though I don't have any support for it (and his backup, Darnell Hillman, was a pretty good defender in Chris Andersen sort of way).

Runoff Vote: Billy Cunningham

Changing my vote to somebody I am far more confident in. Cunningham even as a young player was valuable on arguably the GOAT team. He's got solid longevity as a star player and definitely has an impressive peak. Shared ALL-NBA First Team Honors with Elgin Baylor, Connie Hawkins, and John Havlicek for three years straight — a hellacious run. Great posts throughout this thread on The Kangaroo Kid.