RealGM

They were teammates and a great backcourt but which player would you take in a vacuum if you had to choose?

Dumars

As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

Quotatious wrote:As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

Stockton never had a positive DBPM either.

colts18 wrote:

Quotatious wrote:As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

Stockton never had a positive DBPM either.

True. But DWS looks nicer with Stockton

Stockton was not an all time great defender, he was good but not elite in that regard, and he doesn't get the same kind of repuation Dumars gets. His steal numbers were high because he read well the passing lanes and he was a good gambler, but his man to man D was not great.

Given that, Dumars might be a bit overrated after all, even tough I don't trust defensive stats as much as I trust offensive ones. But if they don't look good, usually it indicates the defender is not really elite.

Quotatious wrote:As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

I think a big problem with those is that they're box score based metrics, and Dumars isn't a guy who gets good defensive box score stats. He didn't get steals very often, he blocked shots hardly ever, and he barely grabbed any defensive rebounds. His big rep on defense were his man capabilities, so while he shouldn't be overstated on defense because of the fact that help defense is more important than man, it's also hard to get an idea of his defense by looking at those particular metrics. RAPM from that era sure would be nice

As for the question, I think I would still take Isiah, but I think Dumars is closer than the general opinion would be. He's probably a better shooter than Isiah, he's a great playmaker as a shooting guard, and I'm willing to give him the defensive edge based on the rep and his size advantage until someone tells me I'm wrong. It's close enough for me that it really depends on the team. If I don't have a good lead guard, I think Isiah can make things happen to get the offense to maybe not a great level, but at least a good level. But if I have a comparable ball handler, I don't think Isiah would be willing to give over control of the offense so readily, which is why Dumars is a much better fit in that case. Isiah's still the better player in my opinion though, so most cases I would go with him.

Joao Saraiva wrote:Stockton was not an all time great defender, he was good but not elite in that regard, and he doesn't get the same kind of repuation Dumars gets. His steal numbers were high because he read well the passing lanes and he was a good gambler, but his man to man D was not great.

Oh, I absolutely believe Stockton is an elite defender. Stockton = Ricky Rubio IMO, "only" above average man defenders but really really elite, maybe GOAT level at disrupting passes and offensive sets. RAPM data for both (post-prime!!) Stockton and Ricky put their defense at a elite forward level.

Fragment of a note I have on Ricky:

Jaivl wrote:

Joao Saraiva wrote:Stockton was not an all time great defender, he was good but not elite in that regard, and he doesn't get the same kind of repuation Dumars gets. His steal numbers were high because he read well the passing lanes and he was a good gambler, but his man to man D was not great.

Oh, I absolutely believe Stockton is an elite defender. Stockton = Ricky Rubio IMO, "only" above average man defenders but really really elite, maybe GOAT level at disrupting passes and offensive sets. RAPM data for both (post-prime!!) Stockton and Ricky put their defense at a elite forward level.

Fragment of a note I have on Ricky:

Spoiler:

Impacto en defensa más próximo al de un alero All-D que al de un base:
(All-D small forward-like defensive impact:)

14-yr RAPM dataset:

Code: Select all

   
   Ricky:       +4.2 (1.3 / 2.9)
   Doug Christie:   +3.1 (0.1 / 3.1)
   P. George:      +4.1 (1.3 / 2.8)
   A. Iguodala:   +4.6 (1.7 / 2.8)
   R. Artest:      +4.4 (1.0 / 3.4)
   S. Battier:      +4.0 (1.3 / 2.8)

(Stockton averaging +2.0 DRAPM from '98 to '00)

Stockton was a good defender: like I said before and you did agree, he was great at covering passing lanes and gambling. However his man to man D was good but not elite. Not being elite doesn't mean he wasn't a very good defender. Maybe we have diferent definitetions of elite, it's a wide open concept.

Zeke vs Joe Dumars is like Jordan vs Pippen with smaller gap.

Jetzger wrote:

Quotatious wrote:As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

I think a big problem with those is that they're box score based metrics, and Dumars isn't a guy who gets good defensive box score stats. He didn't get steals very often, he blocked shots hardly ever, and he barely grabbed any defensive rebounds. His big rep on defense were his man capabilities, so while he shouldn't be overstated on defense because of the fact that help defense is more important than man, it's also hard to get an idea of his defense by looking at those particular metrics. RAPM from that era sure would be nice

As for the question, I think I would still take Isiah, but I think Dumars is closer than the general opinion would be. He's probably a better shooter than Isiah, he's a great playmaker as a shooting guard, and I'm willing to give him the defensive edge based on the rep and his size advantage until someone tells me I'm wrong. It's close enough for me that it really depends on the team. If I don't have a good lead guard, I think Isiah can make things happen to get the offense to maybe not a great level, but at least a good level. But if I have a comparable ball handler, I don't think Isiah would be willing to give over control of the offense so readily, which is why Dumars is a much better fit in that case. Isiah's still the better player in my opinion though, so most cases I would go with him.

Bumping an old thread while researching Joe Dumars and trying to get a gauge for how good he'd be in a modern system.

Watching film on his best days makes me believe he would be a great offensive player today as a second option. He was such a great ball handler and always attacked the outside food. He had sneaky quick athletic ability and his bank shot was money. He be an excellent spacer as well.

The defense is where I am really wondering if he was nearly as good as everyone makes him out to be and I think that was spot on when talked about in this thread. Would he be a solid man to man defender? Absolutely. I don't think he'd be anything special though and his impact was never positive. The request for RAPM data for his time in this comment I replied too is actually available:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140516221528/http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/

This is legit Engleman data.

Just check out the early 90s from 90-94 which was Joes peak outside of what he did in the late 80s. His RAPM is pretty terrible for the reputation he had. He was okay offensively but every time he would improve offensively his defensive RAPM would negate the impact. If you combine this with the DBPM and historical RAPTOR he's a terrible defender per these advanced metrics.

I still don't think he was or would be a terrible defender and the point made that his man to man defense is what gave him the rep makes sense but it's still not something you would except for someone with that reputation. I think Dumars defense has been blown way out of proportion because of one quote from Michael Jordan. Jordan also sang the praises of Jeff Malone, that should tell you something.

In today's game he would primarily be guarding point guards and I don't see him anywhere near peak Jrue Holiday level but still good enough to possibly make second team as a Derrick White like man defender if he got the chance.
On offense I think he'd be much better as a combo guard who could score on all three levels.

colts18 wrote:

Quotatious wrote:As overrated as Isiah sometimes gets, I think that he was better than Dumars. As mediocre as Zeke's advanced metrics are, Dumars' are even worse. I think that Joe gets overrated as a defender. He never had a positive DBPM in his career (I mean regular season). For someone who is supposedly an all-time great perimeter defender, that's really horrible. There's also a chance that BPM may not be a good stat (Kobe was a negative on defense for most of his career, too, and both Dumars/Bryant have terrific defensive reputation, all those All-Defensive selections and praise from other players/coaches), but I still believe there's something in it. His DWS are also poor. Definitely some food for thought, so if we assume that Dumars is overrated defensively, Thomas is IMO clearly superior on offense, which makes him the better overall player. Isiah had a few seasons in the mid 80s when he was pretty impressive statistically, definitely more impressive than Dumars' peak numbers.

Thomas was also better in the playoffs.

Stockton never had a positive DBPM either.

What are you even talking about? Stockton never had a NEGATIVE DBPM.

Exactly opposite what you claimed.

This is because Stockton was an excellent team defender who was basically a play maker on defense like Manu Ginobli. He was always getting steals and constantly making great help plays to create turnovers or blow up easy buckets.

It's his man to man defense where he was just average and struggled on any big strong player who took advantage of his size.

chrismikayla wrote:They were teammates and a great backcourt but which player would you take in a vacuum if you had to choose?

So, sorry, I'm going to focus on a meta bit here:

While I think we all know that Isiah was seen as the superstar and Dumars the sidekick, back when I got on the boards 20 years ago, there was some serious Dumars love. I don't believe there was ever a time where Dumars won a poll over Isiah for being the better player, it seemed like it used to really be a debate on people's minds... and then it was like the pull for people to praise Dumars just dissipated. It didn't come with people hating Dumars, it was more like people just weren't as drawn to champion him.

And I'll say:

I've always wondered if Dumars at the time having a midas touch as GM for the Pistons had a factor in that urge to champion him, and when he lost that shine, he lost the advocacy.

To the actual debate, I don't believe I've ever rated Dumars ahead of Isiah, but he certainly has strengths Isiah doesn't (off-ball play, 3-point shooting, man defense) which could make him a better fit particularly for eras that emphasize 3-point shooting, to say nothing of just general the better option to fill out a roster who doesn't have an on-ball star.

But in terms of who was more dangerous with the ball, I'd certainly say Isiah by a good margin.

Doctor MJ wrote:

chrismikayla wrote:They were teammates and a great backcourt but which player would you take in a vacuum if you had to choose?

So, sorry, I'm going to focus on a meta bit here:

While I think we all know that Isiah was seen as the superstar and Dumars the sidekick, back when I got on the boards 20 years ago, there was some serious Dumars love. I don't believe there was ever a time where Dumars won a poll over Isiah for being the better player, it seemed like it used to really be a debate on people's minds... and then it was like the pull for people to praise Dumars just dissipated. It didn't come with people hating Dumars, it was more like people just weren't as drawn to champion him.

And I'll say:

I've always wondered if Dumars at the time having a midas touch as GM for the Pistons had a factor in that urge to champion him, and when he lost that shine, he lost the advocacy.

To the actual debate, I don't believe I've ever rated Dumars ahead of Isiah, but he certainly has strengths Isiah doesn't (off-ball play, 3-point shooting, man defense) which could make him a better fit particularly for eras that emphasize 3-point shooting, to say nothing of just general the better option to fill out a roster who doesn't have an on-ball star.

But in terms of who was more dangerous with the ball, I'd certainly say Isiah by a good margin.

This makes me feel old but I remember those times and I probably had some pro-Dumars post. Agree with your assesment in the comparison of these two. A real interesting comparison is Laimbeer to both of em. He does get a bit under-credited for what he brought to the table given how loathsome and dispicable his style of play was.

Dumars is an elite second option but I prefer Zeke

I need to go back and watch some more of Dumars. On the surface he seems similar to Chauncey Billups. Strong defender can play on or off the ball, excellent shooter.

To answer the original OP...in a vacuum, you go with the better overall player. And even though Joe Dumars is one of my favorite players, I have to go with Isiah Thomas. But I echo what has already been said thus far. Dumars is the more well-rounded player and more portable in terms of adjusting to any team as he can fulfill many roles without hindering the alpha dogs.

Bwelc679 wrote:I still don't think he was or would be a terrible defender and the point made that his man to man defense is what gave him the rep makes sense but it's still not something you would except for someone with that reputation. I think Dumars defense has been blown way out of proportion because of one quote from Michael Jordan. Jordan also sang the praises of Jeff Malone, that should tell you something.

In today's game he would primarily be guarding point guards and I don't see him anywhere near peak Jrue Holiday level but still good enough to possibly make second team as a Derrick White like man defender if he got the chance.
On offense I think he'd be much better as a combo guard who could score on all three levels.

While I don't think he's on the level of Sidney Moncrief or Gary Payton, for example, I still do think he's an elite defender. True, MJ gave him major props, but I think he's earned that reputation. He's not the type of defender that lights up the individual or advanced stats. He's a great team defender who has great anticipation, strength and lateral quickness. The lateral quickness a big thing that allowed Dumars to stay in front of his man. Allan Houston mentioned this as well and that he (Dumars) was really good at tennis which translated to his defense. He's done well against bigger players like Magic Johnson, Clyde Drexler, Reggie Miller, etc. Jrue Holiday was always the one player today that Dumars was compared to overall, not just defense. He doesn't have Jrue' athleticism but I think Dumars was slightly better offensively. Different circumstances, but the 1989 Finals MVP...albiet, vs a depleted Lakers backcourt, is still an impressive feat. And he had a solid case being the best player that series unlike say, Iggy.

The difference between them on defense is probably overrated by Dumars guarding MJ. so this seems Isiah pretty handily.

Yeah we’re definitely going a little overboard on the Isiah Thomas skepticism. This is Isiah easily.

One thing I noticed from watching a lot of tape recently is how good Dumars is off ball zipping between picks and getting open for jumpers. His small size and quickness made him very tough to guard.

Still, this is Isiah pretty comfortably. His overall offensive talent is just miles ahead of Dumars although Joe was a fantastic defender. An all-time great on D who sometimes gets omitted from conversations he should be in.

Does Isiah winning a title as the best player on his team in college factor into this at all?