Vote
Reed I still don't feel there's any real interest in this vote, but I'll stick with it. Winning matters. I know some people will argue that it's situational, it's your teammates and that is true. That said I've seen plenty of players who appeared to be in a situation to win and they failed. They didn't get along with teammates as well as you'd like, they were too much about their numbers, etc etc. Reed wasn't that kind of player and that matters. I think everyone knows this and yet we still constantly under value it. Along with that leadership and intangible argument, Reed was one of the most complete players (and big men) we have left. He was a strong plus defender if you want to say elite or great or whatever, I'll leave that for someone else. His offense was better than the box score would tell you, bringing in a very decent jump shot that allowed floor spacing in a era before we really fully understood it as such. His peak is as good or better than nearly anyone left on the board. Yes, longevity is a concern and I'm not sure how to fairly value peaks vs career value add.
Alt
MANU GINOBILI Sorry, but you gotta scream his name, it's in a rules somewhere. I've had Iverson here, but after some of the threads on Manu, I've had to move him up. The big reason for this wasn't RAPM, VORP, BPM, 4 titles, his insane value at 35+, not international play... I am moving him up because I started looking at the spurs playoff runs. The spurs under Duncan lost in the first round 4 times. The first being 00 where Duncan missed the playoffs and Manu wasn't on the team. The second was 09 where Manu was injured and didn't play. The second was 11 where Manu by nearly every metric was the spur's best player, Manu missed game and was hobbled for the series, his numbers were great, and he hit about the most crazy clutch shot I can remember (Rex Chapman's 3 in phoenix is about the only shot I can think of I'd take over it), but I always felt had Manu been healthy and played game 1 the spurs find a way in that series. We should point out Duncan was horrible in that series but again had manu been 100% it would have opened the game up for Duncan a bit more. Then the spurs lost in 15 to the clippers in one of the weirder seeded playoffs of all time.
As for the counter to manu here, I completely dismiss the bench aspect of his career. I'll start with if you voted in McHale, Manu and him have very similar numbers of games started. The minutes concern is fair but that's why we are talking about Manu now and not 20 spots earlier. If you think RAPM has any value, then I'll leave you with these.
https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2 4th
https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm 8th
https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/xrapm-points-above-average-91-14 26th
Only the last one, and I have no idea how a 91-14 xRAPM works, but that is the only one that would rank anyone over manu who we don't have in yet. (Tmac plus some all time great defenders in wallace, Mutombo, and AK47).
If you don't care about those metrics VORP stands very strong in favor of Manu. Yes it would also like us to look at Ben Wallace (i see a pattern forming on him), Larry Nance, and Shawn Marion (who I'll be interested to see how the board judges). Of course the playoff's are left out of VORP and Manu's 213 playoff games (18% of his career games were in the playoffs).
I really want to get back to Iverson, especially against players like English, but the more I look over Manu vs the field the more I'm drawn to the absurd impact he had. If I have the choice between a volume scorer, a rim protector, or Manu...I'm taking Manu. There are only a few guys left who you win a title with if they're your best player unless you pair them with a killer number 2 or 3. Reed is absolutely one of them and so is Manu. After that we get into guys who'd need a good bit of luck, but would make your team relevant (and that matters too).
