RealGM 2017 Top 100 #92 (Jack Sikma)

[dhsilv2]

Hoping we get one more vote before tomorrow morning which will eliminate the need for a lengthy 3-way runoff.

I'll change my alt to sikma if you can give me a good case for him over the 2 other bigs I listed. Just any meaningful separation. I fully went in hoping ot do that with my review of them and I left just unable to separate any of them. Sikma is the one I watched too little of so an good case for him could move me, what did I miss?

[SactoKingsFan]

Primary: Vlade Divac

One of the more underrated defensive bigs. Arguably a legit defensive anchor based on the RAPM data we have and prime DBPM. Wasn't known as a great rim protector but had a stretch during his prime as a good shot blocker. Divac was also a very good post defender, mobile enough to effectively defend the PnR, had active hands and was quite skilled at drawing offensive fouls.

On the offensive end Divac brought all-time great passing and vision, soft hands, good shooting range for a center and good low post scoring. Had the passing, vision and court awareness to frequently run the offense through the mid to high post. We also know Divac was a good leader and could be one of the most impactful players on a contender.

One of only 7 players with at least 13000 points, 9000 rebounds, 3000 assists and 1500 blocks. The others are Kareem, Garnett, Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem and P. Gasol. This shouldn't automatically bump Divac over other candidates, but it’s an indicator of his well-rounded skill set and good longevity.

Alt: Jack Sikma

For my secondary vote I could have gone with Mookie, Laimbeer or even Kemp. All have reasonable top 90ish cases but I'm giving Sikma the edge in total career value due to prime longevity. He was a high quality player for over a decade.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

[trex_8063]

Hoping we get one more vote before tomorrow morning which will eliminate the need for a lengthy 3-way runoff.

I'll change my alt to sikma if you can give me a good case for him over the 2 other bigs I listed. Just any meaningful separation. I fully went in hoping ot do that with my review of them and I left just unable to separate any of them. Sikma is the one I watched too little of so an good case for him could move me, what did I miss?

I ultimately don't know that I could clearly separate him from the other two for you (as it is relatively close), and I'm sort of rushing the following, but here goes....


In the broad strokes statistical comparison, I'd note [wrt the rate metrics] that Sikma played the largest mpg, Vlade the least:
Vlade: 17.7 PER, .137 WS/48, +3.3 BPM, +7 efficiency differential in 29.8 mpg
Laimbeer: 16.1 PER, .149 WS/48, +2.0 BPM , +11 efficiency differential in 31.8 mpg
Sikma: 17.3 PER, .146 WS/48, +2.5 BPM, +8 efficiency differential in 33.4 mpg

In terms of longevity, it's fairly close all around: Vlade has the most total seasons (Laimbeer the least, though obv not far behind), Vlade has the most total rs games (Laimbeer the least, but again not far back), total prime(ish) seasons/games is basically a wash between Vlade and Sikma (Laimbeer again the least), but total minutes played goes to Sikma (with Vlade and Laimbeer being basically equal); total prime minutes would also go to Sikma (with Laimbeer again the least). Where Vlade's total seasons are concerned, it's 16 on paper, but realistically just 15, as his final season was comprised of just 130 minutes of ineffectual play.
All three guys were at the very least relevant role players in all other seasons.

I'd rate longevity roughly like: Sikma=Vlade > Laimbeer

In terms of advanced metrics that sort of count longevity (WS and VORP).......
Sikma is a relatively close 2nd in VORP (Vlade is just 7.9% ahead) while being 16.7% ahead of Vlade in total WS. Sikma is ahead of Laimbeer in both VORP and WS (by a somewhat substantial margin in the former). If we took PER above replacement level (like PER=13 or thereabouts) multiplied by mpg or total minutes, Sikma would again come out just negligibly ahead of Vlade. So it seems like Sikma would have a marginal edge here.



Short version of player assessment.....
Defense
Sikma is the only one of the three with any defensive accolades (and soundly wins out in total awards/accolades, fwiw), but I feel defensively it's very close. Gun to my head, I probably give the marginal nod to Vlade for overall defense. Although not a great rim-protector, he probably provides the most presence of the three in that regard. He was also a savvy and attentive rotational team defender, and provided fairly decent pnr defense even into his later years (despite poor lateral quickness). An underrated defensive center overall. However, Vlade's also the weakest defensive rebounder of the three. All three appear [to me] to be fundamentally sound "box-out" guys (as opposed to chasing or cannibalizing boards), so I'm basing that straight off their defensive rebounding numbers, where Vlade is a clear third (Laimbeer and Sikma more or less tied).

Laimbeer was always a good physical post defender, good rotational team defender, and generally just a dirty player who theoretically could be in opponents' heads; as mentioned a good defensive rebounder, too.

Sikma also was an excellent low-post defender, very good defensive rebounder, decent rotational defender from my more limited eye test, and more or less equal to Laimbeer [which is to say somewhat mediocre] as a rim-protector. Forced the odd turnover more than Laimbeer, though.
All very close, imo.

Offense
Vlade's the best passing big man of the three, Laimbeer is the least effective distributor of the three.
Vlade and Laimbeer are roughly tied as the best offensive rebounders, with Sikma just a little behind.
Scoring is very close all around, but I'd give the small edge to Sikma here. Vlade and Laimbeer both averaged just marginally BELOW league average volume per 100 poss (20.2 for Vlade, 19.6 for Laimbeer), while Sikma averaged slightly above (at 22.3); all on fairly similar efficiency.
And then there's the floor spacing effect. Vlade was perhaps an "OK" mid-range shooting big, but not "good", and never did really extend his range to the 3pt line (or really even the deep 2's). Laimbeer and Sikma both did.....but Sikma did it better (and he did so despite being the earliest era player of the three, the ONLY one who came into the league before the existence of a 3pt line; and it was scarcely more than a gimmick for most of his career; so he was fairly ahead of his time in this regard). He's also the best of the three (for peak, prime, and career) in FT-shooting, too; all this sort of indicates he's the best floor-spacing big (with Vlade being a relatively distant third).


Some comments on era.....
I personally think strength of era is very close, and likely a negligible concern. Sikma entered the league a year after the merger and only had two seasons in the 70's (a decade often not well thought of), and the league only expanded by 1 team anywhere in his first 11 seasons (it would expand by 4 more teams over the next two season; but the bulk of his career was already over before then). It was likewise in his career that so many of the "all-time juggernaut" talents entered the league (he played the bulk of his career alongside FIVE of the top 10 (and NINE of the top 21) players on our list).

Vlade is the nearest to the "modern" era, but he's also the only one who played thru the weakened circa-2000 years. I label this era thus because all the old-guard of the 90's-----Jordan (and his one-time teammates Pippen, Grant, Rodman, fwiw), Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, Barkley, Stockton, Drexler, etc-----are declining or retiring/retired by the late 90's; and the next generation of superstars----Lebron, Wade, Duncan, Garnett, Bryant, Nowitzki, Nash, etc----were either not around yet or not quite (or barely) into their primes yet.
So there was a lull in top-shelf talent circa-2000, and meanwhile the league had expanded by two more teams in '96, somewhat diluting the average talent, too.

Laimbeer's career misses this talent lull of the late 90's, and he didn't play a minute in the "weakish" 70's. otoh, the late portion of his prime sees the rapid expansion from 23 teams to 27 teams (and he wins both his titles as this expansion is occurring, fwiw).

So idk; I don't think era is much of a distinguishing factor here.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #23:

Jack Sikma - 3 (Outside, trex_8063, pandrade83)
Tiny Archibald - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Mookie Blaylock - 1 (dhsilv2)
Vlade Divac - 1 (SactoKingsFan)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)


I guess we technically have to enter a runoff, and based on secondary votes, it'll have to be a 3-way runoff between Sikma, Tiny, and Mookie:

Jack Sikma - 4 (SactoKingsFan, Outside, trex_8063, pandrade83)
Tiny Archibald - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Mookie Blaylock - 1 (dhsilv2)


If your name isn't shown here, please state your pick between three three with reasons why. If it stays this un-close, I may conclude this one early.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

Obv no one had a strong opinion in this one. Moving on....