Better peak - Jamaal Wilkes vs James Worthy

[70sFan]

A lot of people are very high on James Worthy but the more I watch 1980s Lakers, the more I feel that Wilkes was better all-around player than him. Much better shooter and smarter defender. Comparable finisher, though worse ISO player.

Who would you pick as the better player at their peaks?

[Goudelock]

I can see where you're coming from, but it's very difficult for me to not go with James Worthy. I feel like his better iso skills were more important to the team in the halfcourt, and I just feel like Worthy put more pressure on the defense on a consistent basis than Wilkes.

Their defensive skills seem to be on about the same tier to me, although I could see the case for Wilkes.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Worthy's drive was so good. Worthy was the first player that made me want to slow down the video and count his steps. He was the forerunner to LeBron in dribbling as little as the refs will let you get away with. But seeing as the refs were OK with how Worthy drove Worthy's driving was a fantastic weapon.

Worthy eventually became a good jump shooter. Worthy was bigger than Wilkes.
Worthy was reluctant to be a physical rebounder. Wilkes broke into the NBA as a physical undersisized power forward and then Wilkes turned into the less physical smoother Silk. I trust Silky Wilkes more to get the needed rebound than I trust Worthy to get the rebound.

I think Wilkes had the higher basketball IQ, better defensive instincts and more heart.

Still, the Worthy drive makes Worthy the better player even if Wilkes was better at everything else.

[JoeMalburg]

I'll take Worthy, but it's not unreasonable to prefer Wilkes.

I believe was Worthy was better relative to his competition and I think he played in a era where the talent pool was deeper.

For Wilkes peak prime years ('79-'83) I have him ranked 31, 18, 24, 23, 33
For Worthy's prime ('86-'90) I have him ranked 13, 11, 14, 13, 18

Wilkes was a borderline all-star and never made an all-NBA team. HE was a better defender by reputation than Worthy, but he was not elite in that regard.

Worthy made seven consecutive all-star teams and was a borderline all-NBA guy most seasons, making the third team twice. He was also a better fit for the Showtime fast break and I would say his transition and isolation scoring ability exceed any single skill Wilkes brought to the table.

[Jiminy Glick]

Wilkes, better defender and scoring is close.

[penbeast0]

I'm not sure Wilkes is a better defender than Worthy in that day and age. Worthy isn't as smart defensively, but makes up for it with his greater size and quickness and is a better post defender which matters a lot when both played a lot of 4 defensively for the team.

[Owly]

I'm not sure Wilkes is a better defender than Worthy in that day and age. Worthy isn't as smart defensively, but makes up for it with his greater size and quickness and is a better post defender which matters a lot when both played a lot of 4 defensively for the team.

Are we sure on better post defender and regarding playing the 4.

Wilkes would presumably have been the 4 (alongside Barry as forwards) when he collared his 2 All-Defensive awards and Hollander books refer to him as taking that defensive role.

[penbeast0]

Wilkes was surprisingly effective at a slender 6-6 but Worthy did a better job at establishing/denying position in the post which seemed the more key to me in that day and age.

[Cavsfansince84]

Worthy's drive was so good. Worthy was the first player that made me want to slow down the video and count his steps. He was the forerunner to LeBron in dribbling as little as the refs will let you get away with. But seeing as the refs were OK with how Worthy drove Worthy's driving was a fantastic weapon.

Worthy eventually became a good jump shooter. Worthy was bigger than Wilkes.
Worthy was reluctant to be a physical rebounder. Wilkes broke into the NBA as a physical undersisized power forward and then Wilkes turned into the less physical smoother Silk. I trust Silky Wilkes more to get the needed rebound than I trust Worthy to get the rebound.

I think Wilkes had the higher basketball IQ, better defensive instincts and more heart.

Still, the Worthy drive makes Worthy the better player even if Wilkes was better at everything else.

Worthy always came across as a pretty intense competitor though. He was a guy who you sort of knew was going to raise his game in the playoffs or make some big baskets.

[penbeast0]

...Wilkes broke into the NBA as a physical undersisized power forward and then Wilkes turned into the less physical smoother Silk....

I think Silk was his college nickname but yes, Worthy had the PF body but the wing mentality.

[TheBomb81]

Worthy.

[trex_8063]

I gotta go with Worthy. Big Game James was a much underrated defender, imo hardly behind Wilkes in this regard, while being a significantly better offensive player.

The statistical comparison is clearly in Worthy's favour, and his prime WOWYR is better, fwiw.

[Owly]

Worthy's drive was so good. Worthy was the first player that made me want to slow down the video and count his steps. He was the forerunner to LeBron in dribbling as little as the refs will let you get away with. But seeing as the refs were OK with how Worthy drove Worthy's driving was a fantastic weapon.

Worthy eventually became a good jump shooter. Worthy was bigger than Wilkes.
Worthy was reluctant to be a physical rebounder. Wilkes broke into the NBA as a physical undersisized power forward and then Wilkes turned into the less physical smoother Silk. I trust Silky Wilkes more to get the needed rebound than I trust Worthy to get the rebound.

I think Wilkes had the higher basketball IQ, better defensive instincts and more heart.

Still, the Worthy drive makes Worthy the better player even if Wilkes was better at everything else.

Worthy always came across as a pretty intense competitor though. He was a guy who you sort of knew was going to raise his game in the playoffs or make some big baskets.

I'd be inclined to debate one implicit point and caveat another.

For the most part I'm inclined to think those who raise their game in the playoffs are, on average, less intense. Certainly not bringing night-to-night intensity is one way of getting higher playoff numbers (arguably Tim Thomas, Jerome James, Derrick Coleman apply here).

Insofar as raised game in the playoffs (insofar as discussing output rather than a feeling that a player would) the 80s Lakers playoff stats are somewhat inflated by playing atypically low competition in the West.

[Colbinii]

Worthy's drive was so good. Worthy was the first player that made me want to slow down the video and count his steps. He was the forerunner to LeBron in dribbling as little as the refs will let you get away with. But seeing as the refs were OK with how Worthy drove Worthy's driving was a fantastic weapon.

Worthy eventually became a good jump shooter. Worthy was bigger than Wilkes.
Worthy was reluctant to be a physical rebounder. Wilkes broke into the NBA as a physical undersisized power forward and then Wilkes turned into the less physical smoother Silk. I trust Silky Wilkes more to get the needed rebound than I trust Worthy to get the rebound.

I think Wilkes had the higher basketball IQ, better defensive instincts and more heart.

Still, the Worthy drive makes Worthy the better player even if Wilkes was better at everything else.

Worthy always came across as a pretty intense competitor though. He was a guy who you sort of knew was going to raise his game in the playoffs or make some big baskets.

I'd be inclined to debate one implicit point and caveat another.

For the most part I'm inclined to think those who raise their game in the playoffs are, on average, less intense. Certainly not bringing night-to-night intensity is one way of getting higher playoff numbers (arguably Tim Thomas, Jerome James, Derrick Coleman apply here).

Insofar as raised game in the playoffs (insofar as discussing output rather than a feeling that a player would) the 80s Lakers playoff stats are somewhat inflated by playing atypically low competition in the West.

It should be worth (no pun intended) noting Worthy didn't actually raise his numbers come post-season.

1986-1991 RS: 19.0 PER, .159 WS/48, 3.0 BPM
1986-1991 PS: 18.5 PER, .130 WS/48m 3.1 BPM

As you noted Worthy's best runs were in 87/88/89 where he faced a plethora of bad defenses.
1987: 3 teams with Drtg > 110
1988: 112.8 Defense with the rest of the teams being solid defensively.
1989: 2 bad defensive teams, swept in finals

It should also be worth noting that Worthy wasnt a particularly good defender; in fact he was a poor defender.

[Owly]

I gotta go with Worthy. Big Game James was a much underrated defender, imo hardly behind Wilkes in this regard, while being a significantly better offensive player.

The statistical comparison is clearly in Worthy's favour, and his prime WOWYR is better, fwiw.

Just on D, on the limited info available Wilkes has a clear advantage.

Worthy was more solid, above average ranging up towards good, and verstile - this in his prime, weaker with his overall game later, thought I'd quoted the Barry guides on here before in similar discussions but can't find it ("solid" and "underrated" from the version published in '89, and versatile though also "not a stopper").

Wilkes gets "polished defensive player" from Hollander immediately after being drafted. "No more astute defensive young player" after year two, and in the team section one of a group (with Charles Dudley, Phil Smith) that play strong aggressive intelligent defense". Year three "has shown scrapiness and willingness on defense". Noted with Jabbar and Don Chaney as the group that don't typically struggle. Skeptical of him in year 4 (though they also target, among others Ron Boone but not Dantley ... doesn't match typical reps) injuries and team instability make for a washout of year. Hmm, next year again perceived as disappointing. Thereafter ... " a tough defender", "an exceptional defender", "an outstanding defensive player" [and in the team section "top-caliber" as a defender], " a very underrated defensive player" and "do[es] the job quietly".

Whilst the negative (review) years had really made an impression before between the awards and these my impression Wilkes is more confidently "good" with some upside (though possibly some more downside or just non-impact on a weaker or worse fitting team than I'd previously thought).

[Colbinii]

I gotta go with Worthy. Big Game James was a much underrated defender, imo hardly behind Wilkes in this regard, while being a significantly better offensive player.

The statistical comparison is clearly in Worthy's favour, and his prime WOWYR is better, fwiw.

Just on D, on the limited info available Wilkes has a clear advantage.

Worthy was more solid, above average ranging up towards good, and verstile - this in his prime, weaker with his overall game later, thought I'd quoted the Barry guides on here before in similar discussions but can't find it ("solid" and "underrated" from the version published in '89, and versatile though also "not a stopper").

Wilkes gets "polished defensive player" from Hollander immediately after being drafted. "No more astute defensive young player" after year two, and in the team section one of a group (with Charles Dudley, Phil Smith) that play strong aggressive intelligent defense". Year three "has shown scrapiness and willingness on defense". Noted with Jabbar and Don Chaney as the group that don't typically struggle. Skeptical of him in year 4 (though they also target, among others Ron Boone but not Dantley ... doesn't match typical reps) injuries and team instability make for a washout of year. Hmm, next year again perceived as disappointing. Thereafter ... " a tough defender", "an exceptional defender", "an outstanding defensive player" [and in the team section "top-caliber" as a defender], " a very underrated defensive player" and "do[es] the job quietly".

Whilst the negative (review) years had really made an impression before between the awards and these my impression Wilkes is more confidently "good" with some upside (though possibly some more downside or just non-impact on a weaker or worse fitting team than I'd previously thought).

What makes Worthy a solid to good defender?

[70sFan]

Worthy always came across as a pretty intense competitor though. He was a guy who you sort of knew was going to raise his game in the playoffs or make some big baskets.

I'd be inclined to debate one implicit point and caveat another.

For the most part I'm inclined to think those who raise their game in the playoffs are, on average, less intense. Certainly not bringing night-to-night intensity is one way of getting higher playoff numbers (arguably Tim Thomas, Jerome James, Derrick Coleman apply here).

Insofar as raised game in the playoffs (insofar as discussing output rather than a feeling that a player would) the 80s Lakers playoff stats are somewhat inflated by playing atypically low competition in the West.

It should be worth (no pun intended) noting Worthy didn't actually raise his numbers come post-season.

1986-1991 RS: 19.0 PER, .159 WS/48, 3.0 BPM
1986-1991 PS: 18.5 PER, .130 WS/48m 3.1 BPM

As you noted Worthy's best runs were in 87/88/89 where he faced a plethora of bad defenses.
1987: 3 teams with Drtg > 110
1988: 112.8 Defense with the rest of the teams being solid defensively.
1989: 2 bad defensive teams, swept in finals

It should also be worth noting that Worthy wasnt a particularly good defender; in fact he was a poor defender.

Worthy was a poor defender? I strongly disagree with that opinion.

[penbeast0]

What makes Worthy a solid to good defender?

First off, his physical abilities. He had quick feet and good lateral movement and had a good base in team defense from playing under Dean Smith at North Carolina. He wasn't as polished or aware as Wilkes but probably better as a post defender when shifting to the 4 with his superior size and wider body. His main weakness, even as a 3, is his poor defensive rebounding but he did box out which helped his teammates. I would rate him an above average defensive 3 from what I saw.

[Owly]

I gotta go with Worthy. Big Game James was a much underrated defender, imo hardly behind Wilkes in this regard, while being a significantly better offensive player.

The statistical comparison is clearly in Worthy's favour, and his prime WOWYR is better, fwiw.

Just on D, on the limited info available Wilkes has a clear advantage.

Worthy was more solid, above average ranging up towards good, and verstile - this in his prime, weaker with his overall game later, thought I'd quoted the Barry guides on here before in similar discussions but can't find it ("solid" and "underrated" from the version published in '89, and versatile though also "not a stopper").

Wilkes gets "polished defensive player" from Hollander immediately after being drafted. "No more astute defensive young player" after year two, and in the team section one of a group (with Charles Dudley, Phil Smith) that play strong aggressive intelligent defense". Year three "has shown scrapiness and willingness on defense". Noted with Jabbar and Don Chaney as the group that don't typically struggle. Skeptical of him in year 4 (though they also target, among others Ron Boone but not Dantley ... doesn't match typical reps) injuries and team instability make for a washout of year. Hmm, next year again perceived as disappointing. Thereafter ... " a tough defender", "an exceptional defender", "an outstanding defensive player" [and in the team section "top-caliber" as a defender], " a very underrated defensive player" and "do[es] the job quietly".

Whilst the negative (review) years had really made an impression before between the awards and these my impression Wilkes is more confidently "good" with some upside (though possibly some more downside or just non-impact on a weaker or worse fitting team than I'd previously thought).

What makes Worthy a solid to good defender?

Well, as I ever I trust my own "eye test" basically not at all. How I got to that is from what I've heard, mainly the Hollander Yearbooks and Rick Barry Scouting Reports. The Barry reports (AAA to D to grade all players in the league) put him A after '89, B after '90, A after '91, B after #92 (all his grades his year seem a touch generous). "

As to what about him was good the version after the '90 season lists "long arms, quickness and jumping ability" as his assets (though if he was reasonably smart defensively and trying, which I think he was, and he was that great in the any of the above they'd have rated him considerably higher than a B). Next year it's "length, quickness and willingness to deny the ball" and again notes covering 2s and a good job on Mullin in the playoffs.

Versatility in managing to defend down a position (to SG) to accommodate Magic is a plus (or a mitigating factor depending on perspective).

One might also interpret his his competition at SF in the 80s in one of 2 ways. Given most of the big name at 3 in the 80s (bar Marques and Bird) were fairly poor defenders, you might either see Worthy as a huge upgrade/advantage in that regard, or see him as benefiting from being graded on a generous curve.

[penbeast0]

...
One might also interpret his his competition at SF in the 80s in one of 2 ways. Given most of the big name at 3 in the 80s (bar Marques and Bird) were fairly poor defenders, you might either see Worthy as a huge upgrade/advantage in that regard, or see him as benefiting from being graded on a generous curve.

You think Bird was a better defender at the 3 (or worse, covering 2's) than Alex English? I always thought English was an underrated defender; not as strong or physical as Marques but appreciably quicker than Bird and much more willing to put in effort on that end than King, Aquirre, or Dantley.