RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 (Moses Malone)

Moderators: Doctor MJ, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Quotatious, Clyde Frazier, trex_8063

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,092
And1: 5,074
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 (Moses Malone) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:30 am

2020 List
1. LeBron James
2. Michael Jordan
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Bill Russell
5. Tim Duncan
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Magic Johnson
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Larry Bird
11. Kevin Garnett
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Jerry West
14. Oscar Robertson
15. Dirk Nowitzki
16. Karl Malone
17. David Robinson
18. Julius Erving
19. George Mikan
20. ???

This one will conclude somewhere around 6pm EST on Monday (don't wait to the last second guys; the EXACT stop time is somewhat dictated by when I have time to get to it amidst real-life stuff).

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

Cavsfansince84 wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

DQuinn1575 wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dutchball97 wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

Franco wrote:.

freethedevil wrote:.

Gregoire wrote:.

Hal14 wrote:.

HeartBreakKid wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

Joey Wheeler wrote:.

Jordan Syndrome wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

lebron3-14-3 wrote:.

limbo wrote:.

Magic Is Magic wrote:.

Matzer wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Odinn21 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

O_6 wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

PistolPeteJR wrote:.

RSCD3_ wrote:.

[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]
Senior wrote:.

SeniorWalker wrote:.

SHAQ32 wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

Tim Lehrbach wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

Whopper_Sr wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

876Stephen wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin
Jordan Syndrome
Rookie
Posts: 1,213
And1: 943
Joined: Jun 29, 2020
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#2 » by Jordan Syndrome » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:40 am

It is rather fitting that a current player is #1 and the oldest player is #20.
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 11,912
And1: 4,799
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#3 » by Joao Saraiva » Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:19 am

Votes
Moses Malone
Kevin Durant
Steph Curry


I'll start saying Moses has very good longevity, with 13 seasons I consider him a star in the league.

Definitely one of the faces of the league in the late 70s and early 80s, he was an offensive force. Both his scoring and offensive rebounding were very good, and given the way the game was played back then it made him a major offensive weapon.

On defensive he could have been better, but during his best years he was still a good player in that regard.

Good playoff performer overall, even tough not as consistent as Dr. J (and that's why I gave Doc my vote on the last thread), more longevity than KD, and an historic part of the team 83 team when he won the ring. For a team to show domination like they did it has something to do with him and Dr. J definitely being great players. I give them a ton of credit for coexisting and making that super historic run.

Had Moses been a better playmaker than he was and I'd consider giving him a top 15 spot. Since he wasn't, I feel top 20 is about right for him for now. Can see Steph and KD taking his spot once he we redo this proejct again.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
Odinn21
Starter
Posts: 2,186
And1: 1,612
Joined: May 19, 2019
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#4 » by Odinn21 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:41 am

20. Moses Malone
I believe this will be my most controversial choice so far but I'm pretty confident in this pick.
His single season peak was tier 2 on overall for me. I'd put 1982 or 1983 Moses in the same tier as 2004 Garnett, even though I'd rate Garnett slightly higher. One of the things going for Moses though, his 3 season peak from 1980-81 to 1982-83 is definitely at the top level among the available names. He does not come short in peak, extended peak, prime and extended prime for me. His career resume is also massive.
He was one of the most skilled bigs on offense. His name rarely comes up among the best low post scorers but he literally had every move in his book and he was at least pretty good on some and great or best on most. Look at the players he thought; Hakeem Olajuwon and Charles Barkley. Also he was at least as good as old man Duncan from mid range.
The arguments against him usually go such as this;
- "He wouldn't be that good in the modern times which utilize PnR far more."
Portability is very important, yes. But, TBH, this is like saying Oscar Robertson did not shoot enough threes to me. Don't see the point of penalizing a player for a play style that was not there in his time.
Also, one of the things that gets easily overlooked while thinking about Moses' portability is that he's quite possibly the greatest foul drawing big. That would make wonders in any era. I don't have the exact numbers right now because BBRef made their play index service paid but I know that Moses Malone before fell out of his prime made young Hakeem Olajuwon fouled out in majority of their h2h games. I wrote the exact numbers in the past on the forum, if I find, I'll edit this part.
- "He was a negative impact on defense."
This is flat out wrong and it's not about some preference unlike the previous point. If Moses Malone was a negative impact on defense, then how did the Sixers improved on defense after losing their best defender in order to get Moses?
1982 Sixers; 7th in DRtg with -3.0 rDRtg
1983 Sixers; 5th in DRtg with -3.8 rDRtg
The thing about his defense was, he was inconsistent. He had bad defensive seasons and good defensive seasons, in the end both sides would cancel out each other and I'd put down Moses Malone as an average defender. But I never get the point of talking about him as if he was Nowitzki who got way more traction than him so far.
- "He was not an impact player."
This is also one of the wrong assumptions about him. I think I watched enough games of him to get the sense of a very positive impact player.
Also there was a Dipper 13 thread at the time, showing on/off Rtg numbers for the '80s Sixers. I'm looking for that, couldn't find it so far. If anyone has the link, it'd be appreciated.
Edit; Found it.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZxRM9p2dFil5w6s21VEB4HnQZJymEY8_2vej-jREuUo/edit#gid=459687126
Just look at the numbers he had in '83 and '85 in Philly. (I tend to consider 1984 of Moses as something like 2005 for Bryant, a down year but also an outlier.)

The only aspect I'd hold against him is his passing. He was not a black hole, he was a decent facilitator. Though his passing lacked in some sense and you wouldn't see him those cutting passes to a guard under the basket. That type of stuff was the only major gap in his game for me.
His skillset was great, his scoring volume was great, he had the proper impact on offense, he's among one of the greatest rebounders. We usually overlook rebounding, the neutral aspect of the game, in this offense and defense evaluations. His defensive inconsistencies and passing issues are there to be addressed surely but, his great qualities are enough for me to put him on 14th spot.

Note: I have been voting for Malone since the #12 thread for the #14 spot.

21. Charles Barkley
I think we're getting to the part, long prime duration and overall longevity are luxuries to have at the same time.
The player pool I have for this spot;
Barkley, Wade, Curry, Durant, Pettit (and maybe Ewing but probably not)
As I stated many times before, peak, average prime quality, prime duration, overall longevity, intangibles and career resume are my criteria.
We can beat a dead horse about peak, but I'd rate Barkley at the top for average prime quality and prime duration. His intangibles were quite problematic but it's not enough to force one of the other 4 ahead of him.

I think Barkley's quality / average prime level are underrated.
I don't like making a case based BBRef profile pages but I want to highlight consistency (bar 1992) from 1988 to 1993.
[I'll use very old Eff in there too because I think unweighted data is also important.]

Regular season;
26.5 pts 11.7 reb 4.1 ast 1.6 stl 0.9 blk 3.3 tov on .587 efg .642 ts
31.9 eff per game (40.9 eff per 100), 27.3 per, 0.254 ws/48, 7.3 obpm
https://i.imgur.com/cwRfYKp.png
Just look at this. This is insane consistency. Especially on offense. His defensive performance in these seasons were average. Not bad. Actually, I'd go on a limb and would say Barkley was slightly positive impact in 1993 Phoenix Suns where he did not have to create and carry an offense as hard as he did in Philadelphia.

His unweighted eff data is also very consistent.
From 1988 to 1993, his eff per game; 32.5, 32.7, 31.7, 30.8 and 31.8
From 1988 to 1993, his eff per 100; 41.1, 40.7, 40.4, 41.5 and 40.7

These are for his +/- data in Philadelphia;
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1344019
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZxRM9p2dFil5w6s21VEB4HnQZJymEY8_2vej-jREuUo/edit#gid=1421792540

I'm never one to use MVP as the best player award. However, in Barkley's case I think the results he got should be mentioned because 1990 and 1993 were among the top competitions for the award.
In 1990, he got the most 1st place votes when Jordan and Magic were still in their MVP competition seasons. (What I mean is, something like James in 2009-2013 time frame and James after 2013) Barkley arguably should've won the award considering he was denied by hate.
In 1993, it was Jordan and Olajuwon.
I'm not saying he got the MVP and he should be way up. What I mean will be in italics after.

Jordan, Magic and Olajuwon made the top 10 in this project. And Barkley came really really close to them. Even in Retro PotY project which had postseasons under consideration as well, Olajuwon and Barkley were neck on neck. (Olajuwon 0.652 vs. Barkley 0.570 share)
One way to go from there; Barkley was better in 1990 and Olajuwon was not that better in 1994 compared to 1993. I'm not saying this as Barkley was better than Olajuwon. Barkley's prime level was insane. He kept it up with peak/near peak Jordan (and Magic/Olajuwon) better than Curry and Durant kept it up with James.

Barkley was also more durable than Curry and Durant, and his postseason resilience was significantly better. Wade's postseason resilience was on par with Barkley but Barkley has him beat in prime duration and overall longevity.

22. Bob Pettit
I initially thought about this spot between Wade, Durant, Curry (then Ewing, Paul and Nash). Wade was coming ahead. Then remembered Pettit's existence and I think the more modern names ain't beating him for me.
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 6,914
And1: 2,584
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#5 » by colts18 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Stockton has to start being discussed in this range. His statistical profile


All-time Ranks:
Minutes 11th
Games Played 5th
Assists 1st
Steals 1st
BPM 8th
VORP 3rd
Win Shares 6th
WS/48 11th
TS% 15th
O Rating 5th

The most impressive stat for Stockton is finishing in the Top 10 of BPM 17 times, most in NBA history. The man played 82 games in 17 out of his 19 seasons in the league.
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 11,912
And1: 4,799
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#6 » by Joao Saraiva » Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:52 am

colts18 wrote:Stockton has to start being discussed in this range. His statistical profile


All-time Ranks:
Minutes 11th
Games Played 5th
Assists 1st
Steals 1st
BPM 8th
VORP 3rd
Win Shares 6th
WS/48 11th
TS% 15th
O Rating 5th

The most impressive stat for Stockton is finishing in the Top 10 of BPM 17 times, most in NBA history. The man played 82 games in 17 out of his 19 seasons in the league.


Well, I'm a big fan of Stockton, he and Malone were my idols when I started watching and they're the reasons I am a fan of Utah.

How do you feel about Stockton vs Curry and Kevin Durant? Because I feel Stockton doesn't fall in the same range as far as a #1 option on a team as those two... hard for me to ignore that. However, I believe he is the 2nd best playmaker of all time, a fantastic PG distributing the ball under any circumstances... I'd say he's the #2 playmaker of all time right behind Magic. Yes I feel he's ahead of Paul and Nash.

I'm also high on Stockton's defense. I wouldn't say he's the GOAT PG in that regard since I have 4-5 ahead of him in that department, but he was tough and should be in consideration as a positive guy in that regard. And for a long time, he was still good on D in his later years...

Too much longevity vs KD and Steph? Is that still possible to consider here?
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
Odinn21
Starter
Posts: 2,186
And1: 1,612
Joined: May 19, 2019
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#7 » by Odinn21 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:54 am

colts18 wrote:Stockton has to start being discussed in this range. His statistical profile


All-time Ranks:
Minutes 11th
Games Played 5th
Assists 1st
Steals 1st
BPM 8th
VORP 3rd
Win Shares 6th
WS/48 11th
TS% 15th
O Rating 5th

The most impressive stat for Stockton is finishing in the Top 10 of BPM 17 times, most in NBA history. The man played 82 games in 17 out of his 19 seasons in the league.

No, he doesn't.

Odinn21 wrote:
colts18 wrote:Stoton wasn't that bad in the playoffs. He lead the playoffs in Assists per game 10 different times. His BPM is 6.01, 16th all-time (Zeke is 17th). His Playoff VORP is 10th all-time. During his prime years of 1988-1997, He averaged 16-12-4, 57.4 TS%, 2 stl, 6.6 BPM. Those are pretty good numbers.

Stockton's obpm change from regular season to playoffs was below the average range as I said.
His performances against good or better than good defenses were not good.

The Jazz did not face a -2.0 or better defense in the playoffs until 1990, so I'll start from there. From 1990 to 1997, Stockton against -2.0 or better defenses in the playoffs;
14.5/3.4/11.2/1.7 and 3.0 tpg on .559 ts (73 games)

Considering he was 15.5/2.9/12.6/2.4 and 3.3 tpg on .616 ts in regular seasons in that time frame, and 14.7/3.4/11.3/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .566 ts in playoffs on overall; yeah, Stockton's postseason resilience was not good.

In the series Stockton faced proper positional competition directly, such as 1993/1996 Sonics series or 1991/1992 Blazers series, he was 13.5/3.3/11.7/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .545 ts (44 games).

Surely Stockton was still a good player to have. Doesn't mean he was a good playoff performer. He struggled to keep his scoring and efficiency on that volume. Come on...

You did not address any of these.

People like to point out as Malone benefited from Stockton. And sure he did. But let's not overreact / overcorrect Stockton's situation because he benefited more from Malone's scoring volume.
As you can see, Stockton struggled at 15 ppg volume. And his offensive impact, his ability to create offense was not something like Nash's one. Or hid defensive impact was not Kidd-like or Frazier-like. He did not make for that struggle on scoring in other departments.

Would you vote next Artis Gilmore and Elvin Hayes because they have massive career totals?
Moses Malone is 3rd in rebounds and 9th in points. Yet he'll make #20 or #21.

You're shaping your criteria around your opinion. It should be the other way around.
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 6,914
And1: 2,584
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#8 » by colts18 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 2:32 am

Odinn21 wrote:
colts18 wrote:Stockton has to start being discussed in this range. His statistical profile


All-time Ranks:
Minutes 11th
Games Played 5th
Assists 1st
Steals 1st
BPM 8th
VORP 3rd
Win Shares 6th
WS/48 11th
TS% 15th
O Rating 5th

The most impressive stat for Stockton is finishing in the Top 10 of BPM 17 times, most in NBA history. The man played 82 games in 17 out of his 19 seasons in the league.

No, he doesn't.

Odinn21 wrote:
colts18 wrote:Stoton wasn't that bad in the playoffs. He lead the playoffs in Assists per game 10 different times. His BPM is 6.01, 16th all-time (Zeke is 17th). His Playoff VORP is 10th all-time. During his prime years of 1988-1997, He averaged 16-12-4, 57.4 TS%, 2 stl, 6.6 BPM. Those are pretty good numbers.

Stockton's obpm change from regular season to playoffs was below the average range as I said.
His performances against good or better than good defenses were not good.

The Jazz did not face a -2.0 or better defense in the playoffs until 1990, so I'll start from there. From 1990 to 1997, Stockton against -2.0 or better defenses in the playoffs;
14.5/3.4/11.2/1.7 and 3.0 tpg on .559 ts (73 games)

Considering he was 15.5/2.9/12.6/2.4 and 3.3 tpg on .616 ts in regular seasons in that time frame, and 14.7/3.4/11.3/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .566 ts in playoffs on overall; yeah, Stockton's postseason resilience was not good.

In the series Stockton faced proper positional competition directly, such as 1993/1996 Sonics series or 1991/1992 Blazers series, he was 13.5/3.3/11.7/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .545 ts (44 games).

Surely Stockton was still a good player to have. Doesn't mean he was a good playoff performer. He struggled to keep his scoring and efficiency on that volume. Come on...

You did not address any of these.

People like to point out as Malone benefited from Stockton. And sure he did. But let's not overreact / overcorrect Stockton's situation because he benefited more from Malone's scoring volume.
As you can see, Stockton struggled at 15 ppg volume. And his offensive impact, his ability to create offense was not something like Nash's one. Or hid defensive impact was not Kidd-like or Frazier-like. He did not make for that struggle on scoring in other departments.

Would you vote next Artis Gilmore and Elvin Hayes because they have massive career totals?
Moses Malone is 3rd in rebounds and 9th in points. Yet he'll make #20 or #21.

You're shaping your criteria around your opinion. It should be the other way around.


1st off, those numbers against -2.0 defenses is still good. We would expect him to drop off in the playoffs vs good defense. It's natural. It happens to all of the greats including MJ and LeBron. Stockton is suffering from a case of Robinsonitis. David Robinson too dropped off in the playoffs. He was unfairly maligned by being compared to his other worldly regular season standards. If you compared his playoff production to the other greats, he was fine. It's the same with Stockton.

And your proper positional competition numbers are laughable. You include freakin Terry Porter, a career 0 All-NBA teams, but do not include Kevin Johnson, 5 career all-NBA teams. Stockton completely outplayed Johnson the two years in the playoffs they faced off each other including straight up murdering him in 1991. And your numbers do not even include 1992 when Stockton was destroying Gary Payton. And if you are going to Terry Porter, you might as well include Rod Strickland who was 18/9 player that Stockton outplayed.

Not to mention your positional numbers suffers from an endpoint bias. It doesn't include 1988, when Stockton destroyed the same Terry Porter you were touting earlier. How about John Stockton outplaying Prime Magic Johnson in 1988?

Stockton's playoff performances were fine. He wasn't at the same level he was in the playoffs, but he was still a great playoff player (10th in career playoff VORP).
WestGOAT
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,430
And1: 1,852
Joined: Dec 20, 2015

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#9 » by WestGOAT » Sun Nov 22, 2020 2:45 am

I managed to scrape regular and post-season miscellaneous team stats from basketball-reference, and decided to plot and compare the team playoff ORtg for IT, Stockton, and Nash. I have added tables below as well. I did this for all the post-season teams, so this can be a nice resource for those who are interested. I never realized myself how good the late 80's Hawks were on offense, for example. Mind you I did this a bit automated, so there could be some mistakes.

Anyway I think the graphs speak for themselves, safe to say the Pistons(1985-1990) and the Suns(2005-2010) were better offensively than the Jazz(1988-1993). How much credit/fault you want to give the respective PG's is up to your discretion of course, but these stats did not change my mind on Stockton.

Thomas, team ranking: [4,8,5,11,4,8], average: 6.66.
Above average in the playoffs. Definitely better than the Jazz. For having relatively low TS%, it didn't seem like his team suffered from it too much.

Stockton, team ranking: [9,13,10,9,4,14], average: 9.83.
Underwhelming for his and Malone's reputation. Once again how valuable is an individual's high TS% on low volume if the rest of the team is meh?

Nash, team ranking : [1,2,2,12,nan,1], average: 3.6.
Finishing top 2, 4 out of 5 post-seasons, is pretty insane.
Dragged down by the 2008 performance. Also, how heavily do you penalize him for missing the playoffs in 2009? Still very impressive numbers.

Image
Image
Image



Absolute and relative ORtg for each team for the 1985-1993 playoffs:
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

             Team         Year   ORtg   Orank
0       Los Angeles Lakers  1985  117.0    1.0
12        Dallas Mavericks  1985  115.5    2.0
5   Portland Trail Blazers  1985  111.8    3.0
4          Detroit Pistons  1985  111.7    4.0
2           Denver Nuggets  1985  111.6    5.0
1           Boston Celtics  1985  111.3    6.0
11     Cleveland Cavaliers  1985  110.5    7.0
7          Milwaukee Bucks  1985  109.5    8.0
10           Chicago Bulls  1985  108.2    9.0
3       Philadelphia 76ers  1985  107.8   10.0
15            Phoenix Suns  1985  105.8   11.0
9        San Antonio Spurs  1985  105.3   12.0
13      Washington Bullets  1985  105.0   13.0
14         New Jersey Nets  1985  104.6   14.0
6                Utah Jazz  1985  103.6   15.0
8          Houston Rockets  1985  100.2   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
2       Los Angeles Lakers  1986  115.6    1.0
0           Boston Celtics  1986  115.0    2.0
5         Dallas Mavericks  1986  114.4    3.0
4       Philadelphia 76ers  1986  111.4    4.0
1          Houston Rockets  1986  110.7    5.0
11               Utah Jazz  1986  110.1    6.0
3          Milwaukee Bucks  1986  109.8    7.0
9          Detroit Pistons  1986  109.6    8.0
7            Atlanta Hawks  1986  109.1    9.0
10  Portland Trail Blazers  1986  108.7   10.0
6           Denver Nuggets  1986  108.2   11.0
12           Chicago Bulls  1986  108.0   12.0
13         New Jersey Nets  1986  107.0   13.0
8       Washington Bullets  1986  104.8   14.0
14        Sacramento Kings  1986  102.0   15.0
15       San Antonio Spurs  1986   91.0   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
0       Los Angeles Lakers  1987  119.9    1.0
4          Milwaukee Bucks  1987  115.3    2.0
1           Boston Celtics  1987  114.7    3.0
10        Dallas Mavericks  1987  114.3    4.0
2          Detroit Pistons  1987  113.9    5.0
8       Philadelphia 76ers  1987  111.6    6.0
5          Houston Rockets  1987  110.4    7.0
3      Seattle Supersonics  1987  110.3    8.0
12  Portland Trail Blazers  1987  109.9    9.0
6            Atlanta Hawks  1987  109.4   10.5
13           Chicago Bulls  1987  109.4   10.5
7    Golden State Warriors  1987  108.5   12.0
9                Utah Jazz  1987  105.1   13.0
11          Indiana Pacers  1987  103.9   14.0
14          Denver Nuggets  1987   99.8   15.0
15      Washington Bullets  1987   92.2   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
4            Atlanta Hawks  1988  115.7    1.0
10     Seattle Supersonics  1988  114.9    2.0
2         Dallas Mavericks  1988  114.7    3.0
0       Los Angeles Lakers  1988  114.1    4.0
9          Milwaukee Bucks  1988  113.7    5.0
6           Denver Nuggets  1988  111.7    6.0
3           Boston Celtics  1988  110.1    7.0
12         Houston Rockets  1988  109.7    8.0
5                Utah Jazz  1988  108.7    9.0
8      Cleveland Cavaliers  1988  108.0   10.0
1          Detroit Pistons  1988  107.6   11.0
11      Washington Bullets  1988  105.9   12.0
13         New York Knicks  1988  105.2   13.0
15       San Antonio Spurs  1988  103.9   14.0
14  Portland Trail Blazers  1988  103.1   15.0
7            Chicago Bulls  1988  102.1   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
1       Los Angeles Lakers  1989  115.8    1.0
8            Atlanta Hawks  1989  114.1    2.0
3             Phoenix Suns  1989  113.4    3.0
0          Detroit Pistons  1989  113.2    4.0
6          Milwaukee Bucks  1989  110.5    5.0
4          New York Knicks  1989  110.4    6.0
14  Portland Trail Blazers  1989  109.8    7.0
10         Houston Rockets  1989  108.5    8.0
2            Chicago Bulls  1989  108.0    9.0
13      Philadelphia 76ers  1989  107.2   10.0
7      Seattle Supersonics  1989  107.1   11.0
5    Golden State Warriors  1989  106.9   12.0
15               Utah Jazz  1989  105.8   13.0
9      Cleveland Cavaliers  1989  105.3   14.0
12          Denver Nuggets  1989  104.7   15.0
11          Boston Celtics  1989   97.4   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
8           Boston Celtics  1990  119.0    1.0
9      Cleveland Cavaliers  1990  113.9    2.0
5       Los Angeles Lakers  1990  112.7    3.0
4        San Antonio Spurs  1990  111.0    4.0
3             Phoenix Suns  1990  110.5    5.0
6          New York Knicks  1990  110.3    6.0
2            Chicago Bulls  1990  109.9    7.0
0          Detroit Pistons  1990  109.7    8.0
7       Philadelphia 76ers  1990  109.6    9.0
10               Utah Jazz  1990  108.0   10.0
12         Milwaukee Bucks  1990  107.3   11.0
1   Portland Trail Blazers  1990  105.8   12.0
11         Houston Rockets  1990  105.6   13.0
14          Denver Nuggets  1990  105.1   14.0
15          Indiana Pacers  1990  103.5   15.0
13        Dallas Mavericks  1990  103.2   16.0

                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
0            Chicago Bulls  1991  117.2    1.0
9           Indiana Pacers  1991  116.4    2.0
4           Boston Celtics  1991  114.7    3.0
5    Golden State Warriors  1991  112.9    4.0
1       Los Angeles Lakers  1991  111.7    5.0
3          Detroit Pistons  1991  111.2    6.0
2   Portland Trail Blazers  1991  111.0    7.0
6       Philadelphia 76ers  1991  110.8    8.0
7                Utah Jazz  1991  109.9    9.0
10     Seattle Supersonics  1991  108.4   10.0
12       San Antonio Spurs  1991  106.7   11.0
8            Atlanta Hawks  1991  105.7   12.0
14         Milwaukee Bucks  1991  103.6   13.0
13         Houston Rockets  1991  102.8   14.0
11            Phoenix Suns  1991   99.4   15.0
15         New York Knicks  1991   93.7   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
10   Golden State Warriors  1992  117.2    1.0
6             Phoenix Suns  1992  116.0    2.0
4           Boston Celtics  1992  114.6    3.0
3                Utah Jazz  1992  113.7    4.0
1   Portland Trail Blazers  1992  113.6    5.0
7      Seattle Supersonics  1992  113.3    6.0
2      Cleveland Cavaliers  1992  112.3    7.0
0            Chicago Bulls  1992  112.2    8.0
13          Indiana Pacers  1992  111.0    9.0
15       San Antonio Spurs  1992  110.1   10.0
9     Los Angeles Clippers  1992  108.4   11.0
14              Miami Heat  1992  107.0   12.0
5          New York Knicks  1992  105.7   13.0
12         New Jersey Nets  1992  105.0   14.0
11      Los Angeles Lakers  1992  100.8   15.0
8          Detroit Pistons  1992   96.9   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
0            Chicago Bulls  1993  113.8    1.0
2      Seattle Supersonics  1993  111.1    2.0
1             Phoenix Suns  1993  111.0    3.0
13          Indiana Pacers  1993  110.9    4.0
12          Boston Celtics  1993  107.3    5.0
5        San Antonio Spurs  1993  107.1    6.0
3          New York Knicks  1993  106.5    7.0
4          Houston Rockets  1993  106.4    8.0
6        Charlotte Hornets  1993  105.4    9.0
7      Cleveland Cavaliers  1993  105.3   10.0
14  Portland Trail Blazers  1993  103.9   11.0
9       Los Angeles Lakers  1993  103.0   12.0
15           Atlanta Hawks  1993  102.4   13.0
11               Utah Jazz  1993  102.3   14.0
10         New Jersey Nets  1993  101.9   15.0
8     Los Angeles Clippers  1993   97.7   16.0

Absolute and relative ORtg for each team for the 2005-2011 playoffs:
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

                        Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
3          Phoenix Suns  2005  118.2    1.0
4      Dallas Mavericks  2005  113.3    2.0
13     Sacramento Kings  2005  113.0    3.0
14    Memphis Grizzlies  2005  112.0    4.0
9       Houston Rockets  2005  111.7    5.0
6   Seattle Supersonics  2005  111.1    6.0
0     San Antonio Spurs  2005  110.0    7.0
2            Miami Heat  2005  107.2    8.0
10        Chicago Bulls  2005  106.3    9.0
7    Washington Wizards  2005  105.6   10.0
1       Detroit Pistons  2005  105.0   11.0
12   Philadelphia 76ers  2005  101.2   12.0
8        Boston Celtics  2005  100.6   13.5
15      New Jersey Nets  2005  100.6   13.5
5        Indiana Pacers  2005   97.7   15.0
11       Denver Nuggets  2005   97.4   16.0
0
                    Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
6      San Antonio Spurs  2006  114.0    1.0
3           Phoenix Suns  2006  113.7    2.0
5   Los Angeles Clippers  2006  111.6    3.0
1       Dallas Mavericks  2006  110.2    4.5
14       Milwaukee Bucks  2006  110.2    4.5
12    Washington Wizards  2006  109.4    6.0
11      Sacramento Kings  2006  108.8    7.0
2        Detroit Pistons  2006  107.9    8.0
7        New Jersey Nets  2006  106.5    9.5
8     Los Angeles Lakers  2006  106.5    9.5
0             Miami Heat  2006  106.2   11.0
9          Chicago Bulls  2006  104.2   12.0
4    Cleveland Cavaliers  2006  103.7   13.0
10        Indiana Pacers  2006  103.2   14.0
15     Memphis Grizzlies  2006   99.0   15.0
13        Denver Nuggets  2006   95.0   16.0
0
                     Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
7   Golden State Warriors  2007  110.9    1.0
6            Phoenix Suns  2007  110.6    2.0
0       San Antonio Spurs  2007  107.6    3.0
3               Utah Jazz  2007  106.9    4.0
9        Dallas Mavericks  2007  105.7    5.0
2         Detroit Pistons  2007  105.2    6.0
12     Los Angeles Lakers  2007  103.8    7.0
15     Washington Wizards  2007  103.5    8.0
4           Chicago Bulls  2007  103.4    9.0
14          Orlando Magic  2007  102.9   10.0
1     Cleveland Cavaliers  2007  102.5   11.0
5         New Jersey Nets  2007  101.7   12.0
10        Toronto Raptors  2007  101.0   13.0
11         Denver Nuggets  2007  100.7   14.0
8         Houston Rockets  2007   99.6   15.0
13             Miami Heat  2007   96.9   16.0
0
                   Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
5   New Orleans Hornets  2008  111.5    1.0
7         Orlando Magic  2008  111.0    2.0
6             Utah Jazz  2008  110.1    3.5
14      Toronto Raptors  2008  110.1    3.5
1    Los Angeles Lakers  2008  110.0    5.0
0        Boston Celtics  2008  109.4    6.0
2       Detroit Pistons  2008  108.0    7.5
12     Dallas Mavericks  2008  108.0    7.5
11   Washington Wizards  2008  104.9    9.0
4   Cleveland Cavaliers  2008  104.6   10.0
15       Denver Nuggets  2008  104.3   11.0
13         Phoenix Suns  2008  104.1   12.0
3     San Antonio Spurs  2008  103.9   13.0
9       Houston Rockets  2008  103.8   14.0
8         Atlanta Hawks  2008  101.6   15.0
10   Philadelphia 76ers  2008   99.8   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
3           Denver Nuggets  2009  116.8    1.0
6         Dallas Mavericks  2009  113.0    2.0
2      Cleveland Cavaliers  2009  112.6    3.0
0       Los Angeles Lakers  2009  111.4    4.0
1            Orlando Magic  2009  107.3    5.0
9               Miami Heat  2009  106.7    6.0
4           Boston Celtics  2009  106.3    7.0
8            Chicago Bulls  2009  105.9    8.0
13       San Antonio Spurs  2009  105.4    9.0
5          Houston Rockets  2009  104.7   10.0
14               Utah Jazz  2009  104.2   11.0
11  Portland Trail Blazers  2009  103.9   12.0
7            Atlanta Hawks  2009  102.0   13.0
10      Philadelphia 76ers  2009  100.5   14.0
12     New Orleans Hornets  2009   93.7   15.0
15         Detroit Pistons  2009   93.6   16.0
0
                      Team  Year   ORtg  Orank
3             Phoenix Suns  2010  117.8    1.0
7                Utah Jazz  2010  114.0    2.0
10          Denver Nuggets  2010  113.9    3.0
0       Los Angeles Lakers  2010  112.8    4.0
2            Orlando Magic  2010  110.8    5.0
4      Cleveland Cavaliers  2010  108.2    6.0
12  Portland Trail Blazers  2010  106.5    7.0
6        San Antonio Spurs  2010  105.7    8.0
9         Dallas Mavericks  2010  105.1    9.0
8          Milwaukee Bucks  2010  105.0   10.5
13           Chicago Bulls  2010  105.0   10.5
1           Boston Celtics  2010  104.8   12.0
5            Atlanta Hawks  2010  104.3   13.0
11   Oklahoma City Thunder  2010  103.6   14.0
15       Charlotte Bobcats  2010  100.2   15.0
14              Miami Heat  2010   96.2   16.0
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 22,522
And1: 4,793
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#10 » by penbeast0 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 3:02 am

With Mikan gone, it's tougher; I've been riding that horse for a while now.

In terms of big men, there are pretty much 3 or 4 top ones for me, Moses, Ewing, Pettit, and Durant. I have Pettit over Barkley for his intangibles and Barkley's defense. Durant is the most talented of these 4, but the worst leader. Not sure where I go. Besides, there are 5 legit PG candidates to consider too (I don't think it's DWade time yet at SG).

PG Curry, Paul, Nash, Stockton, Frazier -- Curry has the most individual impact, his unreal shooting just opens up the floor for his teammates and gives guys like Draymond, Klay, etc. the ability to play in space. He also has the shortest prime and a lesser playoff resume. Paul has the best turnover efficiency of any ATG PG, good defense, makes his teammates better, but can come across as a jerk and has had some key injuries. Nash has the flashy team offenses, particularly in Phoenix -- you want to look at his impact, look at Marion's efficiency with the likes of Kidd and Marbury then look at it with Nash. I think his numbers overrated his ability a bit as SSOL sacrificed defense to create mismatches all through the front court, but even discounting a little for that, they are still incredible. Stockton has the ironman thing which I really thing rubs off on teammates, the nasty defense, but mainly the greatest assist generator in NBA history. Stockton has half again as many assists as Magic, Nash, or Chris Paul. People dismiss this as no big deal because it just boggles the mind. And, he did it with generally weak offensive help outside of his long time star Karl Malone and a few years of Jeff Hornacek. Give him a 3rd option like Hornacek and his team ORTG's start looking amazing too. Finally, Frazier is one of the 3 main defensive GOAT PGs (with Kidd and probably Payton being the others) while also being and extremely efficient scorer relative to his era, a great floor general (though low assist due to the type of offense he ran), and someone who can play on ball, off ball, outside, inside, and really picked up his game in the playoffs, particularly the NBA finals. The only downside for Frazier (to me) is playing in the 70s.

So, how to judge this:
1. Curry (haven't been talked out of him yet)
2. Durant (sigh, but yeah, he's that good)
3. Moses (default -- willing to listen to argument re: Paul, Nash, Stockton, Frazier)
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
User avatar
Magic Is Magic
Junior
Posts: 386
And1: 433
Joined: Mar 05, 2019
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#11 » by Magic Is Magic » Sun Nov 22, 2020 3:18 am

Voting for the #20 spot:

1. Kevin Durant
2. Charles Barkley
3. Moses Malone

1. I really dislike Kevin Durant's move in 2017 but his overall resume is hard to ignore. 4x Scoring Champion, MVP, 4 Finals, 2 Finals MVPs, 11-straight seasons of 25 ppg or more, 10x All Star (approaching Oscar level who had 12), ROY. KD has averaged 25 ppg or higher every single playoff run and has one of the top 6 all time Finals when ranked by Game Score. He is 14th all time in MVP win shares, 10th all time in playoff points. Again, strongly dislike his move in 2017 but the rest is hard to ignore. I don't think any player not already included in the top 14 has that resume to match up with him.

-Top 10 all time playoff scoring (every one ahead of him in playoff points is already ranked ahead of him except for Tony Parker but KD will pass TP in his next playoff run in 2021 meaning he will be at least top 9 all time in playoff scoring)
-11-straight 25 ppg seasons
-EVERY playoff run is 25 ppg or higher
-4 Scoring Titles
-4 Finals
-2 Finals MVPs
-1 Regular season MVP
-No one else is close offensively if you ask me, and probably not even remotely close. He has that uncanny ability to pull off a 30 ppg 50/40/90 season, something that very few have ever been able to do



2. Charles Barkley. Sir Charles is a legend, but a ringless legend! If he had actually won a championship he would be much higher up but I also find it very hard to make the top 15 without a championship when so many other ATGs were able to win at least one ring. He is an 11x All-Star, 11x All NBA, 1993 MVP and had a brilliant Finals performance too. He also has the only single playoff game in league history with a Game Score over 50.0 (1994, WC1). Charles' rebounding ability was also on another level, especially for his height, and he is a respectable top 25 in MVP win shares (Karl Malone is #8). I think 1993 is the one year where Jordan truly stopped someone from winning a championship because Barkley was on a roll and probably not losing to anybody except an all-time performance by MJ where had to average 40 ppg for the series to beat Chuck's Suns.

3. Moses Malone with nearly 30k points is huge! He is sitting at 9th all time at 27,409 which is a big accomplishment no doubt about it. Plus him being top 30 in playoff rebounds is notable as is his 3x MVP which is another big accomplishment. Come to think of it, there aren't any other 3x MVP winners that aren't already ranked in this discussion (LBJ, MJ, Bird, Kareem, Wilt, Russell off the top of my mind). Lastly, you can't talk about all time great playoff runs without mentioning that 1983 run. That 76ers run is one of very few to win a championship while only losing 1 game along the way. The others that come to mind are the 2001 Lakers and 2017 Warriors. Which means Moses is one of only three teams to ever do it! (albeit the 76ers was 12-1, not 15-1 LAL or 16-1 GSW).
Odinn21
Starter
Posts: 2,186
And1: 1,612
Joined: May 19, 2019
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#12 » by Odinn21 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:16 am

colts18 wrote:
Odinn21 wrote:
colts18 wrote:Stockton has to start being discussed in this range. His statistical profile


All-time Ranks:
Minutes 11th
Games Played 5th
Assists 1st
Steals 1st
BPM 8th
VORP 3rd
Win Shares 6th
WS/48 11th
TS% 15th
O Rating 5th

The most impressive stat for Stockton is finishing in the Top 10 of BPM 17 times, most in NBA history. The man played 82 games in 17 out of his 19 seasons in the league.

No, he doesn't.

Odinn21 wrote:Stockton's obpm change from regular season to playoffs was below the average range as I said.
His performances against good or better than good defenses were not good.

The Jazz did not face a -2.0 or better defense in the playoffs until 1990, so I'll start from there. From 1990 to 1997, Stockton against -2.0 or better defenses in the playoffs;
14.5/3.4/11.2/1.7 and 3.0 tpg on .559 ts (73 games)

Considering he was 15.5/2.9/12.6/2.4 and 3.3 tpg on .616 ts in regular seasons in that time frame, and 14.7/3.4/11.3/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .566 ts in playoffs on overall; yeah, Stockton's postseason resilience was not good.

In the series Stockton faced proper positional competition directly, such as 1993/1996 Sonics series or 1991/1992 Blazers series, he was 13.5/3.3/11.7/1.8 and 3.1 tpg on .545 ts (44 games).

Surely Stockton was still a good player to have. Doesn't mean he was a good playoff performer. He struggled to keep his scoring and efficiency on that volume. Come on...

You did not address any of these.

People like to point out as Malone benefited from Stockton. And sure he did. But let's not overreact / overcorrect Stockton's situation because he benefited more from Malone's scoring volume.
As you can see, Stockton struggled at 15 ppg volume. And his offensive impact, his ability to create offense was not something like Nash's one. Or hid defensive impact was not Kidd-like or Frazier-like. He did not make for that struggle on scoring in other departments.

Would you vote next Artis Gilmore and Elvin Hayes because they have massive career totals?
Moses Malone is 3rd in rebounds and 9th in points. Yet he'll make #20 or #21.

You're shaping your criteria around your opinion. It should be the other way around.


1st off, those numbers against -2.0 defenses is still good. We would expect him to drop off in the playoffs vs good defense. It's natural. It happens to all of the greats including MJ and LeBron. Stockton is suffering from a case of Robinsonitis. David Robinson too dropped off in the playoffs. He was unfairly maligned by being compared to his other worldly regular season standards. If you compared his playoff production to the other greats, he was fine. It's the same with Stockton.

And your proper positional competition numbers are laughable. You include freakin Terry Porter, a career 0 All-NBA teams, but do not include Kevin Johnson, 5 career all-NBA teams. Stockton completely outplayed Johnson the two years in the playoffs they faced off each other including straight up murdering him in 1991. And your numbers do not even include 1992 when Stockton was destroying Gary Payton. And if you are going to Terry Porter, you might as well include Rod Strickland who was 18/9 player that Stockton outplayed.

Not to mention your positional numbers suffers from an endpoint bias. It doesn't include 1988, when Stockton destroyed the same Terry Porter you were touting earlier. How about John Stockton outplaying Prime Magic Johnson in 1988?

Stockton's playoff performances were fine. He wasn't at the same level he was in the playoffs, but he was still a great playoff player (10th in career playoff VORP).

Those numbers had series against Strickland. Wonder if you saw 44 games and only 4 matchups mentioned as examples. How many playoff series went to a game 11?
I compared Robinson's playoff production to the other greats and he was not fine. That's why Robinson was not among them. At least for me. Similarly for Garnett as well.

I didn't leave out the good playoff series Stockton had. You already had them in your numbers which I responded to. If you want me to respond to those;
- Outperforming would be accurate choice of word because Magic and Stockton weren't matched up. You measure the quality by All-NBA teams and you mention Magic to have it your way? You're incredibly biased in this conversation.
- Performances like 1988 against the Lakers were in a pretty small minority for Stockton. I did not say he entirely lacked good performances. Majority of the time, he did and struggled.

An issue with VORP; it's a cumulative stat. If you look at VORP per game of the top 50, you'd see Stockton is #19 and either VORP total and VORP per game list is hardly conclusive.

Let's not give up on VORP total, and focus on quality in average why would you put Stockton ahead of Durant who got a few supporters but not in many ballots?
Durant's VORP total is almost matched Stockton's total in 43 less games. Why should we start consider Stockton for top 25?

Code: Select all

24.74   179   0.1382   Michael Jordan*
33.25   260   0.1279   LeBron James
18.34   190   0.0965   Magic Johnson*
15.35   164   0.0936   Larry Bird*
12.64   139   0.0909   Kevin Durant
9.69   109   0.0889   Chris Paul
12.87   145   0.0888   Hakeem Olajuwon*
10.8   124   0.0871   Kawhi Leonard
9.54   112   0.0852   Stephen Curry
10.15   123   0.0825   Charles Barkley*
11.79   145   0.0813   Dirk Nowitzki
13.52   173   0.0782   Julius Erving*
9.89   128   0.0773   James Harden
5.46   71   0.0769   Allen Iverson*
8.47   111   0.0763   Isiah Thomas*
18.56   251   0.0739   Tim Duncan*
10.65   145   0.0734   Clyde Drexler*
16.15   220   0.0734   Kobe Bryant*
12.93   182   0.0710   John Stockton*
15.32   216   0.0709   Shaquille O'Neal*
8.67   123   0.0705   David Robinson*
12.3   177   0.0695   Dwyane Wade
14.18   208   0.0682   Scottie Pippen*
12.99   196   0.0663   Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*
9.45   143   0.0661   Kevin Garnett*
9.42   144   0.0654   Reggie Miller*
6.88   106   0.0649   Russell Westbrook
12.07   193   0.0625   Karl Malone*
7.62   123   0.0620   Draymond Green
9.71   158   0.0615   Jason Kidd*
8.45   146   0.0579   Chauncey Billups
7.38   136   0.0543   Pau Gasol
6.41   121   0.0530   Rajon Rondo
6.55   130   0.0504   Ben Wallace
6.58   133   0.0495   Maurice Cheeks*
6.73   139   0.0484   Patrick Ewing*
10.44   218   0.0479   Manu Ginóbili
8.14   170   0.0479   Paul Pierce
5.56   120   0.0463   Steve Nash*
7.91   171   0.0463   Ray Allen*
7.75   169   0.0459   Kevin McHale*
6.5   143   0.0455   James Worthy*
5.59   124   0.0451   Al Horford
5.54   124   0.0447   Terry Porter
6.15   140   0.0439   Jeff Hornacek
6.13   151   0.0406   Bobby Jones*
9.88   244   0.0405   Robert Horry
6.88   170   0.0405   Horace Grant
6.58   177   0.0372   Rasheed Wallace
6.1   166   0.0367   Andre Iguodala


https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/vorp_career_p.html
It has Stockton at #11 but whatever, it's splitting hairs.

---

It's also ridiculous to measure quality with All-NBA teams. Terry Porter was a damn good player. He's not some random player to write off.

Also if we follow that, Stockton has no upside.

Because
in 1991 he lost to KJ and Drexler. (KJ 212, Drexler 202, Stockton 160 points)
in 1992 he lost to Drexler and Tim Hardaway. (Drexler 408, Hardaway 288, Stockton 269)
in 1993 he lost to Price, almost tied with Dumars. (Price 344, Stockton 294, Dumars 290)
(finally a clear cut result in 1994 when there was no good competition)
(another good result in 1995, a better competition than 1994 but still not so great)
in 1996 he lost to Penny and Payton. (Penny 516, Payton 294, Stockton 258)
in 1997 he lost to Tim Hardaway, Payton, Richmond. (Hardaway 435, Payton 386, Richmond 198, Stockton 142)
in 1998 he lost to Payton, Tim Hardaway, Strickland, Richmond, Miller. (Payton 561, Hardaway 245, Strickland 173, Richmond 139, Miller 124, Stockton 64)
in 1999 he lost to Iverson, Kidd, Payton, Tim Hardaway and tied with Bryant. (Iverson 532, Kidd 516, Payton 440, Hardaway 168, Stockton and Bryant 75)

Stockton got well deserved All-NBA selections in 1988, 1989 and 1990. As you can see the sources in the following sources, it was obvious that he'd get overtaken with KJ emerging and he was. He lost to KJ, Tim Hardaway, Price and Dumars.
Then the only times he made All-NBA 1st teams were in a very weak positional competition. Again, just look at the results in the links.
Then he was beatern by Payton on a constant basis but I think we should draw the line at 1997 for Stockton's prime.

If All-NBA teams are a good measure to rely on, I'd ask you why the hell on earth Stockton was beaten by a healthy Tim Hardaway on a constant basis?

Sources;
Spoiler:


---

If you think being #11 on VORP career playoffs is a good reason, it's not. It does a good job about highlighting Stockton's longevity. But it doesn't say much about his peak and prime. FWIW, there are types of players BPM design loves particularly. Stockton is one of them. Nash's career BPM is less than half of Stockton and it's very likely that we'll vote Nash in before.
If you feel Stockton should be regarded for the top 25 and you point out that VORP rank because it suits your feeling, then it's a bigger issue...
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
User avatar
LA Bird
Veteran
Posts: 2,598
And1: 1,999
Joined: Feb 16, 2015

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#13 » by LA Bird » Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:57 am

colts18 wrote:Yes. Stockton's impact was like 95% as good as Malone. We have RAPM data for 7 years that Stockton and Malone played together (97-03) and Stockton finished ahead of Malone 6 out of 7 years. Even during Malone's MVP season in 1999, Stockton finished ahead of Malone.

1. Doctor MJ already said this last thread and you never addressed it - Stockton beating Malone in the 00s when the Jazz were non contenders means little when it comes to inferring their prime impact. You place so much emphasis on these 00s numbers yet you were actively trying to dismiss mid 90s +/- by pretending Stockton was out of his prime then already.

2. RAPM is a rate stat and Stockton was putting up high per possession numbers in limited minutes. In your 1999 example,
Malone was +4.58 per 100 possession in 4173 possessions
Stockton was +5.14 per 100 possession in 3217 possessions
Once you include minutes played in the equation, Malone was clearly ahead in the totals in 97, 98, and 99.

And yes Stockton's on/off numbers were near Jordan level. He finished ahead of MJ in 1998 RAPM.

Unless you are referring to NPI, no he didn't. Jordan was ahead per possession and almost doubled him in totals.
Jordan was +6.15 per 100 possession in 7559 possessions
Stockton was +5.32 per 100 possession in 4534 possessions

Stockton finished All-NBA first team twice. Another indicator he was top 5.

The All NBA first team also indicated Latrell Sprewell as a top 5 player over Robinson, Shaq and Ewing in 1994.

Lol @ saying Stockton was never a top 5 player. We have plenty of data that says Stockton was top 5. He finished Top 5 in RAPM in 1998 and 2001. He finished Top 10 in both 1999 and 2000. And we don't have any data from any of the 9 seasons he lead the league in Assists (88-96).

Statistically, Stockton had many Top 5 seasons.
# of Top 5 finishes in the following stats:
BPM: 12
VORP: 8
WS: 8
WS/48: 8

The man finished top 5 in TS% 8 times, Top 5 in Steal% 11 times (most in history), Top 5 in Assist% 18 times (most in history) all while playing 82 games 17 times (An NBA record).

During Stockton's career, the Jazz finished Top 3 in SRS 6 times, and had 9 Top 5 finishes. Is it a surprise that one of the star players from a top 3 team who had a great box score statistical profile that was backed by impacts stats is a top 5 player?

Thanks, I can also read the stats off the basketball reference site. In which of those seasons do YOU actually rank Stockton as a top 5 player? Name the years and then we can go into specific discussions instead of speaking in generalities.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 42,962
And1: 11,678
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#14 » by Doctor MJ » Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:23 am

Vote:

1. Steph Curry
2. Steve Nash
3. Moses Malone

I voted for Curry first last time and explained how I saw him - as the focal point of the best team I've ever seen play. I don't see a need to belabor the point. To be clear, Nash certainly has a longevity argument over Curry, and I'm not saying those who rate Nash over Curry prime vs prime are crazy, but I do rate Curry's prime beyond Nash's, and the significance of what Curry achieved is so huge legacy-wise that it's not easy to make up for that for me. Anyway, I want to give a focus on Nash here:

Steve Nash was Ruthian.

In '04-05, Nash had an ORtg of 120.0 (according to bkref). For comparison:

The next best ORtg on another team that year was 114.1, and the league average was 106.1. The gap between Nash and the best of anyone not on his team was about 3/4ths of the gap between that non-teammate-best and mediocrity.

And as I believe I've already mentioned, Nash was on the previous year's #1 team with the 2nd best ORtg in the league behind Dirk, and Dirk's number stood at 113.2.

The number Nash was putting up, people basically didn't know to be looking at at the time, but his work that year was arguably the start of a revolution that has consumed the NBA for a reason. It was the way forward, when people eventually figured it out.

As I've also mentioned, Nash would have the best ORtg in the league for 7 straight seasons in Phoenix, and between his Dallas & Phoenix years, he would spend 10 straight years as either #1 or #2 in the entire league by this metric. I've looked back in history, and I don't think it's at all likely that anyone could match either of those accomplishments. (Oscar & Magic being the main guys to look at here.)

Wherever you end up ranking Nash, I hope you can appreciate how much of an outlier in performance he was. He's perhaps the most unexpected source of a paradigm shift in basketball the NBA has ever seen.

For my 3rd spot here, in all honesty I'm trying to pick from guys who I think are likely to be in the final runoff. And to be clear, I don't see this as anything weird. To me it's the most reasonable expectation of voters. In an ideal world we'd all have long lists turned in each time and eventually you'd get your vote moved down to those finalists anyway.

The 3 most likely other candidates are Moses, KD, and Barkley. Of them I chose Moses. Why?

I'll start with Moses vs Barkley because that's an obvious comparison and I had Barkley higher on my list last time. Given that they had so much in common and Barkley literally learned directly from Moses, might we not look at Barkley as essentially the rich man's Moses, with the ability to have truly outlier efficiency, better playmaking, and better range? Yes, but...Barkley is a hard player to base your franchise around. There are things about him that make it seem, for example, that he's not likely to be the guy who comes into a team that can't get over the hump, and turns them not just into a champion but arguably the greatest team in the history of the game to that point. There's a grind to Moses that helped make that happen, and it makes it awfully hard for me to look at Barkley as actually having accomplished more.

What about Durant? Bad news for Barkley again for similar reasons. I have more faith in Durant's ability to utterly shine on a good-as-it-gets NBA team than I do Barkley, and I do think there's a "getting to the promised land" aspect of this that I won't pretend I don't notice.

So then, Moses vs Durant? Well, both were a key part of best-of-generation teams. If everything else were equal I'd give the nod to the Warriors, but not everything else is equal. Aside form the fact that Moses still has a longevity edge, he also has the "I didn't become really unhappy and vengeful because we succeeded and yet not everyone praised me as much as I wanted praise" edge.
Hey: With what's going on in the world, my fuse is shorter than it used to be, and it's leading my lose my cool and then go on self-imposed breaks from things (such as RealGM). Please try to keep it civil, and I'll be looking to do the same.
Dutchball97
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,627
And1: 1,422
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#15 » by Dutchball97 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:59 am

No change to my ballot as I didn't have Mikan. I don't mind that he got voted in because he had to get in somewhere. Mikan's relative dominance is top 5 for sure and people have taken away some other concerns about him (playing the globetrotters and doing well means a lot to me for that era, him actually having 2 more prime years than bkref lists helps and we've seen worse players than Mikan be elite into the late 50s/early 60s). The shot clock not being implemented yet kept me from voting him though. It remains a dealbreaker to me. The game was just too different.

1. Kevin Durant - I've been voting him for a while now so this shouldn't come as a surprise. He has proven to be elite in both the regular season and play-offs. I also don't think his prime is short either. He's been elite for nearly a decade. Injuries have slowed him down at some crucial points, which is why I don't mind him not making the top 15 yet. To me it's less of an issue though. Something which has been a staple of my argument is that he's already matched #15 Dirk and #16 Karl Malone in cumulative play-off stats in significantly less time. KD not getting in yet feels like bias against active players.

2. Steph Curry - Another guy that has a peak good enough to be much higher and enough prime years to show he can be elite on a consistent basis. It's understandable people leave him out for now for longevity reasons but it's not as much of a concern for me with 5+ prime seasons already in the books. He has arguably the best regular season ever and some great play-off runs as well, making the finals 5 years straight. There aren't a lot of guys left that match Curry's dominance and impact on the game.

3. Moses Malone - This spot came down to Moses and Barkley for me. I'm also getting to a point where I'd consider Pettit and Mikan but I'm not sure if I'd take them over Moses or Barkley at the moment. I think Barkley played at a high level for a long time and he has some good play-off runs as well but he never managed to win a title and even in his MVP season, few people would say he was the best player on the team. Moses has an argument to be the best player in the early 80s with 83 as a year where he's almost certainly the best on a dominant title winning team.
Joey Wheeler
Starter
Posts: 2,401
And1: 1,331
Joined: May 12, 2017

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#16 » by Joey Wheeler » Sun Nov 22, 2020 11:45 am

1-Kevin Durant

Should already be in, don't see any case for some of the guys already in over him. GOAT level scorer, imo the best ever in that regard along with Jordan, his insane volume and efficiency holds up even in the biggest stage in the Finals. Too big to be defended by wings, he'll just shoot over them; too quick and agile to be defended by bigs. He's a walking mismatch and can score at insane efficiency with a shot profile full of what would be inefficient shots for just about anyone else. Very good longevity already too.

2-Charles Barkley

One of the best offensive players ever, super efficient scorer, great offensive rebounder, he was outright dominant during his prime.

3-Moses Malone

I don't like his skillset for the modern NBA, but his in-era dominance can't be denied, he dominated the league and was an enormous difference maker. You could argue for a higher spot, but again I don't think his game has really aged well.
WestGOAT
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,430
And1: 1,852
Joined: Dec 20, 2015

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#17 » by WestGOAT » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:04 pm

colts18 wrote:
Odinn21 wrote:
colts18 wrote:And your proper positional competition numbers are laughable. You include freakin Terry Porter, a career 0 All-NBA teams, but do not include Kevin Johnson, 5 career all-NBA teams. Stockton completely outplayed Johnson the two years in the playoffs they faced off each other including straight up murdering him in 1991. And your numbers do not even include 1992 when Stockton was destroying Gary Payton. And if you are going to Terry Porter, you might as well include Rod Strickland who was 18/9 player that Stockton outplayed.


KJ is often used as an example of Stockton being able to shut down superstar PGs in the playoffs, but he was suffering from viral enteritis in the 1990 series (https://vault.si.com/vault/1990/05/07/blues-for-the-jazz-as-its-series-with-phoenix-began-utah-again-hit-some-sour-playoff-notes), the commentator in game 5 mentioned Kevin Johnson lacking his usual speed and penetration ability (and still then KJ managed to hit the series-clinching game-winner against Stockton). In 1991 a similar theme, but Kevin Johnson was supposedly hindered by his right hamstring (https://vault.si.com/vault/1991/04/29/the-nba-playoffs); he missed quite a few games heading into the playoffs, which lingered on into the beginning of 1992 season for him (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-12-05-sp-593-story.html). 

Also, why make note of Stockton vs Payton in 1993 playoffs (when Payton was not in his prime yet even), while you make no mention of how that match-up went in the 1996 playoffs (Yea Stockton was not in his prime, but what about Payton in 1993 then?)

For how great Stockton is made out to be on defense on this forum and I think it's fair to bring up Terry Porter lighting him up twice (Portland series, 1991 and 1992), as well as, Kenny Smith putting up very good offensive stats against him (Rockets series, 1994 and 1995). 4 play-off series, 2 against the same player each, is not an anomaly.

Regardless, I don't know why posters use defence as a major differentiator between PGs. The ultimate value of regular-sized PG defence is limited, wing and big-men defence is the main determinant of how well a team performs on defence. As long if the PG is not Isaiah Thomas (Celtics) then there won't be major issues. So I don't see why people place such emphasis on defence for PGs. It isn't game-changing, unless your PG can also guard wings consistently, like Gary Payton/Jason Kidd/Marcus Smart. John Stockton ain't that.

I fully appreciate people regarding Stockton highly in GOAT-lists cause of his longevity, and I think that is definitely fair to place such an emphasis on longevity, but I still don't buy the narrative that Stockton was a superstar in his prime and was 1a/1b to Malone or how he could easily replace Isiah Thomas' offensive production for this Pistons.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 22,522
And1: 4,793
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#18 » by penbeast0 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:40 pm

WestGOAT wrote:...how he could easily replace Isiah Thomas' offensive production for this Pistons.


I think I said this last thread too. Stockton couldn't replace Isiah Thomas's offensive production, he wasn't the same type of player. However, he could quite probably make the Pistons' offense more effective than Isiah did by shooting much more efficiently and being a more consistent playmaker. He wouldn't replace Isiah's points by himself but he would replace most of them on less shots than Isiah took to get them and the rest could be distributed between Dumars, Dantley/Aguirre, Laimbeer, Vinnie, etc. as Stockton would share the ball more than Isiah did (Isiah was a good playmaker but Stockton passed more so more opportunities for other players).

Stockton wouldn't take over games and go hero ball the way Isiah sometimes did either but as a rule, that's been established to be an inefficient method of scoring although it gets fans excited and the successes get remembered more than the failures do.
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
WestGOAT
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,430
And1: 1,852
Joined: Dec 20, 2015

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#19 » by WestGOAT » Sun Nov 22, 2020 2:58 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
WestGOAT wrote:...how he could easily replace Isiah Thomas' offensive production for this Pistons.


I think I said this last thread too. Stockton couldn't replace Isiah Thomas's offensive production, he wasn't the same type of player. However, he could quite probably make the Pistons' offense more effective than Isiah did by shooting much more efficiently and being a more consistent playmaker. He wouldn't replace Isiah's points by himself but he would replace most of them on less shots than Isiah took to get them and the rest could be distributed between Dumars, Dantley/Aguirre, Laimbeer, Vinnie, etc. as Stockton would share the ball more than Isiah did (Isiah was a good playmaker but Stockton passed more so more opportunities for other players).

Stockton wouldn't take over games and go hero ball the way Isiah sometimes did either but as a rule, that's been established to be an inefficient method of scoring although it gets fans excited and the successes get remembered more than the failures do.

So do you think it is likely that the Pistons maintain or even exceed their ORTg in the playoffs, despite the graphs I posted above demonstrating that the Pistons were better than the Jazz during the playoffs on offense relative to their competition when you compare IT and Stockton in their respective prime? Doesn't Thomas deserve more credit for his team performing better?

Thomas, team ranking ORtg (1985-1990): [4,8,5,11,4,8], average: 6.66.
Stockton, team ranking ORtg (1998-1993): [9,13,10,9,4,14], average: 9.83.

The Pistons were above-average in the playoffs with Thomas being the driving force of their offense (first-option). He was the shot-maker for the team, it's only natural he would have a lower TS% if he has to make the most difficult shots. I don't think it's fair at all to keep comparing Thomas and Stockton's TS% when they had such vastly different roles. Who is to say Thomas' TS% would not have been higher as a second option during his prime if he played with someone like Karl Malone?

The Jazz were underwhelming in the playoffs based on stats above, despite Stockton playing with Karl Malone. Why did he not put up more shots with such high TS% and help his team out? Perhaps it is like tsherkin once pointed out:
tsherkin wrote:High efficiency on limited volume has diminishing returns. If you're that efficient, you should look to score more... unless you're essentially a roleplayer whose offense is dictated by the play of others.


You say that Stockton would replace "most of them" (points of IT) on fewer shots, I don't see that happening:

Image

There is quite a gap in production if you look at all of the playoff games played during their prime (every dot is a game), which you don't easily see simply by looking at average points/game.

So who replaces IT's production? Does Stockton maintain his high TS% without someone like Malone? If Stockton doesn't increase his volume, who of the Pistons becomes the first option and takes the tough shots? Do Dumars, Dantley/Aguirre, Laimbeer, Vinnie maintain their TS% with more shot attempts?
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 22,522
And1: 4,793
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #20 

Post#20 » by penbeast0 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 3:34 pm

I think both Dantley and Aguirre have showed that they can maintain their TS% at higher usage than they did in Detroit and were 1st options most of their career. I think both Dumars and Vinnie are quite comfortable being the open man while Laimbeer could run a mean pick and pop.
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.

Return to Player Comparisons