RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 (Bob Lanier)

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

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 (Bob Lanier) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:55 pm

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. Moses Malone
21. Charles Barkley
22. Kevin Durant
23. Chris Paul
24. Stephen Curry
25. Bob Pettit
26. John Stockton
27. Steve Nash
28. Dwyane Wade
29. Patrick Ewing
30. Walt Frazier
31. James Harden
32. Scottie Pippen
33. Elgin Baylor
34. John Havlicek
35. Rick Barry
36. Jason Kidd
37. George Gervin
38. Clyde Drexler
39. Reggie Miller
40. Artis Gilmore
41. Dolph Schayes
42. Kawhi Leonard
43. Isiah Thomas
44. Russell Westbrook
45. Willis Reed
46. Chauncey Billups
47. Paul Pierce
48. Gary Payton
49. Pau Gasol
50. Ray Allen
51. Dwight Howard
52. Kevin McHale
53. Manu Ginobili
54. Dave Cowens
55. Adrian Dantley
56. Sam Jones
57. ???

Target stop time around 11-12 EST on Saturday.

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:.

euroleague wrote:.

Franco wrote:.

Gregoire wrote:.

Hal14 wrote:.

HeartBreakKid wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

iggymcfrack wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

Joe Malburg 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:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 29,775
And1: 9,559
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#2 » by penbeast0 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:24 pm

1. Alex English -- Versatility, consistency, and character put English over the likes of Dantley, Nique, Tmac, etc. English played many roles and always made his teams better no matter what role Denver played him in. He was a solid 35-30ppg scorer at above average efficiency for a full decade. In the 1980s he scored more points than Larry Bird, Dominique Wilkens, Adrian Dantley, Isiah Thomas, Moses Malone, or well, anyone. And he did it while generally guarding the better of the opponents starting forwards in the era of the great scoring forwards. From watching him, I have him as the only above average defender among the killer lineup of great scoring fowards of his era (Bird, Gervin, Nique, AD, King, Aquirre). One of the most underrated players in history. Also won numerous citizenship awards, one of the great people to play the game.

2. Anthony Davis -- last season pushed his totals for me quite a bit. 8 year career, great peak/playoff run. Two way player, very versatile.

3. Paul Arizin MVP who led his team to a title, albeit in the weak 1950s. When he left for the military, the team was badly hurt; when the team's other big name star, Neil Johnston, was out for a year, the team was only affected in a minor way. If you are going to put a 50s star in, it makes more sense to vote for Arizin, who made his team a champion, than Cousy, a flashy spectacular player that fans loved but a poor defender and less efficient a scorer. One of the Cousy supporters talks about his rings but Cousy was actually a playoff detriment to the team in those title seasons (except possibly 1957), his scoring efficiency was truly awful -- Russell Westbrook in Washington bad -- and yet he kept shooting at high volumes. He should go in as a 50s star but his play from 58 on, particularly in the playoffs, was not HOF level or even close.

Then: Parish (better combination of offense and defense than Hayes, Thurmond, or Lanier), Bobby Jones, another English type player with super consistency and versatility though a defensive star instead of an offensive one. Note that Jones has more 1st team All-Defense teams than any other player in history. Hayes/Thurmond/Lanier would be the mix I am looking at for the next spot with a preference for Hayes as a Bullet (not as high a defensive peak as Thurmond but more of a consistent ironman with more team success). Lanier's numbers should put him ahead of either Hayes or Thurmond but I just don't think you could win an NBA title in the 70s-90s with a weak defensive centerpiece -- the same reason I don't support one of my favorite players, Dan Issel, for this project. Mutombo and Mourning are now in the mix as well. None are good passers, each of the others has a weakness -- Lanier was a generally poor defender, Hayes and Thurmond are poor efficiency scorers, Mutombo had issues catching entry passes and can't score with the others, Mourning had more injury issues. Have to do some work to rank these 5 bigs. For the moment, call it Zo, Deke, Lanier, Hayes, Thurmond. Whether they are the next 5 overall after Bobby Jones, I don't know, also have to consider the wings and points.

Guys that I love but whose primes are too short to be top 5 right now: Giannis, Hawkins, Moncrief, Lever, Walton . . . convince me they have played long enough to go ahead of an Anthony Davis (short but not AS short) or Bobby Jones type player. I'd have the first three over the likes of Penny Hardaway who has been mentioned.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#3 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:34 pm

1st vote: Robert Parish
So yeah.....I'm a meaningful longevity guy. This is not a secret, nor new. And Parish is actually my clear top pick via my criteria; as my list stands now, there's actually no one left on the table who's even within 5 places of Parish.

But seriously:
Parish was an entirely fine two-way player [and was so for a really damn long time].
While I think he’s somewhat more remembered for his offense, he was also a very capable defender thru much of his career (especially early on).

For example, during his first SEVEN seasons in the league......
*He never averaged less than 2.8 blocks per 100 possessions (and as high as 4.4).
**In both ‘79 and ‘81 he was 4th in the league in bpg despite playing just 31.7 and 28.0 mpg; was 5th in ‘82 while playing just 31.7 mpg, too.
***He had a cumulative 97 DRtg, leading the league in DRtg in ‘79; had a DRtg in the top 8 four times (three times in the top 3).

Offensively, he was a 7-footer who ran the floor pretty well, while being a competent finisher (making him one of the more notable transition threats among the centers of his era). He was a very very good low-post scorer (could utilize a little hook shot, or that crazy high-arcing turnaround of his), and also had a tiny bit of range (out to about 12-14 feet, anyway, he was quite effective).
Was an entirely decent FT-shooter for a big-man (72.1% for his career).
The primary reason he was averaging just 16-20 ppg during his prime was because he was playing on an extremely stacked team thru most of it. I've little doubt prime Parish could have avg ~23-24 ppg for a less talent-laden club.

While I don't think Parish could have been “the man” on a contender, I think we’re well past the point on the list where that is a necessary consideration. Especially when one has the kind of longevity that Parish had: he had a prime that basically lasted 13 years (>1,000 rs games), and five other seasons as decent role player of varying (but certainly relevant) value; only 3 seasons (years 19-21) that were of negligible or nil value.

And while he couldn’t have been #1 on a contender, he certainly could have been the #1 on a 40-45 win playoff participant. I think this was more or less proven in '89 when Bird missed the entire season: Parish was arguably the best player [at worst a "1B"] on a 42-win team.....this was at age 35 (the single-oldest man on the Celtic roster). No Bird to feed him, but old-man Parish still averaged 18.6 ppg @ +7.0% rTS, to go with 12.5 rpg and 1.5 bpg.

And he was clearly capable of being the #2 on a contender. Indeed, he WAS either the 2nd or 3rd best player on MULTIPLE contenders.
He’s got one ring as the clear #2 ('81), another as---at worst---the #2B ('84), a third ring as the clear #3 ('86), and then a 4th ring as a sparsely used limited-value bench player ('97).

He was 7th in MVP voting in ‘81, 4th in MVP voting in ‘82.

A look at his prime production…….
Robert Parish (‘79-’91) (13 years: 1022 rs games!)
Per 100 (rs): 25.8 pts, 15.6 reb, 2.5 ast, 1.3 stl, 2.5 blk with 3.6 tov @ 58.4% TS
PER 20.2, .168 WS/48, 113 ORtg/102 DRtg (+11) in 32.4 mpg
Playoffs Per 100: 22.9 pts, 13.9 reb, 1.9 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.2 tov @ .551 TS%
PER 16.5, .121 WS/48 in 34.9 mpg

Robert Parish (full career)
Per 100 (rs): 24.6 pts, 15.5 reb, 2.3 ast, 1.3 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.5 tov @ .571 TS%
PER 19.2, .154 WS/48, 111 ORtg/102 DRtg (+9) in 28.4 mpg
**And note this is over 21 years, 1611 rs games (more than any other player in history)
Per 100 (playoffs): 22.6 pts, 14.2 reb, 1.9 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.1 tov @ .547 TS%
PER 16.6, .121 WS/48, 109 ORtg/105 DRtg (+4) in 33.6 mpg

Career rs WS: 147.0 (#26 all-time)
Career playoff WS: 15.6 (#39 all-time)
9-Time NBA All-Star
2-Time All-NBA (1x 2nd, 1x 3rd)

That’s an awful lot of career value, imo.


2nd vote: Bob Lanier
A big body with sweet shooting touch in the mid and close ranges, very good rebounder, fair passing big. Sporadically [like in '74] was a good defensive big, though overall probably not so much. But when looking at his production, efficiency, and signs of lift, as well as his totally decent longevity (generously might be said to have had a 9-year prime [so so], but 14 mostly durable seasons in which he was ALWAYS good).......he seems like a worthy candidate for this stage.

From '72-'80 (extended prime) he averaged roughly 28 pts/100 possessions [give or take a couple tenths], ~14.4 reb/100, and ~4.2 ast/100 @ +4.2% rTS with a fair/respectable big-man turnover economy [based on '78-'84].
This is all while averaging 37.4 mpg thru those 9 seasons.

In '74 he averaged 1.6 steals and 3.7 blocks per 100 possessions with a 27.1% DREB%, anchoring a -3.9 rDRTG [3rd of 17 teams]. He had both the league's best individual DRtg AND the league's best DBPM (this was a league that contained Dave Cowens and Kareem).

Granted, that year appears like a completely outlier for him [defensively], but it's still worth acknowledging.

His WOWYR is more than strong for this stage of the list, with a prime WOWYR of +5.4 (career WOWYR of +5.8).
This jives with some of my own more crude WOWY studies for Lanier [omitted his first four years since he only missed four games TOTAL in that span]......
With/Without Records and Wins added per season (pro-rated to 82 games)
‘75: 39-37 (.513) with Lanier, 1-5 (.167) without him/+28.4 wins
‘76: 30-34 (.469) with Lanier, 6-12 (.333) without him/+11.1 wins
‘77: 38-26 (.594) with Lanier, 6-12 (.333) without him/+21.4 wins
‘78: 31-32 (.492) with Lanier, 7-12 (.368) without him/+10.2 wins
‘79: 21-32 (396) with Lanier, 9-20 (.310) without him/+7.1 wins
‘80 Pistons: 9-28 (.243) with Lanier, 5-12 (.294) without
‘80 Pistons overall before trading Lanier for Kent Benson): 14-40 (.259)
‘80 Pistons after trade: 2-26 (.071)
‘80 Bucks before obtaining Lanier: 29-27 (.518)
‘80 Bucks after obtaining Lanier: 20-6 (.769) (Lanier played all 26 games)
‘81: 48-19 (.716) with Lanier, 12-3 (.800) without him/-6.9 wins
‘82: 53-21 (.716) with Lanier, 2-6 (.250) without him/+38.2 wins

The above data spans eight years, SIX different head coaches, and a fair amount of supporting cast turnover, fwiw.

He always took a back seat to some of the other great centers of his day, as he just never seemed to be on a team that could generate the narrative. I'll back-track to that '74 season, because it was a pretty impressive accomplishment (almost a "carry-job", I would say [and I HATE that term, and feel it's way over-used])......but they won 52 games with a +4.02 SRS [2nd of 17] with just Lanier, post-injury Dave Bing, and nothing much behind that [Curtis Rowe was probably the 3rd-best player].
They lost in the first round, though it was in 7-games to 54-win +3.20 SRS Bulls team that boasted Chet Walker, Jerry Sloan, Bob Love, and Norm Van Lier; and the Pistons actually outscored them by 2.3 ppg in the series. The Piston victories were by 9, 14, and 4; while their losses were by 5, 1, 4, and 2.
sansterre would probably say they merely lost a coin-toss, or even that they may have been the marginally better team.

I'm also going to refer to sansterre's post #14 in the #54 thread.



3rd pick gets hard.
I guess I'll go with [throws dart]......
EDITED: 3rd vote: Elvin Hayes
A defensive stud [or semi-stud, at least] who played for a long time (seems longer when considering the insane mpg he had thru most of his career) while barely missing a game [9 missed games in 16 years :o ].
A pretty damn substantial piece of a title Bullets team, and an utterly massive statistical footprint (for whatever that's worth to you).
Whether you like his style or not, it can hardly be denied that he's a valid candidate here.


"4th vote": Anthony Davis(???)
Was thinking really hard about breaking the ice on Allen Iverson, too. Bob Cousy and Elvin Hayes are guys I'd be more or less comfortable supporting here, too.
I think AD is arguably the best peak left on the board [imo it's between him, Giannis, and TMac, for that distinction]. Whereas TMac has a clear [almost outlier] peak season ('03), I think AD actually has a couple years of similar value (I think quite highly of his '15 campaign, which I think gets slept on).

He's proven to be a good floor-raiser, and fit nicely next to Lebron to be the best 1-2 punch in the league on what ultimately was the championship team.
Came into the league as pretty much a borderline All-Star as a rookie [and as mentioned was (imo) at least weak MVP tier by his 3rd season], so though he's got only 8 seasons, he's packed a considerable amount of value in there.


For the record....
Among those with traction, I'm presently going with this order:
Parish > Lanier > Hayes > Davis > Cousy > Mourning > Arizin > English.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 20,699
And1: 19,096
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#4 » by Hal14 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:21 pm

1. Bob Cousy
2. Nate Thurmond
3. Elvin Hayes

Bob Cousy - Very underrated on this board. When you look at the players from his era, Mikan and Pettit were better than Cousy. But Cousy has a strong argument for being better than any other player from his era. You could argue that Cousy was better than Schayes and Schayes got voted in a long time ago in the no. 41 spot.

Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Schayes - 12x all star, 6x all NBA 1st team, 0 MVP, 1x NBA title

Cousy has a clear edge in awards and titles over Schayes plus had greater impact on the game - decades later, Cousy was the guy all point guards modeled their game after. Did Schayes do that? Of course not - he was a PF and the guy back then all PFs modeled their game after was Pettit.

What about Arizin? He was a SF and he didn't have as much impact as Cousy either - Baylor was the guy back then all SFs would model their game after - not Arizin.

And as for awards and titles, we have:

Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Arizin - 10x all star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 1x all NBA 2nd team, 0 MVP, 1x NBA title

Not to mention the impact Cousy had on the game and his legacy. We simply had never before seen a guy who could make the kind of passes that Cousy could. It's like he had eyes in the back of his head - able to see 2 steps ahead of the opposition, able to anticipate where his teammates would be, hit teammates perfectly in stride for transition layups. Some of the plays he made - you might watch them today in 2021 and think they are routine plays - but a) many of the plays he made were truly outstanding and not routine at all and b) He was so far ahead of his time - to make the types of plays he did back in the 50s was pretty amazing. Keep in mind back then there was much more strict rules in regards to dribbling. The way players dribble the ball in today's game - they would get called for a carry, palming or travel pretty much every time down the floor. Cousy was called the hardwood Houdini for a reason. And it's not like he was all flash and no substance (like Maravich, Jason Williams, etc.), Cousy was all about winning. That's all he cared about - winning. Scoring the basketball, making great passes to teammates to get them baskets. Hell, he was even a good rebounder for his size. He did whatever it takes to win. He became the player that all point guards who would come later on would model their games after.

Not for another 2 decades when Frazier came along would we see a player as good as Cousy at both scoring and setting up teammates for scores. Frazier was obviously a better defender, but he also had the advantage of coming along decades later, when more players were lifting weights, rules weren't as strict on palming/carrying/traveling, the ball was easier to shoot and easier to dribble than the one Cousy played with, etc. Frazier was voted in at the no. 30 spot in this poll. Is he really 26 spots better than Cousy? No way.



Cousy led the NBA in assists 8 years in a row.

Cousy was hands down the best player at his position for an entire decade, was considered the best scorer and best passer at his position for an entire decade, and completely ignore all of the awards (which were voted on be people who actually were alive back then and followed the game very closely LIVE and based their voting off not just stats but also intangibles, eye test and impact the player had on the game, reputation around the league, etc. and also completely ignoring contributing the more titles than any PG ever, a huge part of the greatest dynasty in NBA history, the guy who was the one leading the famous Celtics fast break which changed the way the game would be played from then on since up until then no one else was playing that type of push the tempo, run run run, get quick shots up before the defense is set type of style. Let's also ignore that during his career Cousy made more high degree of difficulty shots - shots that literally no one had ever even attempted, let alone made, he was also the league's best ball handler and passer for his entire career - in an era where they played with a ball that was MUCH more difficult to dribble, pass and shoot than the ball they have the advantage of playing with today.

Nate Thurmond - right in that same tier with Reed, Gilmore and Ewing. I see those four centers as pretty debatable. Ewing, Gilmore and Reed all got voted in already - it's Thurmond's time now. Thurmond has a strong case for being better than all 3 of them (probably the best defender of the group, but Gilmore has the longevity and ABA Finals MVP, Reed has 2 Finals MVPs so I've got Thurmond just barely ranked behind those other guys).

Article here:
https://www.nba.com/history/legends/profiles/nate-thurmond

Excerpt:
Both Abdul-Jabbar and Chamberlain have gone on record saying they felt Thurmond was their toughest adversary. “He plays me better than anybody ever has,” Abdul-Jabbar told Basketball Digest when he was in his prime. “He’s tall, has real long arms, and most of all he’s agile and strong.” In an article in Sport, Abdul-Jabbar also said, “When I score on Nate, I know I’ve done something. He sweats and he wants you to sweat, too.”

"Some basketball observers have suggested that the 6-11 Thurmond provided the best mix of offense and defense in basketball history. Many say that his defense was better than Chamberlain’s, and that his offense was better than Bill Russell’s. With quickness and long hands, a smooth outside shooting touch, tenacious rebounding, classic shot blocking ability, and a total team attitude, Thurmond offered a perfectly balanced package."

Thurmond is one of the most underrated players of all time and is top 50, no question in my mind.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/defensive-dominator-thurmond-one-nbas-most-underrated-all-time

Thurmond went against Wilt, Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, Unseld, Bellamy, Beaty, Cowens, Reed - all in their prime. Yet he still managed:

-7 all star games in 14 seasons

-2 times all defensive 1st team, 3 times all defensive 2nd team...despite the fact that all defense awards didn't exist until his 6th season! Clearly one of the best defensive players of all time and one of the best rebounders of all time

-Did not make a 1st or 2nd team all NBA (obviously those usually went to Wilt/Kareem/Russell) but there's very little question he would have made quite a few all NBA 3rd team selections if it existed back when he played

-Finished 2nd in MVP voting in 66-67, finishing ahead of Russell, Robertson and Barry - Thurmond finished no. 2 behind Wilt who was no. 1. Finished 11th in 69-70, 8th in 70-7, 8th in 71-72, 9th in 72-73 and 8th in 73-74

-Helped his team to NBA Finals in 67, where they lost to arguably the greatest team of all time, the 67 Sixers. That series Thurmond averaged 14 PPG and 26.7 RPG while playing 47 MPG, going head to head vs Wilt. Thurmond's Warriors fell in 6 games to Wilt's Sixers. Let's compare that to the Eastern Division Finals - Russell (while also going against Wilt) averaged less PPG (11) and less RPG (23) than Thurmond, and Russell's Celtics lost in 5 games to Wilt's Sixers. How did Wilt do in each series? His numbers. were better in the Eastern Division Finals, going against Russell than they were in the NBA finals vs Thurmond. Wilt went from 21 PPG, 32 RPG and 10 APG vs Russell down to 17 PPG, 28 RPG and 6 APG vs Thurmond.

Elvin Hayes - here's why Hayes > Anthony Davis. Hayes = longer prime, much better longevity, much better durability. So if you're picking Davis right now you must really think that Davis peak is astronomically better than Hayes. But how good can Davis' peak really be when he's missed at least 7 games in every season of his career? He's never won MVP. He's only won 1 title and he had to join a stacked Lakers team led by LeBron James (who is literally the GOAT according to this poll) in order to win that title.

This is what Davis' Hornets/Pelicans teams did prior to Davis leaving for greener pastures, showing zero loyalty to the franchise the drafted him and teaming up with Lebron to form a super team:

2013 - below .500
2014 - below .500
2015 - swept in 1st round
2016 - below .500
2017 - below .500
2018 - lost 4 games to 1 in western conference semis
2019 - below .500

Why were Davis' teams always so bad before he arrived in LA? After all, those years (2012-2019) weren't exactly amazing years for the West. We're not talking about a stacked conference like the west was throughout the 90s or during the 2005-2009 timeframe. This was a time period where you had an old, aging Spurs team make it through a weak western conference to get to the the finals back to back years - then it was Warriors domination for the next several years with no other legit contenders in the west during that time except the 2018 Rockets. And the east was pretty weak those years as well other than Heat in 2013 and 2014 and then Cavs the next few years after that. So in a league that didn't have that many good teams - if Davis was that good of a player, how is it that he only made the playoffs 2 times out of 7 seasons, only made it out of the 1st round once and never made it to conference finals? Him, Rondo and Cousins was a solid core with some decent role players around them.

-In Davis' rookie year, the Hornets went 27-55. The year before they added Davis, they went 21-45. So after adding Davis, they won 6 more games but they lost 10 more. So that means they actually were 4 games worse after adding Davis
-In Hayes' rookie year, the Royals went 37-45. The year before they added Hayes, they went 15-67. So after adding Hayes, they got 22 games better.

Pretty significant edge for Hayes there ^

Davis has only played 8 seasons. That's simply not enough to be considered this early in the poll - only other guy with such bad longevity who's been voted in is Mikan and he was literally the best player on a championship team like 7 times - not to mention playing 7 seasons back in Mikan's era was like playing 14 seasons in the modern era.

Davis might seem like he has good numbers but consider:

1) Hayes playing in era with more possessions + playing more mins per game AND playing more games per season = he is more likely to be fatigued which accounts for his lower efficiency...whereas Davis, playing in era with less possessions + playing less mins per game and less games per season = he's less fatigued which accounts for his higher efficiency and higher numbers across the board..simply looking at per 100 possession numbers for who played 40 years apart is a slippery slope - the modern player has an unfair advantage
2) Hayes also played in a more physical era - dudes were literally getting the you know what beat out of them, there was less spacing, the paint (where Hayes operated) was more clogged up which also accounts for lower efficiency...all of thatw as the opposite for Davis, less physical era, so easier for him to have higher efficiency
3) No 3 point shot for most of Hayes' career (and all of his prime) so to make this an apples to apples comparison if you're looking it points per possession you'd have take all of the 3 point shots that Davis made and count them all as 2-pointers and then calculate his points. per possession.
4) The hoop/rim was different back in the 70s and so was the ball. The ball was not as favorable to dribble and shoot back then and the hoop/rim it was harder to get the ball to go in back then. The sneakers in modern era, they're more favorable, they allow you to run faster and jump higher. All of this helps Davis have better efficiency and accounts for Hayes' lower efficiency.
5) Not to mention Hayes was relied upon to carry more of his team's offensive load - teams geared up and game planned for stopping him, he saw more double teams, and it's more taxing, causes more fatigue when you have to carry the load, the shots you have to take have a higher degree of difficulty. Davis has had other guys who can score (LeBron, Cousins, etc.) so hasn't had to carry the load as much which helps his efficiency.

The durability factor is worth digging into further. Davis even during his 3 peak seasons (16-17, 17-18, 19-20) still missed 7, 7 and 9 games. If you look at his non-peak seasons, he's missing closer to 20 games per season. And this is is in an era with less physicality, more days off between games, star players playing less mins per game and the advantage of better weight training, better strength and conditioning programs, better supplements, better nutrition, better equipment, better facilities, etc. So it's not a reach to say that if Davis was playing in the 70s he would be a guy who at his peak would be missing 10-15 games a year and during non-peak seasons would be missing 30-40 games a year. You miss 30-40 games, you aren't even being remotely considered for an all NBA team. So we're looking at a player in Davis who is only a 3 time all NBA selection. Even as it stands today, Davis is only a 4 time all NBA selection. Does he really belong in the conversation for this poll? Cousy is a 12 time all NBA player and Hayes is a 6 time all NBA player.
1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,940
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#5 » by Odinn21 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:23 pm

Wow. Sam Jones is one of my biggest disagreements on the list so far. I thought #68 was a bit too generous to him in the 2017 version but this is just nuts to me. Anyways.

After all the engagements about Hayes vs. Davis in the last thread, when I look at Hayes and his durability, he also should be higher than Mourning.
Davis' prime duration and durability; 6 seasons and 14 missed games per season, 397 games played in total.
Mourning's prime duration and durability; 8 seasons and 11 missed games per season, 534 games played in total.

Mourning's prime duration and durability are slightly better than Davis' but I don't think it's enough for him to be above Hayes at the moment.

So I'm changing my order from Mourning/Hayes to Hayes/Mourning.

57. Elvin Hayes
Hayes' peak isn't that special among these names but his prime duration, overall longevity and durability are just too strong. He was an inefficient scorer but he made up more than enough with his relentless offense, rebounding and defense. He has to be one of the highest motor players ever, and coupled with his durability (9 missed games in 16 seasons :-o ), his case for the top 60 is just great.
(In terms of advanced metrics Hayes is one of Moses-esque figures in the game's history.)

58. Alonzo Mourning
It's quite insane that we as a group have forgotten about Mourning. He had Walton-Reed like career in a way but the unlucky injury hit him much later. He had 8 good prime seasons with very very good peak. He still had 4 seasons of regular games after the injury, his overall longevity isn't great but it's there. His intangibles were great.
Dantley is the only pick I'm certain right now and I'm going through names to be more certain and I had Mutombo in my ballot before but I'm changing him to Mourning/Hayes.

59. Dikembe Mutombo
I think it's OK to reward him for being one of the biggest defensive forces we've ever seen. Unlike Ben Wallace, he wasn't a limited player with negative impact on offense until later in his career.
This was a recap of Mutombo's career;
Spoiler:
Odinn21 wrote:
Does anyone know of any strong evidence for Mutombo's defense moving the needle? Obviously it did, but how much? BPM takes a fairly dim view of steals, but AuRPM gives Mutombo several very strong seasons, and his WOWYR is bonkers. I would really like to give him some love, but I'm cautious about voting players that BPM is so meh about. I know he was better than BPM says; I just don't know how much better.

The Nuggets went from being the dead last to being average on defense in Mutombo's rookie season.

Here's a quick recap;

1991 Nuggets; -10.31 SRS (27th), +6.8 rDRtg (27th) [the 2nd worst SRS in the season was -6.27]
Mutombo joins as a rookie
1992 Nuggets; -7.59 SRS (27th), +0.4 rDRtg (13th) [the 2nd worst SRS in the season was -7.47]
1993 Nuggets; -2.14 SRS (21st), -1.7 rDRtg (8th)
1994 Nuggets; +1.54 SRS (16th), -4.0 rDRtg (5th)
The team makes the playoffs and upsets the 63W (+8.68 SRS, 1st in SRS Sonics) with Deke's defense and the team also forces a game 7 against the 53W Jazz (+4.10 SRS)
1995 Nuggets; +0.96 SRS (13th), -0.1 rDRtg (14th)
The team gets swept by the Spurs in the 1st round. Mutombo does a good job on Robinson. Though I don't recall why Mutombo played and shot so little in that series.
1996 Nuggets; -2.62 SRS (19th), +0.5 rDRtg (17th)
The team misses the playoffs.

1996 Hawks; +1.29 SRS (14th), +0.4 rDRtg (16th)
Mutombo joins the team in the middle of his prime.
1997 Hawks; +5.52 SRS (5th), -4.4 rDRtg (3rd)
The team gets past the Pistons in the 1st round after Deke's massive performance (18.2 ppg on .745 ts, +21.4 rts), then they fall short to the historic Bulls in 5.
1998 Hawks; +3.85 SRS (8th), -0.7 rDRtg (13th)
The team loses to the Hornets in the 1st round, mediocre performance from Mutombo.
1999 Hawks; +2.82 SRS (8th), -5.1 rDRtg (2nd)
Another strong performance by Mutombo against the Pistons in the 1st round. Mutombo did a good job against Ewing, but the Hawks were utterly outclassed by the pace Sprewell and Houston brought. Mutombo was .492 ts scorer and the rest of the team was .405 ts.
The Hawks give up on Blaylock and Smith.
2000 Hawks; -5.41 SRS (26th), +3.8 rDRtg (25th)
The team misses the playoffs.

2001 Sixers; they were doing OK with Ratliff in 2000 and also in 2001 regular season, in fact their Rtg numbers got worse with Mutombo in 2001 regular season. But NPI-RAPM has Mutombo in the top 7-8 percentile in general and he was in the top percentile in D-RAPM.
In the playoffs, Mutombo was massive though. Especially against the Bucks in the ECF. He had a series like he did against the Pistons in 1997. 16.6 ppg on .577 ts (when the rest of the team scored on .462 ts). One could make a case for Mutombo being the best Sixer over Iverson in that series.
He was almost 35 by this point.

I'm not sure how you'd like to interpret this recap but I think it's quite impressive. He proved his defensive qualities in many different situations. The only significant dip in there was 2000 Hawks season but it was like Draymond Green's season without Curry and Thompson, it was hard to care. I remember some vague games of that Hawks team and I thought how disorganized they are at the time. But I wasn't a full-time follower back then, so, I might be off with 2000 Hawks season.

And I think it's good enough to earn Mutombo this spot. Though I definitely see Parish's and Lanier's cases as well. I have Mutombo ahead of them right now.

I'll edit this message about my rankings of the players those got 1st place votes for the Condorcet method.
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.
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,499
And1: 11,106
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#6 » by Cavsfansince84 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:34 pm

I think 56 may be as far as I am going to go in this project so if Trex could take me off the notice list for each thread and the updates from here on out that would be good.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 29,775
And1: 9,559
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#7 » by penbeast0 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:56 pm

Hal14 wrote:...

What about Arizin? He was a SF and he didn't have as much impact as Cousy either - Baylor was the guy back then all SFs would model their game after - not Arizin.

And as for awards and titles, we have:

Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Arizin - 10x all star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 1x all NBA 2nd team, 0 MVP, 0 NBA title

...


(a) Arizin played mainly in the 50s, his career started in 1950 like Cousy's. Baylor didn't even come into the league until 1958, almost a decade later and when the playstyle was just in the process of changing over to the 60s style that he was one of the models for . . . not for Arizin and his generation of 50s players.

(b) I had thought Arizin won an MVP but I was wrong, he has a 2nd and 3rd place finish. He did, however, win a title in 1956 (2nd place MVP finish) as the probably best player on his team (Neil Johnston had an even better offensive year but was a weak defender while Arizin was a good one). Cousy never won a title until Russell came into the league and for most of the Russell years, he was the weak spot on this playoff juggernaut. Nor did his high assist totals lead to strong offenses (unlike the other great assist generators like Oscar, Magic, Stockton, Nash). Let me make this clear (league ts% in paratheses):

1957 playoff ts% .409 (.459) Team Offensive rank (5/8)
1959 ts% .408 (.457) Ranked (5/8)
1960 ts% .350 (.463) Ranked (5/8)
1961 ts% .450 (.469) Ranked (8/8)
1962 ts% .408 (.479) Ranked (7/9)
1963 ts% .407 (493) RAnked (9/9)

So, his volume scoring was consistently almost 50 points below league average and his volume assists were leading to below average offenses EVERY YEAR of the title runs. And, unlike Bill Sharman, he was a notoriously bad defender; even Red Auerbach said so. It's not reasonable to give Cousy much (if any) credit for Boston's titles. He was a wonderful entertainer and probably a good overall offensive player in the period from 1950-1956 when the Celtics were consistently a middle of the pack NBA team. Good enough that he is a reasonable top 100 candidate for that early NBA era. He was not a significant positive factor in the NBA titles -- unlike Paul Arizin who was at worst 1B on his Warrior title team.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#8 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:53 pm

Cavsfansince84 wrote:I think 56 may be as far as I am going to go in this project so if Trex could take me off the notice list for each thread and the updates from here on out that would be good.


Thanks for playing :).
Come on back at any point if you change your mind.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,945
And1: 708
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#9 » by DQuinn1575 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 3:48 am

1. Arizin
2. Elvin Hayes
3. Robert Parish

Arizin was top 2-3 player in the league in 50s, and led team to 56 title. Johnson's stats look good, but his lack of support at the time and what others said make me think his were pretty empty stats.

Hayes was a great player for a long time, had his scoring and efficiency increase in the playoffs, and both raised a terrible expansion team to playoffs, plus was a 1a/1b player on a championship team and 3 time finalists.

As I look at Cousy, who I had higher, I realized his impact on the championships of Boston weren't that great, and I just changed my rating - Parish was a darned good player a long time, adding lots of value. In the early 80s he was equal or better than McHale, and although McHale peaked higher, he kept on playing and adding value. Strong scorer, rebounder, defender - was pretty solid across the board, which compared to Cousy made me drop him in favor of Hayes and Parish.
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,000
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#10 » by Dutchball97 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:10 pm

1. Paul Arizin - He led his team to a title in 56 with a dominant performance. Not a lot of players left who can say they won a title as the clear best player on their team. Top 3 in MVP voting twice, 5 seasons of 10+ WS and plenty of good showings in the post-season. In my opinion the only thing seperating Arizin from his contemporary Schayes is somewhat worse longevity but the gap isn't even that big and Arizin often got the best of Schayes in the play-offs in the late 50s. If anything I think Arizin is a bit overdue to get in and probably the last player left on the board I'd have put in my top 50.

2. Elvin Hayes - One of the longevity titans, which in itself demands respect but what seperates him from the likes of a Parish to me is multiple high level post-season runs. Someone with a pretty good peak/prime as well as elite longevity should definitely get in somewhere around here.

3. Bob Lanier - We're getting to a point in the list where I have to soften my emphasis on the post-season a bit. While Lanier never really got far in the post-season he did consistently perform at a high level. Even with bad teammates he was elite year after year. With how good Lanier was at his peak, with how long he was able to keep playing at a high level and with how there is plenty of evidence of his play translating well into the play-offs I can't keep him out of my ballot any longer for not having any deep runs.

My ranking for other candidates receiving votes so far:

Anthony Davis > Robert Parish > Alex English > Dikembe Mutombo > Alonzo Mourning > Bob Cousy > Nate Thurmond
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,945
And1: 708
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#11 » by DQuinn1575 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 1:05 pm

Odinn21 wrote:Wow. Sam Jones is one of my biggest disagreements on the list so far. I thought #68 was a bit too generous to him in the 2017 version but this is just nuts to me. Anyways.



For this purpose, I am not arguing that Jones was better than any of these guys - the group voted all of them better.

Times top 10 in mvp voting:


Gary Payton* 8
Dwight Howard 5
Dave Cowens* 5
Sam Jones 3
Willis Reed* 3
Chauncey Billups 2
Manu Ginóbili 2
Adrian Dantley* 1
Kevin McHale* 1
Ray Allen* 1
Paul Pierce 1
Pau Gasol 0

note - in 1967 we only have the top 5 finishers, Jones was 2nd team All-NBA, so he might be shy one.

Playoff Win Shares per 48


Chauncey Billups 0.186
Adrian Dantley* 0.174
Kevin McHale* 0.173
Dwight Howard 0.167
Manu Ginóbili 0.165
Sam Jones 0.156
Pau Gasol 0.155
Willis Reed* 0.145
Ray Allen* 0.142
Paul Pierce 0.126
Dave Cowens* 0.120
Gary Payton* 0.096


So the last 12 players averaged 2.7 years in the Top 10 in the league, and .150 WS/48 in the playoffs.
Jones exceeds both of those.
For the regular season -He ranks tied for 4th in years as Top 10 players in the league
He is 6th of 12 -in the middle in playoff ws/48.

Again, I am not arguing that Jones was better than any of these guys - the group voted all of them better.
And you can go on and say MVP voting is flawed, and win shares are flawed - etc. I'm using easy to find measures to rank them,
And I am excluding his record in Game 7 and any mention of team success.
But I (probably obviously) don't see the case where he totally doesn't belong at least towards the bottom of this group.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#12 » by trex_8063 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:16 pm

Thru post #11:

Paul Arizin - 2 (DQuinn1575, Dutchball97)
Bob Cousy - 1 (Hal14)
Robert Parish - 1 (trex_8063)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Elvin Hayes - 1 (Odinn21)


Hopefully can get at least a couple more votes on this one before the deadline (sansterre? Joaoa Saraiva? Clyde Frazier?....keep hoping Doctor MJ and LA Bird will return to the project, too).
Probably about 26 hours left for this one.


Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

DQuinn1575 wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dutchball97 wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

Franco wrote:.

Gregoire wrote:.

Hal14 wrote:.

HeartBreakKid wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

iggymcfrack wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

Joe Malburg 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:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#13 » by trex_8063 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:25 pm

Odinn21 wrote:.


The link you gave me to that PIPM database is view-only [I can't change the Player being looked at (but rather each "player finder" tab is just stuck on the players who were filled in at the time I saved the link)].
Any way I can get edit access or the ability to search players? Is it YOUR personal database, so that you'd be the one receiving any request to edit I send?
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#14 » by sansterre » Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:49 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
Odinn21 wrote:.


The link you gave me to that PIPM database is view-only [I can't change the Player being looked at (but rather each "player finder" tab is just stuck on the players who were filled in at the time I saved the link)].
Any way I can get edit access or the ability to search players? Is it YOUR personal database, so that you'd be the one receiving any request to edit I send?

Usually when I get something like that, I just copy/paste into a new sheet and use that one.

It doesn't work for fancier things, but things like the raw database it works fine for.

Incidentally, does anyone have a handy Wins Added -> CORP converter? If you don't that's fine, I can rig one with a little time, but I thought I'd ask.
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#15 » by sansterre » Fri Feb 12, 2021 3:44 pm

Okay, I've built a loose PIPM -> CORP converter and have built values for the players being discussed. So right now my rankings are a blend of CORP derived from BackPicks BPM, CORP derived from PIPM and WOWYR. This has led to a little shuffling.

1. Bob Lanier - I know next to nothing about his play, but I've loved his stats ever since I could read them. One of the highest WOWYRs remaining (+5.4/+5.8), he played on multiple teams and missed some time so we got a good sample of his impact, and it was considerable. He was a high-usage player (I'm eyeballing it in the mid-high 20s) but extremely efficient, averaging +5 rTS% through his peak. He was not a skilled passer, but he wasn't a liability with the ball either. He wasn't an historically great rebounder, but he commonly was in the top ten in rebounds per game, dominant on the defensive glass. He was a sufficient defender, but his unusually high efficiency combined with high volume made him unusually valuable, and it was value that he retained regardless of team. And in the playoffs his shooting, far from dropping, actually *increased* 2%. In fact, here are his per 100s for regular season and playoffs from '74 to '80:

Regular Season: 28.2 points on 24.8 TSA (56.2% TS), 13.9 TRB, 4.4 AST, 1.5 TOV
Playoffs: 28.9 points on 24.8 TSA (58.2% TS), 15.2 TRB, 4.4 AST, 0.7 TOV

So against playoff defenses his usage stays the same, but he's even more efficient, rebounds even more and drops his turnovers in half, without losing any assists. Seriously. Bob Lanier was fantastic. So why don't we hear about him? Because he played for the sad-sack Detroit Pistons through his entire prime and only ended up in Milwaukee a little past his peak. And Milwaukee happened to play in a murderous conference and could never make the Finals. He may never have been on a winner. But I'm telling you. Bob Lanier deserves serious consideration.

2. Dikembe Mutombo - His WOWYR numbers are insane. Completely insane. +8.5 levels of insane (nobody else being discussed is above +6). And it isn't like he played his whole career for a team that always had weak backups. Mutombo played for four different teams for at least two seasons each (and another two teams for one). So we got a pretty good sampling of how valuable he was to his teams in a ton of different situations. And it was, apparently, really freaking valuable. He was never a strong offensive player, yet his career OBPM is actually near league average. He scored fairly efficiently on limited usage, and while his passing/turnovers were quite weak, he was consistently one of the best offensive rebounders in the league for a decade. So it would be quite unfair to Mutombo to think of him as "defensive monster, offensive liability". He was an average to slightly above average offensive player, and for a center that's actually respectable. Also, defensive monster. Odinn did a better job going into detail than I, but there's a mountain of evidence that for a considerable string of years he was one of most valuable defensive players in the league. And if you were making a list of the most impactful defensive centers ever, Mutombo probably makes that list near the bottom of the top 10. So we combine 1) considerable longevity, 2) outstanding defense and 3) non-liability offense and you get a pretty valuable player. I've become convinced that defensive impact from box score metrics should be treated with caution, and that you need to look at external indicators for context. And Mutombo's WOWYR strongly suggests that his defense was more valuable than perhaps was thought.

3. Robert Parish - Parish is done a disservice by the fact that his most memorable years ('86 specifically) were well past his prime. The knock on Parish is that he was never *great*. He had many iterations as a scorer, from higher usage and sufficient efficiency to lower usage and more efficiency. But he was never a particularly good scorer. He *was* a really good rebounder, but never dominant. He had eight different years in the top 10 of rebounds, but only one in the Top 5. He was never a dominant defender, but he was strong on that end for a very long time. And for all of McHale getting flack for being a black hole, Parish's Shots per Assist was around 10 for most of his career (compared to 7 for McHale). Parish was never a good passer and turned the ball over a fair amount. Put all this together and Parish was never dominant. He was never close to dominant. At his best he was only quite good. But here's the thing. He did that crap FOR EVER. He's 2nd all time in offensive boards, 4th in defensive boards, 10th in blocks, Top 30 in points and so on. To be clear, I don't care about those career counting stats. But I want to be clear that, in contrast to, say, Giannis, who has several ATG seasons but little else, Parish has maybe 15 All-Star (or close) seasons. In career value, Parish makes up the difference in sheer longevity.

Lanier > Mutombo > Parish > AD > Elvin Hayers > Alonzo Mourning > Giannis > Thurmond > Arizin > Cousy > English
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,940
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#16 » by Odinn21 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 3:56 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
Odinn21 wrote:.


The link you gave me to that PIPM database is view-only [I can't change the Player being looked at (but rather each "player finder" tab is just stuck on the players who were filled in at the time I saved the link)].
Any way I can get edit access or the ability to search players? Is it YOUR personal database, so that you'd be the one receiving any request to edit I send?

I’m away for the weekend for Valentine’s Day. Do not have access to my computer right now.
I created that Google Sheets document when the actual owner put his copy into the bin. You can do the same to my copy by looking the options on top left hand. There should be an option to create copies. Don’t remember the exact pathway to the option though.
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.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,375
And1: 8,056
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#17 » by trex_8063 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 4:41 pm

Odinn21 wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Odinn21 wrote:.


The link you gave me to that PIPM database is view-only [I can't change the Player being looked at (but rather each "player finder" tab is just stuck on the players who were filled in at the time I saved the link)].
Any way I can get edit access or the ability to search players? Is it YOUR personal database, so that you'd be the one receiving any request to edit I send?

I’m away for the weekend for Valentine’s Day. Do not have access to my computer right now.
I created that Google Sheets document when the actual owner put his copy into the bin. You can do the same to my copy by looking the options on top left hand. There should be an option to create copies. Don’t remember the exact pathway to the option though.


Oh wow, that worked [I was skeptical, tbh]. Weird how simply making a copy would unlock the player finder option. Thanks!
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 20,699
And1: 19,096
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#18 » by Hal14 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:52 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
Hal14 wrote:...

What about Arizin? He was a SF and he didn't have as much impact as Cousy either - Baylor was the guy back then all SFs would model their game after - not Arizin.

And as for awards and titles, we have:

Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Arizin - 10x all star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 1x all NBA 2nd team, 0 MVP, 0 NBA title

...


(a) Arizin played mainly in the 50s, his career started in 1950 like Cousy's. Baylor didn't even come into the league until 1958, almost a decade later and when the playstyle was just in the process of changing over to the 60s style that he was one of the models for . . . not for Arizin and his generation of 50s players.

(b) I had thought Arizin won an MVP but I was wrong, he has a 2nd and 3rd place finish. He did, however, win a title in 1956 (2nd place MVP finish) as the probably best player on his team (Neil Johnston had an even better offensive year but was a weak defender while Arizin was a good one). Cousy never won a title until Russell came into the league and for most of the Russell years, he was the weak spot on this playoff juggernaut. Nor did his high assist totals lead to strong offenses (unlike the other great assist generators like Oscar, Magic, Stockton, Nash). Let me make this clear (league ts% in paratheses):

1957 playoff ts% .409 (.459) Team Offensive rank (5/8)
1959 ts% .408 (.457) Ranked (5/8)
1960 ts% .350 (.463) Ranked (5/8)
1961 ts% .450 (.469) Ranked (8/8)
1962 ts% .408 (.479) Ranked (7/9)
1963 ts% .407 (493) RAnked (9/9)

So, his volume scoring was consistently almost 50 points below league average and his volume assists were leading to below average offenses EVERY YEAR of the title runs. And, unlike Bill Sharman, he was a notoriously bad defender; even Red Auerbach said so. It's not reasonable to give Cousy much (if any) credit for Boston's titles. He was a wonderful entertainer and probably a good overall offensive player in the period from 1950-1956 when the Celtics were consistently a middle of the pack NBA team. Good enough that he is a reasonable top 100 candidate for that early NBA era. He was not a significant positive factor in the NBA titles -- unlike Paul Arizin who was at worst 1B on his Warrior title team.

1) I give Arizin credit for having a strong season in 55-56 and winning a title. But he was by no means the clear cut best player on that Warriors team. Arizin was 2nd on the team in PER, 2nd in win shares, 2nd in TS%, edged out Johnston in scoring by only 2 PPG. Arizin was 2nd on the team in minutes, 4th in rebounding and tied for 4th in assists. Also keep in mind that was not a very good year for the NBA. The Warriors and Celtics were the only teams in the league who finished more than a game over .500. The Pistons team they beat in the finals was just a game over .500. Mikan was washed up by then..

2) There's no MVP voting data prior to 1956, so below I've outlined where each player finished in terms of all NBA voting pre-1956, and from 1956 onward where each player finished in MVP voting:

1951 Neither made all NBA team but both made all-star team
1952 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, Arizin = 1st team all NBA
1953 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, Arizin = military
1954 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, finishing above his teammate Mcauley who made 2nd team. Arizin = military
1955 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, finishing above teammate Sharman who made 2nd team. Arizin = did not make either 1st or 2nd team, but his teammate Neil Johnston finished above him on 1st team
1956 Cousy = 3rd place in MVP, Arizin 2nd...Arizin wins NBA title
1957 Cousy = 1st place in MVP, Arizin 3rd
1958 Cousy = 6th place in MVP, Arizin 8th
1959 Cousy = 4th place in MVP, Arizin 5th
1960 Cousy = 4th place in MVP, Arizin did not get any points in MVP voting
1961 Cousy = 6th place in MVP, Arizin 16th
1962 Cousy = 8th place in MVP, Arizin did not get any points in MVP voting
1963 Cousy = still going strong with 8th place in MVP voting + NBA title, Arizin is retired and did not play this season

Your assertion that Cousy should not get any credit for Celtics winning 6 titles is way off base. When the Celtics won the title in 1957, guess who the league MVP was that year? Bob Cousy. During the 6 years the Celtics won the title with Cousy, he finished in the top 8 in MVP voting every time. Those 6 years he finished 1st once, 4th twice, 6th once and 8th twice. He made all NBA 1st team 4 of those 6 years and made all NBA 2nd team the other 2 years. He also led the NBA in assists during 3 of those 6 seasons he helped the Celtics win the title.

Also, the Celtics improved their record by 16.5 wins during Cousy's rookie year. The warriors improved their record by only 15 wins in Arizin's rookie year. So a +1.5 wins edge for Cousy there. Not a huge advantage but an advantage for Cousy nonetheless.

If we're factoring in longevity, definitely adds to the case for Cousy. Cousy played 13 full seasons - only 10 for Arizin.
1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 29,775
And1: 9,559
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#19 » by penbeast0 » Fri Feb 12, 2021 8:26 pm

Hal14 wrote:1) I give Arizin credit for having a strong season in 55-56 and winning a title. But he was by no means the clear cut best player on that Warriors team. Arizin was 2nd on the team in PER, 2nd in win shares, 2nd in TS%, edged out Johnston in scoring by only 2 PPG. Arizin was 2nd on the team in minutes, 4th in rebounding and tied for 4th in assists. Also keep in mind that was not a very good year for the NBA. The Warriors and Celtics were the only teams in the league who finished more than a game over .500. The Pistons team they beat in the finals was just a game over .500. Mikan was washed up by then..

2) There's no MVP voting data prior to 1956, so below I've outlined where each player finished in terms of all NBA voting pre-1956, and from 1956 onward where each player finished in MVP voting:

1951 Neither made all NBA team but both made all-star team
1952 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, Arizin = 1st team all NBA
1953 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, Arizin = military
1954 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, finishing above his teammate Mcauley who made 2nd team. Arizin = military
1955 Cousy = all NBA 1st team, finishing above teammate Sharman who made 2nd team. Arizin = did not make either 1st or 2nd team, but his teammate Neil Johnston finished above him on 1st team
1956 Cousy = 3rd place in MVP, Arizin 2nd...Arizin wins NBA title
1957 Cousy = 1st place in MVP, Arizin 3rd
1958 Cousy = 6th place in MVP, Arizin 8th
1959 Cousy = 4th place in MVP, Arizin 5th
1960 Cousy = 4th place in MVP, Arizin did not get any points in MVP voting
1961 Cousy = 6th place in MVP, Arizin 16th
1962 Cousy = 8th place in MVP, Arizin did not get any points in MVP voting
1963 Cousy = still going strong with 8th place in MVP voting + NBA title, Arizin is retired and did not play this season

Your assertion that Cousy should not get any credit for Celtics winning 6 titles is way off base. When the Celtics won the title in 1957, guess who the league MVP was that year? Bob Cousy. During the 6 years the Celtics won the title with Cousy, he finished in the top 8 in MVP voting every time. Those 6 years he finished 1st once, 4th twice, 6th once and 8th twice. He made all NBA 1st team 4 of those 6 years and made all NBA 2nd team the other 2 years. He also led the NBA in assists during 3 of those 6 seasons he helped the Celtics win the title.

Also, the Celtics improved their record by 16.5 wins during Cousy's rookie year. The warriors improved their record by only 15 wins in Arizin's rookie year. So a +1.5 wins edge for Cousy there. Not a huge advantage but an advantage for Cousy nonetheless.

If we're factoring in longevity, definitely adds to the case for Cousy. Cousy played 13 full seasons - only 10 for Arizin.


If you put a lot of value on awards, Cousy ranks higher than Arizin. I believe that those awards were undeserved; Cousy is the exact type of player that gets grossly overrated . . . inefficient volume scorer + high stat totals (assists) that don't contribute as might be expected to team performance (team ORTG). Pete Maravich (one of the most similar players) made 2 ALL-NBA 1st teams and 2 ALL-NBA 2nd teams and got MVP votes in 5 seasons. There are a lot of players (a good hundred I would guess) that got less awards and were more valuable to their team's playoff chances. If his playmaking was so key after 1957, why were the Celtics in the bottom half of the league in ORTG every year. If his scoring was so valuable, why did they win championships when almost every year his scoring efficiency for the playoffs was awful. Was he contributing strongly to their defensive dominance? His rep is as a poor defensive player; Auerbach didn't even want him for the Celtics because of it (obviously he changed his valuation later).

I think Cousy pre 1957 playoffs is probably a valuable player, one of the best of the early 50s. His MVP in 57 was pretty questionable but as a regular season award at least arguably semi-deserved. Giving him credit for the 6 titles to me is just ignoring the numbers and I trust the numbers more than the voters of that era.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
Baski
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,533
And1: 3,950
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #57 

Post#20 » by Baski » Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:44 am

1.Dikembe Mutombo
One of the greatest defenders and shot blockers ever. ATG Rebounder as well. A bit limited offensively; he's not exactly Russell scoring-wise, but on the flipside he's not exactly Russell passing wise. In an era with Hakeem, Mourning, Duncan and Robinson, he stood out as arguably the best defender of the late 90s. Solid longevity, especially defensively.

Made multiple All star and All NBA teams on the strength of mostly his defense and rebounding.

2.Alonzo Mourning
3.Bob Lanier


Order of preference:
Bob Cousy
Paul Arizin
Robert Parish
Alex English
Elvin Hayes

Return to Player Comparisons