RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 (Anthony Davis)

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

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 (Anthony Davis) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:18 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. Bob Lanier
58. Dikembe Mutombo
59. Elvin Hayes
60. Paul Arizin
61. ???

Will look to conclude this one around 10-11am EST on Thursday.
Reminder to everyone to keep tabs and provide an ordered list of those with traction [or face potential consequences to your eligibility to vote]. Cousy, Parish, Mourning, TMac, Walton, Davis, English, as well as Thurmond, Iverson, Giannis [possibly others].....probably good idea to include them.


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:.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#2 » by trex_8063 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:27 pm

1st vote: Robert Parish (sigh......AGAIN)
So I'm a meaningful longevity guy. And Parish has this in spades. He's been my clear top pick for awhile via my criteria; as my list stands now, there's actually no one left on the table who's even within 7-8 places of Parish.

We're fastly approaching a point where I think he's being underrated [unless your criteria hinges on peak or similar].

Because 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, +2.2 BPM, 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, +1.1 BPM, 109 ORtg/105 DRtg (+4) 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, +1.5 BPM, 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, +1.1 BPM, 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. It's an amount that is [imo] utterly unmatched by anyone left on the table. If full career value is even remotely a foundation of your criteria [here I'll even take an authoritative tone]: Parish belongs on your ballot [probably at #1].


2nd vote: Anthony Davis
I think AD is arguably the best peak left on the board [well.....except probably Walton; after that [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).
Hell, even in '19 he was playing at an amazing level. I frowned a bit at how he stayed out [or was kept out] of games after he made it clear he wanted a trade. But you know, it's his prerogative to want to be somewhere where he can actually contend [and frankly anyone who uses '19 against him should be extra generous to Kevin Garnett for sticking it out for 12 fruitless years in Minnesota]; and once the decision was more or less set, the Pels too sort of WANTED to keep him out (to protect their trade asset). It's hardly any use if they play him too much in a dead-end season [ceiling is a 1st round exit at best] and risk him getting injured, at which point his stock goes way down.

Anyway.....
He's a proven 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.


3rd vote (holds nose): Allen Iverson
I'm not a fan of Iverson at all. He's got some major flaws as a player and no doubt is overrated in the mainstream. But I [somewhat grudgingly??] must acknowledge that his body of work makes him a decent candidate at this stage. I will try to find the time to post more extensively about him later.

Could really see going with Bob Cousy for my 3rd vote, too (sort of similar player and career-arc in a number of ways).
Vince Carter is another I think needs some discussion here. Unseld as well.


For the record....
Among those with traction, I'm presently going with this order:
Parish > Davis > Iverson > Cousy > Mourning > Thurmond > McGrady > Parker > Giannis > English > Walton
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Odinn21
Veteran
Posts: 2,533
And1: 1,887
Joined: May 19, 2019
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#3 » by Odinn21 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:31 pm

trex_8063 wrote:1st vote: Robert Parish (sigh......AGAIN)

Wow, he has been your #1 vote since the #53 thread. Massive respect for the patience and fortitude.

---

61. 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. Still a prime longer than A. Davis and also arguably better. 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.

62. Tony Parker
His peak is underrated, also how long his peak lasted is underrated. I'd personally pick 2013 as his peak but I definitely see someone going for 2009 which was only to be disrupted by injury in 2010 in the future. In 2009, he was in the top 10% percentile in impact numbers. In 2012 and 2013 he was in the very top 1%. He usually is considered as not so great impact player but he really was at his best. His prime duration beyond peak duration was also good. He had 9 seasons of actual prime with 4 seasons worthy of peak. Even before going into extended prime which I usually refer as just prime, he was a force for a decade and a half. Yeah, his overall longevity is worse than Parish without a doubt but I think edges going in his favour for peak and prime are more than that.
Some of us in here usually look at WS or VORP but in Parker's case, sheer numbers are more telling.
He's #10* in total points and #5 in total assists in the pro playoff history. It's very likely that Durant will surpass Parker for that #10 spot in 2021 playoffs but the point stands still. Parker is the only player in top 20 to make the list yet it's obvious that his peak/prime/longevity stack more than enough at this point in the list.
(*He's #9 in the NBA playoff history. Erving's ABA career.)

63. Robert Parish
I'm reaching to a point that my more prime oriented vision won't be able to favour anyone else over Parish's massive longevity. Right now, I have him as a placeholder and I might change this pick because I have some thoughts I'm yet to unfold properly (about Arizin, Davis, McGrady, Iverson, English, Thurmond and McAdoo).

BTW, in the previous project it looks like Rasheed Wallace made the top 85 just barely but I feel like I might consider him in the near future.

Edit;
Cousy > Thurmond > McGrady > Davis > English > Giannis > Jokic > Iverson > B. Jones > Walton
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.
Hal14
Pro Prospect
Posts: 761
And1: 297
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#4 » by Hal14 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:43 pm

Hal14 wrote:1. Bob Cousy
2. Nate Thurmond
3. Allen Iverson

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.

Ranking of players getting traction: Cousy > Parish > English > Mourning > Walton > McGrady > Davis
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 18,069
And1: 14,036
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#5 » by HeartBreakKid » Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:56 pm

Criteria

Spoiler:
I'm a pretty big peak guy, I'm not that interested in value of total seasons. The value of multiple seasons to me is to give me a greater sample size to understanding how good they were on the court, not necessarily the totality of their impact through out the years.

I also value impact over all else, and I define impact as the ability to help a team win games. Boxscore stats, team accolades and individual accolades (unless I agree with them personally) have very little baring on my voting so some names will look a bit wonky. The reason why I ignore accolades and winningness is because basketball is a team game and the players are largely not in control of the quality of their teammates or the health f their team (or their own personal health in key moments), thus I don't see the value of rating players based on xx has this many MVPs versus this guy has this many rings. In addition, I simply find this type of analysis boring because it's quite easy to simply look at who has a bigger laundry list of accomplishments.



1) Bill Walton. He is the best player by far here. He was probably a top 3 player in the world during his last couple years in college as well, though I believe this is NBA only. I am quite certain that Bill Walton is a top 20 peak ever. He is a top ten defensive anchor which alone adds more value than anyone left, and his offensive passing can generate very efficient offenses without him needing to score.

2)) Nikola Jokic. #2 vote I'll give to the only guy who is large and passes better than Walton. I'm not a longevity guy but Jokic has actually been a star caliber player for longer than people think. He was greatly underplayed in his 2nd season and Malone was criticized for that even back then. He has 4 seasons of all-star impact and two seasons where I had him as the 2nd best player in the league. I do think his offense is so special from his position that it causes an imbalance that makes him more valuable than two way bigs. His scoring ability might be the best among all the bigs left, and what's great about him is that he doesn't need to score a lot to have impact. Walton's defense is so intense that I can't imagine taking Jokic over that, but everyone else left is a tier or 2 down from either Walton's offense or his defense.


3) Giannis Antetokounmpo - I can see why he isn't getting much traction as he's still young. Though he has 6 seasons of being a good player and 5/6 of them he was all-nba caliber I think. Two well deserved MVP's is nothing to scoff at and even though he is slammed for his playoff failures he still did make the conference finals. I am fairly convinced that his crazy ability to finish in the paint as well as have the handles to get into there produces so much gravity that if he played with another real star you wouldn't be able to just "stay back and let Giannis shoot". As he is now he still requires 3-4 guys jumping in the paint - what if you replaced Khris Middleton with Curry, Bryant, Durant, Pierce etc - these are all guys who were 2nd options or co-anchors of teams. Seems like a lot of players who do not have MVP caliber teammates are held to the same standards as guys with them which does not make sense to me. I can see why me picking Jokic would be controversial, but Giannis seems pretty primed for this type of competition - I don't think he is any less valuable than Anthony Davis, and I am still not sure how Davis winning a title with LBJ convinces people that he is a much better post season player than Giannis.



Anthony Davis. I think he is kind of like a better version of Karl Malone. His ability to play off others seems more effective than Karl Malone - certainly comparable as a finisher. Defense he is a couple years above Karl. That should mean he goes pretty high up here.



Alonzo Mourning. He's not much worse than Dwight Howard who I think is comfortably a top 40 player. I think Alonzo is not as good of a defender as his reputation suggest but his verticality is still very intimidating. His flawed offensive game is well documented in this section so I don't see a reason to dog him, but he is still a legitimate two way player with massive defensive impact. I just remembered Giannis existed so he bumps Alonzo out.





Davis> Mourning> >Thurmond>McGrady>English>Parish>Cousy
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 12,037
And1: 4,864
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#6 » by Joao Saraiva » Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:27 pm

Votes
1. Anthony Davis
2. Allen Iverson
3. Robert Parish


AD deserves it for me. To put it simple the guy is still a bit low on longevity - he has played 19000 minutes so far in the RS in his career. But he's been damn good. He's a super finisher arround the rim, he has the midrange, the 3 point shot and he's a defensive anchor like not many left in the list.

His impact is brutal on both sides of the court, and if you give him the right team he's gonna boost your chances big time.

I think he is better on offense than any big man left, and at least in the same tier on defense as the ones left. So his peak and prime for me are clearly the best available here.

60 players have been chosen. Is longevity gonna hurt him how many more spots? There comes a point where enough is enough.

About the other players listed...

Nate Thrumond
Mourning
McGrady
Giannis
Jokic
Tony Parker
Bob Cousy
Bill Walton

I have Bill Walton out of my top 100.
“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
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#7 » by trex_8063 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:34 pm

Since Jokic is getting a tiny bit of buzz (while simultaneously having an amazing [probably peak??] season), I just wanted to make sure it's absolutely clear to everyone: events, accomplishments, play that occurred AFTER '20 are "inadmissable" for this project.

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:.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 23,076
And1: 5,150
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#8 » by penbeast0 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:35 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. Bobby Jones, another English type player with super consistency and versatility though a defensive star instead of an offensive one, then maybe Parish. Note that Jones has more 1st team All-Defense teams than any other player in history with 11 (2 ABA). He was 1st All-Defense team every year of his career until his final one where he was 2nd team.

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. Lever may not make my top 100, Walton almost definitely won't. 1.5 seasons as a star and 1 as a top reserve does not make up for 10 as a highly paid injury; it's a shame because he's probably top 20 all-time with more seasons, maybe top 10.

After Parish, call it Giannis, then Unseld, Mourning, Thurmond, Parker, Nique, Cousy, Hawkins, Tmac, Moncrief. Those are subject to change, I haven't thought deeply about the ranking past my top 3.
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 23,076
And1: 5,150
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#9 » by penbeast0 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:41 pm

English v. Nique v. Tmac

Two of the greatest scorers of the 80s, both classy guys who stayed with one team for a decade. Tmac is a more modern player who gets the advantage of the 3 point shot being used in his lifetime but suffers in terms of leadership and locker room issues as more than 1 of his coaches have complained about his practice habits and insistence on doing things his way instead of playing within the team concept.

Defensively, Tmac has the edge on peak, English on consistency. Strangely enough Wilkins probably played on the best defensive teams with those Mike Fratello Hawks squads but he fails the eye test, once getting voted "player who puts the least effort on defense" in a player contest in Sports Illustrated (over George Gervin who came in second). Tmac could be a terrific defender when locked in; English started with more of a rep as a defensive player than a scorer in Milwaukee and Indiana before coming to Denver and starting a run where he scored more points during the 80s than anyone else, including Larry Bird, Adrian Dantley, and Nique among others.

IN terms of scoring, English is the most efficient, shooting at a .550 ts% for his career, Nique is behind him at .536, with Tmac trailing at .519 though in a tougher defensive era. Since the main value of each of the three is their volume scoring, this seems a strong argument for English. On the other hand, while all three were big volume scorers, Nique scored the most per 100 possessions at 34.5pts (though he was also the most frequently iso scorer rather than scoring in the flow of the offense), Tmac is a 31.6 and English at 30.4. Tmac has the single dominant season of the 3 when Grant Hill went down to injury and Orlando featured Tmac all the time every time; but he was also less consistent and more often injured than the other two. Note: Using the per 100 figure to avoid giving an advantage to English over Nique since English played in an extremely high pace system in DEN and Nique in a relatively low paced one in ATL.

In terms of playmaking, Tmac was the primary playmaker at 7.1 assists per 100 possessions, English a decent secondary playmaker at 5.1, and Wilkins not creating much for others at 3.5. Nique turned the ball over 3.5 times/100 possessions as did Tmac with English in the same neighborhood at 3.3. Rebounding gives the edge to Nique by a hair of Tmac at 9.3 v. 9.1 v. 7.7 to English.

In terms of versatility and a willingness to take on different roles to help the team, English has a strong case, at different times, he was the primary front court defensive stopper (next to Kiki Vandeweghe and Dan Issel, on an admittedly terrible defensive front court), a post up threat (same team), the primary outside shooter (later teams with Fat Lever and TR Dunn at guard), a point forward, an offball player, etc. Tmac played much more 2 guard and even some 4 which neither of the other two did much of, he even played PG at time. Nique changed his game to incorporate a 3 point shot toward the end of his career which English never really added.

Playoff success is the one additional factor that frequently gets mentioned. Tmac went to the playoffs less and never got out of the 1st round but had some great numbers in losing series. From watching him, he tended to play less well when his teammates were strong but would suddenly take on the superman mantle when Hill went out in Orlando or when Yao would get injured in Houston and just be a one man wrecking crew. English's numbers didn't drop at all in the playoffs, maybe because of his versatility. His teams had one WCF appearance and 4 times into the second round for the most playoff success of the 3. Nique is one of the great whose number drop the most precipitously in playoff competition; maybe because he tended to one particular style that could be gamed more, I don't know. He had ATL in the playoffs every year but two but only got out of the 1st round 3 times in the stacked East of his era.

I have it English, Wilkins, Tmac based primarily on efficiency, consistency, and character. Nique and TMac have a definite advantage in flash being great dunkers while English would get a "quiet" 25-30; Nique also had possibly the greatest nickname in NBA history -- this translated into more accolades for the two flashier players.
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
Dutchball97
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,976
And1: 1,679
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#10 » by Dutchball97 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:38 pm

1. Anthony Davis - In terms of regular season longevity AD is no lightweight. Davis 86 WS in the regular season falls short of most of the candidates with full careers but to put it into context it is already higher than the likes of Cowens, IT, Kawhi and Reed. His 5 years of 10+ WS match Arizin and is more than enough to prove to me AD's peak isn't an outlier. I'd have liked to have seen AD gotten a bit deeper in the play-offs as a first option as I don't think those Pelicans were that bad necessarily and even his great 2020 play-off run came as the clear second option but at this point his strong peak and decent longevity is enough for me to vote him here.

2. Robert Parish - Still a lot of guys I'm looking at here but Parish is the guy with the most support out of everyone else I'm considering and it's probably for a good reason. There are a couple very good peaks still left on the table but in most cases it's only 1 or 2 really good seasons and sometimes with questionable play-off runs as well. Parish might not have peaked as high as most of the other candidates at this point but at his best he was still a top 10 player imo, that paired with his incredible longevity and many deep post-season campaigns gets it done.

3. Allen Iverson - Next man up from the last thread since Arizin finally made the list. AI is one of those players who is at all times simultaneously overrated and underrated. I feel like this is a fair place to put him though. A pretty lengthy career all things considered, plenty of play-off success and even though I don't think AI deserved that MVP award his peak that season was still very impressive imo.

Giannis Antetokounmpo > Tracy McGrady > Nikola Jokic > Bob Cousy > Alonzo Mourning > Alex English > Bobby Jones > Tony Parker > Nate Thurmond > Bill Walton
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#11 » by trex_8063 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 8:05 pm

Don't know if it's counter-intuitive to lobby for my 3rd pick, but I think I've said just about all I can for Parish [at this point whomever doesn't want to won't].
So I'm gonna start the ball rolling for a guy I'm not a fan of, but who I think bears a pinch too much criticism here: Allen Iverson.

So first thing to keep in mind if you look at his "all-in-one" rate metrics (things like PER, WS/48, BPM): Iverson played some absurd minutes (and a PER of 21 while playing 30 mpg is not at all the same thing as doing it while playing 42 mpg, for example).
Consider that in his first twelve seasons in the league, Iverson averaged <40 mpg ONCE (at 39.4 mpg).
I mean, the guy's motor was beyond compare (Hondo is always the first guy to jump to mind when talking about motor, but Iverson is right there with him).

Such playing must also be kept in mind if looking at his impact metrics or indicators. For example, his best 7 years RAPM added puts him in the company of guys like Marc Gasol [whom you'd think would be higher, as we always allude to his non-box impact] and Steve Francis, as well as the best 6-years [because I'm missing '20] for Anthony Davis and Giannis Antetokounmpo.

Not bad company. Iverson does so while destroying the field in mpg, though.

I compiled some extensive WOWY data for Iverson [with special focus on team offense]----which fwiw, Iverson is one of those players for whom what paints a far different picture than Ben Taylor's WOWYR (Sidney Moncrief is the other who comes to mind:
WOWYR loves him, but my own [fairly extensive] WOWY studies painted a far more pedestrian picture).
Anyway, here's how that looked for Iverson:

’99
Sixer avg 83.0 ppg w/o him, 89.9 ppg with (+6.9 ppg change).
47.5 TS% w/o him, 49.5 TS% with (+2.0%).
97.4 ORtg w/o, 100.0 ORtg with (+2.6).
-12.04 SRS w/o, +3.17 SRS with (+15.21).

’00
85.4 ppg without him, 96.4 ppg with him (+11.0 ppg).
46.9 TS% without him, 50.6 TS% with him (+3.7%).
94.7 ORtg w/o him, 102.7 ORtg with him (+8.0).
-1.69 SRS w/o him, +1.48 SRS with him (+3.17).

’01
88.8 ppg w/o him, 95.6 with (+6.8 ppg).
51.6 TS% w/o, 51.8 TS% with (+0.2%).
103.2 ORtg w/o, 103.7 ORtg with (+0.5).
+0.48 SRS w/o, +4.12 SRS with him (+3.63).

’02
84.7 ppg w/o, 93.3 ppg with (+8.6 ppg).
49.1 TS% w/o, 50.7 TS% with (+1.6%).
100.2 ORtg w/o, 102.8 ORtg with (+2.6).
-4.18 SRS w/o, +3.27 SRS with him (+7.45).

'03--no missed games

’04---banged up much of year, missed 34 games
85.1 ppg w/o, 90.0 ppg with (+4.9 ppg).
50.8 TS% w/o, 50.3 TS% with (-0.5%)
100.3 ORtg w/o, 98.3 ORtg with (-2.0).
-2.54 SRS w/o, -3.24 with him (-0.70).

’05
95.9 ppg w/o, 99.4 ppg with (+3.5 ppg).
52.6 TS% w/o, 52.8 TS% with (+0.2%).
101.6 ORtg w/o, 103.7 ORtg with (+2.1).
-0.60 SRS w/o, -1.11 with him (-0.51).

’06
90.9 ppg w/o, 100.5 ppg with (+9.6 ppg).
53.1 TS% w/o, 53.9 TS% with (+0.8%).
103.9 ORtg w/o, 106.3 ORtg with (+2.4).
-5.59 SRS w/o, -1.62 with him (+3.97).

AVERAGE effect of having Iverson vs. not having him over these years:
NOT weighted for games played/missed
+7.3 ppg
+1.1% TS%
+2.3 ORtg
+4.61 SRS
WEIGHTED for games played
+7.4 ppg
+1.2% TS%
+2.5 ORtg
+4.21 SRS
Weighted for games missed
+7.1 ppg
+0.8% TS%
+1.4 ORtg
+2.90 SRS
39-59 record (.398) without, 251-193 record (.565) with (avg of +13.7 wins added per 82-game season).


And note: '04 [injury year] was a definitive outlier within this time period (according to all his rate metrics too). He was playing banged up and performing well below his usual standard; and perhaps non-surprisingly, it's the ONE year in this sample that looks off from the rest.
If I can cherry-pick a little and remove that year from consideration.....
AVERAGE effect of having Iverson vs. not having him during '99-'02, '05 and '06:
NOT weighted for # of games played in each season
+7.8 ppg
+1.4% TS%
+3.0 ORtg
+5.49 SRS
WEIGHTED for games played
+7.7 ppg
+1.4% TS%
+3.0 ORtg
+4.81 SRS
WEIGHTED for games missed
+8.3 ppg
+1.5% TS%
+3.2 ORtg
+4.82 SRS
25-39 record (.391) without, 232-164 record (.586) with: avg of +16 wins added per 82-game season.

So basically in his prime [minus '04], he was worth about 16 additional wins and a roughly +5 bump to their SRS (and specifically at +3(ish) bump to their ORtg).

I'll stop there for now.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
sansterre
Senior
Posts: 548
And1: 789
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#12 » by sansterre » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 am

1. Tracy McGrady. It's time to talk about T-Mac. I teased him earlier and got no traction. But by my stuff McGrady is the #1 player on the board right now (of the 15 names that are being discussed). Of the six metrics I use he ranks:

BackPicks (my personal CORP conversion): 1st of 15
PIPM CORP (personal CORP conversion): 3rd of 13
CORP (ElGee's numbers): 3rd of 11
Win Share CORP (personal formula): 8th of 15
VORP CORP (personal formula): 1st of 12
WOWYR (ElGee's numbers): tied 5th of 12

Look, I realize that these are all formulas. None of these are visually verified. And I'm leery of arguing hard for a player purely based on formulas. But that's pretty good representation (especially since many of these formulas value different things). You know who the WSCORP and VORPCORP formulas love love love? Dominique Wilkins and Allen Iverson. But BackPicks BPM, CORP, PIPM and WOWYR all range from disinterest to *hate* for those two. Because different formulas like different things. But T-Mac shows up pretty well in all of them. The only one he struggles with (Win Share CORP) is the stat I think least of. And he seems to have gotten even better in the playoffs. Here are some regular season vs. playoff comparisons from some of his best years (I'm not using the 'P' word because if I do Odinn will yell at me about how I chose the wrong years and he'll probably be right):

RS '01-'07: 32.9% Usage, 52.8% TS, 9.6% Reb, 28.6% Ast, 9.4% TO, +6.6 OBPM
PO '01-07: 35.1% Usage, 52.7% TS, 8.9% Reb, 34.4% Ast, 10.2% TO, +7.7 BPM

So in the playoffs his usage went up by 2.2%, and between the usage increase and going against playoff defenses (where his team was *always* the lower seed) his efficiency didn't budge. Do you realize how nuts that is? We praise Kobe for his inelastic offense, but T-Mac's statistical resume on that front is superior to Kobe's (granted, we only have five series to look at, so this could be a sample size issue, but still). Are we sure that we aren't just hating on T-Mac because he couldn't get out of the first round? How different is T-Mac's situation from Kobe in '05-'07? Except that a) we'd seen Kobe play with Shaq and it was awesome and b) we got to see Kobe play with Gasol and it was awesome. We never got to see that with T-Mac except for with Yao, and Yao was injured a lot. Here's Kobe from '06-07:

RS '06-'07: 36.2% Usage, 56.8% TS, 7.9% Reb, 24.8% Ast, 9.8% TO, +6.9 OBPM
PO '06-'07: 30.9% Usage, 57.5% TS, 8.1% Reb, 20.9% Ast, 15.0% TO, +4.2 OBPM

Kobe's usage plummets in the playoffs, but he gains little in terms of scoring (though his efficiency is still notably higher than McGrady), his assists fall, his turnovers spike . . . I'm not kidding. Are we sure that T-Mac wasn't a seriously inelastic scoring monster that never got enough support? His Heliocentrism scores, from '01 to '07 (again, VORP is only so good at stuff, but it's something):

'01: 67% RS, 80% PO
'02: 56% RS, 80% PO
'03: 97% RS, 143% PO
'04: 407% RS
'05: 45% RS, 56% PO
'06: 40% RS (missed half the season)
'07: 32% RS, 36% PO

Compare this with Kobe:

'06: 60% RS, 25% PO
'07: 58% RS, 67% PO

Look. I've gone on a while here. I'm just saying. It's pretty clear to me that McGrady's supporting cast in Orland ranged from pretty bad to flaming dumpster fire. And when he moved to Houston he started missing games and wasn't quite himself. I don't know what to make of it. But few players have his resume of stepping his performance in the playoffs, even when acting as the first option on a weak team. The second McGrady gets *any* support he'll have my vote. But until then I'm just going to push him where I can.

Anyhow, on with the list:

2. Anthony Davis - Davis is amazing. I think it's impossible not to really, really like him. He's the modern Garnett/Robinson in the sense that he is INSANE as a second option. He's insane going to the rim, really hard to defend in a pick and roll and can nail threes if undefended. He can make *any* shot the defense gives him, which makes him a matchup nightmare. He's a skilled passer (for a big) and has low turnovers (for a big). And on defense he's a great shot blocker, super long and athletic to generate steals *and* quick enough to defend wings (like Jimmy Butler in the '20 Finals). I'm serious, there may not be a player better suited to the modern game than Anthony Davis. And you know what's crazy? When he played as the first option on weak teams, his scoring and efficiency generally went *up* in the playoffs. So he could absolutely play as a first option successfully, even if it was a better use of his skills to play as the 2nd. Now I'll back up for a bit. I mentioned him in the same breath as Garnett or Robinson. Is/was he at that level? Probably not. Both guys were absurd needle-movers on the defensive end, while AD (for all his gaudy box-score stats) doesn't seem to do the same. But his peak years (which is pretty much every year since 20) have been at a level nearly unmatched at this point. The knocks against him? That he misses a lot of regular season time compared to other players here. Totally fair point. But let the record show that AD's WS->CORP and VORP->CORP numbers are both pretty strong (about average in both of the 15 players under consideration now). Average may not sound great, but those are volume-driven numbers and despite a comparably short career and missing regular season time he holds his own. Him being this high on my rankings is driven by two things: ElGee's hand-calculated CORP numbers have him pretty high, and his playoff performance is consistently superior to his regular season performance (something not a lot of players can say). At the intersection of high peak + getting even better in the playoffs . . . I'm not so worried about his regular season durability.

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.

McGrady > AD > Parish > Thurmond > Iverson > Mourning > Parker > Giannis > Cousy > English > Jokic > Penny > Dominique > Walton
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."
sansterre
Senior
Posts: 548
And1: 789
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#13 » by sansterre » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:52 am

trex_8063 wrote:I compiled some extensive WOWY data for Iverson [with special focus on team offense]----which fwiw, Iverson is one of those players for whom what paints a far different picture than Ben Taylor's WOWYR (Sidney Moncrief is the other who comes to mind:
WOWYR loves him, but my own [fairly extensive] WOWY studies painted a far more pedestrian picture).
Anyway, here's how that looked for Iverson:

’99
Sixer avg 83.0 ppg w/o him, 89.9 ppg with (+6.9 ppg change).
47.5 TS% w/o him, 49.5 TS% with (+2.0%).
97.4 ORtg w/o, 100.0 ORtg with (+2.6).
-12.04 SRS w/o, +3.17 SRS with (+15.21).

’00
85.4 ppg without him, 96.4 ppg with him (+11.0 ppg).
46.9 TS% without him, 50.6 TS% with him (+3.7%).
94.7 ORtg w/o him, 102.7 ORtg with him (+8.0).
-1.69 SRS w/o him, +1.48 SRS with him (+3.17).

’01
88.8 ppg w/o him, 95.6 with (+6.8 ppg).
51.6 TS% w/o, 51.8 TS% with (+0.2%).
103.2 ORtg w/o, 103.7 ORtg with (+0.5).
+0.48 SRS w/o, +4.12 SRS with him (+3.63).

’02
84.7 ppg w/o, 93.3 ppg with (+8.6 ppg).
49.1 TS% w/o, 50.7 TS% with (+1.6%).
100.2 ORtg w/o, 102.8 ORtg with (+2.6).
-4.18 SRS w/o, +3.27 SRS with him (+7.45).

'03--no missed games

’04---banged up much of year, missed 34 games
85.1 ppg w/o, 90.0 ppg with (+4.9 ppg).
50.8 TS% w/o, 50.3 TS% with (-0.5%)
100.3 ORtg w/o, 98.3 ORtg with (-2.0).
-2.54 SRS w/o, -3.24 with him (-0.70).

’05
95.9 ppg w/o, 99.4 ppg with (+3.5 ppg).
52.6 TS% w/o, 52.8 TS% with (+0.2%).
101.6 ORtg w/o, 103.7 ORtg with (+2.1).
-0.60 SRS w/o, -1.11 with him (-0.51).

’06
90.9 ppg w/o, 100.5 ppg with (+9.6 ppg).
53.1 TS% w/o, 53.9 TS% with (+0.8%).
103.9 ORtg w/o, 106.3 ORtg with (+2.4).
-5.59 SRS w/o, -1.62 with him (+3.97).

AVERAGE effect of having Iverson vs. not having him over these years:
NOT weighted for games played/missed
+7.3 ppg
+1.1% TS%
+2.3 ORtg
+4.61 SRS
WEIGHTED for games played
+7.4 ppg
+1.2% TS%
+2.5 ORtg
+4.21 SRS
Weighted for games missed
+7.1 ppg
+0.8% TS%
+1.4 ORtg
+2.90 SRS
39-59 record (.398) without, 251-193 record (.565) with (avg of +13.7 wins added per 82-game season).


And note: '04 [injury year] was a definitive outlier within this time period (according to all his rate metrics too). He was playing banged up and performing well below his usual standard; and perhaps non-surprisingly, it's the ONE year in this sample that looks off from the rest.
If I can cherry-pick a little and remove that year from consideration.....
AVERAGE effect of having Iverson vs. not having him during '99-'02, '05 and '06:
NOT weighted for # of games played in each season
+7.8 ppg
+1.4% TS%
+3.0 ORtg
+5.49 SRS
WEIGHTED for games played
+7.7 ppg
+1.4% TS%
+3.0 ORtg
+4.81 SRS
WEIGHTED for games missed
+8.3 ppg
+1.5% TS%
+3.2 ORtg
+4.82 SRS
25-39 record (.391) without, 232-164 record (.586) with: avg of +16 wins added per 82-game season.

So basically in his prime [minus '04], he was worth about 16 additional wins and a roughly +5 bump to their SRS (and specifically at +3(ish) bump to their ORtg).

I'll stop there for now.

I'm a little confused - one of the reason my ranker is so low on Iverson is that his WOWYR on backpicks is crap-tastic. Iverson shows as +1.6 Scaled, +2.6 10-yr, +1.7 Prime and +0.8 Career.

If you can help me to understand why I shouldn't trust his backpicks WOWYR I'd be happy to adjust that part of his ranking accordingly.
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#14 » by trex_8063 » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:43 am

sansterre wrote:I'm a little confused - one of the reason my ranker is so low on Iverson is that his WOWYR on backpicks is crap-tastic. Iverson shows as +1.6 Scaled, +2.6 10-yr, +1.7 Prime and +0.8 Career.

If you can help me to understand why I shouldn't trust his backpicks WOWYR I'd be happy to adjust that part of his ranking accordingly.


Your guess may be as good as mine. I have a few theories as to why it looks so much different....

1) Coinciding injuries - in his blog posts about WOWYR he alludes to considerations for WHO ELSE [teammates] are injured and when, with the regression [in it's admittedly noisy way--->especially within single seasons] supposedly parsing out the credit *appropriately. (*maybe it did, maybe it didn't.)

2) Minutes - he's assigned a "score" for WOWYR, which appears independent of minutes played (would partially explain why Bobby Jones's is so high, despite playing role player minutes). Just as I'd alluded to wrt Iverson's box-based advanced metrics, playing a shite-ton of minutes skews how his rate metrics should be interpreted (e.g. being a +2.0 player for 42 mpg is likely more valuable over the course of a whole game as being a +2.5 player for 33 mpg).

3) "Controls" - he alludes [very vaguely] to some "control" inputs into his formulations. Perhaps these "controls" reflect poorly on Iverson relative to others???


Beyond that, I don't know what to tell you. I simply harvested the data (I can show you the game-by-game for each game that he missed in each season, if you like). I looked at what they did in each game he missed, computed the average outcome algebraically, and then from that [again: algebraically] figured what they did in the "with" sample. I did this for each season listed. The data simply is what it is.


As an aside, I'd suggest we don't put a ton of stock in WOWY or WOWYR when we have RAPM [a more reliable product, imo] for Iverson's career.
His RAPM also isn't superb, though [as noted] isn't at all awful for this stage of the list either--->and this was while he was playing far more mpg than just about anyone else in the databall era.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 18,069
And1: 14,036
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#15 » by HeartBreakKid » Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:20 am

Iverson vs Cousy is interesting...I'm not really sure who's better to be honest. They kind of had similar roles in their respective times except one has more emphasis on scoring and the other passing.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#16 » by trex_8063 » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:44 pm

Thru post #15:

Anthony Davis - 2 (Joao Saraiva, Dutchball97)
Bob Cousy - 1 (Hal14)
Robert Parish - 1 (trex_8063)
Alonzo Mourning - 1 (Odinn21)
Tracy McGrady - 1 (sansterre)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Bill Walton - 1 (HeartBreakKid)


Probably just a little over 24 hours left for this one.
And a quick reminder of the announcements in OP of #60 thread, if you didn’t read them….


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:.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,555
And1: 5,364
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#17 » by trex_8063 » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:58 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:Iverson vs Cousy is interesting...I'm not really sure who's better to be honest. They kind of had similar roles in their respective times except one has more emphasis on scoring and the other passing.


Yeah, there are a striking number of similarities once you start looking for them....

Both are PG-sized players.
Have careers of almost identical length.
Both took a lot of shots.
Both had [mostly] underwhelming shooting efficiency.
Both were at the lead of [mostly] mediocre to poor offenses.
However, both provided more lift than they're typically given credit for here [on the PC forum].
Both were/are overrated in the mainstream, because....
Both were EXTREMELY popular players who, in some way, shaped the way the game would subsequently be played.
Both won an MVP award that he didn't really deserve.


Pros for Cousy [over Iverson]:
Better and more willing playmaker.
Better teammate.
Has the "legacy chips" of being a part of multiple championship teams.
Has the accolade lead (fwiw).
Did actually lead a number of good-to-elite offenses pre-Russell (something Iverson almost never did ['08 in Denver: a +2.5 rORTG is I believe his best]).


Pros for Iverson [over Cousy]:
Able to shoulder higher offensive load over the course of a game/sesaon than Cousy.
MUCH more playoff-resilient.
EDIT: I'm not 100%, but I'd likely give a small defensive edge to Iverson for at least generating a fair number of turnovers.
Did everything he did in [imo] a more competitive era.



Ultimately shakes out fair even for me; I actually have them adjacent on my ATL and don't feel particularly strongly for one over the other [although I've opted to go with Iverson by a hair].
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Hal14
Pro Prospect
Posts: 761
And1: 297
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#18 » by Hal14 » Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:32 pm

sansterre wrote:2. Anthony Davis - Davis is amazing. I think it's impossible not to really, really like him. He's the modern Garnett/Robinson in the sense that he is INSANE as a second option. He's insane going to the rim, really hard to defend in a pick and roll and can nail threes if undefended. He can make *any* shot the defense gives him, which makes him a matchup nightmare. He's a skilled passer (for a big) and has low turnovers (for a big). And on defense he's a great shot blocker, super long and athletic to generate steals *and* quick enough to defend wings (like Jimmy Butler in the '20 Finals). I'm serious, there may not be a player better suited to the modern game than Anthony Davis. And you know what's crazy? When he played as the first option on weak teams, his scoring and efficiency generally went *up* in the playoffs. So he could absolutely play as a first option successfully, even if it was a better use of his skills to play as the 2nd. Now I'll back up for a bit. I mentioned him in the same breath as Garnett or Robinson. Is/was he at that level? Probably not. Both guys were absurd needle-movers on the defensive end, while AD (for all his gaudy box-score stats) doesn't seem to do the same. But his peak years (which is pretty much every year since 20) have been at a level nearly unmatched at this point. The knocks against him? That he misses a lot of regular season time compared to other players here. Totally fair point. But let the record show that AD's WS->CORP and VORP->CORP numbers are both pretty strong (about average in both of the 15 players under consideration now). Average may not sound great, but those are volume-driven numbers and despite a comparably short career and missing regular season time he holds his own. Him being this high on my rankings is driven by two things: ElGee's hand-calculated CORP numbers have him pretty high, and his playoff performance is consistently superior to his regular season performance (something not a lot of players can say). At the intersection of high peak + getting even better in the playoffs . . . I'm not so worried about his regular season durability.

He's insane as a 2nd option...really? What is this statement based on?

Davis was the no. 1 option in New Orleans (on teams that were really bad during most of his seasons there, despite having a strong supporting cast and playing in a western conference that most of the time only had 1 or 2 elite teams to compete with).

Then last season he was the Lakers leading scorer in both reg season and playoffs so no. 1 option.

That leaves this season, where he has been the 2nd option (averaging 3 points per game less than LeBron). So he has what, a sample size of 23 games as a 2nd option? Is that really something worth mentioning in a poll analyzing and ranking the top 100 greatest players of all time?

He's played only 23 games - that's 23 games out of a possible 32, so we're not even halfway through the season and he's already missed 9 games, his numbers are down from last year, the Lakers are only in 3rd place in the West (when they were heavy favorites to win the title coming into the season) yet we're supposed to think he is INSANE as a 2nd option?

This is just another one of the countless examples of modern players being overrated on this board..
Dutchball97
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,976
And1: 1,679
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#19 » by Dutchball97 » Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:59 pm

On the topic of modern players, I'm probably going to be including Paul George on my ballots pretty soon. Giannis and Jokic are coming up soon for me and I'm actually undecided about how I feel about them compared to PG13 at this stage in their respective careers.
sansterre
Senior
Posts: 548
And1: 789
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #61 

Post#20 » by sansterre » Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:06 pm

Hal14 wrote:Man, modern players get sooooo overrated on this board..

Uhh, so, your position is that "Anthony Davis has never been a second option until this year, but he's being credited for it therefor . . . modern players are overrated"? Seems a stretch.

To be clear, when I refer to him as a second option, I'm primarily referring to him being the second highest usage player (and to being the secondary driver of the offense). Points per game is a pretty imperfect measure of which players are "first options", so I generally don't use it.

You and I value different things in ranking players. For example, awards seem to mean a lot more to you than to me (which doesn't take much, since they mean nothing to me). Rings seem to mean more to you than to me (but again, that doesn't mean much). And for that matter, I don't really care about "greatness" or a player's "place in history". For me I'm pure Career Value / expected career championship yield. For better or for worse.

You and I are coming at this problem totally differently. And we're coming up with considerably different answers. Which is fine; we each are seeing things that the other is missing. It's only when such different views come together in a list like this that everybody gets a chance to learn something.

Tempting as it would be for everyone to agree with me, and for me to assume that everyone who disagrees with me is *obviously* wrong, the current system of having lots of people who disagree talk about this stuff is the best way. Discussions about Arizin led to me looking at him harder, and trying to figure out why my rating system of the time didn't like him as much. This led to changes and at the time of his election, he was #4 on my ballot, which isn't great, but it was part of him getting in when he did. And I made those changes because of people who disagreed with me making impassioned arguments on his behalf.

In a world with open (but respectful) disagreement, everybody wins.
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

Return to Player Comparisons