RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #66 (Allen Iverson)

Post #1 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 3:39 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. Anthony Davis
62. Robert Parish
63. Bob Cousy
64. Alonzo Mourning
65. Nate Thurmond
66. ???

Target stop-time around 10-11am EST on Sunday.
Strangely fitting that Thurmond and Mourning are adjacent [similar players in many ways, imo].

Spoiler:

Hal14 · Post #2 » by **Hal14** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 3:50 pm

1. Allen Iverson
2. Alex English
3. Dominique Wilkins

Allen Iverson
Very underrated guy on this board. Has a strong case over Ginobili and Sam Jones - both got voted in awhile ago. Hell, he can even make a case over Miller and Ray Allen who were both voted in a LONG time ago. I get it, Iverson wasn't the most efficient shooter, but:

-the dude took a beating, he had to carry the team, had such a weak supporting cast of dudes who couldn't score on the Sixers which meant he had to take more shots and defenses geared up to stop him which created higher degree of difficulty for his shots. He still won 4 scoring titles
-Overall a good defender who led the league in steals 3 years in a row
-Won an MVP, beating out Duncan, Shaq, McGrady and KG who were all in their prime - that year he got a team to the NBA finals with a weak supporting cast - and despite going against one of the best teams of all time (01 Lakers) he led the Sixers to a win in game 1 (pretty much everyone assumed it would be a sweep, no contest) on the road in LA, where Iverson put on one of the best performances in NBA finals history
-Wasn't just a scorer, but also averaged 7+ assists 7 times and averaged 6+ assists 10 times...the scoring and assist numbers were especially impressive given the era which was a lower number of possessions

Alex English
He barely gets the edge over Wilkins. Very close. But English with the advantage on shooting efficiency and slight edge on defense and passing barely gives him the nod over Wilkins.

Both Wilkins and English were extremely elite players throughout the 80s - English was the decade's leading scorer while Dominique had higher finishes in MVP voting. Both are right there in that next tier of great players from the 80s after Bird/Magic/Jordan. Both English and Wilkins were absolutely lethal scorers who also helped their team in other ways. Neither had great team success, but it's understandable given the highly competitive era with so many great teams that were stacked with better supporting casts than they had. If either guy carried their teams to the finals they would have been voted in way before now.

sansterre · Post #3 » by **sansterre** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 3:57 pm

It is my custom only to run numbers on players that get votes or are discussed. So if somebody suddenly gets mentioned, don't be surprised if they pop up on my list.

1. Tracy McGrady. I've spoilered my wad of posts about McGrady for length.

Spoiler:

2. Vince Carter - I know, I know. I move on from one guy famous for scoring who never won anything onto a second guy famous for dunking who never won anything. I'm sorry. But, not kidding, I think Vince deserves some love. Instead of being voted in for his dunking (which I really could not care less about) let's appreciate this guy. We're talking a guy who is 15th all-time in minutes. From 2000-2007 he averaged a +5.1 OBPM over 21.6k minutes. But he's also got another 18k minutes averaging above a +2 OBPM. I'm not trying to brag about a +2 OBPM, but my point is that he was averaging +5 OBPM for almost a Bill-Sharman-career number of minutes, and then he went on to continue being a solid (but not great) offensive player for another wad of minutes comparable to Kawhi's entire career so far. That is *insane* levels of longevity. Let me put it another way: Carter played more career regular season minutes than Robert Parish. At his peak he was a solid volume scorer, with solid passing numbers and low turnovers. In fact, let's compare Vince (ages 23-28) to Kobe at the same ages:

Kobe: 33.0% Usage, 55.8% TS, 8.3% REB (3.5 OREB), 26.0% AST, 11.0% TO, +5.9 OBPM (450 games)
Vince: 30.7% Usage, 53.2% TS, 7.9% REB (5.2 OREB), 22.4% AST, 9.2% TO, +5.3 OBPM (410 games)

I'm not trying to say that Carter was Kobe-level during his peak. He wasn't. But he's in the same ballpark. And that's a massive credit, considering that a) we're in the mid-60s right now and b) Vince played another billion minutes after this. Let's check playoffs:

Kobe: 30.8% Usage, 52.5% TS, 6.9% REB (2.7 OREB), 22.6% AST, 11.1% TO, +4.6 OBPM
Vince: 29.9% Usage, 50.4% TS, 9.4% REB (7.6 OREB), 24.1% AST, 9.3% TO, +5.8 OBPM

"But," you may say, "that's all box-score metrics. His actual impact was worse, because we know that he was a selfish weasel." But his WOWYR, while not great, is a respectable +3.5 (and that's over an 11-year peak), which is about average for the players being mentioned now. And AuRPM actually quite likes him. From 2000 to 2017 he put up the following number of seasons in each range:

+5s: 4
+4s: 4
+3s: 3
+2s: 4
+1s: 2

None of those are bonkers seasons, but that is a buttload of career value. And his numbers don't appreciably slip in the playoffs. He had a strong (but not dominant peak), and then put up buckets (literally and figuratively) of value in the rest of his career. Let's give this guy some love.

3. Rasheed Wallace - I was shocked to have Rasheed jump leaps and bounds over everyone besides McGrady. Pretty much every metric really, really likes him. VORP (which punishes inefficient scoring) only has him slightly above average for this group, but he has the 3rd highest WSCORP and 2nd highest BPCorp. His PIPMCORP is really good, and his WOWYR of +6.0 is the highest of anyone remaining by a good margin (unless you're counting Bill Walton or Sidney Moncrief). So all the box-score driven metrics think fairly well of him, but the impact metrics think he's even better. Don't forget that he had a habit of showing up on teams that were way better than they seemingly should have been, from the '00 Blazers to the '04-05 Pistons. And also let's point out that the '04 Pistons switched from very good to murderous the second they acquired Rasheed. I'm very comfortable with him being here.

McGrady > Carter > R.Wallace > Nance > B.Wallace > Grant > Marion > Unseld > Moncrief > Iverson > Bosh > A.Hardaway > Parker > Issel > Giannis > Greer > Wilkins > Worthy > B.Jones > Walton > Jokic > English > McAdoo

Dutchball97 · Post #4 » by **Dutchball97** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 3:57 pm

1. Allen Iverson - He has his faults but that doesn't mean AI wasn't a really good basketball player. His 2001 season as a whole was really good and he has enough other strong seasons in both the regular season and play-offs for me to not see it as a complete outlier. The deep and high level 2001 play-offs are what sets him apart from guys like T-Mac and Giannis who are otherwise comparable but lack that one defining run.

2. Giannis Antetokounmpo - Not the best longevity as he's only 26 and needed a few seasons to grow into his own but at this point in the list I'd definitely argue that 4 elite seasons that include solid post-season play every one of those years is really good. We've already voted in players with similar longevity to that and Giannis' peak is nothing to scoff at. He just lacks that one play-off run that cements him as elite in the post-season to place him ahead of the likes of Arizin or AD in my book.

3. Tracy McGrady - T-Mac is pretty much the guard version of Bob Lanier. Both had a high peak, solid prime length and generally played well in the post-season despite little team success. I feel like he's definitely on the level of the last couple of picks and only got moved to the back of that list because the others generally did have deeper play-off runs.

Wes Unseld > Nikola Jokic > Anfernee Hardaway > Vince Carter > Alex English > James Worthy > Bobby Jones > Rasheed Wallace > Hal Greer > Tony Parker > Dominique Wilkins > Bill Walton

Post #5 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 4:43 pm

LA Bird wrote:.

You cited that topic asking about the "top 10 seasons between AI/Carter/TMac".

Off-the-cuff, I don't think Iverson would have too many of the top 10 for me (two, maybe three), and McGrady would have the lion's share.
But that's not how I'd look at it anyway. I'd take a more extended look [me being into meaningful longevity]. And I suspect if I were to list the top 25 or 30 seasons between them, that it would change to probably Iverson having the lion's share [and McGrady would almost assuredly have the smallest number].

Well, now I'm curious, so let's look....

(comes back after crunching some numbers)

OK, I'd probably rate it roughly like this [btw, I do factor missed games in my thinking]....
1-5
'03 McGrady
'01 Carter
'01 Iverson*
'01 McGrady*
'00 Carter*
(*those last three really close, imo; almost a 3a/3b/3c situation. Gun-to-my-head though, I'm putting Iverson at top of that group; yes I think Carter was marginally better than AI in '01)

6-10
'06 Iverson
'05 McGrady
'99 Iverson
'02 McGrady
'07 McGrady

11-15
'08 Iverson
'06 Carter
'04 McGrady
'07 Carter
'05 Iverson

16-20
'05 Carter
'03 Iverson
'02 Iverson
'99 Carter
'06 McGrady

21-25
'08 Carter
'98 Iverson
'00 Iverson
'09 Carter
'07 Iverson

....Or something very close to that. '04 McGrady, '10 Carter, '02 Carter are pretty close to the end of the list, too.

At any rate, it comes out close to how I expected:
*Iverson did marginally better within the top 10 than I thought he would, having three (3 of the top 8 even, though only 1 of the top 5).
**McGrady does indeed dominate the top 10 (with FIVE of the spots, including the clear [imo] #1).
***Iverson comes away with the lion's share in a more extended look, taking possibly 10 of the top 25.
****McGrady largely falls from contention after dominating the top 10 (ultimately with maybe only 7 of the top 25).
*****Carter looms fairly large in the top 5, but not so much in the top 10 (his '00 and '01 seasons do seem somewhat like outliers in his career). Then makes a resurgence in the middle and later portions of the listing.

Post #6 » by **penbeast0** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 5:49 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. 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.

3. Giannis -- Highest prime left outside of Walton but more than 1.5 seasons as a star plus 1 as a reserve, doesn't have the multiple years of hurting his team due to salary/injury.

After Giannis, then Unseld, Mourning, Thurmond, Parker, Nique, Tmac, Hawkins, Moncrief. Those are subject to change and new players to be added. I don't have either Iverson or Walton on my top 100 despite their iconic status.

Post #7 » by **penbeast0** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 5:49 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.

Post #8 » by **penbeast0** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 5:57 pm

Would Iverson have been better today or would he have been worse? He would have had an easier path to the basket with more spacing BUT any team with Iverson is going to have spacing issues as that wasn't his game. His game was clear a side and let him iso into the lane and either try to shoot, draw a foul, or kick out if he sees an open man. So while his individual stats might have been better, the team stats might actually suffer as he (a) takes EVEN MORE inefficient shots relative to a normal decent team since today's offensive are designed for more efficient 3 pointers and (b) his court vision wasn't all that good and he might not be good at widening it to include the farther reaches where open 3 point shooters might lurk. He got a lot of assists because he had the ball in his hands constantly but you don't see him finding men cutting open that well or threading an unexpected pass. His passes tended to be shorter and simpler when a player near him would leave their man to double.

Could be develop that skill? Sure. Heck, I was one of those who were rooting for him to develop that skill back in Philly but he didn't feel he needed to do anything but what he's doing. He's like Westbrook without the great rebounding and with less court vision. Maybe he'd be better today (individually) but without changing his game which he chose to quit the NBA rather than do at the end of his career, he might be even worse of an offensive engine for a team and it's a team game.

There you go Trex, that divisive enough for ya> :devil:

Post #9 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 7:43 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
There you go Trex, that divisive enough for ya>

Oh, he's a baaad man....battle on!
:starwars

Anyway, I don't know that Iverson is any better in today's league. To be clear, I DO think he'd have better offensive efficiency [particularly of the shooting variety] as a result of the better spacing and less hand-checking. But---as many people like to argue when denigrating the current league---EVERYONE has better efficiency now. So Iverson being more efficient isn't going to separate him from the mean [more than he was in his own time], because the mean itself has been elevated, too.

And Iverson thrived in that half-court based, no ball-movement, iso-heavy era.......it's a style that doesn't lend itself to strong team offense [which is why that era has the lowest ORtg of the 3pt era]; but it's totally Iverson's wheelhouse. Hard to say how he'd adapt or take to a philosophy of less dribble, more pass, move off-ball more, spread the floor, find shooters, etc. All I can say is it's a bit of a departure from what he was in his own time.

And his form on his shot is far from pristine, so I'm not sure he'd ever adapt into a stellar 3pt shooter.

So my hunch is that he's not a great fit. The lesser rebounding/lesser passing Westbrook isn't a bad comparison; though maybe a bit less transition while being a bit better in isolation [that crazy handle]. So maybe like a hybrid of poor man's [lesser rebounding/passing] Westbrook and a poor man's [lesser shooter] Kyrie?? But with a better motor than either.

So that's still a very very good player; but probably one that isn't going to lead you to a title as the clear best player [and who may have issues deferring to and/or synergizing with better players].......not unlike what he was in his own time.

And I don't know that him not translating great to a modern setting is terribly relevant. I don't use era portability as a significant portion of my criteria anyway; and YOU have stated emphatically it's not part of yours.

And that he's "like Westbrook", but not as good in a couple areas doesn't exactly void him from consideration here [considering Westbrook was voted in >20 places ago].

Odinn21 · Post #10 » by **Odinn21** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 8:07 pm

66. 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.)

67. Wes Unseld
Well, like I keep saying I'm bigger on higher scoring thus better floor raisers but I think Unseld's combination of defense, rebounding and facilitating is tad better than McGrady's insane offensive output with considering the prime durations and the times they played in.

68. Tracy McGrady
Probably the best peak and prime left on the board. But his longevity is an issue to be addressed.

---

I've always felt like Iverson's either too overrated due to '01 MVP and postseason run or too underrated due to efficiency issues.
In '01 playoffs, the Sixers got to the NBA Finals because they were the better team than the Raptors and the Bucks. In terms of individual performances, Carter performed better than Iverson in the 2nd round and Allen performed better than Iverson in the C finals. Heck, in the C finals, it was probably Mutombo that was the best Sixers player, not Iverson.
OTOH, that Sixers teams were built around Iverson's insane high motor* and "chucking" many shots. When the league let go of some defensive rules and Iverson started to play not so awful offensive casts, his efficiency was better.
(*: In his first 12 seasons in the league, Iverson averaged less than 40 mpg only 1 time, his average over 12 seasons was 41.8 mpg. That's gotta be the most Wilt-esque play time since Hayes in the '70s.)

Cavsfansince84 · Post #11 » by **Cavsfansince84** » Fri Mar 5, 2021 10:17 pm

66. Alex English
-Nice combo of size, athleticism and scoring skills. Good length of prime and leading or co leading teams that were somewhat competitive(usually 1st or 2nd rd exits). 3x all nba 2nd team. 6x top 15 in mvp voting. 23rd all time scorer on 103 ts+ for career(1.5% above league average).

67. Hal Greer
-7x all nba 2nd team. 9-10 year prime where he is between 20-23ppg on very good efficiency(ts+ between 103 and 106) while being a + defender. Many high scoring playoff runs including the 67 title Sixers that he led in playoff scoring(27.7ppg).

68. Giannis Antetokounmpo
-Perhaps the highest peak of any player left(along with Walton and Jokic) and I am very reserved on ranking any player whose prime is in the 3-5 year range but he's been at such a high level for the last 2.5 seasons with another 2 strong seasons prior that I have to rank him here. Just an all around unstoppable type of player who I think could do very well in a reduced usage role as well.

69. Wilkins
70. Tmac
71. Parker
72. Unseld
73. Jones
74. McAdoo
75. Iverson
76. Lucas
77. Hagan
78. Worthy
79. Dumars
80. Cheeks
81. Rodman
82. DeBusschere
83. Hill
84. Johnston
85. Carter
86. Irving
87. Bellamy
88. Issel
89. Jokic
90. KJ
91. Wallace
92. Mullin
93. Cunningham
94. Nance
95. Silas
96. Moncrief
97. Price
98. Rasheed
99. Aldridge
100. Bosh

HeartBreakKid · Post #12 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 4:38 am

trex_8063 wrote:

And that he's "like Westbrook", but not as good in a couple areas doesn't exactly void him from consideration here [considering Westbrook was voted in >20 places ago].

Well, hey, you could say Vince Carter is like MJ but not as good and MJ got in a long time ago!

HeartBreakKid · Post #13 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 12:49 pm

Criteria

Spoiler:

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.

Unseld > Wallace >McGrady> Jones> English> Greer> Parker> Iverson> Wilkins

Post #14 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 5:29 pm

1st vote: 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.

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).

2nd vote: Tracy McGrady
I used to be pretty high on McGrady; my opinion was soured a little noting his less than stellar RAPM [and maybe a smidge by his comments in the '03 playoffs].
But sansterre's made some sort of compelling arguments to where it feels harder and harder to justify some of the others ahead of him. And certainly mid-60s doesn't feel inappropriate at all.

3rd vote: Wes Unseld
Solid [but not great] post defender and team defender (smart in his positioning, physical, and near-impossible to move if he didn't want to be moved; solid box-out big, too). Possible GOAT in screen-setting and outlet passing, as has been often stated. Efficient low-volume scorer, definitely one of the better/best passing bigs left on the table, and and offensive rebounding threat. Seemingly a model teammate and certainly one of the better intangible leader-types left on the table.

This company feels about right considering his full legacy.

For the record....
Among those with traction, I'm presently going with this order:
Iverson > McGrady > Unseld > Carter > Wilkins > Parker > Giannis > English > Walton/Jokic (I need to think more about where I'd have Jokic in relation to Walton; both are outside my top 100 as of 2020, though)

Post #15 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 5:34 pm

Thru post #14:

Allen Iverson - 3 (Dutchball97, Hal14, trex_8063)
Alex English - 2 (Cavsfansince84, penbeast0)
Bill Walton - 1 (HeartBreakKid)
Tracy McGrady - 1 (sansterre)
Tony Parker - 1 (Odinn21)

Approximately 22 hours left for this one.

Spoiler:

Post #16 » by **penbeast0** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 7:17 pm

Welcome aboard Cavsfan, I think I've been sitting on English longer than Trex was on Parish, lol.

Post #17 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 9:59 pm

penbeast0 wrote:Welcome aboard Cavsfan, I think I've been sitting on English longer than Trex was on Parish, lol.

Muck this opinion into the trash as you see fit, but I'd suggest that you ***consistently being way ahead of the pitch on English might be an indication that you're simply too high on him.

***2014 project: even though English got in almost historically early at #54 that year [ties his best finish in the last 15 years: he'd been #55 in 2006, #54 in 2008, #56 in 2011], you were still voting for him 9 places in advance of that finish.
2017 project: You began voting for him 21 places ahead of where he actually went.
2020 project: You began voting for him 12 places ago in this one. No one else even had him as one of his alternate votes until 7 places ago [though that poster subsequently down-graded his rank of by at least one spot]. Another poster wouldn't show up with English as an alternate [3rd vote] until 5 places ago.

I mean, I'm WAY over on one end of the spectrum in how much I value longevity, and I know this. Consequently, I know going into these projects that I'm going to be ahead of the pitch on players like Karl Malone, John Stockton, Jason Kidd, and Robert Parish; I can usually even predict roughly how far ahead of the consensus I'm going to be on them.

But again: it's not a surprise, and I know exactly WHAT aspect of my criteria is creating the difference.

If you're so consistently on an island with English for such a long period of time [even longer than I am with guys like Parish], and cannot identify the reason other than I'm just higher on him than others......idk; either you're off or the ENTIRE rest of the forum is.

Odinn21 · Post #18 » by **Odinn21** » Sat Mar 6, 2021 10:29 pm

Some random thoughts about the players with traction and not on my ballot;

- I already talked about Iverson in my voting post.
- English might be too good to exclude entirely. If the Nuggets rORtg numbers were slightly better, I'd probably have him on my ballot already.
- Wilkins is very similar to English. Though his high scoring output had possibly worse impact than English. Importantly, he was less efficient than English and his postseason resilience was also worse.
- Carter is one of the players I'd be big on right now. Decent single season peak, decent prime quality and duration, his RAPM/PIPM numbers are quite good.
- I believe, even though I'm yet to have him on my ballots, I'm the first one to mention Sheed for consideration, so I think my position is obvious about him.
- Giannis has 4 seasons of prime considering we're doing this by end of 2020 season. That's a bit on the low side for me.
- Jokic is on the same boat as Giannis.
- Walton's prime is even shorter than Giannis and Jokic...
- I love Bobby Jones mention but I can't help being curious about why not Sheed and why Bobby Jones over Sheed?
- Hal Greer being barely mentioned is showing that we had Sam Jones too early in the project. But anyways, Jones is in and Greet is yet to. It is what it is. Greer is one of the players I'd favour at this point. Though his exact spot still is kind of challenge. English, Iverson, Sheed, Carter and Greer feel so close to each other.

I believe these are the players those on other ballots.

For the Condorcet method if it'll be necessary;
Iverson > English > Sheed > Carter > Greer > Wilkins > Giannis > Jokic > B. Jones > Walton
(TBH, I'm not entirely sure Greer's spot in there. I might pop him over Sheed and Carter but me having doubts about his placement wouldn't matter in my effective selection.)

Post #19 » by **penbeast0** » Sun Mar 7, 2021 2:38 am

I'm higher on English for a couple of reasons. (a) From eye test, I have a higher opinion of his defense than others, (b) I value character higher than most. I also tend to be consistently lower on people like Iverson for similar reasons.

HeartBreakKid · Post #20 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sun Mar 7, 2021 3:53 am

trex_8063 wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:Welcome aboard Cavsfan, I think I've been sitting on English longer than Trex was on Parish, lol.

Muck this opinion into the trash as you see fit, but I'd suggest that you ***consistently being way ahead of the pitch on English might be an indication that you're simply too high on him.

***2014 project: even though English got in almost historically early at #54 that year [ties his best finish in the last 15 years: he'd been #55 in 2006, #54 in 2008, #56 in 2011], you were still voting for him 9 places in advance of that finish.
2017 project: You began voting for him 21 places ahead of where he actually went.
2020 project: You began voting for him 12 places ago in this one. No one else even had him as one of his alternate votes until 7 places ago [though that poster subsequently down-graded his rank of by at least one spot]. Another poster wouldn't show up with English as an alternate [3rd vote] until 5 places ago.

I mean, I'm WAY over on one end of the spectrum in how much I value longevity, and I know this. Consequently, I know going into these projects that I'm going to be ahead of the pitch on players like Karl Malone, John Stockton, Jason Kidd, and Robert Parish; I can usually even predict roughly how far ahead of the consensus I'm going to be on them.

But again: it's not a surprise, and I know exactly WHAT aspect of my criteria is creating the difference.

If you're so consistently on an island with English for such a long period of time [even longer than I am with guys like Parish], and cannot identify the reason other than I'm just higher on him than others......idk; either you're off or the ENTIRE rest of the forum is.

I'm on the opposite side. Something tells me I'm going to be voting Bill Walton in at #100 :lol:

Seems like you scared the other Bill Walton bloke off, might be time when Bill Walton can't make the top 100 anymore.