Post#11 » by sansterre » Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:31 pm
1. Larry Nance - I know that nobody else has mentioned him (except for TRex bringing his name up to me). But I'm telling you, Larry Nance was considerably better than you think. You know that Bill James observation that people like players who do one thing historically well more than players who are quite good at everything (Lou Brock vs. Ron Santo is a good example - Santo was miles better, but Brock was more historically notable)? Anyhow. This applies to Nance particularly. He was an athletic 6'10" power forward who played strong defense. He consistently posted strong defensive stats (Block% above 3.5 and Steal% above 1 for much of his career) and pretty much every metric we have (which are, in fairness, mostly box score driven) really likes his defense. But he was no Hakeem or Ewing. He was merely an unusually good defending 4. He also rebounded well, averaging 13+% TRB for most of his career, but he was never great. Just quite good. Passing/ball control? His turnover were low for a big, and his assists were in the "not a liability, but definitely not strong" for a big. His scoring? His usage rate was rarely higher than 22%, and his PP75 were never much above 21-22. But his efficiency was exceptional, posting seven different seasons with an rTS% above +5, and four above +6. You know who his statistical (not play style, just statistical) comp is? Kevin McHale.
McHale: 30.1k minutes, 22.4% usage, +6.7 rTS, 13.2% Reb, 8.1% Ast, 11.7% TO, 0.6% Stl, 3.2% Blk, +2.4 / +0.1 / +2.5
Nance: 30.7k minutes, 20.6% usage, +4.9 rTS, 13.6% Reb, 11.8% Ast, 11.3% TO, 1.4% Stl, 3.8% Blk, +2.3 / +1.4 / +3.6
They're comparable as rebounders. As passers Nance has a small edge. McHale is clearly the better scorer but Nance (according to box score metrics) was the notably better defender. Now, I'll be the first to admit that McHale's defense is underestimated by DBPM. I'm not trying to suggest that Nance was the better defender necessarily. But if I said "Picture McHale, slightly worse scorer, comparable defender and slightly better passer" . . . that's a pretty good player, right? And I'll stipulate that McHale's scoring took a jump in the postseason where Nance's didn't, but still. McHale got in a while ago. And it's worth mentioning that McHale's WOWYR numbers are fairly humdrum (+3.6 prime) compared to Nance's +5.1 prime.
So if Nance was so good, why is nobody talking about him? Because his teams never won. He was dominant on a series of decent Phoenix teams, and then they traded Nance and immediately took off. That may sound like a bad look for Nance but Phoenix got a haul for him. They basically got West and Corbin (their quality defensive bigs for the next five years) and Dan Majerle while replacing Nance with free agent Tom Chambers. Both teams got what they needed. And in Nance's twilight years (where he was still very good) his Cavs were quite good, breaking 50+ wins several times. But he was never on a team that made the Finals. And frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. Nance was an excellent all-around player that both impact metrics (WOWYR) and box score metrics think very well of.
2. Shawn Marion - Pretty much every box-score stat *loves* Marion. He's at least a standard deviation above the mean of this group in BackPicks, PIPM, WS and VORP (in this group he is 3rd, 3rd, 2nd and 2nd respectively in those metrics). He's a really, really weird player. Given his success in box score metrics you might guess he was a scorer but he really wasn't. His usage in his prime was above average (but usually in the 22-23% range) and his efficiency was in the +0% to +2% range for much of it. His only strong shooting seasons were from '06 to '08 with Steve Nash, for which Nash perhaps deserves some credit. But Marion, whether he played a big SF or small PF was a ferocious rebounder for his position/height. If I ask StatHead for players 6'7" or under with seasons at 13% TRB or better, I get Charles Barkley having 14, and then next is Shawn Marion tied with Wes Unseld with 11. I'm not trying to sell you on Marion being a Rodman, he wasn't, he was just a really, really great rebounder for his size. He was never a good passer, but he mitigated the cost there by turning the ball over very rarely (consistent AST:TO > 1). And he was really, really good on defense. Not Bill Russell or anything, but he was a really strong defensive wing. With the understanding that these are just steals and blocks, if I ask StatHead for players that averaged 2.5% steals or better, and 2% blocks or better, I get 6 of Marion and Hakeem, 5 or Erving, 4 of Wade and Kirilenko and then others at 3. Blocks and steals are not great stats, but those are all extremely athletic players. After his prime, Marion reinvented himself as something of a rebounding/defensive specialist, and was a critical piece of the 2011 Mavericks. He played a long career (40k minutes) and also had a strong (if not flashy) prime. His AuRPMs are good but not as good as you'd think (slightly below average for this group) and his -> playoff numbers weren't great. But given his blend of strong prime *and* strong longevity, Marion is hard to pick against here. Unless you like flashy scorers. Then don't vote Marion.
3. Jeff Hornacek - "Jeff Hornacek!?" you say. "Jeff Hornacek" I say. There are simply not metrics that he looks bad in. His BackPicks BPM, Win Shares CORP and VORP CORP are all well above average for this group. His PIPM is a little underwhelming, though still above average. And his peak WOWYR of +5.2 is one of the best in this group. Surprising, right? And yet, he's weirdly excellent.
Let's imagine that we looked for strong (but not dominant) shooting guard seasons. We're looking for a 2nd/3rd option, so sub 22% usage. He needs to break an OBPM of +2, TS above 57% and post PPX above 22. But we want him to be a solid passer who doesn't make mistakes, so AST% > 22% and TO% below 12.5%. That's a pretty specific player I just asked for. But Hornacek had six of those seasons; nobody else had more than 1. What if I loosened the terms? If I allowed usage rates higher than 22% I'd get Jordan and Kyrie tying with him. If I dropped the shooting efficiency requirement Fat Lever had four of those seasons. If I remove the assist requirement Hornacek had 8 seasons, with Reggie Miller and J.J. Reddick having 5 each. My point is, I'll stipulate that Hornacek was only an average usage player. But within those constraints he 1) scored efficiently, 2) passed well (or at least for volume), 3) turned the ball over very little (Assist:TO of 2.5 for much of his career) and 4) overall contributed to offenses at a solid level. And he did it for a long freaking time. He never really had a "Peak" because his seasons were metronomically excellent. He put up four straight 3+ VORP seasons in Phoenix, then another five in Utah. So if you're trying to remember Hornacek's time when he dominated the league . . . you won't find it. He was merely really good for a very long time.
And he kept showing up on strong teams. His age 25 season (1989) was when the Suns took a big step forward. Was he the one driving it? No, KJ was. But Johnson surely benefited from the spacing that Hornacek provided. And by VORP, Hornacek was the 2nd best player on both the '89 and '90 Suns (two teams that made my Top 100 list). In '92 The Suns posted a +5.68 RSRS with Hornacek as their best player (according to VORP). From 1992 to 1993 the Suns replaced Hornacek with Danny Ainge, and replaced Tim Perry and Andrew Lang with Charles Barkley and Cedric Ceballos. And the team's RSRS improved by . . . +0.59. Perry + Lang -> Barkely + Ceballos is clearly a monster upgrade. And Danny Ainge was no pushover. Was losing Hornacek a bigger blow than we thought? I don't want to overplay it; KJ missed almost half the year and that was clearly a driving force. And I'm not trying to sell you on the idea that Hornacek was a Barkley-level player. He wasn't. But even with KJ missing some time, you'd think the jump from '92 to '93 would be bigger than it was. Unless Hornacek was actually better than anyone realized.
And then Utah. Here are their seasons starting at '93:
1993: 47-35, +1.74 RSRS
1994: 53-29, +4.10 RSRS
1995: 60-22, +7.76 RSRS
1996: 55-27, +6.25 RSRS
1997: 64-18, +7.97 RSRS
They acquired Hornacek in the middle of one of those seasons; any guesses which?
Look. This is all slightly circumstantial. There are other factors that explain why the Jazz went from being decent to being the best team in the conference besides Jeff Hornacek. But Hornacek was clearly a big part of it.
Naysayers would argue that Hornacek was a bad first option. This is totally true. He had no business running your offense as the primary ball handler. But as long as he wasn't asked to take more than 20% of the team's shots he'd space the floor, can shots at a well-above average rate, pass well, not screw anything up and generate a fair number of steals. And the combination of these things had a consistent and genuine impact, even if no one of them is particularly remarkable.
We don't have AuRPM for his whole career, but here are his numbers with the Jazz starting at Age 31:
+3.4, +2.8, +5.9, +5.2, +4.5, +3.1
Two +5 seasons toward the tail-end of his career? That's damned impressive.
Nance > Shawn Marion > Hornacek > Terry Porter > Horace Grant > D.Green? > Kyle Lowry > B.Wallace > Eddie Jones > Bosh > Bellamy > Jokic > A.Kirilenko > Hill > M.Cheeks > B.Walton > P.George > Webber > LaMarcus Aldridge > KJ > D.Issel > A.Iguodala > H.Greer > Moncrief > J.Worthy > A.Hardaway > B.Jones > J.Butler > D.Lillard > D.Johnson > D.Rodman > C.Mullin > B.McAdoo > K.Irving > K.Thompson
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."
"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
