RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 (Larry Nance)

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

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,512
And1: 8,154
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 (Larry Nance) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 1:27 am

2020 List
1. LeBron James
2. Michael Jordan
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Bill Russell
5. Tim Duncan
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Magic Johnson
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Larry Bird
11. Kevin Garnett
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Jerry West
14. Oscar Robertson
15. Dirk Nowitzki
16. Karl Malone
17. David Robinson
18. Julius Erving
19. George Mikan
20. 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. Allen Iverson
67. Tracy McGrady
68. Alex English
69. Vince Carter
70. Wes Unseld
71. Tony Parker
72. Rasheed Wallace
73. Dominique Wilkins
74. Giannis Antetokounmpo
75. Kevin Johnson
76. Bobby Jones
77. Bob McAdoo
78. Shawn Marion
79. Dennis Rodman
80. ???

Target stop-time around 9pm EST on Tuesday.

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:.

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

SeniorWalker wrote:.

SHAQ32 wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

Tim Lehrbach wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

Whopper_Sr wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

876Stephen wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,512
And1: 8,154
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#2 » by trex_8063 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 1:30 am

1st vote: Chris Bosh
Things I really like when looking at his career....
1) Fairly nice peak and average prime year: he was basically like clockwork good for ~23/10 year after year in Toronto. Much of that was for mediocre to poor teams, though he also did it for a couple of weak supporting casts that he semi-carried to positive SRS's, 41-47 wins, and playoff berths.
2) Adaptability: he altered his game in Miami to integrate with Lebron on a contender [semi-dynasty]. He developed a 3pt shot, and didn't complain [to my knowledge] about his reduced role. In the meantime he also became [imo] one of the league's best pnr defenders.
3) Consistent high level/longevity of quality. If you just look at total games played [893] or seasons played [13], his longevity doesn't look that great. But a couple things to consider: a) he packed nearly 32k minutes into the 893 games [CAREER avg of 35.8 mpg]; and b) he was good basically his ENTIRE career--->he was already at least an average player as a rookie, improved to clearly above avg in his 2nd year, was a clear All-Star talent by his 3rd season.....and basically never again declined below at least borderline All-Star for the rest of his career [peaking near All-NBA 2nd Team level].

It's a decent amount of career value, imo. Surprised he doesn't have a pinch more traction, really.


2nd vote: Larry Nance
Another "good at many things, perhaps great at nothing" type of forwards, who had solid effective longevity [because he doesn't have any meaningless seasons], and was an ideal teammate.
Compared to Marion, he may have been a marginally better scorer, and was a better rim-protector and passer. But a worse rebounder, less defensively versatile and generally lesser man defender, and lesser longevity.

Truly underrated in his career; am thinking of bumping him ahead of Bosh, actually.


3rd vote: Horace Grant
Yup, I went there. I'll post the supporting arguments later. Am also thinking hard on Ben Wallace. Melo and Dan Issel are very close in consideration as far as I'm concerned, too. I'm thinking more on Hal Greer; might bump him into this range, as well.


Among those who have received votes of any kind, I'm tentatively going with this order:
Bosh > Nance > Grant > Wallace > Melo > Greer > Hornacek > D.Lillard > D.Johnson > G.Williams /Tiny/Walton/Jokic (I need think about how I want those four ordered; I've gone round and round in my head. None of them [DJ either] are actually in my top 100, but if it's required for Condorcet I will come up with a hierarchy I can live with).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,053
And1: 9,710
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#3 » by penbeast0 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 2:51 am

1. Larry Nance -- Four long, very good career guys are the next two on my list. None graduated to "great" in my book but made very consistent contribution both as very good (not great) defenders and good offensive players. I have Larry Nance over Horace Grant because he more successfully approaching having a great impact with his shotblocking; he was the greatest shotblocking non-center to ever play in the league (counting guys like Duncan as centers because they played there a lot). He was also a higher percentage shooter and one of the great finishers with outstanding hops and quickness for a guy his size. He won the first NBA (not ABA) Slam Dunk competition over Julius Erving but despite this, managed to stay under the radar of the casual fan and sportswriters. Grant's advantage comes from his role in some very successful teams and his superior passing and turnover economy; he was also stronger in terms of post defense where "the Thin Man" could be pushed by the wide bodies of the NBA.
2. Horace Grant

3. Hal Greer Similarly, Greer and Hornacek were both good player, second option types who played good offense and good defense but neither really dominated. They would be an asset on any team. I have Greer first based on accolades to tell the truth; I don't remember seeing him play but his peers were very impressed.
4. Jeff Hornacek

I am looking at Sidney Moncrief, Grant Hill, James Worthy, Connie Hawkins, Dennis Johnson, Ben Wallace, Chris Bosh, Dan Issel, Gus Williams, Bill Walton, Jokic in roughly that order though there are a number of other names we should also be considering. Bosh is the one I need to think about and possibly move up but he never impressed me that much in terms of eye test so it would have to be the kind of statistical impact that Rasheed Wallace had.

Looking at the list from 2017, the following names have not been voted in yet:

71 Sidney Moncrief
73 Grant Hill
75 Chris Bosh
78. Hal Greer
79. Ben Wallace
80. Dan Issel

For the rest:
Sidney Moncrief v. Grant Hill v. James Worthy (Using per 100 stats to lessen era/minute differentials)

Moncrief 5 year prime: ~36.5 mpg, 27 p, 7.5 r, 6.1 a, ~.590 ts%, 4 1st team All-Defense, 1 2nd team, 2xDPOY, 1 1st All-NBA, 4 2nd All-NBA. 2 years pre-prime, 3 hobbled years post prime (ignoring years with less than 50 games played other than 1999). Surprisingly his rebounding per 100 is actually equal to Worthy's.

Hill 6 year prime: ~29 mpg, 30 p, 11 r, 8.5 a, .540ts%, 1 1st team All-NBA, 4 2nd All-NBA, 6 solid post prime seasons. Hill was the focus of the Detroit offense; both of the others played on deep teams that spread the ball around. He was also the primary distributor while the others were more secondary distributors or finishers.

Worthy 7 year prime (85-91): ~35.5 mpg, 27 p, 7.5r, 4.5 a, ~.570ts%, 2 x All-NBA 3rd, 1FMVP, I have his 1st 2 years as pre-prime as his scoring load was significantly less and his last 3 years as post-prime as his efficiency dropped significantly. The healthiest of the bunch, probably the lowest RS peaks. His scoring volume may have been hurt a bit by all the talent on the Lakers, on the other hand, playing with Magic (as compared to say Brian Winters or Lindsey Hunter at PG) probably helped his efficiency.

I have these three as:

1. Moncrief -- his prime was shorter but a lot stronger. He was one of the NBA's all time great defenders, the others were both solid but not outstanding, plus offensively he's at least arguably the strongest of the 3 with the highest shooting efficiency at equivalent scoring volume. The monster defense for 5 years is worth more to me than 1 or 2 years of extra years of equivalent offense and decent defense and the extra role player years don't move the needle that much in comparison.

2. Hill's case is based on his rebounding and playmaking from the 3, though his scoring efficiency was less, plus his long post-prime career where he reinvented himself as a 3 and D guy. The rebounding and playmaking is certainly an argument in his favor, he rebounds significantly better as a 3/2 guy than the 3/4 Worthy and gets more assists than the 2/1 Moncrief (though a lot of that is role). His career outside his prime is better than Worthy's and significantly better than Moncrief's, enough to make it close but not enough for me to put him higher.

3. Worthy is the lowest of the 3, an efficient scorer but despite playing a lot of PF, a weak rebounder. He was blessed to play with the most talent around him and thus had a stronger playoff resume, his case is based on that, particularly his FMVP season. His career was actually shorter than Hill's in number of games despite his better health. 926 games to 1026 for Hill (and 767 for Moncrief).

Let's look at those playoff numbers in their primes again using per 100 possessions:

Worthy ~39mpg 28p, 7r, 4.5a, .580 ts%
Hill ~38mpg, 32.7p, 11r, 9a, .520ts% (only 13 games to avoid using 00 when he was injured)
Moncrief ~40mpg, 25p, 7r, 5.5a, .575ts%

I don't think this makes Worthy's case appreciably stronger although he certainly played a lot more playoff games than the other two due to his situation in LA.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,202
And1: 26,065
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#4 » by Clyde Frazier » Mon Apr 5, 2021 4:02 am

Vote 1 - Hal Greer
Vote 2 - Carmelo Anthony
Vote 3 - Chris Bosh

The Rest: Moncrief > Cunningham > Nance > Hill > Tiny > DeBusschere > Ben Wallace > Terry Porter > Jerry Lucas > Gus Williams > Hornacek > Horace Grant > Dennis Johnson > Lillard > Hawkins > Jokic > Walton


- 15 year career (all with same franchise)
- 7x all NBA 2nd team
- Sixers all time leader in games played, minutes played, FGM, total points

Greer's overall body of work is impressive. He had marked consistency throughout his career, along with great durability and longevity for his time. He played in 79+ games in 10 of his 15 seasons, which spanned from 59-73. He scored on above average efficiency relative to his era, putting up the following #s from 61-70:

22 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 4.4 APG, 45.4% FG, 80.3% FT (6 FTAs per game), 51% TS (+2.09 rTS)

He performed similarly in the playoffs, playing a major role in the 67 sixers championship run, commonly considered one of the best teams of all time:

27.7 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.3 APG, 42.9% FG, 79.7% FT (7.9 FTAs per game), 48.7% TS (regular season league avg 49.3%)

And yes, grain of salt I know when it comes to many of the statements below. I think it at least puts things in historical context considering how long ago he played.

"I knew Hal when I got there [as the Sixers' business manager] in '68. I was with him for one year," said Pat Williams, who was raised in Wilmington and later became the Sixers' general manager for 12 seasons. "Tough little bulldog. He was tough as nails. And quiet. Didn't talk much ... but would just go out and perform. Maybe the best middle distance jump shooter of all-time. You could argue that. That 15-, 16-, 17-foot range. It was like a layup to him.”


http://www.apbr.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4498

It’s been echoed elsewhere that he had the best mid range jumper of his generation. Also effective on both ends of the floor, and could post you up on either baseline. Stayed within the confines of his game, which ultimately led to team success.

Some great videos on the 67 sixers from (I believe) our own Dipper 13:





More insight on Greer per Dipper 13:

Tremendous athlete as well, great agility & quickness and could stop on a dime and pull up. It is not surprising to see Greer fall this low, seeing as he apparently was underrated by most even during his playing days. Not being a self promoter or big interview with the press will do that, plus he was overshadowed by Wilt during some of his best years. I'm sure if the Sixers had repeated in 1968, then Greer would have been voted in well before this point. Wilt even said he was on par with Robertson or West, for what it is worth.


Season of the 76ers: the story of Wilt Chamberlain and the 1967 NBA champions - Wayne Lynch

"I think I'm better than the fourth guard," Greer told reporters. "You gotta realize that Oscar is the greatest. Jerry West is right behind Oscar, but I think I should be up there. I think I'm on a par with West.


Dynasty's End: Bill Russell And the 1968-69 World Champion Boston Celtics - Thomas J. Whalen

"Hal needs a certain amount of recognition to show people that he's on par with Robertson and West," All-Star teammate Wilt Chamberlain said afterward.

Greer needed no convincing himself. He knew he was the equal of any elite guard in the league, and that included Sam Jones of the Celtics. "He's on a team where they work for him," Greer said. "Our team is balanced. We're a team all the way. We don't work for one guy. Sam doesn't really have to work for his shots. They work for him. He's strictly offense, I'm offense plus I move the ball, too. I move on the fast break." Always intense and demanding of himself as a player, Greer strove for nothing short of basketball perfection in every contest. "After a game," he once revealed, "I think about the mistakes I made on defense that night. Sometimes I stay up all night thinking about defense, like after I've been chasing Oscar all over the court. That's enough to keep any man awake."'


The Sun - Nov 16, 1965

It's generally acknowledged in basketball circles that there are three superstar backcourters, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West and Sam Jones . . . and then there's Philadelphia's Hal Greer. Greer is the most underrated player in the league. He's among the top five in my opinion. Teammate Al Bianchi adds, "He has to be one of the greatest backcourt shooters ever." He rates with Sharman, Robertson, and West when it comes to hitting the 15-20 foot jumper.

The league alerted everybody about West and Bailey Howell nearing 10,000 points. Forgot Greer of course. "My wife and I talk about it a lot", admits the eight year veteran who climbed over the 10,000 figure with 33 tallies at New York's expense Saturday night. Howell and West reached it Sunday. "I don't like it but what can you do about it. As long as we're winning that's the important thing. The ink is all right but winning is the thing. I think I'm better than the fourth guard in the league."


The Black Athlete: Emergence & Arrival - 1968

No one in basketball is more effective than Hal Greer at sprinting down the middle of the court on a fast break, stopping just beyond the keyhole and scoring on a jump shot. "Hal," said one NBA coach, "has the finest middle-distance shot in the game." From fifteen to eighteen feet, Greer is more deadly than the Big O." At 6 ft. 3 in. and 178 pounds, Greer frequently gives away 40 pounds and 6 inches to NBA adversaries assigned to shutting off the middle. The key to Greer's success, therefore, is maneuverability and speed. Particularly speed.


Great Teams of Pro Basketball - 1971

First there was Hal Greer, one of the best guards in the game. He was fast. "I must be fast," Greer said, "always, always quick. The day I slow down I'm finished." And he was a constant scoring threat. Said his former coach, Dolph Schayes, "Hal has the finest middle-distance shot in the game. From 15 to 18 feet, Hal is more deadly than Oscar Robertson." At 6'2", 175 pounds, Greer was agile, strong and not prone to injury. An eight-year veteran of NBA play, he could be counted on to average 20 points a game and contribute steadily in assists.


The Game Within the Game - Walt Frazier

Image

Hal Greer: Productive, Consistent and Durable

This article originally appeared in the January 2006 issue of Hoop.

Star Guard on a Team for the Ages

Hal Greer made the All-NBA Second Team seven straight years but never was selected to the All-NBA First Team. That’s what happens when you play during the same era as Oscar Robertson and Jerry West, but Greer--a 10-time All-Star who was honored as one of the NBA’s 50 Greatest Players--accomplished something that neither Robertson nor West did: being the leading playoff scorer on a team that defeated Bill Russell’s Boston Celtics in the playoffs and went on to win an NBA championship.

Russell’s Celtics won eight straight titles and 11 in 13 seasons, but many observers still maintain that the greatest single season team in NBA history is the 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers. The Sixers beat Boston 4-1 in the Eastern Division finals and then defeated the Rick Barry-Nate Thurmond San Francisco Warriors in the NBA Finals. Greer produced 27.7 ppg, 5.9 rpg and 5.3 apg in the playoffs, while his teammate Wilt Chamberlain posted these mind-boggling numbers: 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg and 9.0 apg. Hall of Famer and Top 50 selection Billy Cunningham, the sixth man on the 1967 championship team, says, “Hal Greer was such a smart player. In his mind he had a book about every player he played against and what he had to do to make sure that he got free to get shots. He was probably as fine a screener as a guard as anybody. The thing about it was he knew that if he set a good screen then he would be open because he would force a switch and he would end up being matched up with a bigger, slower player that he knew he could easily beat to get whatever shot he wanted.”

Remember the old shoe commercial with playground legend Lamar Mundane? The voiceover said that Mundane would shoot as soon as he crossed midcourt and the fans would yell, “Layup!” That would be a good way to describe Hal Greer’s top of the key jump shot; Sixers coach Alex Hannum said that Greer made that shot at a 70% clip and gave Greer the green light to launch from that range whenever he was open. Greer’s jump shot was so fluid and so deadly that he shot his free throws that way, connecting on better than 80% of his career attempts. Cunningham offers high praise for Greer’s jump shot: “It was as good as anybody’s who ever played the game. I think the beauty of Hal Greer’s game is that he knew where he was most effective and he never shot the ball from an area where he was not completely confident and comfortable. He never went outside of 18-20 feet maximum, but he was deadly and he had the ability to get to that spot.”


The Palm Beach Post - Apr 2, 1967

"Greer plays the complete game,' said Hannum, "He's an offensive threat every minute he's in there. He has the perfect disposition, is well liked by everybody. We wouldn't have near the record this team has without Hal. You hear about our powerful front line of Wilt, Luke Jackson, Chet Walker and Billy Cunningham, but Greer's outside shooting helps make this possible."

Greer admits that the toughest guard in the league against him is Boston's K.C. Jones, but denies the rap placed on him by some writers that he gets "K.C.-itus"

"The three best games of my career have been against Boston," he notes. "I scored 50 points against them my first year in the league, 45 against them here, and 38 this season in Boston."

While he is recognized generally as one of the top offensive players in the game, few people are aware that Greer can play defense with the best. Often, Hannum will send Greer after Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Rick Barry, or Sam Jones, at least until the 76ers' guard gets into foul difficulty.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,877
And1: 21,805
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#5 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Apr 5, 2021 4:41 am

For Greer supporters, I'm curious how you see him stacking up compared to Billy Cunningham and Chet Walker.

An answer of "longevity" frankly would work as that's clearly a thing, but my impression was that Cunningham was considered the best of the three at his best, and when viewed from a lens of efficiency, Chet is really something.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#6 » by Dutchball97 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 10:23 am

1. Nikola Jokic - I might be voting for Jokic for a while but I think he deserves to make the list at least. Jokic' case is very similar to Giannis in my opinion. Both have 4 high level years along with 1 other positively contributing year. While both have 4 great regular seasons it is clear Giannis has the edge up till 2020, which is why I have him ahead. The difference in longevity is just Giannis' first two years when he was barely a replacement level player so if you're fine with Giannis being voted in this range, how can you justify not having Jokic not in your top 100 at all? Their play-off resumes are comparable at this point as well. Giannis has 5.8 WS and 3.4 VORP in the post-season so far compared to 5.5 WS and 3.5 VORP for Jokic. Giannis has reached the play-offs more often (5 times) than Jokic (2 times) but both have 3 play-off series wins at this point. While Giannis has played 10 more games than Jokic, the reason why the numbers are still close is that both of Jokic' runs were arguably better than any of Giannis' play-off outings. It's a shame some of the voters don't consider him for the top 100 project at all but at this point of the list we're all simply going to have to accept players will receive votes that others don't have among their next 25 picks at all.

2. Ben Wallace - Boxscore stats generally don't do defensive specialists justice but even so Ben Wallace still comes out looking very well in stats like WS and BPM. Despite a relatively short 6 year prime Ben still has pretty solid longevity at this point in the list as well. The main factor why I'm voting for him here is his excellent post-season play. 3 consecutive post-season runs with 3+ WS and 1+ VORP is very impressive. That alone would be a strong play-off pedigree at this point but he has multiple other very solid performances in the post-season as well. His pivotal role for the Pistons in some very deep runs and even a championship shouldn't be understated.

3. Gus Williams - While another voter already has Dennis Johnson on his ballot, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned his teammate on the 79 champion Supersonics yet tbh. Gus Williams was only a 2 time All-Star so I understand he might fly under the radar for some people but this massively undervalues him. His prime quality and duration really isn't much different than Ben Wallace. It maybe shouldn't be a surprise I'm this high on Gus WIlliams because I've consistently put a big emphasis on play-off performance and Gus was a post-season savant who consistently stepped his game up when it counted most. After being the best player for the 78 Sonics that lost game 7 of the finals, he went on to post a 23.8 PER, .210 WS/48 and 6.7 BPM alongside a league leading 2.7 WS and 1.3 VORP on the way to a championship the next year. That isn't the end of Gus Williams being amazing in the play-offs though. In the 1980, 82, 83 and 84 post-seasons he had 20+ PER, .150+ WS/48 and 6+ BPM in every single one of those campaigns.

Sidney Moncrief > Terry Porter > Anfernee Hardaway > Draymond Green > Jimmy Butler > Grant Hill > Horace Grant > James Worthy > Paul George > Damian Lillard > Jeff Hornacek > Larry Nance > Kyle Lowry > Jerry Lucas > Walt Bellamy > Carmelo Anthony > Maurice Cheeks > Hal Greer > Andrei Kirilenko > Eddie Jones > Chris Bosh > Bill Walton > Connie Hawkins > Dennis Johnson > Dave DeBusschere > Tiny Archibald
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#7 » by HeartBreakKid » Mon Apr 5, 2021 10:35 am

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) Sidney Moncrief - Sidney does everything well. He is lacking longevity, with maybe 5 great seasons - but outside of that he gave a team everything they'd need. Incredible defensive ability, great passing, good scoring (modest volume but outlier efficiency), good rebounder and he plays well with other stars. The Bucks were a pretty consistent threat in the 80s and Sidney may have been the largest individual reason why. Once his prime really started to hit he was a consistent playoff performer as well. Not only does he seem more well rounded than some of the new contenders (Bosh, B Jones, McAdoo, Marion, Wallace) but he is an outlier in two categories, scoring efficiency and defense. Seems like a superstar almost.













B Wallace > Gus Williams > Nance > Greer> Hornacek > H Grant > Bosh > Lucas > C Anthony
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#8 » by sansterre » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:22 am

Okay, all of the new guys are included in the rankings now.

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. 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.

3. Terry Porter - Porter is a weird mix of peak and longevity. He played 35k minutes, with 13 different seasons posting higher than a +1 OBPM, and 9 different seasons posting higher than a +2 OBPM. And he retained fair value even late in his career, posting back-to-back +4 AuRPM seasons for the Spurs at the turn of the century. He's 55th in offensive win shares all-time, and 45th in VORP all-time. Most metrics really like Porter; he's more than one standard deviation above the mean in both PIPM and VORP, and his win shares and BackPicks ratings are still well above average.

Porter was a weird sort of tweeter-guard. He rarely posted higher than league average usage rates, but made up for it with efficiency (consistently scoring in the +4 to +6% range) passing well (assist% in the 25-35% range) and being a fair ballhawk (ten different seasons at 2%+ steals). His seven-year peak:

19.9% Usage, +4.5% rTS, 30.5% Ast, 2.2% Steals, 15.4% TO, +3.3 OBPM, +3.9 BPM

It's good, but not great (though again, it's a strong peak combined with a lot of longevity). But in the playoffs he got better. For his nine-year playoff peak (89-97):

20.2% Usage, +7.3% rTS, 26.1% Ast, 1.6% Steals, 12.2% TO, +4.5 OBPM, +4.8 BPM

So in the playoffs (and in fairness, I'm taking slightly different years), Porter slowed as a distributor and grew into an extremely efficient scorer. A nine-year playoff peak with an OBPM at +4.5? That's pretty nice. I'll give you a hint on this; McHale didn't have a nine-year playoff peak at that level (though select seasons were certainly better).

Regular season Terry Porter? He was a strong player with a decently long career and a good peak. But playoff Terry Porter? Playoff Terry Porter was *really* good. Do you know how many players increase both usage and shooting against playoff defenses? Not a lot of them. But Terry Porter is absolutely on that list.


Nance > 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 > D.Issel > A.Iguodala > Schrempf > H.Greer > Moncrief > G.Williams > J.Worthy > C.Anthony > Lucas > Cunningham > A.Hardaway > D.DeBusschere >J.Butler > M. Johnson > D.Lillard > D.Johnson > C.Hawkins > M.Price > C.Mullin > K.Irving > K.Thompson > Archibald
"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."
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 21,189
And1: 19,705
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#9 » by Hal14 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 3:04 pm

1. Dennis Johnson
2. Tiny Archibald
3. Walt Bellamy

Johnson was Finals MVP in 79. The dude was an animal. Flying around the court like a bat outta hell, some of the best defense a guard has ever played. Going all out, hustling, taking it strong to the rim.

Next, let's look at 84. 83-84 was his first year on the Celtics. The year before that in 83 the Celtics got swept in the 2nd round by the Bucks. Yes, KC Jones taking over as coach was a factor as well, but the Celtics adding Johnson was a HUGE reason why they went from being swept in the 2nd round in 83 to NBA world champs beating the Lakers in the finals the very next year in 84 (with Magic and Kareem in their prime).

In both 84 and 86 Johnson was one of the team's top 4 players, came through in the clutch time and time again and Bird is on record saying that Johnson was the best teammate he ever played with (meaning Bird thinks Johnson was better than Parish and Mchale).

Johnson was one of the best defensive guards of all time, easily one of the top 10 defensive guards ever. The guy had very good size and strength at the PG position which made him a tough matchup, early in his career had great explosiveness and athleticism, he could score inside, drive to the basket and as his career went on developed a deadly outside shot - especially in the mid range area, not as much from 3 because at the time 3's weren't being taken very much across the league (early in his career there was no 3 point line), plus he could rebound well, unselfishly looked to get the ball to his teammates but would make you pay dearly if you ignored him too much on offense, plus of course his outstanding defense.

Solid longevity, played 14 seasons (13 of which he played 27+ mins a game and all of them he played in 70+ games) which was solid for that era, especially considering he played in a ton (180 to be exact) of playoff games.

How about durability? The guy always played, he was always in the lineup. Out of his 14 seasons:
-he played 72+ games in 14/14 (100%)
-he played in 77+ games in 12/14 seasons (86%)
-he played in 80+ games in 7/14 seasons (50%)

How about Rasheed's durability?
-he played 72+ games in 14/16 (63%)
-he played in 77+ games in 8/16 seasons (50%)
-he played in 80+ games in 10/16 seasons (13%)

Tiny is a 6 time all-star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team. You want peak? Only player ever to lead the NBA in both scoring and assists in the same season. And he was a key piece on the 1981 NBA championship-winning Celtics. Solid defender. Very few point guards in the history of the game possessed his combination of scoring and distributing. And he did it in an era before it was easier for point guards to dominate the league (like it's been since 2005). He'd be even higher up this list if not for injuries, but still had 13 seasons which is pretty good longevity, especially for that era.

Bellamy is another guy who would be higher up on this list if not for injuries. But it's about time he gets voted in:

1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,512
And1: 8,154
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#10 » by trex_8063 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 3:09 pm

To make a case for Horace Grant, I'm going to copy some arguments I'd made several threads ago, by way of comparing him to Dennis Rodman [just voted in at #79], with some additional info regarding defensive rebounding at the bottom....


Why not someone like Horace Grant over Rodman?
In terms of impact:

WOWYR (which we've been calling into question a lot in the above posts, fwiw)
Rodman (prime/career): +5.3/+3.9
Grant: +3.6/+4.0
(just for comparison, the sometime teammate of both [Scottie Pippen] had prime/career WOWYR of +4.3/+4.0, fwiw)

AuPM ['94-'96] (using Ben Taylor's AuPM spreadsheet; granted Ho is four years younger, though only 1 year younger in NBA years)
'94 - Rodman: +2.7, Grant: +2.7 (fwiw, Grant leads +2.91 to +2.48 by colts18's AuPM model)
'95 - Rodman: +3.8, Grant: +4.6
'96 - Rodman: +2.6, Grant: +4.3


RAPM
‘97 - Rodman: +3.23, Grant: +3.25
‘98 - Rodman: +1.70, Grant: +2.26
‘99 - Rodman: +0.37, Grant: +1.17

Grant would go on to be a positive in RAPM each year until his 17th and final season [‘04], where he was -0.2.

PIPM
Rodman’s best 7 years are: +2.4, +2.1, +1.2, +1.2, +0.9, +0.8, +0.6 (avg of +1.31)
Grant’s best years are: +4.5, +2.7, +2.2, +2.0, +2.0, +1.9, +1.8 (avg of +2.44 [equal or marginally better than Rodman’s single-season best])

Grant has 13 total seasons with a PIPM >0; Rodman has 10.


In a quick-glance career box-based rate metrics (both played almost exclusively for very successful teams, and have similar career win%’s, for those metrics influenced by team success)….
Rodman: 14.6 PER, .150 WS/48, +0.9 BPM, +14 net rating, in 31.7 mpg
Grant: 16.0 PER, .147 WS/48, +1.4 BPM, +13 net rating in 33.2 mpg

^^^That’s despite playing three more seasons than Rodman. If we look only at Grant’s first 14 seasons [that’s as long as Rodman was around], to not penalize for three “twilight years”....

Grant: 16.3 PER, .151 WS/48, +1.6 BPM, +13 net rating in 34.2 mpg
…..having already at that point played over 6,300 more minutes than Rodman did in his career, because Grant was significantly more durable.


On top of all this, he’s a model teammate who meshed almost seamlessly with multiple contenders.

He’s a solid defender; peaked lower than Rodman defensively, but in terms of defensive consistency [or average defensive year], he’s probably roughly on par with Rodman, even if he doesn’t have the media accolades to show for it (like Kobe and Payton, Rodman got some based on reputation alone).
Grant’s a decent post defender, a very good pnr defender; not super-versatile on the perimeter, but you’re not hung out to dry if he’s caught on a switch either [see final play of G6 ‘93 Finals as example]. He provides more rim-protection than Rodman [generates more turnovers too, for that matter], and is a solid defensive rebounder (actually blocks out, too, whereas Rodman poached).

He’s arguably/probably a better halfcourt passer than Rodman [though I’ll def give Rodman the edge in outlet passing]; and at any rate he has a MUCH better turnover economy (Horace Grant is actually in a GOAT-tier [with Dirk and LMA] among big-men for overall turnover economy).

Grant is at least a marginally better scorer, and definitely spreads the floor a pinch more.

Rodman’s the much better offensive rebounder (though Grant was pretty good in this regard, too).


Idk, my 2c….
Character, portability, and longevity all factored in, I think Horace Grant actually stacks up very similarly/favourably vs Rodman or Bobby Jones [voted in at #76], too. He just doesn’t have as many media awards as the other two.


wrt rebounding---because this is often used as a major separating factor.....

On the offensive glass, yes: Grant was very good, but Rodman was in a GOAT-tier.

On the defensive glass, however, Rodman's individual numbers inflate his actual value on the defensive glass, because he would poach rebounds from his own teammates.
Suppose he [and his man] are on the strong side when a shot goes up from the wing or corner......if he could get there in time, more often than not later-career Rodman would migrate over to that weak-side [even if a teammate already had that side boxed out] rather than box his man out on the strong-side. He did so because he knows a missed shot from the side is most likely to come off on that weak-side, and he was more concerned with getting the rebound HIMSELF than with ensuring the other team didn't get the rebound.

Grant, otoh, was the more fundamental team rebounder.
I'm not saying Rodman wasn't an excellent defensive rebounder. I'm just saying the positive imprint of his defensive rebounding is OVER-stated based on his individual numbers (whereas someone like Grant is probably either appropriately represented or marginally UNDER-rated based on his individual numbers).

Although this is a very crude look at it, below I'm going to cite the team DREB% rank by year on some of their teams during their time, as well as before/after.....

Chicago rank in DREB%:
‘92: 4th of 27
‘93: 12th of 27
‘94: 2nd of 27
(Grant leaves)
‘95: 18th of 27
(Rodman arrives; Jordan back for full season)
‘96: 8th of 29
‘97: 12th of 29

Orlando rank in DREB%:
‘94: 21st of 27
(Grant arrives)
‘95: 15th of 27

Detroit rank in DREB%:
‘92: 7th of 27
‘93: 16th of 27
(Rodman leaves)
‘94: 24th of 27

San Antonio rank in DREB%:
‘93: 3rd of 27
(Rodman arrives)
‘94 (Rodman healthy all year): 4th of 27 [they actually FALL one place with Rodman's arrival]
‘95 (Rodman misses 33 games): 4th of 27 [he misses over a third of the season, but their league rank remains unchanged]
(Rodman leaves)
‘96: 13th of 29


Obviously this is a crude and noisy look at it, so take it for whatever it's worth (and do your own deeper dive as you see fit).

My bottom line is: if guys like Rodman, Bobby Jones, and Larry Nance are solid candidates in this range, then Grant must be as well [or at least VERY close behind]......even if he doesn't have the accolades to show for it (as I know there are a few who are going to hang their hats on that "measure").
Some years he was flat snubbed. I look at '92 in particular: 14.2 ppg @ +8.7% rTS, 10.0 rpg, 2.7 apg, 1.6 bpg, with only 1.2 topg.

A 14/10/3 statline with over 1 and a half blocks and ELITE efficiency [both the shooting kind and the turnover kind] while playing good defense for the best team in the league.......that's an All-Star. Even PER [which doesn't give a hot damn what kind of team you put the numbers up for] has him as a 20.6 that year (i.e. All-Star level).

His WS/48, meanwhile, is 3rd in the league that year; and his BPM was 10th.
He's frankly much closer to All-NBA than he is to NOT being an All-Star that year.
But you often don't get recognition if you don't score lots of points, especially when you're both soft-spoken AND over-shadowed by better teammates.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,877
And1: 21,805
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#11 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Apr 5, 2021 4:38 pm

Vote:
1. Damian Lillard
2. Connie Hawkins
3. Ben Wallace

Other preferences in order:

Spoiler:
Chris Bosh
Bill Walton
Nikola Jokic
Billy Cunningham
Grant Hill
Sidney Moncrief
Tiny Archibald
Dave DeBusschere
Larry Nance
Hal Greer
Horace Grant
Dennis Johnson
Terry Porter
Jeff Hornacek
Jerry Lucas
Gus Williams


So, same first 2 as before, bumping up Wallace a spot.

First thing I want to say is that my extended preference order is far from set in stone, just forcing myself to do it to help speed along the process.

Second thing I'll say is that it seems like everyone's kind of on their own island right now championing different guys, and while that's completely understandable opinion-wise, it makes it harder to get debate going, and I think debate is a good thing.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that I'd like to see analysis of Greer vs Cunningham vs Walker. I always saw Cunningham as the best player of the bunch, but now getting a better understanding of Walker, I'm tempted by him as well.

Keeping Lillard as my top choice and would really challenge folks to question why they don't have him near the top of their list. The guy has become a 30 PPG on well above 60+% TS. By all traditional standards, this would put him in the GOAT scorer territory. Yes I understand that in this era we're seeing a variety of guys do this and so some sort of adjustment by era is natural, but in terms of point guard-sized guys doing this, you're still just talking about Curry & Lillard, and while I rate Curry higher, he also got in a long time ago. I think recognizing that if Curry didn't exist you really wouldn't have anyone in basketball history that was Lillard's size that you should expect to be able to carry an offense as well as him is important, I'd urge people to literally do that comparison between Lillard and <whatever guy occurs to you>.

The Hawk. If you're not sure where Connie Hawkins stands up for you, I hope you give it consideration. It's entirely possible that in the end you'll conclude he lacks the longevity to be on this list (though watch out for selecting guys like Walton or Jokic ahead of him then), but this guy was an exceptional player.

I've mentioned before how important it is to recognize that Hawk wasn't simply a "proto-Doctor" or "Baylor 1.5". Hawkins had much more of a passing orientation than those guys did. Yes, I know that Dr. J led his team in assists at times, but I'd argue that was simply a part of the early heliocentrism he got to play with on the Nets. Yes, I know that Baylor made some spectacular passes, but he was always a scorer first and foremost.

In Hawkins you literally have a guy that was outstanding pivot passer first and foremost, who then developed into an incredible, efficient volume scorer.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
User avatar
Ainosterhaspie
Veteran
Posts: 2,681
And1: 2,778
Joined: Dec 13, 2017

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#12 » by Ainosterhaspie » Mon Apr 5, 2021 5:00 pm

I'm surprised Klay Thompson and Draymond Green aren't getting mentioned yet. Curry's greatness is intertwined with the exceptional synergy he had with those two. Both filled holes in his game. Both are elite at what they do best and provide exceptional secondary benefits to their team. They are the grinders championship team's needs and had a five year window of being cornerstones of some of the greatest teams ever.

Green belongs in the conversation with the likes of Nance, Rodman, Grant. I don't think any of those guys peaked as high as Green in 2016. He was an elite defender, excellent playmaker and even shot the three pointer at a very high level that year. He was an indispensable part of that 73 win team and nearly won the Warriors game seven with an unblievable three point barrage. Curry, Thompson and Durant may have brought the offensive flash, but Green made their defense while also being an effective if not always exceptional offensive player. On top of that, he was probably the closest thing to a leader on that team often setting the tone for them.

Hay be losing some shine the last two years and longevity holds him back compared to those other guys in similar class, but the heights he brought his team to and the length of time he was a key to them being at the top counters that.

Compare him to Bosh who is getting mention now. Green's the better defender, better leader, better playmaker and peaked higher offensively (maybe not in raw points, but I can't think of an offensive version of Bosh I'd prefer over 2016 Green). Bosh may be better at leading leading mediocre team to mediocre achievements, but there's no value in that. Both are best as complimentary pieces and Green is better in that role.

Thompson is hard to place as well, but elite three point shooting and high level defense often taking the most difficult perimeter assignment are perfect tools that can be addedd to any team and significantly improve it. He may not be able to consistently carry a team's offense, but he has repeatedly shown the ability in short bursts than can be game changing. He and Green ket the team winning in the playoffs even with Curry out. We've got the top 3 players for the '96 Bulls in, but only one from the Warriors 73 win team that was dynastic for longer than that Bulls team.

Obviously it's impossible to squeeze in everyone who is deserving here, but those two belong in the discussion right now.
Only 7 Players in NBA history have 21,000 points, 5,750 assists and 5,750 rebounds. LeBron has double those numbers.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,512
And1: 8,154
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#13 » by trex_8063 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:07 pm

Thru post #12:

Larry Nance - 2 (penbeast0, sansterre)
Hal Greer - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Nikola Jokic - 1 (Dutchball97)
Chris Bosh - 1 (trex_8063)
Damian Lillard - 1 (Doctor MJ)
Dennis Johnson - 1 (Hal14)
Bill Walton - 1 (HeartBreakKid)


About 26 hours left for this one.

Hal14, I need to know your order on all of the above names, just in case.

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:.

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

SeniorWalker wrote:.

SHAQ32 wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

Tim Lehrbach wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

Whopper_Sr wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

876Stephen wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 21,189
And1: 19,705
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#14 » by Hal14 » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:15 pm

Votes for those who have received traction:
1. Dennis Johnson
2. Bill Walton
3. Hal Greer
4. Chris Bosh
5. Larry Nance
6. Damian Lillard
7. Nikola Jokic
1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#15 » by HeartBreakKid » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:22 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:Vote:
1. Damian Lillard
2. Connie Hawkins
3. Ben Wallace

Other preferences in order:

Spoiler:
Chris Bosh
Bill Walton
Nikola Jokic
Billy Cunningham
Grant Hill
Sidney Moncrief
Tiny Archibald
Dave DeBusschere
Larry Nance
Hal Greer
Horace Grant
Dennis Johnson
Terry Porter
Jeff Hornacek
Jerry Lucas
Gus Williams


So, same first 2 as before, bumping up Wallace a spot.

First thing I want to say is that my extended preference order is far from set in stone, just forcing myself to do it to help speed along the process.

Second thing I'll say is that it seems like everyone's kind of on their own island right now championing different guys, and while that's completely understandable opinion-wise, it makes it harder to get debate going, and I think debate is a good thing.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that I'd like to see analysis of Greer vs Cunningham vs Walker. I always saw Cunningham as the best player of the bunch, but now getting a better understanding of Walker, I'm tempted by him as well.

Keeping Lillard as my top choice and would really challenge folks to question why they don't have him near the top of their list. The guy has become a 30 PPG on well above 60+% TS. By all traditional standards, this would put him in the GOAT scorer territory. Yes I understand that in this era we're seeing a variety of guys do this and so some sort of adjustment by era is natural, but in terms of point guard-sized guys doing this, you're still just talking about Curry & Lillard, and while I rate Curry higher, he also got in a long time ago. I think recognizing that if Curry didn't exist you really wouldn't have anyone in basketball history that was Lillard's size that you should expect to be able to carry an offense as well as him is important, I'd urge people to literally do that comparison between Lillard and <whatever guy occurs to you>.

The Hawk. If you're not sure where Connie Hawkins stands up for you, I hope you give it consideration. It's entirely possible that in the end you'll conclude he lacks the longevity to be on this list (though watch out for selecting guys like Walton or Jokic ahead of him then), but this guy was an exceptional player.

I've mentioned before how important it is to recognize that Hawk wasn't simply a "proto-Doctor" or "Baylor 1.5". Hawkins had much more of a passing orientation than those guys did. Yes, I know that Dr. J led his team in assists at times, but I'd argue that was simply a part of the early heliocentrism he got to play with on the Nets. Yes, I know that Baylor made some spectacular passes, but he was always a scorer first and foremost.

In Hawkins you literally have a guy that was outstanding pivot passer first and foremost, who then developed into an incredible, efficient volume scorer.

Why should we care about Damian Lillard's size? He's also only averaged 30 PPG one time. Only averaged 60 TS% one time as well to boot.
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#16 » by HeartBreakKid » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:26 pm

Ainosterhaspie wrote:I'm surprised Klay Thompson and Draymond Green aren't getting mentioned yet. Curry's greatness is intertwined with the exceptional synergy he had with those two. Both filled holes in his game. Both are elite at what they do best and provide exceptional secondary benefits to their team. They are the grinders championship team's needs and had a five year window of being cornerstones of some of the greatest teams ever.

Green belongs in the conversation with the likes of Nance, Rodman, Grant. I don't think any of those guys peaked as high as Green in 2016. He was an elite defender, excellent playmaker and even shot the three pointer at a very high level that year. He was an indispensable part of that 73 win team and nearly won the Warriors game seven with an unblievable three point barrage. Curry, Thompson and Durant may have brought the offensive flash, but Green made their defense while also being an effective if not always exceptional offensive player. On top of that, he was probably the closest thing to a leader on that team often setting the tone for them.

Hay be losing some shine the last two years and longevity holds him back compared to those other guys in similar class, but the heights he brought his team to and the length of time he was a key to them being at the top counters that.

Compare him to Bosh who is getting mention now. Green's the better defender, better leader, better playmaker and peaked higher offensively (maybe not in raw points, but I can't think of an offensive version of Bosh I'd prefer over 2016 Green). Bosh may be better at leading leading mediocre team to mediocre achievements, but there's no value in that. Both are best as complimentary pieces and Green is better in that role.

Thompson is hard to place as well, but elite three point shooting and high level defense often taking the most difficult perimeter assignment are perfect tools that can be addedd to any team and significantly improve it. He may not be able to consistently carry a team's offense, but he has repeatedly shown the ability in short bursts than can be game changing. He and Green ket the team winning in the playoffs even with Curry out. We've got the top 3 players for the '96 Bulls in, but only one from the Warriors 73 win team that was dynastic for longer than that Bulls team.

Obviously it's impossible to squeeze in everyone who is deserving here, but those two belong in the discussion right now.


I actually do agree, Draymond Green is very comparable if not better than some of the players getting mentioned. I don't really care for Klay Thompson though, kind of doubt he is really a top 100 all time guy, he was never even a top 15 guy in the league most likely.



Why not throw some votes in though?
User avatar
Ainosterhaspie
Veteran
Posts: 2,681
And1: 2,778
Joined: Dec 13, 2017

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#17 » by Ainosterhaspie » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:35 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:Why not throw some votes in though?

Not enough time to organize my thoughts enough to do it, but thought I'd at least try to get one or two other guys into the discussion.
Only 7 Players in NBA history have 21,000 points, 5,750 assists and 5,750 rebounds. LeBron has double those numbers.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,877
And1: 21,805
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#18 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:53 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:Why should we care about Damian Lillard's size? He's also only averaged 30 PPG one time. Only averaged 60 TS% one time as well to boot.


Point taken. I was trying to set a frame of reference but I certainly don't think we should be penalizing other players for being bigger.

Re: Only 30/60 once. Okay, but the dude's had a pretty consistent arc to his career so far, so yes while that might only be his peak to this point, what I'm trying to emphasize is that this is a guy whose level of achieved greatness is pretty dang high compared to what you'd expect given, for example, his MVP voting, and that at this point his longevity really stacks up with other guys being discussed.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,877
And1: 21,805
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#19 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Apr 5, 2021 11:58 pm

Ainosterhaspie wrote:I'm surprised Klay Thompson and Draymond Green aren't getting mentioned yet. Curry's greatness is intertwined with the exceptional synergy he had with those two. Both filled holes in his game. Both are elite at what they do best and provide exceptional secondary benefits to their team. They are the grinders championship team's needs and had a five year window of being cornerstones of some of the greatest teams ever.

Green belongs in the conversation with the likes of Nance, Rodman, Grant. I don't think any of those guys peaked as high as Green in 2016. He was an elite defender, excellent playmaker and even shot the three pointer at a very high level that year. He was an indispensable part of that 73 win team and nearly won the Warriors game seven with an unblievable three point barrage. Curry, Thompson and Durant may have brought the offensive flash, but Green made their defense while also being an effective if not always exceptional offensive player. On top of that, he was probably the closest thing to a leader on that team often setting the tone for them.

Hay be losing some shine the last two years and longevity holds him back compared to those other guys in similar class, but the heights he brought his team to and the length of time he was a key to them being at the top counters that.

Compare him to Bosh who is getting mention now. Green's the better defender, better leader, better playmaker and peaked higher offensively (maybe not in raw points, but I can't think of an offensive version of Bosh I'd prefer over 2016 Green). Bosh may be better at leading leading mediocre team to mediocre achievements, but there's no value in that. Both are best as complimentary pieces and Green is better in that role.

Thompson is hard to place as well, but elite three point shooting and high level defense often taking the most difficult perimeter assignment are perfect tools that can be addedd to any team and significantly improve it. He may not be able to consistently carry a team's offense, but he has repeatedly shown the ability in short bursts than can be game changing. He and Green ket the team winning in the playoffs even with Curry out. We've got the top 3 players for the '96 Bulls in, but only one from the Warriors 73 win team that was dynastic for longer than that Bulls team.

Obviously it's impossible to squeeze in everyone who is deserving here, but those two belong in the discussion right now.


I'm glad you brought them up. Both are serious candidates for me.

I'll say that to this point in their respective careers, I have to give Dray the edge over Klay. I think most of us expect that Klay has a game that will age better (health permitting), and maybe we would have already seen it in massive quantities these past two years without Klay's injuries, but to this point, I don't think Klay has really come close to topping Dray for achievement.

The other group of players I often compare Dray to is the 2012 Draft. For me it's been a 3-man horse race between AD, Dame & Dray, but currently I have them pretty cleanly in that order, which is why I'm championing Lillard right now.

Jokic is also starting to get some love and I'll say that Jokic vs Green is still something I'm debating in my head. It's one of those things where I fear I'm being biased by what I'm seeing in the '20-21 season.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,942
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #80 

Post#20 » by Odinn21 » Tue Apr 6, 2021 5:36 pm

80. Ben Wallace
I considered players with 5-6 seasons of prime such as Sidney Moncrief, Grant Hill. But I think in terms of best 5-6 consecutive seasons, Wallace was straight up better player and he had better prime duration.

81. Hal Greer
I respect his prime very much. Also quite high on his prime duration, especially considering the '60s standards. Scoring, passing, playmaking, defending, he had it all. Mainly, his prime duration almost doubling Moncrief's and Hill's while being a '60s player is the reason why I'm going with Greer over those 2. Their peaks are not good enough to reward like I did with Wallace.

82. Grant Hill
In terms of prime duration, Marion has an advantage over Moncrief and Hill but Marion played around 550-600 games in his prime and Hill played 450ish game (though he'd be closer to 500 with a full season in 1998-99). Between Marion and Hill, Marion has better prime duration and better overall longevity but Hill feels too good to be denied with that many games on that higher quality.

S. Moncrief > C. Bosh > H. Grant > L. Nance > G. Williams > D. Lillard > N. Jokic > C. Hawkins > B. Walton > N. Archibald > D. Johnson
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.

Return to Player Comparisons