RealGM

Battle of the 6th Man Winners/multi-champions. #52 vs #53 in the last Top 100 project, respectfully: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2004777

Who should be ranked higher all time?

Mchale. More reliable. More consistent. Much better defensively

1993Playoffs wrote:Mchale. More reliable. More consistent. Much better defensively

Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

The only thing they had in common was that they were both 6th men. Otherwise I can't think of two players who were as different from each other as those two.

rand wrote:

1993Playoffs wrote:Mchale. More reliable. More consistent. Much better defensively

Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

Yes, McHale was much better defensively. He was an elite post defender in an era of post up basketball.
Im not sure Manu was a top 10 player in the nba at any time, but i do agree he was a very good player and at his time a great 6th man. These 2 are not a great comparison.

dans1230 wrote:

rand wrote:

1993Playoffs wrote:Mchale. More reliable. More consistent. Much better defensively

Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

Yes, McHale was much better defensively. He was an elite post defender in an era of post up basketball.
Im not sure Manu was a top 10 player in the nba at any time, but i do agree he was a very good player and at his time a great 6th man. These 2 are not a great comparison.

Plus McHale could be a number 1 option for a good team, don't think Ginobili could. I think McHale, with his skillset in scoring, in place of Webber on the Kings would've made them better.

migya wrote:

dans1230 wrote:

rand wrote:Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

Yes, McHale was much better defensively. He was an elite post defender in an era of post up basketball.
Im not sure Manu was a top 10 player in the nba at any time, but i do agree he was a very good player and at his time a great 6th man. These 2 are not a great comparison.

Plus McHale could be a number 1 option for a good team, don't think Ginobili could. I think McHale, with his skillset in scoring, in place of Webber on the Kings would've made them better.

Both could be 1st options comfortably and they would be amazing together.

rand wrote:

1993Playoffs wrote:Mchale. More reliable. More consistent. Much better defensively

Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

I haven’t looked into it deeply so you may be right. But Id say by virtue of position and era Mchale Being a great post defender. He’s able to be more impactful than Ginobili out on the perimeter

70sFan wrote:

migya wrote:

dans1230 wrote:Yes, McHale was much better defensively. He was an elite post defender in an era of post up basketball.
Im not sure Manu was a top 10 player in the nba at any time, but i do agree he was a very good player and at his time a great 6th man. These 2 are not a great comparison.

Plus McHale could be a number 1 option for a good team, don't think Ginobili could. I think McHale, with his skillset in scoring, in place of Webber on the Kings would've made them better.

Both could be 1st options comfortably and they would be amazing together.

I don't think Ginobili could be the number 1 option on a very good, contending team, unless he has considerable talent next to him.

I agree both of them would fit great together.

migya wrote:

70sFan wrote:

migya wrote:
Plus McHale could be a number 1 option for a good team, don't think Ginobili could. I think McHale, with his skillset in scoring, in place of Webber on the Kings would've made them better.

Both could be 1st options comfortably and they would be amazing together.

I don't think Ginobili could be the number 1 option on a very good, contending team, unless he has considerable talent next to him.

I agree both of them would fit great together.

What were his limitations in your opinion?

70sFan wrote:

migya wrote:

70sFan wrote:Both could be 1st options comfortably and they would be amazing together.

I don't think Ginobili could be the number 1 option on a very good, contending team, unless he has considerable talent next to him.

I agree both of them would fit great together.

What were his limitations in your opinion?

Ginobili was a very talented and skilled player and had his moments, but besides not having sustained long term energy at the same level, hence his relatively low minutes, he made bad key plays. Ginobili is a nice second option, great third option, and was so for the Spurs, but he had Duncan. Prime Drexler for example, in place of Ginobili, cuts up the league. Much like Eddie Jones and Richard Hamilton weren't capable first options but gravy second or third options, Ginobili that way.

migya wrote:

dans1230 wrote:

rand wrote:Was McHale "much better" defensively? I know he made 6 All-Defense teams and Ginobili didn't make any, but All-Defense like other accolades is a popularity contest and Ginobili was robbed of accolades generally.

Unfortunately we don't have DRAPM for McHale but it suggests Ginobili was a beast of a defensive guard. In 2005 Manu posted a +2.5 DRAPM which tied prime Artest that season. In 2008 he posted a +3.0 DRAPM which was #7 in the entire league with only PFs and Cs above him. DBPM and individual DRtg aren't great stats but we don't have much else for direct comparison and they love Ginobili over McHale straight up. Despite these stats I'd be willing to accept that McHale had a defensive edge over Ginobili but I can't accept that he was "much better".

I voted Manu though I can see arguments for McHale based around consistency or durability. But in terms of impact, Manu was a top-10 player in his prime. I can only rely on others to assess whether the same was true of McHale in his own prime.

Yes, McHale was much better defensively. He was an elite post defender in an era of post up basketball.
Im not sure Manu was a top 10 player in the nba at any time, but i do agree he was a very good player and at his time a great 6th man. These 2 are not a great comparison.

Plus McHale could be a number 1 option for a good team, don't think Ginobili could. I think McHale, with his skillset in scoring, in place of Webber on the Kings would've made them better.

Manu was the number 1 option on the 11 Spurs who were a good team. He finished just 4 pts behind Wade in Mvp voting and was 8th overall

For 1 game it's a toss up. McHale had a significantly better career though

KobesScarf wrote:For 1 game it's a toss up. McHale had a significantly better career though

Significantly better career? Manu has more rings and a gold medal...McHale did not do significantly better than that. And that's with subjective awards underrating Manu (even if you think Manu sucks, he only has 1 6th man of the year award which is a joke).

Kevin McHale.