People were interested in these podcasts
Play Episode
60min
RealGM Radio
Wild Pacers Comeback & Timberwolves Game 2 Adjustments (with Dane Moore)
Wes Goldberg reacts to a wild Indiana Pacers comeback in Game 1 vs the New York Knicks, Tyrese Haliburton's almost-game winner, and what went wrong for the Knicks down the stretch (0:44). Then he's joined by Dane Moore (The Dane Moore NBA Podcast) to discuss some adjustments the Minnesota Timberwolves can make ahead of Game 2 against the Oklahoma City Thunder (12:28). RealGM Radio is powered in part by North Station Media (CLNS). For advertising or media inquiries, contact info@clnsmedia.com 🔔 Like, comment, and subscribe for more NBA insights and analysis! Follow RealGM Twitter: https://x.com/RealGM Follow Wes Goldberg Twitter: https://x.com/wcgoldberg PrizePicks: PrizePicks is the best place to get real money sports action. With over 10 million members and billions of dollars in awarded winnings, PrizePicks has made daily fantasy sports accessible to all. You just pick MORE or LESS on at least two players for a shot to win up to 1000x your cash! Run Your Game all season long on PrizePicks. Download the app today and use code CLNS to get $50 instantly after you play your first $5 lineup! Gametime: Take the guesswork out of buying tickets with Gametime. Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code CLNS for $20 off your first purchase. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
RealGM Radio
Pacers Go Up 2-1 in NBA Finals
Wes Goldberg shares his takeaways and observations from the Indiana Pacers' win over the Oklahoma City Thunder in Game 3 of the NBA Finals, including Tyrese Haliburton's aggressiveness, the Pacers' defensive adjustments and where Shai Gilgeous-Alexander fell short. RealGM Radio is powered in part by North Station Media (CLNS). For advertising or media inquiries, contact info@clnsmedia.com 🔔 Like, comment, and subscribe for more NBA insights and analysis! Follow RealGM Twitter: https://x.com/RealGM Follow Wes Goldberg Twitter: https://x.com/wcgoldberg PrizePicks: PrizePicks is the best place to get real money sports action. With over 10 million members and billions of dollars in awarded winnings, PrizePicks has made daily fantasy sports accessible to all. You just pick MORE or LESS on at least two players for a shot to win up to 1000x your cash! Run Your Game all season long on PrizePicks. Download the app today and use code CLNS to get $50 instantly after you play your first $5 lineup! Gametime: Take the guesswork out of buying tickets with Gametime. Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code CLNS for $20 off your first purchase. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
RealGM Radio
Thunder Take Control of NBA Finals, Desmond Bane Trade and Kevin Durant Destinations With Dave DuFour
OKC's defensive masterclass and Jalen Williams' breakout performance have the OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER on the brink of a championship. Wes Goldberg and Dave DuFour (The Athletic) analyze the THUNDER's path to success, dissecting their suffocating defense and the PACERS' struggles. The conversation shifts to blockbuster trade scenarios, including Desmond Bane's move to Orlando and potential Kevin Durant destinations. Charlotte's challenges with LaMelo Ball and roster construction strategies for struggling franchises round out this comprehensive NBA discussion. Timestamps 0:00 Intro 3:37 Thunder Defense 25:31 Exciting Finals for fans 34:00 Desmond Bane trade 50:14 Kevin Durant's next team 57:30 Trade Machine ideas RealGM Radio is powered in part by North Station Media (CLNS). For advertising or media inquiries, contact info@clnsmedia.com 🔔 Like, comment, and subscribe for more NBA insights and analysis! Follow RealGM Twitter: https://x.com/RealGM Follow Wes Goldberg Twitter: https://x.com/wcgoldberg PrizePicks: PrizePicks is the best place to get real money sports action. With over 10 million members and billions of dollars in awarded winnings, PrizePicks has made daily fantasy sports accessible to all. You just pick MORE or LESS on at least two players for a shot to win up to 1000x your cash! Run Your Game all season long on PrizePicks. Download the app today and use code CLNS to get $50 instantly after you play your first $5 lineup! Gametime: Take the guesswork out of buying tickets with Gametime. Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code CLNS for $20 off your first purchase. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
RealGM Radio
Do the Thunder or Pacers Have the Edge in the NBA Finals? (With Mo Dakhil)
Wes Goldberg and Mo Dakhil discuss the first two games of the NBA Finals between the Oklahoma City Thunder and Indiana Pacers. RealGM Radio is powered in part by North Station Media (CLNS). For advertising or media inquiries, contact info@clnsmedia.com 🔔 Like, comment, and subscribe for more NBA insights and analysis! Follow RealGM Twitter: https://x.com/RealGM Follow Wes Goldberg Twitter: https://x.com/wcgoldberg PrizePicks: PrizePicks is the best place to get real money sports action. With over 10 million members and billions of dollars in awarded winnings, PrizePicks has made daily fantasy sports accessible to all. You just pick MORE or LESS on at least two players for a shot to win up to 1000x your cash! Run Your Game all season long on PrizePicks. Download the app today and use code CLNS to get $50 instantly after you play your first $5 lineup! Gametime: Take the guesswork out of buying tickets with Gametime. Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code CLNS for $20 off your first purchase. #nba #nbafinals #nbaplayoffs #thunder #pacers Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 - 1957-58 Bob Pettit

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

User avatar
LA Bird
Analyst
Posts: 3,593
And1: 3,328
Joined: Feb 16, 2015

Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 - 1957-58 Bob Pettit 

Post#1 » by LA Bird » Wed Oct 5, 2022 12:13 pm

RealGM Greatest Peaks List (2022)
1. 1990-91 Michael Jordan
2. 2012-13 LeBron James
3. 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal
4. 1976-77 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
5. 1966-67 Wilt Chamberlain
6. 2002-03 Tim Duncan
7. 1993-94 Hakeem Olajuwon
8. 1963-64 Bill Russell
9. 1985-86 Larry Bird
10. 1986-87 Magic Johnson
11. 2016-17 Stephen Curry
12. 2003-04 Kevin Garnett
13. 2020-21 Giannis Antetokounmpo
14. 1963-64 Oscar Robertson
15. 1965-66 Jerry West
16. 2021-22 Nikola Jokic
17. 1976-77 Bill Walton
18. 2005-06 Dwyane Wade
19. 2007-08 Kobe Bryant
20. 1993-94 David Robinson
21. 2016-17 Kawhi Leonard
22. 1975-76 Julius Erving
23. 2010-11 Dirk Nowitzki
24. 2016-17 Kevin Durant
25. 1982-83 Moses Malone
26. 2019-20 Anthony Davis
27. 2006-07 Steve Nash
28. 2014-15 Chris Paul
29. 2018-19 James Harden
30. 1949-50 George Mikan
31. 1989-90 Charles Barkley
32. 1997-98 Karl Malone
33. 1989-90 Patrick Ewing
34. 2002-03 Tracy McGrady
35. 2010-11 Dwight Howard
36. 2021-22 Joel Embiid
37. 1957-58 Bob Pettit

Spoiler:
Please vote for your 3 highest player peaks and at least one line of reasoning for each of them.

Vote example 1
1. 1991 Jordan: Explanation
2. 2013 LeBron: Explanation
3. 2000 Shaq: Explanation

In addition, you can also list other peak season candidates from those three players. This extra step is entirely optional

Vote example 2
1. 1991 Jordan: Explanation
(1990 Jordan)
2. 2013 LeBron: Explanation
(2012 LeBron)
(2009 LeBron)
3. 2000 Shaq: Explanation

You can visit the project thread for further information on why this makes a difference and how the votes will be counted at the end of the round.

Voting for this round will close on Friday October 7, 9am ET.
User avatar
CharityStripe34
General Manager
Posts: 9,433
And1: 6,358
Joined: Dec 01, 2014
     

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#2 » by CharityStripe34 » Wed Oct 5, 2022 1:12 pm

Been a while for me. Gonna try and pimp some old dudes who I feel have been overlooked.

1. Bob Pettit (1959) : Arguably the league's best player in the first half-decade of the shot-clock era, and certainly a Top 5 player for literally 95% of his career until his last season when he got a knee-injury and decided to retire (as an All-NBA 2nd teamer) to pursue banking/finance (take that plumbers and firemen). The league's first true, prototypical PF that could shoot from distance and rebound like a MF'er who won two MVP's and a title. His 1959 was his absolute peak coming off a dominant title-winning season the year before.

Honorable mention: (1958, 1962)

2. Rick Barry (1975): Someone who definitely gets lost in all-time discussions, mostly because he made a big impact coming into the league in the mid-late 60's, but then went to the ABA for a few seasons. Only then to return to the NBA and, thanks to his awesome season, took the Warriors as a massive underdog to the Finals against a really good Bullets team and demolished them in a sweep. 30-6-5 on 46% shooting and considering he did much of his damage shooting dribble pull-ups that's pretty damn good, in my eyes. He had better post-season stats in 1967, but 28-6-6 with 3 steals is nothing to sneeze at (12.7 WS). Yeah, he had a girly FT shooting motion, but led basketball multiple times with above 90% from the stripe.

Honorable mention: 1967, 1969

3. Sidney Moncrief (1983): Probably a very controversial pick over someone like Reggie Miller, who has huge shooting bona fides that could be plucked from, say 1994 into today's game, but that's not what I'm really considering. Moncrief was 5x All-NBA and 5x All-Defensive in an incredibly talent-laden era, being a two-time DPOY as well. From 82-86 he was a 20-6-4 guard with elite defensive chops for a very gritty, tough Bucks team that just ran into the Sixers and then Celtics. 1983 was his best statistical RS in the regular and advanced stats even though in 84 & 85 he was slightly better in the playoffs. I would not hold it against anyone if they felt Miller's awesome playoff runs in 94-95 (his peak) puts him over Moncrief. Call it a homer pick, but I'll take Moncrief's two-way excellence.

Honorable mention: 1984, 1985
"Wes, Hill, Ibaka, Allen, Nwora, Brook, Pat, Ingles, Khris are all slow-mo, injury prone ... a sandcastle waiting for playoff wave to get wrecked. A castle with no long-range archers... is destined to fall. That is all I have to say."-- FOTIS
User avatar
Ron Swanson
RealGM
Posts: 25,333
And1: 28,990
Joined: May 15, 2013

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#3 » by Ron Swanson » Wed Oct 5, 2022 2:46 pm

1957-58 Bob Pettit (HM: 1962-63) Feels appropriate to put Pettit here right after Mikan gets in. Tough to gauge with the limited footage we have of prime Bob, but the results and numbers we do have speak for themselves. One of only two teams to beat the Russell Celtics in the 1957-1969 postseason period (and took the C's to a Game 7 two other times). Dropped 50/19 on 34 shots in a closeout Finals game, and a 29/17/2 line in the Finals overall. Biggest hurdle for me placing Pettit any higher is that his championship year clearly wasn't his best statistical season (24/17/2 on +5% TS adjusted, .209 WS/48, 26.3 PER) and his series against the Pistons was incredibly underwhelming by his standards (Cliff Hagan carried them offensively those 5-games). He had much better efficiency seasons and I'm not knowledgeable enough on his defense (outside of knowing it certainly wasn't poor) to gauge how much value he contributed on that end, but I feel pretty confident in his placement here.

1969-70 Willis Reed (HM: 1968-69) Was ready to go into my next tier of Westbrook/Stockton/Butler before I realized I missed Reed. Think he's often forgotten for a couple reasons: His longevity is lacking (basically washed by his age-29 season), and the Knicks were a stacked roster with Frazier, DeBusschere, Bill Bradley, and Dick Barnett. But Willis anchoring the #1 defense and winning an MVP and championship in a two-year stretch of basically 21/14/2 with DPOTY level impact and efficient offense (+6 rTS) gives him my vote. What's weird is that you could go with Frazier here too, but I think I'd actually prefer his '71-72 season for peaks.

1974-75 Rick Barry (HM: 1966-67) Time for Barry to get his flowers. One of the last elite single season carry-jobs I have on my list. The '75 Warriors were probably a low-level contender in any other season, but Barry's heliocentrism worked really well with that roster surrounded by good defensive players, lifting them to the #2 offense with their next best offensive player being.....a rookie Jamaal Wilkes? Not much if any postseason regression (30/6/5/3 on 51% TS vs. 28/6/5/3 on 50% TS) combined with beating a very good Bullets squad in the Finals (60-win, 6.5 SRS) as their clear best/most impactful player. Would love to have some lineup data of prime Barry to really confirm how good of an offensive ceiling guy he was. Criticisms and reasons for him not being higher should be pretty obvious. His career efficiency (52.5% TS on volume) is heavily buoyed by his early-ABA seasons where I have serious competition concerns. And his personality/attitude issues, well.....let's just say for anyone who knows NBA history, those are pretty well documented at this point, and their subsequent affects on locker room chemistry.
User avatar
AEnigma
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,067
And1: 5,882
Joined: Jul 24, 2022
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#4 » by AEnigma » Wed Oct 5, 2022 3:22 pm

CharityStripe34 wrote:3. Sidney Moncrief

I respect the vote, and have myself considered him as a possible top fifty option… but definitely a little hurt that you did not vote for his centre as your homer choice. ;-)

1. Bob Lanier (1974)
Wrote a long explanation here which I would appreciate people reading.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2228113#p101330440
I will also paste it in its (near) entirety into the below spoiler.
Spoiler:
AEnigma wrote:
Roger Murdock, A.K.A. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar wrote:Listen, kid, I’ve been hearing that crap ever since I was at UCLA. I’m out there busting my buns every night! Tell your old man to drag Walton and Lanier up and down the court for 48 minutes!
Isiah Thomas wrote:I was having some success in the game early on. I remember coming down the lane, and [Lanier] literally grabbed me out of the air and gently set me down and said, ‘Don’t come down here anymore.’ For the rest of the game, I became a great jump shooter. He was one of the true enforcers in the game. And he patrolled the paint. I remember that moment vividly in my head. That was my rookie night.

Lanier is often lost in the throng of 1970s centres. He did not win an MVP and title like Walton, Reed, Cowens, Gilmore, and I guess technically McAdoo (sixth man titles well past your prime count too). During his prime in Detroit, he won a single (three-game) postseason series, against the 1976 no-more-Kareem Bucks. He never even made an all-NBA team, which is more a reflection of position in an era where the league’s third best centre may as well be its third best player, but that does still mean voters never saw him as a top two centre. And despite a generally productive career, Lanier never made one of those NBA all-time teams. For quite a few people, that paragraph may be an automatic non-starter for Lanier.

His 1974 season at least might occasionally grab people’s attention, if we try to move past accolades. The Pistons had the league’s second-best SRS (well behind the Bucks). Lanier finished second that season in both PIPM and BPM (and PIPM wins added and VORP), closely behind Kareem and well ahead of anyone else. That PIPM score is top 75 all-time, and in the pre-databall era, every higher peak option was admitted long ago (for reference, that score is higher than Ewing’s, KMalone’s, Barkley’s, Moses’s, etc.).

He also led the league in BBR’s individual defensive rating and finished third in defensive win shares (Hayes and Kareem), which you would expect from anchoring the league’s third best defence without the strong defensive support you see on the Bullets or Celtics or Bulls. The Pistons did go on to lose to that Bulls team, but against the league’s top defence Lanier elevated his already impressive regular season scoring level, and the Pistons actually outscored the Bulls over the course of that seven-game road series. Unfortunately for the Pistons, it turns out winning four games matters more than outscoring in aggregate, and total wins matters more for seeding than total SRS; in a seventh game decided by two points, that Chicago home advantage may well have been the difference.

Anyway, postseason elevation was not unusual for Lanier, who was quietly one of the top playoff risers in league history.
1974-78 Lanier regular season: 21/11/3.5/2 per 75 possessions on 56.6% efficiency (~+6 rTS), playing 38 minutes per game.
1974-77 Lanier postseason (22 games): 22.5/12/3/2 per 75 possessions on 58.6% efficiency (~+8 rTS), playing 41 minutes per game. 13/22 games were against that season’s #1 defence.

Most people recognise that as all-time offence at the centre position, so then the attention shifts to his defence. The 1974 Pistons were a -4 defence. They never were never above average in any other year. Can part of that collapse be attributed to Lanier? Absolutely. He had career high marks in block rates and steal rates, and nearly in rebounding rate, and this was by all accounts the healthiest season of his career. 1974 was his peak defensive season, by a distance which I think comfortably secures it as his overall peak season. However, an individual’s decline in defence tends not to lead to a six point swing in team defence… which brings us to the tortured history of the Detroit Pistons.

Keith Black Trudeau wrote:From the outset of Lanier’s rookie season, he was plagued by his bad knee. Despite not missing a single game, his contributions were limited and he played fewer than 30 minutes in at least 55 of them. Nevertheless, the Pistons, 31-51 the year prior, were transformed almost instantly. They won their first nine games of the 1970-71 season, a team record that stands to this day. Detroit ran their fast start to 12-1 before coming back to earth, but the point was proven. Led by their rookie big man, the Pistons were no longer a pushover. There was, unfortunately, another big change to the NBA that season. In an effort to streamline scheduling, the league broke its East and West divisions up into conferences, with playoff seeds awarded to the top two teams in each of the four divisions. The Pistons, to make things even, were banished to the Western Conference, and into the Midwest Divison with contenders Chicago, Phoenix, and a Milwaukee Bucks team that already had Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and acquired Oscar Robertson to form one of the greatest 1-2 combos in NBA history.

The Pistons, despite winning 45 games, finished dead last in their division and were disqualified, while three teams with worse records made it, including the top two teams in the Eastern Conference’s Central Division. Bob Lanier’s on-the-job rehabilitation was cut short, and he once again had to watch from home as Dave Cowens accepted the Rookie of the Year award on behalf of a Celtics team that had actually won fewer games than the Pistons.

Drafting Lanier was hardly the cure for all of Detroit’s problems. They were still very much a circus act, which reared its ugly face in Lanier’s second season.

Point guard Dave Bing, on the cusp of superstardom, suffered a detached retina in the 1971-72 season opener that cost him 37 games and marked the start of his own physical decline. Head coach Butch Van Breda Koff quit his job just nine games later, shortly after signing a 2-year contract extension. Van Breda Koff was replaced on an interim basis by Terry Dischinger, who doubled as one of the team’s small forwards. Dischinger was eventually succeeded by Earl Lloyd, a scout/assistant coach that had been loyally waiting in the wings for almost a decade for a head coaching opportunity, repeatedly denied only because he was a black man. Howard Komives, of the few white players on the team, staged an attempted coup after being DNP’d, implying Lloyd was racist. The attempt failed and Komives was forced to apologize before being traded out of Detroit, but the stigma remained and Lloyd was fired shortly after the start of the following season.

I spotlight all of this because Bob Lanier still managed to arrive as a superstar in this cesspool, averaging a career-best 25.7 points to go with 14.2 rebounds and 3.1 assists. The 1972 season would be his first of seven trips to the All-Star game over the next eight seasons. The Pistons finished 26-56.

This changed in 1974:
Sports Illustrated wrote:Detroit has won 10 of its 15 most recent games against .500-plus clubs, and in one heady burst clobbered the NBA's two most successful clubs, Milwaukee (twice) and Boston. These winning ways continued last week as the Pistons swept three weak opponents at Cobo before losing at Chicago 109-91. That defeat prevented Detroit from moving ahead of the Bulls into second place in the Midwest Division, easily the league's toughest, but hardly tarnished the Pistons' 33-19 record, fourth-best in the NBA.

It is defense in its many forms—trap presses, switching man-to-man and occasionally a thinly disguised zone of the sort used by most good pro teams—that has turned the Detroit Pistons, for 16 seasons one of the NBA's most persistent losers, into insistent winners. Last year Detroit ranked 10th in defense, allowing 110 points per game—and that was a six-point improvement over 1971-72. Now the Pistons have a 98.9 defensive average and are getting better with almost every game; only three of their last 13 opponents have scored as many as 100 points.

Bob Lanier was accused of having too much gut and not enough guts. Today, he is no worse than the third-best NBA center and may well be named the NBA's Most Valuable Player.
According to Lanier, it has only been in the last year that he has overcome the physical and psychological effects of the knee injury that ended his college career in 1970 when he was playing in the NCAA regionals for St. Bonaventure and fell over Villanova's (now, ironically, the Pistons') Chris Ford… The most versatile shooter among pro centers, Lanier is grinding down opponents with his inside game and wearing them out with his defense. He averages 23.9 points and 14 rebounds per game, but impressive as those numbers are, his best statistic is the Pistons' defensive average, for which he is most responsible.

Lanier is not only clogging the middle with his immense frame, but is using his unexpected quickness to move away from the basket and help Detroit's switching defense in much the same manner that last year's MVP, Dave Cowens, does for the Celtics. Twice in the Pistons' 93-89 win over Houston last week, Lanier switched onto Rocket Calvin Murphy, the smallest (5'9") and perhaps the fastest man in the league. Both times Murphy attempted to drive past Lanier, only to end up passing off in frustration when he could not get by. The next night Lanier put together one of the tidiest performances of the season as Detroit beat Seattle 94-83. He scored 27 points, grabbed 19 rebounds, had five assists, stole the ball three times and blocked seven shots. He said of that night's work: "I've had quite a few games like this so far this year, and I expect I'm going to have even more of them in the future."

Then, the series against the Bulls:
Greg Eno wrote:The Pistons lost a brutal, angry seven-game series to the Chicago Bulls in the first round. The Pistons weren't done until the final inbounds pass of Game 7, with just seconds to play and the Pistons trailing by one. But David Bing's throw-in was batted away by Dennis Awtrey. Game over. Series over. Season over.

And the tears flowed; not just for 10 year-old Greg Eno, but for Ray Scott's grown-up Pistons players.

"Yeah, we cried, too," Scott said when I told him of my crying jag. "Bob was a spartan; he did everything that we could possibly get him to do… We got beat by Clifford Ray.” Clifford Ray was a big, long-armed shot-blocker and rebounder. He was not, by any stretch, an offensive threat. Kind of like Ben Wallace that way. But, Scott said, Ray was able to match Bob Lanier's offensive production in Game 7 -- a matchup that hadn't worked in the Bulls favor in the previous six games.

The team started to slide in 1975 as health issues and contract disputes ravaged their lineups:
Pat Putnam wrote:After using up 13 coaches since 1948, the Pistons came upon Ray Scott almost two years ago and suddenly, instead of a bunch of people playing one-on-one, there was cohesion. Instead of individual stars, the Pistons became a galaxy. Just as important, Scott convinced Lanier not only that he was a premier center but that anyone who is 6'11" and weighs in at 260 pounds just naturally ought to be an assassin. "More elbows," ordered Scott. By nature a gentle man, Lanier became an enforcer, and the Pistons, a team at last, began to win. Only a two-point loss to Chicago kept them from the Western Conference final against Milwaukee. [SI: Forwards Love and Walker provided their usual exemplary shooting, averaging 45.1 points per game between them, but the rest of the Bulls seemed cowed by the Piston defense, particularly by Lanier whenever any of them moved into his area near the basket.]

When the season opened the consensus was that Detroit would sprint ahead of its Midwest rivals... But the Pistons had problems of their own, although some of them were not quite visible. Bing and Don Adams, the brilliant defensive forward, had been preseason holdouts, and for Adams, at best a slow starter, the delay was costly. And Scott sensed that the holdouts had disrupted the team unity that by the end of last season had lifted the Pistons out of perennial mediocrity.

Then came the injuries. Bing hurt a foot and had to have half of his right big toenail removed. For the first two weeks of the season he wore a size 14 shoe on his right foot, where normally he wears a 12. Later he sprained an ankle. Two weeks into the season Adams injured an Achilles tendon, missed eight games and then needed another month to play himself back into shape. Then almost the entire forward corps collapsed. Willie Norwood started the first seven games and was shooting at 54% when he complained of extreme pain in his left knee. A few days later he had an operation to remove a bone spur and still is out. Curtis Rowe came down with near pneumonia, lost 15 pounds but continued to play, though he was not as effective. After 20 games the Pistons had won but 10. They bumped along, finally reaching 16-17, taking turns with the Bulls and the Kings in first place.

"That was enough," says Scott. "We thought in the beginning we could run and shoot. We found out we couldn't. And so we went back to the things we do best: tough defense and more patience on offense. That's what won for us last year."

The move suited the 6'11", 260-pound Lanier, who was having a fine year and at that point became even better. In an attempt to determine the NBA's most complete player, statistics were fed into a computer. They included total scoring, assists, rebounds, blocked shots and field-goal scoring. Lanier came out No. 1. After 40 games he was averaging 24.7 points and playing tremendous defense. And he was doing it with a left knee wracked by tendinitis and arthritis. Every few days the knee has to be drained, and after every game he packs it in ice to reduce the pain and swelling.
"He's our savior," says Rowe.
"Our healer," says Adams.
"Our leader," says Bing.
"Listen to those guys," says Lanier. "They think I'm Moses."

Returning to their old style of play and healthy again, the Pistons ran off six straight victories. In November they played 14 games and gave up an average of 102.4 points per game. In 21 games since then they have allowed but 91.8 points a game and lowered their season average to 97.4, second best in the NBA.

The Pistons went on to lose to the Sonics in a three-game series. Bing was traded. After a rough start, Coach Ray was fired in front of the team. Bad vibes all-around.

I am not the biggest fan of Dave Bing — utter joke he has consistently made all-time NBA teams over Lanier — but he did at least occupy defensive attention. Many games have been scrubbed from Youtube over the years, but in what 1976 postseason games are available (either from searching or from the list that 70sFan provided in Peak #29 of this project), you can see Lanier getting legitimately triple-teamed and hear commentators saying, “Guard Lanier, and you stop [Detroit’s] offence.” All the same, the Pistons managed to give the #1 SRS Warriors a strong push, falling just short in overtime of Game 6.

1977 was even more internally disastrous, but thanks to what was probably Lanier’s second best season, the Pistons stayed relatively steady.
https://vault.si.com/vault/1977/02/28/moaning-and-winning-in-motown
I am not quoting this one because it is not overly relevant to Lanier’s play, but it is a good read if you want to learn about maybe the most dysfunctional playoff team in league history.

After this last gasp, the Pistons ran out of juice. Two and a half years without postseason play. One and a half years spent in utter irrelevance. And then… Milwaukee.
Barry McDermott wrote:Only the Pacific Division champion Lakers (23-6) had a better record [than the Bucks] after the [1980] All-Star break.

It was then that the Bucks got Center Bob Lanier, trading Kent Benson and their 1980 first-round draft pick to Detroit, and Lanier proved to be the anchor that stopped the team's drifting. With the 6'11" 250-pounder on court, Milwaukee has demonstrated that it can compete with the best—even world champion Seattle, its probable opponent in the Western Conference semifinals. After Lanier arrived, the Bucks closed with a 20-6 rush, and the losses were by a total of only 16 points.

Nelson says Milwaukee could have won 62 games if Lanier had been with the team from the start, which the big fellow would have welcomed. Over the years, during the good times—the Pistons won 52 games in 1973-74—and the more recent bad ones, Lanier was Detroit's workhorse, a 22.8 career scorer and 11.9 rebounder. With the Bucks he isn't expected to carry the team on his broad back. "I don't have the emotional burden," he says. "Here I help on defense, set picks and pass the ball, things I do well anyway. It makes life easier. My playing time has gone down but the Ws are up."

"I'm happy for him," says Dave Bing, Lanier's former teammate. "It gives him a chance to go out a winner. He would have died in Detroit." Bing was a candidate for the Pistons' coaching job when Dick Vitale was fired earlier this season, and Lanier supported his candidacy, but Richie Adubato was given the position. It was the straw that broke Lanier's back. He told management he wanted out.

The deal with Milwaukee would have been made six weeks earlier except that Lanier broke the little finger on his left hand, and while recuperating he worried about his reputation as a loser who was injury prone. He previously had had two knee operations, a broken right hand, a bad toe, a sore back and a chronic shoulder problem. Lanier, who is from Buffalo, also fretted because Kent Benson, for whom it was rumored he would be traded, was Milwaukee's kind of guy: a hard-working, diligent Midwesterner. At the All-Star Game, Lanier approached Marques Johnson and asked him how the Bucks would view him. "Come on aboard," Johnson said.

With Lanier aboard, the floor looks a little bigger and less congested to Marques. Says Buckner, "Before, we would go to our guns down the stretch, and Marques was being forced so far from the basket that everything was long distance." Johnson points out, "When we take the floor now, you can just see the respect in the opposing center's eyes."

Lanier's importance was demonstrated in his very first game with the Bucks on Feb. 6. That night, Brian Winters made a game-ending 20-foot jump shot for a 111-109 win over Cleveland. Later Winters explained how he had gotten free: "Everybody was going to Bob as if he were a magnet." And at first Lanier thought Winters had missed; he was so conditioned to losing he had forgotten all about game-winning shots.

When Lanier joined up, Milwaukee trailed Kansas City by five games; it won 11 of its next 13. On March 16 the Bucks beat the Kings 128-121 and took the division lead for good. They had defeated Seattle twice, including a two-point victory in The Kingdome. The Bucks began calling Lanier "Coach" in deference to his age, 31, and stature. Because there weren't so many hands in their faces anymore, they began shooting better; at the All-Star break Milwaukee was shooting 47%; since then it has been 51%.
Anthony Cotton wrote:By the start of last season it was thought that all Milwaukee needed to make a run at the championship was a dominating center. That shortcoming was remedied right after last season's All-Star break when the Bucks traded Kent Benson and their 1980 first-round draft choice to the Pistons for Lanier. Milwaukee was 29-27 at the time, but with Lanier they went 20-6 for the remainder of the regular season before losing a tense seven-game playoff series to defending champion Seattle. Without Lanier, Detroit won two of its last 28 games.

Milwaukee has continued at that pace in 1980-81 despite what has been a depressing season for Lanier. In October his father was killed by a hit-and-run driver, and recently his wife filed for divorce. On the court Lanier, 32, has endured a broken nose, pain in his shoulders, neck and back, and floating bone chips in his left knee. At least five times this season the knee has locked.

"I guess you could say this hasn't been one of the grandest years of my life," says Lanier. "I've struggled, and there has been a lot of unrest in my mind—right now because of the knee. Some days I can play, some days I can't."

When he does play, Lanier still has his feathery touch from the outside. On the inside he's still 6'10", 250 pounds, which means he takes up a lot of room in the lane.

Nelson has sometimes held Lanier out of entire games to rest the knee. When he's not in the lineup, the Bucks seem to rise to the occasion—witness a 113-103 win over Boston on Feb. 5—but Nelson and everyone else know that a reasonably healthy Lanier is essential if Milwaukee is to seriously challenge for the NBA title. So, with Lanier's knee continuing to give him problems, Nelson has of late tried reducing the strain on it by limiting Lanier's playing time to short spurts. Lanier, however, balks at that treatment, saying he needs more playing time to loosen up the knee, which stiffens during rest periods on the bench. "People have started to dismiss us because they don't think Bob will be able to go full speed in the playoffs," says Nelson, "but I know he'll be tough." Says Lanier, "I haven't had the opportunity to get my game on track this year with all that's gone on, but my teammates have carried me. I'm not where I want to be yet, but if I can get there, I'll be doing the carrying."

Lanier has played in the NBA for 11 seasons but never made it to the championship series. Now he feels he may finally get there. "What makes this year so important to me is that I've had a full season with a good team," he says. "I know the system and I know the players. And, for me, there's no promise that there'll be a next year."

Marques Johnson is optimistic about the playoffs, but he's well aware that Lanier's soundness is crucial to Milwaukee's hopes. "Our strength is our flexibility," he says. "Whatever matchup we meet, we have a lineup to counter it. That Seattle series last year and the experience of taking the Sonics to seven games is our biggest plus. Not having handled that kind of pressure before was our downfall then. What I remember most is the Sonics' saying that it was their experience that helped them win. Now I guess you could say we're an experienced club. But without Bob we're not strong inside, and teams like Philadelphia. Boston and Chicago can take advantage of us on the boards."

Lanier continued to decline and retired in 1984. The Bucks hung his jersey in their rafters just a couple of months later. Only four and a half seasons with the team, but he sure made an impression.

Different RealGMers have sought to quantify Lanier’s “impact” on these teams.
Owly wrote:The Hollander handbooks remain pretty constantly positive after '74 (when he lost some weight), not really just a couple of years.
The 1975 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1974 wrote:Trimmer last season. Defense was his biggest improvement. He concentrated more on stopping other teams from penetrating and fourth in blocked shots with 247.
The 1976 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1975 wrote:Such awesome grace has never before been present in a man of this size...Dainty movements coming from a man who sometimes weighs 280 suggests image of a ballerina elephant...The single most versatile offensive center--ever...Actually has more moves than Abdul-Jabbar, who has become almost strictly a hook man.
The 1977 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1976 wrote:Has become a very intimidating defensive player who, like Dave Cowens, is not afraid to switch out on unsuspecting forwards and guards… He also clogs the middle nicely.
The 1978 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1977 wrote:Can rebound, block shots, play defense, do everything but clean the kitchen floor… Injuries have been a problem, though, but he has always played hurt.
The 1979 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1978 wrote:Lanier seals off the middle and is tough and aggressive.
The 1980 Pro Basketball Handbook from 1979 wrote:Defensively he can be as imposing as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Bill Walton or Artis Gilmore.

In large samples Lanier was having a substantial impact in '76-'78. The difference with him to without him (per game in points diff) was ...

'76: 5.2
team points differential over the year -86 over 82 games, -1.05 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -92 over 18 games, -5.1 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier +6 over 64 games, 0.1 per game

'77: 6.3
team points differential over the year -85 over 82 games, -1.04 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -107 over 18 games, -5.95 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier 22 over 64 games, 0.35 per game

'78: 4.3
team points differential over the year -102 over 82 games, -1.24 per game
team points differential over 19 games without Lanier -100 over 19 games, -4.35 per game
team points differential over 63 games with Lanier -2 over 63 games, -0.05 per game

This is from a guy hitting his apex in '74. In '75 still more or less as healthy as he ever was (he was injured late in his NCAA career and the Pistons hurried him back in his rookie year, which may have altered his career trajectory, but I digress), he's still blocking more than two shots a game, and I think for those first two years of my span ('74, '75) he's having a larger impact overall and a larger impact on D (than for ’76-’78). But even if it were just at these levels, I just don't buy that his impact was exclusively offensive, and in later Pistons years I don't think Lanier was put in a position to look good in terms of turnover, coaching turnover, coaching quality and teammates.

The Bucks in net in year improvement upon Lanier's arrival is huge suggesting at worst non-harmful at that point on that end. Those games with Lanier, and Lanier played in them all, they go +287, or +11.04 per game. Before that point, over 56 games they had been +36 or 0.64 per game.

I can't think really of another angle to analyse this from. I'd guess he's portable as he can score from the post, he space the floor and shoot the J, and it seems like at his best (anecdotally) he could defend guys out on the floor as well as play a more conventional anchor, and his assist % is pretty strong for a big man

Short-version:
- Mid-70s boxscore composite "advanced" metrics not too far off Kareem (on a per-minute basis).
- Despite missing time in his prime, above metrics were at a high level for a long time.
- With-without splits from when injured during prime indicates significant impact.
- Post-prime splits after trade for the more stable team (Milwaukee) suggest (on a small, but non-trivial sample) huge impact.
- From '74 on, a prominent yearly publication far more bullish on Lanier's D

His absence from All-NBA is very explainable, 2 teams, Kareem and various others as very strong competition often with better teams and so better team success and - a more genuine negative, though one that illustrated his net value in WoWY metrics - an inability to get to 70 games in many of his best years.

I think the most I can say on Lanier is the more I got into (1) the numbers and (2) the year by year history rather than the big, broad strokes, after the fact histories (and related rankings), the more I thought "Isn't he better than much more fabled 70s centers (Reed, Unseld, Cowens)?" Instinctively I'd say maybe in Ewing's ballpark.

Elgee wrote:Bob Lanier's defense I've argued repeatedly wasn't that bad, as evidenced by 4 things:

(1) Ability to be part of an elite defensive team
(2) The reputation of his Detroit teams as being absolutely god awful on defense at the other positions
(3) His individual praise in old articles for defending elite centers well (at times)
(4) His defensive role/impact in Milwaukee

Lanier had the following team DRtg's (estimated before 1974)
Det 70 +4.3 (pre Lanier)
Det 71 +1.7
Det 72 +4.4
Det 73 +1.6
Det 74 -3.9
Det 75 +2.0
Det 76 +1.9 (64g)
Det 77 +0.8 (64g)
Det 78 +0.6 (63g)
Det 79 +0.8 (53g)
Det 80 +3.5 (Lanier plays 37 games before trade)
--
Mil 80 -2.4 (26g post trade at +11 MOV)
Mil 81 -3.7 (67g)
Mil 82 -4.6

I've always argued he wasn't as bad as made out to be...maybe average or even slightly above average. That's what he looks like on film to me. Yes, Curtis Rowe looks like a decent defender...but how can you say some of these teams are decent defensively? There was an SI (I think) article I read discussing their lack of effort on that end... https://vault.si.com/vault/1974/02/04/great-scott-he-did-some-ring-job

Lanier was on 7 teams between 0.6 and 2.0 points worse than league average...that's not "significantly worse than league average." And he's considered the meat of the Milwaukee interior after the trade... That's based on quotes from his teammates and opponents when he came to Mil in the early 80s. You can call him aging but the team was monstrous when he arrived. It almost reminds me of a lite version of Kevin Garnett from Minny to Boston the way he is talked about. Not equating their defensive value, but KG has showed us how powerful a role like that can be, even post-prime. (Of course the Bucks were 6th in DRtg in 83 w Lanier out half the year...but the C's were 2nd with KG missing 25 games in 09.)

Remember, Lanier's value is primarily on offense, which is why in 74 and 77 he finished top-4 in MVP voting. Over and over we see the value in that high-post big who can pass and stretch the defense with shooting, and that was Bob Lanier. The 75 Pistons were a top-5 offense. As were the 76 Pistons...which is interesting because there was no more Dave Bing.

Then we look at Mutombo, and here were his team DRtg's
Den 91 +6.8 (pre Deke)
Den 92 +0.6
Den 93 -1.7
Den 94 -4.0
Den 95 -0.1
Den 96 +0.5
Den 97 +4.5 (post)
--
Atl 96 +0.4 (pre)
Atl 97 -4.4
Atl 98 -0.7
Atl 99 -5.1
Atl 00 +3.8
Atl 01 +1.3 (leaves post AS)

Without delving any further into scheme and roster, we can see Mutombo joins a bad defensive team, has them around average , with one elite defensive team he anchors in 1994. Again in Atlanta, he joins an average defensive team from the year before, has another impact (this time to elite) and anchors 2 elite defensive teams. He also is part of a horrible defensive team in 2000 (with the same coach.)

We can see when Deke misses 11 games in 1992 (rookie year) the team is -13.1 (!) without him and -7.1 with him...with all the change being in ppg against. In 96 he misses 8 more games and this time, theoretically around his peak as a player, they are -1.4 without him and -2.9 with him. Small sample, but negligible change at a cursory glance on both sides of the ball. In 01, we can see the difference in Atlanta and Philly pre/post trade, and in Atlanta they were -8.7 post trade (-2.8 pre), but in Philadelphia, the 76ers closed the year +1.6 while going +5.5 without Mutombo. (ppg against almost identical.)

Huh? So even a 4-time DPOY and block master has:
(1) evidence of little to no defensive impact in certain situations
(2) has been part of many average defensive teams
(3) has even been part of a bad defensive team

So Lanier "anchored" an elite team in 74 (he blocked a career best 3.0 per game that year w/1.4 steals). We know there is in/out evidence of him having little effect, like Mutombo, and him having considerable defensive effect. He is part of a horrible team in 72. He also has many average defensive teams. I said it reminded me of Kevin Garnett, who without PM data wouldn't have the reputation in the community as being as damn impressive as he's been defensively because he played on so many bad defensive teams in Minnesota and as an aging part of Boston's team, he's been surrounded by so many notable defenders on paper (Perkins, Posey, Rondo, etc.) And even with that, it still takes extensive analysis by people like drza to separate exactly how impressive KG's defense is.

TLDR: Lanier shows similar trends to Mutombo ITO of defensive teams, so we shouldn't be quick to dismiss him as a bad defender.

Relatedly, Lanier fares extremely well in WOWYR and its various iterations:
https://backpicks.com/metrics/wowyr/

In my own film watched of Lanier, I have always been impressed by his overall play, and his defence at least seems like something you could clearly build around. The 1974 postseason section which 70sFan linked was maybe the worst stretch of Pistons play you could find in that series — Pistons end the video down 34-14! — but even there you can see Lanier switching onto Van Lier and switching onto multiple players in one possession and clearly pushing the Bulls to take jumpshots (which unfortunately for Lanier and the Pistons they made at a disproportionately high rate), with the commentators highlighting how Detroit is switching everything and asking a lot of Lanier. Here we have an impact giant who can anchor a good defence, is one of the best ever big man scorers, elevates in the postseason, has great range, has good passing vision and instincts for his position (a few steps behind guys like KMalone or Walton, but well ahead of anything you see from Ewing or Gilmore or Mourning or McAdoo or Moses), fits well with a variety of teammates because of that passing and that range… Oh, and had his biggest outlier season perfectly coincide with the only year he could claim a reasonably normal level of health. That all just screams top 40 peak to me, but it is not as if I am alone on this assessment.
TrueLAFan wrote:Lanier. Imagine if Patrick Ewing was about an inch or two taller, and stronger, and had a little more range on his jumper. Take away a little of his defense—maybe 10%--but double his assist numbers. And make him the nicest, most respected guy in the league off the court, and one of the great fighters on it. I've always felt that, all in all, Peak Lanier was (at least) comparable to Peak Ewing. This is Peak Bob Lanier. Think of it like this; Clifford Ray got all the juice for being such a great defender in the 1975 playoffs. And Ray was a very good defender. Lanier averaged 26 and 15 with 3 assists and 2 blocks in the playoff series where they were matched up.
sansterre wrote:Lanier in the playoffs from '74 to '81 averaged a 118 offensive rating on 21.1% usage rate. Julius Erving in the playoffs in the same timeframe (including the ABA) averaged a 112 offensive rating on 27.4% usage. Using Neil Payne's Usage->ORating conversion (‪https://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/index9e74.html?p=5500‬) he assigns a value of 0.833 for each usage percent that a high-usage player goes up or down. Dropping Erving to Lanier's level (a drop of 6.3% would be worth an estimated amount of 5.2 ORating. So, in theory, Erving's ORating with Lanier's usage would go up to about 117.2, still below Lanier's 118. I'm serious, Bob Lanier might well have been the 2nd best offensive player in the playoffs in the late 70s (besides Kareem obviously).
Quotatious wrote:Lanier and Reed emerged as great candidates because of their excellent all-around skill-set, and the fact they are centers, which earns a few points in my book, too- I give Lanier a slight edge, but it's basically a toss-up. Both were great offensively and defensively at their peaks, very good rebounders, too. Excellent in the playoffs, as well (and against #1 rated defenses, at that). It was an extremely tough choice to give Lanier the edge, but he looks marginally better, statistically, and that playmaking Lanier provided, is the thing that made me give it to him. Both guys really impressed me based on eye-test, too. Great post game for that era, good shooting touch, both really physical, but capable of finesse moves, as well. Especially Lanier's post game (that hook shot he had, was effective out to about 13-15 feet - that's awesome range for a hook shot or jump hook) was textbook perfect.

For whatever additional value it is worth, he was also voted securely as the top Detroit Pistons peak.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2088158&start=20#p91463240

And as a final bonus, courtesy of 70sFan…


2. Penny Hardaway (1996)
Proxy’s post/vote is typically excellent, so will just add a few other elements I think bolster his case:
— Joe Dumars collided with his knee in the 1996 first round, and Penny said it was never the same since. That knee would of course increasingly hamper Penny over time.
— Penny went 60-30 across 1995-97 without Shaq. If you want to boost strength of schedule you can include the 1997 Heat series and say 62-33, which translates to a 53.5-win team.
— Speaking of that 1997 Heat series (flawless segue), the Magic won 2/5 games despite Horace Grant’s postseason absence. Starting centre Rony Seikaly also missed the decisive fifth game (Heat only won by 8 but had been up by 16 entering the fourth quarter). The Heat were a 5.6 SRS team.
— More relevantly to Penny, the Heat were a -6 relative defence. Penny averaged 31 points on 57.5% efficiency against them (with admittedly the bulk of his production coming from the Magic’s two home wins). Against that same Heat team, Michael Jordan averaged 30 points on 47.5% efficiency.
— Penny adapted well to other ballhandlers, deferring more to a breakout Darrell Armstrong in 1999 and to Jason Kidd in 2000.
— Speaking of Jason Kidd (two for two on these segues, look at me), when Kidd missed time at the end of the 2000 regular season, Penny led the Suns to a 9-6 record and a 2-1 postseason lead over the Duncan-less Spurs. When Penny missed games that season, the Suns could only do 9-11. In the last season that could possibly constitute his prime, sadly removed from those 1995-97 heights, Penny still looks like a top fifteen to twenty impact player in the league.
— Relatedly, he has arguably the best WOWYR mark of any top forty peak contender remaining, with a value on par with Kobe and Shaq — which amusingly reflects some of the comparisons he saw with both throughout his career.

3. Scottie Pippen a.) 1995 b.) 1994 c.) 1996
Thinking more about Thurmond has me less committed to a Pippen vote this round. In all honesty, I am not completely sold on him being a better absolute first option than a lot of guys on the board — Paul George maybe the most immediately analogous as a DPoY-level wing who thrives as a second option — but that 1994 performance against the Knicks was pretty special. Which I guess takes us back to those Penny/Luka questions: does being a top three to five player in the 1990s really mean the same thing in 2022? Well, nevertheless…

Over 1994/95, including the 1994 postseason, he led a 51.5-win team against a tough schedule without Jordan and with Grant only there for a bit over half of that sample. By reputation might be the best non-big defender in league history. His and Grant’s growth and his ability to be the lead passer in Jackson’s triangle is what elevated the Bulls from a 50-win team into a dynasty.

1994: +5.5 on, +7 net, +5 AuPM2.0
1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), +6.3 AuPM2.0 (second in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan; finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year behind Dikembe Mutombo (deserved but imo a result which partially sought to reward Dikembe’s 1994 playoff run)
1996: +16.8 on, +11.8 net, +7.2 AuPM2.0 (third in league); finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year and was more deserving of the award than the actual winner :blank:
As for the box score metrics, from 1994-96 he averaged around .197 WS/48, 7.2 BPM, +7.7 RAPTOR, and +5.1 PIPM.

Biggest weakness is his scoring, and playoff defences were consistently able to diminish him (although he was never an especially strong scorer even in the regular season). That diminishment is what makes me prefer Penny over him in-era. Out of era, I am less sure; defence always maintains, but post-scoring (Penny’s go-to scoring advantage) is a dying art.

I see his true prime as 1991-97, with a down season in 1993 and decent adjacent seasons post-injury as well as in 1990. He has better postseason scoring in the earlier Bulls runs, but I would attribute that mostly to playing with a better version of Jordan and a strong third piece in Grant, plus at least partially a group of defences less individually equipped to defend them.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Some people are clearly far too overreliant on data without context and look at good all in one or impact numbers and get wowed by that rather than looking at how a roster is actually built around a player
Samurai
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 3,113
Joined: Jul 01, 2014
     

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#5 » by Samurai » Wed Oct 5, 2022 5:42 pm

1. Bob Pettit 1959. (alternate 58, 62) I have Pettit as very close to Mikan so I suppose it makes sense for me to list him just after Mikan. In terms of how he did against his peers, I think a good argument could be made that 59 Pettit could have been a top ten season. Obviously we also have to look at the context of his season and the quality of his competition and figure out how much to penalize him for the era he played in. He was MVP in a league that had Bill Russell averaging 23 boards/game, a rookie Elgin Baylor averaging 25 pts and 15 rebounds/game, and Hall of Famers like Schayes, Arizin, Hagan, Cousy and Twyman in their primes. Pettit led the league with 29.4 pts/game, a 28.2 PER and 14.8 WS while finishing second in rebounds with 16.4/game.

2. Artis Gilmore 1975. Tremendous all-around season for a player who is often underrated. Averaged 23.6 pts/game while finishing second (behind Dr. J) in OWS. Second in offensive rebounds behind a rookie named Moses Malone. Led the league in DWS, total rebounds, total blocks, and defensive rating. Named first team All ABA, All-defensive first team, and MVP of the playoffs as he captured the only ring in his career.

3. Bob Lanier 1974. A truly great offensive player. Feathery soft jump shot and the second best hook shot in the low post that I've ever seen. Based on his shooting mechanics, I am very confident that he could have been a good 3-point shooter if he played in today's era. Also an excellent screen setter and passer; his 17.9 assist % was the second highest of his career and is comparable to the career highs of centers like Kareem and Cowens. It is defensively where Lanier struggles more, but he put together an outlier career best defensive season in 74. His 7.1 DWS was by far the best of his career and was good for third best in the league and he actually led the league in Defensive Box Plus/Minus with 2.9. He anchored the Pistons defense which was 3rd best in the league despite the team not having any other defensive stalwarts.
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,338
And1: 6,938
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#6 » by falcolombardi » Wed Oct 5, 2022 5:44 pm

AEnigma wrote:
CharityStripe34 wrote:3. Sidney Moncrief

I respect the vote, and have myself considered him as a possible top fifty option… but definitely a little hurt that you did not vote for his centre as your homer choice. ;-)

1. Bob Lanier (1974)
Wrote a long explanation here which I would appreciate people reading.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2228113#p101330440
I will also paste it in its (near) entirety into the below spoiler.
Spoiler:
AEnigma wrote:
Roger Murdock, A.K.A. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar wrote:Listen, kid, I’ve been hearing that crap ever since I was at UCLA. I’m out there busting my buns every night! Tell your old man to drag Walton and Lanier up and down the court for 48 minutes!
Isiah Thomas wrote:I was having some success in the game early on. I remember coming down the lane, and [Lanier] literally grabbed me out of the air and gently set me down and said, ‘Don’t come down here anymore.’ For the rest of the game, I became a great jump shooter. He was one of the true enforcers in the game. And he patrolled the paint. I remember that moment vividly in my head. That was my rookie night.

Lanier is often lost in the throng of 1970s centres. He did not win an MVP and title like Walton, Reed, Cowens, Gilmore, and I guess technically McAdoo (sixth man titles well past your prime count too). During his prime in Detroit, he won a single (three-game) postseason series, against the 1976 no-more-Kareem Bucks. He never even made an all-NBA team, which is more a reflection of position in an era where the league’s third best centre may as well be its third best player, but that does still mean voters never saw him as a top two centre. And despite a generally productive career, Lanier never made one of those NBA all-time teams. For quite a few people, that paragraph may be an automatic non-starter for Lanier.

His 1974 season at least might occasionally grab people’s attention, if we try to move past accolades. The Pistons had the league’s second-best SRS (well behind the Bucks). Lanier finished second that season in both PIPM and BPM (and PIPM wins added and VORP), closely behind Kareem and well ahead of anyone else. That PIPM score is top 75 all-time, and in the pre-databall era, every higher peak option was admitted long ago (for reference, that score is higher than Ewing’s, KMalone’s, Barkley’s, Moses’s, etc.).

He also led the league in BBR’s individual defensive rating and finished third in defensive win shares (Hayes and Kareem), which you would expect from anchoring the league’s third best defence without the strong defensive support you see on the Bullets or Celtics or Bulls. The Pistons did go on to lose to that Bulls team, but against the league’s top defence Lanier elevated his already impressive regular season scoring level, and the Pistons actually outscored the Bulls over the course of that seven-game road series. Unfortunately for the Pistons, it turns out winning four games matters more than outscoring in aggregate, and total wins matters more for seeding than total SRS; in a seventh game decided by two points, that Chicago home advantage may well have been the difference.

Anyway, postseason elevation was not unusual for Lanier, who was quietly one of the top playoff risers in league history.
1974-78 Lanier regular season: 21/11/3.5/2 per 75 possessions on 56.6% efficiency (~+6 rTS), playing 38 minutes per game.
1974-77 Lanier postseason (22 games): 22.5/12/3/2 per 75 possessions on 58.6% efficiency (~+8 rTS), playing 41 minutes per game. 13/22 games were against that season’s #1 defence.

Most people recognise that as all-time offence at the centre position, so then the attention shifts to his defence. The 1974 Pistons were a -4 defence. They never were never above average in any other year. Can part of that collapse be attributed to Lanier? Absolutely. He had career high marks in block rates and steal rates, and nearly in rebounding rate, and this was by all accounts the healthiest season of his career. 1974 was his peak defensive season, by a distance which I think comfortably secures it as his overall peak season. However, an individual’s decline in defence tends not to lead to a six point swing in team defence… which brings us to the tortured history of the Detroit Pistons.

Keith Black Trudeau wrote:From the outset of Lanier’s rookie season, he was plagued by his bad knee. Despite not missing a single game, his contributions were limited and he played fewer than 30 minutes in at least 55 of them. Nevertheless, the Pistons, 31-51 the year prior, were transformed almost instantly. They won their first nine games of the 1970-71 season, a team record that stands to this day. Detroit ran their fast start to 12-1 before coming back to earth, but the point was proven. Led by their rookie big man, the Pistons were no longer a pushover. There was, unfortunately, another big change to the NBA that season. In an effort to streamline scheduling, the league broke its East and West divisions up into conferences, with playoff seeds awarded to the top two teams in each of the four divisions. The Pistons, to make things even, were banished to the Western Conference, and into the Midwest Divison with contenders Chicago, Phoenix, and a Milwaukee Bucks team that already had Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and acquired Oscar Robertson to form one of the greatest 1-2 combos in NBA history.

The Pistons, despite winning 45 games, finished dead last in their division and were disqualified, while three teams with worse records made it, including the top two teams in the Eastern Conference’s Central Division. Bob Lanier’s on-the-job rehabilitation was cut short, and he once again had to watch from home as Dave Cowens accepted the Rookie of the Year award on behalf of a Celtics team that had actually won fewer games than the Pistons.

Drafting Lanier was hardly the cure for all of Detroit’s problems. They were still very much a circus act, which reared its ugly face in Lanier’s second season.

Point guard Dave Bing, on the cusp of superstardom, suffered a detached retina in the 1971-72 season opener that cost him 37 games and marked the start of his own physical decline. Head coach Butch Van Breda Koff quit his job just nine games later, shortly after signing a 2-year contract extension. Van Breda Koff was replaced on an interim basis by Terry Dischinger, who doubled as one of the team’s small forwards. Dischinger was eventually succeeded by Earl Lloyd, a scout/assistant coach that had been loyally waiting in the wings for almost a decade for a head coaching opportunity, repeatedly denied only because he was a black man. Howard Komives, of the few white players on the team, staged an attempted coup after being DNP’d, implying Lloyd was racist. The attempt failed and Komives was forced to apologize before being traded out of Detroit, but the stigma remained and Lloyd was fired shortly after the start of the following season.

I spotlight all of this because Bob Lanier still managed to arrive as a superstar in this cesspool, averaging a career-best 25.7 points to go with 14.2 rebounds and 3.1 assists. The 1972 season would be his first of seven trips to the All-Star game over the next eight seasons. The Pistons finished 26-56.

This changed in 1974:
Sports Illustrated wrote:Detroit has won 10 of its 15 most recent games against .500-plus clubs, and in one heady burst clobbered the NBA's two most successful clubs, Milwaukee (twice) and Boston. These winning ways continued last week as the Pistons swept three weak opponents at Cobo before losing at Chicago 109-91. That defeat prevented Detroit from moving ahead of the Bulls into second place in the Midwest Division, easily the league's toughest, but hardly tarnished the Pistons' 33-19 record, fourth-best in the NBA.

It is defense in its many forms—trap presses, switching man-to-man and occasionally a thinly disguised zone of the sort used by most good pro teams—that has turned the Detroit Pistons, for 16 seasons one of the NBA's most persistent losers, into insistent winners. Last year Detroit ranked 10th in defense, allowing 110 points per game—and that was a six-point improvement over 1971-72. Now the Pistons have a 98.9 defensive average and are getting better with almost every game; only three of their last 13 opponents have scored as many as 100 points.

Bob Lanier was accused of having too much gut and not enough guts. Today, he is no worse than the third-best NBA center and may well be named the NBA's Most Valuable Player.
According to Lanier, it has only been in the last year that he has overcome the physical and psychological effects of the knee injury that ended his college career in 1970 when he was playing in the NCAA regionals for St. Bonaventure and fell over Villanova's (now, ironically, the Pistons') Chris Ford… The most versatile shooter among pro centers, Lanier is grinding down opponents with his inside game and wearing them out with his defense. He averages 23.9 points and 14 rebounds per game, but impressive as those numbers are, his best statistic is the Pistons' defensive average, for which he is most responsible.

Lanier is not only clogging the middle with his immense frame, but is using his unexpected quickness to move away from the basket and help Detroit's switching defense in much the same manner that last year's MVP, Dave Cowens, does for the Celtics. Twice in the Pistons' 93-89 win over Houston last week, Lanier switched onto Rocket Calvin Murphy, the smallest (5'9") and perhaps the fastest man in the league. Both times Murphy attempted to drive past Lanier, only to end up passing off in frustration when he could not get by. The next night Lanier put together one of the tidiest performances of the season as Detroit beat Seattle 94-83. He scored 27 points, grabbed 19 rebounds, had five assists, stole the ball three times and blocked seven shots. He said of that night's work: "I've had quite a few games like this so far this year, and I expect I'm going to have even more of them in the future."

Then, the series against the Bulls:
Greg Eno wrote:The Pistons lost a brutal, angry seven-game series to the Chicago Bulls in the first round. The Pistons weren't done until the final inbounds pass of Game 7, with just seconds to play and the Pistons trailing by one. But David Bing's throw-in was batted away by Dennis Awtrey. Game over. Series over. Season over.

And the tears flowed; not just for 10 year-old Greg Eno, but for Ray Scott's grown-up Pistons players.

"Yeah, we cried, too," Scott said when I told him of my crying jag. "Bob was a spartan; he did everything that we could possibly get him to do… We got beat by Clifford Ray.” Clifford Ray was a big, long-armed shot-blocker and rebounder. He was not, by any stretch, an offensive threat. Kind of like Ben Wallace that way. But, Scott said, Ray was able to match Bob Lanier's offensive production in Game 7 -- a matchup that hadn't worked in the Bulls favor in the previous six games.

The team started to slide in 1975 as health issues and contract disputes ravaged their lineups:
Pat Putnam wrote:After using up 13 coaches since 1948, the Pistons came upon Ray Scott almost two years ago and suddenly, instead of a bunch of people playing one-on-one, there was cohesion. Instead of individual stars, the Pistons became a galaxy. Just as important, Scott convinced Lanier not only that he was a premier center but that anyone who is 6'11" and weighs in at 260 pounds just naturally ought to be an assassin. "More elbows," ordered Scott. By nature a gentle man, Lanier became an enforcer, and the Pistons, a team at last, began to win. Only a two-point loss to Chicago kept them from the Western Conference final against Milwaukee. [SI: Forwards Love and Walker provided their usual exemplary shooting, averaging 45.1 points per game between them, but the rest of the Bulls seemed cowed by the Piston defense, particularly by Lanier whenever any of them moved into his area near the basket.]

When the season opened the consensus was that Detroit would sprint ahead of its Midwest rivals... But the Pistons had problems of their own, although some of them were not quite visible. Bing and Don Adams, the brilliant defensive forward, had been preseason holdouts, and for Adams, at best a slow starter, the delay was costly. And Scott sensed that the holdouts had disrupted the team unity that by the end of last season had lifted the Pistons out of perennial mediocrity.

Then came the injuries. Bing hurt a foot and had to have half of his right big toenail removed. For the first two weeks of the season he wore a size 14 shoe on his right foot, where normally he wears a 12. Later he sprained an ankle. Two weeks into the season Adams injured an Achilles tendon, missed eight games and then needed another month to play himself back into shape. Then almost the entire forward corps collapsed. Willie Norwood started the first seven games and was shooting at 54% when he complained of extreme pain in his left knee. A few days later he had an operation to remove a bone spur and still is out. Curtis Rowe came down with near pneumonia, lost 15 pounds but continued to play, though he was not as effective. After 20 games the Pistons had won but 10. They bumped along, finally reaching 16-17, taking turns with the Bulls and the Kings in first place.

"That was enough," says Scott. "We thought in the beginning we could run and shoot. We found out we couldn't. And so we went back to the things we do best: tough defense and more patience on offense. That's what won for us last year."

The move suited the 6'11", 260-pound Lanier, who was having a fine year and at that point became even better. In an attempt to determine the NBA's most complete player, statistics were fed into a computer. They included total scoring, assists, rebounds, blocked shots and field-goal scoring. Lanier came out No. 1. After 40 games he was averaging 24.7 points and playing tremendous defense. And he was doing it with a left knee wracked by tendinitis and arthritis. Every few days the knee has to be drained, and after every game he packs it in ice to reduce the pain and swelling.
"He's our savior," says Rowe.
"Our healer," says Adams.
"Our leader," says Bing.
"Listen to those guys," says Lanier. "They think I'm Moses."

Returning to their old style of play and healthy again, the Pistons ran off six straight victories. In November they played 14 games and gave up an average of 102.4 points per game. In 21 games since then they have allowed but 91.8 points a game and lowered their season average to 97.4, second best in the NBA.

The Pistons went on to lose to the Sonics in a three-game series. Bing was traded. After a rough start, Coach Ray was fired in front of the team. Bad vibes all-around.

I am not the biggest fan of Dave Bing — utter joke he has consistently made all-time NBA teams over Lanier — but he did at least occupy defensive attention. Many games have been scrubbed from Youtube over the years, but in what 1976 postseason games are available (either from searching or from the list that 70sFan provided in Peak #29 of this project), you can see Lanier getting legitimately triple-teamed and hear commentators saying, “Guard Lanier, and you stop [Detroit’s] offence.” All the same, the Pistons managed to give the #1 SRS Warriors a strong push, falling just short in overtime of Game 6.

1977 was even more internally disastrous, but thanks to what was probably Lanier’s second best season, the Pistons stayed relatively steady.
https://vault.si.com/vault/1977/02/28/moaning-and-winning-in-motown
I am not quoting this one because it is not overly relevant to Lanier’s play, but it is a good read if you want to learn about maybe the most dysfunctional playoff team in league history.

After this last gasp, the Pistons ran out of juice. Two and a half years without postseason play. One and a half years spent in utter irrelevance. And then… Milwaukee.
Barry McDermott wrote:Only the Pacific Division champion Lakers (23-6) had a better record [than the Bucks] after the [1980] All-Star break.

It was then that the Bucks got Center Bob Lanier, trading Kent Benson and their 1980 first-round draft pick to Detroit, and Lanier proved to be the anchor that stopped the team's drifting. With the 6'11" 250-pounder on court, Milwaukee has demonstrated that it can compete with the best—even world champion Seattle, its probable opponent in the Western Conference semifinals. After Lanier arrived, the Bucks closed with a 20-6 rush, and the losses were by a total of only 16 points.

Nelson says Milwaukee could have won 62 games if Lanier had been with the team from the start, which the big fellow would have welcomed. Over the years, during the good times—the Pistons won 52 games in 1973-74—and the more recent bad ones, Lanier was Detroit's workhorse, a 22.8 career scorer and 11.9 rebounder. With the Bucks he isn't expected to carry the team on his broad back. "I don't have the emotional burden," he says. "Here I help on defense, set picks and pass the ball, things I do well anyway. It makes life easier. My playing time has gone down but the Ws are up."

"I'm happy for him," says Dave Bing, Lanier's former teammate. "It gives him a chance to go out a winner. He would have died in Detroit." Bing was a candidate for the Pistons' coaching job when Dick Vitale was fired earlier this season, and Lanier supported his candidacy, but Richie Adubato was given the position. It was the straw that broke Lanier's back. He told management he wanted out.

The deal with Milwaukee would have been made six weeks earlier except that Lanier broke the little finger on his left hand, and while recuperating he worried about his reputation as a loser who was injury prone. He previously had had two knee operations, a broken right hand, a bad toe, a sore back and a chronic shoulder problem. Lanier, who is from Buffalo, also fretted because Kent Benson, for whom it was rumored he would be traded, was Milwaukee's kind of guy: a hard-working, diligent Midwesterner. At the All-Star Game, Lanier approached Marques Johnson and asked him how the Bucks would view him. "Come on aboard," Johnson said.

With Lanier aboard, the floor looks a little bigger and less congested to Marques. Says Buckner, "Before, we would go to our guns down the stretch, and Marques was being forced so far from the basket that everything was long distance." Johnson points out, "When we take the floor now, you can just see the respect in the opposing center's eyes."

Lanier's importance was demonstrated in his very first game with the Bucks on Feb. 6. That night, Brian Winters made a game-ending 20-foot jump shot for a 111-109 win over Cleveland. Later Winters explained how he had gotten free: "Everybody was going to Bob as if he were a magnet." And at first Lanier thought Winters had missed; he was so conditioned to losing he had forgotten all about game-winning shots.

When Lanier joined up, Milwaukee trailed Kansas City by five games; it won 11 of its next 13. On March 16 the Bucks beat the Kings 128-121 and took the division lead for good. They had defeated Seattle twice, including a two-point victory in The Kingdome. The Bucks began calling Lanier "Coach" in deference to his age, 31, and stature. Because there weren't so many hands in their faces anymore, they began shooting better; at the All-Star break Milwaukee was shooting 47%; since then it has been 51%.
Anthony Cotton wrote:By the start of last season it was thought that all Milwaukee needed to make a run at the championship was a dominating center. That shortcoming was remedied right after last season's All-Star break when the Bucks traded Kent Benson and their 1980 first-round draft choice to the Pistons for Lanier. Milwaukee was 29-27 at the time, but with Lanier they went 20-6 for the remainder of the regular season before losing a tense seven-game playoff series to defending champion Seattle. Without Lanier, Detroit won two of its last 28 games.

Milwaukee has continued at that pace in 1980-81 despite what has been a depressing season for Lanier. In October his father was killed by a hit-and-run driver, and recently his wife filed for divorce. On the court Lanier, 32, has endured a broken nose, pain in his shoulders, neck and back, and floating bone chips in his left knee. At least five times this season the knee has locked.

"I guess you could say this hasn't been one of the grandest years of my life," says Lanier. "I've struggled, and there has been a lot of unrest in my mind—right now because of the knee. Some days I can play, some days I can't."

When he does play, Lanier still has his feathery touch from the outside. On the inside he's still 6'10", 250 pounds, which means he takes up a lot of room in the lane.

Nelson has sometimes held Lanier out of entire games to rest the knee. When he's not in the lineup, the Bucks seem to rise to the occasion—witness a 113-103 win over Boston on Feb. 5—but Nelson and everyone else know that a reasonably healthy Lanier is essential if Milwaukee is to seriously challenge for the NBA title. So, with Lanier's knee continuing to give him problems, Nelson has of late tried reducing the strain on it by limiting Lanier's playing time to short spurts. Lanier, however, balks at that treatment, saying he needs more playing time to loosen up the knee, which stiffens during rest periods on the bench. "People have started to dismiss us because they don't think Bob will be able to go full speed in the playoffs," says Nelson, "but I know he'll be tough." Says Lanier, "I haven't had the opportunity to get my game on track this year with all that's gone on, but my teammates have carried me. I'm not where I want to be yet, but if I can get there, I'll be doing the carrying."

Lanier has played in the NBA for 11 seasons but never made it to the championship series. Now he feels he may finally get there. "What makes this year so important to me is that I've had a full season with a good team," he says. "I know the system and I know the players. And, for me, there's no promise that there'll be a next year."

Marques Johnson is optimistic about the playoffs, but he's well aware that Lanier's soundness is crucial to Milwaukee's hopes. "Our strength is our flexibility," he says. "Whatever matchup we meet, we have a lineup to counter it. That Seattle series last year and the experience of taking the Sonics to seven games is our biggest plus. Not having handled that kind of pressure before was our downfall then. What I remember most is the Sonics' saying that it was their experience that helped them win. Now I guess you could say we're an experienced club. But without Bob we're not strong inside, and teams like Philadelphia. Boston and Chicago can take advantage of us on the boards."

Lanier continued to decline and retired in 1984. The Bucks hung his jersey in their rafters just a couple of months later. Only four and a half seasons with the team, but he sure made an impression.

Different RealGMers have sought to quantify Lanier’s “impact” on these teams.
Owly wrote:The Hollander handbooks remain pretty constantly positive after '74 (when he lost some weight), not really just a couple of years.

In large samples Lanier was having a substantial impact in '76-'78. The difference with him to without him (per game in points diff) was ...

'76: 5.2
team points differential over the year -86 over 82 games, -1.05 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -92 over 18 games, -5.1 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier +6 over 64 games, 0.1 per game

'77: 6.3
team points differential over the year -85 over 82 games, -1.04 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -107 over 18 games, -5.95 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier 22 over 64 games, 0.35 per game

'78: 4.3
team points differential over the year -102 over 82 games, -1.24 per game
team points differential over 19 games without Lanier -100 over 19 games, -4.35 per game
team points differential over 63 games with Lanier -2 over 63 games, -0.05 per game

This is from a guy hitting his apex in '74. In '75 still more or less as healthy as he ever was (he was injured late in his NCAA career and the Pistons hurried him back in his rookie year, which may have altered his career trajectory, but I digress), he's still blocking more than two shots a game, and I think for those first two years of my span ('74, '75) he's having a larger impact overall and a larger impact on D (than for ’76-’78). But even if it were just at these levels, I just don't buy that his impact was exclusively offensive, and in later Pistons years I don't think Lanier was put in a position to look good in terms of turnover, coaching turnover, coaching quality and teammates.

The Bucks in net in year improvement upon Lanier's arrival is huge suggesting at worst non-harmful at that point on that end. Those games with Lanier, and Lanier played in them all, they go +287, or +11.04 per game. Before that point, over 56 games they had been +36 or 0.64 per game.

I can't think really of another angle to analyse this from. I'd guess he's portable as he can score from the post, he space the floor and shoot the J, and it seems like at his best (anecdotally) he could defend guys out on the floor as well as play a more conventional anchor, and his assist % is pretty strong for a big man

Short-version:
- Mid-70s boxscore composite "advanced" metrics not too far off Kareem (on a per-minute basis).
- Despite missing time in his prime, above metrics were at a high level for a long time.
- With-without splits from when injured during prime indicates significant impact.
- Post-prime splits after trade for the more stable team (Milwaukee) suggest (on a small, but non-trivial sample) huge impact.
- From '74 on, a prominent yearly publication far more bullish on Lanier's D

His absence from All-NBA is very explainable, 2 teams, Kareem and various others as very strong competition often with better teams and so better team success and - a more genuine negative, though one that illustrated his net value in WoWY metrics - an inability to get to 70 games in many of his best years.

I think the most I can say on Lanier is the more I got into (1) the numbers and (2) the year by year history rather than the big, broad strokes, after the fact histories (and related rankings), the more I thought "Isn't he better than much more fabled 70s centers (Reed, Unseld, Cowens)?" Instinctively I'd say maybe in Ewing's ballpark.

Elgee wrote:Bob Lanier's defense I've argued repeatedly wasn't that bad, as evidenced by 4 things:

(1) Ability to be part of an elite defensive team
(2) The reputation of his Detroit teams as being absolutely god awful on defense at the other positions
(3) His individual praise in old articles for defending elite centers well (at times)
(4) His defensive role/impact in Milwaukee

Lanier had the following team DRtg's (estimated before 1974)
Det 70 +4.3 (pre Lanier)
Det 71 +1.7
Det 72 +4.4
Det 73 +1.6
Det 74 -3.9
Det 75 +2.0
Det 76 +1.9 (64g)
Det 77 +0.8 (64g)
Det 78 +0.6 (63g)
Det 79 +0.8 (53g)
Det 80 +3.5 (Lanier plays 37 games before trade)
--
Mil 80 -2.4 (26g post trade at +11 MOV)
Mil 81 -3.7 (67g)
Mil 82 -4.6

I've always argued he wasn't as bad as made out to be...maybe average or even slightly above average. That's what he looks like on film to me. Yes, Curtis Rowe looks like a decent defender...but how can you say some of these teams are decent defensively? There was an SI (I think) article I read discussing their lack of effort on that end... https://vault.si.com/vault/1974/02/04/great-scott-he-did-some-ring-job

Lanier was on 7 teams between 0.6 and 2.0 points worse than league average...that's not "significantly worse than league average." And he's considered the meat of the Milwaukee interior after the trade... That's based on quotes from his teammates and opponents when he came to Mil in the early 80s. You can call him aging but the team was monstrous when he arrived. It almost reminds me of a lite version of Kevin Garnett from Minny to Boston the way he is talked about. Not equating their defensive value, but KG has showed us how powerful a role like that can be, even post-prime. (Of course the Bucks were 6th in DRtg in 83 w Lanier out half the year...but the C's were 2nd with KG missing 25 games in 09.)

Remember, Lanier's value is primarily on offense, which is why in 74 and 77 he finished top-4 in MVP voting. Over and over we see the value in that high-post big who can pass and stretch the defense with shooting, and that was Bob Lanier. The 75 Pistons were a top-5 offense. As were the 76 Pistons...which is interesting because there was no more Dave Bing.

Then we look at Mutombo, and here were his team DRtg's
Den 91 +6.8 (pre Deke)
Den 92 +0.6
Den 93 -1.7
Den 94 -4.0
Den 95 -0.1
Den 96 +0.5
Den 97 +4.5 (post)
--
Atl 96 +0.4 (pre)
Atl 97 -4.4
Atl 98 -0.7
Atl 99 -5.1
Atl 00 +3.8
Atl 01 +1.3 (leaves post AS)

Without delving any further into scheme and roster, we can see Mutombo joins a bad defensive team, has them around average , with one elite defensive team he anchors in 1994. Again in Atlanta, he joins an average defensive team from the year before, has another impact (this time to elite) and anchors 2 elite defensive teams. He also is part of a horrible defensive team in 2000 (with the same coach.)

We can see when Deke misses 11 games in 1992 (rookie year) the team is -13.1 (!) without him and -7.1 with him...with all the change being in ppg against. In 96 he misses 8 more games and this time, theoretically around his peak as a player, they are -1.4 without him and -2.9 with him. Small sample, but negligible change at a cursory glance on both sides of the ball. In 01, we can see the difference in Atlanta and Philly pre/post trade, and in Atlanta they were -8.7 post trade (-2.8 pre), but in Philadelphia, the 76ers closed the year +1.6 while going +5.5 without Mutombo. (ppg against almost identical.)

Huh? So even a 4-time DPOY and block master has:
(1) evidence of little to no defensive impact in certain situations
(2) has been part of many average defensive teams
(3) has even been part of a bad defensive team

So Lanier "anchored" an elite team in 74 (he blocked a career best 3.0 per game that year w/1.4 steals). We know there is in/out evidence of him having little effect, like Mutombo, and him having considerable defensive effect. He is part of a horrible team in 72. He also has many average defensive teams. I said it reminded me of Kevin Garnett, who without PM data wouldn't have the reputation in the community as being as damn impressive as he's been defensively because he played on so many bad defensive teams in Minnesota and as an aging part of Boston's team, he's been surrounded by so many notable defenders on paper (Perkins, Posey, Rondo, etc.) And even with that, it still takes extensive analysis by people like drza to separate exactly how impressive KG's defense is.

TLDR: Lanier shows similar trends to Mutombo ITO of defensive teams, so we shouldn't be quick to dismiss him as a bad defender.

Relatedly, Lanier fares extremely well in WOWYR and its various iterations:
https://backpicks.com/metrics/wowyr/

In my own film watched of Lanier, I have always been impressed by his overall play, and his defence at least seems like something you could clearly build around. The 1974 postseason section which 70sFan linked was maybe the worst stretch of Pistons play you could find in that series — Pistons end the video down 34-14! — but even there you can see Lanier switching onto Van Lier and switching onto multiple players in one possession and clearly pushing the Bulls to take jumpshots (which unfortunately for Lanier and the Pistons they made at a disproportionately high rate), with the commentators highlighting how Detroit is switching everything and asking a lot of Lanier. Here we have an impact giant who can anchor a good defence, is one of the best ever big man scorers, elevates in the postseason, has great range, has good passing vision and instincts for his position (a few steps behind guys like KMalone or Walton, but well ahead of anything you see from Ewing or Gilmore or Mourning or McAdoo or Moses), fits well with a variety of teammates because of that passing and that range… Oh, and had his biggest outlier season perfectly coincide with the only year he could claim a reasonably normal level of health. That all just screams top 40 peak to me, but it is not as if I am alone on this assessment.
TrueLAFan wrote:Lanier. Imagine if Patrick Ewing was about an inch or two taller, and stronger, and had a little more range on his jumper. Take away a little of his defense—maybe 10%--but double his assist numbers. And make him the nicest, most respected guy in the league off the court, and one of the great fighters on it. I've always felt that, all in all, Peak Lanier was (at least) comparable to Peak Ewing. This is Peak Bob Lanier. Think of it like this; Clifford Ray got all the juice for being such a great defender in the 1975 playoffs. And Ray was a very good defender. Lanier averaged 26 and 15 with 3 assists and 2 blocks in the playoff series where they were matched up.
sansterre wrote:Lanier in the playoffs from '74 to '81 averaged a 118 offensive rating on 21.1% usage rate. Julius Erving in the playoffs in the same timeframe (including the ABA) averaged a 112 offensive rating on 27.4% usage. Using Neil Payne's Usage->ORating conversion (‪https://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/index9e74.html?p=5500‬) he assigns a value of 0.833 for each usage percent that a high-usage player goes up or down. Dropping Erving to Lanier's level (a drop of 6.3% would be worth an estimated amount of 5.2 ORating. So, in theory, Erving's ORating with Lanier's usage would go up to about 117.2, still below Lanier's 118. I'm serious, Bob Lanier might well have been the 2nd best offensive player in the playoffs in the late 70s (besides Kareem obviously).
Quotatious wrote:Lanier and Reed emerged as great candidates because of their excellent all-around skill-set, and the fact they are centers, which earns a few points in my book, too- I give Lanier a slight edge, but it's basically a toss-up. Both were great offensively and defensively at their peaks, very good rebounders, too. Excellent in the playoffs, as well (and against #1 rated defenses, at that). It was an extremely tough choice to give Lanier the edge, but he looks marginally better, statistically, and that playmaking Lanier provided, is the thing that made me give it to him. Both guys really impressed me based on eye-test, too. Great post game for that era, good shooting touch, both really physical, but capable of finesse moves, as well. Especially Lanier's post game (that hook shot he had, was effective out to about 13-15 feet - that's awesome range for a hook shot or jump hook) was textbook perfect.

For whatever additional value it is worth, he was also voted securely as the top Detroit Pistons peak.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2088158&start=20#p91463240

And as a final bonus, courtesy of 70sFan…


2. Penny Hardaway (1996)
Proxy’s post/vote is typically excellent, so will just add a few other elements I think bolster his case:
— Joe Dumars collided with his knee in the 1996 first round, and Penny said it was never the same since. That knee would of course increasingly hamper Penny over time.
— Penny went 60-30 across 1995-97 without Shaq. If you want to boost strength of schedule you can include the 1997 Heat series and say 62-33, which translates to a 53.5-win team.
— Speaking of that 1997 Heat series (flawless segue), the Magic won 2/5 games despite Horace Grant’s postseason absence. Starting centre Rony Seikaly also missed the decisive fifth game (Heat only won by 8 but had been up by 16 entering the fourth quarter). The Heat were a 5.6 SRS team.
— More relevantly to Penny, the Heat were a -6 relative defence. Penny averaged 31 points on 57.5% efficiency against them (with admittedly the bulk of his production coming from the Magic’s two home wins). Against that same Heat team, Michael Jordan averaged 30 points on 47.5% efficiency.
— Penny adapted well to other ballhandlers, deferring more to a breakout Darrell Armstrong in 1999 and to Jason Kidd in 2000.
— Speaking of Jason Kidd (two for two on these segues, look at me), when Kidd missed time at the end of the 2000 regular season, Penny led the Suns to a 9-6 record and a 2-1 postseason lead over the Duncan-less Spurs. When Penny missed games that season, the Suns could only do 9-11. In the last season that could possibly constitute his prime, sadly removed from those 1995-97 heights, Penny still looks like a top fifteen to twenty impact player in the league.
— Relatedly, he has arguably the best WOWYR mark of any top forty peak contender remaining, with a value on par with Kobe and Shaq — which amusingly reflects some of the comparisons he saw with both throughout his career.

3. Scottie Pippen a.) 1995 b.) 1994 c.) 1996
Thinking more about Thurmond has me less committed to a Pippen vote this round. In all honesty, I am not completely sold on him being a better absolute first option than a lot of guys on the board — Paul George maybe the most immediately analogous as a DPoY-level wing who thrives as a second option — but that 1994 performance against the Knicks was pretty special. Which I guess takes us back to those Penny/Luka questions: does being a top three to five player in the 1990s really mean the same thing in 2022? Well, nevertheless…

Over 1994/95, including the 1994 postseason, he led a 51.5-win team against a tough schedule without Jordan and with Grant only there for a bit over half of that sample. By reputation might be the best non-big defender in league history. His and Grant’s growth and his ability to be the lead passer in Jackson’s triangle is what elevated the Bulls from a 50-win team into a dynasty.

1994: +5.5 on, +7 net, +5 AuPM2.0
1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), +6.3 AuPM2.0 (second in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan; finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year behind Dikembe Mutombo (deserved but imo a result which partially sought to reward Dikembe’s 1994 playoff run)
1996: +16.8 on, +11.8 net, +7.2 AuPM2.0 (third in league); finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year and was more deserving of the award than the actual winner :blank:
As for the box score metrics, from 1994-96 he averaged around .197 WS/48, 7.2 BPM, +7.7 RAPTOR, and +5.1 PIPM.

Biggest weakness is his scoring, and playoff defences were consistently able to diminish him (although he was never an especially strong scorer even in the regular season). That diminishment is what makes me prefer Penny over him in-era. Out of era, I am less sure; defence always maintains, but post-scoring (Penny’s go-to scoring advantage) is a dying art.

I see his true prime as 1991-97, with a down season in 1993 and decent adjacent seasons post-injury as well as in 1990. He has better postseason scoring in the earlier Bulls runs, but I would attribute that mostly to playing with a better version of Jordan and a strong third piece in Grant, plus at least partially a group of defences less individually equipped to defend them.



How big do you have the gap in scoring between scottie and penny?

Watching them both penny seems like a unremarkable finisher inside with a jumper that is not that much more better than pippen jumper

He is a incredible ball handler who can maneuver himself to the rim more easily than scottie and is clear his post game is much more refined but scottie seems to me like he shrinks the gap with just plain old buckets in the paint. Whether it be touch or reach or strenght through contact his shots at the paint just seemed to go in more consistently

Looking at the stats there is a penny efficiency advantage but is not as big as i expected before watching them more closely

Penny main advantage seems to be passing imo (better reads than pippen who is already a good passer) which alongside his handle also means a fair amount less turnovers whioe creating more assists.

I agree penny is easily the better offensive player (this wouldnt even be a debate if that was not the case) but not -mainly- from his scoring (although i agree he is better at creating his own shots and more efficient overall)
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 90,249
And1: 30,132
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#7 » by tsherkin » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:05 pm

AEnigma wrote:He has better postseason scoring in the earlier Bulls runs, but I would attribute that mostly to playing with a better version of Jordan and a strong third piece in Grant, plus at least partially a group of defences less individually equipped to defend them.


Code: Select all

PS / Average Pace
91 / 87.9
92 / 89.3
93 / 87.8
94 / 83.6
95 / 86.2
96 / 86.5
97 / 85.2
98 / 83.2


Pace trended down in the playoffs from the start of the first three-peat to the end of the second. That didn't help him, particularly since he was a crappy FT shooter with a tepid jumper. And of course, he was also aging, and then in 94 didn't have Jordan running the show on offense and drawing all the attention. Even MJ's efficiency went down in the playoffs, particularly in the Finals against Seattle and Utah, but also against New York prior. Pippen never really had a chance against defenses like that (relative to his RS performances). Shot 47.8% FG in the 91-93 playoffs. 43.4% in 94, 44.3% in 95. 39.0% in 96. 41.7 and 41.5 in 97 and 98. Shot 75.0% FT from 91-94 in the playoffs. 69.5% from 95-98. .398 FTr 91-93. .265 in 94, .542 in 95, .279 and .278 in 96 and 97, then .456 in 98. 53.6% TS 91-93, 52.1 in 94, 54.9 in 95, then 47.3, 52.6 and 50.0 in 96-98.

He didn't have the skill profile of a #1 scorer. Good passer, phenomenal defender. Good enough inside the triangle that in the RS, he was a functional piece at the head of Chicago's offense for a year. Not surprising that he tailed off sharply after the first three-peat, though (in the PS). Obviously, almost everyone tails off in the PS because you face better defenses, so there's some mitigation to be done as far as how LARGE a drop-off, but that's for elsewhere. Here, that difference between earlier on and later on comes some from the game slowing down, him being in his 30s and of course his weakness with shooting (especially FTs).
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 90,249
And1: 30,132
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#8 » by tsherkin » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:08 pm

falcolombardi wrote:How big do you have the gap in scoring between scottie and penny?


4-5% TS is a fairly large difference. 95 and 96, Penny was basically a 60% TS guy who was drawing at .450 or so. That's a very large difference in ability, even if their shooting profile wasn't that far off. Hardaway was exceptionally athletic, very bouncy.
User avatar
prolific passer
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,143
And1: 1,458
Joined: Mar 11, 2009
     

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#9 » by prolific passer » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:13 pm

Even though the 58 hawks won the title. The 59, 60, and 61 squads were much better imo. Pettit I believe was better in those years then in 58.
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,338
And1: 6,938
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#10 » by falcolombardi » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:15 pm

tsherkin wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:How big do you have the gap in scoring between scottie and penny?


4-5% TS is a fairly large difference. 95 and 96, Penny was basically a 60% TS guy who was drawing at .450 or so. That's a very large difference in ability, even if their shooting profile wasn't that far off. Hardaway was exceptionally athletic, very bouncy.


Fair enough, the stats difference is fairly clear so i wont push that point.
User avatar
AEnigma
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,067
And1: 5,882
Joined: Jul 24, 2022
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#11 » by AEnigma » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:31 pm

falcolombardi wrote:
AEnigma wrote:2. Penny Hardaway (1996)
Proxy’s post/vote is typically excellent, so will just add a few other elements I think bolster his case:
— Joe Dumars collided with his knee in the 1996 first round, and Penny said it was never the same since. That knee would of course increasingly hamper Penny over time.
— Penny went 60-30 across 1995-97 without Shaq. If you want to boost strength of schedule you can include the 1997 Heat series and say 62-33, which translates to a 53.5-win team.
— Speaking of that 1997 Heat series (flawless segue), the Magic won 2/5 games despite Horace Grant’s postseason absence. Starting centre Rony Seikaly also missed the decisive fifth game (Heat only won by 8 but had been up by 16 entering the fourth quarter). The Heat were a 5.6 SRS team.
— More relevantly to Penny, the Heat were a -6 relative defence. Penny averaged 31 points on 57.5% efficiency against them (with admittedly the bulk of his production coming from the Magic’s two home wins). Against that same Heat team, Michael Jordan averaged 30 points on 47.5% efficiency.
— Penny adapted well to other ballhandlers, deferring more to a breakout Darrell Armstrong in 1999 and to Jason Kidd in 2000.
— Speaking of Jason Kidd (two for two on these segues, look at me), when Kidd missed time at the end of the 2000 regular season, Penny led the Suns to a 9-6 record and a 2-1 postseason lead over the Duncan-less Spurs. When Penny missed games that season, the Suns could only do 9-11. In the last season that could possibly constitute his prime, sadly removed from those 1995-97 heights, Penny still looks like a top fifteen to twenty impact player in the league.
— Relatedly, he has arguably the best WOWYR mark of any top forty peak contender remaining, with a value on par with Kobe and Shaq — which amusingly reflects some of the comparisons he saw with both throughout his career.

3. Scottie Pippen a.) 1995 b.) 1994 c.) 1996
Thinking more about Thurmond has me less committed to a Pippen vote this round. In all honesty, I am not completely sold on him being a better absolute first option than a lot of guys on the board — Paul George maybe the most immediately analogous as a DPoY-level wing who thrives as a second option — but that 1994 performance against the Knicks was pretty special. Which I guess takes us back to those Penny/Luka questions: does being a top three to five player in the 1990s really mean the same thing in 2022? Well, nevertheless…

Over 1994/95, including the 1994 postseason, he led a 51.5-win team against a tough schedule without Jordan and with Grant only there for a bit over half of that sample. By reputation might be the best non-big defender in league history. His and Grant’s growth and his ability to be the lead passer in Jackson’s triangle is what elevated the Bulls from a 50-win team into a dynasty.

1994: +5.5 on, +7 net, +5 AuPM2.0
1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), +6.3 AuPM2.0 (second in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan; finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year behind Dikembe Mutombo (deserved but imo a result which partially sought to reward Dikembe’s 1994 playoff run)
1996: +16.8 on, +11.8 net, +7.2 AuPM2.0 (third in league); finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year and was more deserving of the award than the actual winner :blank:
As for the box score metrics, from 1994-96 he averaged around .197 WS/48, 7.2 BPM, +7.7 RAPTOR, and +5.1 PIPM.

Biggest weakness is his scoring, and playoff defences were consistently able to diminish him (although he was never an especially strong scorer even in the regular season). That diminishment is what makes me prefer Penny over him in-era. Out of era, I am less sure; defence always maintains, but post-scoring (Penny’s go-to scoring advantage) is a dying art.

I see his true prime as 1991-97, with a down season in 1993 and decent adjacent seasons post-injury as well as in 1990. He has better postseason scoring in the earlier Bulls runs, but I would attribute that mostly to playing with a better version of Jordan and a strong third piece in Grant, plus at least partially a group of defences less individually equipped to defend them.

How big do you have the gap in scoring between scottie and penny?

Watching them both penny seems like a unremarkable finisher inside with a jumper that is not that much more better than pippen jumper

He is a incredible ball handler who can maneuver himself to the rim more easily than scottie and is clear his post game is much more refined but scottie seems to me like he shrinks the gap with just plain old buckets in the paint. Whether it be touch or reach or strenght through contact his shots at the paint just seemed to go in more consistently

Looking at the stats there is a penny efficiency advantage but is not as big as i expected before watching them more closely

Penny main advantage seems to be passing imo (better reads than pippen who is already a good passer) which alongside his handle also means a fair amount less turnovers whioe creating more assists.

I agree penny is easily the better offensive player (this wouldnt even be a debate if that was not the case) but not -mainly- from his scoring (although i agree he is better at creating his own shots and more efficient overall)

That might just be some random selection bias from whatever games you have been watching. Pippen is a strong finisher, especially in transition — worth keeping in mind Tserkin’s point about the effect pace reduction had on Pippen’s scoring at the same time Penny was peaking — but I definitely would not call peak Penny “unremarkable” there.

Of course, peak is the key. You have been gesturing to 1997, perhaps because of my post, but the reason my first point in that list was about the 1996 injury was to highlight why 1997 was a diminished form beyond suddenly playing without Shaq.
Proxy wrote:Penny 28 games without Shaq in '96
-Averaged 27 per 75 on +10 rTS%
-50 win pace(+3 team without Shaq and with Horace)
-+4 team rORTG

And while the previous season had a much smaller Shaq-less sample, you could see similar results: https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199502260ORL.html

1997 is an obvious step down. He drives less frequently (eye test and stat sheet), is less successful as a finisher (mostly eye test here because we do not have shooting data, but also basic logic when you think about that efficiency decline), and is just less dynamic than that November 1995 run where he looked like the true successor to Jordan. I brought up 1997 to show that even having lost a step, Penny was an elite offensive driver who could also be a strong individual scoring anchor against an elite defence, in a larger sample than ~30 games without Shaq. His range was iffy, sure, which is why I suspect Penny would lose more relative value in the modern era, but no, his peak scoring was absolutely on a level beyond Pippen at that time. If someone wants to throw some ScoreVal numbers here, they can, but I do kind-of think it speaks for itself when watching those 1995 games.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Some people are clearly far too overreliant on data without context and look at good all in one or impact numbers and get wowed by that rather than looking at how a roster is actually built around a player
User avatar
Proxy
Sophomore
Posts: 237
And1: 192
Joined: Jun 30, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#12 » by Proxy » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:34 pm

Small note: I think the rTS% for Penny in that sample might have been a bit closer to +9 ish when rounding than the +10 I said. Don't feel that should make a large difference for a evaluation though
AEnigma wrote:Arf arf.
Image

trex_8063 wrote:Calling someone a stinky turd is not acceptable.
PLEASE stop doing that.

One_and_Done wrote:I mean, how would you feel if the NBA traced it's origins to an 1821 league of 3 foot dwarves who performed in circuses?
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,338
And1: 6,938
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#13 » by falcolombardi » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:35 pm

AEnigma wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:
AEnigma wrote:2. Penny Hardaway (1996)
Proxy’s post/vote is typically excellent, so will just add a few other elements I think bolster his case:
— Joe Dumars collided with his knee in the 1996 first round, and Penny said it was never the same since. That knee would of course increasingly hamper Penny over time.
— Penny went 60-30 across 1995-97 without Shaq. If you want to boost strength of schedule you can include the 1997 Heat series and say 62-33, which translates to a 53.5-win team.
— Speaking of that 1997 Heat series (flawless segue), the Magic won 2/5 games despite Horace Grant’s postseason absence. Starting centre Rony Seikaly also missed the decisive fifth game (Heat only won by 8 but had been up by 16 entering the fourth quarter). The Heat were a 5.6 SRS team.
— More relevantly to Penny, the Heat were a -6 relative defence. Penny averaged 31 points on 57.5% efficiency against them (with admittedly the bulk of his production coming from the Magic’s two home wins). Against that same Heat team, Michael Jordan averaged 30 points on 47.5% efficiency.
— Penny adapted well to other ballhandlers, deferring more to a breakout Darrell Armstrong in 1999 and to Jason Kidd in 2000.
— Speaking of Jason Kidd (two for two on these segues, look at me), when Kidd missed time at the end of the 2000 regular season, Penny led the Suns to a 9-6 record and a 2-1 postseason lead over the Duncan-less Spurs. When Penny missed games that season, the Suns could only do 9-11. In the last season that could possibly constitute his prime, sadly removed from those 1995-97 heights, Penny still looks like a top fifteen to twenty impact player in the league.
— Relatedly, he has arguably the best WOWYR mark of any top forty peak contender remaining, with a value on par with Kobe and Shaq — which amusingly reflects some of the comparisons he saw with both throughout his career.

3. Scottie Pippen a.) 1995 b.) 1994 c.) 1996
Thinking more about Thurmond has me less committed to a Pippen vote this round. In all honesty, I am not completely sold on him being a better absolute first option than a lot of guys on the board — Paul George maybe the most immediately analogous as a DPoY-level wing who thrives as a second option — but that 1994 performance against the Knicks was pretty special. Which I guess takes us back to those Penny/Luka questions: does being a top three to five player in the 1990s really mean the same thing in 2022? Well, nevertheless…

Over 1994/95, including the 1994 postseason, he led a 51.5-win team against a tough schedule without Jordan and with Grant only there for a bit over half of that sample. By reputation might be the best non-big defender in league history. His and Grant’s growth and his ability to be the lead passer in Jackson’s triangle is what elevated the Bulls from a 50-win team into a dynasty.

1994: +5.5 on, +7 net, +5 AuPM2.0
1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), +6.3 AuPM2.0 (second in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan; finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year behind Dikembe Mutombo (deserved but imo a result which partially sought to reward Dikembe’s 1994 playoff run)
1996: +16.8 on, +11.8 net, +7.2 AuPM2.0 (third in league); finished second in voting for Defensive Player of the Year and was more deserving of the award than the actual winner :blank:
As for the box score metrics, from 1994-96 he averaged around .197 WS/48, 7.2 BPM, +7.7 RAPTOR, and +5.1 PIPM.

Biggest weakness is his scoring, and playoff defences were consistently able to diminish him (although he was never an especially strong scorer even in the regular season). That diminishment is what makes me prefer Penny over him in-era. Out of era, I am less sure; defence always maintains, but post-scoring (Penny’s go-to scoring advantage) is a dying art.

I see his true prime as 1991-97, with a down season in 1993 and decent adjacent seasons post-injury as well as in 1990. He has better postseason scoring in the earlier Bulls runs, but I would attribute that mostly to playing with a better version of Jordan and a strong third piece in Grant, plus at least partially a group of defences less individually equipped to defend them.

How big do you have the gap in scoring between scottie and penny?

Watching them both penny seems like a unremarkable finisher inside with a jumper that is not that much more better than pippen jumper

He is a incredible ball handler who can maneuver himself to the rim more easily than scottie and is clear his post game is much more refined but scottie seems to me like he shrinks the gap with just plain old buckets in the paint. Whether it be touch or reach or strenght through contact his shots at the paint just seemed to go in more consistently

Looking at the stats there is a penny efficiency advantage but is not as big as i expected before watching them more closely

Penny main advantage seems to be passing imo (better reads than pippen who is already a good passer) which alongside his handle also means a fair amount less turnovers whioe creating more assists.

I agree penny is easily the better offensive player (this wouldnt even be a debate if that was not the case) but not -mainly- from his scoring (although i agree he is better at creating his own shots and more efficient overall)

That might just be some random selection bias from whatever games you have been watching. Pippen is a strong finisher, especially in transition — worth keeping in mind Tserkin’s point about the effect pace reduction had on Pippen’s scoring at the same time Penny was peaking — but I definitely would not call peak Penny “unremarkable” there.

Of course, peak is the key. You have been gesturing to 1997, perhaps because of my post, but the reason my first point in that list was about the 1996 injury was to highlight why 1997 was a diminished form beyond suddenly playing without Shaq.
Proxy wrote:Penny 28 games without Shaq in '96
-Averaged 27 per 75 on +10 rTS%
-50 win pace(+3 team without Shaq and with Horace)
-+4 team rORTG

And while the previous season had a much smaller Shaq-less sample, you could see similar results: https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199502260ORL.html

1997 is an obvious step down. He drives less frequently (eye test and stat sheet), is less successful as a finisher (mostly eye test here because we do not have shooting data, but also basic logic when you think about that efficiency decline), and is just less dynamic than that November 1995 run where he looked like the true successor to Jordan. I brought up 1997 to show that even having lost a step, Penny was an elite offensive driver who could also be a strong individual scoring anchor against an elite defence, in a larger sample than ~30 games without Shaq. His range was iffy, sure, which is why I suspect Penny would lose more relative value in the modern era, but no, his peak scoring was absolutely on a level beyond Pippen at that time. If someone wants to throw some ScoreVal numbers here, they can, but I do kind-of think it speaks for itself when watching those 1995 games.


Yeah, small sample size of games watched is a issue when evaluating players you have not watched much before

Is why i always ask if my impressions pass the smell test
User avatar
AEnigma
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,067
And1: 5,882
Joined: Jul 24, 2022
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#14 » by AEnigma » Wed Oct 5, 2022 6:42 pm

It is something I noticed when you put a tentative vote for 1997, and I probably should have addressed it there. I see how spending most of my write-up talking about that year rather than the year I see as his actual peak might have given the wrong impression, but I was trying to work against any dismissals of 1996 (and 1995) for “had Shaq / only played a few games without Shaq / no postseason sample without Shaq”.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Some people are clearly far too overreliant on data without context and look at good all in one or impact numbers and get wowed by that rather than looking at how a roster is actually built around a player
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,338
And1: 6,938
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#15 » by falcolombardi » Wed Oct 5, 2022 8:36 pm

In other thoughts i am a bit lower on reggie as i keep watching 94 or 95 games

Before i pegged him as maybe a small positive on D off ben taylor profile and his lenght. But he doesnt seem to do all that much with his long wingspan defensively other than when contesting jumpshots. He gets pushed a bit too much by strong wings and blew by a bit too easily by 2's and even 3's

I wish there were 2022 games available to rewatch in youtube so i can rewatch butler games while focusing on defense to see if he mantained strong perimeter D alongside his offense last season playoffs
OhayoKD
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,926
And1: 3,867
Joined: Jun 22, 2022
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#16 » by OhayoKD » Wed Oct 5, 2022 9:19 pm

1. 17 Westbrook
(2016)
Having out-valued, out-box stat'd and out-played prime KD in the post-season while staying within range in the regular season, 2016 Westbrook(and to an extent 2014 westbrook) is a great peak aready. Adding in westbrook's tendency to get better vs stronger opponents and his significant playoff elevation on very strong playoff opponents(crushing the 70 win spurs, taking the warriors to 7, pushing the 14 spurs to overtime of game 6, beating the best clippersi iterations, ect, ect) and Westbrook accomplishing this without good spacing, 2016(and 2014 to a degree) sets a verty strong floor.

2017 Westbrook can claim a stronger regular season performance(second in impact stuff behind 2017 curry), a better skill-set(stronger catch and shoot) and nothing about the rockets first playoff exit really calls into questions Westbrook's track record as a playoff elevator.

2. 94 Scottie Pippen
(91, 92)
Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.

3. 2016 Draymond
Think people are too quick to assume is lack of regular season lift in regular seasons in his 30's as he coasts is reflective of him not being a capable floor-raiser at his peak. Even in 2021 we saw him carrry an otherwise meh defense to 6th and in 2016 he was far and away the most valuable warrior when curry was out and they amnaged to beat one .500 team in the first round. Draymond also put together one of the all-time final performances and has broken impact data at his best. Add that to an incredibly "portable" skillset, and whatever intangible value draymond provides in the lockeroom(probably deserves some credit for 2022 dubs role palyers taking a leap) and i think the second best player for a team that won 2 titles, and made 3 finals(exlcuding durant years) is a reasonsable pick here.
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,338
And1: 6,938
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#17 » by falcolombardi » Wed Oct 5, 2022 9:23 pm

OhayoKD wrote:1. 17 Westbrook
(2016)
Having out-valued, out-box stat'd and out-played prime KD in the post-season while staying within range in the regular season, 2016 Westbrook(and to an extent 2014 westbrook) is a great peak aready. Adding in westbrook's tendency to get better vs stronger opponents and his significant playoff elevation on very strong playoff opponents(crushing the 70 win spurs, taking the warriors to 7, pushing the 14 spurs to overtime of game 6, beating the best clippersi iterations, ect, ect) and Westbrook accomplishing this without good spacing, 2016(and 2014 to a degree) sets a verty strong floor.

2017 Westbrook can claim a stronger regular season performance(second in impact stuff behind 2017 curry), a better skill-set(stronger catch and shoot) and nothing about the rockets first playoff exit really calls into questions Westbrook's track record as a playoff elevator.

2. 94 Scottie Pippen
(91, 92)
Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.

3. 2022 Embid
Improved from leading a contender in 2019 across the board in the regular, strong playoff performances in adverse circumstances and mvp level impact with questionable fit


Embiid got in, you have to pick a different #3 pick
trelos6
Senior
Posts: 521
And1: 210
Joined: Jun 17, 2022
Location: Sydney

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#18 » by trelos6 » Wed Oct 5, 2022 11:12 pm

37. Draymond Green 15-16. He doesn't score at a rate like the others, but at this point, the player isn't leading you to a title as the 1A. As a 1B, Draymond was impactful on both sides of the ball. His defense was malleable and fit the Warriors system perfectly, as did his offense and intellect with his passing game. I judge players offensively partially by how well their teams performed on offense and same for defense. We can see the Warriors were by far the best offensive team and a top 5 defense, both of which Draymond played a huge part in. His O-PIPM was 5.2 and D-PIPM was a 4.6. Huge numbers considering peak Lebron was +6.6 and +3.3. I won’t bother with other seasons because this was clearly his peak.

38 Penny Hardaway 95-96. Solid scoring and great efficiency as the #2 to a young Shaq. He led his team to a fantastic offense which is the job of the lead guard. 23.2 pp75 at +6.3% rTS. This is the only season I’d have above Pippen.

39. Scottie Pippen 95-96. Do it all wing. I have this as his best season. Amazing defensively, and was a key part of the Bulls defensive schemes, even as a wing. Not too fantastic offensively as a scorer, but distributed the ball well and you can't go wrong picking a guy who was the second best player on a team that went 72-10. 20.9 pp75 on .9 rTS%.

Alternative year, 94-95 (he was better defensively), then 93-94, then 91-92. I’d put all of those seasons above Grant Hill.

40. Grant Hill 96-97. Pre injury Grant was a beast. Shame we never got to see his full potential. 23.2 pp75 on +2 rTS% with 3.5 O-PIPM and 1.7 D-PIPM. This is the only season I’d have above Reggie Miller.

HM. Reggie Miller 93-94. A gravity unrivalled until Steph came into the league. His ability to space the floor for teammates and ramp up his scoring in the post season is why he's here. One of the most portable players of all time and a big ceiling raiser. 23 pp75 at +10.8 rTS%. Had about 9 seasons similar, so they’re all pretty close.


HM: Artis Gilmore. Efficient big man, was probably best in the ABA, which makes it harder to evaluate his peak.I’d go with 81-82 prob, but any late 70’s also works.
User avatar
AEnigma
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,067
And1: 5,882
Joined: Jul 24, 2022
 

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#19 » by AEnigma » Thu Oct 6, 2022 12:04 am

trelos6 wrote:39. Scottie Pippen 95-96. Do it all wing. I have this as his best season. Amazing defensively, and was a key part of the Bulls defensive schemes, even as a wing. Not too fantastic offensively as a scorer, but distributed the ball well and you can't go wrong picking a guy who was the second best player on a team that went 72-10. 20.9 pp75 on .9 rTS%.

Could you add a couple of alternate years? Pushing solely for 1996 might cause a bit of vote splitting.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Some people are clearly far too overreliant on data without context and look at good all in one or impact numbers and get wowed by that rather than looking at how a roster is actually built around a player
User avatar
Proxy
Sophomore
Posts: 237
And1: 192
Joined: Jun 30, 2021
       

Re: Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #37 

Post#20 » by Proxy » Fri Oct 7, 2022 12:25 am

Proxy wrote:
Proxy wrote:Waaaayy too much uncertainty for me in this range, really just splitting hairs for these spots until the early 40s so i've began losing interest and will provide less for my 'explanations' - some of these players have also made these projects before if further brief reasoning is needed(*cough* Frazier), but anyways


1. 2022 Joel Embiid
-Mentioned before, him going this low for me is mainly durability related, but I did have Paul on my ballot starting in the early 20s with a similar problem.


2. 1972 Walt Frazier (1971, 1973)
-Arguably the best defensive PG of all-time(though I might prefer Jason Kidd, iirc he ended second in the project from a few years ago), and the best perimeter defender of the era, 70sfan also linked some Knicks footage for anyone interested.



Odinn21 wrote:Frazier always caused big troubles to the player he defended.

A quick look at the star players played against the Knicks in the playoffs during Frazier's prime;
E. Monroe against Frazier in '69 playoffs - 28.3 ppg on .386 fg (25.8 ppg on .440 fg r. season average for Monroe and his team was .427 against the Knicks)
E. Monroe in '70; 28.0 ppg on .481 fg (23.4 ppg on .446 fg r. season and .418 fg team)
E. Monroe in '71; 24.4 ppg on .407 fg (21.4 ppg on .442 fg r. season and .448 fg team)
S. Jones in '69; 14.5 ppg on .350 fg (16.3 ppg on .450 fg r. season and .469 fg team)
P. Maravich in '71; 22.0 ppg on .377 fg (23.2 ppg on .458 fg r. season and .427 fg team)
J. West in '70; 31.3 ppg on .450 fg (31.2 ppg on .497 fg r. season and .494 fg team)
J. West in '72; 19.8 ppg on .325 fg (25.8 ppg on .477 fg r. season and .421 fg team)
J. West in '73; 21.4 ppg on .442 fg (22.8 ppg on .479 fg r. season and .431 fg team)
J. White in '72; 22.6 ppg on .402 fg (23.1 ppg on .431 fg r. season and .416 fg team)
J. White in '73; 23.6 ppg on .414 fg (19.7 ppg on .431 fg r. season and .443 fg team)
J. White in '74; 15.2 ppg on .385 fg (18.1 ppg on .449 fg r. season and .467 fg team)
C. Murphy in '75; 20.7 ppg on .418 fg (18.7 ppg on .484 fg r. season and .481 fg team)

The only time a player improved their scoring volume and fg% from the floor was Monroe in 1970. There are 12 performances on there and literally half of them regressed in both volume and % against Frazier. Other than those 6, I'd put also '69 against Monroe, '70 against West and '75 against Murphy as definite wins in Frazier's case. That's 9 out of 12.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=86032971#p86032971

Meshed well with a variety of different teammates(though there was not much roster turnover for some of those Knicks teams) and one of the rare superstars to consistently elevate their play in the PS and capped off the year with a dominant performance against the #2 ranked defense Lakers in the finals, averaging 23-8-8 on 61.25 TS%(+14 ish rTS% iirc, I can't tell if bballref is glitched but it also says they had a +10 rORTG that series but got killed on defense). Even w/o his co-star Willis Reed(who he led the team to a 50-win pace in games without him albeit with a fairly strong cast - they were some very strong teams when healthy, somehow they got like 5 players into the nba's 75th anniversary team lol).

3. 1996 Penny Hardaway
-This year placed Penny in rarefied air as an offensive engine in NBA history(note the following numbers may be slightly off, and I haven't checked them in a while so I would fact check them if you aren't already aware)

Proxy wrote:Penny 28 games without Shaq in '96
-Averaged 27 per 75 on +10 rTS%
-50 win pace(+3 team without Shaq and with Horace)
-+4 team rORTG

Other stuff from that year:
A top 50 RS AuPM/g peak OAT, top 5 in the league in 1996

#1 in the league according to Pollack's on/off estimates(+17.1) - on a side note the team numbers in *1995* being so similar makes me believe there was maybe some starter substitution stuff going on for those teams, but this year's result was still without Shaq 1/4 of the year so i'd say it's mostly fair

The 96 Magic finished with a rORTG of +5.3 even with Shaq missing 28 games

Shaq missed 28, Horace Grant missed 19. The Magic were a +10 ish SRS team with both iirc...with an offensive rating of 117.6!

After Penny sliced up the Bulls in the 1996 ECF...


and Shaq departed, the following year they were a respectable +3 team with Horace Grant again (+3 ORtg), only this time Penny missed 21 games and without him the Magic were a -6.5 SRS team w/ a -7.9 ORtg. 

The Orlando Magic had a stellar +7.7 PS Ortg from 95-97 with what i'd call close to 1A 1B situation on offense for some of those years.


Otoh concerns on his defense is what lowers him enough for me from what I think is a top-20 offensive peak OAT. When revisiting him I didn't necessarily think it was quite as bad as I did before, and fwiw on Phoenix he was considered a positive defensively(hard to measure actual improvements vs team situation). Anyways, that uncertainty gets him to being someone i'm fine in the back end of my top-40 and really just interchangable with the people i'm voting for this round.

4. 2022 Luka Dončić (2020)
-LukasGOAT has been making comparisons to him to players that have been in already that look fairly good for him - I could copy paste if needed, honestly I could somewhat see the case for him to have been ranked top-30 already based on his offensive brilliance in the PS so far.

I would probably prefer him to someone like Harden in a PS setting on as a primary for the same reasons as him(but like he said his defense might be even worse), he never really combined something like the RS dominance of 2020 with his PS performance in 2022 so ig it's maybe understandable with just one season making it out of the first round and the other two both against the Clippers so far(PS elevation confidence).
---
I really didn't think I would find myself ranking him this early going into the project but i'm thinking about Scottie Pippen next - the more I look into him I feel my concerns over his HC offense value maintaining in the PS(cuz of scoring ability specifically) were a little overstated, and his defensive versatility was just so valuable for the era, I would probably have either him or Bobby as the best non-big defender OAT w/ Kawhi, Dennis, and AK having cases as well.


I'm probably between him Dwight, Zo, Thurmond, or Barry next but the centers here are just so extremely packed. Solid cases for Lanier and Gilmore are being made even and just more to come.


Will add on Pippen if he's needed for a tiebreaker or something, I decided on Dwight over him in the end but he got in already.

Wasn't super impressed by Zo's playoffs/the likely Riley impact slightly overstating what I think his goodness in a vacuum really is(I consider him the GOAT coach) so I held back on him - think these will round out the top 40 for me.


1. 1972 Walt Frazier (1973, 1971)
2. 1996 Penny Hardaway
3. 2022 Luka Dončić (2020)
4. 1995 Scottie Pippen (1994, 1996)
AEnigma wrote:Arf arf.
Image

trex_8063 wrote:Calling someone a stinky turd is not acceptable.
PLEASE stop doing that.

One_and_Done wrote:I mean, how would you feel if the NBA traced it's origins to an 1821 league of 3 foot dwarves who performed in circuses?

Return to Player Comparisons