RealGM

ceiling raiser wrote:How good are these guys’ cases from an impact metrics perspective?

PaulieWal wrote:Would you like to provide some of your own perspective instead of just making these one liner-question threads?

ceiling raiser wrote:How good are these guys’ cases from an impact metrics perspective?

Proxy wrote:

falcolombardi wrote:What is the bird argument over magic btw?

Magic peak offense results just impress me more

Was bird defensive edge sizable?

This is not a detailed or organized explanation so there won't be film or anything(apologize for that in advance) and not a direct comparison as neither of them were on my ballot before and neither will be in my top 3 for this round, and I don't have time for a post like that but I think there are alot of indicators showing Bird could stack up well against pretty much anyone p4p and Magic is no exception that i'll touch on.

The main argument for Bird > Magic, however, i'd say depends on how much his defense and scalability are valued. Larry made a probably deserved all-defense team in 1984 and personally I don't think his defensive value changed that much from then by 1986 in the film i've seen(he does fall off in the following years), while I can't see Magic being much better than a neutral defensively.

I also don't think Larry's offensive value was as high as Magic's but the 86-88 Celtics had a +7.26 playoff rORTG -

btw their PS offenses being relatively similar to their RS values despite noone else on the team taking a notable leap maybe hints as Bird's value being similar despite his scoring weaknesses hurting his efficiency similar to how someone like Steph's value looks relatively the same from the RS to PS when healthy even though it dips slightly, the way teams guard you is really what matters

The Cs were also the 2nd best RS offense of the decade in the 1988 behind the 82 Nuggets that went all in on offense(McHale also missed 18 games!). I really don't think that team's depth was that good offensively which is why i'm really impressed by that result though someone could argue that was a better version of Bird offensively.

Otoh the Lakers peaked at a PS rORTG +9.3 for 3 years both 85-87 and 87-89 and never fell below +3.9 rORTG in the playoffs when Magic was healthy lmfao, I won't argue against Magic's value there.


His impact indicators are really great as well.
In this old WOWY study for the first 30 ish years of the league(up until 1983 Larry even ranked #1)
https://backpicks.com/2016/09/28/iii-historical-impact-wowyr-60-years-of-plus-minus/

It's worth noting Magic is actually number 1 in prime WOWYR but it says Reggie Lewis messes up Bird's prime numbers.
https://backpicks.com/2017/11/17/part-iv-historical-impact-multiple-wowyr-studies/

He also has some eye popping results both as a ceiling raiser and floor raiser in his prime. In 87 and 88 they were a +1 ish team(45 win pace) w/o Bird and a +7 team w/ him (61 win pace), it was similar to the result in 1989 where he was injured for the full year basically. Even without McHale they played at a 57 win pace from 86-88, and his results in the 1984 playoffs on a Celtics team that rly only had 6 actual rotation players was impressive as well and highlights strong value as a floor raiser(+6.4 playoff rORTG on neutral ish defense). 

Other little things I could see someone arguing for is how the height of the teams he led(the 1986 Celtics) were probably better than that for Magic(1987 Lakers) and he played consistently more difficult competition in the playoffs iirc. I think the 86 Celtics were something like +12 MOV against +5 SRS teams while being 9-0 against them in the RS, also they absolutely smoked the 8.7 SRS Bucks in the PS but correct me if those numbers were wrong, they also had a +13.1 PS net rating which was a bit higher than any showtime Lakers squad. I could also see how someone might believe Bird's combination of off ball value and defense allow him to scale up better on stronger teams which depending on how much that is valued could be a difference maker.

As far as 1 number metrics go, idrc about them that much personally but for the sake of saying they both have cases over eachother. Bird also peaked higher in the PS according to both bballref BPM and I think backpicks BPM, as well as playoff PIPM, also believe all of these view him as around a t5-10 player ever at his peak but again correct me if i'm wrong. He could be argued to maybe be undersold more by these approaches similar to how someone like Steph is considered because of how his off ball play isn't measured properly.

If Larry is viewed as an near all-defense level ish defender(at least very clear positive), while also being a possibly top 8-ish offensive player ever than I could see how someone gets that combination of player over peak Magic but it's rly just preference tbh. I didn't list all of Magic's value indicators which are very strong in their own right but i'm sure they would conclude that this debate could really go either way cuz they are usually in the same range as Larry's.

Just some food for thought ig

migya wrote:This can be approached by looking at total career metrics or relevant seasons, which means seasons that (for top 10 consideration ranking) are at a significant level, reasonable to say above .150ws/48, above 4.0bpm, for at least 60 games (3/4 of season).

Looking at it, some of these players only have a few significant seasons.

I'd rank them as following, which translates to their case for top 10 alltime:



David Robinson -
1990-2002, 923gm, 32595 totmins, 116OR, 96DR, 26.6PER, 58.5ts%, 96.1ows, 76.6dws, 172.7ws, .254ws/48, 7.8bpm, 80.2vorp


Karl Malone -
1989-2002, 1108gm, 42013 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 25.5PER, 58.7ts%, 129.8ows, 70.4dws, 200.3ws, .229ws/48, 6.3bpm, 88.1vorp


John Stockton -
1987-2003, 1340gm, 44339 totmins, 121OR, 104DR, 22.3PER, 61.1ts%, 139.1ows, 59.7dws, 198.7ws, .215ws/48, 7.3bpm, 103.7vorp


Kevin Durant -
2010 2023 824gm, 30259 totmins, 120OR, 105DR, 26.6PER, 63.0ts%, 109.8ows, 41.4dws, 151.2ws, .240ws/48, 7.8bpm, 74.5vorp


Kevin Garnett -
1998-2012, 1098gm, 40491totmins, 111OR, 98DR, 24.1PER, 55.1ts%, 92.8ows, 77.1dws, 169.9ws, .201ws/48, 6.6bpm, 88.3vorp


Larry Bird -
1980-1992, 897gm, 34443 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 23.5PER, 56.4ts%, 86.8ows, 59.0dws, 145.8ws, .203ws/48, 6.9bpm, 77.2vorp


Kobe Bryant -
2000-2013 (Can't exclude 2012, which is below the cutoffs, on BR in getting the numbers from 2000 to 2013), 1039GM, 40335 totmins, 112OR, 105DR, 24.1PER, 55.6ts%, 115.2ows, 44.9dws, 160.1ws, .190ws/48, 5.4bpm, 75.2vorp


Steve Nash -
2001-2010 (01 and 02 are well below bpm cutoff and 09 is below both but the ws/48 weren't far below so included those seasons or total games would be so low), 778gm, 26522 totmins, 21.5PER, 61.3ts%, 90.6ows, 11.5dws, 102.1ws, .185ws/48, 3.9bpm, 39.8vorp



Nash is well below the level of the others, which tends to support the view that D'Antoni's system was the major factor of the effectiveness of Nash.

Kobe doesn't stack up to the level of the alltime stars and certainly not comparable to Jordan, who he professes to have mimicked.

Bird was a star all his seasons but his back injury obviously ruined his career, as he was much better before it. He could've been a legit GOAT candidate with 11-12 seasons like his first 8.

Garnett's longevity is not significantly high and his defensive strength is shown, though with not such high offensive strength.

Durant is very high level with these numbers, which might be more than expected. He has been great since early in his career and is still going strong. He has missed many games which decreases his case at the moment.

John Stockton was strong for so many seasons and high level on both ends right to his last season.

Karl Malone also was strong for so many seasons, until his very late 30s.

David Robinson was very high level, elite, from the almost all of his career, still among the best impact in his last seasons. He really is among the best ever and looking at the total number of games for all these players, he is middle of the pack, showing his lack of longevity is overrated. For significant seasons, he is the best here and certainly the best case for top 10 here.

SNPA wrote:Bird doesn’t belong in this grouping. Weird he is added here.

None of the rest are top ten.

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:This can be approached by looking at total career metrics or relevant seasons, which means seasons that (for top 10 consideration ranking) are at a significant level, reasonable to say above .150ws/48, above 4.0bpm, for at least 60 games (3/4 of season).

Looking at it, some of these players only have a few significant seasons.

I'd rank them as following, which translates to their case for top 10 alltime:



David Robinson -
1990-2002, 923gm, 32595 totmins, 116OR, 96DR, 26.6PER, 58.5ts%, 96.1ows, 76.6dws, 172.7ws, .254ws/48, 7.8bpm, 80.2vorp


Karl Malone -
1989-2002, 1108gm, 42013 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 25.5PER, 58.7ts%, 129.8ows, 70.4dws, 200.3ws, .229ws/48, 6.3bpm, 88.1vorp


John Stockton -
1987-2003, 1340gm, 44339 totmins, 121OR, 104DR, 22.3PER, 61.1ts%, 139.1ows, 59.7dws, 198.7ws, .215ws/48, 7.3bpm, 103.7vorp


Kevin Durant -
2010 2023 824gm, 30259 totmins, 120OR, 105DR, 26.6PER, 63.0ts%, 109.8ows, 41.4dws, 151.2ws, .240ws/48, 7.8bpm, 74.5vorp


Kevin Garnett -
1998-2012, 1098gm, 40491totmins, 111OR, 98DR, 24.1PER, 55.1ts%, 92.8ows, 77.1dws, 169.9ws, .201ws/48, 6.6bpm, 88.3vorp


Larry Bird -
1980-1992, 897gm, 34443 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 23.5PER, 56.4ts%, 86.8ows, 59.0dws, 145.8ws, .203ws/48, 6.9bpm, 77.2vorp


Kobe Bryant -
2000-2013 (Can't exclude 2012, which is below the cutoffs, on BR in getting the numbers from 2000 to 2013), 1039GM, 40335 totmins, 112OR, 105DR, 24.1PER, 55.6ts%, 115.2ows, 44.9dws, 160.1ws, .190ws/48, 5.4bpm, 75.2vorp


Steve Nash -
2001-2010 (01 and 02 are well below bpm cutoff and 09 is below both but the ws/48 weren't far below so included those seasons or total games would be so low), 778gm, 26522 totmins, 21.5PER, 61.3ts%, 90.6ows, 11.5dws, 102.1ws, .185ws/48, 3.9bpm, 39.8vorp



Nash is well below the level of the others, which tends to support the view that D'Antoni's system was the major factor of the effectiveness of Nash.

Kobe doesn't stack up to the level of the alltime stars and certainly not comparable to Jordan, who he professes to have mimicked.

Bird was a star all his seasons but his back injury obviously ruined his career, as he was much better before it. He could've been a legit GOAT candidate with 11-12 seasons like his first 8.

Garnett's longevity is not significantly high and his defensive strength is shown, though with not such high offensive strength.

Durant is very high level with these numbers, which might be more than expected. He has been great since early in his career and is still going strong. He has missed many games which decreases his case at the moment.

John Stockton was strong for so many seasons and high level on both ends right to his last season.

Karl Malone also was strong for so many seasons, until his very late 30s.

David Robinson was very high level, elite, from the almost all of his career, still among the best impact in his last seasons. He really is among the best ever and looking at the total number of games for all these players, he is middle of the pack, showing his lack of longevity is overrated. For significant seasons, he is the best here and certainly the best case for top 10 here.

Why aren’t you including playoffs for this? The list would look a lot different if you included those as well

ceoofkobefans wrote:

SNPA wrote:Bird doesn’t belong in this grouping. Weird he is added here.

None of the rest are top ten.

Can you add why you believe this?

SNPA wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

SNPA wrote:Bird doesn’t belong in this grouping. Weird he is added here.

None of the rest are top ten.

Can you add why you believe this?

Because Bird is the GOAT all around player, widely consider for overall GOAT at his retirement and widely viewed as top ten today (although to low from many younger fans).

Shooting? Legend.
Rebounding? Double digits for his career in a front court with Parish and McHale.
Passing? Legend.
Defense? All NBA.
Toughness? Off the charts.
Leadership? Ask his teammates.
Psychology of the game? Legend.
Hustle? Top of the line.
BBIQ? GOAT.

There are interviews of players discussing Bird, Worthy would rather guard Jordan. Dr. J said if you believe the hick from French Lick bit for a second you’d lose. Kareem talks about his BBIQ being steps ahead.

He was the best player on the planet for at least half a decade. None of the other players reached that level. I can go on.

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:This can be approached by looking at total career metrics or relevant seasons, which means seasons that (for top 10 consideration ranking) are at a significant level, reasonable to say above .150ws/48, above 4.0bpm, for at least 60 games (3/4 of season).

Looking at it, some of these players only have a few significant seasons.

I'd rank them as following, which translates to their case for top 10 alltime:



David Robinson -
1990-2002, 923gm, 32595 totmins, 116OR, 96DR, 26.6PER, 58.5ts%, 96.1ows, 76.6dws, 172.7ws, .254ws/48, 7.8bpm, 80.2vorp


Karl Malone -
1989-2002, 1108gm, 42013 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 25.5PER, 58.7ts%, 129.8ows, 70.4dws, 200.3ws, .229ws/48, 6.3bpm, 88.1vorp


John Stockton -
1987-2003, 1340gm, 44339 totmins, 121OR, 104DR, 22.3PER, 61.1ts%, 139.1ows, 59.7dws, 198.7ws, .215ws/48, 7.3bpm, 103.7vorp


Kevin Durant -
2010 2023 824gm, 30259 totmins, 120OR, 105DR, 26.6PER, 63.0ts%, 109.8ows, 41.4dws, 151.2ws, .240ws/48, 7.8bpm, 74.5vorp


Kevin Garnett -
1998-2012, 1098gm, 40491totmins, 111OR, 98DR, 24.1PER, 55.1ts%, 92.8ows, 77.1dws, 169.9ws, .201ws/48, 6.6bpm, 88.3vorp


Larry Bird -
1980-1992, 897gm, 34443 totmins, 115OR, 101DR, 23.5PER, 56.4ts%, 86.8ows, 59.0dws, 145.8ws, .203ws/48, 6.9bpm, 77.2vorp


Kobe Bryant -
2000-2013 (Can't exclude 2012, which is below the cutoffs, on BR in getting the numbers from 2000 to 2013), 1039GM, 40335 totmins, 112OR, 105DR, 24.1PER, 55.6ts%, 115.2ows, 44.9dws, 160.1ws, .190ws/48, 5.4bpm, 75.2vorp


Steve Nash -
2001-2010 (01 and 02 are well below bpm cutoff and 09 is below both but the ws/48 weren't far below so included those seasons or total games would be so low), 778gm, 26522 totmins, 21.5PER, 61.3ts%, 90.6ows, 11.5dws, 102.1ws, .185ws/48, 3.9bpm, 39.8vorp



Nash is well below the level of the others, which tends to support the view that D'Antoni's system was the major factor of the effectiveness of Nash.

Kobe doesn't stack up to the level of the alltime stars and certainly not comparable to Jordan, who he professes to have mimicked.

Bird was a star all his seasons but his back injury obviously ruined his career, as he was much better before it. He could've been a legit GOAT candidate with 11-12 seasons like his first 8.

Garnett's longevity is not significantly high and his defensive strength is shown, though with not such high offensive strength.

Durant is very high level with these numbers, which might be more than expected. He has been great since early in his career and is still going strong. He has missed many games which decreases his case at the moment.

John Stockton was strong for so many seasons and high level on both ends right to his last season.

Karl Malone also was strong for so many seasons, until his very late 30s.

David Robinson was very high level, elite, from the almost all of his career, still among the best impact in his last seasons. He really is among the best ever and looking at the total number of games for all these players, he is middle of the pack, showing his lack of longevity is overrated. For significant seasons, he is the best here and certainly the best case for top 10 here.

Why aren’t you including playoffs for this? The list would look a lot different if you included those as well

Because playoffs is far less games. It is significant so I would have included it but it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

ceiling raiser wrote:

PaulieWal wrote:Would you like to provide some of your own perspective instead of just making these one liner-question threads?

Fair question. Honest answer is threefold:

(1) I’ve been a bit out of the loop with regards to a lot of this data the last few years, and am wondering about developments.

(2) Historically my analysis has been a bit reductionist. Once I know where a guy stands in metrics I’ll be able to form my prior.

(3) Forums are one of the best places to crowdsource data/opinions, so in the time it would take to write one effort post OP, I can start 5-10 threads with questions I find interesting (setting aside my Kobe threads).

All that said I’ll try to effort post a bit more. No promises though lol.

Jaivl wrote:

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

Why aren’t you including playoffs for this? The list would look a lot different if you included those as well

Because playoffs is far less games. It is significant so I would have included it but it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

(alternate translation: Malone fares badly)

migya wrote:

Jaivl wrote:

migya wrote:
Because playoffs is far less games. It is significant so I would have included it but it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

(alternate translation: Malone fares badly)

Here fares better than Garnett. Not to hurt feelings.