Peak Mark Eaton time travels to the current league, does he play?

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Tacko Fall is not In the NBA.
It took Mark Eaton a while to get NBA playing time.

I have couple guys at the Warriors board a gluing that Kerr would not play a traditional center if given a traditional center.

Warriors have no back up center and Looney is not big.

I think peak Eaton who played 30+ minutes per game would play at least 25 minutes per game today.

Sure Eaton had slow feet but so what.

[Doctor MJ]

I think peak Eaton who played 30+ minutes per game would play at least 25 minutes per game today.

Sure Eaton had slow feet but so what.

I think at most he plays as a deep rotation guy valuable in limited spurts against the right opponent lineup, maybe 10-15 MPG.

What's working against him?

a) Spacing on defense means that he can't have as much impact as a goalie. That decreases his value.
b) Spacing on offense means that he'll be even more of a negative because he can't space the floor, and will have defenses cheating off him unless you put him on the interior in the way of drivers.
c) Pacing means suffer from the negative impact of additional transition possessions - where he'll be less valuable - and will wear him out.
d) Because teams know about these sorts of issues they are less likely to work hard to find a way to make use of him, so he's less likely to achieve what ever possible peak he has.

[kcktiny]

It took Mark Eaton a while to get NBA playing time.

Eaton was Utah's starting C just 50 games into his rookie season (1982-83), and remained their starting C for a decade.

Sure Eaton had slow feet but so what.

Eaton's first seven seasons (1982-83 to 1988-89) the league averaged 101-104 team ball possessions per 48 minute game. He averaged 340 blocked shots a season over those 7 years (averaged 2450 minutes/season).

The league hasn't averaged even 101 team ball possessions per 48 minute game since the late 1980s, and the past few seasons averaged just 98-100.

Eaton blocked all those shots playing at a faster game pace than teams play today. So slow feet and all he could easily play today.

No player has blocked even 220 shots in a season in 8 years, in the past decade a player blocked more than 220 shots in a season just once, and the past 2 decades a player blocked 300+ shots in a season just once, and 250+ just 3 times.

Fans watching the NBA today have never seen a dominant shot blocker anywhere near the likes of Eaton. If he played today he would be a dominant force on defense, a perennial DPOY candidate.

Even with the 3pt shot. Just 2 seasons ago teams averaged 4.9 bs/g. Back in 1984-85 when Eaton set the league record of 456 blocked shots team averaged 5.3 bs/g. Little difference.

[SNPA]

No. He doesn’t play significant minutes. There is no room for him in the modern game, which sucks.

[Colbinii]

Luka Garza except significantly worse offensively.

[Jaivl]

He had SUCH SLOW FEET in the 80s, but seeing how he stayed in good shape later in life, mentored Rudy, etc (i.e. wasn't dumb nor a lazy ass), I think he could easily adapt to the circumstances (only-defense Marc Gasol?).

[tsherkin]

He'd be troublesome to play in today's league. Slow as all heck, no range, no real utility on D outside of the paint. Foul-prone. Not a dominant rebounder (though for his size, still pretty good despite mobility issues). Not good on offense.

kcktiny made a point about Eaton's shotblocking in a faster-paced league.... but, he liked to camp out in the paint real bad. The restricted area would not be his friend, and he'd either be giving up a procession of open jumpers or looking like a lumbering block of stone getting torched on high screens. SHAQ had trouble with high PnR, and he was considerably more mobile than Eaton. In an era where guys go switch-hunting, Eaton's true defensive impact would be a lot lower than it was in his own time.

I could certainly see a couple of teams trying it, particularly if he were racking up blocks, but I can't see it working out well in the contemporary context.

[Texas Chuck]

so Boban was starting and playing 30 mpg in close out games in the playoffs just a couple seasons ago. Now Boban obviously offers something on the offensive end, but there is zero chance peak Eaton is more of a defensive liability than Boban.

Now does his lack of offense keep him off the court? Maybe. But we've seen the big immobile center play. And Boban's per minute stats are silly and despite having to be the worst defensive center in the league by some distance he has very shiny on/off numbers.

We are too quick at times to state categorically who can and can't play is all I'm trying to get at it.

[70sFan]

I think people overestimate the hit Eaton would take. I know that he was slow and it would be problematic, but his height alone didn't make him a great defender. He was one of the best defenders we have ever seen for a reason. Eaton was very hard working man and I am sure he'd do anything he could to find a way to be successful. He was also quite smart defender - again, size alone won't make you good.

The bigger problem in postseason would be his offense, because I really struggle to see him playing high minutes with such a limited value on that end.

[Statlanta]

Yes because he's still a better defender than a good lot of the NBA. Would rookie Eaton get drafted or be in the league? Probably not.

[tsherkin]

I think people overestimate the hit Eaton would take. I know that he was slow and it would be problematic, but his height alone didn't make him a great defender. He was one of the best defenders we have ever seen for a reason. Eaton was very hard working man and I am sure he'd do anything he could to find a way to be successful. He was also quite smart defender - again, size alone won't make you good.

The bigger problem in postseason would be his offense, because I really struggle to see him playing high minutes with such a limited value on that end.

He sure knew how to play defense in his own time. He had good timing and positioning and all that, for sure. But things aren't the same now.

The issue isn't really his work ethic. It's that right away, he's gonna get switch-hunted and brutalized. That happens to anyone who doesn't have the mobility to hang it out there. And yes, sometimes those guys produce enough elsewhere in the game to make that vulnerability worthwhile. Eaton was basically dog-crap on offense, however, and not good enough on the glass for that to cover up. And while he would make for strong at-rim defense, the restricted area would be a huge issue for a dude who was already foul-prone. And yeah, you put a 5 who can shoot on the floor and now he has a Sophie's Choice in front of him: go contest on the perimeter (and get blown by routinely, or leave a hole under the rim defensively) or leave the shooter open. And he sure isn't showing and recovering fast enough to make a difference.

He definitely made a difference to the Jazz defense, but it is of some relevance to recall that the league outside of the Jazz were not using PnR action to anywhere near the same volume. Same same corner 3pt spacing. That was a big deal out of Sloan's style. Not unique, of course, I mean we saw the Bulls using Paxson and Hodges well enough in the first 3pt and the Celtics had Ainge in the 80s, the Lakers Scott and Cooper, etc. But Utah made a huge focus of it. You open things up from outside that much and your high-end interior shotblocker matters only so much. That's one of the reasons we see a lot less emphasis on shotblockers now and much more on lateral mobility. They still help, I mean we've see Lopez's impact and most of us remember Whiteside, or even Dwight and so forth, but mobility is at more of a premium than stand-still guys who can operate in what is today basically the restricted area.

His height certainly wasn't the only thing which made him a good defender, but his wingspan was very much integral. He certainly didn't leap a lot and he often blocked shots without ever leaving the ground. That doesn't happen nearly as often if you're 6'10. As you say, the offensive deficiencies would be hugely problematic, but the game isn't quite the same as when he played and I suspect he'd be reduced a lot. In 92, 3PAr was .087. Teams were taking 7.6 3PA/g against 87.3 total FGA/g. Today, it's .387, with teams taking 34.2 3PA/g against 88.3 FGA/g. That very much changes the landscape of when someone like Eaton is relevant on defense, particularly since we see a lot of above-break threes early in the shotclock. And again, much more PnR than we saw from basically anyone but the very Jazz on which Eaton was playing back then. Tonally, the flow of contemporary offenses is very, very different. Maybe matchup-wise, it would be interesting.

You throw him against Jokic or Embiid and hope for the best kind of thing. That might make some sense. Those guys do occupy the post a fair bit, though they'd be nightmarish matchups for Eaton further from the rim.

[Doctor MJ]

so Boban was starting and playing 30 mpg in close out games in the playoffs just a couple seasons ago. Now Boban obviously offers something on the offensive end, but there is zero chance peak Eaton is more of a defensive liability than Boban.

Now does his lack of offense keep him off the court? Maybe. But we've seen the big immobile center play. And Boban's per minute stats are silly and despite having to be the worst defensive center in the league by some distance he has very shiny on/off numbers.

We are too quick at times to state categorically who can and can't play is all I'm trying to get at it.

Just have to say:

Boban has only one playoff series where he averaged north of 20 MPG.
He averaged 20.8 MPG in that series.
He was 7th in minutes on the team in the series.
His on-court DRtg was 122.1.
His team lost and was eliminated.
His team the next year proceeded to make their playoff run with a core 5 players where none was taller than 6'7" and Boban basically nailed to the bench.

Do I think Eaton could at least match success on this level in today's game? Certainly.
The question is how much more we could expect him to do.

[henshao]

On the other side of the coin Eaton suddenly has a much easier time on offense, though that was never a big deal during his career he was playing alongside Karl Malone (!) and the era spacing was much tighter. Surely the giant can dunk it with ease a few more times a game nowadays

[RCM88x]

On the other side of the coin Eaton suddenly has a much easier time on offense, though that was never a big deal during his career he was playing alongside Karl Malone (!) and the era spacing was much tighter. Surely the giant can dunk it with ease a few more times a game nowadays

Perhaps, but teams wouldn't be forced to guard him up to the free throw line anymore and could double off him much easier. His slow speed would probably make him a complete low level threat as a role man so any real offense would be stationary right around the rim. Perhaps he'd score more points (even this I kind of doubt though) but I don't think he'd be better overall.

Ultimately the spacing is only advantageous if you can actually take advantage of it as a team.

[kcktiny]

He'd be troublesome to play in today's league. Slow as all heck, no range, no real utility on D outside of the paint. Foul-prone.

And while he would make for strong at-rim defense, the restricted area would be a huge issue for a dude who was already foul-prone.

Fact check.

Eaton had a career rate of 4.7 PF/40min. During the 11 years he played just the average C in the league committed 4.9 PF/40min.
He committed less fouls per minute than did just the average C.

During those 11 years he played there were 68 Cs that played 5000+ total minutes. Among those 68 Cs Eaton had the 28th lowest per minute foul rate.

So why are you calling him foul prone?

And for all the talk of him being slow footed, he looks here pretty nimble for a 7-4 player:

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[Texas Chuck]

so Boban was starting and playing 30 mpg in close out games in the playoffs just a couple seasons ago. Now Boban obviously offers something on the offensive end, but there is zero chance peak Eaton is more of a defensive liability than Boban.

Now does his lack of offense keep him off the court? Maybe. But we've seen the big immobile center play. And Boban's per minute stats are silly and despite having to be the worst defensive center in the league by some distance he has very shiny on/off numbers.

We are too quick at times to state categorically who can and can't play is all I'm trying to get at it.

Just have to say:

Boban has only one playoff series where he averaged north of 20 MPG.
He averaged 20.8 MPG in that series.
He was 7th in minutes on the team in the series.
His on-court DRtg was 122.1.
His team lost and was eliminated.
His team the next year proceeded to make their playoff run with a core 5 players where none was taller than 6'7" and Boban basically nailed to the bench.

Do I think Eaton could at least match success on this level in today's game? Certainly.
The question is how much more we could expect him to do.

I'm not suggesting Dallas should have (or any team should) played Boban more. Just pointed out that he in fact was playing big minutes in close out games against the Clippers. Not saying he should have been. Jalen Brunson basically got nailed to the bench for instance as he was ineffective against the length of the Clippers.

Just pointing out that did happen and pointing out that Boban in his limited minutes over his career is a positive player. Now I don't want to overreact to +/- numbers when many of his minutes are garbage time and coaches are having to find favorable matchups, but I also know the numbers say what the numbers say.

And Boban was the most tragic defensive player I've ever seen. Eaton would not be that. Now again, Boban provides huge value on the offensive end. He was a scoring machine and great rebounder. Eaton would not provide that value.

So Eaton might not work. But he might. We don't actually know. I think our confidence meter in these exercises is always way too high and I was just trying to show an example of why we can't make declarative statements on these time machine threads.

I would agree with the majority that he's almost certain to not be as effective as he was in era. But I'm not prepared to just rule him out because Tacko Fall, someone whose basketball IQ didn't remotely approach Eaton's didn't work out.

[tsherkin]

So why are you calling him foul prone?

Because that's still a consequential foul rate. 3.5 PF/g in 30.9 mpg from 84-92 is still a lot of fouls. Yes, you can make the argument that relative to the average center, it wasn't a big deal, but 4.2 PF36 is still a fair bit. He did improve some after his first couple of seasons but in context of a guy who offers little on offense and looks worse on D today than he did back then, it does matter.

And for all the talk of him being slow footed, he looks here pretty nimble for a 7-4 player:

He didn't have meaningful lateral quicks. He did not have good recovery across large distances. He didn't do well aired out beyond the key. That's what I was talking about. Also, that highlight video doesn't really show anything nimble. It shows a ground-bound guy who was intelligent about how he used his length and how he shielded with his body. Not a mobile player.

As ever, nice to see you intentionally evading the quote feature for notifications.

[tsherkin]

So Eaton might not work. But he might. We don't actually know. I think our confidence meter in these exercises is always way too high and I was just trying to show an example of why we can't make declarative statements on these time machine threads.

There is a limit to how much one can equivocate in discussion, though. It becomes too ponderous. There is some implication that we all realize that what we're saying cannot be definitively proven, no?

EDIT (too many tabs!):

so Boban was starting and playing 30 mpg in close out games in the playoffs just a couple seasons ago. Now Boban obviously offers something on the offensive end, but there is zero chance peak Eaton is more of a defensive liability than Boban.

Boban played 10+ mpg once in his career, in a 58-game season. He did it in the playoffs twice for Dallas, sure. 13.7 and 20.8 mpg. Dallas got obliterated on offense in both of those matchups, though obviously looking at team performance doesn't specifically discuss Boban. The first of those two seasons, he never played more than 17:19 in the playoffs. The second year, he played 4 of 7 games. Dallas was 2-1 without him and then 1-4 with him. He played one game of more than 20:04 (the last one), so I don't know how much you want to sell that off of two series where the Clips averaged 126 ppg against them.

Speaking of the definitive statements, I think we should pay attention to the notion that you're really talking about two games while Dallas was getting spanked in the back half of the series while Boban actually played. I wonder if that's the best example set to defend his inclusion. Didn't watch the series, though, so admittedly I'm looking at it basically from box scores. Maybe you saw something at the time I do not.

[Texas Chuck]

I wonder if that's the best example set to defend his inclusion..

Probably not. I certainly hated it in real-time.

But I also know Rick Carlisle knows way more about this than me and with all his options with the series on the line, that's the one he went to so...... It seems foolish now watching Brunson cook to think Boban was playing instead of him. Or even KP being relegated to standing in the corner and then having to play out of position on defense.

Just was trying to point out, he did play a major role in some key games. But maybe the point I should have focused on is that in his limited minutes, he has been very effective his entire career. Again albeit with the caveats of garbage time, and having to find the right matchups. He's rarely secured just a regular backup center role because of his inability to move and thus defend.

But Eaton wasn't Boban which was the other part. He moved a lot better than Boban. The question is would he move well enough and I can't say for sure.

[tsherkin]

Just was trying to point out, he did play a major role in some key games. But maybe the point I should have focused on is that in his limited minutes, he has been very effective his entire career. Again albeit with the caveats of garbage time, and having to find the right matchups. He's rarely secured just a regular backup center role because of his inability to move and thus defend.

But Eaton wasn't Boban which was the other part. He moved a lot better than Boban. The question is would he move well enough and I can't say for sure.

I watched a decent amount of Eaton when he was playing, since the Jazz were often playing teams I enjoyed (or at least teams with a player I enjoyed... looking at you, San Antonio, and your crappy support rosters...). We obviously have different faith in Eaton's ability to play meaningful minutes, but that's cool. Like I said in another post, it's possible there are matchups which would make some sense, but he clearly wouldn't have been as good as he was in his own time, so it makes you wonder if it's worth it to try trotting out the gimmick who can't do much on offense and whose defense is limited to certain spots on the court.

There are teams that do that with more mobile guys, and there are rumblings that even that is a problem already. Might he be very effective inside 8 feet? Absolutely. Is that worth it when he can't really guard past the elbow and gives almost nothing on the other end? Mmmmmmmmm. That becomes a question, right alongside "how much of his efficacy might he retain in this environment?"

Like, how might his foul rate change now that if he has a foot on the line in the RZ, he gets the blocking foul instead of the charge? How much does the removal of illegal defense change things when guys can roam off of him and generally have the mobility to rotate back? The game doesn't work the same way for centers who played his style of defense. You still get guys who can block a lot of shots, of course. We saw Whiteside pop like a BLK% of 8 or so a few years back, it's doable still. Eaton's no pogo stick but with arms that long, it matters only so much.

Makes me wonder. He was a guy who took comparatively limited minutes to begin with. He certainly had 1 or 2 seasons of MMPG in the mid-30s in his day, and a decade of shocking durability for a guy his size. I dunno, maybe they Brook Lopez him into hitting 3s in transition as the trailer and that gives him enough punch on O to make it worthwhile.