1. We have a pool of Nominees you are to choose from for your Induction (main) vote to decide who next gets on the List. Choose your top vote, and if you'd like to, a second vote which will be used for runoff purposes if needed.
2. Nomination vote now works the same way.
3. You must include reasoning for each of your votes, though you may re-use your old words in a new post.
4. Post as much as they want, but when you do your official Vote make it really clear to me at the top of that post that that post is your Vote. And if you decide to change your vote before the votes are tallied, please edit that same Vote post.
5. Anyone may post thoughts, but please only make a Vote post if you're on the Voter list. If you'd like to be added to the project, please ask in the General Thread for the project. Note that you will not be added immediately to the project now. If you express an interest during the #2 thread, for example, the earliest you'll be added to the Voter list is for the #3.
5. I'll tally the votes when I wake up the morning after the Deadline (I don't care if you change things after the official Deadline, but once I tally, it's over). For this specific Vote, if people ask before the Deadline, I'll extend it.
Here's the list of the Voter Pool as it stands right now (and if I forgot anyone I approved, do let me know):
Spoiler:
AEnigma Ambrose ceilng raiser ceoofkobefans Clyde Frazier Colbinii cupcakesnake Doctor MJ Dooley DQuinn1575 Dr Positivity DraymondGold Dutchball97 eminence f4p falcolombardi Fundamentals21 Gibson22 HeartBreakKid homecourtloss iggymcfrack LA Bird JimmyFromNz Joao Saraiva lessthanjake ljspeelman Lou Fan Moonbeam Narigo OhayoKD OldSchoolNoBull One_and_Done penbeast0 rk2023 Samurai ShaqAttac Taj FTW Tim Lehrbach trelos6 trex_8063 ty 4191 ZeppelinPage
Alright, the Nominees for you to choose among for the next slot on the list (in alphabetical order):
Vote for #26 - Charles Barkley Alternate - Dwyane Wade Nomination - Reggie Miller Alternate Nomination - Scottie Pippen
rk2023 wrote:With Barkley, I'm not as impressed as others may be with his peak / best season(s). With that said, he has the most career value out of the candidates in the nominee pool by a considerable margin. I'd say all of 1985-99 are all-star+ seasons, with a pretty solid stockpile of All-NBA level ones and a fringe-MVP level apex. Tremendous rebounder (put-back machine), paint and 2p scorer, finisher, and transition player - per Dipper's data I posted and what's discernible on film. With that said, I don't think his playmaking is doing too much ITO improving team offense. OSNB posted TO:AST data showing Barkley to be >= Malone and a clear step above Kemp, where I think Box Creation *may* be underselling him because of the sheer pressure he puts on defenses at his position however - FWIW. Barkley certainly taketh's some while he gives it, being a poor effort defender and undersized for his position. I think his scoring package / blistering ability to get downhill catalyzed an attack that makes him the second best all-time on offense for his position behind Dirk (I'm not cheating and considering LBJ/Bird here), but the other lesser-strengths (framing it more positively) set his ceiling back. I'd reckon this could be a thing in the AuPM/Raw PM/WOWY stuff we have for him - though far from the end-all, be-all. Nonetheless, how impressive Barkley's longevity looks while he still is a very solid player capable of leading solid PS offenses gives him the nod for me here.
***Worth noting this was copied in from past rounds' voting. Of course, Giannis was enshrined - so now all of this goes for Wade whom I see as not *too* far from him - prime for prime***
Anyhow - want to think this out. Giannis, as it stands, has 10 years of his career - whereas Wade's pre-injury / steep decline span was the same in 10 years of 2004-13. Between the two, I think 2004/08/14-16 are essentially moot. How I'd rank the remaining is as follows:
22 and 21 Giannis > 2009 and 10 Wade > 2006 Wade >= 2019 and 20 Giannis > 2011 Wade > 2023 and 18 Giannis >= 2005/12 Wade > 2017 Giannis > 2007/13 Wade
Scoring this ranking from 15-1 (120 total): Giannis: 64 Wade: 56
rk2023 wrote:Since he's garnering discussion in this thread and perhaps would be my next nomination after Wade/Joker, I'll put it out there that I think it's understated in the mainstream how damn good Reggie Miller was! He probably never reached an MVP-level of play, but 13 years of Miller being an offensive force (and one that ramped up insurmountably in the playoffs) is very impressive.
Here's some good for thought how good Reggie was, even at older ages:
Spoiler:
LukaTheGOAT wrote: Reggie Miller in the Playoffs from 1990-99: • 27.0 Points/75 on +11.3 rTS%
Kevin Durant in the playoffs from 2012-19: • 29.0 Points/75 on +6.2 rTS%
Steph Curry in the playoffs from 2014-19: • 28.0 Points/75 on +9.0 rTS%
James Harden in the playoffs from 2015-21: • 28.1 Points/75 on +5.5 rTS%
The Pacers offenses were also typically spectacular with Miller, as he is one of 3 people ever in history to play on two separate teams with five-year stretches of +5 playoff offenses (Magic and Kobe are the other 2).
Heck, in 1999 the Pacers were the best offense in the NBA (+6.5 rORTG) as well as the best in 2000 (+4.4 rORTG) This is at 33 and 34 years old and Reggie was the best offensive player on those teams.
Reggie Miller in the 2000s Finals against an all-nba talent in Kobe (whose ankle injury might have him perform worse than his averages):
• 24.2 PPG • 4.5 REB • 3.7 AST • 0.8 STL • 58.8 TS% • 37% From 3 • 98% From the Line (45-46)
And those numbers only cover the 90's decade. He was the best offensive player and player on a team that made to the Finals in 2000, despite not being close to his peak years.
In the Finals game 1:
Reggie Miller in G1 vs the Lakers of the 2000 finals: 7pts 1/16 FG (6.3%)
After the worse playoff game of his life he rebounded really well:
Reggie Miller in G2-G6: 27.8ppg on 47.7/40.5/97.6 shooting.
In the end:
Reggie Miller in the 2000s Finals against an all-nba talent in Kobe (whose ankle injury might have him perform worse than his averages):
• 24.2 PPG • 4.5 REB • 3.7 AST • 0.8 STL • 58.8 TS% • 37% From 3 • 98% From the Line (45-46)
Kobe in the Finals in 2000 (Once again his ankle injury maybe made things significantly worse)
15.6 PPG 4.6 RPG 4.2 AST 1 Steal 41.1 TS%
Chasing Reggie around, probably was incredibly taxing for Kobe...
That's insanely impressive for a 34-year-old man. Reggie is the definition of consistency year after year. The consistency for so long is just too much to pass over here.
I think his lesser volume playmaking and shot-creation holds him back from top-20 or so offensive players in NBA History for example (I think on-off reflects that - from what I've seen).. but the scoring potency Miller displayed from 1990-2002 (with a significant ramp up in PS goodness, as Colbinii pointed out earlier) made him a very good centerpiece to build around in that era. The Pacers became a solid offense upon Miller's breakout and didn't tail-off too much as they got defensive pieces and became a more serious playoff threat. Here's some more data significantly in Miller's favor once the calendar flips to April: https://imgur.com/a/J4EMJ9h
Even as we got a more stable, more holistic sample - Reggie's scoring production and impact didn't show any significant dip with excellent team offensive data (not even a case of gimmicky rORTGs) to show for it. It's worth keeping in mind that we are analyzing within an era where outlier shot-making can hold more value ITO offensive separation because the league average efficiency marks would be lower than that of the modern-day. I still might not be as confident with Miller as the best player on a championship team, but he would be an absolute dynamite offensive co-pilot alongside a two-way force (eg. Hakeem, Duncan, KG) or a secondary offensive option - because of how well his scoring approach scales down.
Mogspan wrote:I think they see the super rare combo of high IQ with freakish athleticism and overrate the former a bit, kind of like a hot girl who is rather articulate being thought of as “super smart.” I don’t know kind of a weird analogy, but you catch my drift.
I'll be brief on Barkley, as I suspect he's going to roll through in a landslide. Barkley was a dominant and unique offensive force. We say that about about alot of players, but it's rarely true. There are basically a handful of guys in NBA history who are unique archetypes (Kareem, Magic, etc). Barkley is one of them. He doesn't get any bonus points for that fact, it's just important to note when considering his impact. One of the reasons he was so unstoppable on O was because of this unique player type. Too quick for bigs, too strong for smalls. I think we'd remember him alot differently if the Sixers hadn't messed up his career in 1 day with the ill fated trades of the #1 pick and Moses for basically nothing. Possibly the worst 24 hours of trades for a franchise ever.
Barkley's numbers are awesome, we all know it so I won't bother citing them here. Obviously he's held back a little by his D and his inability to power a team offense in the same way a Steve Nash or James Harden does. I think Barkley's dominance is a different type of dominance to them, and depending on what your team needs you might prefer Nash or Harden. On the whole though, I'd take Barkley. His game is more resilient in the playoffs than Harden, and Nash blossomed late in his career; you only get rated for what you actually did. I can see the argument for those 2 over him, Nash is in already obviously, but otherwise his weaknesses don't bother me. It's #26. All the guys left have some warts, or they'd have gone much higher. I don't care about his attitude at all, except to the degree he didn't keep in shape. Other than that it didn't seem to impact winning; he was much loved by his team mates for the most part. An annoyingly charismatic guy, even today. He's the guy you want to hate, but just can't.
Ranking the 5 options I'd go:
Barkley Harden Wade
Ewing
[Another 100 NBA power forwards]
[Top 100 Euroleague players of all time]
[Best 10 G-Leaguers of all-time]
Pettit
Pettit has no place on this list to me. He played in a weak 8 team era of barely professional basketball. The top Euroleague teams today would sweep the league Pettit won a title in. Pettit's skills don't translate to today, he's not enough of an outlier, and he is overrated even in his bygone era. The Hawks averaged 44 wins a year through his career, had a bunch of sub-500 seasons, missed the playoffs in his prime, and only won a title when Russell was injured. Terrible efficiency obviously.
The nominations probably deserve more discussion than the inductees. There's about 10 guys I want to nominate, and I'm having a tough time sifting between them other than Kawhi. Anthony Davis is better than any of the other names I've seen proffered. He was an actual MVP talent, who showed he could be the best player on a title team, and has sufficient longevity. Others include Gilmore, Pippen, Butler, Lillard, Clyde, Kidd, Embiid, Dwight, the Gasol brothers, maybe Paul George. There are alot of names to consider, some of whom I've missed no doubt. I'd take guys like Ray Allen or Paul Pierce over Stockton. They were closer to being the main guy, and MVP type talents, than Stockton ever was.
Overall though Kawhi is my first nomination. He's got far and away the best peak left, and I'd say on the whole he has 'sufficient' longevity to get up here. Especially given we have already nominated Giannis and Jokic. There's only really 3 healthy seasons where he was peak Kawhi (17, 19 and 20), but he was basically healthy for 8 of his first 9 seasons. His first few are elite role player seasons only, but I'd say his 2014 season was an unsung all-star quality year, and 2015 he was an all-nba type talent. 2016 he actually finished 2nd in the MVP vote. 2017 and 2019 I have him as clearly the best player in the league.
His insane stats blow anyone left out of the water: 2017-2023 RS p100: 37.4/9.7/6, 121 Ortg/106 Drtg, 608 TS%
His peak season is also insane. In 2017 he put up 39/9/5, 121/102 and 610 TS% in the RS, and a ridiculous 40/11/7, 136/110 and 672 TS% in the playoffs. I'm actually starting to believe he could have carried the Spurs to the title if not for Zaza injuring him. I don't hold that against him though, because he played enough playoff games. If I did, it would be rewarding guys who got eliminated in the 1st round and never had a chance to get injured as a result of a cheap play. If he had been injured due to recurring issues I'd get it, but a random injury like "this guy punched me and broke my jaw" doesn't count IMO. People are discussing Pippen, but Kawhi is better on O and D than Pippen and it's not terribly close. He's the best defensive wing ever, able to guard perimeter players, then turn around and shut down Giannis to some degree. He would make Paul George and Butler look helpless against him, and those are alpha males of the league, physical and veteran savvy. Kawhi would just punk them and take t heir lunch money. Lebron hated Kawhi guarding him too. Sure, he can't be stopped because he's still Lebron, but Kawhi would drive him crazy. I remember Reddick on a podcast talking eloquently about his D, and being baffled how he could be so good. He described him as one of the only perimeter players he'd ever seen who genuinely made a difference turning the game on D.
I've talked about Gilmore, who I'm considering, and his case is below:
Spoiler:
I think it’s almost time to vote for Gilmore.
Unlike fellow MVP and 11 time-star Pettit, Gilmore led his team to a title in a much tougher league. The ABA in 1975 was probably stronger than the NBA. Gilmore has a skill set that would absolutely translate today. When I look at Gilmore, I see a guy who physically resembles a stronger, slightly shorter version of Kareem. His huge arms and relative fluidity would make him an excellent rim-roller, who in a pinch could score in other ways in and around the rim. His short jump shots and hook look surprisingly clean, even if I don’t know how often they went in.
It’s easy to look on youtube and find extensive footage of Artis dunking on Kareem and playing great against the showtime Lakers, on just horrible Chicago teams that clearly didn’t put anything much around him. There’s even a game of the NBA stars against the ABA stars, where Gilmore matches up very well physically with 1972 Wilt. If we were in the top 10 that would mean nothing, but we’re now nominating people who will be 30 or higher all-time.
Statistically, Gilmore compares favourably to say Moses, who is already in.
Moses per 100 from 1979-84: 31.6/18.2/2, 2 blks, 115 Ortg/103 Drtg, 578 TS% Gilmore per 100 from 1975-79: 27.5/17.1/3.4, 3 blks, 113 Ortg/97 Drtg, 601 TS%
Yeh, Moses scores a bit more, because of a play style he wouldn’t be able to replicate today. Otherwise though I’m not seeing much difference between him and Gilmore, except Gilmore’s style would be even more valuable today, and his team mates and situation was in general far worse than Moses. Moses doesn’t even really have Gilmore beat on longevity. Gilmore played 1329 games and was an all-star still at age 36. Moses last all-star season was at age 33, and if we take away his completely irrelevant final 3 seasons he drops from 1455 games down to 1372 games, though I guess Gilmore’s last few seasons weren’t terribly relevant either. Moses has maybe more longevity, depending on how you look at it, because he started earlier. But it’s not enough to matter.
I am more impressed by Gilmore than I am with guys like Ewing or Stockton, the latter wasn’t even a real star. The former seems to be perpetually overrated. Gilmore wishes he had all the help Ewing did.
I've also discussed Stockton at length, and why I feel his nomination is completely inappropriate. We're in the MVP stage still, and Stockton was nowhere near that sort of player.
Spoiler:
Apparently the Jazz had 2 true MVPs on their team from 88-94, and usually a 3rd all-star too, yet somehow managed to win 51 games on average and lose in the 1st round 3 times. They only got out of the 2nd round twice in that 7 year stretch. Losing to giants like the 43 win 1989 Warriors (who swept them in the 1st round), or the Kevin Johnson led Suns (also in the 1st round), or Drexler's Blazers (a 4-1 curbstomping in the 2nd round), or Gary Payton & Kemps Sonics in the 1st round in 1993 (GP & Kemp were in their 2nd and 3rd yrs in the league!), is a record that's basically imposible to reconcile with this claim. It would basically be unprecedented for such circumstances to align.
A simpler explanation is that Stockton wasn't MVP calibre, which aligns with pretty much all the other evidence except some advanced stats from the tail end of Stockton's career which people shouldn't overemphasise. Advanced stats can be wrong, and often are, for a whole host of reasons
On Reggie and Stockton more generally:
Spoiler:
Reggie and Stockon are a perfect example of how guys with advanced stats, who were not rated super highly in their day, get overrated today.
Just granting that their advanced stats were taken at face value; you then need to join the dots and ask why their impact might (and I say only might) have been bigger than it seemed back then. The answer for both is largely due to the fact that they were good 3pt shooters in a league that didn't care too much about stopping 3pt shots. In today's league defence is geared around stopping easy 3s, so they'd be far less impactful because unlike Harden or even Nash to a lesser extent they can't blow by you in iso to punish overguarding the 3. They'd be nice all-star level players today, but if anything their impact would be lower because the league has wised up.
Now Manu on the other hand would certainly translate, though I won't be rating him nearly as high as Doc MJ and his extremist comments. Yes, rating him over Duncan in some prime years qualifies as an extreme take.
On Harden vs Wade.
Spoiler:
Here are Harden’s top 5 MVP finishes: 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd
Here is Wade’s top 5 MVP finishes: 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th
Here’s Harden’s best RS per 100 (2019): 48.2/8.9/10, 118 Ortg/108 Drtg, 616 TS%
Here’s Wade’s best RS per 100 (2009): 41.8/7/10.3, 115 Ortg/105 Drtg, 574 TS%
Bigger samples of RS stats don’t help Wade at all. But maybe you really care about playoffs.
Here’s Wade’s PS from 05-12 per 100: 35.2/7.8/7.1, 110 Ortg/102 Drtg, 565 TS%
Here’s Harden PS from 15-20 per 100: 37.6/7.4/9.7, 113 Ortg/107 Drtg, 586 TS%
So Harden is basically killing him. Yeh, Wade is better on D, but other than that is it just the title? Because I’ve got to tell you, some of Harden’s teams (which were less talented support wise than the 06 Heat) could have won that 2006 title too. That 2006 Heat team was the worst title team in the last 25 years probably, nothing about that was replicable. It felt very flukey as soon as it happened. Other than that, Wade has been a sidekick. I rate Wade around here anyhow, but I feel like the argument for him over Harden is tough. Harden has the longevity, the better floor raising, the more reliable health, and even his limited playoff resilience isn't as bad as it seems. He dips below his own high standard, but that dip is still a more valuable player than Wade. Wade’s weak 3pt shooting is a big minus too.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
As an undersized PF, Barkley was still one of the most efficient and dynamic volume scorers the game has ever seen. He used an uncanny combination of bulk and speed to beat larger defenders off the dribble, and finish above the rim. From '86-'92, he put up 24.7 PPG on a hyper efficient 64.4% TS (+10.7 rTS!) He scored on over 60% TS in each of those 7 seasons, leading the league in TS% for 4 years straight during that span. He has an absurd career TS Add of 2,972.8 and was never a negative in his 16 seasons.
Barkley's physicality early in his career was exemplary. He used sheer force to take over games, and it carried over into other areas in addition to scoring. He ranked 7th in the league in steals at 2.2 per game in only his 2nd year, extremely impressive for a 250+ pound player. A year later, Barkley led the league in boards at 14.6 per game. As a footnote to his career, he finished 2nd in RPG and TRB% at 35 years old.
It's important to note that every team Barkley was on immediately improved when he got there:
Phoenix - '92: 53-29, 5.69 SRS - '93: 62-20, 6.27 SRS (first year with the suns, taking them to the finals)
Houston - '96: 48-34, 1.63 SRS - '97: 57-25, 3.85 SRS (first year with the rockets)
While the suns finals appearance in '93 would be their best finish after acquiring Barkley, they had 3 straight seasons of 56+ wins in his 4 years there. One of the main culprits here was injuries to his best teammates. In Barkley's 4 years in PHX, Kevin Johnson only played in 49, 67, 47, and 56 games respectively. In 95-96, Barkley's last season in PHX, Danny Manning only played 33 games, and their 3rd leading scorer was a rookie Michael Finley.
I don't pay super close attention to career totals when it comes to the NBA, but this is impressive nonetheless: Barkley is 1 of 7 players in NBA history to post career totals of 20,000+ points, 10,000+ boards, and 4,000+ assists (Kareem, LeBron, Wilt, Karl Malone, Duncan, Garnett).
VOTE: Dwyane Wade Alternate: Patrick Ewing NOMINATE: Scottie Pippen AltNom: Reggie Miller
Odd spot here because I have largely been chasing consensus, but I really have no stakes in Barkley versus Pettit. I think Barkley was a better and more valuable player, but Pettit was more accomplished in his time, so between those two I am willing to sit out. And I also expect Barkley will ultimately win this vote regardless.
That gives me a much freer ballot and makes me give more direct attention to ordering Wade and Ewing. I backed Wade well before Ewing, but again, more a product of chasing consensus than of seeing a significant career value gap. Wade has three seasons better than any from Ewing, and 1990 is the only year I have Ewing being particularly close. However, I also think Ewing was a pretty consistent top ten player for a decade, and Wade famously was not. Ewing lost to the eventual champions six times in seven years — two with a serious shot to win the title himself — and I think but for those suspensions would have added a seventh in 1997. Wade only did twice, but his opportunity to do so was a smaller by virtue of winning three titles. Wade won one title as his team’s best player; Ewing was a shot away from doing so, with the acknowledgment that Wade’s performance through four rounds was also much more impressive outside of team results.
Ewing, Harden, and Barkley are all tiered together for similar reasons, with Wade as more of an outlier because of his higher peak, superior success, and shortened prime. I suppose falling back on the old rule, while I can entertain an argument for Harden over Ewing, I really cannot move past wanting to keep Wade above Harden for at least one more project.
AEnigma wrote:VOTE: Dwyane Wade Alternate: Patrick Ewing NOMINATE: Scottie Pippen AltNom: Reggie Miller
Odd spot here because I have largely been chasing consensus, but I really have no stakes in Barkley versus Pettit. I think Barkley was a better and more valuable player, but Pettit was more accomplished in his time, so between those two I am willing to sit out. And I also expect Barkley will ultimately win this vote regardless.
That gives me a much freer ballot and makes me give more direct attention to ordering Wade and Ewing. I backed Wade well before Ewing, but again, more a product of chasing consensus than of seeing a significant career value gap. Wade has three seasons better than any from Ewing, and 1990 is the only year I have Ewing being particularly close. However, I also think Ewing was a pretty consistent top ten player for a decade, and Wade famously was not. Ewing lost to the eventual champions six times in seven years — two with a serious shot to win the title himself — and I think but for those suspensions would have added a seventh in 1997. Wade only did twice, but his opportunity to do so was a smaller by virtue of winning three titles. Wade won one title as his team’s best player; Ewing was a shot away from doing so, with the acknowledgment that Wade’s performance through four rounds was also much more impressive outside of team results.
Ewing, Harden, and Barkley are all tiered together for similar reasons, with Wade as more of an outlier because of his higher peak, superior success, and shortened prime. I suppose falling back on the old rule, while I can entertain an argument for Harden over Ewing, I really cannot move past wanting to keep Wade above Harden for at least one more project.
Was Ewing really a top 10 player for a decade? The only years he ranked top 10 in BPM were 1990 and 1994 (10th both years). He ranked in the top 20 for 7 years from ‘88-‘94. Wade actually has 8 seasons ranking in the top 20 by BPM and 7 in the top 10. Granted one of those is the ‘07 season where he got hurt and then didn’t have it in the playoffs, but I think the meaningful longevity gap might be a little overblown, especially compared to the massive gap in 5 year peak between the two.
I mean, ultimately you voted Wade anyway so it’s not like there’s something to really change your mind about, but you said you were interested in your own personal ordering between the two so I think it’s still worth looking at. Personally, I’ll be voting for Wade until either he goes in or Stockton gets nominated.
My orderings, like most people’s, tend not to be a rote replication of BPM. Especially when it comes to bigs / players with significant value beyond the box score. BPM gives Stockton ten top 10 BPM postseasons; I give him maybe two, with one being a three-game sample.
If I were more critical of Ewing, maybe I could cut down on a few of the border years, but overall I tend not to assess major year-to-year variations among players. All the same, you should recognise the disconnect when I clearly prefer to build a team around Ewing as my best (/ maximum salary) player regardless of “BPM”.
Gibson22 wrote:Nah jokic 4 positions below kd after 5 seasons of real basketball (didn't make the playoffs before that) is wild
Did Oscar only have 5 seasons of “real basketball” as a #1 before joining Kareem? Jokic was already putting up better box and impact numbers than KD’s career averages in 2017 and 2018. His team had a NetRtg over 5 with him on the floor both years so it’s not his fault they didn’t make the playoffs either.
Vote Ewing: Strong defender, team leader, scorer, good durability, some playoff failures. Much as I root against the Knicks (and all NY teams), his excellent defense gives him extra value over the better offensive players like Barkley, Harden, and even Pettit. And, he could be a valuable 2nd or 3rd option where the great scorers frequently lose a lot of their value if asked to dial back their scoring to help the team.
Alternate Pettit: Far from convinced that Pettit is the best here but I have a hard time voting for Barkley or Harden this high with all the baggage they bring. So, it comes down to Wade v. Pettit and Pettit was much more consistently outstanding though Wade probably peaked higher.
Nomination: Stockton: Similar to Steve Nash, better in set plays, less outstanding when required to improvise, equivalent shooter on near equivalent volume, far superior defender, strong durability edge. Issues with playoff performances are his biggest weakness as I don't think a player is automatically just a role player if he doesn't score 20 ppg.
Frazier: Efficient scorer, arguably GOAT guard defender, team leader, ran a widely admired (though not super efficient) offense, good playoffs, great finals. The two strikes against him are a relatively short prime/career, and being from the weaker 1970s era.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0 wrote:Vote Ewing: Strong defender, team leader, scorer, good durability, some playoff failures. Much as I root against the Knicks (and all NY teams), his excellent defense gives him extra value over the better offensive players like Barkley, Harden, and even Pettit. And, he could be a valuable 2nd or 3rd option where the great scorers frequently lose a lot of their value if asked to dial back their scoring to help the team.
Alternate Pettit: Far from convinced that Pettit is the best here but I have a hard time voting for Barkley or Harden this high with all the baggage they bring. So, it comes down to Wade v. Pettit and Pettit was much more consistently outstanding though Wade probably peaked higher.
Nomination: Stockton: Similar to Steve Nash, better in set plays, less outstanding when required to improvise, equivalent shooter on near equivalent volume, far superior defender, strong durability edge. Issues with playoff performances are his biggest weakness as I don't think a player is automatically just a role player if he doesn't score 20 ppg.
Frazier: Efficient scorer, arguably GOAT guard defender, team leader, ran a widely admired (though not super efficient) offense, good playoffs, great finals. The two strikes against him are a relatively short prime/career, and being from the weaker 1970s era.
It kinda feels like once you agree that Wade peaked higher, it's kinda hard to put Pettit ahead based on meaningful longevity when his actual longevity was so low. Here are their postseason runs by PER for instance:
There's no real inflection point where Pettit takes over and eventually you get back to the point where Wade is contributing and Pettit isn't. Now granted, this does miss 2 prime seasons for Pettit, 1955 where he went 26-46 and 1962 where he went 29-51, but are those really banner campaigns? Wade misses the 2008 and 2015 seasons himself.
Say what you will about choking in playoffs, Harden’s stats show he was as valuable as Kobe in his prime. I hate how Harden plays the game, but I’m putting that aside.
His 5 year 15-19 RS run: 30.5 pp75, +6.2 rTS%, 14 FTA/100, team rOrtg from 5-6 in the last 3 years of that range.
Alternate: Wade
Short peak, but 3 legit MVP level seasons. Pretty good guard defender also.
nominations, Scottie Pippen . Solid 6 years as a weak MVP. Also probably the best perimeter defender of all time.
Alternate nomination. Frazier. Outlined Frazier v Stockton in the last thread. It’s close.
Spoiler:
Walt vs Stockton
Walt Frazier Weak MVP Seasons (4): 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973 All NBA Seasons (3): 1969, 1974, 1975 All Star Seasons (1): 1976 All D level: 7 seasons
John Stockton All NBA Seasons (9): 1988-1996 All Star Seasons (5): 1997-2001 All D level: 10 seasons
So what we have here are 2 very good defensive guards, with Frazier having the edge in peak, and Stockton the edge in longevity.
Frazier's peak was 18.8 pp75 +7.2 rTS%, although his 6 year stretch is 17.4 pp75 on +3.9 rTS%. He played well in the playoffs, with a 3 year peak of 20.4 pp75 on +8.4 rTS%. Stockton's 6 year stretch is 16.6 pp75 on +7.3 rTS%. With his best 3 year stretch producing 17.9 pp75 on +6.1 rTS%.
Stockton also has the clear edge in creation metrics, posting superior creation and passer rating numbers.
It's really a toss up, with my slight edge to Frazier as I think he achieved a higher peak, but I can probably be persuaded either way.
Again and again and again for all the reasons I've posted many times. Historic efficiency and rebounding. Not much of a dropoff to the playoffs. Career hampered by having most of his prime years on a crappy team.
Secondary Vote: Bob Pettit
Best era-relative case of current nominees.
Nomination: John Stockton
Best combination of longevity and two-way impact left.
Secondary Nomination: Kawhi Leonard
Perhaps the highest peak of potential nominees being discussed.
If you knew you could keep the player for his whole career, no GM would opt to build around Stockton over say Harden or Kawhi or AD. And that's what we're judging here, their whole careers. Harden is an MVP type player, so were those other guys. Stockton isn't. He shouldn't be close to nomination yet.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Gibson22 wrote:Nah jokic 4 positions below kd after 5 seasons of real basketball (didn't make the playoffs before that) is wild
Did Oscar only have 5 seasons of “real basketball” as a #1 before joining Kareem? Jokic was already putting up better box and impact numbers than KD’s career averages in 2017 and 2018. His team had a NetRtg over 5 with him on the floor both years so it’s not his fault they didn’t make the playoffs either.
Cmon bro it's not just about the playoffs, he had other 3 seasons and in the first 2 he had 21 and 28 mpg. i know he was impactful but damn he wasn't even named an all star and he doesnt appear in our player of the year project in those 3 years. he wasn't a relevant player in the league. i absolutely consider him an A tier offensive player and his peak stacks up with almost everybody in history but come on. stockton nash pettit barkley wade ewing frazier barry should definitely be ahead of him
One_and_Done wrote:If you knew you could keep the player for his whole career, no GM would opt to build around Stockton over say Harden or Kawhi or AD. And that's what we're judging here, their whole careers. Harden is an MVP type player, so were those other guys. Stockton isn't. He shouldn't be close to nomination yet.
Any GM who would take Kawhi over Stockton for building his team around would be insane to do so. 4 "healthy" Kawhi seasons are not as valuable as Stockton's whole career.
Kawhi was basically healthy for 8 of his first 9 seasons. It's not like he didn't add value outside those seasons either. But look forward to your strong anti-Walton arguments.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
One_and_Done wrote:Kawhi was basically healthy for 8 of his first 9 seasons. It's not like he didn't add value outside those seasons either. But look forward to your strong anti-Walton arguments.
Since when playing 58 games in RS with restricted minutes is a "healthy" season?
Kawhi wasn't on prime Stockton level until 2014, so we can be generous and give him 6 prime seasons (2014-20 without 2018). After that, his contract is negative from GM perspective, because he can't be healthy in full postseason run anymore. It's better to play than to get paid for staying on the bench, you know?
I don't have Walton inside my top 100, so don't worry about my consistency.
AGAIN!......Barkley, I am supporting for similar reasons to why I voted for Durant previously: I've the most confidence in his combined box-production/efficiency profile, impact profile, longevity, and career accomplishment (in a tough era) of those players listed (made a little easier now that Moses is off the table [and Stockton is not yet on the table]). Giannis and Jokic simply lack the full career value for me yet (though super-close: I would say ONE prime season away for both). Wade is a somewhat intriguing option for alternate, but he suffers a pinch from similar concerns.
However Harden, at this point, is also intriguing for me. Honestly, I think his player type [vaguely: offensive power-house, weak defensively], effective longevity, career accomplishment and accolades all closely parallel that of Charles Barkley. I consequently feel that wherever you have Barkley on your list, Harden should not be far away. Their respective careers just have too much in common, imo.
Though Ewing is an intriguing option now. The trio of Barkley/Harden/Ewing sit #(23?)/24-26 on my own ATL (Barkley occasionally bumping up to #23 [Stockton]; all very close, and it feels like a semi-fluid range, though I generally lean toward Stockton and Barkley at the front. And fwiw, Wade sits #27; so it's all a close race for me here. Even Pettit doesn't languish, sitting either 30 or 31 on my ATL.
Pettit suffers for lack of meaningful longevity compared to Barkley, Harden, and Ewing, and in concerns/reservations regarding era vs all of them. He doesn't reside far behind any of them on my ATL, however (I presently have him #30 or 31). I could see going higher with him if we had some more tangible suggestions of large(ish) defensive impact.
Nomination: John Stockton Alt Nom: Scottie Pippen
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Gibson22 wrote:Nah jokic 4 positions below kd after 5 seasons of real basketball (didn't make the playoffs before that) is wild
Did Oscar only have 5 seasons of “real basketball” as a #1 before joining Kareem? Jokic was already putting up better box and impact numbers than KD’s career averages in 2017 and 2018. His team had a NetRtg over 5 with him on the floor both years so it’s not his fault they didn’t make the playoffs either.
Cmon bro it's not just about the playoffs, he had other 3 seasons and in the first 2 he had 21 and 28 mpg. i know he was impactful but damn he wasn't even named an all star and he doesnt appear in our player of the year project in those 3 years. he wasn't a relevant player in the league. i absolutely consider him an A tier offensive player and his peak stacks up with almost everybody in history but come on. stockton nash pettit barkley wade ewing frazier barry should definitely be ahead of him
If you want to bring up the POY project, Jokic is currently 20th all-time in POY shares, one spot ahead of Durant, and well ahead of everyone you mention. He has the same number of years receiving votes as Stockton and Nash. Wade and Frazier have one more year receiving votes each. Personally, I think Jokic should have gone much higher in the project. I was surprised he wasn't in the top 20.
