RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #34 (Kawhi Leonard)

Post #1 » by **Doctor MJ** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 2:23 pm

Our system is now as follows:

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:

Alright, the Nominees for you to choose among for the next slot on the list (in alphabetical order):

Walt Frazier

John Havlicek

Jason Kidd

Kawhi Leonard

Reggie Miller

70sFan · Post #2 » by **70sFan** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 3:33 pm

I'm glad that Stockton got in, now it's the battle between longevity monsters vs higher peak guys with health issues.

I think I need to do more work with Gilmore advertasing. He should be already available for voting in my opinion.

AEnigma · Post #3 » by **AEnigma** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 3:48 pm

VOTE: Reggie Miller
Alternate: Walt Frazier
NOMINATE: Rick Barry
AltNom: Artis Gilmore

Grade most the candidates as well as a few potential nominees on similar levels. At this point, I side with overwhelming longevity disparity among the franchise centrepieces available, and of that group, I am most confident in Miller or Havlicek to lead my team to consistent playoff success over time. I vacillate between the two: Miller is more specialised and “modern”, but Havlicek is more accomplished and fulfilled a role in his team’s pecking orders which would have been similar for Reggie in his place (Russell speaks for himself, but I take Cowens’ peak/prime over both Havlicek’s and Reggie’s as well). However, the candidates with the most support are Reggie, Frazier, and Kawhi, so of those three, my vote will go to Reggie and Frazier.

Barry and Gilmore have more playoff uncertainty, but in that uncertainty it is easy to see them higher than I currently have them. I feel more comfortable in the career value of their respective archetypes than I do some others.

Post #4 » by **trex_8063** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 4:43 pm

I'm going to be away for awhile, so I need to get my votes in right away.

VOTE: Jason Kidd
On our Greatest Defensive Players by Position project some years ago voted Jason Kidd the best defensive PG of all-time.
For defensive peak, I think the argument can at least be made:

He was big for PG (6'4" and 205 lbs, according to bbref, which seems about right to me). He couldn't be bullied in the post by larger PG's or combo guards, and was quick enough to stay in front of most guards, big enough to fight through screens, and it wasn't a mis-match if he got switched on to a SG's or even some SF's. fwiw, His "effective height/length" is bigger than the 6'4" suggests too, because he has kinda wicked long arms (anyone know his wingspan? I'd be shocked if it's not at least 6'7").

And he was great at getting those long arms into the passing lane when defending pnr's (he's stick those poles right into the pocket-pass window). It's no wonder he's got more steals to his credit than anyone except the guy last voted in.
And he's a helluva good rebounding PG (behind perhaps only Westbrook and Magic, perhaps??).

It could be argued that he anchored (or co-anchored, with Jason Collins??) those league-leading or near league-leading NJ defenses of the early-mid 00's. That's in a defense-dominated era, too, fwiw.

Seems he was a pretty good passer, too, especially in transition, falling 2nd again all-time to John Stockton in dimes lent.

His scoring leaves something to be desired, and he's been criticized heavily for it at times. However, his ORAPM was consistently positive (even has a handful of years where it's in the top 15 of the league).

Combine that with his defensive imprint, consistency/durability and longevity (19 years in the league, decent contributor [at a minimum] in ALL of them), and he's my pick among the listed candidates.

Alt. vote: Kawhi Leonard
Sort of the counter-balance on my longevity-leaning criteria: not much longevity to speak of, but his healthy(ish) prime and peri-prime seasons just carry so much value, he's in contention around the mid-30s for me.

Nomination: Elgin Baylor (I doubt I'll be able to get a post in for him, but I do think he should be in the mix by now)
Alt Nom: Artis Gilmore

Dutchball97 · Post #5 » by **Dutchball97** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 5:18 pm

My ballot remains the same as last round:

Vote: Kawhi Leonard - I see Kawhi as having the highest peak here by a solid margin, outside of Frazier I don't think the other nominees come particularly close. Kawhi was in my opinion the best player in the world in 2019 and he has enough seasons of being an elite player in the regular season before taking it up to all-time levels in the play-offs that I am confident we're not looking at a fluke player who had only 1 or 2 high level seasons before fizzling out. While Kawhi might not have the best longevity, he has still played more minutes than Jokic, who is already in. This is especially prominent with Kawhi roughly playing double the minutes and games as Jokic in the post-season. On the stage where it matters most, Kawhi has no longevity issues at all as evidenced by him being 54th in career play-off minutes (ahead of guys like Oscar, Moses, Nash and Barkley) and 17th in career play-off Win Shares. It's also telling that longevity giant, Karl Malone, is 16th on that list with just 0.12 more career play-off WS than Kawhi despite playing 56 more games(193 and 137 respectively).

Alternate Vote: Walt Frazier - Kind of a similar case to Kawhi and with Frazier having over 2 POY shares (including 4 straight top 3 placements from 1970-1973) I don't think there are many doubts to just how good Frazier was in the early 70s. Like Kawhi, he's also a very strong play-off performer. Out of the 8 post-seasons (1968-1975) Frazier played in, he had good to great runs in all but his rookie season.

For runoff purposes I'd rank the rest of the nominees as John Havlicek > Jason Kidd > Reggie Miller.

Nominate: Anthony Davis - Can't say I'm entirely sure about this but despite there being plenty of candidates around, none of them really jump out at me as guys that just have to make the list asap. AD has suffered a lot of injuries but that didn't stop him from racking up quite a career already. I do think him playing only a handful of post-seasons hurts him compared to most of his contemporaries but it's easy to forget just how well Davis has performed every time he did get a chance to show off on the biggest stage.

Post #6 » by **trex_8063** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 5:51 pm

The opening salvo to get Elgin Baylor on the list of eligible candidates (from my archives):

I view him as a very good [not great] scorer in his era.......a modern(ish) comp [as a scorer only] maybe being Carmelo Anthony.

But although he's a touch shorter than Melo, I'm not sure he wouldn't be a slightly better rebounder, even in the modern era. I know the league was marginally shorter and a bit less athletic at that time, but Baylor's pre-injury rebounding numbers are resoundingly impressive. Here are his reb/100 possession estimates by year:
'59: 15.3
'60: 15.85
'61: 17.75
'62: 16.3
‘63: 13.9

For comparison, here are some notable big-time big-men and their reb/100 possession estimates for the same years (and relation to Baylor's avg):
Pettit
'59: 17.1 (+1.8)
'60: 16.9 (+1.05)
'61: 18.9 (+1.15)
'62: 17.1 (+0.8)
‘63: 16.0 (+2.1)

Wilt
'59: na
'60: 20.9 (+5.05)
'61: 20.7 (+2.95)
'62: 19.4 (+3.1)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Russell
'59: 20.2 (+4.9)
'60: 19.9 (+4.05)
'61: 19.3 (+1.55)
'62: 16.3 (+2.8)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Wayne Embry
'59: 15.5 (+0.2)
'60: 17.1 (+1.25)
'61: 15.1 (-2.65)
'62: 14.3 (-2.0)
‘63: 15.0 (+1.1)

Walter Dukes
'59: 16.7 (+1.4)
'60: 16.1 (+0.25)
'61: 19.2 (+1.45)
'62: 16.4 (+0.1)
‘63: 15.7 (+1.8)

Dolph Schayes
'59: 14.4 (-0.9)
'60: 13.2 (-2.65)
'61: 11.9 (-5.85)
'62: 11.05 (-5.25)

Bailey Howell
'59: na
'60: 13.1 (-2.75)
'61: 14.3 (-3.45)
'62: 13.5 (-2.8)
‘63: 12.2 (-1.7)

When viewing that I'd note two things: every single one of those guys is taller than Elgin, and every single one of them was more a low-post player on one or both ends (so presumably would more frequently [than Elgin] be in the position to grab rebounds). And yet he's at least in the neighborhood of all of them except for Wilt and Russell----who are both a) legitimately BIG and b) legitimately freakish athletes, and c) considered on the short-list of greatest rebounders ever (and even Russell isn't far ahead of him in '61, fwiw).
Otherwise Baylor's reasonably close to everyone else, and well ahead of Schayes and Howell (though admittedly Schayes is trickling into his post-prime for most of the years referenced here).

He was a thick strong guy, good at creating space with his lower body, could jump (isn't he labeled the "grandfather of hang-time" or some such?), and seems to have had great anticipation for where the rebound was going (a la Jerry Lucas, Fat Lever, and Jason Kidd). All this has me suspecting that Baylor would be special kind of rebounder for the SF position in any era (maybe likened to Shawn Marion in this regard).

Basic WOWY:
‘59: 33-37 (.471) with, 0-2 without
‘60: 23-47 (.329) with, 2-3 (.400) without
‘61: 34-39 (.466) with, 2-4 (.333) without
‘62: 37-11 (.771) with, 17-15 (.531) without **West missed only 5 games, no one else in the regular rotation missed more than 2 games
‘63: 52-28 (.650) with

The Lakers in ‘58 were 19-53 with an SRS of -5.78. And then they obtained rookie Elgin Baylor.
In ‘59--with Baylor being the only relevant player acquisition--they improved by 14 games to 33-39, SRS of -1.42 (+4.36 improvement); also made it to the finals (defeating the 2.89 SRS defending champion Hawks 4-2 along the way). That strikes me as indication of fairly significant impact.

The big criticism on Baylor has been his offensive efficiency (relative to his astronomical volume), and whether he was really “helping” the offense.

The Laker team offensive rating improved with rookie Baylor by +2.8 (+1.4 in rORTG terms) in ‘59. I won’t claim that Baylor always “helped the offense optimally” to the best of his abilities; but I do think he helped it. Obviously other metrics of offensive production/efficiency suggest Baylor was a “big deal” (more on that below)......but what I’m beginning to wonder about is whether or not Baylor had a defensive impact that hasn’t been properly appreciated.

Maybe his capability as a rebounder eliminated a lot of second-chance points for opponents????

idk, but something I noted is that the Laker team rDRTG improved by -2.8 in ‘59. In ‘58, they were 8th of 8 defensively, DRtg +4.5 over league avg and +2.5 over the next worse team.
In ‘59, improved to +1.7 over league avg (6th of 8).
They would continue to improve defensively over the next couple of seasons with acquisitions of Jerry West and aging Ray Felix. And then interestingly their defense appears to suffer slightly in ‘62 when Baylor misses significant games:
In ‘61, the Laker DRtg is -1.3 to league average (again: minus is good), 4th of 8.
In ‘62 Baylor misses 32 games and the Laker DRtg falls a little: just -0.3 vs league average (though still 4th of 9).
In ‘63: no more big Ray Felix in playing significant minutes in the middle and Jerry West misses 25 games (things you’d expect to hurt the team defense); they otherwise obtain guard Dick Barnett, and the only other change from the previous year is that Baylor is healthy (doesn’t miss a game)…….and the team DRtg improves to -1.2 vs league average (3rd of 9).
And then beginning in ‘64 (perhaps non-coincidentally just as Baylor begins to be significantly hampered by knee injuries, which causes his overall effectiveness to suffer, as seen by sudden drop in PER, etc), the Laker team DRtg takes a sudden dip……...And it would never recovery to a better than average team defense (even with big bodies like Darrall Imhoff and Mel Counts) until ‘69 when they obtained Wilt Chamberlain.

So I’m starting to wonder if Baylor had a bigger impact defensively than he’s typically given credit for.
And I sort of wonder if he isn't like Carmelo Anthony scoring, Shawn Marion on the glass, with defense somewhere in between (and a little better passer than either). That's an awfully good player.

Anyway…..
Otherwise, I promised some tidbits regarding his overall production and efficiency during his prime years:

In ‘59 and rookie Elgin Baylor had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only a peak Bob Pettit.
In ‘60 he had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only Wilt Chamberlain.
In ‘61: he had the highest PER (even ahead of Wilt, not to mention Pettit and rookie Oscar Robertson).
‘62 and ‘63: 2nd-best PER in the league both years, behind only Wilt Chamberlain (even ahead of triple-double season Robertson, as well as Pettit and Walt Bellamy’s insane rookie season).

That’s a super-impressive 5-year span. Yes, he drops off quite a bit after, but it’s not as though he faded into obscurity or ineffectiveness in subsequent years. He was a relevant player until ‘70. So…..

For another comparison:

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) rs
Per 100 Possessions: 38.7 pts, 10.0 reb, 5.1 ast on 61.7% TS% (+8.0% on league avg)
26.9 PER, .250 WS/48 in 38.8 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) rs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.3 pts, 15.7 reb, 4.2 ast on 49.9 TS% (+2.7%)
26.1 PER, .195 WS/48 in 42.1 mpg

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) playoffs
Per 100 Possessions: 35.8 pts, 10.2 reb, 5.2 ast on .583 TS% (+4.6%)
24.4 PER, .189 WS/48 in 42.3 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) playoffs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.4 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.5 ast on 51.2 TS% (+4.0%)
25.1 PER, .183 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg

Well, there's a start. I'll try to post more in subsequent threads.

Post #7 » by **tsherkin** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 6:09 pm

trex_8063 wrote:The opening salvo to get Elgin Baylor on the list of eligible candidates (from my archives):

Elgin Baylor.

Let's talk about his scoring for a bit.

27.4 ppg on his career. 43.1% FG, 78.0% FT, .366 FTr, which is actually impressive given his shooting volume. 49.4% TS. Only one season of 50%+ TS in the first 9 years of his career... but he was TS+ 100 or better in all but two of those years. He started out actually quite efficient but sort of got left behind as the league improved. He was at 107, 106, 106, 103 and 105 over his first half decade, and four of those seasons were 100+ TSAdd. He moved much closer to (and sometimes beneath) league average thereafter, with the only major exception being a 54-game season in 1970.

Flop over to the playoffs. 27.0 ppg, 43.9% FG. Largely maintaining what he was doing in the RS. Led the playoffs in scoring from 60-63, including consecutive postseasons at 38+ ppg (and one of them at 47.0% FG over a postseason-high 12 games). .348 PS FTr. 49.7% TS (a shade higher than the RS, worthy of note).

In 1962, he was scoring 38+ ppg during Wilt's epic season. He only played 48 games, so we don't hear about it as much. That was the year he was in military service and could only play on weekend passes. The year before, he was the first player to score 70+ points in an NBA game.

Also worthy of note (especially in light of my remarks about him getting left behind), he had some knee problems which led to surgery after the 65 playoffs. Didn't much affect him statistically, but worth noting and certainly he had health issues later in his career.

He is also the dude with some of the worst timing ever. He retired and the first game after started LA's 33-game winning streak, and that was their title season. The Lakers gave him a ring anyway, but yeah, he missed their title run. And he had to compete with Russ and Wilt and Oscar for MVPs and never broke through. But now we're out of that echelon and he's definitely an interesting name to discuss.

Post #8 » by **penbeast0** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 7:36 pm

VOTE Walt Frazier: A valuable offensive player with excellent efficiency and someone that ran an offense that coaches have been using as a model for the last 50 years. Defensively, he was apparently one of the great point of attack stoppers v. other PGs with excellent size and athleticism, and he upped his game in the NBA finals twice to bring NY it's only NBA championships. On the downside he was not a heliocentric offensive PG who had the ball in his hands all the time and his offenses were not historically that impressive and his career was fairly short.

Alternative: Reggie Miller Miller for his efficiency and playoffs, Havlicek for his motor and defense, Kidd for his defense and guard rebounding . . . . dang, it's arguable. Going with Miller but would be happy to be talked down.

NOMINATE Artis Gilmore: Gilmore was a bit underwhelming in the NBA despite putting up some of the most efficient scoring seasons in NBA history. But in the ABA, he was a monster, making his impact even stronger as the league got stronger toward the end. Part of that was gameplanning, Chicago played him closer to the basket on both ends than Kentucky making him work a bit less on defense but also to affect less shots as a rim protector while making the shots easier and more efficient on offense but more difficult to get the ball to him to score. Part of it was his personality, he was a relatively passive athlete who didn't call his own number or push things. If he'd had the personality of a Alonzo Mourning or Mel Daniels with his size and skills, he'd be in the conversation for 6th best center of all time with David Robinson and Moses Malone.

Alternative Manu Ginobili: Could have gone for a few guys here. Dantley for the best remaining scoring numbers but it seems a bit early for a guy who didn't elevate his teams as much as his numbers would suggest. Kevin McHale hasn't been mentioned, strong two way impact for a very good ultra stacked team with one great year as lead option when Bird wasn't at his peak. I used to think he was a poor rebounder but have come around on it; when playing next to Larry Bird, there aren't as many opportunities. Pau Gasol is another F/C to look at too.

Owly · Post #9 » by **Owly** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 8:45 pm

penbeast0 wrote:VOTE Walt Frazier: A valuable offensive player with excellent efficiency and someone that ran an offense that coaches have been using as a model for the last 50 years. Defensively, he was apparently one of the great point of attack stoppers v. other PGs with excellent size and athleticism, and he upped his game in the NBA finals twice to bring NY it's only NBA championships. On the downside he was not a heliocentric offensive PG who had the ball in his hands all the time and his offenses were not historically that impressive and his career was fairly short.

Alternative: Reggie Miller Miller for his efficiency and playoffs, Havlicek for his motor and defense, Kidd for his defense and guard rebounding . . . . dang, it's arguable. Going with Miller but would be happy to be talked down.

NOMINATE Artis Gilmore: Gilmore was a bit underwhelming in the NBA despite putting up some of the most efficient scoring seasons in NBA history. But in the ABA, he was a monster, making his impact even stronger as the league got stronger toward the end. Part of that was gameplanning, Chicago played him closer to the basket on both ends than Kentucky making him work a bit less on defense but also to affect less shots as a rim protector while making the shots easier and more efficient on offense but more difficult to get the ball to him to score. Part of it was his personality, he was a relatively passive athlete who didn't call his own number or push things. If he'd had the personality of a Alonzo Mourning or Mel Daniels with his size and skills, he'd be in the conversation for 6th best center of all time with David Robinson and Moses Malone.

Alternative Manu Ginobili: Could have gone for a few guys here. Dantley for the best remaining scoring numbers but it seems a bit early for a guy who didn't elevate his teams as much as his numbers would suggest. Kevin McHale hasn't been mentioned, strong two way impact for a very good ultra stacked team with one great year as lead option when Bird wasn't at his peak. I used to think he was a poor rebounder but have come around on it; when playing next to Larry Bird, there aren't as many opportunities. Pau Gasol is another F/C to look at too.

On McHale, if '87 ... McHale's RS production peak ... Bird might be at his offensive RS peak around then TS% explodes up and he's in the first year of his shooting peak in both senses (from distance/jumpshooting 3pt attempts up, 3pt %s holding above 40% as in immediately prior seasons, FT% up above 90% - also more generally TS% significantly up) his assist% hits it's highest point. I don't think as it happened he was lead option nor should he have been. When perhaps he was, in Bird's absence ('89 ... "perhaps" because Lewis is slightly higher usage) my memory of some contemporary writing and my recollection (checked) of Reference box aggregates is that he was seen not to have stepped up and the box concurs. His Reference composites are across the board the worst they had been post-1984 and were weaker than they would be the two years following, despite being just two years on from his peak. His usage is slightly up from the year before, but down from the year before that or the next year (or indeed any of 3 years after '89). By contrast Parish saw a statistical renaissance nearly across the board and good positive jump in all the Reference composites (also besting McHale in each of PER, WS/48 and BPM).

Fwiw, on a more opinion-y angle there's also a significant part of me that thinks peer Larry Nance would have been a better PF partner for Bird. Otoh he's generally more productive, he's more consistently good year-to-year over a longer span (health helps here), he's not the hyper-efficient low-block scorer but I think he's the better defender (again health helps ... I think in Phoenix he was often the 3, still he accumulated all those blocks whilst perhaps covering a position a little further out and loaded with scoring threats). Fwiw, with the mentions of McHale (6th man) and Manu (6th man) and Nance (box productive, not a volume scorer, positive influence ... someone who's been discussed in the same framework in previous projects ....) Bobby Jones comes to mind as a potential interesting discussion point and perhaps potential candidate.

70sFan · Post #10 » by **70sFan** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 9:13 pm

penbeast0 wrote:NOMINATE Artis Gilmore: Gilmore was a bit underwhelming in the NBA despite putting up some of the most efficient scoring seasons in NBA history. But in the ABA, he was a monster, making his impact even stronger as the league got stronger toward the end. Part of that was gameplanning, Chicago played him closer to the basket on both ends than Kentucky making him work a bit less on defense but also to affect less shots as a rim protector while making the shots easier and more efficient on offense but more difficult to get the ball to him to score. Part of it was his personality, he was a relatively passive athlete who didn't call his own number or push things. If he'd had the personality of a Alonzo Mourning or Mel Daniels with his size and skills, he'd be in the conversation for 6th best center of all time with David Robinson and Moses Malone.

So far, I have tracked 12 ABA (1973-76) and 13 NBA (1977-80) Gilmore games. I checked how his shooting attempts compare in terms of range in these limited samples and here is what I have got:

ABA:

Efficiency: 60.3% overall, 83% from 0-3 feet, 45% from 3-10 feet, 29% from 10-16 feet, 33% from 16+ feet
Volume: 45% from 0-3 feet, 44% from 3-10 feet, 10% from 10-16 feet, 2% from 16+ feet

NBA:

Efficiency: 48% overall, 67% from 0-3 feet, 42% from 3-10 feet, 30% from 10-16 feet, 100% from 16+ feet
Volume: 29% from 0-3 feet, 57% from 3-10 feet, 14% from 10-16 feet, 1% from 16+ feet

For now ignore efficiency numbers for the NBA. As you can see, the NBA sample is not representative (yet), but the volume distribution shows that Gilmore actually took more of his shots at the rim in the ABA. Again, samples are small and can be noisy, but I don't think Gilmore played much closer to the rim in Chicago (at least not in the 1970s, where his offensive style looks similar to the ABA).

iggymcfrack · Post #11 » by **iggymcfrack** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 11:26 pm

Vote: Kawhi Leonard
Nominate: Anthony Davis

Top 10 playoff career leaders in TS%
(max playoff scoring average w/5 game min in parenthesis)

1. Rudy Gobert: .666 (16.9 PPG)
2. Deandre Ayton: .641 (17.9 PPG)
3. Cornbread Maxwell: .633 (18.2 PPG)
4. Kawhi Leonard: .622 (30.5 PPG)
5. Kevin McHale: .618 (25.4 PPG)
6. Anthony Davis: .618 (30.1 PPG)
7. Nikola Jokic: .614 (31.0 PPG)
8. Kurt Rambis: .610 (7.5 PPG)
9. Hersey Hawkins: .608 (23.5 PPG)
10. Stephen Curry: .606 (30.5 PPG)

Anything stand out to you? I don't think people realize what all-time playoff scorers Kawhi and AD are. With AD specifically, people always focus on what he can't do when he's top 20 all-time in playoff PPG with all-time efficiency, even better than Jokic and Curry. Kawhi has a very strong case for being the best playoff scorer of all-time at peak. Yeah, he has a hard time staying healthy, but since 2017, he's averaged 29.6 PPG on better efficiency than any volume scorer in NBA history.

And you know what else AD and Kawhi have in common? They're both all-time defenders as well! I don't have the numbers in front of me right now, but for a 3 year peak, Kawhi has better DRAPM numbers than any wing ever. Those would be his Spurs years and he didn't do it as much in the regular season after getting injured, but in the playoffs, he's still an all-timer. He completely shut down Giannis in the 2019 Eastern Conference Finals and changed that series. Davis is coming off one of the most dominant defensive postseasons of all-time last year and has been a force since his days in New Orleans.

Post #12 » by **penbeast0** » Thu Oct 12, 2023 11:32 pm

70sFan wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:NOMINATE Artis Gilmore: Gilmore was a bit underwhelming in the NBA despite putting up some of the most efficient scoring seasons in NBA history. But in the ABA, he was a monster, making his impact even stronger as the league got stronger toward the end. Part of that was gameplanning, Chicago played him closer to the basket on both ends than Kentucky making him work a bit less on defense but also to affect less shots as a rim protector while making the shots easier and more efficient on offense but more difficult to get the ball to him to score. Part of it was his personality, he was a relatively passive athlete who didn't call his own number or push things. If he'd had the personality of a Alonzo Mourning or Mel Daniels with his size and skills, he'd be in the conversation for 6th best center of all time with David Robinson and Moses Malone.

So far, I have tracked 12 ABA (1973-76) and 13 NBA (1977-80) Gilmore games. I checked how his shooting attempts compare in terms of range in these limited samples and here is what I have got:

ABA:

Efficiency: 60.3% overall, 83% from 0-3 feet, 45% from 3-10 feet, 29% from 10-16 feet, 33% from 16+ feet
Volume: 45% from 0-3 feet, 44% from 3-10 feet, 10% from 10-16 feet, 2% from 16+ feet

NBA:

Efficiency: 48% overall, 67% from 0-3 feet, 42% from 3-10 feet, 30% from 10-16 feet, 100% from 16+ feet
Volume: 29% from 0-3 feet, 57% from 3-10 feet, 14% from 10-16 feet, 1% from 16+ feet

For now ignore efficiency numbers for the NBA. As you can see, the NBA sample is not representative (yet), but the volume distribution shows that Gilmore actually took more of his shots at the rim in the ABA. Again, samples are small and can be noisy, but I don't think Gilmore played much closer to the rim in Chicago (at least not in the 1970s, where his offensive style looks similar to the ABA).

I remember him flashing to the rim from the mid-post for dunks more in the ABA where in the NBA he was generally set up in the low post in Chicago (and presumably SA). Where you finish isn't necessarily where you are set up. On the other hand, it is memory mainly from the grainy Richmond UHF channel, so it is certainly fallible.

trelos6 · Post #13 » by **trelos6** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 3:31 am

Looking at the greatest peaks project last year.

21. 2016-17 Kawhi Leonard
26. 2019-20 Anthony Davis
33. 1989-90 Patrick Ewing
35. 2010-11 Dwight Howard
36. 2021-22 Joel Embiid
37. 1957-58 Bob Pettit
38. 1994-95 Scottie Pippen
44. 1971-72 Walt Frazier

vote. Kawhi Leonard. Probably best peak of remaining players. 5 all NBA, 8 all star campaigns is a bit short vs others, but I think his peak makes up for it.

Outlined Frazier v Stockton below. It’s close.

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.

alt vote: Frazier .

nom: Dwight Howard. Fantastic defender in his prime. Did enough on offense as a lob catcher. Was a dominant defender for 10+ seasons.

Alt nom: Anthony Davis one of the best defenders in the nba since he was drafted. Fantastic one year peak, some ok longevity.

HeartBreakKid · Post #14 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 3:33 am

I gotta catch up to the last couple of threads posts but I'll leave my stock vote here just in case

My vote is for Kawhi Leonard - At two different points he was an awesome defender and an awesome scorer. His health and priorities never made them line up at least not for a long time, but I think his dominance as a scorer and defender depending on the year is truly special.

Alternate vote is for Walt Fraizer - Another injury prone, short prime but high peak guy. His offense is underappreciate due to his low boxscore stats. From watching him it seems like he was a legitimate pass first guy with great shooting. He has a very prototypical tool kit for an MVP caliber point guard. If I was more of a longevity guy I would put Stockton over him though as I think Stockton is not too far from him ability wise.

My nomination is for Anthony Davis - I don't feel good about it. He's close with Reed. Seems like when he was healthy he's been a pretty consistent top 5 guy who is usually quite good in the playoffs. Is very good at playing off ball and he grew into one of the best defenders of his generation. I suppose his efficiency and defensive reputation make me feel that he should go over Reed.

My alternate nomination is for Willis Reed - Arguably just as good as Frazier albeit his career feels even shorter. I might put him over Davis, but I think alot of the guys I am voting for at this point in the project are going to be injury prone fellas.

homecourtloss · Post #15 » by **homecourtloss** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 1:59 pm

trex_8063 wrote:The opening salvo to get Elgin Baylor on the list of eligible candidates (from my archives):
Spoiler:
I view him as a very good [not great] scorer in his era.......a modern(ish) comp [as a scorer only] maybe being Carmelo Anthony.

But although he's a touch shorter than Melo, I'm not sure he wouldn't be a slightly better rebounder, even in the modern era. I know the league was marginally shorter and a bit less athletic at that time, but Baylor's pre-injury rebounding numbers are resoundingly impressive. Here are his reb/100 possession estimates by year:
'59: 15.3
'60: 15.85
'61: 17.75
'62: 16.3
‘63: 13.9

For comparison, here are some notable big-time big-men and their reb/100 possession estimates for the same years (and relation to Baylor's avg):
Pettit
'59: 17.1 (+1.8)
'60: 16.9 (+1.05)
'61: 18.9 (+1.15)
'62: 17.1 (+0.8)
‘63: 16.0 (+2.1)

Wilt
'59: na
'60: 20.9 (+5.05)
'61: 20.7 (+2.95)
'62: 19.4 (+3.1)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Russell
'59: 20.2 (+4.9)
'60: 19.9 (+4.05)
'61: 19.3 (+1.55)
'62: 16.3 (+2.8)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Wayne Embry
'59: 15.5 (+0.2)
'60: 17.1 (+1.25)
'61: 15.1 (-2.65)
'62: 14.3 (-2.0)
‘63: 15.0 (+1.1)

Walter Dukes
'59: 16.7 (+1.4)
'60: 16.1 (+0.25)
'61: 19.2 (+1.45)
'62: 16.4 (+0.1)
‘63: 15.7 (+1.8)

Dolph Schayes
'59: 14.4 (-0.9)
'60: 13.2 (-2.65)
'61: 11.9 (-5.85)
'62: 11.05 (-5.25)

Bailey Howell
'59: na
'60: 13.1 (-2.75)
'61: 14.3 (-3.45)
'62: 13.5 (-2.8)
‘63: 12.2 (-1.7)

When viewing that I'd note two things: every single one of those guys is taller than Elgin, and every single one of them was more a low-post player on one or both ends (so presumably would more frequently [than Elgin] be in the position to grab rebounds). And yet he's at least in the neighborhood of all of them except for Wilt and Russell----who are both a) legitimately BIG and b) legitimately freakish athletes, and c) considered on the short-list of greatest rebounders ever (and even Russell isn't far ahead of him in '61, fwiw).
Otherwise Baylor's reasonably close to everyone else, and well ahead of Schayes and Howell (though admittedly Schayes is trickling into his post-prime for most of the years referenced here).

He was a thick strong guy, good at creating space with his lower body, could jump (isn't he labeled the "grandfather of hang-time" or some such?), and seems to have had great anticipation for where the rebound was going (a la Jerry Lucas, Fat Lever, and Jason Kidd). All this has me suspecting that Baylor would be special kind of rebounder for the SF position in any era (maybe likened to Shawn Marion in this regard).

Basic WOWY:
‘59: 33-37 (.471) with, 0-2 without
‘60: 23-47 (.329) with, 2-3 (.400) without
‘61: 34-39 (.466) with, 2-4 (.333) without
‘62: 37-11 (.771) with, 17-15 (.531) without **West missed only 5 games, no one else in the regular rotation missed more than 2 games
‘63: 52-28 (.650) with

The Lakers in ‘58 were 19-53 with an SRS of -5.78. And then they obtained rookie Elgin Baylor.
In ‘59--with Baylor being the only relevant player acquisition--they improved by 14 games to 33-39, SRS of -1.42 (+4.36 improvement); also made it to the finals (defeating the 2.89 SRS defending champion Hawks 4-2 along the way). That strikes me as indication of fairly significant impact.

The big criticism on Baylor has been his offensive efficiency (relative to his astronomical volume), and whether he was really “helping” the offense.

The Laker team offensive rating improved with rookie Baylor by +2.8 (+1.4 in rORTG terms) in ‘59. I won’t claim that Baylor always “helped the offense optimally” to the best of his abilities; but I do think he helped it. Obviously other metrics of offensive production/efficiency suggest Baylor was a “big deal” (more on that below)......but what I’m beginning to wonder about is whether or not Baylor had a defensive impact that hasn’t been properly appreciated.

Maybe his capability as a rebounder eliminated a lot of second-chance points for opponents????

idk, but something I noted is that the Laker team rDRTG improved by -2.8 in ‘59. In ‘58, they were 8th of 8 defensively, DRtg +4.5 over league avg and +2.5 over the next worse team.
In ‘59, improved to +1.7 over league avg (6th of 8).
They would continue to improve defensively over the next couple of seasons with acquisitions of Jerry West and aging Ray Felix. And then interestingly their defense appears to suffer slightly in ‘62 when Baylor misses significant games:
In ‘61, the Laker DRtg is -1.3 to league average (again: minus is good), 4th of 8.
In ‘62 Baylor misses 32 games and the Laker DRtg falls a little: just -0.3 vs league average (though still 4th of 9).
In ‘63: no more big Ray Felix in playing significant minutes in the middle and Jerry West misses 25 games (things you’d expect to hurt the team defense); they otherwise obtain guard Dick Barnett, and the only other change from the previous year is that Baylor is healthy (doesn’t miss a game)…….and the team DRtg improves to -1.2 vs league average (3rd of 9).
And then beginning in ‘64 (perhaps non-coincidentally just as Baylor begins to be significantly hampered by knee injuries, which causes his overall effectiveness to suffer, as seen by sudden drop in PER, etc), the Laker team DRtg takes a sudden dip……...And it would never recovery to a better than average team defense (even with big bodies like Darrall Imhoff and Mel Counts) until ‘69 when they obtained Wilt Chamberlain.

So I’m starting to wonder if Baylor had a bigger impact defensively than he’s typically given credit for.
And I sort of wonder if he isn't like Carmelo Anthony scoring, Shawn Marion on the glass, with defense somewhere in between (and a little better passer than either). That's an awfully good player.

Anyway…..
Otherwise, I promised some tidbits regarding his overall production and efficiency during his prime years:

In ‘59 and rookie Elgin Baylor had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only a peak Bob Pettit.
In ‘60 he had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only Wilt Chamberlain.
In ‘61: he had the highest PER (even ahead of Wilt, not to mention Pettit and rookie Oscar Robertson).
‘62 and ‘63: 2nd-best PER in the league both years, behind only Wilt Chamberlain (even ahead of triple-double season Robertson, as well as Pettit and Walt Bellamy’s insane rookie season).

That’s a super-impressive 5-year span. Yes, he drops off quite a bit after, but it’s not as though he faded into obscurity or ineffectiveness in subsequent years. He was a relevant player until ‘70. So…..

For another comparison:

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) rs
Per 100 Possessions: 38.7 pts, 10.0 reb, 5.1 ast on 61.7% TS% (+8.0% on league avg)
26.9 PER, .250 WS/48 in 38.8 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) rs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.3 pts, 15.7 reb, 4.2 ast on 49.9 TS% (+2.7%)
26.1 PER, .195 WS/48 in 42.1 mpg

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) playoffs
Per 100 Possessions: 35.8 pts, 10.2 reb, 5.2 ast on .583 TS% (+4.6%)
24.4 PER, .189 WS/48 in 42.3 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) playoffs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.4 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.5 ast on 51.2 TS% (+4.0%)
25.1 PER, .183 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg
.

Some RWoWY from Moonbeam:

Moonbeam wrote:- Los Angeles Lakers
Key players: Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dick Barnett, Rudy LaRusso, Wilt Chamberlain, Gail Goodrich

Post #16 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 3:09 pm

homecourtloss wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:The opening salvo to get Elgin Baylor on the list of eligible candidates (from my archives):
Spoiler:
I view him as a very good [not great] scorer in his era.......a modern(ish) comp [as a scorer only] maybe being Carmelo Anthony.

But although he's a touch shorter than Melo, I'm not sure he wouldn't be a slightly better rebounder, even in the modern era. I know the league was marginally shorter and a bit less athletic at that time, but Baylor's pre-injury rebounding numbers are resoundingly impressive. Here are his reb/100 possession estimates by year:
'59: 15.3
'60: 15.85
'61: 17.75
'62: 16.3
‘63: 13.9

For comparison, here are some notable big-time big-men and their reb/100 possession estimates for the same years (and relation to Baylor's avg):
Pettit
'59: 17.1 (+1.8)
'60: 16.9 (+1.05)
'61: 18.9 (+1.15)
'62: 17.1 (+0.8)
‘63: 16.0 (+2.1)

Wilt
'59: na
'60: 20.9 (+5.05)
'61: 20.7 (+2.95)
'62: 19.4 (+3.1)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Russell
'59: 20.2 (+4.9)
'60: 19.9 (+4.05)
'61: 19.3 (+1.55)
'62: 16.3 (+2.8)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Wayne Embry
'59: 15.5 (+0.2)
'60: 17.1 (+1.25)
'61: 15.1 (-2.65)
'62: 14.3 (-2.0)
‘63: 15.0 (+1.1)

Walter Dukes
'59: 16.7 (+1.4)
'60: 16.1 (+0.25)
'61: 19.2 (+1.45)
'62: 16.4 (+0.1)
‘63: 15.7 (+1.8)

Dolph Schayes
'59: 14.4 (-0.9)
'60: 13.2 (-2.65)
'61: 11.9 (-5.85)
'62: 11.05 (-5.25)

Bailey Howell
'59: na
'60: 13.1 (-2.75)
'61: 14.3 (-3.45)
'62: 13.5 (-2.8)
‘63: 12.2 (-1.7)

When viewing that I'd note two things: every single one of those guys is taller than Elgin, and every single one of them was more a low-post player on one or both ends (so presumably would more frequently [than Elgin] be in the position to grab rebounds). And yet he's at least in the neighborhood of all of them except for Wilt and Russell----who are both a) legitimately BIG and b) legitimately freakish athletes, and c) considered on the short-list of greatest rebounders ever (and even Russell isn't far ahead of him in '61, fwiw).
Otherwise Baylor's reasonably close to everyone else, and well ahead of Schayes and Howell (though admittedly Schayes is trickling into his post-prime for most of the years referenced here).

He was a thick strong guy, good at creating space with his lower body, could jump (isn't he labeled the "grandfather of hang-time" or some such?), and seems to have had great anticipation for where the rebound was going (a la Jerry Lucas, Fat Lever, and Jason Kidd). All this has me suspecting that Baylor would be special kind of rebounder for the SF position in any era (maybe likened to Shawn Marion in this regard).

Basic WOWY:
‘59: 33-37 (.471) with, 0-2 without
‘60: 23-47 (.329) with, 2-3 (.400) without
‘61: 34-39 (.466) with, 2-4 (.333) without
‘62: 37-11 (.771) with, 17-15 (.531) without **West missed only 5 games, no one else in the regular rotation missed more than 2 games
‘63: 52-28 (.650) with

The Lakers in ‘58 were 19-53 with an SRS of -5.78. And then they obtained rookie Elgin Baylor.
In ‘59--with Baylor being the only relevant player acquisition--they improved by 14 games to 33-39, SRS of -1.42 (+4.36 improvement); also made it to the finals (defeating the 2.89 SRS defending champion Hawks 4-2 along the way). That strikes me as indication of fairly significant impact.

The big criticism on Baylor has been his offensive efficiency (relative to his astronomical volume), and whether he was really “helping” the offense.

The Laker team offensive rating improved with rookie Baylor by +2.8 (+1.4 in rORTG terms) in ‘59. I won’t claim that Baylor always “helped the offense optimally” to the best of his abilities; but I do think he helped it. Obviously other metrics of offensive production/efficiency suggest Baylor was a “big deal” (more on that below)......but what I’m beginning to wonder about is whether or not Baylor had a defensive impact that hasn’t been properly appreciated.

Maybe his capability as a rebounder eliminated a lot of second-chance points for opponents????

idk, but something I noted is that the Laker team rDRTG improved by -2.8 in ‘59. In ‘58, they were 8th of 8 defensively, DRtg +4.5 over league avg and +2.5 over the next worse team.
In ‘59, improved to +1.7 over league avg (6th of 8).
They would continue to improve defensively over the next couple of seasons with acquisitions of Jerry West and aging Ray Felix. And then interestingly their defense appears to suffer slightly in ‘62 when Baylor misses significant games:
In ‘61, the Laker DRtg is -1.3 to league average (again: minus is good), 4th of 8.
In ‘62 Baylor misses 32 games and the Laker DRtg falls a little: just -0.3 vs league average (though still 4th of 9).
In ‘63: no more big Ray Felix in playing significant minutes in the middle and Jerry West misses 25 games (things you’d expect to hurt the team defense); they otherwise obtain guard Dick Barnett, and the only other change from the previous year is that Baylor is healthy (doesn’t miss a game)…….and the team DRtg improves to -1.2 vs league average (3rd of 9).
And then beginning in ‘64 (perhaps non-coincidentally just as Baylor begins to be significantly hampered by knee injuries, which causes his overall effectiveness to suffer, as seen by sudden drop in PER, etc), the Laker team DRtg takes a sudden dip……...And it would never recovery to a better than average team defense (even with big bodies like Darrall Imhoff and Mel Counts) until ‘69 when they obtained Wilt Chamberlain.

So I’m starting to wonder if Baylor had a bigger impact defensively than he’s typically given credit for.
And I sort of wonder if he isn't like Carmelo Anthony scoring, Shawn Marion on the glass, with defense somewhere in between (and a little better passer than either). That's an awfully good player.

Anyway…..
Otherwise, I promised some tidbits regarding his overall production and efficiency during his prime years:

In ‘59 and rookie Elgin Baylor had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only a peak Bob Pettit.
In ‘60 he had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only Wilt Chamberlain.
In ‘61: he had the highest PER (even ahead of Wilt, not to mention Pettit and rookie Oscar Robertson).
‘62 and ‘63: 2nd-best PER in the league both years, behind only Wilt Chamberlain (even ahead of triple-double season Robertson, as well as Pettit and Walt Bellamy’s insane rookie season).

That’s a super-impressive 5-year span. Yes, he drops off quite a bit after, but it’s not as though he faded into obscurity or ineffectiveness in subsequent years. He was a relevant player until ‘70. So…..

For another comparison:

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) rs
Per 100 Possessions: 38.7 pts, 10.0 reb, 5.1 ast on 61.7% TS% (+8.0% on league avg)
26.9 PER, .250 WS/48 in 38.8 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) rs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.3 pts, 15.7 reb, 4.2 ast on 49.9 TS% (+2.7%)
26.1 PER, .195 WS/48 in 42.1 mpg

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) playoffs
Per 100 Possessions: 35.8 pts, 10.2 reb, 5.2 ast on .583 TS% (+4.6%)
24.4 PER, .189 WS/48 in 42.3 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) playoffs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.4 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.5 ast on 51.2 TS% (+4.0%)
25.1 PER, .183 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg
.

Some RWoWY from Moonbeam:
Moonbeam wrote:- Los Angeles Lakers
Key players: Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dick Barnett, Rudy LaRusso, Wilt Chamberlain, Gail Goodrich

Thanks. This more or less supports what I had supposed: Up at the top we have Wilt (#7 on our list) and not far behind us jerry West (#14 on our list). Next best, and seemingly a clear cut above the rest (Goodrich, LaRusso, and Barnett) is Elgin.

Doesn’t necessarily strongly endorse his candidacy here, though nor is it a strike against it.

Post #17 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 3:09 pm

homecourtloss wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:The opening salvo to get Elgin Baylor on the list of eligible candidates (from my archives):
Spoiler:
I view him as a very good [not great] scorer in his era.......a modern(ish) comp [as a scorer only] maybe being Carmelo Anthony.

But although he's a touch shorter than Melo, I'm not sure he wouldn't be a slightly better rebounder, even in the modern era. I know the league was marginally shorter and a bit less athletic at that time, but Baylor's pre-injury rebounding numbers are resoundingly impressive. Here are his reb/100 possession estimates by year:
'59: 15.3
'60: 15.85
'61: 17.75
'62: 16.3
‘63: 13.9

For comparison, here are some notable big-time big-men and their reb/100 possession estimates for the same years (and relation to Baylor's avg):
Pettit
'59: 17.1 (+1.8)
'60: 16.9 (+1.05)
'61: 18.9 (+1.15)
'62: 17.1 (+0.8)
‘63: 16.0 (+2.1)

Wilt
'59: na
'60: 20.9 (+5.05)
'61: 20.7 (+2.95)
'62: 19.4 (+3.1)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Russell
'59: 20.2 (+4.9)
'60: 19.9 (+4.05)
'61: 19.3 (+1.55)
'62: 16.3 (+2.8)
‘63: 19.9 (+6.0)

Wayne Embry
'59: 15.5 (+0.2)
'60: 17.1 (+1.25)
'61: 15.1 (-2.65)
'62: 14.3 (-2.0)
‘63: 15.0 (+1.1)

Walter Dukes
'59: 16.7 (+1.4)
'60: 16.1 (+0.25)
'61: 19.2 (+1.45)
'62: 16.4 (+0.1)
‘63: 15.7 (+1.8)

Dolph Schayes
'59: 14.4 (-0.9)
'60: 13.2 (-2.65)
'61: 11.9 (-5.85)
'62: 11.05 (-5.25)

Bailey Howell
'59: na
'60: 13.1 (-2.75)
'61: 14.3 (-3.45)
'62: 13.5 (-2.8)
‘63: 12.2 (-1.7)

When viewing that I'd note two things: every single one of those guys is taller than Elgin, and every single one of them was more a low-post player on one or both ends (so presumably would more frequently [than Elgin] be in the position to grab rebounds). And yet he's at least in the neighborhood of all of them except for Wilt and Russell----who are both a) legitimately BIG and b) legitimately freakish athletes, and c) considered on the short-list of greatest rebounders ever (and even Russell isn't far ahead of him in '61, fwiw).
Otherwise Baylor's reasonably close to everyone else, and well ahead of Schayes and Howell (though admittedly Schayes is trickling into his post-prime for most of the years referenced here).

He was a thick strong guy, good at creating space with his lower body, could jump (isn't he labeled the "grandfather of hang-time" or some such?), and seems to have had great anticipation for where the rebound was going (a la Jerry Lucas, Fat Lever, and Jason Kidd). All this has me suspecting that Baylor would be special kind of rebounder for the SF position in any era (maybe likened to Shawn Marion in this regard).

Basic WOWY:
‘59: 33-37 (.471) with, 0-2 without
‘60: 23-47 (.329) with, 2-3 (.400) without
‘61: 34-39 (.466) with, 2-4 (.333) without
‘62: 37-11 (.771) with, 17-15 (.531) without **West missed only 5 games, no one else in the regular rotation missed more than 2 games
‘63: 52-28 (.650) with

The Lakers in ‘58 were 19-53 with an SRS of -5.78. And then they obtained rookie Elgin Baylor.
In ‘59--with Baylor being the only relevant player acquisition--they improved by 14 games to 33-39, SRS of -1.42 (+4.36 improvement); also made it to the finals (defeating the 2.89 SRS defending champion Hawks 4-2 along the way). That strikes me as indication of fairly significant impact.

The big criticism on Baylor has been his offensive efficiency (relative to his astronomical volume), and whether he was really “helping” the offense.

The Laker team offensive rating improved with rookie Baylor by +2.8 (+1.4 in rORTG terms) in ‘59. I won’t claim that Baylor always “helped the offense optimally” to the best of his abilities; but I do think he helped it. Obviously other metrics of offensive production/efficiency suggest Baylor was a “big deal” (more on that below)......but what I’m beginning to wonder about is whether or not Baylor had a defensive impact that hasn’t been properly appreciated.

Maybe his capability as a rebounder eliminated a lot of second-chance points for opponents????

idk, but something I noted is that the Laker team rDRTG improved by -2.8 in ‘59. In ‘58, they were 8th of 8 defensively, DRtg +4.5 over league avg and +2.5 over the next worse team.
In ‘59, improved to +1.7 over league avg (6th of 8).
They would continue to improve defensively over the next couple of seasons with acquisitions of Jerry West and aging Ray Felix. And then interestingly their defense appears to suffer slightly in ‘62 when Baylor misses significant games:
In ‘61, the Laker DRtg is -1.3 to league average (again: minus is good), 4th of 8.
In ‘62 Baylor misses 32 games and the Laker DRtg falls a little: just -0.3 vs league average (though still 4th of 9).
In ‘63: no more big Ray Felix in playing significant minutes in the middle and Jerry West misses 25 games (things you’d expect to hurt the team defense); they otherwise obtain guard Dick Barnett, and the only other change from the previous year is that Baylor is healthy (doesn’t miss a game)…….and the team DRtg improves to -1.2 vs league average (3rd of 9).
And then beginning in ‘64 (perhaps non-coincidentally just as Baylor begins to be significantly hampered by knee injuries, which causes his overall effectiveness to suffer, as seen by sudden drop in PER, etc), the Laker team DRtg takes a sudden dip……...And it would never recovery to a better than average team defense (even with big bodies like Darrall Imhoff and Mel Counts) until ‘69 when they obtained Wilt Chamberlain.

So I’m starting to wonder if Baylor had a bigger impact defensively than he’s typically given credit for.
And I sort of wonder if he isn't like Carmelo Anthony scoring, Shawn Marion on the glass, with defense somewhere in between (and a little better passer than either). That's an awfully good player.

Anyway…..
Otherwise, I promised some tidbits regarding his overall production and efficiency during his prime years:

In ‘59 and rookie Elgin Baylor had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only a peak Bob Pettit.
In ‘60 he had the 2nd-highest PER in the league, behind only Wilt Chamberlain.
In ‘61: he had the highest PER (even ahead of Wilt, not to mention Pettit and rookie Oscar Robertson).
‘62 and ‘63: 2nd-best PER in the league both years, behind only Wilt Chamberlain (even ahead of triple-double season Robertson, as well as Pettit and Walt Bellamy’s insane rookie season).

That’s a super-impressive 5-year span. Yes, he drops off quite a bit after, but it’s not as though he faded into obscurity or ineffectiveness in subsequent years. He was a relevant player until ‘70. So…..

For another comparison:

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) rs
Per 100 Possessions: 38.7 pts, 10.0 reb, 5.1 ast on 61.7% TS% (+8.0% on league avg)
26.9 PER, .250 WS/48 in 38.8 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) rs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.3 pts, 15.7 reb, 4.2 ast on 49.9 TS% (+2.7%)
26.1 PER, .195 WS/48 in 42.1 mpg

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) playoffs
Per 100 Possessions: 35.8 pts, 10.2 reb, 5.2 ast on .583 TS% (+4.6%)
24.4 PER, .189 WS/48 in 42.3 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) playoffs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.4 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.5 ast on 51.2 TS% (+4.0%)
25.1 PER, .183 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg
.

Some RWoWY from Moonbeam:
Moonbeam wrote:- Los Angeles Lakers
Key players: Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dick Barnett, Rudy LaRusso, Wilt Chamberlain, Gail Goodrich

Thanks. This more or less supports what I had supposed: Up at the top we have Wilt (#7 on our list) and not far behind us jerry West (#14 on our list). Next best, and seemingly a clear cut above the rest (Goodrich, LaRusso, and Barnett) is Elgin.

Doesn’t necessarily strongly endorse his candidacy here, though nor is it a strike against it.

Post #18 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 9:02 pm

Vote 1 - Walt Frazier
Vote 2 - John Havlicek
Nomination 1 - Rick Barry
Nomination 2 - Dolph Schayes

Frazier in the Finals

70 (7 games): 17.6 PPG, 7.7 RPG, 10.4 APG, 54.1% FG, 77.5% FT, 5.7 FTAs per game

(yes, i'm aware of the potentially faulty assist count in game 7…)

72 (5 games): 23 PPG, 8 RPG, 8 APG, 58.5% FG, 70.4% FT, 5.4 FTAs per game

73 (5 games): 16.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 47.9% FG, 65% FT, 4 FTAs per game

While the knicks would lose in 5 games to the lakers in 72, this was without reed, so they didn't have much of a chance. That said, Clyde stepped up in his absence as evidenced by his impressive all around play. Overall, he was a great performer in the finals. He really had a solid case for finals MVP in 73, but the "big bias" of the time essentially put reed over the top. In addition, his historic game 7 in the 70 finals put the knicks over the top, some of which can be watched here:

Watch on YouTube

It's also worth noting the knicks nearly went to 4 finals in a row if not for a 2 pt game 7 loss to the bullets in the 71 ECF. Frazier led some truly great teams during that stretch.

Frazier embodied just about all you could ask from a star player. He was a versatile playmaker with great decision making, rarely deterred by defensive pressure. On the other side of the ball, he's widely considered one of the best defensive guards of all time. He had the unique ability to lull a player into an "easy" drive to the basket, and then tapping the ball from behind for a steal and fast break bucket. He was also great in passing lanes, and had the size and speed to guard both the 1 and 2.

From a more intangible standpoint, clyde fit in seamlessly with one of the most balanced scoring teams in NBA history. Team chemistry was huge, and he valued the importance of his teammates highly. Per Page 2 interview via ESPN:

The story of that night is that Reed's presence really inspired your team and really rattled the Lakers …

Frazier: Oh, unequivocally. If Willis didn't come out, I would not have had that game.

Is that right?

Frazier: Absolutely. He gave us the confidence we needed. The crowd ... the crowd propelled us to that win, man. They never shut up. They had us doing things we never thought we could do.

The knicks routinely ran an "option-less" offense, where "hit the open man" was the basic game plan. Clyde would further his ability to adapt to playing with other star players when his conference rival Earl Monroe was traded to NY. Two of the best guards in the game with only one ball to go around were expected to clash, but instead their styles of play complemented each other quite well en route to the 73 title.

Albert pointed out that Frazier, too, had to make accommodations. ''They both subjugated their game,'' he said. But, after playing so intensely against one another, Albert said: ''They both were so in tune with one another and what needed to be done. So it worked.''

- - - - -

But for basketball fans, Monroe's career was a tutorial in winning. ''By enthusiastically adopting the Knicks' philosophy,'' Bradley said, ''Earl helped to show that no one can accomplish alone as much as all of us can accomplish together.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/07/sports/backtalk-when-stars-collide-in-new-york.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C%7B%221%22%3A%22RI%3A9%22%7D

iggymcfrack · Post #19 » by **iggymcfrack** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 11:06 pm

Have to say, I have a hard time seeing much of a case for Frazier over Kawhi. Frazier basically had 7 seasons as an impact player. His rookie year he was league average-ish statistically on low minutes, comparable to Kawhi's rookie year. By 75/76, he had a 2.5 BPM and the team went 26-33 in games he played and 12-11 in games he missed. After that, he'd never have a BPM over 2 or make the playoffs again.

Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier, has the same number of championships, and more FMVPs, but the knock on him is his longevity. Well, in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2020, he was completely healthy through the postseason and played at a much higher level than Frazier did in his 5 best seasons. In 2017, he did take an injury on a dirty play, but he'd already led his team to the Western Conference Finals before that, and he was probably the frontrunner for POY prior to the injury. Even with the injury, he finished 4th in POY voting which is higher than Frazier did in all but 4 seasons. Then 2021 is another impactful season where Kawhi led the playoffs in PER, finished 6th in POY voting, and only made it to Round 2 to get hurt because he averaged 32.1/7.9/4.6/2.3/1.0 on .723 TS% to beat Luka's Mavs in 7.

So basically:
2019 Kawhi >>> 1973 Frazier
2016 Kawhi >>> 1972 Frazier
2020 Kawhi >>> 1971 Frazier
2014 Kawhi > 1970 Frazier
2015 Kawhi >>> 1969 Frazier
2017 Kawhi > 1974 Frazier
2021 Kawhi > 1975 Frazier
2013 Kawhi > 1976 Frazier
2023 Kawhi > 1977 Frazier
2012 Kawhi = 1968 Frazier

So after all that, the only real longevity "edge" is Frazier's 1978-1980 seasons where he was basically worthless. What criteria do people use to take Frazier? Are you just looking at raw POY shares and ignoring the fact that Kareem was basically the only other superstar level player in the league during Clyde's prime?

Post #20 » by **Doctor MJ** » Fri Oct 13, 2023 11:41 pm

iggymcfrack wrote:Have to say, I have a hard time seeing much of a case for Frazier over Kawhi. Frazier basically had 7 seasons as an impact player. His rookie year he was league average-ish statistically on low minutes, comparable to Kawhi's rookie year. By 75/76, he had a 2.5 BPM and the team went 26-33 in games he played and 12-11 in games he missed. After that, he'd never have a BPM over 2 or make the playoffs again.

Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier, has the same number of championships, and more FMVPs, but the knock on him is his longevity. Well, in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2020, he was completely healthy through the postseason and played at a much higher level than Frazier did in his 5 best seasons. In 2017, he did take an injury on a dirty play, but he'd already led his team to the Western Conference Finals before that, and he was probably the frontrunner for POY prior to the injury. Even with the injury, he finished 4th in POY voting which is higher than Frazier did in all but 4 seasons. Then 2021 is another impactful season where Kawhi led the playoffs in PER, finished 6th in POY voting, and only made it to Round 2 to get hurt because he averaged 32.1/7.9/4.6/2.3/1.0 on .723 TS% to beat Luka's Mavs in 7.

So basically:
2019 Kawhi >>> 1973 Frazier
2016 Kawhi >>> 1972 Frazier
2020 Kawhi >>> 1971 Frazier
2014 Kawhi > 1970 Frazier
2015 Kawhi >>> 1969 Frazier
2017 Kawhi > 1974 Frazier
2021 Kawhi > 1975 Frazier
2013 Kawhi > 1976 Frazier
2023 Kawhi > 1977 Frazier
2012 Kawhi = 1968 Frazier

So after all that, the only real longevity "edge" is Frazier's 1978-1980 seasons where he was basically worthless. What criteria do people use to take Frazier? Are you just looking at raw POY shares and ignoring the fact that Kareem was basically the only other superstar level player in the league during Clyde's prime?

If we go by Career Win Shares (regular season):

Frazier 113.54
Kawhi 90.35

If we go by Peak Win Shares (regular season):

Frazier 15.62
Kawhi 13.75

As I showed before, if we look at Frazier's 7 year run in the playoffs, here are the league leaders in WS:

Frazier 15.8
Kareem 12.6
Wilt 12.1

With the recollection that Frazier had more WS than his 3 top teammates combined.

If we take the best 7 year duration of Kawhi's playoff career we get:

LeBron 26.6
Curry 17.6
Kawhi 16.4

Keep in mind that players in today's game get an extra round to play in the playoffs.

I have no problem with folks saying Kawhi > Frazier when both at their best, but:

a) I think it's close and more debatable than people who look at Reed's accolades and take them seriously think.
b) I think Frazier still has a significant edge that can either be chalked up to longevity or durability - take your pick, so long as you knock Kawhi, because even relative to Frazier, Kawhi deserves to be knocked.
c) I believe Frazier is someone who made his teammates and locker rooms better, and I think the opposite is true of Kawhi.
d) I think Frazier is a very smart team basketball player. I think Kawhi would be much better served if the game were 1v1 on both ends of the floor.