Rasheed Wallace, Shawn Kemp and Zach Randolph

[SelakStreet]

How would you rank them from one to three as overall better players and careers?

[One_and_Done]

In today's league it's Sheed by a large margin. So, there's your answer.

[penbeast0]

Doesn't answer better in their day or career value for most analysts as most people on this site aren't only interested in how everyone that played before the 2020s would translate to 2024.

Kemp is the most dominant but also the most mistake prone and the shortest prime. Rasheed has the longest prime and is the best fit next with most lineups. Randolph suffers defensively in comparison to the other two without standing out offensively. Without looking at the numbers and off the top of my head, I'd rank them in their day and in career value:

1. Rasheed Wallace
2. Shawn Kemp
(gap)
3. Zach Randolph

[One_and_Done]

To me 'who is better today?' is almost the same question as 'who was better'? Today's league is better, and at any rate most of today's players would be even more impactful in prior leagues.

Kemp is a tricky one. In today's league his value is substantially reduced. Like, he'd be good defensively at the 4, but he can't play the 5. He'd basically be A.Gordon with no range. That's not an all-star level player honestly, and it's a tough piece to build a legit winner around.

[homecourtloss]

To me 'who is better today?' is almost the same question as 'who was better'? Today's league is better, and at any rate most of today's players would be even more impactful in prior leagues.

Kemp is a tricky one. In today's league his value is substantially reduced. Like, he'd be good defensively at the 4, but he can't play the 5. He'd basically be A.Gordon with no range. That's not an all-star level player honestly, and it's a tough piece to build a legit winner around.

Kemp is extraordinarily overrated by most casuals. Yes, he had some extraordinary highlights, and there were some things that he could’ve done to his game to make himself more impactful, but he really wasn’t relative to the hype that he has , and it really just speaks to the dirt of talent when he was in his heyday.

This is Rasheed Wallace by a landslide.

[penbeast0]

Why couldn't Kemp play the 5 today? He had good size, strength, and athleticism, nice defensive instincts and the ability to guard out on the floor, and was capable of being a rim protector though not a Tim Duncan type of course and many more of today's centers are smaller and quicker than in his day. He was foul prone and pig headed but he's certainly shown more on that end than, say, DeMarcus Cousins who was a similar player.

[One_and_Done]

It's not that he couldn't play the 5, heck he'd probably have to, but you're then starting a flawed 5 that handicaps your team and limits their ceiling.

No real rim protection, no shooting, no dribbling, and honestly probably a below average passer. Fun player, love watching him, but it's just a different variation of the Blake/Sabonis problem.

[migya]

Kemp is the best two way player of the three, had considerably higher peak and level of prime and had most potential. He has similarities to Giannis, but better shooter.

[70sFan]

It's not that he couldn't play the 5, heck he'd probably have to, but you're then starting a flawed 5 that handicaps your team and limits their ceiling.

No real rim protection, no shooting, no dribbling, and honestly probably a below average passer. Fun player, love watching him, but it's just a different variation of the Blake/Sabonis problem.

I struggle to understand how you can say he can't shoot or dribble, but call him only "probably below average passer".

[homecourtloss]

Kemp is the best two way player of the three, had considerably higher peak and level of prime and had most potential. He has similarities to Giannis, but better shooter.

There is absolutely nothing that supports Kemp as the best two way player out of these three. Wallace in his prime and peak was one of the most impactful players in the NBA.

[migya]

Kemp is the best two way player of the three, had considerably higher peak and level of prime and had most potential. He has similarities to Giannis, but better shooter.

There is absolutely nothing that supports Kemp as the best two way player out of these three. Wallace in his prime and peak was one of the most impactful players in the NBA.

Ŕasheed was never that.

A player that never was the best on his team's best player on either end and played on loaded teams, thus being seen often in his career, is not among the best. He was a good complementary piece and effective in the right system, but many players were.

[One_and_Done]

Kemp is the best two way player of the three, had considerably higher peak and level of prime and had most potential. He has similarities to Giannis, but better shooter.

There is absolutely nothing that supports Kemp as the best two way player out of these three. Wallace in his prime and peak was one of the most impactful players in the NBA.

Ŕasheed was never that.

A player that never was the best on his team's best player on either end and played on loaded teams, thus being seen often in his career, is not among the best. He was a good complementary piece and effective in the right system, but many players were.

Sheed was definitely the best player on the 00 Blazers, who won 59 games and were a Qrt away from a title. He continued to be the best player on the Blazers from 01 until he was traded in 04. The Blazers averaged 50 wins from 01 to 03.

[migya]

There is absolutely nothing that supports Kemp as the best two way player out of these three. Wallace in his prime and peak was one of the most impactful players in the NBA.

Ŕasheed was never that.

A player that never was the best on his team's best player on either end and played on loaded teams, thus being seen often in his career, is not among the best. He was a good complementary piece and effective in the right system, but many players were.

Sheed was definitely the best player on the 00 Blazers, who won 59 games and were a Qrt away from a title. He continued to be the best player on the Blazers from 01 until he was traded in 04. The Blazers averaged 50 wins from 01 to 03.

Very loaded teams and he wasn't among the best players in those years. You can't honestly say you think he was on the level of Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Carter, TMac, to name a few.

[One_and_Done]

Ŕasheed was never that.

A player that never was the best on his team's best player on either end and played on loaded teams, thus being seen often in his career, is not among the best. He was a good complementary piece and effective in the right system, but many players were.

Sheed was definitely the best player on the 00 Blazers, who won 59 games and were a Qrt away from a title. He continued to be the best player on the Blazers from 01 until he was traded in 04. The Blazers averaged 50 wins from 01 to 03.

Very loaded teams and he wasn't among the best players in those years. You can't honestly say you think he was on the level of Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Carter, TMac, to name a few.

I mean, peak Sheed was definitely of comparable value to Carter if you understand basketball. He wasn't as good as those other guys, but neither was Kemp. Sheed was an all-nba talent.

[migya]

Sheed was definitely the best player on the 00 Blazers, who won 59 games and were a Qrt away from a title. He continued to be the best player on the Blazers from 01 until he was traded in 04. The Blazers averaged 50 wins from 01 to 03.

Very loaded teams and he wasn't among the best players in those years. You can't honestly say you think he was on the level of Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Carter, TMac, to name a few.

I mean, peak Sheed was definitely of comparable value to Carter if you understand basketball. He wasn't as good as those other guys, but neither was Kemp. Sheed was an all-nba talent.

Kemp was not at the level of the 90s superstars but he was the best player on the mid 90s Sonics that won among the most games. He was flawed but on both ends was very effective and had a number of games where he played to the level at least of the superstar bigs at that time.

[One_and_Done]

He dunked like a star maybe. He wasn't the best Sonic either, that was Payton. That's reflected in the MVP voting, and also in how he led them to 61 wins after Kemp left.

[homecourtloss]

Kemp is the best two way player of the three, had considerably higher peak and level of prime and had most potential. He has similarities to Giannis, but better shooter.

There is absolutely nothing that supports Kemp as the best two way player out of these three. Wallace in his prime and peak was one of the most impactful players in the NBA.

Ŕasheed was never that.

A player that never was the best on his team's best player on either end and played on loaded teams, thus being seen often in his career, is not among the best. He was a good complementary piece and effective in the right system, but many players were.

Wallace was the best player on his team in different seasons. He was easily insertable into any lineup and as evidenced by career RAPM numbers, was an impact monster who could add to high end teams as shown by the massive impact that he had on the Detroit Pistons in 2004. Pistons lost the first two games Sheed played with them and then went on to win 20 out of the next 24 with Sheed sitting out a few. These games from 2/23/2004 to 4/12/2004, the Pistons had:

—A MOV of +13.58
—DRtg of 89-90, rDRtg of about -12

They wound up having a playoffs DRtg of -11.84

He was versatile on defense, and he was versatile on offense. Since we have full tracking data, i.e., since 1997, Sheed is one of 7 players who has over 1000 dunks and 1000 threes made. He could shoot, score from the post, space the floor, create mismatches, put the ball on the floor, could finish in traffic off of passes and/or off his own dribble, and generally was a very high IQ player on both sides of the court. On defense, his versatility annd length allowed him to switch between guarding forwards and centers, disrupting opponents' actions. His shot-blocking/shot-altering ability and understanding of defensive rotations made him a reliable rim protector. I think he’d be even more impactful on defense in today’s game.

Wallace was at minimum a top 35-40 impact player in the databall age.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WMfP-GVHXCjPfp2sMnBjWB301OtO3LO7n-EKoBSl-iQ/edit

With whatever data we do have for Kemp from his best seasons (not shown here), he was nowhere near that because he didn’t do anything particularly great on offense and was a low-IQ defender who would get caught watching quite a bit.

[prolific passer]

Kemp in today's game would be the most exciting. Can you imagine him getting put back dunks on offensive rebounds from all those missed threes they have today? He would create his own three point plays with those along with his good foul shooting.

[prolific passer]

To me 'who is better today?' is almost the same question as 'who was better'? Today's league is better, and at any rate most of today's players would be even more impactful in prior leagues.

Kemp is a tricky one. In today's league his value is substantially reduced. Like, he'd be good defensively at the 4, but he can't play the 5. He'd basically be A.Gordon with no range. That's not an all-star level player honestly, and it's a tough piece to build a legit winner around.

Jokic would love to have Kemp on his team. Increase those assists with those alley oops.

[One_and_Done]

To me 'who is better today?' is almost the same question as 'who was better'? Today's league is better, and at any rate most of today's players would be even more impactful in prior leagues.

Kemp is a tricky one. In today's league his value is substantially reduced. Like, he'd be good defensively at the 4, but he can't play the 5. He'd basically be A.Gordon with no range. That's not an all-star level player honestly, and it's a tough piece to build a legit winner around.

Jokic would love to have Kemp on his team. Increase those assists with those alley oops.

The GM would prefer a Kemp who shoots 3 and is a higher IQ player.