RealGM

Dave Berri (sports economist/ Basketball analyst) wrote a very interesting column a few days ago, ranking every single player to play for the Celtics since 1977.

Topping the rankings is… Larry Bird. Larry Legend produced 261.9 wins for the Celtics. Across these 32 seasons, this mark is easily the best. Of course, one suspects that if we went back before 1977-78 we would see Bill Russell produced more than Bird. But alas, we don’t have the data so we don’t really know (well, we have enough data to be pretty sure Russell would be number one in Boston history).

Sticking with the years where we have data, here is the rest of the top ten.

2. Robert Parish

3. Paul Pierce

4. Kevin McHale

5. Cedric Maxwell

6. Danny Ainge

7. Rajon Rondo

8. Reggie Lewis

9. Kevin Garnett

10. Dee Brown

Looking over the list we see a couple of surprises. For example, I am not sure Maxwell is regarded as one of the five most productive Boston players across the last three decades. And it’s hard to believe that Rondo (in just three seasons) and KG (in just two) already are in the top 10. Beyond who is on the list, the other big surprise is that 64.6% of the team’s Wins Produced since 1977 can be tied to these ten players.

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2009/05/28/ ... ince-1977/

Here is the table showing the wins produced:

http://www.wagesofwins.com/Boston77-09.html

The least productive player for the Celtics in the last 30 years was Scal.

Larry is definitely the best player since 1977. There shouldn't even be a discussion about it. Dee Brown shouldn't be on the list though. What has he done? All I can remember is him winning the dunk contest with a no look slam.

I also find it funny that Dee Brown would make the list. Larry Legend is the most exciting and best player on the team possibly ever, so he'd have to be number 1.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but those rankings are based on a particular statistical formula that does not take into account defense (steals and blocks aside). If so, it's no wonder that it underrates KG and DJ.

Second, the formula gives high value to FG%, so it would tend to be biased to people who had teammates that also had high FG% (with all proper adjustments, including for 2s vs. 3s). One goal of a defense is to make all the top offensive choices equally good or equally bad for the opponent ...

^Yeah, Berri's the guy who uses win shares.

I've never been a big fan of any of these formulas (win shares, PER, etc) to rank players. Mainly because someone like Rondo is ranked over Garnett (he's obviously played far more games, so thats the main reason- because Rondo's Wins Produced per 48 is far less than Garnett's).

I'm surprised Walker didn't even beat out Dee Brown.

Fencer reregistered wrote:Please correct me if I'm wrong, but those rankings are based on a particular statistical formula that does not take into account defense (steals and blocks aside). If so, it's no wonder that it underrates KG and DJ.

Second, the formula gives high value to FG%, so it would tend to be biased to people who had teammates that also had high FG% (with all proper adjustments, including for 2s vs. 3s). One goal of a defense is to make all the top offensive choices equally good or equally bad for the opponent ...

It is based on total wins produced (not win shares), which is why KG is not ranked higher. He has only played 2 years for the Celtics.

Couple of problems with this fellas statistical results.

From July 1978 until his retirement in June 1983, Tiny Archibald was the most irreplaceable Celtic.
That included 4 straight 60 win seasons. If Tiny had not dislocated his shoulder in Game 2 of the 1982 ECF the Celtics would have repeated as champions, but alas, he was the one Celtic where there was no alternative. Where the hell is Tiny on this joker's list? The omission immediately makes me question his method.

Yet Dee Brown makes the list over Tiny Archibald???

I was a Cedric Maxwell fan, because I knew what a great defender he was. Between 1978 and 1983 Cedric Maxwell twice led the NBA in FG% and was second twice, meaning Four years 1rst or 2nd in NBA. Seeing him high on the list is consistent with what I remember watching many games, I'm just surprised that a guy who was more needed for defense made the list. Cedric was amazingly efficient during his first 5 years in Boston, dramatically falling off in his 8th season in Boston due to injuries.


I'm not gonna question the rest of the list, but Tiny's omission is the most glaring omission.

Roll the timeline back to 1970 and you would have to add Dave Cowens, John Havlicek and JoJo White to any top ten list for wins.

I think this is a given that Larry Bird is #1, you don't even need the data. The man was simply awesome, I hated him during the 80s but 20 years later, he is one of the players I respect the most to this day.

Jammer wrote: Where the hell is Tiny on this joker's list? The omission immediately makes me question his method.

Number 15, read the article before you criticize.

Kind of seems like a garbage list to me and I agree Tiny being that low is a joke.

TheSheriff wrote:

Jammer wrote: Where the hell is Tiny on this joker's list? The omission immediately makes me question his method.

Number 15, read the article before you criticize.

Well, it seems that you are proud of your find (referring to The Wages of Wins website).

Many of us basketball aficionados have been aware of this website for several years.

So, what is apparently new to you, or relatively new, is OLD NEWS to some of us.
As in several years old.

Anyway, thanks for posting the link to a site that has not been mentioned too frequently
by our fellow RealGM'ers, as I'm sure other RealGMer's were either not aware of it or had never bothered to check it out before.

I stand by statements.