RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #10 (Magic Johnson)

Post #1 » by **Doctor MJ** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 3:58 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. There will also be a Nomination vote where whoever gets nominated by the most voters gets added to the Nominee list for subsequent votes. This is again optional.

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):

Larry Bird

Kobe Bryant

Steph Curry

Magic Johnson

George Mikan

Post #2 » by **penbeast0** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 4:10 pm

I'm choosing between Curry and Magic here.

Curry has the modernity edge where he has been the other dominant player to this board's #1 LeBron pick over the last decade. His gravity is the most extreme of the 3 with his ability to hit not just 3s, but really long 3s at a ridiculously effective clip warping defenses.

Magic is arguably the greatest playmaker in NBA history (Stockton and Paul have claims as well) as well as providing scoring, rebounding, mismatches, pretty much everything but defense. He played on one of the most stacked teams of all time but he quickly became its engine and led it to great success. He also is one of the great locker room guys to ever play; he gets, or should get, a lot of credit for reinvigorating Kareem who had become really self-isolating and that's why the Magic era Lakers had so much more success than the Nixon/Wilkes/Kareem era version.

It's very close between two with everyone else a level back.

VOTE: Curry -- the era strength differential over Magic was my decision maker as I do not have the early 80s as a strong NBA era.

ALTERNATIVE: Magic -- intangibles and playoff resume.

NOMINATE: Jerry West over Kevin Durant. The leadership skills and history of great playoff performances over the era strength bonus and pure scoring skills. West's defensive gives him my nod over Oscar. Julius and David Robinson are in the mix as well.

lessthanjake · Post #3 » by **lessthanjake** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 4:18 pm

Vote for #10: Stephen Curry
Alternative Vote: Magic Johnson
Nomination: Moses Malone

My reasoning for these votes can be found in my posts in the last thread(s), so for now I’ll just refer to those. Will probably add further information in future posts, but for now I’ll just rest on the large amount of prior posting I’ve done on these guys.

AEnigma · Post #4 » by **AEnigma** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 4:30 pm

VOTE: Magic Johnson
Nominate: Oscar Robertson

AEnigma wrote:I have a latent preference for players like Magic (such as my personal top two) who can figure you out and adapt. Magic is a guy I can trust in a lot of situations. I can trust him to adjust to another point guard. I can trust him to develop his shooting. I can trust him in a high transition era, but I can also trust his half-court brilliance. I can trust him to feed scorers, but I can also trust him to successfully increase his scoring volume when necessary. I cannot trust him to be a good defender… but I can trust that he does not prevent me from pairing him with the types of players who can anchor defences. I can trust him to typically outperform his direct rivals, and in his prime I can almost always trust him to not disappoint.

I gestured at this previously, but his GOAT path was comfortably ahead of Jordan’s pace when he was forced into retirement. Magic was securely better at basically every age until their respective age 23 (per basketball-reference here because both have birthdays after the data cutoff) seasons. And while I am sure many would prefer 1987-90 Jordan to 1983-87 Magic (I am more mixed on the question), by that point Magic had four rings and three Finals MVPs to Jordan’s zero. Jordan makes up ground from 1991-93… but then he retires while Magic has a phenomenal age 31 season. So at the time of Jordan’s first retirement, even if the public prefers his high octane scoring and had already crowned him the greatest guard in league history, he has no real accomplishment advantage over Magic (nor would I say he was as tied to his team’s success). For me, it was not until 1997 where the totality of Jordan’s career probably had surpassed Magic’s career, and then 1998 (plus signs of a higher level aging curve in 2002/03) was what created a full tier of separation between the two.

For how most of us approach this exercise, minutes and longevity hold Magic back. Even then, I find myself considering Oscar — the greatest guard before these two arrived. Around ten thousand more minutes played. Second highest minute load throughout his career (by far), behind only notorious exception Wilt. In presence, he offered more to his teams than Magic ever did, or possibly even would have without the stigma of the time. And yet I prefer Magic without a second thought, because that is how much better he played the position. The Lakers for his entire career were a ~7.5 net rating team. 900 games at that level, and then regularly mediocre without him (despite decent enough replacements). Very similar circumstances to Tim Duncan, except with a potentially (likely) even better aging curve.

Dr Positivity · Post #5 » by **Dr Positivity** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 4:35 pm

My only strikes against Curry are longevity and two way impact, I don't really see Magic and Bird having enough of an advantage in those areas, and I see Curry's era 2 paradigm shifts away from Magic and Bird's.

Therefore my primary competition for Curry here of nominated players is the Mamba, like KG, it comes down to having easily more superstar years, although I don't like his impact as much as Curry's.

DraymondGold · Post #6 » by **DraymondGold** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 4:57 pm

Finally getting the chance to follow back up on the rate metrics vs per-season metrics. Apologies for the delay! I figured I'd reply to this in the new thread, since Curry is on pace to be in the top two players with Magic. Magic seems like the favorite to win (and I may end up voting for Magic first), but there still are arguments one could make for Curry. I'll make two of them here.

Per 100 Possession metrics vs Total Season metrics for Curry

OhayoKD wrote:
draymondgold wrote:I'd argue here's one of the rare situations where a player was so good that their per-season value actually undersells them

Uh...how?

Is the rate he is outscoring them per possession likely to increase?
Are his replacements going to look better if they less time against opposing starters?

I recall 2020 Giannis barely playing in the fourth quarter. Does not seem to have been a positive influence on his impact to not be in those circumstances anymore.

Fair enough to point out that Steph *could* maybe theoretically maintain a similar rate with more time played… but at that point it is a question of confidence.

Presenting these lower minutes as some sort of disadvantage seems like a stretch.

Uh… how? Read the rest of the post! Lol

-Is his per season value going to go up if he plays more fourth quarters? Yes.
-Is the rate he is outscoring them per possession likely to increase? I provided reasoning that it won’t decrease, and has a chance to increase.
-Are his replacements going to look better if they less time against opposing starters? These are adjusted metrics, not raw ones, so they adjust for opponents on the court. Regardless, the point is that Curry is resting in blowouts, when the opposing starters would also be resting. In which case if opponents would have any affect, Curry would be playing more minutes against non starters anyway.

You recall Giannis resting a bunch of fourth quarters in 2020. That’s… not really true.

Number of Fourth Quarters Rested for some recent stars:
Garnett 2001–04: 4, 6, 2, 3 —> Average: 3.75 games a season
Giannis 2019–22: 5, 6, 6, 4 —> Average: 5.25 games a season
LeBron 2009–13: 14, 5, 8, 7, 9 —> Average: 8.6 games a season
Jokic 2020–23: 9, 15, 11, 10 —> Average: 11.25 games a season
Paul 2012–15: 7, 16, 10, 16 —> Average: 12.25
Curry 2015–18: 20, 19, 25, 18 —> Average: 20.5 games a season

So Curry rested 16.75 more fourth quarters *per season* than Garnett did! And nobody’s at all close. Not Giannis on his dominant teams (he rests 6 in 2020), certainly not Garnett who’s up for vote now.

And remember, Curry’s not just skipping more fourth quarters, his team is also dominant enough that he’s playing less in the fourth quarters he doesn’t miss (see previous post).

The rate comment was sort of supplemental to my point. But I wasn’t very clear about my point, so let me be more explicit:

-Jake provided (a wall of) stats that favor Curry over Garnett. Some of which were rate stats.
-You argued these rate stats overrate Curry and underrate Garnett because Garnett played more minutes/possessions than Curry, which makes up for the gap in the rate stats.

-I’m arguing that Curry’s teams were so dominant (in no small part because of Curry) that
1) Peak Curry missed far more fourth quarters entirely than any other star in this era [and provided clear evidence for this to be the case]
2) In the fourth quarters peak Curry did play, that he played fewer minutes than expected, which is again because his teams are so dominant [and provided clear evidence for this to be the case]

3) Therefore: some of the gap in per-season volume is from Curry’s missed fourth quarters.
Side Note: Curry played in a much faster era than Garnett. So Curry played more possessions per minute than Garnett. So Curry would be making up even more of the possession gap than the minute gap if he played in the 4th quarter. And the impact stats are usually per 100 possessions, not per 36 minutes.

4) We should only expect Curry’s total season value in these metrics to go up if he played more the fourth quarter, which he would have if he played on any other team that was less dominant.
One counter argument is that if he played more minutes, he would get more tired, so his per-100 rate would go proportionally, such that his per-season value remains roughly the same. This doesn’t seem to work in this situation. Why?
4i: First, there’s the obvious reason that’s he’s playing more. You’d expect volume to go up as minutes / possessions go up
4ii: Second, he’d be playing more at the end of the game. It’s not like he’d be playing more in the 2nd quarter, which might tire him out in the 3rd or 4th. We’d be adding minutes to the 4th quarter, so we could reasonably expect his performance in Quarters 1-3 to be fairly unchanged.
4iii: Third, he’d be playing more particularly in the games that were blowout victories for the Warriors, which correlate strongly with Curry’s better games with positive plus/minus. So he’d be playing more during his better games, when he’s hot, or when he’s already posting all-time level plus minus. Therefore we should expect awarding him more minutes in the 4th should increase his total season value.

Now here’s where we get into personal criteria. As above, people can have different criteria. I can understand penalizing someone (or at least not being willing to project value) for missed time due to injury, or sudden retirement, or something like that. But, me personally, I have a much harder time penalizing someone because their team was so good that they were in so many blowouts that they didn’t have to play that much.

It’s a very rare situation. It’s rare for someone to be on such a good team that they play notably fewer minutes, fewer possessions, than other stars of their caliber in their era. But if this is the case for a player, and if that player looks better in rate stats but slightly behind in total season value due to playing less possessions because they were in so many blowouts, I’m less interested in rating a player lower for that.

I’ve made the case that Curry fits in this situation. As such, I’m more willing to *slightly* mentally curve up his total-season value if he were in another situation, one where his Warriors weren’t so dominant that he got to rest in more 4th quarters than any other star in the modern era.

Curry's Career WOWY vs Garnett

OhayoKD wrote:
Ohayo, for someone who values WOWY so highly,

How highly though? If we were to look at my post arguing Kareem peaked higher than Micheal...
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107462472#p107462472
...we can see WOWY, as you are using it, is merely a small chunk of the whole of my case.

As far as data goes, most of the post is directed towards years where there is no direct WOWY. And this is for Kareem, a player where we have very limited alternatives in terms of assessing impact. I have maintained that WOWY has use even when we have access to data like RAPM. If you thought that meant I rank players according to regular-season WOWY averages(and we barely even have WOWY for KG's best regular-seasons), that is on you.

I think real-world stuff is especially useful to compare outliers(2016, 2004, 2009 ect), or to examine why something is happening in the artifical-stuff(Duncan staggering minutes with Drob's bad replacements, Spurs not really affected by Manu's absence, ect), but on the flip-side, lineup-adjustment makes things less noisy and is useful for establishing a baseline over longer time-frames. FWIW, I do rank RS Steph's highs pretty highly, above the best years for players like Hakeem and Jordan. But the same is true for KG. So unless you are willing to make the case years like 2016 were on another level compared to KG's 2004 or 2003, we get into how they generally look(KG carries an overwhelming advantage in both of the extended rapm sets we have), how much of their value can be tied to situation(very strongly favors Garnett), and what they and their casts do in the playoffs(2004 beats out 2016 pretty handily on that both fronts imo).

Considering all of that, I'm left thinking KG was the better player. It is then we get to the longevity, and there, a reasonably close comparison turns into a lopsided one.

And as "low" as I am on Steph, I am still likely to vote him 11th or 12th. Ahead of Bird and possibly ahead of Kobe. But he is not the best "impact" candidate currently on the board. Nor is he the most successful. And I certainly do not see why skill-set analysis would put him ahead of an all-time two-way big and an all-time helio. Two archetypes that have generally established higher floors and ceilings than the likes of MJ, Steph or Bird. Steph is probably the pinnacle of his archetype, and I imagine he would just look better and better the more you teleport him back, but in an era-relative comparison, I do not see his case for 9.

Kg’s already voted in (and I was a voter for him), so no big disagreement on KG, but I do disagree on the explanation here for KG, as presented.

For someone who says “The main advantage of WOWY is that you can see what truly happens when a player is removed from a team.”, for someone who characterizes WOWY as the true measure of wholistic global impact, this portrayal of Steph seems just flat out incorrect.

Steph clearly has better WOWY than KG. *For his career*.

Here’s all the raw single season WOWY data for KG and Curry:

Spoiler:

We can look at their full career weighted average WOWY, weighting by the smaller with/without sample (which is the dominant source for noise):
KG’s Career avg WOWY: +3.4 (+4979.3 total career WOWY)
Curry’s Career avg WOWY: +7.8 (+6900.3 total career WOWY)
Career Average WOWY: Curry >> KG

KG Career WOWY (avg WOWY * total games): +4979.3
Curry’s Career WOWY (avg WOWY * total games) +6900.3
Total Career WOWY, method 1: Curry >> KG

We can sum their WOWY each season (individual season WOWY * games in that season) to calculate a ballpark full career WOWY, method 2:
KG’s Career WOWY (summing up each season's WOWY): +8538.9
Curry’s Career WOWY (summing up each season'w ): +8768.4
Total Career WOWY, method 2: Curry > KG
*Note that we have to interpolate for 2003–2005, since KG doesn’t have any missed games in those years. I use a weighted average of 2000–02 and 2005–2008 for those years for this method. You could improve his performance up to 15% in these years before KG finally surpasses Curry. While 2003 and 2004 are the best years in this stretch, 2005 is also the worst year in this stretch, making it less likely these three years on the whole are 15% better than the surrounding years. Even if so, this method doesn't give any extra benefit for having a better prime or peak (like most people do), which Curry just might have...

So what if we just look at 10-year Primes?
1999–2008 KG total WOWY: +4796.9
2000–2009 KG total WOWY: +4630
2013–2022 Curry total WOWY: +6564.8
2014–2023 Curry total WOWY: +5610.3
10-year Prime WOWY: Curry >> KG

Note that the career value numbers and even prime numbers do *not* curve shortened seasons (1999, 2012, 2020, 2021) to full-length seasons. Curry would benefit more than KG if we did this.

Note that this does *not* apply corrections for diminishing returns on better teams, which would benefit Curry more than KG. When we do account for diminishing returns, recall that KG is 4th all time (above LeBron, Shaq, Bird, Hakeem, Magic, Duncan, Russell, Kobe, Jordan, Wilt, Kareem) in the single-season prime WOWY ranking by Thinking Basketball…. suggesting prime Curry is higher than those players too in prime WOWY.

And note that this does *not* include multi-season WOWY (e.g. comparing 2020 vs 2021 Warriors with or without Curry, without KD or Klay to bias the numbers), where Curry also *clearly* surpasses KG, per my previous post:

I mean if we look at their large-sample multi-year data, ranked by how valuable the samples are:
*Alternate Value: 2019–20 Warriors: Total change: +12.97 [Alternate years: Alternate Value using 2019 instead of 2021, subtracting 2021 Durant’s 1.97 WOWY. Klay’s 17–19 WOWY / 22 WOWY are both too noisy to use and at same time as other injuries.]
-2018 Warriors: 9.71 with, -0.16 without. Total change: +9.87 [Injury year] (51 games)
*Alternate Value: 2007–08 Celtics: Total change: +9.30 [Teammate Adjustment: Alternate Value subtracting 07 Ray Allen’s 3.7 WOWY]
-2020–21 Warriors: 0.4 with, -8.52 without. Total change: +8.92 [Injury year]
-2022–23 Warriors: 5.38 with, -1.0 without. Total: 6.38 [Injury year]
-2015–16 Timberwolves: -2.21 with, -7.57 without. Total change: +5.36 [Traded, joining Timberwolves]
-2012 Warriors: -0.54 with, -5.28 without. Total change: +4.74 [Injury year]
-2008–09 Celtics: 9.88 with, 5.33 without. Total change: +4.55 [Injury year]
-2013–14 Celtics: -0.62 with, -4.97 without. Total change: +4.35 [Traded, leaving Celtics]
*Alternate Value: 2009–10 Celtics: Total change: +3.98 [Alternate years: Alternate value using 2010 instead of 2008]
-2007–08 Timberwolves: -3.16 with, -6.26 without. Total change: +3.1 [Traded, leaving Timberwolves]
-1995–96 Timberwolves: -5.14 with, -8.22 without. Total change: +3.08 [Rookie year]
-2016 Timberwolves: -2.61 with, -4.34 without. Total change: +1.73 [Injury year]
-2009–10 Warriors: -3.28 with, -3.8 without. Total change: +0.52 [Rookie year]
-2015–16 Nets: -3.02 with, -2.73 without. Total change: -0.29 [Traded, leaving Nets]
-2016–17 Timberwolves: -2.61 with, -0.64 without. Total change: -1.97 [Retirement]
-2013–14 Nets: -1.57 with, 1.25 without. Total change: -2.82 [Traded, joining Nets]

Considering how KG is 4th in the prime raw WOWY ranking (single-season data), and has the longevity advantage... and Curry *still* ends up on top for career WOWY value, I'd say that's highly compelling, especially in conjunction with all the other impact metrics that portray him as clearly a top 10 player for primes and many even for career value.

There’s obviously other stats too, but I’m really not getting how someone who values WOWY more than most posters here (obviously including other data/criteria too ofc) doesn’t see Curry’s GOAT level WOWY as cause to rank him higher….

Post #7 » by **cupcakesnake** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 5:06 pm

Vote: Magic Johnson
Alternate: Steph Curry
Nominate: Jerry West

My reasoning isn't complicated for this clash of the GOAT offensive guards. I don't think Curry has quite caught Magic in terms of career value. I think he probably will and I'll probably have Curry over Magic by the time we hit the next version of this project. Magic only has a 20 more regular season games (and 40 more playoff games). I have '87 Magic a tiny touch above '17 Curry, and I have Magic getting to a weak-MVP level sooner than Curry did, (and I think I'm pretty high on pre-superstar Curry).

Offensively, I do like Magic's ability to exert control over a possession a little bit more than Curry's ability to break defenses with shooting gravity and think it has a bit more resiliency. There's been a few times where defenses have found little ways to chip away at Curry's value (not to the point where he still wasn't really **** good) in ways that I haven't perceived with Magic. Whether it was jamming him on cuts, top locking, or switching actions, I've seen stuff work against Curry. If someone could give me a comparable example where Magic was stopped from producing elite playoff offense before the 90s, I'd be curious to compare. I think Magic's physical advantages make him harder to mitigate. Until we got a prime Scottie Pippen vs. an older Magic, there just wasn't way to stop Magic from starting every possession with an advantage as a scoring threat. Defenses had to react to his scoring threat at that size, and then he got to get into slicing up defenses with the playmaking. It's a lot like Jokic's 2023 playoff run. And I'm just talking about halfcourt offense right now because I don't think anyone needs to be told about Magic's transition work.

I like Curry's defense more in terms of technique, awareness, and effort. Obviously his size makes him hard to compare to Magic, and Curry would get targeted way more than Magic ever did. But looking at film it's clear that Curry works his ass off in matchups and makes good decisions as a defensive playmaker. I can't say the same thing about Magic. His defense makes me hold my nose. I'm not in the camp of Magic's defense not being that bad. It was bad! He brought some disruptiveness with his size though for sure, and he wasn't a juicy matchup to attack. It's a less dramatic version of Harden's defense IMO, where the overall defense is poor but not because he's exploitable one-on-one. I think Harden actually guards the ball better than Magic bit is dramatically less aware.

I'm not necessarily locked into Curry after Magic. I have Curry, West, Oscar, Mikan, and Bird rounding out the bottom of my top 15 and I'm super interested about this chunk of gatekeepers to the top 10. I have 9 other guys who I also consider pretty close here.

iggymcfrack · Post #8 » by **iggymcfrack** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 5:11 pm

Seems like it’s very close between Curry and Magic. Both players have similar length primes and Magic did lead better offenses on average by a couple points a year. However, Steph led better offenses at peak and I think his peak supporting casts were more comparable to Magic’s supporting casts than what he’s had the last few years. Notably, the team did collapse horrifically in 2020 without Steph although to be fair they also played pretty well when he missed long stretches last year. Overall, I think Steph’s better defense, tougher era, and worse teammates (on average, not at peak!) are enough to make up for Magic leading better offenses (again on average, not at peak) although I’d like to do some year-by-year WOWY analysis before making an official voting post.

With the landscape for nominations pretty wide open, I think this would be a good time for people to look at David Robinson who probably has about as good of an argument as KG or Hakeem to be the second best defender all-time, has very good career box score numbers, and had incredible impact numbers in his decline years playing next to Duncan.

ZeppelinPage · Post #9 » by **ZeppelinPage** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 5:45 pm

Vote: Magic Johnson
Nomination: Jerry West

Among the available options, I have Magic the highest. I would prefer to vote West or Oscar though, so I'll dedicate some time so that they might gain traction, starting with West. To put it simply, Magic is the greatest passer ever and the value he brings as an offensive engine while bringing size, versatility, and rebounding to the table is too much for me to ignore among the current candidates. I don't see other candidates having quite his level of overall impact. Now, onto West:

Everyone here is knowledgeable enough to know just how good West was on offense during his time. His TS+ numbers on such a high volume are among the greatest ever. He was a fantastic all-around player that could drive or utilize his lighting fast pull-up to catch defenders off-guard. Perhaps later on I'll post some more on West's offensive capabilities, especially his passing.

What I did want to bring to light was Jerry West's defensive ability. Earlier I saw someone mention something along the lines of "West was a good defender but nothing spectacular" so I did want to go into a little more detail about what coaches, players, and writers of the time thought about West's defense. This is important because, while there is a good amount of footage on West out there, nobody watched West more than these contemporary sources. Afterwards, I wanted to show more of what West can do on film.

"I don't even like to talk about myself but I think I would have set a steal record that no one would have ever come close to--no one."
-- Jerry West on Point Forward with Andre Igoudala and Evan Turner

"I think the best player that I had play defense against me was Jerry West."
-- Sam Jones in a 2011 ESPN interview

Jerry West was around 6'5" in shoes. He's spoken about his athletic abilities before, but he was quite a standout in his era and would hold up even today. He was quick, long (around a 6'9" wingspan), and could jump higher than most players.

Through my research I've found what seems like countless mentions of Jerry West's defense. His stealing and blocking ability was frequently mentioned:

"Certainly, he blocks more shots than any other guard ever and more than most centers. Then, too, he breaks up a lot of plays."
-- Bill Sharman in 1965, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"Jerry is a superstar on offense who can be just as valuable on defense and you can't find too many of those around . . . He blocks more shots than any other guard."
-- Warriors Coach Bill Sharman in 1967, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"At his position, nobody does as good an all-around job. Bill Russell is 6-10, so he is big enough to plug up the middle, but West deflects more passes and blocks a lot of shots."
-- Fred Schaus in 1967

Spoiler:

"...I lost count of all his steals and blocked shots."
--Basketball column by John Hall following 1968 Western Conference Finals

Spoiler:

"Sure, Jerry gets a lot of steals, but people often overlook how many times he touches the ball on defense during the game. He has the quickest hands of any player I've ever seen."
-- Hot Rod Hundley on West in 1969

Spoiler:

"[Jerry West] merely leads the NBA in assists and the world in steals, deflected passes and broken dribbles."
-- 1970

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 7 steals in the 3rd quarter against the Sonics:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 9 steals and a "few" blocks:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 10 steals in three quarters:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 12 steals against the Phoenix Suns in the 1970 playoffs:

Spoiler:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Praise of West's general defensive abilities was also common:

"Right close by his offensive prowess was his defensive ability, and to me, Jerry West was the most underrated defensive player in that era."
-- Red Auerbach

"West is the greatest superstar in the league at both ends of the court."
-- Warriors Coach Bill Sharman in 1968, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"I've often said he's the best defensive guard EVER to play the game . . . I know he has two or three times more blocked shots than any guard who lived."
-- Lakers coach Bill Sharman in 1973

Spoiler:

"He is the best defensive guard in the league."
-- Chicago Bulls coach Johnny Kerr in 1968

Spoiler:

"It's the best defensive job done on me this year -- or any year for that matter."
-- Hall of Famer Lou Hudson after 1970 Western Conference Finals where Jerry West held him to 16.3 PPG on a 29 FG%

Spoiler:

"Jerry's defense is what they miss the most when he's not there . . . West gives more defensive effort when the other team has the ball than any other of the big offensive stars in the entire NBA."
--Cincinnati Royals player on West in 1964

Spoiler:

This is all just a snippet of many more mentions regarding West's defense that I have found, far too many to list here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's take a look at the film and see if it supports what contemporary accounts are telling us.

West has described "seeing the game in slow motion" and thinking about the game in "angles" as a key reason for his impactful defense. His long arms and quick hands could find these angles and poke the ball free. This, combined with his leaping ability, led to plays like this:

West Steal to Win Game 3 of 1962 Finals:

Spoiler:

West 3 Blocks vs Warriors - 1964:

Spoiler:

West 2-on-1 Transition Block into Steal (Lakers Coach Fred Schaus Commentating) - 1965:

Spoiler:

West Back-to-Back Steals at End of Game 7 of the 1966 Finals:

Spoiler:

West Steal and Block vs 76ers - 1969:

Spoiler:

West Pressuring and Deflecting - 1969 Western Conference Finals:

Spoiler:

West Blocks Sam Jones Twice and Steals Pass - Game 1 of 1969 Finals:

Spoiler:

West Disrupts Celtics in Transition for Steal and Reads Pass for Steal - Game 4 of 1969 Finals:

Spoiler:

West Uses Length to Strip Connie Hawkins - Game 7 of 1970 Western Division Semifinals:

Spoiler:

West Pokes Ball Away for Steal - 1970:

Spoiler:

West's threat level on defense could help negate the transition game of teams like the Celtics. In Game 7 of the 1962 NBA Finals, Jerry West falls back off missed shots to ensure he's there to disrupt the Celtics' fast break. Not only does he block this Sam Jones drive:

Spoiler:

But his presence alone was making it more difficult to pass or get open looks:

Spoiler:

Much like the written sources, this is but a tiny glimpse of West's defense, but he consistently displays this high-impact defense that is mentioned from people of the time period. I believe West is one of the greatest defenders of his era, and among the greatest stealers and off-ball defenders to ever play the game.

OldSchoolNoBull · Post #10 » by **OldSchoolNoBull** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 5:46 pm

Vote: Magic Johnson

I will quote my post from the previous thread:

Magic is arguably the greatest combination of scoring and playmaking the game has ever seen. For his career in the regular season, Magic averaged:

19.5ppg and 11.2apg on +7.2 rTS in 13 seasons(this includes 1996)
25.4pp100 and 14.5ap100

(At this point I want to say that I fully realize that there's more to playmaking impact than just looking at assists; it's just that it usually involves metrics that don't exist for Magic(or Oscar or the first two-thirds of Stockton's career, two players I'm going to be looking at, for that matter), so I'm just using assists as quick point of comparison).

Compare that to some others in the scoring+playmaking conversation...

LeBron: 27.2ppg and 7.3apg on +4.6 rTS in 20 seasons
LeBron: 36.8pp100 and 10.1ap100

Oscar: 25.7ppg and 9.5apg on +6.8 rTS in 14 seasons
(no Per 100 numbers available)

Oscar(adjusted for pace): 21.9ppg and 8.1apg on +6.8 rTS in 14 seasons

So, Magic and Oscar are pretty close as scorers, in both volume and efficiency, but Magic still has a big playmaking advantage.

Harden: 24.7ppg and 7apg on +5.7 rTS in 14 seasons
35.1pp100 and 10ap100

Steph: 24.6ppg on 6.5apg on +7 rTS in 14 seasons
34.9pp100 and 9.2ap100

As you'd expect, Steph has the best overall volume+efficiency combination as a scorer, but his assists numbers fall way short.

Nash: 14.3ppg and 8.5apg on +6 rTS(though he had two dramatic outlier years - the 99 lockout season and his final season, and if you removes those, it's +7.3 rTS) in 18 seasons
23.3pp100 and 13.8ap100

Nash falls short on the per game numbers, though it's certainly closer by Per 100...in fact there, Nash gets closer than just about anyone to Magic.

Stockton: 13.1ppg and 10.5apg on 7.3 rTS in 19 seasons.
21pp100 and 16.8ap100

Very similar to Nash, and again, by straight per-game numbers, his points are below, but like Nash, his Per 100 is comparable with Stockton in fact being the only one top Magic in ap100.

Paul: 17.9ppg and 9.5apg on +3.2 rTS
26.7p100 and 14.1ap00

CP3's per-game numbers are fairly comparable, and his Per 100 numbers even moreso, much like Nash and Stockton, but his rTS is well below anyone else I've looked at here, and his constant injury issues don't help his case either.

Here's how these players rank in career TS Add:

Oscar: 212.7(pace adjusted)
Steph: 187.1
Magic(w/1996 removed): 170.4
Harden 169.4
Magic: 161.4
LeBron: 142.0
Stockton: 129.8
Nash: 118.2
CP3: 72.3

The broad point is that among these types of players, Magic ranks near the top as a scorer(with only Oscar and Steph clearly ahead by TS Add) and pretty much at the top as an assist-maker on a per-game basis(though Stockton and Nash have a strong Per 100 case there). His offensive impact, when looking at the volume and efficiency of his scoring combined with the volume and consistency of his playmaking, is GOAT tier. To the point where I'm not sure how much his defensive deficiencies matter.

In terms of actual impact signals, I look at two.

One, in his second season, 1980-81, he played only 37 games. The Lakers' overall SRS that year was 3.27. By my calculations, their SRS in the 37 games Magic played was 6.30.

Two, in 1990-91, the Lakers had a 6.73 SRS and +7.1 Net Rtg. Following Magic's retirement, in 1991-92, they had a -0.95 SRS and -1.2 Net Rtg. Now, I acknowledge that James Worthy also missed 28 games and that Vlade Divac also missed 46 games that season, and I'm sure that contributed to the team's precipitous fall, but I have to think Magic's absence was the biggest factor. Frankly, the following season, 1992-93, when Worthy and Divac were healthy, the numbers were even worse - -1.2 SRS and -1.3 Net Rtg.

(And FWIW, they fell from #5 in Def Rtg in 91 to #17 in 92 and #16 in 93, make of that what you will).

I said two, but I thought of a couple more that are less definitive imo but still worth mentioning. The 1989 Lakers swept through the playoffs, didn't lose a single game, and then got swept in the Finals after Magic went down. I know, Byron Scott was also out, and Magic in fact played the first game and most of the second game they lost. Still something to consider.

The 1996 Lakers' SRS was 4.21 but, by my calculations, their SRS in the 32 games Magic played was 5.81(and none of the other major pieces of that team missed any significant amount of time). Maybe it doesn't mean much, but again, worth mentioning.

Finally, with regards to his (lack of) longevity:

Look, I'm not a big longevity guy to begin with. But to hold it against a guy who was literally forced into his retirement seems particularly wrong-headed to me.

First off, compare his numbers from 1986-87 - usually held as his peak year - and 1990-91 - his last year:

1986-87: 23.9ppg, 12.2apg, 6.3rpg on +6.4 rTS, 9.4 BPM, .263 WS/48 in 36.3mpg over 80 games
1990-91: 19.4ppg, 12.5apg, 7.0rpg on +8.9 rTS, 9.0 BPM, .251 WS/48 in 37.1mpg over 79 games

Not a whole heck of a lot of drop there. You commonly hear this argument(usually from people trying to discredit MJ) that Magic was old or washed-up or done in 1991, and it's just nonsense. Magic was All-NBA 1st Team and #2 in MVP voting that year behind MJ, and I showed above what happened to that Lakers team the following two seasons after he retired.

He never wanted to retire, he had to. Then he came back, won the 1992 ASG MVP, played well for the Dream Team that summer, thought people were ready to accept him, launched a comeback in the preseason that fall, and was forced out AGAIN.

When he made an ill-advised attempt at coaching in 1994, it was quite obviously the decision of a man who desperately wanted to still be in the league.

And when he finally did come back in 1996, guys like Ceballos and Van Exel were acting like punks, giving him attitude, and just generally disrespecting him(while he was putting up pretty damn decent numbers for a 36 year old who hadn't played in 3.5 years[14.6ppg, 6.9apg, 5.7rpg on +7 rTS, 5.2 BPM, .181 WS/48 in 29.9mpg over 32 games], suggesting he would've been productive into the mid-90s if he'd had the chance), so it's no wonder he didn't come back for 96-97.

His body didn't break down. He didn't burn out. He was forced out. To hold it against him is in a maddening injustice to me.

He was the heart and soul of one of the three greatest dynasties in NBA history.

Secondary Vote: Larry Bird

OldSchoolNoBull · Post #11 » by **OldSchoolNoBull** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 5:49 pm

A question for everyone: Steph was #24 three years ago. Do you guys think the 2022 championship run was worth a 13-14 spot jump? Or do you think he was rated too low last time?

eminence · Post #12 » by **eminence** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:11 pm

OldSchoolNoBull wrote:A question for everyone: Steph was #24 three years ago. Do you guys think the 2022 championship run was worth a 13-14 spot jump? Or do you think he was rated too low last time?

I'm not voting for Steph yet, and probably won't get the chance to, as I expect he'll be in before I'd be voting for him (I tend to be lower on mid career guys than most).

But I see the totality of '21-'23 being worth a pretty solid rankings jump from wherever you had him prior. '22 did the most for him, no question, but '21/'23 were both high value seasons in their own right, even without factoring in '22 at all he should be climbing a few spots on individuals lists (overall I'd be shocked if he didn't go top 15 this go around based on current trends).

homecourtloss · Post #13 » by **homecourtloss** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:21 pm

Official vote: Magic Johnson
Nomination: Oscar Robertson

An offensive savant with a natural feel for the game whose impact signals look as strong as anyone’s in the ‘80s and early ‘90s (WOWYR, Squared2020’s partial RAPM samples). @rk2023 sums up his impact signals well (and makes a good case for why his longevity or relative lack thereof is not a function of his game not holding up but rather through forces outside of his control). The ‘96 season in which he came back in which the Lakers were +7.1 when he was on court, when Magic was not in the best shape for obvious reasons, STILL impacted heavy offensive impact through scoring+playmaking that speaks to the inelasticity of his impact.

rk2023 wrote:- 9 seasons and PS campaigns in the 100th percentile in Thinking Basketball's Passer Rating
- Monster grades in Jacobs' historical RAPM for 1985 & 88 (Am aware this is a very small sample and only a 1 year RAPM sample)
- Pretty solid on-court track record (atl at glance) from Jacobs' career tracking of Magic's +/-. Checks out given the Lakers' impressive team data in the Magic era. https://squared2020.com/2022/07/22/some-magic-johnson-plus-minus-numbers/
- Consistently high WOWY scores, regardless of statistical method, in Moonbeam's modeling
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107785464#p107785464
- Furthermore, Lakers PS rORTG(s) in 3 year increments from when Magic "took the reigns" in 1984 (so starting with 1984-86):
8.0, 9.1, 8.3, 9.0, 8.2, 7.2

One of my favorite things to watch is Johnson dribbling the ball up to the left side of the court turn his back, dribble from the post, make a move into the lane, naturally bump off body, contact, and work his way into a little skyhook or a little finger roll. He also had that hard dribble to his left, starting from the right side of the key, and then finishing in the lane to be honest with you, he probably should have taken more shots given how highly efficient he was in his half court offense, but then again he was a creator par excellence. How many times have you watched him at the top of the key and throw a pass onto the right side of the lane by the basket seemingly into the middle of nowhere, but somehow those seemingly nowhere passes would find his teammates coming off of the double picks set on the left side…he was brilliant.

Every year in the league he developed as a player by becoming a better shooter (FT and 3p) and a more adept half-court offensive player who could drive. Post up, change drives into post ups, drive to draw contact, drive to dish to others, drive to score. @70sFan posted a good video of his offensive arsenal:

Watch on YouTube

There were excellent posts made about his scoring+playmaking, attributed that led to a #1 offense in 1989 and 1990 primarily through Magic’s offensive genius.

Magic is arguably the greatest combination of scoring and playmaking the game has ever seen. For his career in the regular season, Magic averaged:

19.5ppg and 11.2apg on +7.2 rTS in 13 seasons(this includes 1996)
25.4pp100 and 14.5ap100

(At this point I want to say that I fully realize that there's more to playmaking impact than just looking at assists; it's just that it usually involves metrics that don't exist for Magic(or Oscar or the first two-thirds of Stockton's career, two players I'm going to be looking at, for that matter), so I'm just using assists as quick point of comparison).

Compare that to some others in the scoring+playmaking conversation...

LeBron: 27.2ppg and 7.3apg on +4.6 rTS in 20 seasons
LeBron: 36.8pp100 and 10.1ap100

Oscar: 25.7ppg and 9.5apg on +6.8 rTS in 14 seasons
(no Per 100 numbers available)

Oscar(adjusted for pace): 21.9ppg and 8.1apg on +6.8 rTS in 14 seasons

So, Magic and Oscar are pretty close as scorers, in both volume and efficiency, but Magic still has a big playmaking advantage.

Harden: 24.7ppg and 7apg on +5.7 rTS in 14 seasons
35.1pp100 and 10ap100

Steph: 24.6ppg on 6.5apg on +7 rTS in 14 seasons
34.9pp100 and 9.2ap100

As you'd expect, Steph has the best overall volume+efficiency combination as a scorer, but his assists numbers fall way short.

Nash: 14.3ppg and 8.5apg on +6 rTS(though he had two dramatic outlier years - the 99 lockout season and his final season, and if you removes those, it's +7.3 rTS) in 18 seasons
23.3pp100 and 13.8ap100

Nash falls short on the per game numbers, though it's certainly closer by Per 100...in fact there, Nash gets closer than just about anyone to Magic.

Stockton: 13.1ppg and 10.5apg on 7.3 rTS in 19 seasons.
21pp100 and 16.8ap100

Very similar to Nash, and again, by straight per-game numbers, his points are below, but like Nash, his Per 100 is comparable with Stockton in fact being the only one top Magic in ap100.

Paul: 17.9ppg and 9.5apg on +3.2 rTS
26.7p100 and 14.1ap00

CP3's per-game numbers are fairly comparable, and his Per 100 numbers even moreso, much like Nash and Stockton, but his rTS is well below anyone else I've looked at here, and his constant injury issues don't help his case either.

Here's how these players rank in career TS Add:

Oscar: 212.7(pace adjusted)
Steph: 187.1
Magic(w/1996 removed): 170.4
Harden 169.4
Magic: 161.4
LeBron: 142.0
Stockton: 129.8
Nash: 118.2
CP3: 72.3

The broad point is that among these types of players, Magic ranks near the top as a scorer(with only Oscar and Steph clearly ahead by TS Add) and pretty much at the top as an assist-maker on a per-game basis(though Stockton and Nash have a strong Per 100 case there). His offensive impact, when looking at the volume and efficiency of his scoring combined with the volume and consistency of his playmaking, is GOAT tier. To the point where I'm not sure how much his defensive deficiencies matter.

In terms of actual impact signals, I look at two.

One, in his second season, 1980-81, he played only 37 games. The Lakers' overall SRS that year was 3.27. By my calculations, their SRS in the 37 games Magic played was 6.30.

Two, in 1990-91, the Lakers had a 6.73 SRS and +7.1 Net Rtg. Following Magic's retirement, in 1991-92, they had a -0.95 SRS and -1.2 Net Rtg. Now, I acknowledge that James Worthy also missed 28 games and that Vlade Divac also missed 46 games that season, and I'm sure that contributed to the team's precipitous fall, but I have to think Magic's absence was the biggest factor. Frankly, the following season, 1992-93, when Worthy and Divac were healthy, the numbers were even worse - -1.2 SRS and -1.3 Net Rtg.

(And FWIW, they fell from #5 in Def Rtg in 91 to #17 in 92 and #16 in 93, make of that what you will).

I said two, but I thought of a couple more that are less definitive imo but still worth mentioning. The 1989 Lakers swept through the playoffs, didn't lose a single game, and then got swept in the Finals after Magic went down. I know, Byron Scott was also out, and Magic in fact played the first game and most of the second game they lost. Still something to consider.

The 1996 Lakers' SRS was 4.21 but, by my calculations, their SRS in the 32 games Magic played was 5.81(and none of the other major pieces of that team missed any significant amount of time). Maybe it doesn't mean much, but again, worth mentioning.

And the comparison with others:

OhayoKD wrote:
Magic vs Steph

I'll start this off with some excerpts from the skillset analysis me and blackmill did(and I presented chunks of for the Kareem thread). Some of you may have see this before, but for posterity...

"Making teammates better" Tiers
Spoiler:
This is an interesting way to break things down though I think we can add some levels here(this is somewhat tangential to this discussion but may as well)

Also think we can add "play-calling"/"running the offense" to shift "Playmaking" to "making teammates better".

I think the bottom-level is when your play-making/ball-handling is an active detriment to your ability to generate scoring oppurtunities for yourself(at the high-end of this is Durant, low-end of this might be Davis).

I think a tier up we get players who aren't really able to create a bunch but have suffecient skill here that they are not that dependent on teammates to generate scoring oppurtunities for themselves(Kawhi)

Tier two we get players who, with the right pieces, can leverage their scoring gravity towards creating for others(Kareem as you allude to may be the best of this archtype since he really just needs "functional" help here)

Tier three guys are players who can function as primary ball-handlers and therefore automatically will generate for their teammates offensively(At the high end you have Jordan/Curry, lower end you get someone like Giannis)

And then I think Tier four are guys who not only generate oppurtunities with their gravity but effectively leaverage their teammates and their own abilities to not only generate potential oppurtunities, but then select/generate the best possible ones(low-end might be CP3, mid might be lebron/jokic, highest end might be magic/nash).

In this framework, Magic grades a tier higher than Steph based on two alleged advantages;
-> The ability to leverage/organize his teammates as a floor-general
-> The efficiency of his creation

I don't think most readers here will contest the first one as being true. But the second might sound a bit wonky. So let's elaborate a little:

There is a bit of a fallacy I think where people look at raw assist totals, raw creation counts, or box-oc and pretend volume is everything. But it's not just about what you create. It's also about the quality of what you're creating AND how much you're leaving on the table with suboptimal decisions. Players on this tier have better discernable offensive "lift" than players the tier below, and often this is blamed entirely or pre-dominantly on "this is just because of who their teammates are", but I actually think the real source of this offensive advantage is the "quality" of what they're creating(and some of the backseat coaching stuff has an off-court effect that can't be tracked via impact stuff)

We'll get to "discernible left" after but let's start with some granular analysis. First up, Jordan:
Spoiler:

Much like we look at scoring volume(creation) and efficiency(passer-rating), I would like you to look at both when interpreting these screencaps. His passer-rating peaks at 8.0 in 88 and 95 but his creation is substantially lower. His volume peaks at 16 in 1989 but his passer-rating falls. And then in the subsequent years(largely considered his "best"), his volume and efficiency falls.

We see a bit of an upgrade with Steph:
Spoiler:

From 14-16 he puts up volume on par with Jordan's best marks alongside efficiency on par with Jordan's best marks peaking a teensy bit higher in both and putting the two together at the same time. Curiously those numbers decline when KD comes(that may be regular-season specific though).

And then we get to Lebron, one of the best creators ever:
Spoiler:

Notably his raw voume is not stand-out. Peaking at 16.2 it's barely ahead of Jordan's 89 and a bit behind two Steph marks. But efficiency is a different matter. Jordan is simply not competitive here. Steph competes from 14 to 16 but he's at a significant disadvantage generally and has no answer for Lebron's 2010.

Enter Johnson:
Spoiler:

Jordan may not be competitive with Lebron, but Lebron is even less competitive with Magic. Magic completely breaks the chart in terms of volume and efficiency, again and again. He has three seasons where he creates more than any of the years we've looked at and all three are more efficient than any of the seasons we've looked at.

But does any of this matter? Well...

Proof of Concept:
Curry:
Spoiler:
2015 +4 (RS) +4.1(PS)
2016 +7.9(RS)+5.7(PS)
2017 +6.8(RS)+11.6 (PS)
2018 + 5.0(RS)+6.5(PS)
2019 + 5.5(RS)+5.4 (PS)
average: 5.85 (RS) 6.6(PS)
combined average: +6.2

Lebron
Spoiler:
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

jordan* (i had to use his first 5 championship seasons)
Spoiler:
1991 +6.7(RS) +11.7 (PS)
1992 +7.3(RS) +6.5 (PS)
1993 +4.9 (RS) +9.8 (PS)
1996 +7.6 (RS) +8.6 (PS)
1997 +7.7(RS) +6.5(PS)
average +6.85 (RS) +8.6(PS)
combined average:+7.7

nash
Spoiler:
2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: +8.5

shaq
Spoiler:
1998 +6.9(RS), +10.1(PS)
1999 +5.4(RS), +4.7(PS)
2000 +3.2(RS), +9.3(PS)
2001 +5.4 (RS) +13.6(PS)
2002 +4.9(RS), +6.4 (PS)
Average +5.2(RS) +8.8(PS)
combined average: +7

bird
Spoiler:
1984 +3.3 (RS) +6.4 (PS)
1985 +4.9 (RS) +3.9 (PS)
1986 +4.6 (RS) + 8.3 (PS)
1987 +5.2 (RS) + 8.7 (PS)
1988 +7.4 (RS) +4.2 (PS)
average +5.1(RS) +6.3(PS)
combined average: +5.7

magic
Spoiler:
1986 +6.1(RS) +6.7
1987 +7.6 (RS) +10.7
1988 +5.1(RS) +8.3
1989 +6 (RS) +9.3
1990 +5.9(RS) +8.4
Average +6.1(RS), + 8.7 (PS)
combined average: +7.4

Magic leads better offenses than Steph. Players similar to Magic tend to lead better offenses than players similar steph. Magic has proven himself without his best co-star, and players like Magic have shown proof of concept outside of optimal-situations while Steph and players like Steph seem to struggle generating great results until they find the right situation.

Magic on the other hand, by impact, was the king of his era:
Spoiler:
Magic Johnson(3x MVP) 1980-1991
Lakers are +0.8 without, +7.5 with

Micheal Jordan(5x MVP) 1985-1998
Bulls are +1.3 without, +6.1 with

Hakeem(1x MVP) 1985-1999
Rockets are -2.8 without. +2.5 with

Hakeem takes 33-win teams to 48 wins
Jordan takes 38-win teams to 53.5 wins
Magic takes 44-win teams to 59 wins

Keeping in mind that it's harder to lift better teams, Hakeem comes marginally behind Jordan, and slightly more behind Magic, but he's right up there with both.

Ben has his own(presumably more sophisticated) approach which likes Hakeem even better; "Prime WOWY" ranks Olajuwon 10th. Magic and Jordan rank 12th and 20th, respectively.

Elgee wrote:Collectively, the film and data scream that Johnson was one of the very best offensive players in history. His WOWYR numbers are fantastic, finishing first in the 2016 results, and near the top in all regressed game-level studies. His team’s offenses were even better in the postseason, improving by a weighted average of 2.5 efficiency points. However, Magic’s defensive work dings him somewhat among the other greats, as he was likely a neutral-impact defender in the early part of his career before his defense waned in later seasons. But it’s his longevity that costs him most on this list, as HIV stole valuable prime years for him to climb up the top-10.
In ’87, Magic authored his magnus opum, leading the same rotation from ’86 to a 66-win pace (9.5 SRS) and a mind-boggling 119.9 offensive rating in the postseason, a record that would stand until Cleveland posted a 120.3 mark in the 2017 playoffs.7 The ’88 and ’89 Lakers regressed slightly and then Kareem retired. With the firepower dwindling, the results still remained — LA maintained a win pace around 60 thanks to its elite offense in ’90 and ’91 — a testament to Magic’s floor-raising skills.

Injuries and aging complicate any analysis of Magic’s first retirement. Vlade Divac missed half of the 1992 season, and when he returned, Worthy — rapidly declining with age — missed the remainder of the year. The Lakers finished around .500, and in their only full-strength stretch (all of 11 games) they played at a 50-win pace (2.9 SRS). The offense finished right around average. Even five years after HIV abruptly ended his career, Johnson’s presence helped the ’96 team on offense (while hurting the defense): LA posted a +2.3 rORtg (51-win pace) in 38 games with Eddie Jones, and then a +7.4 rORtg (59-win pace) in 32 games when Magic suited up next to Jones.

eminence · Post #14 » by **eminence** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:27 pm

I'm pretty set on my votes this round (Magic/Mikan), but wide open on nominations, so will be reading those arguments closely.

Oscar, Dirk, Robinson, Malone x2 the guys I'm considering on first thought. Sorry Jerry, you're worth considering, but I've looked at you vs Oscar enough to have a clear preference there. CP3 is probably someone I should begin to consider, but haven't thought about a ton at these levels.

HeartBreakKid · Post #15 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:30 pm

Great stuff from zeppelin. I'm already preparing for Robertson vs West at this point (I'd actually vote them over the current candidates).

lessthanjake · Post #16 » by **lessthanjake** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:32 pm

cupcakesnake wrote:Offensively, I do like Magic's ability to exert control over a possession a little bit more than Curry's ability to break defenses with shooting gravity and think it has a bit more resiliency. There's been a few times where defenses have found little ways to chip away at Curry's value (not to the point where he still wasn't really **** good) in ways that I haven't perceived with Magic. Whether it was jamming him on cuts, top locking, or switching actions, I've seen stuff work against Curry. If someone could give me a comparable example where Magic was stopped from producing elite playoff offense before the 90s.

When the Lakers faced good teams in the early 1980s, their playoff offenses were not actually very good.

For instance, here’s the Lakers’s rORTG (compared to RS league average that year) where either the Lakers faced: (1) a 4+ SRS team, (2) a finalist, or (3) they lost the series:

Lakers Playoff rORTG vs. good teams

1980 vs. SuperSonics: +0.1
1980 vs. 76ers: +1.6
1981 vs. Rockets: -4.2
1982 vs. 76ers: +1.6
1983 vs. 76ers: -5.0
1984 vs. Celtics: +4.4
1985 vs. Celtics: +4.4
1986 vs. Rockets: +0.2
1987 vs. Celtics: +10.1
1988 vs. Pistons: +0.9
1989 vs. Suns: +5.8
1989 vs. Pistons: +5.3
1990 vs. Suns: +3.8
1991 vs. Blazers: +4.0
1991 vs. Bulls: -3.4
1996 vs. Rockets: -5.6

Career Avg: +1.5

Given some of these negative numbers, I don’t think it’d be correct to think teams couldn’t chip away at Magic’s value, particularly in the early 1980s, where the Lakers playoff offenses against good teams really just weren’t very good. Indeed, the 1983 Finals was basically a horror show from Magic. And even the best series in that time period (i.e. 1984 vs. Boston) actually arguably hinged on Magic having some really serious problems at a bunch of key points.

For reference, here’s comparable numbers for Steph’s Warriors for his entire career:

Warriors Playoff rORTG vs. good teams

2013 vs. Nuggets: +5.0
2013 vs. Spurs: -3.2
2014 vs. Clippers: +3.8
2015 vs. Cavaliers: +1.7
2016 vs. Thunder: +1.4
2016 vs. Cavaliers: +2.1
2017 vs. Jazz: +7.3
2017 vs. Spurs: +13.4
2017 vs. Cavaliers: +12.5
2018 vs. Rockets: +5.9
2018 vs. Cavaliers: +16.0
2019 vs. Rockets: +5.3
2019 vs. Blazers: +6.0
2019 vs. Raptors: -0.3
2022 vs. Grizzlies: -2.2
2022 vs. Celtics: -1.2
2023 vs. Lakers: -3.2

Career Avg: +4.14

Steph’s Warriors never had a series as bad offensively as the Lakers had vs. the 1983 76ers, vs. the 1981 Rockets, or vs. the 1991 Bulls (or against the 1996 Rockets, but I don’t really consider that in any meaningful way for Magic). And the Warriors were essentially always good offensively in the playoffs against good teams (in fact, the Warriors were often extremely good), except in the last few years and in 2013, when he’s had substantially less help than Magic had. So I’m not sure it makes sense to say that Steph “was stopped from producing elite playoff offense” more than Magic was.

One_and_Done · Post #17 » by **One_and_Done** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:53 pm

Vote: Curry (switched from Magic after reading the discussion more)

Alternate: Magic

Nominate: D.Rob (cos KD isn't getting traction)

We’re now getting down into the gritty part of the voting, so I think it’s time for some more in depth cases to be made for new candidates, as I think things will open up after the #12 vote. Being realistic, I think Magic has this one in a walkover, and imma stick with him for the reasons discussed already. 2nd for me is Curry. I feel he has the higher peak than Magic or KG and lets you build a more devastating system around him. KG helps you build a system defensively, but on offense he’s more a complementary player. He's in now, so Curry should be in soon too.

Magic is maybe the GOAT offensive player, the swiss army knife of unique ability, and has enough longevity to take here.

Curry is his rival as the GOAT offensive player though, and his unique ability to supercharge your offense is just more valuable than what say KG does. He’s changed the game forever; and not in a superficial, narrative way. Every team plays differently because of Curry. The league changed a lot from 2010 to 2011, because teams like the Mavs started using modern defensive concepts in conjunction with modern offensive ones. From 2005 we’d seen teams like the Suns start to lean into modern D.Antoni offensive concepts, and from 2008 we saw the Celtics bring Thibs strong side D defensive concepts. The Mavs were the first team to really bring elements from both to the table, and then the Heatles adapted and did the same. The realised they couldn’t play Joel Anthony at the 5, and put Bosh there. Guys like Hibbert started to become unplayable, and teams like the Spurs were doing much the same. Then the Warrors emerged under Kerr and really leaned into it. The league from 2015 changed so much that the pre-2011 NBA doesn’t really compare to it at all. That was where the modern NBA really got into gear. I don’t think many pre-2011 teams, including KG’s Celtics, would have had much of a chance against the champs from 2011 to 2020. Even in years like 2016, 2017 or 2018, I’m not sure most of the champs from the previous decade would even be top 4 teams in those years.

So who do I think we should nominate next. I’m torn between several candidates. First is KD, who would be my first choice for the reasons set out below. Unfortunately he may not get any traction.

Spoiler:

As for Durant vs Kobe I don’t understand the argument for Kobe. Durant was a better scorer, better defender, and a better complementary piece who fit in more easily with others. His longevity is enough that any minor advantage Kobe has is negated.

Let’s just look at a peak to peak comparison to start with. Because KD has the consistency of a metronome (when he’s on the court), a number of different years can be advanced as his “peak”. But 2014 seems to have the strongest case. So let’s look at 2014 KD v.s 2008 Kobe (which is often advanced as Kobe’s best year).

KD: 41.8 pp 100, 9.6 rp 100, 7.2 ap 100, 123 Ortg, 104 Drtg, on an insane 635. TS%

Kobe: 36.5 pp 100, 8.1 rp 100, 6.9 ap 100, 115 Ortg, 106 Drtg, on 576. TS%

KD is better in literally every, single category, and not by a small margin. But let’s be fair to them and look at a bigger, more representative sample.

Here’s KD from 2010 to 2023, a 13 year stretch if we exclude 2020.

RS per 100: 38.2, 10, 6.3, 120 Ortg, 106 Drtg, on 631. TS%

PS per 100: 36.9, 9.8, 5.3, 115 Ortg, 108 Drtg 598. TS%

Kobe from 2000 to 2013:

RS per 100: 37.1, 7.6, 6.9, 112 Ortg, 105 Drtg, TS% 556.

PS per 100: 35.3, 6.9, 6.5, 110 Ortg, 106 Drtg, TS% 543.

So again, KD is basically beating him in every single category except for a trivial defensive rating difference, which could just be noise given how close it is and the sample size. He’s scoring more, and scoring more on insane efficiency. Even his assists are similar, despite Kobe’s supposed passing advantage (which FYI isn’t much of an advantage if you don’t like passing). The difference in Ortg is insane. KD is just cooking him.

On the defensive end KD is almost 7 feet tall with crazy long arms, so he can to a limited extent provide rim protection and switch on to bigger guys, all of which was key to his time on the Warriors. KD fits so much better than Kobe in so many situations, needing a lower usage and complementing other guys. KD was also misused to some degree in OKC, with it now being apparent in hindsight that Westbrook was not an optimal co-star for KD (to put it lightly). He often played with poor spacing in OKC, and thrived anyway.

But let’s turn to the one thing Kobe supporters can maybe argue, which is longevity. I don’t buy this, because KD has had enough longevity to score almost 27K points despite playing through several seasons cut short by COVID and lock outs, so at that point I’d say he has “enough” longevity that unless the person he’s being compared to is a comparably good player longevity isn’t enough to move the needle. But then I’m not even sure we can criticise KD’s longevity too much. Kobe has basically 12-13 healthy-ish, prime type seasons. His last few seasons were negative value add, and the early part of his career is mostly not adding too much. If we took out those years Kobe actually only has 28k+ points, so barely different to KD (who isn’t done yet either).

But what of KD? He was healthy from 2010 to 2014. That’s 5 prime seasons right there. 2016 healthy. That’s 6. 2017 and 2018 he was being rested and was out by design basically, I count those as healthy seasons. KD is up to 8 prime seasons. 2019? He was healthy all the way to the finals, then had an injury. I don’t dock him for that because it’s absurd. It would be rewarding guys like Kobe for getting bounced out in the first round, before they had a chance to injure themselves. That’s 9 prime seasons. In my mind that’s enough to overcome Kobe’s longevity easily. But I also feel KD added good value from 2021 to 2023. In those 3 seasons some of the games he missed were for rest, or due to reasons having nothing to do with injury; if he and the team were keen on him playing more, he could have. He was also healthy for the playoffs in 2021 and 2023 when it mattered (which is what he was being rested for).

I just don’t see what Kobe’s argument over KD would be. KD is just flat out better.

I’d also be interested in Karl Malone, who has more longevity than most if not all remaining candidates, and whose case v.s Kobe I discussed below. Moses Malone has a lot of longevity also, but I am doubtful about how his game would translate today. He feels like a player who was built for a different era, and that holds him back a little.

Spoiler:

Dr J seems to have peaked higher than Kobe, who has already been nominated, as I discuss below.

Spoiler:

There’s also D.Rob, who doesn’t have great longevity, but arguably has “enough” that it doesn’t matter. Giannis is another player in this category. Yeh, sure, Giannis only has 10 years in the league; but when Jordan first retired he only had 9 and people were already calling him one of the greatest ever. In today’s game would Jordan really be more impactful than Giannis? I have my doubts. Just comparing Giannis/D.Rob/Dirk/Kobe’s best seasons, here’s how they come out:

Giannis 2019-23 – 42.6 pp100, 17.6 rp100, 8.4 ap100, 120 Ortg/103 Drtg, 625 TS%

D.Rob (pre-Duncan) prime 90-96 – 33.9 pp100, 15.6 rp100, 4.1 ap100, 118 Ortg/97 Drtg, 592 TS%

Dirk (post-Nash) prime 2005-11 RS – 35.7 pp100, 12.1 rp100, 4.2 ap100, 119 Ortg/104 Drtg, 586 TS%.

Kobe (post-Shaq) prime 2006-10 RS – 39.2 pp100, 7.3 rp100, 6.6ap100, 114 Ortg/106 Drtg, 565 TS%

How about playoffs?

Giannis 19-23: 39 pp100, 17.8 rp100, 7.5 apg, 113 Ortg/ 102 Drtg 580 TS%

D.Rob 90-96: 31.6 pp100, 15.5 rp100, 3.9 ap100, 113 Ortg/101 Drtg 557 TS%

Dirk 05-11: 34.3 pp100, 13.3 rp100, 3.9 ap100, 119 Ortg/107 Drtg, 586 TS%

Kobe 06-10: 38.1 pp100, 7.3 rp100, 6.9 ap100, 114 Ortg/108 Drtg, 570 TS%

So the first observation is that Giannis is the best of the bunch and it’s not close. The only reason not to take him yet is if you don’t think he has “enough” longevity. He isn’t just a force offensively, he’s one of the best defensive players you could have in the modern era. Defense is something that’s hard to measure, but I think we can all agree D.Rob and Giannis are 2 of the best defensive players ever. Then on the other end they’d only need to be solid to be in discussion here. But they’re not just solid. Giannis is flat out better than the rest on offense, and while D.Rob is the “worst” of the 4 in the playoffs on O, he’s still close enough that I don’t know that the others have much of a case over him given his all-time defensive anchoring ability. If you’re taking Dirk or Kobe it’s got to be on longevity. Kobe looks the worst on balance by far. He’s 2nd of the group on volume scoring, but he does it by having bad efficiency which is probably part of why his TS% is the worst of anyone except playoffs D.Rob, and his Ortg is the worst of the bunch on balance (because regular season isn’t worthless, your performance there adds a lot of value). Then factor in this is literally Kobe’s very best stretch. If we’d run this from 00-10 for instance, he’d look so much worse (see above comparison with KD).

Dirk’s high end run in the 2011 playoffs is a level of impact neither D.Rob nor Kobe had during a singular playoff run, putting up 39.1 pp100, 11.5 rp100, 3.6 ap100 on 115 Ortg/105 Drtg, and 609 TS% while taking out Kobe’s Lakers, KD’s Thunder, and Blazers, and the first incarnation of the Heatles, is crazy impressive. Yeh, they’d have gone down to the 2012 Heatles once they balanced the team a little and figured out the line-ups to play, etc, but nobody expected them to win that year. They weren’t even supposed to beat the Lakers, and they ka-rushed them. Check out the stat-line of 32 year old Kobe v.s 32 year old Dirk. It’s not pretty. Kobe had 23.3 ppg, 3rpg, 2.5 apg on 519 TS%, v.s Dirk’s 25.3ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.5apg on an insane 673 TS%.

AEnigma · Post #18 » by **AEnigma** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 6:56 pm

Not really seeing why we would use league relative ratings rather than opponent relative ratings. Those opponent adjusted results have been pretty clear on who has the advantage on average (even with the Durant effect), and on an individual level, Magic has little to criticise over the course of his career:

70sFan wrote:Magic Johnson against -2+ relative defences (40.64% of playoff games): 40.9 mpg, 8.0 rpg, 11.2 apg, 4.0 tov, 18.8 ppg on 50.1% FG, 27.0% 3FG, 84.8% FT and 60.1% TS (+6.49% rTS)

Magic Johnson against -4+ relative defences (15.51% of playoffs games): 40.3 mpg, 8.2 rpg, 10.5 apg, 3.9 tov, 19.7 ppg on 51.9% FG, 19.2% 3FG, 83.3% FT and 59.5% TS (+5.96% rTS)

lessthanjake · Post #19 » by **lessthanjake** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 7:08 pm

AEnigma wrote:Not really seeing why we would use league relative ratings rather than opponent relative ratings. Those opponent adjusted results have been pretty clear on who has the advantage on average (even with the Durant effect), and on an individual level, Magic has little to criticise over the course of his career:

70sFan wrote:Magic Johnson against -2+ relative defences (40.64% of playoff games): 40.9 mpg, 8.0 rpg, 11.2 apg, 4.0 tov, 18.8 ppg on 50.1% FG, 27.0% 3FG, 84.8% FT and 60.1% TS (+6.49% rTS)

Magic Johnson against -4+ relative defences (15.51% of playoffs games): 40.3 mpg, 8.2 rpg, 10.5 apg, 3.9 tov, 19.7 ppg on 51.9% FG, 19.2% 3FG, 83.3% FT and 59.5% TS (+5.96% rTS)

There’s an argument to look at opponents’ defense in doing a list like I did above, rather than league average. I’m a little skeptical that that’s a better way to do it, though, since I think we have to realize that regular season defensive ratings can often be skewed a large amount by a team’s offensive rating. A really great offense is going to give up more points in the regular season because they simply don’t need to defend as well and their opponents are almost always needing to go all out on offense (there’s tons of literature on how teams let up a significant amount when they get ahead by a lot). So a high SRS team that doesn’t have a great defensive rating often actually *is* a good defense, and a low SRS team that has a really good defensive rating often actually *isn’t* a particularly great defense. This is why, when there’s a weak conference (like the 1980s Western Conference was, or like the Eastern Conference was for most of the 2000s and 2010s), you often have mediocre teams that do not have high overall SRS but do have good regular season defensive ratings (and sometimes the opposite too). Those ratings are partially a product of their offense being so bad that their defense is almost never free to let up and the opposing team’s offense often is letting up.

Of course, the same is actually true within the playoff series’s themselves too, and that skews things as well. The better a team’s playoff defensive rating is, the less likely their offensive rating is to be great (and vice versa), because it won’t need to be. Basically, it’s easier to accrue a high offensive rating in a series that your team is losing or that is close or at least has close games, than it is to accrue a high offensive rating in a series your team is dominating. And, notably, while the Warriors of course had close series’ in there, there’s more blowout series for the Warriors in the above than for the Lakers. This puts downwards pressure on the numbers for Steph comparatively.

OhayoKD · Post #20 » by **OhayoKD** » Sat Jul 29, 2023 7:28 pm

Dr Positivity wrote:My only strikes against Curry are longevity and two way impact, I don't really see Magic and Bird having enough of an advantage in those areas, and I see Curry's era 2 paradigm shifts away from Magic and Bird's.

Therefore my primary competition for Curry here of nominated players is the Mamba, like KG, it comes down to having easily more superstar years, although I don't like his impact as much as Curry's.

Kind of have to ignore the playoffs to have magic and shaq's offensive impact =