RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Dirk Nowitzki)
Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,921
- And1: 912
- Joined: Jun 23, 2016
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Stockton is absolutely a 30ish player. arguing that he's around 50 is blasphemous. yes he's not a deadly scorer, he isn't a nash, doncic, etc level of megacreator and doesn't like automatically give you a #1 offense like nash but he's the most consistent and durable player you can ever find. he will play 20 seasons, never miss a game, and consistently give you good defense, hit his shots, feed the big man in the post, always do the right thing. he's a consistent positive on both ends. there aren't enough guys that have an argument above him to not have him around 30 at worst. the SECURITY of having a guy who never misses a game, never makes a bad decision, you always know what he's gonna give you is unpriceable. stockton is probably 26-27
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,679
- And1: 3,174
- Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Joao Saraiva wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
If he had the record of assists in NBA history, steals in NBA history, high impact stats, a great win%, great longevity, fantastic shooting and all time series where he outplayed Magic for example... well then you might want to consider him in the top 30, let alone top 100.
Let's not pretend Stockton isn't an unique type of player. He's a 9 time assist champion. He lead the playoffs in APG 10 times. He was a 60ts% type of guy before guys jacked up a ton of 3s, so he was definitely efficient. He definitely belongs in the conversation.
If you can build a contender arround Nash you can definitely build a contender arround Stockton.
And you can argue Stockton was our best player from 88 to 92.
You've kind of already covered it but ...
Point guards with a peak (through circa 2010/11 when I did a database) with
a higher PER peak than Stockton
Paul (29.96)
Robertson (27.64)
Johnson (27.03)
Brandon (25.34)
Archibald (25.2)
(Jerry West (24.97))
A "P" Hardaway (24.58)
Arenas (23.99)
(then Stockton (23.87))
Point guards with a WS peak higher than Stockton (what I have is cumulative, happy to look at rate - again through circa 2011)
Robertson 20.65
Paul 18.29
(West 17.13)
Johnson 16.55
Frazier 15.62
(then Stockton 15.61).
BPM wasn't really around then and doesn't go back as far so no Robertson or West, still I'll take a look now - for the sake of clarity I'm not counting Harden as a point - he would also be in this group
Curry 11.94
Westbrook 11.10
Paul 10.98
Johnson 10.11
(then Stockton 8.95)
Modern guys would add the first two lists - otoh Curry to both, Westbrook, Isaiah Thomas and Lillard to PER ... there may be more?
There are only a handful of guards that Reference box aggregates, across the board or on average suggest peaked clearly above Stockton. I think they are mostly either in or are on the ballot (Chris Paul). We should grant Westbrook too (for on average).
Stockton produced at a rate pretty close to that level for a very long time (differing somewhat depending on the metric, and as implied by "rate", minutes didn't hold for later years) mind you, as well as the impact evidence ... but ...
... when was this imagined PJ Tucker that productive? How long do the equivalent lists for him go (whichever position you count him)? How many thousands of names would we be scrolling through (if they were in any way akin to IRL PJ Tucker)?
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,395
- And1: 18,828
- Joined: Mar 08, 2012
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Gibson22 wrote:Vote: Dirk
Alternate: Malone
Out of those guys my list would be: dirk malone kd erving paul. But truthfully have pettit and moses over paul. I think i have about 24 tier a players. I think that kd and dirk had similar impact at their peak, id lean dirk slightly superior, but it is what it is, meaning that dirk and malone's longevity do it.
Nominations: Pettit
Alternate: Malone
I think its really important that pettit gets nominated. he's, with malone, the last player left that was the best player in basketball at least for a season, and pettit was the actual best player in the world pre russell. He was a top 5 player for 10 years, he was the best in 57 and 58, yeah. he should absolutely be above guys like paul and barkley. he's 12th in our poty shares. honestly i don't see why he should be so far below robertson and west. they have a bit of longevity over him, but they aren't that far apart as far as eras and they have about the same level of importance in the league hierarchy throughout their careers, with them not being ever the clear cut best players in basketball like mikan was before bill and wilt took over.
With malone the situation is similar. there are concerns about his impact and longevity, but he won a title as the guy and he bridged as the best player in the world over bird, magic, erving, kareem in 82 and 83 before bird and then magic and then jordan took over and after kareem
They are? Who are the best players now then?
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,679
- And1: 3,174
- Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
HeartBreakKid wrote:Gibson22 wrote:Vote: Dirk
Alternate: Malone
Out of those guys my list would be: dirk malone kd erving paul. But truthfully have pettit and moses over paul. I think i have about 24 tier a players. I think that kd and dirk had similar impact at their peak, id lean dirk slightly superior, but it is what it is, meaning that dirk and malone's longevity do it.
Nominations: Pettit
Alternate: Malone
I think its really important that pettit gets nominated. he's, with malone, the last player left that was the best player in basketball at least for a season, and pettit was the actual best player in the world pre russell. He was a top 5 player for 10 years, he was the best in 57 and 58, yeah. he should absolutely be above guys like paul and barkley. he's 12th in our poty shares. honestly i don't see why he should be so far below robertson and west. they have a bit of longevity over him, but they aren't that far apart as far as eras and they have about the same level of importance in the league hierarchy throughout their careers, with them not being ever the clear cut best players in basketball like mikan was before bill and wilt took over.
With malone the situation is similar. there are concerns about his impact and longevity, but he won a title as the guy and he bridged as the best player in the world over bird, magic, erving, kareem in 82 and 83 before bird and then magic and then jordan took over and after kareem
They are? Who are the best players now then?
I guess maybe to be read as "[with a complete career]"?
Because as implied, otherwise that is ... dubious.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,945
- And1: 9,431
- Joined: Sep 26, 2017
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
In what world is PJ Tucker a good comparison for someone who was simultaneously the best passer in the league and the best defensive player at his position? Stockton was a multi-dimensional superstar. If anything, Durant is more like Tucker since he’s a one dimensional player who only really impacts the game in one way.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,945
- And1: 9,431
- Joined: Sep 26, 2017
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Comparing him to the current nominees, I’d say CP3 > Dirk > Stockton >> KD > Erving. Definitely a bit of a gap between Stockton and KD IMO. Now he’s never dominated the game like Jokic or Giannis who both have supernova impact where they can carry a team to a title on their back so I’d still want to nominate them first, but I do think we should be looking at nominating Stockton soon. He’s easily a top 20 player IMO.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Colbinii wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
I consider Bobby Jones a Top 100 player and wouldn't build around him per-se.
Sure, but nowhere near this high. There are MVP calibre players left, that's who we should be discussing now. Nominting him anytime soon feels a bit crazy.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Joao Saraiva wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
If he had the record of assists in NBA history, steals in NBA history, high impact stats, a great win%, great longevity, fantastic shooting and all time series where he outplayed Magic for example... well then you might want to consider him in the top 30, let alone top 100.
Let's not pretend Stockton isn't an unique type of player. He's a 9 time assist champion. He lead the playoffs in APG 10 times. He was a 60ts% type of guy before guys jacked up a ton of 3s, so he was definitely efficient. He definitely belongs in the conversation.
If you can build a contender arround Nash you can definitely build a contender arround Stockton.
And you can argue Stockton was our best player from 88 to 92.
Alot of what you're citing is accolades, not ability. I don't care who the all-time assists leader is, or how many apg he had. Obviously if a guy can average 15.4 ppg and 13.4 apg in a season he's an incredible player, except that player was Kevin Porter and he was far from incredible.
Stockton was not considered to be a superstar by his contemporaries, as the award voting makes clear. Nor would he be today. His lack of ability to get to the basket and score, his lack of athletic gifts, renders him an all-nba type guard at best. I don't care what his advanced stats were, but if I did I would note that one reason his advanced stats might be good is due to him being ahead of his time in his play style. Today everyone uses pick and roll and shoots a tonne of 3s, so some of the things Stockton did are less special. Same issues I raised with Reggie Miller.
It would be historically anomalous for 2 top 20 all-time type players to be on the same team for so long, with good team mates and coaching, and have so little to show for it. They have so many bad postseason exits. If Shaq and Kobe has performances like these 2 we'd roast them.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Gibson22 wrote:Stockton is absolutely a 30ish player. arguing that he's around 50 is blasphemous. yes he's not a deadly scorer, he isn't a nash, doncic, etc level of megacreator and doesn't like automatically give you a #1 offense like nash but he's the most consistent and durable player you can ever find. he will play 20 seasons, never miss a game, and consistently give you good defense, hit his shots, feed the big man in the post, always do the right thing. he's a consistent positive on both ends. there aren't enough guys that have an argument above him to not have him around 30 at worst. the SECURITY of having a guy who never misses a game, never makes a bad decision, you always know what he's gonna give you is unpriceable. stockton is probably 26-27
There are guys with alot of longevity left who were also superstars. How about we vote them in before we takk about a non-franchise player with longevity.
Longevity can't help you against a plainly superior player. AC Green has more longevity than Kawhi Leonard, but one guy doesn't move your titles odds much and the other does.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Gibson22 wrote:Vote: Dirk
Alternate: Malone
Out of those guys my list would be: dirk malone kd erving paul. But truthfully have pettit and moses over paul. I think i have about 24 tier a players. I think that kd and dirk had similar impact at their peak, id lean dirk slightly superior, but it is what it is, meaning that dirk and malone's longevity do it.
Nominations: Pettit
Alternate: Malone
I think its really important that pettit gets nominated. he's, with malone, the last player left that was the best player in basketball at least for a season, and pettit was the actual best player in the world pre russell. He was a top 5 player for 10 years, he was the best in 57 and 58, yeah. he should absolutely be above guys like paul and barkley. he's 12th in our poty shares. honestly i don't see why he should be so far below robertson and west. they have a bit of longevity over him, but they aren't that far apart as far as eras and they have about the same level of importance in the league hierarchy throughout their careers, with them not being ever the clear cut best players in basketball like mikan was before bill and wilt took over.
With malone the situation is similar. there are concerns about his impact and longevity, but he won a title as the guy and he bridged as the best player in the world over bird, magic, erving, kareem in 82 and 83 before bird and then magic and then jordan took over and after kareem
1) Pettit was not the best in 57 or 58, Russell was
2) Even if he was, look at the weak league he was 'the best' in.
3) How was he the last guy who was 'the best' in a year left? Did Barkley not win MVP? Did Walton not? There's a dozen and more guys left who can make that claim.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 30,174
- And1: 25,452
- Joined: Aug 11, 2015
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Discussing Dirk and Durant as the main scoring guys. Dirk posted a better scoring numbers in postseason if you exclude his Nash seasons and Durant's GSW seasons:
2005-12 Dirk: 28.0 adj pp75 on +7.3 rTS% (60.0 TS%)
2010-16 KD: 28.4 adj pp75 on +4.9 rTS% (57.5 TS%)
I don't see any reason to put Durant ahead as the main scoring option.
2005-12 Dirk: 28.0 adj pp75 on +7.3 rTS% (60.0 TS%)
2010-16 KD: 28.4 adj pp75 on +4.9 rTS% (57.5 TS%)
I don't see any reason to put Durant ahead as the main scoring option.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 34,243
- And1: 21,858
- Joined: Feb 13, 2013
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:Gibson22 wrote:Stockton is absolutely a 30ish player. arguing that he's around 50 is blasphemous. yes he's not a deadly scorer, he isn't a nash, doncic, etc level of megacreator and doesn't like automatically give you a #1 offense like nash but he's the most consistent and durable player you can ever find. he will play 20 seasons, never miss a game, and consistently give you good defense, hit his shots, feed the big man in the post, always do the right thing. he's a consistent positive on both ends. there aren't enough guys that have an argument above him to not have him around 30 at worst. the SECURITY of having a guy who never misses a game, never makes a bad decision, you always know what he's gonna give you is unpriceable. stockton is probably 26-27
There are guys with alot of longevity left who were also superstars. How about we vote them in before we takk about a non-franchise player with longevity.
Longevity can't help you against a plainly superior player. AC Green has more longevity than Kawhi Leonard, but one guy doesn't move your titles odds much and the other does.
But for some people that is how they view things.
It is different than your view. It isn't wrong.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
70sFan wrote:Discussing Dirk and Durant as the main scoring guys. Dirk posted a better scoring numbers in postseason if you exclude his Nash seasons and Durant's GSW seasons:
2005-12 Dirk: 28.0 adj pp75 on +7.3 rTS% (60.0 TS%)
2010-16 KD: 28.4 adj pp75 on +4.9 rTS% (57.5 TS%)
I don't see any reason to put Durant ahead as the main scoring option.
Limiting it to playoffs only, and then limiting KD to OKC only, makes no sense because the regular season has value too. So this sample doesn't work. Other samples, like the ones I provided on page 1, suggest a radically different conclusion when we add the years where KD actually had decent shooting around him.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
- ijspeelman
- Forum Mod - Cavs
- Posts: 2,661
- And1: 1,222
- Joined: Feb 17, 2022
- Contact:
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
70sFan wrote:Discussing Dirk and Durant as the main scoring guys. Dirk posted a better scoring numbers in postseason if you exclude his Nash seasons and Durant's GSW seasons:
2005-12 Dirk: 28.0 adj pp75 on +7.3 rTS% (60.0 TS%)
2010-16 KD: 28.4 adj pp75 on +4.9 rTS% (57.5 TS%)
I don't see any reason to put Durant ahead as the main scoring option.
I was going to ask why you didn't put Warriors KD in the sample without realizing that Steph lead in FG/75 for RS and PS for all three years (besides PS in 2018-19). Glad I looked it up because I imagined KD as the higher volume scorer and Steph even more off-ball to where he had less chances.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,395
- And1: 18,828
- Joined: Mar 08, 2012
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:Joao Saraiva wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
If he had the record of assists in NBA history, steals in NBA history, high impact stats, a great win%, great longevity, fantastic shooting and all time series where he outplayed Magic for example... well then you might want to consider him in the top 30, let alone top 100.
Let's not pretend Stockton isn't an unique type of player. He's a 9 time assist champion. He lead the playoffs in APG 10 times. He was a 60ts% type of guy before guys jacked up a ton of 3s, so he was definitely efficient. He definitely belongs in the conversation.
If you can build a contender arround Nash you can definitely build a contender arround Stockton.
And you can argue Stockton was our best player from 88 to 92.
Alot of what you're citing is accolades, not ability. I don't care who the all-time assists leader is, or how many apg he had. Obviously if a guy can average 15.4 ppg and 13.4 apg in a season he's an incredible player, except that player was Kevin Porter and he was far from incredible.
Stockton was not considered to be a superstar by his contemporaries, as the award voting makes clear. Nor would he be today. His lack of ability to get to the basket and score, his lack of athletic gifts, renders him an all-nba type guard at best. I don't care what his advanced stats were, but if I did I would note that one reason his advanced stats might be good is due to him being ahead of his time in his play style. Today everyone uses pick and roll and shoots a tonne of 3s, so some of the things Stockton did are less special. Same issues I raised with Reggie Miller.
It would be historically anomalous for 2 top 20 all-time type players to be on the same team for so long, with good team mates and coaching, and have so little to show for it. They have so many bad postseason exits. If Shaq and Kobe has performances like these 2 we'd roast them.
His peers did think of him as a superstar more or less - can't recall many players from his era being low on him. John Stockton vs Karl Malone was a popular argument several decades ago. Stockton vs Magic or "is Stockton the best PG of all time? Second best etc" were common narratives for him. Stockton was a highly rated player at one point. You're trying to make it seem like he was Kyle Lowry.
I don't know what you mean by contemporaries and award voting. People who voted for MVP were not John Stockton's peers. You wouldn't call Skip Bayless a peer of SGA, I hope.
It's odd as many of your arguments are really boxscore based, but you see a guy dominate the boxscore in a way you do not like and conjure reasons for why he isn't good, or wouldn't be good today (which is rather baseless).
John Stockton directly generated 40-50 points per game during several seasons. Many MVP candidates cannot do that.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,460
- And1: 5,664
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
His peers were not outraged by Stockton's award recognition or lack thereof. He was felt to be ranked fairly. I'd also add the media's record of ranking players in awards has been so much better than player voted awards that it's not funny. The players are as bad as the fans, it's been an embarassment.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,395
- And1: 18,828
- Joined: Mar 08, 2012
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:His peers were not outraged by Stockton's award recognition or lack thereof. He was felt to be ranked fairly. I'd also add the media's record of ranking players in awards has been so much better than player voted awards that it's not funny. The players are as bad as the fans, it's been an embarassment.
Right, but you said contemporaries and then used awards as your argument when his contemporaries do not determine his award. So it seems like you are shifting your goal post.
It feels like you see certain players who do not play the way you like and you try to find reasons to justify not rating them highly. The amount of times you said "I do not care" is rather telling. "I don't care if he is an all time great passer". "I don't care if he is efficient".
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
- OldSchoolNoBull
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,081
- And1: 4,474
- Joined: Jun 27, 2003
- Location: Ohio
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:Joao Saraiva wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.
If he had the record of assists in NBA history, steals in NBA history, high impact stats, a great win%, great longevity, fantastic shooting and all time series where he outplayed Magic for example... well then you might want to consider him in the top 30, let alone top 100.
Let's not pretend Stockton isn't an unique type of player. He's a 9 time assist champion. He lead the playoffs in APG 10 times. He was a 60ts% type of guy before guys jacked up a ton of 3s, so he was definitely efficient. He definitely belongs in the conversation.
If you can build a contender arround Nash you can definitely build a contender arround Stockton.
And you can argue Stockton was our best player from 88 to 92.
Alot of what you're citing is accolades, not ability. I don't care who the all-time assists leader is, or how many apg he had. Obviously if a guy can average 15.4 ppg and 13.4 apg in a season he's an incredible player, except that player was Kevin Porter and he was far from incredible.
Stockton was not considered to be a superstar by his contemporaries, as the award voting makes clear. Nor would he be today. His lack of ability to get to the basket and score, his lack of athletic gifts, renders him an all-nba type guard at best. I don't care what his advanced stats were, but if I did I would note that one reason his advanced stats might be good is due to him being ahead of his time in his play style. Today everyone uses pick and roll and shoots a tonne of 3s, so some of the things Stockton did are less special. Same issues I raised with Reggie Miller.
It would be historically anomalous for 2 top 20 all-time type players to be on the same team for so long, with good team mates and coaching, and have so little to show for it. They have so many bad postseason exits. If Shaq and Kobe has performances like these 2 we'd roast them.
Well first of all, Stockton is not going to be top 20, is he? We're on #18 right now and Stockton hasn't even gotten on the ballot yet. He's just now getting nominations.
Secondly, if CP3 is on the table, then Stockton should be too, because their statistical profiles - both box and impact - are pretty darn similar aside from CP3's greater volume of scoring.
Thirdly, Stockton is relevant here because Malone is being discussed and the issue of how credit should be apportioned between the two for what success the Jazz had in their era is relevant.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
- ijspeelman
- Forum Mod - Cavs
- Posts: 2,661
- And1: 1,222
- Joined: Feb 17, 2022
- Contact:
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
One_and_Done wrote:70sFan wrote:Discussing Dirk and Durant as the main scoring guys. Dirk posted a better scoring numbers in postseason if you exclude his Nash seasons and Durant's GSW seasons:
2005-12 Dirk: 28.0 adj pp75 on +7.3 rTS% (60.0 TS%)
2010-16 KD: 28.4 adj pp75 on +4.9 rTS% (57.5 TS%)
I don't see any reason to put Durant ahead as the main scoring option.
Limiting it to playoffs only, and then limiting KD to OKC only, makes no sense because the regular season has value too. So this sample doesn't work. Other samples, like the ones I provided on page 1, suggest a radically different conclusion when we add the years where KD actually had decent shooting around him.
I think its hard to take KD's numbers on the Warriors at face value since its probably the perfect situation for a player. The plethora of off-ball threats (perimeter ones at that) resulted in KD getting more open and wide open shots minute to minute.
Kevin Durant (2014-16) = 5.72 wide open or open shots per 36 minutes
Kevin Durant (2017-19) = 6.46 wide open or open shots per 36 minutes
Difference = .74 wide open or open shots per 36 minutes more in GSW
I do not think Dirk had the same team structure that boosted his overall stats.
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 12,664
- And1: 8,304
- Joined: Feb 24, 2013
-
Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 8/26/23)
Joao Saraiva wrote:For the guys saying Malone played bad on some losses... I'll give you that. He did.
But it's not always the case, we're not talking about a guy who always did that.
Just to cite a few examples of him playing reasonably well to good in [mostly] later rounds in [mostly] pressure series situations:
Game 3 '92 WCF (down 2-0, basically "must-win"): 39 pts @ 67.9% TS, 7 reb, 7 ast, 2 stl, 4 tov. Jazz won by 8.
Game 4 '92 WCF (down 2-1 in series): 33 pts @ 71.2% TS, 12 reb, 3 ast, 4 tov. Jazz won by 9.
Game 5 '92 WCF (series tied): 38 pts @ 58.2% TS, 14 reb, 2 stl, 1 blk, 3 tov. It wasn't enough; Jazz lost by 6. That's three consecutive games of 33+ [at no worse than 58.2% TS] in a late-playoff setting.
Game 5 '95 WC1 (elimination game, against eventual champ Rockets): 35 pts @ 58.7% TS, 10 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 3 tov. He played reasonably well. It wasn't enough; Jazz lost by 4. Worth noting that in their game 3 win of this series, Malone had 32/19/5.
Game 3 '96 WCSF (series tied): 32 pts @ 59.1% TS, 11 reb, 6 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk, 0 tov.
Game 5 '96 WCF (elimination game, down 3-1 in series): It was noted that he had a stinker in their game 7 to lose this series. It's true. Might be worth noting that there wouldn't have been a game 6 or 7 if not for this game 5: 29 pts @ 52.3% TS, 15 reb, 2 ast, 2 stl, 1 tov, in a 3-pt overtime win.
Game 6 '96 WCF (elimination game): 32 pts @ 61.6% TS, 10 reb, 7 ast, 4 stl, 1 tov. Jazz blow the Sonics out by 35.
Game 5 '97 WCF (series tied): 29 pts @ 56.8% TS, 14 reb, 4 ast, 1 blk, 3 tov. (Barkley had 10/7/5, fwiw). Jazz won by 5 pts.
Game 3 '97 Finals (down 2-0 in series, basically a "must-win"): 37 pts @ 55.4% TS, 10 reb, 3 ast, 4 stl, 2 tov. Jazz won by 11.
Game 4 '97 Finals (down 2-1 in series; defensive grudge-match where neither team scored 80, and Michael Jordan had just 22 pts @ 40.7% TS with 4 reb, 4 ast and 3 tov): 23 pts @ 53.1% TS, 10 reb, 6 ast, 1 blk, 2 tov. Jazz won by 5.
Game 5 '98 Finals (facing elimination): 39 pts @ 65.8% TS, 9 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk, 1 tov. An astounding +21.2 BPM and +38 net rating, in a 2-pt victory to stave off elimination.
Game 6 '98 Finals (facing elimination): His crucial turnover has been pointed out in the last thread as a sort of fatal flaw/error. But players will make errors in any/every game, no matter how great or "clutch" they are. With that game, my contention was that if not for the blown shotclock calls earlier, that turnover wouldn't have mattered [and that's not fair]. BUT, even inclusive of that turnover, he had a good all-around game.
5 turnovers, yes; otherwise: 31 pts @ 65.0% TS, 11 reb, 7 ast, 1 stl, +15.5 BPM, +14 net rating. He played well. It wasn't enough. They lost by 1 pt under dubious circumstances.
His starting backcourt [the other two that make up their "big three"] combined for 27 pts @ 54.8% TS, 5 ast and 6 tov.
Ostertag was out, and the ENTIRE center rotation [in 42.8 minutes total playing time] COMBINED for 11 pts @ 50.6% TS, 4 reb, 2 stl, 0 ast, 0 blk, 2 tov, 6 personal fouls. (In Per 36 minutes figures, their centers were collectively averaging 9.3 pts @ -1.8% rTS, 3.4 reb, 0 ast, 1.7 stl, 0 blk, 1.7 tov, 5.0 pf per 36. That’s a severe handicap against a good team when one of the five guys out there at pretty much all times is that putrid a performer.)
Anyway....
I'm not going to deny he probably had more stinkers in the playoffs than good/great games, compared many other all-timers. Though even his "stinkers" are often like 23/9/4 statlines that "stink" because of something like 47% TS. And part of the reason he's got a lot of them to cite, is because they were ALWAYS in the playoffs, and OFTEN making deep(ish) runs, and he was NEVER absent [until his final season]. So there's a ridiculous amount of playoff sample to cherry-pick from (he's tied for 11th all-time in career playoff games).
Though the one other thing I wanted to comment on is a subsequent statement that Joao made, that Malone is a top-10 rs [all-time] performer/resume. He is. And that matters (to some of us, at least).
I've read people stating "all that matters is how they help you win a championship" or something to that effect. I don't agree. While I'll concede that is the ultimate goal, it would seem to diminish [or try to] anything that is done or "accomplished" outside of a legit contending run.
I, otoh, believe there is "glory" to be found in lesser competitive encounters......including in the rs. For me, player comparisons is comparing to ALL of one's professional peers; not just a handful of the better ones who get increased chance to gameplan against you.
Maybe that comes from having a very extended ATL (out to ~350), it makes me consider all levels of competition more, and not just the playoffs.
That's not to say I don't weight a playoff game heavier than a rs one; I do. But will I, for example, weight a 10-game playoff sample as more relevant than an 82-game rs sample? Absolutely not. Will I weight a 22-game playoff sample [part of a title run] as heavily as an 82-game rs sample? idk, close. Point being: how they perform against ALL of their professional peers (even the lesser ones) is relevant to me.
Malone's rs resume is rather easily top-10 all-time with longevity factored in. How far you want to dock him for a less stellar or robust playoff resume is up to you. But let's not denigrate his career more than is reasonable. The bullet-points of his career MORE THAN make him a relevant inclusion at this stage; let's not pretend it is otherwise.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire