Career Value : T-Mac vs Ben Wallace

[1993Playoffs]

In terms of value added over their career, who would you say has more?

[Doctor MJ]

It feels good to get in the 2nd round.

[tsherkin]

It feels good to get in the 2nd round.

Feels good to have healthy teams, and quality rosters, too.

[70sFan]

In terms of CORP evaluation, Tracy finishes in mid 60s, while Ben is the 80s to me, but I think it's way closer than the raw numbers. I think they are in the same tier, I could even put Wallace ahead due to postseason success.

[Colbinii]

In terms of CORP evaluation, Tracy finishes in mid 60s, while Ben is the 80s to me, but I think it's way closer than the raw numbers. I think they are in the same tier, I could even put Wallace ahead due to postseason success.

I would say most players between the 60s and 80s all-time are in a similar tier.

[Colbinii]

It feels good to get in the 2nd round.

You really need to think hard to Invision T-Mac making the 2nd round with Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace.

"Bu-Bu-But Ben Wallace made it out of the 1st round without them!"
He sure did, he beat the Hakeem Olajuwon Toronto Raptors in 2002 in 5 games [Negative SRS, 42-40 Record].

But yeah, those Pistons, and I consider Ben Wallace to be the back-bone of the collective, went to the ECF 6-straight years--the only team to ever do it.

[Doctor MJ]

It feels good to get in the 2nd round.

You really need to think hard to Invision T-Mac making the 2nd round with Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace.

"Bu-Bu-But Ben Wallace made it out of the 1st round without them!"
He sure did, he beat the Hakeem Olajuwon Toronto Raptors in 2002 in 5 games [Negative SRS, 42-40 Record].

But yeah, those Pistons, and I consider Ben Wallace to be the back-bone of the collective, went to the ECF 6-straight years--the only team to ever do it.

I feel like no one actually realizes that I was quoting T-Mac.

So yeah, don't argue with me, argue with McGrady.

[McBubbles]

My immediate thought is Wallace, as I feel like he had a longer prime, both in term of years and in terms of the value he accrued from having multiple deep playoff runs.

[California Gold]

T-Mac's disrespect.

[1993Playoffs]

T-Mac's disrespect.

I don’t think it’s disrespectful because 03 is somewhat of a outlier for T-Mac

[Jaivl]

I'd take Carter over Wallace, nevermind Tracy.

T-Mac's disrespect.

I don’t think it’s disrespectful because 03 is somewhat of a outlier for T-Mac

It is. Take 03 out of the equation and McGrady is still clearly ahead at their peaks, though.

[Owly]

It feels good to get in the 2nd round.

You really need to think hard to Invision T-Mac making the 2nd round with Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace.

"Bu-Bu-But Ben Wallace made it out of the 1st round without them!"
He sure did, he beat the Hakeem Olajuwon Toronto Raptors in 2002 in 5 games [Negative SRS, 42-40 Record].

But yeah, those Pistons, and I consider Ben Wallace to be the back-bone of the collective, went to the ECF 6-straight years--the only team to ever do it.

I feel like no one actually realizes that I was quoting T-Mac.

So yeah, don't argue with me, argue with McGrady.

...
So ... I can't imagine you mean the same thing by this.

I don't know the precise context in which McGrady said it, whether it was overconfidence before the job was done or forgetting the format change (more plausible within the timeline, but again I don't know the context) or what ... I would tend to assume he means something along the lines of "As a player, I look forward to playing deeper in the playoffs." If so, that would seem to be an uncontroversial statement.

You raising it in this context: in which we know McGrady had a deep run ... when he wasn't a relevant player but not one when he was; in a player comparison board; in a player comparison thread; you not being the player .... I can't imagine there isn't a subtext ... likely about measuring McGrady by the lack of advancement ... I'm pretty confident of meaning something different than he did.

And whilst I can't be sure of the intended nuance, if any (I would say by your choice), but the "I'm just quoting McGrady [without acknowledging it or expanding on it]" type-angle with an "argue with McGrady" tagged on ... I don't really understand it.

Then too citing a source which seems to imply the comments as a and probably the significant causal factor e.g

his comments ... while being up 3-1, not only derailed the Magic’s chances at an upset, it leads to McGrady not being able to get out of the first round at his peak

... might make those sympathetic to the idea that McGrady not advancing was not primarily a matter of his flaws ... get their backs up in terms of trusting it, and by proxy at the margins you, in this matter.

I don't care which way one goes on the player comp ... I don't know, maybe I missed something, this just didn't seem much to be about how good either man was at basketball.

[Doctor MJ]

You really need to think hard to Invision T-Mac making the 2nd round with Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace.

"Bu-Bu-But Ben Wallace made it out of the 1st round without them!"
He sure did, he beat the Hakeem Olajuwon Toronto Raptors in 2002 in 5 games [Negative SRS, 42-40 Record].

But yeah, those Pistons, and I consider Ben Wallace to be the back-bone of the collective, went to the ECF 6-straight years--the only team to ever do it.

I feel like no one actually realizes that I was quoting T-Mac.

So yeah, don't argue with me, argue with McGrady.

...
So ... I can't imagine you mean the same thing by this.

I don't know the precise context in which McGrady said it, whether it was overconfidence before the job was done or forgetting the format change (more plausible within the timeline, but again I don't know the context) or what ... I would tend to assume he means something along the lines of "As a player, I look forward to playing deeper in the playoffs." If so, that would seem to be an uncontroversial statement.

You raising it in this context: in which we know McGrady had a deep run ... when he wasn't a relevant player but not one when he was; in a player comparison board; in a player comparison thread; you not being the player .... I can't imagine there isn't a subtext ... likely about measuring McGrady by the lack of advancement ... I'm pretty confident of meaning something different than he did.

And whilst I can't be sure of the intended nuance, if any (I would say by your choice), but the "I'm just quoting McGrady [without acknowledging it or expanding on it]" type-angle with an "argue with McGrady" tagged on ... I don't really understand it.

Then too citing a source which seems to imply the comments as a and probably the significant causal factor e.g

his comments ... while being up 3-1, not only derailed the Magic’s chances at an upset, it leads to McGrady not being able to get out of the first round at his peak

... might make those sympathetic to the idea that McGrady not advancing was not primarily a matter of his flaws ... get their backs up in terms of trusting it, and by proxy at the margins you, in this matter.

I don't care which way one goes on the player comp ... I don't know, maybe I missed something, this just didn't seem much to be about how good either man was at basketball.

Okay, so the context here is that McGrady said this after his Orlando Magic went 3-1 against Ben Wallace's Detroit Pistons. It represents the peak of his career because afterward his team would lose all the rest of the games, fail to make the 2nd round, and then it would be the same story all throughout McGrady's career while he a major part of NBA teams.

Is it a bit of a cheap shot to use this against McGrady in this thread? In some ways, but it's also quite relevant. Why?

1. Because he was literally talking as if he had already beaten Ben Wallace's team when he did so, and that series was literally the place where the two players' careers intersected.

2. Because he was acknowledging something that all of us know: That how good of a career you have is always going to be judged based on the team playoff success you have. McGrady knew this before he knew that he would never have any such success, and it certainly relates to how he and other players see their career achievements when they look back on everything.

Does it mean that McGrady literally had less career value than Wallace? No.

Do I personally think McGrady's career accomplishments are less than Wallace's? Yes.

Was there some luck involved in that? Yes.

Must there be a ton of luck for a guy arguably the best defensive player of his generation to achieve more than a guy who was mostly known for volume scoring inefficiently and struggling to synergize with the other talent on his roster? I don't think so.

[Doctor MJ]

I'd take Carter over Wallace, nevermind Tracy.

And I'd take Wallace over Carter, never mind Tracy.

[Owly]

I feel like no one actually realizes that I was quoting T-Mac.

So yeah, don't argue with me, argue with McGrady.

...
So ... I can't imagine you mean the same thing by this.

I don't know the precise context in which McGrady said it, whether it was overconfidence before the job was done or forgetting the format change (more plausible within the timeline, but again I don't know the context) or what ... I would tend to assume he means something along the lines of "As a player, I look forward to playing deeper in the playoffs." If so, that would seem to be an uncontroversial statement.

You raising it in this context: in which we know McGrady had a deep run ... when he wasn't a relevant player but not one when he was; in a player comparison board; in a player comparison thread; you not being the player .... I can't imagine there isn't a subtext ... likely about measuring McGrady by the lack of advancement ... I'm pretty confident of meaning something different than he did.

And whilst I can't be sure of the intended nuance, if any (I would say by your choice), but the "I'm just quoting McGrady [without acknowledging it or expanding on it]" type-angle with an "argue with McGrady" tagged on ... I don't really understand it.

Then too citing a source which seems to imply the comments as a and probably the significant causal factor e.g

his comments ... while being up 3-1, not only derailed the Magic’s chances at an upset, it leads to McGrady not being able to get out of the first round at his peak

... might make those sympathetic to the idea that McGrady not advancing was not primarily a matter of his flaws ... get their backs up in terms of trusting it, and by proxy at the margins you, in this matter.

I don't care which way one goes on the player comp ... I don't know, maybe I missed something, this just didn't seem much to be about how good either man was at basketball.

Okay, so the context here is that McGrady said this after his Orlando Magic went 3-1 against Ben Wallace's Detroit Pistons. It represents the peak of his career because afterward his team would lose all the rest of the games, fail to make the 2nd round, and then it would be the same story all throughout McGrady's career while he a major part of NBA teams.

Is it a bit of a cheap shot to use this against McGrady in this thread? In some ways, but it's also quite relevant. Why?

1. Because he was literally talking as if he had already beaten Ben Wallace's team when he did so, and that series was literally the place where the two players' careers intersected.

2. Because he was acknowledging something that all of us know: That how good of a career you have is always going to be judged based on the team playoff success you have. McGrady knew this before he knew that he would never have any such success, and it certainly relates to how he and other players see their career achievements when they look back on everything.

Does it mean that McGrady literally had less career value than Wallace? No.

Do I personally think McGrady's career accomplishments are less than Wallace's? Yes.

Was there some luck involved in that? Yes.

Must there be a ton of luck for a guy arguably the best defensive player of his generation to achieve more than a guy who was mostly known for volume scoring inefficiently and struggling to synergize with the other talent on his roster? I don't think so.

Got to be super brief
kind of glad I read it right but kind of sad there wasn't some deeper point and it was just a weird cheap shot.
I know the first level context. As I say, it's could he have forgot they went to 4? What was the question asked etc.
"that series was literally the place where the two players' careers intersected." I mean ... you could say they intersected with the Hill-Wallace trade. Or when they played on the same Pistons team (less relevant players at this point but then this single series, and specifically the apect of somebody ... maybe saying something dumb ... not of huge relevance to me either).

I don't agree with 2. Players want their team to go further. "I would like to continue to advance and remain in this competition for a championship". That doesn't mean saying that validates a (bad) measure of player goodness. Heck even if it was selfishly motivated the answer could still far more easily be "Yes, I would like to not answer questions about "my" [i.e. our] lack of success."
fwiw, I don't judge players on team playoff success. I don't think John Salley, Robert Horry, Pep Saul, James Edwards et al are better than Bob Lanier, Karl Malone, John Stockton etc. I think relying on that is relying on a pretty awful tool.

Wallace is a great player. One can highlight that.
McGrady has actual flaws. One can highlight them.
McGrady's team being competitive versus a team where I think I'd take ... probably at least the top 7 Non-Wallace Pistons from their series rotation before picking a Magic guy doesn't make sense as some kind of coup for BW or a great shame for TM.

[cupcakesnake]

Tmac's peak and his trajectory over the first 6-7 years of his career inspire a lot of imagination for what could have been. His warts get ignored a lot (his poor shooting touch led to strangely awful rim finishing and a really inefficient floor game based around his pull up). To me, McGrady was a player who surfed the immense wave of his physical gifts, and when that wave crashed earlier than expected, that was that. I don't like to rag on a guy who had injuries ruin a HOF career (he still made the hall and did so 4 years before Ben Wallace), but I feel the injuries distracted from a startling lack of development. Defensively he peaked at age 20 and then became less and less interested even before the injuries. Offensively he rode 1 hot shooting year into an assumption that he could shoot (he was below average from 3 for almost all of his career). The playmaking at his size was cool, but I didn't see him improving on his ability to make reads as he grew older. Imo, he really struggled to integrate with other players, and his only success came as a 1 man show.

Ben Wallace has a short prime too. Not Tmac short, but Ben's prime ended when Flip Saunders decided he didn't like playing a non-scoring threat for 40 minutes every night. Ben's bad offense got worse when he left Detroit, because what little value he was able to provide as a rim runner and high-post passer depended a lot on the chemistry he'd built, particularly with Rip Hamilton. Ben's prime is from age 26-31 (5 years), which you can argue Tmac prime lasted 5 as well, though at a very different age (21-26). I think both of them peaked as weak MVP candidates. Like Tmac, Ben spent his post prime with a lot of injuries. Unlike Tmac though, Ben was able to provide some value in those injured post-prime years. He remained a really good defensive specialist in Cleveland and even once he returned to Detroit. He never stopped being a very strong rim protector, rebounder on both ends, and low-key solid switch defender. The offense went from being a 0 into less than zero though. He had some of the worst hands ever.

[Jaivl]

I'd take Carter over Wallace, nevermind Tracy.

And I'd take Wallace over Carter, never mind Tracy.

I would not be surprised if you meant Gerald Wallace...

[Morb]

1. Because he was literally talking as if he had already beaten Ben Wallace's team

a guy who was mostly known for volume scoring inefficiently and struggling to synergize with the other talent on his roster? I don't think so.

What is this trash? Jeez, I thinked you better than this.
Wheres proof of this phrase? Great T-Mac Saying He's not sayed this. Maybe it's fake for motivation of Detroit? Like Jordan fantases))
T-Mac was mostly known for 2001-2005, where he was healthy and efficient. In RS +2-3% TS, In PS +4% TS and low tovs. You don't know this?)
Maybe you don't know about 2003 Historical Season, 22 wins in a row in 2008?) Just Luck.

[Dr Positivity]

Big Ben is maybe as good as the Rockets McGrady. Orlando McGrady is a tier above.