RealGM Top 100 #3

[Baller 24]

From the start of Duncan's career until his last most "prime" season in '08 (so '98 to '08), there was a reason why that any team that got past Duncan reached the NBA Finals. And I certainly wouldn't call them "blatant" failures as compared to that of Bryant, Chamberlain, and O'neal (I think that's what gilmorefan was trying to state).

BTW, if anyone wants to re-do the math, I pace adjusted Duncan's numbers a few years ago to Bird's pace, and they came out to be something ridiculous like 26-27 PPG/13-14RPG/4-5APG/3-3.5BLK/1-1.2STL, Pat Riley called him the most fundamentally profound player he's seen since Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. His '03 playoff run alone (with such an inconsistent cast---Parker had games where he was 0-14), should simulate some thought into how great of a player he is, something the other greats this decade (O'Neal, Garnett, and Bryant), haven't been capable of doing so, without having some of the most superior supporting casts this decade ('09 & '10 for Bryant, '08 for Garnett, '00-02/'06 for O'neal). Definitely would love to see the arguments for him being in the top 5, I'm pretty sure there are consistent ones, especially in terms of accolades, where he's strictly in elite company--Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar, Bird.

[Fencer reregistered]

Oh, and we're now at KAJ- 18, Wilt and Magic on 2 each.

Can some of the KG supporters please re-vote? I suspect most of you will be voting for Karl Malone over Jerry West (who is currently 1 vote ahead), and if you stay with KG this time around you're going to split the vote next round (possibly allowing Oscar to get up). If we just vote Karl Malone in now, then KG will get in next time, and you'll have a chance to debate KG and Karl Malone higher in the list like you want.

In that case, could the Oscar Robertson voters please revote for Jerry West, to get him in ahead of Karl Malone?

Or, better yet, could we please just stop with the political campaigning for strategic voting before it starts?

[Baller 24]

Found it, adjusted to Bird's pace (check out the efficiency on Duncan's part):

Code: Select all

               MPG,  PPG,   RPG, APG, BPG, SPG, TO,   TS,   PER
Bird (80-88):   42.6, 24.5, 10.7, 6.4, 0.9, 1.9, 3.2, .555, 21.9
Duncan (99-07): 40.0, 26.5, 14.1, 4.1, 3.1, 0.8, 3.5, .560, 27.0

[Vinsanity420]

Lol, nominations aren't THAT big of a deal guys... by the time the #10 spot rolls along, 6 more players will be in - Oscar, West, Malone, KG will all be in to debate.

[An Unbiased Fan]

From the start of Duncan's career until his last most "prime" season in '08 (so '98 to '08), there was a reason why that any team that got past Duncan reached the NBA Finals. And I certainly wouldn't call them "blatant" failures as compared to that of Bryant, Chamberlain, and O'neal (I think that's what gilmorefan was trying to state).

I just don't see how Kobe has more "failures" than Duncan in the playoffs though. Outside of the 2004 Finals, what can you really point to? In fact, Kobe had a direct hand in stifling Duncan many of those years. And while you mention that the team's Duncan lost to went to the Finals, it should also be noted that 4 of those teams had Kobe.

But more to the original point, I don't see how Duncan has less "failures" as Magic either. I mean really, Magic made 9 Finals in a 12 year span, Kobe made 7 Finals in a 11 year span, Duncan made 4 Finals in a 11 year span.

Playoff Series record:
Magic 80'-91': 33-6 (.846)
Kobe 00'-10': 27-5 (.844)/12-3 w/o Shaq (.800)
Duncan 98'-08': 24-6 (.800)

[Vinsanity420]

Found it, adjusted to Bird's pace (check out the efficiency on Duncan's part):

Code: Select all

               MPG,  PPG,   RPG, APG, BPG, SPG, TO,   TS,   PER
Bird (80-88):   42.6, 24.5, 10.7, 6.4, 0.9, 1.9, 3.2, .555, 21.9
Duncan (99-07): 40.0, 26.5, 14.1, 4.1, 3.1, 0.8, 3.5, .560, 27.0

Hmm, I was surprised at the 5+ PER difference between the two. Looking back some, I realized PER was generally lower in that era... Bird was #1 in PER twice, something that Duncan never managed to do.

Duncan 21-5 in Series with HCA
Bird 21-7 in Series with HCA

Just for JB,

Bird was the ultimate offensive weapon for me... there literally wasn't a scoring move he couldn't do and was one of the best passers the league has ever seen. He can also rebound like a good PF should... ultimately it comes down to what you like better - Duncan's defense vs Bird's offense. I think Bird's overall offense > Duncan's advantage on defense.

But if you like Duncan over Bird for D, why not KG vs Bird? Or Hakeem vs Bird as well?

[An Unbiased Fan]

Found it, adjusted to Bird's pace (check out the efficiency on Duncan's part):

Code: Select all

               MPG,  PPG,   RPG, APG, BPG, SPG, TO,   TS,   PER
Bird (80-88):   42.6, 24.5, 10.7, 6.4, 0.9, 1.9, 3.2, .555, 21.9
Duncan (99-07): 40.0, 26.5, 14.1, 4.1, 3.1, 0.8, 3.5, .560, 27.0

Interesting, where did you get the pace-adjusted numbers from. I actually have TD over Bird right now, due to his 2-way ability. Larry may be around #9 on my list, frankly.

[Doormatt]

Sorry guys I suddenly became really busy. I really like reading these threads, but I'm not sure I'll be able to, but hopefully I will. Not that it seems to matter, since KAJ appears to be winning in a landslide, but I vote Kareem and nominate West.

[ElGee]

Oh, and we're now at KAJ- 18, Wilt and Magic on 2 each.

Can some of the KG supporters please re-vote? I suspect most of you will be voting for Karl Malone over Jerry West (who is currently 1 vote ahead), and if you stay with KG this time around you're going to split the vote next round (possibly allowing Oscar to get up). If we just vote Karl Malone in now, then KG will get in next time, and you'll have a chance to debate KG and Karl Malone higher in the list like you want.

In that case, could the Oscar Robertson voters please revote for Jerry West, to get him in ahead of Karl Malone?

Or, better yet, could we please just stop with the political campaigning for strategic voting before it starts?

I'm going to suggest you DON'T post the vote count. It really can influence voting, which of course, defeats the purpose of voting.

And could someone explain why playoff "failures" even matter? Do they un-do the good playoff runs someone has? If MJ unretired today and had 10 consecutive playoff choke jobs, would he become less valuable/worse over the course of his career?

EDIT: To clarify, I mean the raw number of "failures" as a "negative" versus just judging the career as a whole. Wouldn't it be better, in that sense, to look at the number of "successes?"

[Fencer reregistered]

Since I keep criticizing GilmoreFan for his attempts to turn all this into a strategic voting game and otherwise to lobby incessantly in advance for his preferred outcomes at many different points on the top 100 list, let me also compliment him for a truly outstanding pro-Duncan post.

[ElGee]

For me, Magic's defense was too weak to beat out KAJ.

This is instructional.

The defense of a point guard is about the least important defensive role on a team. Which means having a great defensive PG doesn't do much to raise team D, and having a horrible defensive PG doesn't do much to hurt team D.

A center is the opposite. A weak defensive center can have a huge negative impact, while a strong one can have a huge positive impact.

You don't compare them linearly across positions. It's like saying "Shaq's 3-point shooting is just too weak for me. He can't stretch the floor like Nash." It's not his role. It's not important. And it doesn't really matter. There's more than one way to skin the cat here.

If you pair Kareem (not a top-10 defensive center IMO) with Gary Payton, your defense will not be as a good from those 2 positions as if you paired Magic with Bill Russell. So it makes absolutely no sense to compare these guys as if defense is a deciding factor.

It's a good habit to think about the overall impact of a player, and not obsess over completeness of one's game. Actually, there's no rule (who cares who is better at FT%, 3pt% 4th-Q scoring, etc.), just look at the overall impact and see who is better.

[mysticbb]

The defense of a point guard is about the least important defensive role on a team. Which means having a great defensive PG doesn't do much to raise team D, and having a horrible defensive PG doesn't do much to hurt team D.

Magic didn't defend opposing PG anyway, that was rather a job for Byron Scott, Michael Cooper or before the Lakers even started Norm Nixon as their PG.

But even then the defensive impact (positive or negative) isn't just determined by the individual defensive abilities especially for wing and perimeter players.

[An Unbiased Fan]

For me, Magic's defense was too weak to beat out KAJ.

This is instructional.

The defense of a point guard is about the least important defensive role on a team. Which means having a great defensive PG doesn't do much to raise team D, and having a horrible defensive PG doesn't do much to hurt team D.

A center is the opposite. A weak defensive center can have a huge negative impact, while a strong one can have a huge positive impact.

You don't compare them linearly across positions. It's like saying "Shaq's 3-point shooting is just too weak for me. He can't stretch the floor like Nash." It's not his role. It's not important. And it doesn't really matter. There's more than one way to skin the cat here.

If you pair Kareem (not a top-10 defensive center IMO) with Gary Payton, your defense will not be as a good from those 2 positions as if you paired Magic with Bill Russell. So it makes absolutely no sense to compare these guys as if defense is a deciding factor.

It's a good habit to think about the overall impact of a player, and not obsess over completeness of one's game. Actually, there's no rule (who cares who is better at FT%, 3pt% 4th-Q scoring, etc.), just look at the overall impact and see who is better.

You're extrapolating a bit too much from that sentence. As players, I feel Magic & KAJ were on par, but I gave KAJ the edge because he was the more complete player.

Also, having bad PG defense most certainly hurts a team. Just look at how Paul was killing LA last year, or how Westbrook was the year before or Brooks the year before that because they had an old Fisher guarding them. Guys like Frazier, Payton, and Kidd most certainly effected their team's defense greatly. Can a PG be a defensive anchor, no. BUT, defense at EVERY postion is still important because basketball is a game of mismatches.

And like mysticbb pointed out, Magic didn't even really defend PGs. My beef with Magic on defense is that he was slow on rotations and not a good man defender. And this is coming from a guy who's favorite player as a kid was Magic.

[Fencer reregistered]

I suspect that Magic's natural defensive position was really PF.

[fatal9]

Has a perfect record

I saw people emphasising how Bill Russell “won when he was supposed to, as well as when he wasn’t supposed to”, but that is even more true of Tim Duncan, whose impact over his career has been simply staggering. Over the last 14 years he has carried the Spurs to an average win record of 57.4 wins (99 has been pro-rated obviously). In his 10 year prime (ending after 07) he never once lost in the playoffs to a team he was supposed to beat.
98- rookie, everyone gives you a pass when you don’t win the title (good for top 5 in the MVP vote, and was already on the all-nba 1st team, which he made the next 8 years, and again in 07).
99- Wins championship in dominant fashion as teams best player.
00- injured for playofs
01- loses to prime Shaq and Kobe
02- loses to prime Shaq and Kobe
03- Wins championship (beats prime Shaq and Kobe with garbage team)
04- injures foot in the regular season (teams goes 50-16 while healthy), despite incredible would be game winning shot he loses to prime Shaq and Kobe (and Karl Malone), and a shot that probably wouldn’t be counted today since there is no physical way to catch and release a ball in 0.4 seconds, and had the timer been started the moment Fisher touched it, it wouldn’t have counted). If Duncan doesn’t miss 16 games this year, he wins his 3rd MVP in a row.
05- Wins championship
06- loses to the excellent Dirk Mavs in 7 games, but take a look at the ridiculous stats he put up this series. Duncan carried them to a boneheaded foul away from winning, this loss is on Parker and Manu.
07- Wins championship
After that Tim isn’t in his prime, though he still continues to have excellent performances, only going down in 08 to the much more stacked Lakers. His per 36 numbers are eerily similar, despite the drop off from his prime, particularly his mobility and defence, which doesn’t show up on paper as much.

There are just no examples of blatant failures like we can see for Magic (81, 86, 90 all stand out as very disappointing outcomes), Wilt everyone knows about, and Shaq has too many to name.

How is '02 not a failure? The story of that series was SA's fourth quarter meltdowns, which resulted from Duncan (as well as rest of the team's) inability to score down the stretch. After winning game two, they had a lead going into the next couple fourth quarters but blew it. I agree that Duncan was nearly flawless but he is not the ultimate go-to scorer like other bigs (Shaq, Hakeem, KAJ being the cream of the crop). A big man shooting 42.4% and averaging 4.6 turnovers in a series where his team blew multiple fourth quarter leads, while an opposing star (Kobe) is simultaneously killing your team in that same stretch? This is not a failure now? Really? While Magic losing in '90 while dropping back to back 40 point games in the last two games of that series is? '01 he had home court and got swept while getting outplayed by two players on the opposing teams (not that I blame him, he could of played like 2003 and not beaten Shaq/Kobe), but I only mention this because again, I've seen you consider some things failures for other players but not here (Duncan went out with a whimper in the last two games as well averaging 12/10/4 on 33% in 37 mpg).

'04 is not a failure either? Blowing a 2-0 lead, going into the series with HCA, and then losing the next 4 games while averaging 17.5 ppg on 38.3% along with 13.8 rpg and 4.3 TOs is not failing?


And the '03 team has been turned into "garbage" the farther we're removed from that year. The team didn't have the great scoring second option but was built well to compliment him and did not have any weaknesses. It also didn't hurt that the two top SRS teams in the league (Mavs and Kings) had injuries to their best players in the playoffs, Webber going down in the WCSF and Dirk going down against the Spurs in WCF, not to mention a weak finals opponent and that being the weakest of the Shaq/Kobe Laker teams (won just 50 games) the Spurs ever faced (and ever defeated).

And IMO the '03 team is very underrated. This usually happens to all the teams that lack that all-star second option ('94 Rockets, this year's Mavs also come to mind, usually teams like these are well balanced and built well around the star player's skill set). That Spurs team was commended all playoffs long for building a perfect team around him. And if you watch them play, you never felt like the team had a weakness. They could flat out lock you down, could stifle guards on the perimeter with Bowen (BIG BIG reason they got past the Lakers), throw bangers who were good post defenders like Rose and give you beastly interior D with Duncan/D-Rob. If you look at the team as a whole, or watch them play, they weren't as weak as people are making them out to be after looking at just stats. Would have been even more dominant if they had a 20+ ppg secondary scorer, but the team wasn't really lacking anything.

Interior defense: Duncan, Robinson
Rebounding: Duncan, Rose, Robinson
Perimeter defense: Bowen (think if Antonio Daniels was defending Kobe again, Spurs are beating the Lakers?)
Outside shooting: Ginobili, Bowen, Stephen Jackson
Playmaking off the dribble: Ginobili, Parker
Guard scoring: Parker, Ginobili, Jackson (inconsistent but two out three would usually step up in basically every game to give you 30-40 pts combined)
Bench: Ginobili, Rose, Claxton, Smith (better than any other opposing bench in the playoffs, only one arguable is Mav because of NVE's explosive scoring in the playoffs)
Coaching: Popovich (how important has he been? look at how well he's managed the Spurs even after Duncan's decline)

I rate Duncan pretty high (top 6-7), saw his entire career, know what he's about but his teammates that year have gotten more and more underrated as the years have gone by.

Add in some breaks like Horry going something like 0/18 on three pointers and missing a buzzer beating 3 that would have shifted the series in LA's favor, while Bruce Bowen shoots 17/26 from three (including game 2 where he hit 7 threes for a career high 27 pts). Duncan should rightly get a ton of credit, he played like a god but just because there wasn't a strong "#2" doesn't mean the team sucked. That said, Duncan stepped up at all the right moments, closed out Lakers with a 37/16/4 game, won back home court against Mavs with a 34/24/6/6 game, and destroyed the Nets in the finals, but you don't need to dismiss his teammates to do it (or play up his competition when it was in fact quite weak).

[Doctor MJ]

Also, having bad PG defense most certainly hurts a team. Just look at how Paul was killing LA last year, or how Westbrook was the year before or Brooks the year before that because they had an old Fisher guarding them. Guys like Frazier, Payton, and Kidd most certainly effected their team's defense greatly. Can a PG be a defensive anchor, no. BUT, defense at EVERY postion is still important because basketball is a game of mismatches.

You're actually confusing the importance of defense against PGs with the importance of a PG on defense.

For the defense, the ability to stop PG offense is extremely important because it is typically the most important position on offense.

Naively, you might think this means that a PG's defense is the most important of all positions. The logical flaw here is that you don't actually stop a great offensive PG simply by putting a great defense PG on him. PGs on defense are completely overmatched when going up against PGs on offense, and thus stopping the offensive PG is much more of a team defense assignment.

I know you hate +/-, but it's relevant again. We have league-wide data available for this stuff. What it tells us over and over again is that it's the centers and forwards who make a defense effective much more than the guards.

[fatal9]

BTW, if anyone wants to re-do the math, I pace adjusted Duncan's numbers a few years ago to Bird's pace, and they came out to be something ridiculous like 26-27 PPG/13-14RPG/4-5APG/3-3.5BLK/1-1.2STL, Pat Riley called him the most fundamentally profound player he's seen since Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Look, I understand the reason for pace adjusting numbers but other than in extreme cases like the 60s which allowed a post player like Wilt to shoot 38 times a game, pace doesn't have an impact on scoring (especially for big men, though it does inflate guard offensive numbers imo especially if they depended on transition for a lot of their scoring).

I expect it to reduce a player's efficiency somewhat as more of the scoring has to be done in the half court, but Bird is not having a problem averaging his usual 18-22 FGA in the 00s, and Duncan is not suddenly taking 20+ FGAs every game (Hakeem didn't manage a 20+ FGA season until the mid 90s when the pace was much slower, the Rocket guards gunned less and waited/worked patiently around him).

And despite the higher pace, I'm not sure he got more touches than you would in the more star centered post-Jordan league. In the half court, you expect to hit your star player for a larger percentage of the offense than in a more free flowing offense that takes shots more quickly. His teams had more talent but that also means the wealth had to be shared more. Games where he could have had 40, he might not get the touches (or minutes) to do it, instead of iso-ing himself over and over again to score, he had to make sure McHale/Parish got their post ups, and Ainge and DJ also get their shots. Look at LeBron and Wade for example, their stats across the board are down because they have to split possessions and have less of a hand in the offense. I've seen peak Bird put some SCARY numbers when McHale was out with an injury and he had to increase his scoring/rebounding while getting more touches (check Feb '86 when he went a full month without him). The one thing I do agree with is the rebounding adjustment, that's shown to be true over the eras, and blocks to an extent too (lot more perimeter shots especially threes being taken, more athletic finishers around the rim). You can't just take Duncan's stats and just automatically add 5 ppg, a bunch of assists and not take into account so many of the other factors. For example, big men wouldn't even make it down the court before a shot was thrown up (Hakeem is a great example of this), his overall offensive numbers/touches I don't expect to increase at all because pace is neutralized by various other factors.

[ElGee]

Fatal - last two posts were amazing. They should be stickied.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Also, having bad PG defense most certainly hurts a team. Just look at how Paul was killing LA last year, or how Westbrook was the year before or Brooks the year before that because they had an old Fisher guarding them. Guys like Frazier, Payton, and Kidd most certainly effected their team's defense greatly. Can a PG be a defensive anchor, no. BUT, defense at EVERY postion is still important because basketball is a game of mismatches.

You're actually confusing the importance of defense against PGs with the importance of a PG on defense.

For the defense, the ability to stop PG offense is extremely important because it is typically the most important position on offense.

Naively, you might think this means that a PG's defense is the most important of all positions. The logical flaw here is that you don't actually stop a great offensive PG simply by putting a great defense PG on him. PGs on defense are completely overmatched when going up against PGs on offense, and thus stopping the offensive PG is much more of a team defense assignment.

I know you hate +/-, but it's relevant again. We have league-wide data available for this stuff. What it tells us over and over again is that it's the centers and forwards who make a defense effective much more than the guards.

But Doc, I'm not saying you stop a great offensive PG with a great defensive PG, anymore than you stop a great offensive C with a defensive C. Kidd would have a tough time guarding Rose, just like Deke had a tough time guarding Shaq. However, a poor defender at ANY postion creates new mismatches for the oppostion, and once again, basketball is a game of mismatches. A poor defender like Fisher not only allows PG increased penetration in the paint, he's also weak on rotations which allows open perimeter looks. You also then have to use other defenders like Kobe to help on D because of the mismatch, which weakens defense in other areas. I'm talking about the sum of all parts.

In regards to Magic, I didn't even bring up PG defense(since he didn't guard them alot), it was his slow rotations on TEAM defense, and his subpar defense in man situations(typically against forwards), that I critqued him on.

[ElGee]

^^^Yes, but you're sounding like that influences you to the point of taking other players over Magic because of that.

As a crude example, I'm a better 3-point shooter and free throw shooter than Shaq. It doesn't matter though, because his overall impact was greater.

Similarly, Magic's overall impact (from his GOAT offense?) is greater than Kareem's IMO. If Magic were a better defender as you were discussing, he'd have a comparable or better peak than Michael. Now if you just think Kareem and Magic were on par on offense, that's different (bc even relative to position/fit, Kareem is adding more value on D). But I also think that's borderline crazy and probably needs some explanation/examination.

I've seen you levy the same criticism at Nash...