RealGM Top 100 List #10

[ronnymac2]

^^^Good post on the Doctor. I do think Erving's man defense is average, but his abilities as a shot-blocker, ball-hawk, defensive rebounder, and overall team defender make him a borderline co-anchor of a defense.

That '83 team is very good defensively. You essentially have three different defensive co-anchors in Moses, Julius, and Bobby Jones. Plus you've got Cheeks, who was a tenacious and ultra-athletic defender at point guard- not too dissimilar to Rajon Rondo when he's dialed in defensively.

[An Unbiased Fan]

ElGee pretty much took a hammer and smashed the case of Kevin Garnett as an elite all-time player. When comparing him to the elites he fails miserably. He is the worst in bad categories, last place in good categories, and certainly doesn't have a case against a guy like Duncan and marginal one at best against Malone.

When did I do this??

I actually think Duncan and KG are incredibly close, and think KG's peak is clearly above Malone's.

Garnett, like Larry Bird, is very much a player I think impacts the game in ways well beyond the box score. He's quite clearly one of the greatest all-around/most versatile players in NBA history. He can score, on the block, on his own, or from the mid post. He can pass. He can play pick and pop. He can play multiple positions. He can play in multiple systems. I assume you are referring to his statistical changes...

Well, he actually increases his PS scoring a fair deal. His TS% across his prime years drops 2.7% more than "expected." As is always the case, you have to judge how much of that is defenses keying on him/teammates and context vs. his own shortcomings. I think it's mostly the former -- I was always *very* impressed with Kevin Garnett in the PS, even if he missed an extra shot or two. (Do people who cite TS% so much even grasp what these difference in % mean?)

As for scoring load, Garnett, never one of the GOAT scorers, carried the team a fair deal. I believe it was UAF who referenced pts%. This can be a very instructional figure. After all, 1999-2004 was the nadir of NBA scoring in the 3-point era. Here are KG's pts% in the PS w/apg in parents:
Garnett
1999 27.1% (3.8)
2000 22.0% (8.8)
2001 25.6% (4.3)
2002 23.5% (5.0)
2003 26.9% (5.2)
2004 26.4% (5.1)
--
By comparison, Robinson's are:
1990 20.8% (2.3)
1991 23.9% (2.0)
1993 22.9% (4.0)
1994 22.7% (3.5)
1995 25.7% (3.1)
1996 25.1% (2.4)

So just from those statistics, you get the picture of which guy is doing more for his team on offense. The one year (2000) KG scores less of his teams points, his assists spike. DRob has a relatively low/consistent share of the scoring load along with moderate assists contributions. IMO, this is a reflection of what one sees when watching them -- KG is all over the place basically trying to do everything (and we know he is unselfish to a fault, that IS something I have statistically suggested) whereas DRob is taking what comes to him and failing at that. Which is what always seems to happen when David Robinson plays good defenses (to a lesser extent at his peak, say in 1995).

THAT is the crux of the difference between these two. Among comparable modern players, no one has more bad shooting games in the PS than David Robinson. http://www.backpicks.com/2011/05/18/hig ... on-part-i/

What I find amazing about this is that it has little effect on his team whether he shoots one way or the other. Why? Because David Robinson's scoring wasn't that valuable to those teams. He rarely ever shot the ball a lot. And his team's performance varied with his other box score metrics, not his shooting numbers. Cummings, Elliot, Anderson and Rod Strickland did a lot on their own on offense. In 95, Avery, Del Negro and co. were decent too...although I think Robinson was better then as well.

And then there's the other side of the ball, in which you watch KG stripping PG's on the inbound pass and doing everything he can (look at the bounding numbers!) and marvel, while at times you ask yourself "where is David Robinson and why is he jumping around like a decapitated chicken?"

That's basically the different in peak between these two players. I don't really find it close.

For clarification, PTS% is a stat I came up with based on AST%, TRB%, and the like. Here's the formula:

PTS% = 100 * (Pts * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * Tm Pts)

But you make some good points Elgee. KG did have a larger offensive load than DRob, but DRob also was more efficient as a scorer.

DRob:
1990 - 28.1% PTS, 58.1% TS
1991 - 27.6% PTS, 76.0% TS
1993 - 26.4% PTS, 52.9% TS
1994 - 29.9% PTS, 47.1% TS
1995 - 30.1% PTS, 53.6% TS
1996 - 34.1% PTS, 56.9% TS


KG:
1999 - 30.5% PTS, 48.8% TS
2000 - 24.7% PTS, 44.1% TS
2001 - 29.8% PTS, 56.9% TS
2002 - 26.1% PTS, 51.4% TS
2003 - 29.7% PTS, 53.9% TS
2004 - 29.4% PTS, 51.3% TS

[ronnymac2]

Anybody want to explain why LeBron James shouldn't be voted in? I've seen arguments against Kobe, Erving, Malone, KG, etc. Yet, James has been ignored, despite him being a better basketball player than all of them.

Maybe I'm putting too much thought into this. Maybe he doesn't have quite the longevity the others have.

Somebody set me straight though. Within the next ten minutes. Doesn't need to be a big post. Otherwise, I think I'm voting for James. But i can be swayed rather easily.

[Doctor MJ]

Anybody want to explain why LeBron James shouldn't be voted in? I've seen arguments against Kobe, Erving, Malone, KG, etc. Yet, James has been ignored, despite him being a better basketball player than all of them.

Maybe I'm putting too much thought into this. Maybe he doesn't have quite the longevity the others have.

Somebody set me straight though. Within the next ten minutes. Doesn't need to be a big post. Otherwise, I think I'm voting for James. But i can be swayed rather easily.

Well how you factor in longevity is really totally up to you imho, but as great as LeBron's peak is, the longevity issue is to big for me at this point.

Consider it from this perspective vs Kobe: Who did more for their franchise, Kobe for the Lakers or LeBron for the Cavs? Then add in LeBron's single year with the Heat, is that really enough to sway you?

Something else I'll say about LeBron is that in all honesty there's a larger uncertainty about him that the older players, and I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt. That uncertainty isn't about his impact in Cleveland (which was huge), but truly he has yet to prove that he really make great use of strong talent around him, and because he has gone to South Beach, that ability is going to have a huge impact on the rest of his career.

I'm not betting against LeBron, but truly, while I'd have been defending a ringless LeBron in Cleveland in definitely, if LeBron ends up ringless in Miami this is going to be a major GOAT issue.

[Doctor MJ]

Oh, and for the record, I expect to vote for LeBron right around 17, the spot we'd expect based on his nomination.

[ronnymac2]

All right, thanks Doc. I won't make this easy on myself by going with the best player. Personally, I don't think he has a problem playing with other players, but he does need to obtain more of...something. I'm not talking about rings either, because it was clear in '09 he was a champion. To me, LBJ has two or three titles already. He's in a gray area though. I don't know if it's between the GOATs and the Cluster **** or Cluster **** and the mortals. Eh, whatever. Maybe I'll change my mind later.

Just to get it in...

Vote: Kobe Bryant

I'll explain later I guess.

[penbeast0]

Kobe (penbeast0, An Unbiased Fan, Black Feet, JayfromLA, JordansBulls, Snakebites, fatal9, pancakes3, SDChargers#1, therealbig3, TMACFORMVP, RoyceDa, Laimbeer, cpower, ronnymac2)
KG (Dr Mufasa, drza, Doctor MJ, Fencer reregistered)
Erving (shawngoat23, Baller24, ravenred)
Karl Malone (Bucksfans1and2, FJS, Vinsanity420, mysticbb, Gongxi, David Stern)

Nominate

DRob (penbeast0, An Unbiased Fan, Black Feet, shawgoat23, Fencer reregistered, JayfromLA, drza, Snakebites, Bucksfans1and2, FJS, Vinsanity420, mysticbb, Doctor MJ, SDChargers#1, TMACFORMVP, RoyceDA, ravenred, Gongxi. David Stern)
Wade (Dr Mufasa, Baller 24, fatal9, therealbig3, RoyceDa, cpower)

Drexler (Clyde Drexler)
Isiah (Laimbeer)
Havlicek (pancakes3)

With thanks to therealbig3

[Black Feet]

Anybody want to explain why LeBron James shouldn't be voted in? I've seen arguments against Kobe, Erving, Malone, KG, etc. Yet, James has been ignored, despite him being a better basketball player than all of them.

Maybe I'm putting too much thought into this. Maybe he doesn't have quite the longevity the others have.

Somebody set me straight though. Within the next ten minutes. Doesn't need to be a big post. Otherwise, I think I'm voting for James. But i can be swayed rather easily.

I don't see any reason for James to go #10,11,12 or 13. To me his style of play is not the most conducive to winning, and building a championship team around Lebron might be harder to do than building around KG, Malone, Kobe, and Erving. Give him a mediocre supporting cast and he will put up great numbers and get you to the playoffs, but when you insert him into a championship caliber team can he maintain those numbers without hurting his team? He also does not have the competitive spirit of Kobe or KG, and as of now his longevity really hurts him against Malone. To me it's how well will a player do on a championship team, what intangibles will he bring to the table? I do see Lebron improving though, and eventually he will clearly be a top 15 player All-Time but I just can't rank him that high yet. Just my 2 cents...

[ronnymac2]

^^^Fair enough.


Just for the sake of accuracy, I nominated Wade earlier in the thread. Whatever though, game's over now. lol

[ronnymac2]

This is what I thought of Kobe vs. KG in the '03 RPOY thread.

Still....the 2-way impact is the thing that makes it close. Which gets to your number 3.....

I'm not giving Kobe the nod because of offensive explosiveness and putting up bunches of points. If I did that, Kobe would probably be the GOAT, ahead of even MJ. That's obviously not true though.

I always say that the real greats in the playoffs need to be either an offensive constant, a true defensive anchor, or an amazing big-game performer/clutch player (along with multi-faceted star impact).

An offensive constant is the most valuable imo because it is harder to find and offense is more important than defense from the star player. What I mean by offensive constant is the ability to always have numerous effects on the game, even if one part of your game is faultering. You need to constantly be opening things up for teammates no matter what the defense/matchup is. The ability to iso score in dominant fashion is important (don't think of Iverson and say iso scoring is overrated.....I'm talking about MJ/Shaq/Hakeem/Jabbar etc.). You need to be able to put so much pressure on a defense that they need to cover you with more than one guy.

Obviously, this, as well as defensive anchoring, is reliant on teammates doing their job (which is why role players imo are so important and underrated and why star players get way too much credit/blame for winning and losing).

Bryant fulfills the offensive constant to a greater degree than Garnett. Garnett obviously is better on defense, but, again, I value the offense more. The big-game play/clutchness....the best KG can hope for here is that it is called even. So Bryant wins out.

Again, I'm not saying KG isn't a great offensive player, or even that Bryant was more valuable to his team's offense that year than Garnett was to his (though I might argue that, considering Kobe had to carry us that year with a 40 pgg month to get into playoff position).

I don't think Kobe is a better scorer because he scored 7 points a game more. Garnett could have had a higher scoring average for all I care; Kobe is still the better scoring option. Hell, I believe in 04, Garnett did outscore him. Doesn't make Garnett a better scorer.

That ability- and willingness- to score against any defender is important. Again, don't think of it in the popular RealGM way of thinking: "Iso scoring is overrated, look at Allen Iverson!" Iso scoring is extremely important. It's how you create offense in the playoffs (in the modern era, at least). Especially if you combine that with great passing, because then it helps your teammates.

KG can give you a versatile iso scoring option, a big who can hit his free throws, a good offensive rebounder, an athletic finisher, and a big who spreads the floor with an elite catch-and-shoot J. He's a great passer in a variety of contexts for a big man. Very valuable. Very good offensive player.

Kobe Bryant gives you the same versatility (more actually, considering he has more range), a true closer, much greater isolation scoring (along with the versatility), a full-court ball-handler who can handle in a variety of contexts (pick-n-roll, bring the ball up, iso, weaving through a defense), and an athletic finisher on the break, and a guy who gets to the line more.

That to me is more valuable. It's not the 7 ppg. That's just production. Whatever. It's what they are doing on the court; how he is going about getting the production. How Kobe can control what is going on on the court offensively in a greater way than KG can. AND he chooses to. In the playoffs, that becomes huge. That's why I value that constant pressure that Bryant exerts on a defense. I just don't think Garnett, who relative to Bryant is passive, exerts that sort of pressure, as great as he is.

Simply wanted to provide some reasoning. Honestly though, that could just be my preference of offense over defense. Reasonable to put KG over Kobe/Wade/West/Robertson/Erving.

Kobe over Karl was tougher this time around. A lot of excellent posters made a lot of excellent posts regarding the lot of excellent years Karl Malone had. Malone is better than Kobe defensively- a co-anchor if there ever was one- but worse than Garnett defensively (Kg is an all-time anchor). He's better offensively than KG obviously, but worse than Bryant.

Essentially, Kobe vs. Karl became "superior offensive Constant with excellent defense" vs. "Offensive Constant with co-anchor defense." Both are big game performers imo. In my view, Malone and Bryant are probably tied as far as playing basketball goes. So my tiebreaker is the flimsy stuff, and Bryant has the edge there.

What I learned from this discussion is that Malone is essentially a top 10 player (I'll treat him as such from now on, even though I'm technically not voting him in here) and he's tied with Kobe as a player, meaning he possibly leapfrogs West and Robertson and Erving and clearly separates himself from the other Malone (GOAM- Greatest of All Malones).

Malone vs. KG will be fantastic in the next thread. Adding in the three perimeter guys and Moses and Dirk and Charles and LBJ...damn...

[Dr Positivity]

My LBJ argument is a cousin of the Malone one. His failures are just too horrifying low to me to put him over players I trust.

I don't think it *all* comes down to the mass total of how you played. Let's not forget we are ranking the greatest players of all time. Does "greatness" exist? (sorry Gongxi for that statement) If it does, I know one thing. Lebron James in 2010 and 2011 did not have it in him. He had regular season greatness. I'm not giving him more credit than players like Kobe, West, Erving, KG after what he did the last two years.

[lorak]

TLDR; KG's numbers go up, D-Rob's go down, even if both sacrifice some efficiency(D-Rob's drop was larger)

Since when drop off is more important than actual level of play?