RealGM Top 100 List #15

[Dr Positivity]

Yeah I'm starting to consider Moses vs Dirk and Barkley now. Still probably voting Moses but sitting down and looking at it, there's not much reason to assume he's a better player

One thing I'll say about Dirk is that while he's been underrated most of his career, I give credit to Cuban for a) Spending so much to jack up the team's depth, b) Knowing things like size beside Dirk and 3pt shooting is huge, and c) Having the most advanced statistical machines which give him an edge in getting the right role players

So while it's easy to look at his team's successes and say wow, Dirk's impact is huge - it is huge, but it was a fabulously well run organization. I think the biggest reason the Mavs were most succesful than the Moses Rockets or Barkley Sixers or KG Wolves is they were organized and fundamental on both ends of the floor as well as anyone but the Spurs. Dirk deserves some credit for that, but it's a team thing too, from the top

[ElGee]

@ Sedale - I was hoping you'd weigh in. The student example is perfect. If his final grade is an 88 - that's what we care about. With LeBron this year, the dude had an A average heading into the Finals. It's not massive that his usual 95 was an 88 (or 78) for that one series.

re: Patrick Ewing - I have him ~26th. I have Payton over him though and I'm gathering that might be an outlying position.

[colts18]

@ Sedale - I was hoping you'd weigh in. The student example is perfect. If his final grade is an 88 - that's what we care about. With LeBron this year, the dude had an A average heading into the Finals. It's not massive that his usual 95 was an 88 (or 78) for that one series.

re: Patrick Ewing - I have him ~26th. I have Payton over him though and I'm gathering that might be an outlying position.

Do you have plus/minus numbers for Barkley during the 90's when he missed quite a few games?

[Dr Positivity]

For me Lebron's "Final Score" was the 88%. We'll say the Finals is a 35% weight and he got 70-75% on it after pulling a 95% the rest of the year. That gives you 86-88%.

[mysticbb]

Just reminding people who have a hard time putting current careers into perspective with finished ones. I didn't say anything about quality

You said "how much they value peak/prime performance" and that wasn't about quality? Really? No idea what peak/prime performance means, if that doesn't relate to quality.
You made it sound like James has 8 peak/prime seasons while West had 10, maybe I understood that wrong, but it really sounded like that.

...and what are you suggesting, that West's rookie season was way better than James?

That wasn't my point and you know that. And don't invite strawmen like "way better", if I didn't even singled out any of West's seasons. The topic was LeBron James and how I have the impression you are running into a cognitive bias here.

No - I don't want to put all the emphasis on someone who has been the best player in the league for 4 years on 4 or 5 Finals games. How did the Heat magically do well against Chicago and Boston down the stretch?

In which game of those series made James' great play off the ball the difference? Seriously, in which game?

You're talking about redundancy.

I'm not just talk about redundancy here, that is not the only point. I talk about a flaw in James' game, a thing which doesn't bring the best out of his teammates when he does not controll the ball. If James could move better without the ball, that would already help. But standing on the perimeter and doing nothing doesn't help at all.

It's like asking if Dirk could maximize Barkley if they played in the same frontcourt.

Why should that be a problem? Nowitzki on the perimeter doesn't get into the way of Barkley at all. And Nowitzki would force a defender out on the perimeter who might be needed to double Barkley. I don't see your point here. Nowitzki doesn't need to be the scorer in order to make an impact, he gives his teammates room to operate. Barea was able to get to the basket, because the necessary spacing was there. That is the difference here. Next to James Barea would become bascially useless. Barea would be come mainly an off-ball spotup shooter, a role he isn't that great in. That was seen in 2010 when Barea and Beaubois were on the court together and it didn't work offensively.

This is just weird man. You're levying charges of bias against the guy who wrote a treatise on +/- variance during the middle of season after one of the closest playoff series in 15 years because I've referenced luck? And you're pinning something on me that John Hollinger wrote after the season ended?

No, I use that as an example. I said two times that the numbers you used for the free throws were wrong and you even used them a 3rd time in order to make a point. After I brought that up the 3rd time, you checked the numbers for the first time. You were convinced it is right, because it supported your idea. That's the bias I see here.

Sometimes it's both luck and skill. I know you know math (probably better than me) and you know how absolutely easy it is for those numbers you just cited to be variance. Then again, we know it's easy for them to be causal, because, you know, Dirk Nowitzki is one of the best players in the world. When the sample size of the opponent is 1, and you play a single short series, the losing team will usually have fewer points and the winning team usually more, and the stars of those teams will have relatively opposite +/- results. If you're not understanding that, you aren't understanding +/- and what it's measuring in the short-term.

For sure, it makes sense. The huge difference is much more likely variance than skill here. BUT we have a similar scheme for the WHOLE season. The players with Nowitzki on the court are much more efficient than without him. Do you think that is just related to luck that during the 3330 minutes with Nowitzki on the court the players were having more luck with their shots? While being completely unlucky during the 1624 without Nowitzki? We have that during the finals too. In 242 minutes with Nowitzki they outscored the Heat by 40 points, without Nowitzki in 46 minutes the Mavericks got outscored by 26 points. And it is not like Nowitzki was incredible shooting the ball. So, why do you think Nowitzki's teammates were more successful when Nowitzki was on the court?
Is there an explanation, a reasonable or is that just coincidence?

It's not an analogy. It's a statement to how knee-jerk the reactions are around here. If we did the project on June 5 LeBron would probably be in the top-10.

No, he wouldn't. Don't fool yourself with that kind of stuff. We have way too many people around here focussing on individual and team accomplishments rather than actual playing level. And the only reason to put James into the Top10 would be a ranking of the best two year peaks in which he would battle with Duncan, O'Neal and Garnett, who all had similar high impact in their respective peak seasons.

I'm also not sure what you mean when I'm say I'm ignoring something. I have a "feeling" LeBron had a higher impact in 09 and 10 so I'd rather have that than something with less of an impact? Yes, precisely. You harp and harp on James' weaknesses but act like there was some huge gulf between Dirk and someone like Paul Pierce at the beginning of the decade.

Holy crap, IT WAS! Nowitzki has high APM numbers since 2000! He always helped his team as a +10 type player, something Paul Pierce NEVER was able to do.

As if Nowitzki clearly didn't improve over the years and he's just been some metronomic constant plugging along for 11 years because of *spacing.* (I've told you from day 1, I appreciate spacing and find it hard to quantify, but you act like it makes Dirk Nowitzki some offensive God.

Nowitzki's impact is rather constant for those 11 years, no idea, but the numbers are telling that to us. He is more constant with the same average as Duncan and Garnett since 2000. Yes, he is some sort of God on offense, due to spacing and his own offensive efficiency.

I suppose then stretch bigs are all awesome (!) and Larry Bird is the GOAT 10x over, because defenders glued to him like they were part of his wardrobe.)

Last season offensive RAPM:

Matt Bonner: +1.7
Vladimir Radmanovic: +1.7
Ryan Anderson: +1.4
Peja Stojakovic: +2.1
Hedo Turkoglu: +1.5
Al Harrington: +1.1
Channing Frye: +0.9
Andrea Bargnani: +0.7
Antawn Jamison: +0.8

That's why so many teams are looking for such a big shooter, because the floor spacing becomes better. Even someone like Andrea Bargnani with not a good season in terms of shooting will improve the team's overall offense due to better floor spacing.

Sorry that I don't love Dirk in 04 and 05 His 08 and 09 seasons were down years to me too -- a drop in offense AND defense. And I hold his 06 peak in limitation relative to every player we've voted (and well behind James) because of HIS giant shortcoming....which is that he's a big occupying one of the key interior defensive positions, and at his best he's slightly above average in that area. It's the same reason why an offensive wizard like Charles Barkley doesn't get more love from me.

APM/Net+/-

Nowitzki:

2004: +11, +8.6, only Maverick player to have a negative off-court +/-
2005: +12, +15.3, Mavericks were -6.0 without him
2006: +11, +8.5, only Maverick player to have a negative off-court +/-
2007: +8, +12.4, only Maverick player to have a negative off-court +/-
2008: +9, +12.7, Mavericks were -4.4 without him
2009: +8, +8, Mavericks were -4.2 without him
2010: +10, +11.7, Mavericks were -6.2 without him
2011: +17, +16.3, Mavericks were -6.1 without him

James:

2004: 0, +1.5
2005: +6, +9.4, Cavaliers -7.1 without him
2006: +10, +11.0, Cavaliers -7.2 without him
2007: +12, +9.6, Cavaliers -4.0 without him
2008: +10, +10.6, Cavaliers -8.4 without him
2009: +15, +21.0, Cavaliers -7.3 without him
2010: +18, +16.0, Cavaliers -5.5 without him
2011: +7, +10.2, only Heat player with a negative off-court +/-

Then we can add the APM for Nowitzki:

2003: +15
2002: +10
2001: +13
2000: +9

So, now please explain me why you think that James had so much more impact during his peak seasons? Because his boxscore numbers are higher due to his playing style being much more related with on-ball action? Honestly, I bet you are surprised that those numbers for Nowitzki are not that far off from James' numbers, because you don't have an explanation for that. And you are not the only one not understanding it. But the Mavericks frontoffice knows that, that's why they kept Nowitzki all the time and had no desire to trade him. That's why the team with the biggest stats department was so sure that they can win a championship with a team build around Nowitzki, because Nowitzki is a difference maker in a similar fashion like Garnett, Duncan or James. His peak level doesn't quite reach those other 3 players, all have produced APM numbers for a two year stretch above Nowitzki's, but Nowitzki was able to produce around +10 for 12 years in a row.

When you see those numbers, would you honestly prefer James for 7 years or Nowitzki for 11?

APM numbers are based on Wayne Winston's method, Net+/- is from 82games.com.

[mysticbb]

So while it's easy to look at his team's successes and say wow, Dirk's impact is huge - it is huge, but it was a fabulously well run organization. I think the biggest reason the Mavs were most succesful than the Moses Rockets or Barkley Sixers or KG Wolves is they were organized and fundamental on both ends of the floor as well as anyone but the Spurs. Dirk deserves some credit for that, but it's a team thing too, from the top

That is correct. If Garnett could have played for the Mavericks during the Cuban era, I bet he would have also had several 50+ wins seasons and maybe already that Finals MVP award. The understanding of how unique Nowitzki is and how much of an advantage in terms of matchups, is something only a well organized franchise can understand and can use. You can't sell jersey with his game style, but you can sell wins. Nowitzki as the cornerstone for that franchise was always a decision about the game, not about the merchandise opportunities. And I don't think you could have done that with either Barkley or Moses Malone. I think Garnett or Karl Malone have also the ability to impact the game on a high level for several years, I don't see that kind of impact in Barkley or Moses Malone (at least the numbers don't suggest something like that, especially during their respective peak seasons when they missed games and didn't make a huge difference in terms of team performance).

[JordansBulls]

Ding ding ding. Went back to the '93 RPOY to pull that up.

My question goes on even further, why is Ewing about to be over 10 spots lower than Robinson? Was there really that big of a difference between the two?

Because people underrate Ewing. It actually seems that once 1998 hit and Ewing got hurt that that is when people stopped looking at him in the lime light.

[Dr Positivity]

So while it's easy to look at his team's successes and say wow, Dirk's impact is huge - it is huge, but it was a fabulously well run organization. I think the biggest reason the Mavs were most succesful than the Moses Rockets or Barkley Sixers or KG Wolves is they were organized and fundamental on both ends of the floor as well as anyone but the Spurs. Dirk deserves some credit for that, but it's a team thing too, from the top

That is correct. If Garnett could have played for the Mavericks during the Cuban era, I bet he would have also had several 50+ wins seasons and maybe already that Finals MVP award. The understanding of how unique Nowitzki is and how much of an advantage in terms of matchups, is something only a well organized franchise can understand and can use. You can't sell jersey with his game style, but you can sell wins. Nowitzki as the cornerstone for that franchise was always a decision about the game, not about the merchandise opportunities. And I don't think you could have done that with either Barkley or Moses Malone. I think Garnett or Karl Malone have also the ability to impact the game on a high level for several years, I don't see that kind of impact in Barkley or Moses Malone (at least the numbers don't suggest something like that, especially during their respective peak seasons when they missed games and didn't make a huge difference in terms of team performance).

Well I'd probably disagree with that in regards to Moses and Barkley and I think the heights they did reach is reflective of where they could go with a team

I think the Rockets during the Moses era in particular weren't entirely smart building teams. I'm looking at the 79 Rockets - They have Calvin Murphy, Rudy T, Rick Barry, Mike Newlin all on one team around Moses. Add that to Reid who is a poor man's Odom as a mismatch making PF and Dunleavy who his yet another solid shooter and it looks like Moses has the most talented team in the league because of the parity and should've won more than 47 Gs and 1st rd knockout. The problem is Murphy, Rudy, Barry, Newlin are basically 20ppg caliber shooters who don't defend - Murphy and Rudy put up 20 and 19ppg that year, Barry had 23ppg the year before in GS and Newlin had 21ppg the year after in NJ. Naturally there's a marginal utility factor at work, especially in the pre 3pt line era. Barry puts up 13ppg that year and Newlin 10ppg in less minutes, just because the shots aren't there. What they end up with is a 1st ORTG team who rank 2nd to last in DRTG. They had too many scorers and not enough defense and rebounding. Because of marginal utility overlap, they played below their talent level because the more shooter scorers you add, the less it matters compared to if you added a defensive role player instead.

At the same time. Dirk and Barkley have both played on offensively jacked, defensively lacking teams, of course - and managed to get 55-60+ W seasons out of it. But at the same time, they had even more offensive talent and obviously had a team more respectable defensively, which might have a lot to do with the ability to have a C who fouls and is aggresive defensively. And Moses' Rockets got better defensively in 80, 81, 82 but he couldn't keep the offense that high enough for them to become elite. So I'd call his Rockets results questionable overall, but am not ready to bury him for it compared to Dirk's Mavs

[Sedale Threatt]

@ Sedale - I was hoping you'd weigh in. The student example is perfect. If his final grade is an 88 - that's what we care about. With LeBron this year, the dude had an A average heading into the Finals. It's not massive that his usual 95 was an 88 (or 78) for that one series.

I couldn't disagree more with this.

Underperformance is underperformance. In instances like this, it doesn't matter if LeBron's C game is better than most players at their best -- Derek Fisher, for example. There's a level of play that he's proven he's capable of regularly reaching over the course of a full decade. When he fails to reach that, and it plays a key role in his team in his team failing to achieve the ultimate goal, that has to matter.

I guess it goes back to one of the old conundrums -- how to weigh the playoffs versus the regular season. Well, I am and always have been of the mind that the playoffs trump anything. Let's take the grade analogy further. I'm sure you took courses where the finals had a massive effect on the overall grade. I want to say I had classes where it was as much as 50 perfect.

In other words, you flunk, and you end up with a pretty crappy grade. That's pretty much how I view LeBron's performance. And a couple of others, frankly.

[Laimbeer]

West is running away, and he's an excellent choice here. But looking forward to the next round, I'd like to build some momentum for Moses. LeBron just hasn't quite caught him yet.

For the nomination, I like Hondo's longevity and the fact he did it with two different casts - as well as being very close to Cowens on his second title group. Baylor would be a great choice, I really would prefer Pippen not get it. He played one role very well - MJ's sidekick. But that doesn't quite match Hondo's resume or Baylor's status as a hugely talented one option.

Vote: Moses
Nominate: Hondo

[kabstah]

I couldn't disagree more with this.

Underperformance is underperformance. In instances like this, it doesn't matter if LeBron's C game is better than most players at their best -- Derek Fisher, for example. There's a level of play that he's proven he's capable of regularly reaching over the course of a full decade. When he fails to reach that, and it plays a key role in his team in his team failing to achieve the ultimate goal, that has to matter.

Would you take Derek Fisher over Lebron as your best player to build a team around? Of course not. Isn't that the bottom line here?

[therealbig3]

I think overall, LeBron is an excellent playoff performer and is a clutch player...it's just that his lack of offensive versatility (can't really play off-ball effectively), when it's properly targeted by teams, can render him surprisingly ineffective. I'm not judging his entire career off this, but it counts.

And as for guys like Kobe and Duncan, who have sometimes not had good games, yet their teams still won, they should be held equally accountable as LeBron not playing well. The people analyzing the players though should take team context into account and understand that LeBron has played with crap for his first 7 years, while Kobe and Duncan usually have an elite team around them. But if they play poorly, and LeBron plays poorly, and it largely affects the outcome of a game, they should be held accountable. It shouldn't matter if Parker or Gasol or Ginobili stepped up and "bailed" out Kobe or Duncan, if they played poorly, they should be scrutinized as much as LeBron.

[Sedale Threatt]

Would you take Derek Fisher over Lebron as your best player to build a team around? Of course not. Isn't that the bottom line here?

No. The bottom line is, if you give us your C game, and it has a direct impact on your team at the most important juncture of the season, you don't deserve a cookie just because it's better than most other guy's A game.

[penbeast0]

@ Sedale - I was hoping you'd weigh in. The student example is perfect. If his final grade is an 88 - that's what we care about. With LeBron this year, the dude had an A average heading into the Finals. It's not massive that his usual 95 was an 88 (or 78) for that one series.

re: Patrick Ewing - I have him ~26th. I have Payton over him though and I'm gathering that might be an outlying position.

The problem is that LeBron isn't being compared to his teammates or even to Dirk, he's being compared to the Validictorians from other schools across the city and the nation for that coveted acceptance spot to Eastman and if his grade falls to 88% -- even though it's better than his classmates from Ohio, it may not be enough to keep up with Jerry West from West Virginia or Moses Malone from St. Petersburg.

This isn't RPOY for this year (where Dirk won, not LeBron), it's a much higher level of competition.

[drza]

While I appreciate the LeBron discussion on whether his failures are more or less vital than the other things we know of him, I could wish that there would have been more momentum to compare him more directly with the Wests and Moses of the world, or the same for Dirk and maybe even Barkley. We've seen West and Moses fleshed out vs each other in previous threads, and now we've had a lot of LeBron vs himself, but I'd like to have seen more discussion on the old heads vs the new guys.

Nevertheless, it seems clear that West is going to win this round. I'm not even sure my vote is necessary, but I'll do it for posterity. And like last night, I guess I'm still leaning towards Dirk. Like Laimbeer, I guess it's just starting momentum for what will hopefully be an interesting discussion in the next thread.

Vote: Dirk Nowitzki
Nominate: Scottie Pippen

[penbeast0]

How is Scottie better than Havlicek (or Baylor who was generally considered better than Havlicek)? Can you make a case other than "the 60s/70s were an inferior brand of basketball?"

[Black Feet]

Vote - West

Nominate - Baylor

[Fencer reregistered]

It's not that simple though... Lebron did not play to his full capacity the last two seasons and it may have cost him 2 titles... how does that get quantified? Does it matter how good he is at basketball if he didn't play to his full ability? If it looked like he wasn't doing everything he could to play to his full ability? I believe in the small things in the NBA and I do believe that Lebron just being Lebron the last two seasons could've easily made him a reigning 2 time champion right now.

I think is a heavily flawed way to judge individual in sports. If Tom Brady were Tom Brady, the Patriots might have beaten the Jets this year. Why people continue to compare athletes to themselves is beyond me - it's such a double-standard and breakdown in logic. It's like saying in team golf, if the best player shot 2 strokes under his average that day (and his team lost by 1) that it's a large negative on him...even if he shot the lowest score!

Sure, if LeBron were his usual awesome self Miami would have won this year. Last year - I'm not sure. People are totally overlooking that Boston's defense was historically good (and a team with a ridiculously good 3-year run). Furthermore, the whole point of individual player analysis shouldn't be based on situations. If Duncan had a down series at times and it didn't matter, literally no one in the world bats an eyelash.

There is a difference between a guy who plays a mediocre game because he quit and one who plays a mediocre game because he's not any better than that. The former sucks the air out of his teammates; the latter doesn't; and hence the former has LESS value that game than the latter.

Similarly, if a star has a bad night but still is trying, his teammates generally try too.

Similarly, if a guy has a bad night but at least is going to the places on the court he should be and making the decisions he should be, then his teammates can play to their own levels; but if he's surprising them through his (in)actions, their games may be screwed up as well.

[penbeast0]

Looks like a big day for the perennial runner-up Lakers franchise.

VOTE
West -- Doctor MJ, penbeast0, cpower, Dr Mufasa , therealbig3, shawngoat23, Jay From LA, pancakes3, Fencer reregistered, mysticbb, ronnymac2, An Unbiased Fan, Black Feet
Moses – JordansBulls, FJS, Sedale Threatt, Baller 24, colts18, RoyceDa59, Laimbeer
LeBron – ElGee, Gongxi
Barkley -- fatal 9
Dirk -- drza

NOMINATION
Baylor – Dr Mufasa, Gongxi, therealbig3, Sedale Threatt, mysticbb, ronnymac2, penbeast0, colts18, Black Feet
Havlicek – cpower, shawngoat23, pancakes3, Fencer reregistered, Laimbeer
Nash -- Doctor MJ, ElGee, fatal9, RoyceDa59
Stockton – FJS, An Unbiased Fan
Ewing – Baller24, David Stern
Pippen -- Jay From LA, drza
Drexler -- JordansBulls

NOT ON LIST
Pistol Pete Vecsey, the_prophet, dan_atko97

[mysticbb]

Well I'd probably disagree with that in regards to Moses and Barkley and I think the heights they did reach is reflective of where they could go with a team

In 1991 and 1992 Barkley missed 22 games, the 76ers went -1.5 in those games. With Barkley during the same time they went -0.6. That is a VERY small difference someone made who had a 26.6 PER. The 76ers were 3.6 points better offensively, but also 2.7 points worse defensively with Barkley. That is not surprising at all, Barkley was great offensively, but bad defensively.

At the same time. Dirk and Barkley have both played on offensively jacked, defensively lacking teams, of course - and managed to get 55-60+ W seasons out of it. But at the same time, they had even more offensive talent and obviously had a team more respectable defensively, which might have a lot to do with the ability to have a C who fouls and is aggresive defensively. And Moses' Rockets got better defensively in 80, 81, 82 but he couldn't keep the offense that high enough for them to become elite. So I'd call his Rockets results questionable overall, but am not ready to bury him for it compared to Dirk's Mavs

I don't understand that. You rather take 8 seasons on a lower level from Moses Malone than 11 years of Dirk Nowitzki? That's what you are saying. And no, there is no indication that Moses Malone had a higher peak than Nowitzki. Unless, obviously, you think that offensive rebounding is so damn underrated in every boxscore metric and it makes a huge difference, I can't see any reason for thinking Moses Malone was better than Nowitzki.