Post#34 » by ElGee » Thu Aug 4, 2011 6:03 pm
Vote: Charles Barkley
Nominate: Scottie Pippen
Pippen v Payton
I have less to say about the vote (again) because of the backlog of discussion from previous threads. Fatal has done a nice job presenting Barkley...and if someone takes Bob Pettit over him, it's hard to quibble too much because of the massive era difference.
As for the nomination, Scottie Pippen is a functional PG to me. When I build teams ATL style, Pippen finds his way on to a LOT of teams because of his lack of need for shots coupled with his ability to initiate offenses/distribute and GOAT perimeter defense and versatility. It means you can pair him 2 other wings as Chicago did with Harp and Jordan and just crush people defensively. (Small, quick PG's excluded, but has anyone noticed that NO ONE can stop those players?)
Gary Payton, OTOH, I actually see as less of a PG. He's certainly not in the mold of a Quarterback who has the keys to the car and everything goes through. He was a good spot up shooter, a good passer, a good scorer (he could post up too) and of course a GOAT-level PG defender. I also think he falls about a year behind Pippen ITO of career value:
Payton: 1995 all-nba level to his peak in 2000.
Pippen: 1991 all-nba level to to 1997.
The peripheral years are close.
Gary Payton Peak Play
How about their peaks? Some people may value 1998 Payton. I'll take 2000 Payton. Some people may take 1992 Pippen or 1994. I'm almost inclined to take 95 or 96 with the shorter 3-point line.
Payton in 1998 played in a totally balanced multipolar offense (6.3 SRS team). Incidentally, it was one of the best offenses of all-time. I don't want my PG's scoring quite as much as Payton, but it should be noted that his style -- again, more combo-guard to me -- didn't exactly prevent him from ostensibly being the point of a great offense. (The 98 team was the 13th best offense relative to league, the 95 team 18th). And for those who have forgotten, that was the VIN BAKER Sonics team, with Schrempf starting and playing 35 mpg and the usual cast of old men. (As an aside, anyone notice how good these old, veteran TEAMS are at basketball? Only reinforces my love of late peaks, as playing well in a team system like this year's Mavs is so valuable.)
Anyway, Payton took 15.6 FGA per game that year, then 18.3 in the PS. Seattle was upset in G2 v Minnesota, despite a big game from Payton scoring-wise. The issue in that game was the defense, and from, IIR, an inability to control the Wolves guards. In G3 Minny held serve, again scoring about 1.2 pts/pos (!), with Payton having a typically strong 26-6-5 50% line. I remember him having what I would call a commanding G4 against elimination, holding on for 92-88 win with 24-8-6 (58% TS) and Marbury going 4-16. (They also went on a big run with KG out of the game to blow it open.) In G5, Marbury again was 2-10, Garnett put out an epic fail (3-11, 10 TOV) and Payton captained the ship with 29 pts (71% TS).
In the next round, Sea was "upset" by the 4 AS Laker squad (6.9 SRS with Shaq missing 28g - +8.9 MOV with Shaq). G2 was a meltdown, with Sea being outrebounded by 22 and scoring 0.83/pos. Yikes. As we often see, those numbers correlate with the star's play, as Payton had 12 points (6-17) and 2 rebounds, and Schrempf went 0-6 (!). The G3 loss was totally on the defense however, giving up 1.35 pts/pos (57.1% shooting for LA). Payton finished with 22 points and 13 assists. G4 Seattle's offense was even better (1.23/pos) but they gave up 1.38 pts/pos! Payton with a monster all-around game in defeat: 31-13-8 (80% TS). In the final game of the series, GP flamed out a bit: 5-16, 5 ast. They still failed on defense, surrending 1.29/pos. They just couldn't handle Shaq with Jim Mac and Baker; O'Neal averaged 30.6 pts 9.6 reb 4 ast 4 blcks 64.1% TS 2.6 TOV. Btw, that Laker team was BBQed by Karl Malone and the old men Jazz in the next round (late peaks!).
In 2000, Payton had a different, alcoholic Vin Baker, no Hersey Hawkins and most importantly no Detlef Shchrempf (to quote Bill Walton, THAT GUY was good). They finished +1.5 in ORtg (9th) and scratched to a 1.2 SRS team with Brent Barry, Ruben Patterson and a 34-yr old Horace Grant. That teams bench reads like a failed experiment, save for 2nd year 6th-man Rashard Lewis, explaining why Payton played 42 mpg (!). In that system, he took 20.3 FGA per night and 22.6 in the PS. They lost in 5 to a 4.5 SRS Jazz team...
In G1, Shammond Williams (some PG play?) and Lazaro Borrell started. That's not a typo. I believe Vin Baker was falling apart at that point. He was dropped from the starting lineup and struggled mightily at the end of the year. Lewis also started and played 16 minutes. It was a unipolar approach for Payton basically -- Iverson's Law time -- and he went 11-29, 11 rebounds, 6 assists. Of course, Karl Malone had 50 and 12. (And people were looking at 2000 like Malone was a scrub?) In G2, for the second straight contest, Seattle's offense faultered. Payton with a totally different approach that game and it didn't work (8-12, 1 ast) with Shammond Williams sort of playing more of a PG role. Stockton had 21 and 11 on 11 FGAs...in other words, he hit a few more of his typical open shots.
So in G3 Payton went back to his unipolar scoring attack. 8-24, 10 ast, 7 reb. 1.02 pts/pos, but while Malone went for 30 on 12-19, Stockton MISSED his typical open shots (in theory) and went 1-8. Seattle was +8 on the glass and held on. In G4, behind Payton and the Shammond Williams rotation shelved, Seattle averaged 1.15 pts/pos with GP dropping a signature 35-11-10 triple double (63% TS), 6 steals and a psychological ownage of John Stockton drilling a key dagger 3 in his face. (Stock made 4 of his standard 9 shots). In G5, another solid offensive showing but Sea fell short at the buzzer (Person missed 3). Payton sparked a furious rally down the stretch down 7, finishing with 27-9-6 54% TS. Malone had 27-8 (13-24) and give Stock credit, he played 41 min and made 6 of his typical 9 shots with 15 dimes and 7 boards.
I'm sorry for the trouble, my mistake. I didn't pay enough attention.
