Re: McAdoo and Mourning
I actually wrote the following post a few threads back, comparing McAdoo with both Howard and Mourning. But I never really saw a counter-argument, so for me the following logic still holds: once adjusting for the high scoring/high pace of the 70s, I see very little to differentiate McAdoo's offensive impact from Mourning's. But on defense, the difference is massive in Mourning's favor. I actually would like to nominate a 70s player here just because we haven't in awhile, but I just don't see why I would vote for McAdoo over Mourning.
McAdoo vs Howard vs MourningAfter DocMJ's post earlier (aside: Doc, you're 6-9? Really?) I wanted to take a closer look at Howard vs McAdoo. Then, after some consideration, I added Mourning to the mix as well. And it breaks down pretty evenly longevity-wise, with Howard having 7 seasons in the league, 'Doo' falling off after his 7th season, and Mourning running into his kidney ailment after his 8th season. As a quick stats back-drop, here's a link to a B-R comp of Howard and McAdoo's first 7 seasons and Mourning's first 8:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y3=2000Stylistically, Howard and Mourning share a lot of similarities. Both are solid scorers but poor passers from the center slot, relying on buckets in the paint and athleticism (rather than shooting ability or touch) to get their points. McAdoo, on the other hand, has often been described as an ancestor of Dirk on offense...a good jump-shot coupled with a strong face-up game as well as ability to score at the rim. McAdoo, therefore, could theoretically provide the type of spacing that has become a buzz word around here lately. On the other hand, Howard and Mourning provide spacing in a different way by drawing defensive attention that opens things up for the perimeter players. Mourning and Howard also did a better job of drawing fouls, averaging about 2 more FT attempts per game than McAdoo. McAdoo wasn't an especially prolific passer himself, averaging more turnovers than assists, though his ratio was still much better than his counterparts.
Statistically, though, on offense the three were about a wash in the boxscores. Much of McAdoo's scoring advantage can be attributed to pace and higher scoring teams, as Mourning actually sported a higher usage percentage than Mac with Howard not far behind. Their PER's were 22.3, 22.3 and 22.4 and Howard had the highest O-Rtg (111), followed by Mourning (109) and McAdoo (106). Presumably, Howard and Mourning's shooting efficiency and offensive rebounds were enough to counteract their turnovers in these particular efficiency stats.
I can buy that McAdoo could have still been the more potent offensive performer of the three due to his higher volume on still excellent efficiency and (relatively) better passing, but it seems that on offense their net benefits are at least comparable.
On defense, they aren't.
Once adjusted for pace, McAdoo's rebounding falls back to Mourning's pace, which is pretty significantly behind Howard who measures out as the dominant rebounder of the trio. On the flip side, Mourning is clearly the best shot-blocker in the group. Both Howard and Mourning won multiple Defensive Player of the Year awards. McAdoo is blown out of the water at this end.
As such, at the moment I'd have both Howard and Mourning over McAdoo. Defensive anchor big men, like floor general PGs, tend to have larger impacts than the box scores measure. I'd estimate that both Howard and Mourning were having larger total impacts than McAdoo was over similar time periods. Of course, both Mourning and McAdoo's careers extended beyond those prime seasons, and both were able to adapt to their situations and become super-sub role players on champions. Maybe they could earn a tidge of longevity here, but the meat of all of their values are in those first 7 - 8 years.
So, at least among these 3, I currently have Howard and Mourning battling it out with McAdoo a step behind.
