RealGM Top 100 List #5

[MacGill]

Vote count:

Shaquille O'Neal - 11 (colts18, PCProductions, O_6, tsherkin, therealbig3, RayBan-Sematra, MacGill, DQuinn1575, Chuck Texas, Moonbeam, ronnymac2)
Hakeem Olajuwon - 3 (90sAllDecade, Quotatious, fpliii)
Tim Duncan - 9 (Jaivl, magicmerl, Baller2014, batmana, Gregoire, penbeast0, trex_8063, Narigo, andrewww)
Magic Johnson - 5 (JordansBulls, ardee, Clyde Frazier, GC Pantalones, john248)
Kevin Garnett 1 - (Doctor MJ)
LeBron James - 2 (SactoKingsFan, rico381)
Larry Bird - 1 (Warspite)

Total votes: 32

Shaq and Duncan still close, but seems like O'Neal will take it.

Moonbeam voted as well. Just not highlighted. Scratch that, I see you have him.

[sp6r=underrated]

The reason Magic didn‘t get to play, however, is different from others. Magic was not injured. Magic was kept off the court for reasons beyond his control.

This thread might be of interest to you

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1271714

[andrewww]

It is interesting to me that most of the Laker affiliated contributors to this project actually have Shaq ranked lower than some of the other candidates here. A lot of his supporters vouch for his statistical efficiency, yet he is generally perceived as a modern day less versatile version of Wilt with plenty of baggage. If Im building a team with the premise for winning over an entire career, this is where Duncan (even though he did not peak as high as either Shaq or Hakeem) shines.

In a similar narrative, I view Lebron as someone who despite the great stats as someone not very portable and whose skillset is the easiest to neutralize when facing elite competition/teams. Magic as an example made his team function cohesively and maximized the players around him, whereas Lebron has a tendency to marginalize his teamates despite the perception that he is a team first player. Im not implying that he isnt a team player, but rather that his style of play thus far is effective only when small ball is involved, an even then his teams have a clear ceiling (any championship level team with a true post presence has outplayed his teams in the 2007, 2011, 2013 and 2014 finals).

Just food thought because stats are meaningless if you arent helping your team win andaximize the potential of thr players around you.

[PaulieWal]

Im not implying that he isnt a team player, but rather that his style of play thus far is effective only when small ball is involved, an even then his teams have a clear ceiling (any championship level team with a true post presence has outplayed his teams in the 2007, 2011, 2013 and 2014 finals).

Smallball works for Miami because they don't have a true center and became a necessity in 2012 after Bosh went down. Miami couldn't have started Haslem and Turiaf. That would have been a disaster. LeBron doesn't marginalize his teammates. In Miami it's not really his fault that Wade has declined rapidly instead of gradually because of his knee issues. Had Wade declined gradually the results in the playoffs would have been a lot more different (outside of 2011). I am sure if you put LeBron on a team with a real C who was a threat on the offensive end and a good defender he would adjust his game and could play "Big" as well.

Edit: In Cleveland they relatively did play "Big" or more conventional and LeBron seemed to do just fine.

[Mutnt]

In a similar narrative, I view Lebron as someone who despite the great stats as someone not very portable and whose skillset is the easiest to neutralize when facing elite competition/teams. Magic as an example made his team function cohesively and maximized the players around him, whereas Lebron has a tendency to marginalize his teamates despite the perception that he is a team first player. Im not implying that he isnt a team player, but rather that his style of play thus far is effective only when small ball is involved, an even then his teams have a clear ceiling (any championship level team with a true post presence has outplayed his teams in the 2007, 2011, 2013 and 2014 finals).

Just food thought because stats are meaningless if you arent helping your team win andaximize the potential of thr players around you.

Proof or else this post is moot and meaningless - and it is.

I don't know where all these ''LeBron marginalizes his teammates'' guys came from over the last couple of months but none of them, and I repeat, NONE OF THEM, actually backed their claims up with any evidence whatsoever.

This isn't food for thought, this is outright nonsense with no substance.

[drza]

I mostly stayed out of the KG vs Duncan longevity debate because I'm not sure that longevity is a determining factor for me this far into both careers. But there was some incorrect information given that I wanted to address.

Plus, I wanted to comment on how ironic/cool/interesting it is to see therealbig3 arguing for KG against Duncan and being accused of being dishonest or frustrating in his takes. For one thing, therealbig3 is one of the bigger Duncan fans on the board. For another, it wasn't long ago at all that he was arguing vehemently for Duncan over KG. I believe he now sees it as a toss-up, which to me is really cool because it indicates that he was willing to look beyond the obvious (even against personal interest) and make a full analysis on what he really thinks of the two players. It's not dis-similar to the on-going process I've seen with Texas Chuck (subbing Dirk for Duncan). Pretty cool stuff. Anyway, to the quotes...

Duncan missed one playoff run due to injury out of 17 years he went to the playoffs, whiles going deep into the playoffs nearly every year(only losing in the 1st round twice).

Garnett missed one playoff run due to injury out of 14 years he went to the playoffs, whiles only playing 3 runs past the 1st round

If you're counting all 14 times KG has made the playoffs, then he's had 6 runs past the 1st round (not 3). He's made the Finals twice, the conference Finals another two times, and the second round twice.

Not true. Duncan has a total of 54.5K and KG is sitting at 54.1K. Plus, a lot of KG's minutes come after his body started breaking down. Basically there is no argument for KG on longevity grounds whatever.

EDIT: excuse me, Duncan has 52.5K v.s 54.1K (didn't carry the 2). So he's slightly behind, but again- KG's body broke down a while ago, so KG broke down long before he reached the 52.5K mark Duncan has withstood to date (with no breakdown).

I think this Garnett "break down" is grossly overstated w/r.t. Duncan. I'll give you 2014...I honestly don't know what the situation was in 2014 because of all of the mystery in Brooklyn. KG said he was healthy enough to play more, especially in the playoffs, but Kidd was determined to stick with that 20 minutes/game thing. Unless there was some big injury that wasn't mentioned, that was frankly weird. I've often wondered if Kidd was so caught up in his own decline the year before (when he ran out of gas way early) that he projected it onto KG and operated accordingly. I have no idea. And I'm really hoping that KG comes back another season with a different coach to see whether last year was the new normal, or whether it was a weird blip. Anyway ( /tangent).

On topic, KG had a serious knee injury that ended his 2009 season early and clearly affected him physically through 2010 (at least). That said, he was still playing at a very effective level in 2010 and 2011 and was even better in 2012 and 2013. Quick comparison between 2012 and 2013 Duncan and KG:

Regular season 2012 + 2013 seasons
Duncan: 127 games played, 29.2 mpg
Garnett: 128 games played, 30.4 mpg

Duncan: 16.7 ppg (54.5% TS), 9.5 rpg, 2.5 apg, .7 spg, 2.1 bpg, 1.9 TO, on/off +/- per 100*: +5.1
Garnett: 15.2 ppg (54.2% TS), 8 rpg, 2.6 apg, 1.0 spg, 1.0 bpg, 1.7 TO, on/off +/- per 100*: +8.4

Playoffs 2012 + 2013 seasons

Duncan:35 games played, 34.2 mpg
Garnett: 26 games played, 36.5 mpg

Duncan: 17.8 ppg (52.6% TS), 9.9 rpg, 2.3 apg, 0.8 spg, 1.8 bpg, 1.8 TO
Garnett: 17.7 ppg (54.4% TS), 11.1 rpg, 2.0 apg, 1.1 spg, 1.3 bpg, 2.4 TO

Like I said. Up until this last (odd and frustrating) season in Brooklyn, KG was holding up just fine compared to Duncan.

(*on/off +/- per 100 is estimate from B-R numbers, using minutes weighted average of +/- per 100 for each season. Not exact, and assumes same pace in the 2 seasons)

[PaulieWal]

I repeat, NONE OF THEM, actually backed their claims up with any evidence whatsoever.

They try to justify it by using players in decline or injured and then say that the players' reduced stats are an indictment on LeBron. I have seen this with Shaq, Hughes, Wade, and see a lot of it with Bosh (but they never mention that he went from a 1st option on bad-mediocre teams to a 3rd option on a title team).

[shutupandjam]

Im not implying that he isnt a team player, but rather that his style of play thus far is effective only when small ball is involved, an even then his teams have a clear ceiling (any championship level team with a true post presence has outplayed his teams in the 2007, 2011, 2013 and 2014 finals).

This is a personnel issue. LeBron just hasn't had the luxury of playing with a great post defender in his prime (unlike Magic, he didn't get to play with Kareem his first 10 years in the league).

Let's look at his center rotations in the years you mentioned:

2007 (not really fair as Bron wasn't in his prime yet and CLE was clearly outmatched by anyone who came out of the west): 31yo Ilgauskas, Varejao

2011: Joel Anthony, 35yo Ilgauskas, 37yo Juwan Howard

2012 (won the title anyway): Joel Anthony, Turiaf, Howard

2013 (won the title anyway): Birdman, Joel Anthony

2014: Birdman, Greg Oden

Of course Bosh played lots of C here, but was forced to play out of position because of the poor big man personnel. These teams getting dominated by great post play is NOT LeBron's fault!

Just food thought because stats are meaningless if you arent helping your team win andaximize the potential of thr players around you.

But LeBron's teams do win, they have been consistently elite since he entered his prime. He has had four straight finals appearances...

[colts18]

In a similar narrative, I view Lebron as someone who despite the great stats as someone not very portable and whose skillset is the easiest to neutralize when facing elite competition/teams.

Prime LeBron has been one of the best stars against elite defensive competition. 09 Magic, 11 Bulls, 11 Celtics, 12 Celtics, 13 Pacers, 13 Spurs, 14 Pacers, 14 Spurs, etc. His teams consistently do well offensively when he has faced elite defenses since 2009.

[therealbig3]

If Magic IMPROVES his teammates, while LeBron marginalizes them...then why did Worthy have BETTER numbers (more volume and better efficiency) in games that Magic missed? That doesn't make much sense.

Unless of course, ALL ball-dominant players, even Magic Johnson, will marginalize other ball-dominant players to a certain extent, because there's only one basketball. However, with a dip in raw production, the other player should see a rise in efficiency and a better contribution in other facets of the game (rebounding/defense). We see that clearly happen with Wade in 2011 before his knees broke down.

[ardee]

snip

Drza I'd be interested to hear your take on my question earlier about KG.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[colts18]

Comparison between playoff LeBron and playoff Bird. They should be compared because Bird has played just only 169 more playoff minutes than LeBron.


Per 100 possessions:
LeBron: 36-11-8, .578 TS%, 12.4 TOV%, 28 PER, 116 O rating (31 usg%), .242 WS/48
Bird: 28-12-8, .551 TS%, 12.5 TOV%, 21 PER, 114 O rating (25 usg%), .173 WS/48

LeBron has 5 playoff runs with higher PER than Bird's highest PER. Bird has 10 playoff runs with worse PER than LeBron's worst PER.

LeBron also did this vs tougher playoff opponents (defensively). These numbers also don't include LeBron's massive defensive gap.

[The Infamous1]

Comparison between playoff LeBron and playoff Bird. They should be compared because Bird has played just only 169 more playoff minutes than LeBron.


Per 100 possessions:
LeBron: 36-11-8, .578 TS%, 12.4 TOV%, 28 PER, 116 O rating (31 usg%), .242 WS/48
Bird: 28-12-8, .551 TS%, 12.5 TOV%, 21 PER, 114 O rating (25 usg%), .173 WS/48

LeBron has 5 playoff runs with higher PER than Bird's highest PER. Bird has 10 playoff runs with worse PER than LeBron's worst PER.

LeBron also did this vs tougher playoff opponents (defensively). These numbers also don't include LeBron's massive defensive gap.

What years are you using?

[Greatness]

Vote: Tim Duncan

This has been the toughest one so far, as I was really debating between 4 guys (Duncan, Shaq, LeBron, Magic). I'm going to take Magic and LeBron out of the equation though as I value longevity highly and Magic's career was pretty short and LeBron is still in the middle of his career.

That leaves Shaq and Duncan. This comes down to what you value, peak play or longevity? Shaq's peak was definitely higher and he had a stretch that rivals MJ's peak. His dominance and playoff production was unmatched in the early 2000s. I think he's similar to Wilt, in that they both were so much more physically dominant than their peers that the game got boring for them.

While Shaq is a great candidate for this spot, I believe Duncan had the better career when factoring in his remarkable longevity. He was the best player on his team from his rookie year up until now (yes I still consider him the best player on the Spurs). Duncan also never played with nearly the talented wing players Shaq played with, as the Diesal had the luxury of playing with Kobe and Wade in his prime. As Baller has pointed out many times, Duncan has won titles with some of the worst supporting casts on championship teams of all time.

Also, the switching teams thing does have to hurt Shaq a bit. The end of his career is atrocious, jumping from team to team every year and struggling to even make a positive impact. Duncan is the prime example of staying on one team and building it from the ground up. The most consistent superstar of all time, and obviously never having to hop teams at the end of his career helps him.

Shaq's peak is higher but Duncan's prime is better than Shaq's mostly because Duncan's prime is is entire career. He has never had a down year while Shaq had several. Never had injury issues like Shaq or teammate issues like Shaq. Tim Duncan is my choice here.

[colts18]

What years are you using?

Whole career. Bird has just 169 more career playoff minutes than LeBron.

[Notanoob]

Vote count:

Shaquille O'Neal - 11 (colts18, PCProductions, O_6, tsherkin, therealbig3, RayBan-Sematra, MacGill, DQuinn1575, Chuck Texas, Moonbeam, ronnymac2)
Hakeem Olajuwon - 3 (90sAllDecade, Quotatious, fpliii)
Tim Duncan - 9 (Jaivl, magicmerl, Baller2014, batmana, Gregoire, penbeast0, trex_8063, Narigo, andrewww)
Magic Johnson - 5 (JordansBulls, ardee, Clyde Frazier, GC Pantalones, john248)
Kevin Garnett 1 - (Doctor MJ)
LeBron James - 2 (SactoKingsFan, rico381)
Larry Bird - 1 (Warspite)

Total votes: 32

Shaq and Duncan still close, but seems like O'Neal will take it.

Moonbeam voted as well. Just not highlighted. Scratch that, I see you have him.

I voted for Shaq a few pages back.

[Mutnt]

Well, I was going to vote for Magic Johnson. A primary argument against Magic, from what I see, is longetivity. But that’s not completely fair. In his final season, Magic was 19.5/7/12/5 player. He was at or near a career high in minutes played, WS, WS/48. He was 31 years old. There aren’t advanced metrics, but I can’t see they would show anything other than Magic was still an elite ballplayer. I don’t think there’s any reasonable reason to think he wouldn’t have stayed at or near that period for several more years.

The problem isn't that there's no indication Magic couldn't continue to produce at a high level past the '91 season, the problem is that, sadly, he didn't, so his career ended there (not counting the brief exhibition back). Making projections out of how he would play would be dishonest and potentially as absurd as crediting the 94' & 95' to Jordan's legacy. Regardless if it was MJ's own decision or not, there's no reason to believe Jordan wouldn't be able to maintain his elite level of play throughout those two years. But he did not, so he doesn't get credited.

The reason Magic didn‘t get to play, however, is different from others. Magic was not injured. Magic was kept off the court for reasons beyond his control. I say this with bias—Magic Johnson is my favorite basketball player—but I really think we’ll look back at what Karl Malone and Clyde Drexler did and said in 1992 and be embarrassed by their paranoia and unsupported fears. I figure Magic was really 7 or 8 years into his peak. Give him 3 more years, and he’s played as long at his top level as any of the other top 5 candidates.

Like I've mentioned previously. As unfortunate as that is, I don't see how it qualifies as a pass.

I’m sorry. I know the love for Shaq on these boards. I’ve read it in these arguments. And, as I said in the previous thread, I think Wilt Chamberlain is the most self-destructive NBA player of all time. But I think Shaq is second and, in many ways, I find his impulses for more dangerous. Wilt, for all his issues, was the greatest Iron Man in the history of the NBA—far more than Malone or Stockton. (Even when he missed virtually an entire season due to injury, he played more in 14 years than Malone did in 16). Shaq’s impulses caused him to miss time on the court. Again—Magic missed well over half a season due to injury and he still played in 65 more games than Shaq did in their first 12 seasons.

Legitimate concerns regarding Shaq, but to me, I've never seen Shaq's 'absences' during his career as seriously hazardous in a way that it would divert me from all the good things he brings on the court. He's a special persona, no doubt, but he is far from being some sort of cancer that would severely drag his teams down. Nothing really suggests that.

How much does that hurt a team? Not just to be missing your star player for, maybe, 10-12 games a year compared to other elite players, but in terms of his attitude? When Shaq put it all together, he was devastating. When Shaquille O'Neal played in over 70 games, he went to the finals four times and won three titles. But there were at least seven other years when he was at or near his peak where he didn’t play 70 games. His teams went to two finals and won one. That shows both the value of Shaq and how he hurt his teams. Giving credit to Shaquille O’Neal for what he might have done “if he was healthy” or “if he was motivated” shows the difference between him and Magic. Magic’s years out of the league do not constitute a “what-if” in terms of his talent or value or impact. Magic was still great but was not allowed to play. Shaquille O’Neal did not allow himself to play. There’s no way I’ll put a player like that over Magic. Or Duncan. Or Hakeem. Sorry.

You are overreacting. Nothing was devastating. Could Shaq have played more games, took better care of his body and be a bit less lazy every now and then? Sure, but that's nit-picking honestly. Don't act like almost every player isn't guilt of coasting here and there. Especially guys who have an enormous burden to carry. And you got to remember, there are benefits to coasting too, especially for a guy like Shaq who carries 300 pounds. Take a look at the bigger picture, going full-throttle against every scrub team in the RS isn't really going to bring championships, which is the ultimate goal, right? LeBron plays most regular season games at 75-80%. Does that mean he's lazy, not really, it means he can achieve his goal (which is to win a game) without needlessly extorting his energy and risking any potential injuries that would be VASTLY more detrimental to the team than him giving 10% more each game.

Shaq was that type of player, and I completely understand him. Carrying 300 pounds, jumping and banging down low each day takes a BIG toll on a guy so it's important that you don't push your body over the limit or it will break down (as if Shaq didn't actually have a plethora of injuries throughout his career... what a surprise.)
But when it came to the playoffs, Shaq was all business, and that's the most important part for me. You can't accuse him of being lazy and in bad shape because the dude beasted for like 40/20 in route to multiple titles, and at the end of the day, no one cared if he played 70% in a regular season game against the Bucks or if he even missed a couple of them as long as the team was at the position they wanted to be.

[E-Balla]

Vote: Earvin Magic Johnson

The trouble I have with Magic that until 1986, when his usage increased, he really is a great point guard, but not a Top 10 all-time player.
Compare 84 and 85 to Stockton's 4 best years:


TS%/TRB%/AST%/USG%/DfRtg/WS per season
84-85 Magic 63.3/10.3/42.5/20.0/106 /11.5
88-91 Stockton 61.9/4.4/56.0/19.5/103/14.6




stockton is shooting almost as well, with similar usage, much higher assist, and better defense.

This is a Top 30 player of all-time; not a Top 10.

Magic has 80-85 - 6 years where he is at this level, and then 6 years where he shows as Top 10.



TS%/TRB%/AST%/USG%/DfRtg/WS per season

88-91 Stockton 61.9/4.4/56.0/19.5/103/14.6
80-85 Magic 60.8/11.9/34.6/103/12.1


He wasn't 1st team all-NBA by either the writers (official) or players (Sporting News) until 1983.

From 1983-85 he was solid Top 5 player in the league, but in the 3 years combined he got 8 first place votes for MVP-

Besides Bird definitely being better, guys like Moses, Doctor J, and Bernard King would have a case - so Magic is 2-5 in this top period.

Win shares for this time shows him 4th, behind Bird, sidney Moncrief, and Moses

http://bkref.com/tiny/9CJjD

for his first 6 years, he is 5th, trailing Bird,Moses,Kareem, and Doc, barely beating out Moncrief.
He is way behind Bird for his first 6 years in the league. Relatively same for 3, then has 3 seasons better.


http://bkref.com/tiny/WyVZL


So with Magic I get 6 years of Stockton/Moncrief, and 6 years of superstar.

It makes me put him behind Bird, LeBron, and Shaq.

Well Magic wasn't the starting point back then. They had Nixon who was a good PG having 8-9apg seasons. Of course Magic looked worse when he didn't have the ball as the lead point.

[therealbig3]

snip

Drza I'd be interested to hear your take on my question earlier about KG.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Here's a post by ElGee earlier in the thread:

viewtopic.php?p=40506609#p40506609

I think in general, people (I'm guilty of it as well with regards to Bird, so I'm looking forward to ElGee enlightening me) are too quick to dismiss anyone with a low TS%, without regarding context. Duncan has ALWAYS played for Popovich. Popovich has ALWAYS had a team of high IQ players that pass the ball and generate good shots. Even when none of them are all that great, playing the "right" way absolutely helps someone like Duncan maintain his efficiency. And we've seen plenty of times when his teams have been overwhelmed, his efficiency has dropped like a rock. Garnett was on one of the most dysfunctional organizations in the league, and he was surrounded by not very good players throughout his Minnesota career, and he was asked to do everything, while facing off against much better teams. Of course his efficiency is going to drop in that case. Duncan very rarely faced similar circumstances, and when he did, his numbers looked VERY similar to Garnett's.

And this line from ElGee resonates with me:

The notion that Kevin Garnett wasn't a scorer, or capable of being a big scorer, is just absolutely fallacious. [Edit -- he can still fall short of Duncan in this as carrying a team, while these scoring skills would be better suited for a stronger or more balanced offensive environment.

KG seems to have a more portable skillset than Duncan...better shooter, better passer, better ball handler, and at minimum, a comparable defender, but I'm beginning to believe he was actually slightly better on defense too. After Parker and Manu developed into stars and surpassed Duncan as the offensive hubs on the team (after 03), I'm hard-pressed to believe that KG wouldn't have been a better fit.

[MacGill]

And 300 pounds was at his rookie season. I don't care what the newspaper clippings tell you, Shaq had at least 50-60 pounds on Wilt, so while they were the same height and both beats of their day, Wilt had long skinny legs, not the tree trunks O'Neal had. And what I mean here by that is we simply don't have really anyone that we can sample Shaq against in this department. Wilt is the closest, and yet there was still a weight difference.

While he did miss regular seasons games, why aren't posters crediting him more for being able to play at the level he did, for as long as he did. And it's because not one person making any of these statements, understand what it is like to be that size. One would think with all the size he carried he'd end up like Oden but what bothers me is that because we have documented events of playing into shape, and his health concerns, that his career has somewhat become a symbol of that?? I mean, if Shaq played a more finesse game, without the ground and pound he took, he may have possibly been able to increase his stamina and health, but acting like he could change his genetics and worked harder to maintain better shape when you seen what he did at that level is just silly.

Just use context here, that's all. He wasn't built like Russell or KAJ or Duncan and all of those guys bulked up. Hell look at Wilt when he came into the league...dude looked like KAJ for damn sakes. Instead, I'd like to have posters tell us how these regular season absences affected the teams outcomes. Put something behind it other than just..oh he didn't want to play...or should have been IRON like Wilt, when the circumstances are so different. What I am learning is that it's just plain easier to 'dislike' Shaq. MJ retires in his prime missing how many games again.....there peaks are pretty close, and he also broke his foot in his second year. 15 games missed a season with right team built around Shaq still gives you 14 years of chip contention!!