RealGM Top 100 List #5

[acrossthecourt]

I don't like the "put the right pieces around him they're a contender" argument because it's so vague. Put the right pieces around Billups and you win a title. So what? What are we proving here? That's too vague.

Oh here's an MVP share that puts heavy emphasis on the playoffs, as voters often ignored guys who missed the playoffs:
Shaq: 5.910
LeBron: 6.652

So did RealGM overrate LeBron or underrate Shaq? How much do those non-MVP contender seasons matter?

Shaq peaked in the vacuum between the 90's legends (Jordan, Olajuwon, Robinson) and the next generation by a hair (Duncan, Garnett, Kobe.) LeBron won an MVP in that crazy 2009 year with all those high level seasons, and beat Durant twice when he had some absurd scoring seasons. I don't think Shaq had better competition for these votes.



On that note, here are my criteria, roughly:
-I focus on peaks. Some sustained, high-level of four to six seasons, typically. When I see a top 100 list, I think people naturally focus on how good those players were at their best and then compare them. I'm fine with that. I don't care that a guy has played 21 seasons and limped his way to 20,000 points.
-Playoffs matter, but I don't obsess over them. I don't care if a guy misses the playoffs in his prime; it's a team game. Rather, I'll focus on how I think the player is contributing to competing and winning. Kareem missed for two straight seasons in a smaller league, and he's top 2/3 according to who you ask.
-I won't count rings. They're partly about luck and teammates. Hakeem could have had zero and it wouldn't have been unlikely. He's still a legend. LeBron could have, say, four rings even if he didn't play differently, but I'm not going to dock him for Wade's embarrassment in 2014 or the lack of support in Cleveland. He's a good player no matter how many rings.
-I don't care how a player's game would "translate" to another era. It's irrelevant. Usually this is about translating a player to your favorite era and applying biases. Yet we rarely care about how players would translate backwards: Reggie Miller without the three-point line?
-This is about how you separate yourself from your peers, if I had to put it simply. Handchecking? Competition is relative, and things go both ways.
-In terms of era adjustments, I'll do soft adjustments for how strong the league was and how complete the competition. Baseball's clearer with this, like with the integration of black players. But there's the ABA stealing talent in the 70's, the international explosion in the 00's, population growth, the popularity of the game, how the competition increased by a large amount from the 50's to the late 60's, etc. It's a bit subjective, but many points aren't: international players and the ABA, for instance. However, the subjectivity is why I don't make any large adjustments.
-Sidenote: people moan about the quality of the league when there are few superstars, but competition is relative! If you contract the league by 15 teams, then some stars will look worse even though the quality level jumped through the roof. Generally, a league where there are a handful of guys who are separating themselves by a mile, when there's a high degree of variation in the quality of the players, is a bad sign for the strength of the league. So yes, the competition is fine in today's game ... players from a large number of nations, the NBA is pretty popular, there's extensive video and stats so you it's easier to be exposed for weaknesses, etc.

[Texas Chuck]

Anybody think it'd be weird if Dirk started to get mentioned?

This isn't a show of support for him to start getting votes, but I ask because his longevity is starting to become truly special, and I know based on advanced stats, his prime is very similar to KG. I remember Mysticbb did a study and found KG had a slightly better peak but that Dirk was making up for it with sustained prime. Or maybe it was vice versa. Either way, he said based on the impact each had on their respective teams, it's basically a pick 'em. Dirk's been an MVP-level player for a while and has constantly led 50 win teams. Great playoff performer. All-time great offensive big man with all-time great defensive rebounding in the playoffs. For those who care, he's never feuded with teammates. He's had many types of supporting casts as well.

Yeah its always amazed me how Dirk v KG is a very close call, but the Dirk crowd never attempts to argue him as a top 10(or top 5 or top 3) guy while the KG crowd does. He's actually the best real test case for the idea of portability even tho he never left Dallas because of just how wildly successful he was in at least 3 completely different situations: The Nellie/Nash/Fin era, the Avery era and the Carlisle/Kidd era. Those were wildly different Mavs teams and Dirk just rolled on.

Its too early to get into him imo, but if KG is getting serious talk Dirk absolutely should.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Anybody think it'd be weird if Dirk started to get mentioned?

This isn't a show of support for him to start getting votes, but I ask because his longevity is starting to become truly special, and I know based on advanced stats, his prime is very similar to KG. I remember Mysticbb did a study and found KG had a slightly better peak but that Dirk was making up for it with sustained prime. Or maybe it was vice versa. Either way, he said based on the impact each had on their respective teams, it's basically a pick 'em. Dirk's been an MVP-level player for a while and has constantly led 50 win teams. Great playoff performer. All-time great offensive big man with all-time great defensive rebounding in the playoffs. For those who care, he's never feuded with teammates. He's had many types of supporting casts as well.

Yeah its always amazed me how Dirk v KG is a very close call, but the Dirk crowd never attempts to argue him as a top 10(or top 5 or top 3) guy while the KG crowd does. He's actually the best real test case for the idea of portability even tho he never left Dallas because of just how wildly successful he was in at least 3 completely different situations: The Nellie/Nash/Fin era, the Avery era and the Carlisle/Kidd era. Those were wildly different Mavs teams and Dirk just rolled on.

Its too early to get into him imo, but if KG is getting serious talk Dirk absolutely should.

I have Dirk even with KG, but not in my Top 10. I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference. That whole block of PFs after TD...... Dirk/KG/Barkley/Malone/Petitt should be interesting.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Oh here's an MVP share that puts heavy emphasis on the playoffs, as voters often ignored guys who missed the playoffs:
Shaq: 5.910
LeBron: 6.652

So did RealGM overrate LeBron or underrate Shaq? How much do those non-MVP contender seasons matter?

#1. How are MVP shares a playoff stat?
#2. I don't care about MVP's.
Shaq's regular-season numbers/impact are on the same level as Lebron's.
Dude averaged 20 / 10 for 14+ seasons something not even Kareem did.
Yes Lebron missed less games which probably makes him the better regular-season guy but that doesn't make him a better player.

Shaq in the playoffs over his first 11 years was more productive & far more consistent then Lebron.
He was also a vastly superior Finals performer with far fewer failures in elimination series.

I will take the better & more consistent playoff performer who doesn't fail as much in elimination and who performs better in the Finals over the regular-season performer who misses less games and wins more subjective media given awards.

Plus Shaq had a ton of years where he was a Top 1-5 player but got way less votes then he deserved (based on how good he was individually compared to everyone else in the league) because of missed games and other circumstances.
That doesn't mean he was less valuable to have then some of the higher finishers once the playoffs started.

LeBron won an MVP in that crazy 2009 year with all those high level seasons

So? Put 00 Shaq in the 09 East and you know he'd be in the convo for best player in the game and he certainly would be the undisputed best in the game if you removed Lebron and put him in his place.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Playoff PER

Lebron
Top 5 years : 29.1
Top 9 years : 27.7

Shaq
Top 5 years : 29.9
Top 9 years : 28.9

Shaq's average production over his first 9 years (in the playoffs) is greater then Lebron's.
Even looking at a shorter 5 year Peak span Shaq still has the clear edge.

He also has a sizable advantage when it comes to consistency which is addressed through the PER stat below and the elimination series stat further below it.

Number of years with a playoff PER above 26
Shaq : 9
Lebron : 5
_______________________________

Number of failures or disappointments in playoff elimination series.
Lebron : 5 (over an 11 year span)
Shaq : 2 (over a 14 year span)

Number of elite Finals performances
Shaq : 4 in 6 appearances.
Lebron : 2 in 5 appearances.

-------------

Shaq was clearly a significantly better playoff performer through their first 11 years (he even won more).
Beyond that Shaq still has a 4 year edge in overall quality years.

Lebron is amazing and the sky still appears to be the limit for him career wise however let us not overrate him in the present.

[DannyNoonan1221]

I have Dirk even with KG, but not in my Top 10. I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference. That whole block of PFs after TD...... Dirk/KG/Barkley/Malone/Petitt should be interesting.

Couldn't agree more. Seems like the discussions are boiling down to RAPM the further we get and somehow that has moved KG way up. I am a huge Dirk supporter and really want to have him in the top 15, and I am fine if that brings KG up as well, but no way should KG get mentions now and not Dirk. But that also starts the domino effect, because if you start mentioning Dirk now, there are a number of other guys who 'deserve' to be mentioned.

Why I hold KG back: He was great in Minnesota, never had much of a supporting cast if any at all, great style of play at both ends with longevity- but he rubs me as a guy who can't be the number one guy on his team to really succeed. Very much what I think Kevin Love is today- a great player, gaudy stats but someone who can't be the number one guy on his team for it to translate to real success.

[Baller2014]

Well, the time has passed and it's:
Duncan- 12
Shaq- 12
Magic- 5 (JBulls, Ardee, Clyde, GG Pan, John) - UBF yet to vote officially
Hakeem- 3 (Quo, 90's, Fplii)
Lebron- 2 (Rio, Sacto)
Bird- 1 (Warspite)
KG- 1 (Dr MJ)

Run off time I guess. Anyone want to switch to Duncan now? I think I count 6-8 alternative voters who said they'd preference Duncan, so it looks like he might have this. Right now the winner needs 19 votes.

[Jaivl]

Number of failures or disappointments in playoff elimination series.
Lebron : 5 (over an 11 year span)
Shaq : 2 (over a 14 year span)

Number of elite Finals performances
Shaq : 4 in 6 appearances.
Lebron : 2 in 5 appearances.

Care to expand on this?

[RayBan-Sematra]

Why I hold KG back: He was great in Minnesota, never had much of a supporting cast if any at all, great style of play at both ends with longevity- but he rubs me as a guy who can't be the number one guy on his team to really succeed. Very much what I think Kevin Love is today- a great player, gaudy stats but someone who can't be the number one guy on his team for it to translate to real success.

Hard to say.
I would have really liked to have seen Minni KG with a solid perimiter scorer ala a Kobe or a T-Mac.
Someone who could be counted on to provide volume scoring even when the going got tough in the playoffs.

I always said that having a reliable secondary scorer is what Shaq needed to contend.
Maybe that is what KG needed also. Don't think he really got that in Minni.
Cassell and Spree were the closest he got to that and when he had them he achieved by far the most team success he would ever have in Minni.

[shutupandjam]

I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference.

FWIW, Dirk has been fairly dominant in RAPM as well, especially the prior informed version, where he has been top-10 ten times since 2003. He was #1 in both npi and pi rapm in 2011 and he's #5 in JE's 14 year rapm that adjusts for aging, etc (of course, Garnett is #1)...

[RayBan-Sematra]

Number of failures or disappointments in playoff elimination series.
Lebron : 5 (over an 11 year span)
Shaq : 2 (over a 14 year span)

Number of elite Finals performances
Shaq : 4 in 6 appearances.
Lebron : 2 in 5 appearances.

Care to expand on this?

If you'd like.

Elimination series.
Shaq underperformed or disappointed in 97 and 99.
Lebron underperformed or disappointed in 07, 08, 10, 11 & imo 13.

Finals series.
Shaq had GOAT level Finals series in 95, 00-02.
Lebron had an GOAT level Finals series in 12 & 14.

[shutupandjam]

Lebron underperformed or disappointed in 07, 08, 10, 11 & imo 13.

Would you elaborate on why you think LeBron underperformed in 2013...he was dominant in the playoffs that year imo.

[magicmerl]

Well, the time has passed and it's:
Duncan- 12
Shaq- 12
Magic- 5 (JBulls, Ardee, Clyde, GG Pan, John) - UBF yet to vote officially
Hakeem- 3 (Quo, 90's, Fplii)
Lebron- 2 (Rio, Sacto)
Bird- 1 (Warspite)
KG- 1 (Dr MJ)

Run off time I guess. Anyone want to switch to Duncan or Shaq now? I think I count 6-8 alternative voters who said they'd preference Duncan/Shaq as a second choice. Right now the winner needs 19 votes.

Fixed.

[An Unbiased Fan]

I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference.

FWIW, Dirk has been fairly dominant in RAPM as well, especially the prior informed version, where he has been top-10 ten times since 2003. He was #1 in both npi and pi rapm in 2011 and he's #5 in JE's 14 year rapm that adjusts for aging, etc (of course, Garnett is #1)...

That's great, but I don't value RAPM as a metric for comparisons. All RAPM data tells me is that KG was in better rotations/lineups for his team than anyone else. There has never been a connection shown between RAPM & Impact, so the over use of it just makes me disengage.

It's like we're supposed to throw out performances, and just focus on an experimental metric that has never bore out as reliable. If you ask any player, coach, scout, analysis, fan...they would look at you funny if you said KG was a Top 5 player ever. He's arguably not even a Top 5 player of his era, but yet with RAPM, here we are. Top player of the 00's....that phrase will yield names like Kobe, Duncan, and Shaq, but not KG. But again, I guess we watched the games wrong and didn't realize KG's impact as he lost seven straight times in the 1st round, and then two years in a row to the Lakers despite having HCA, or missing the playoffs 3 straight years in his prime. Somehow we missed this GOAT impact that RAPM is trying to explain to us.

Sorry in advance, this post isn't directed at you, its just a spill over from the last thread.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Lebron underperformed or disappointed in 07, 08, 10, 11 & imo 13.

Would you elaborate on why you think LeBron underperformed in 2013...he was dominant in the playoffs that year imo.

I was speaking only about elimination series.
Lebron struggled against the Spurs until near the end of that series where he picked it up and then played well.
Sure they ended up winning but Lebron's poor average level of play was likely a major reason behind them almost losing and being in some precarious situations.

I think he had a mediocre series on the whole and certainly disappointed.
Obviously his play at the end of the series and them winning takes away much of the hurt but had they lost in G6 it would have been an even worse showing then what happened in 2011 and people would have killed him.
But since he did play well down the stretch of that series he redeemed himself to some degree which is why I upgrade him from having an All-Time flop series to just having a mediocre one.

[Mutnt]

for the #5 spot, my vote goes to: Shaquille O'Neal

It was between Shaq, Hakeem and Duncan.

I'll say it's pretty close and I can definitely understand anyone who goes for Hakeem or Duncan. All three are similarly good rebounders and passers so at the end of the day it comes to offense vs. defense. While Shaq is clearly the worse defender out of the three, guilty of bad horizontal defense, pick n' roll coverage (tbh, I don't think Duncan is that great of a horizontal defender but okay) and laziness/lack of effort, defensive stats and RAPM still points to the fact that he's a solid defender, not on Duncan or Hakeem's level, but definitely pretty solid. No surprise, the dude basically locks the paint with his size and athleticism. Offensively tho, Duncan can't hang with Shaq as a scoring threat and I believe the difference is larger than what Duncan can cover at the defensive end. Hakeem is closer to Shaq in that respect, but he lacks consistency and needed time to bring his scoring game to where it was later on in his career and that still wasn't enough to offset what Shaq was basically doing since the age of 21.

Magic is an interesting case that I'm looking forward to discussing, if anything, his lack of longevity and defense makes me side with the trio above. LeBron is a beast, but his time will come.

[acrossthecourt]

I have Dirk even with KG, but not in my Top 10. I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference. That whole block of PFs after TD...... Dirk/KG/Barkley/Malone/Petitt should be interesting.

Couldn't agree more. Seems like the discussions are boiling down to RAPM the further we get and somehow that has moved KG way up. I am a huge Dirk supporter and really want to have him in the top 15, and I am fine if that brings KG up as well, but no way should KG get mentions now and not Dirk. But that also starts the domino effect, because if you start mentioning Dirk now, there are a number of other guys who 'deserve' to be mentioned.

Why I hold KG back: He was great in Minnesota, never had much of a supporting cast if any at all, great style of play at both ends with longevity- but he rubs me as a guy who can't be the number one guy on his team to really succeed. Very much what I think Kevin Love is today- a great player, gaudy stats but someone who can't be the number one guy on his team for it to translate to real success.

That's silly for a few reasons.

One is that "being a number one guy" is meaningless when said like that. It doesn't matter if you're perceived as the best player or if you take the most shots. It's about how you contribute to winning.

Duncan took a step back and let Parker take control of the offense. Kareem did that with Magic. Yet they're lauded for it. Unselfishness is good!

I think Garnett was the best player in 2008 in Boston, and they were an incredible team. If you think Garnett would not be successful at a high level with good teammates, then run a test ... set up just like the Celtics, and Garnett was starting to show his age then.

It's popular to bash Love now, but if he were in the east they'd make the playoffs. Al Jefferson gets too much credit for a mediocre Bobcats team who snuck in during the worst eastern conference ever, arguably.

When Love was on the court they played as a +5.6 team in a tough conference. That's not success? So Love gets docked for how terrible his team played when he wasn't on the court? It wasn't a great team save for Love and Rubio minus the awful shooting. I thought we learned our lesson with Kevin's in Minnesota.

Please, please look at the most successful Minnesota team:
Sprewell, 32, sub 50 TS%
Cassell, 34, second best player with a 20/7 average
Hassell, 24, defensive role player with a 8.2 PER
Hoiberg, 31, limited shooter
Mark Madsen, 28, terrible sign for a team when he plays 1200 minutes
Gary Trent, 29, limited player, honestly forgot he existed
Ervin Johnson, 36, wasn't very good when he was younger, 8.5 PER

They won 58 games because of Garnett and Cassell. Is it really Garnett's fault they didn't win a title? That's a limited team and a worse cast than the '94 Rockets or the '03 Spurs.

Look at what he did versus Sacramento:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/box ... 90MIN.html

They were beaten by that weird '04 Lakers team with the four legends, but they still took a couple games.

I thought 2008 was a fascinating test case for the poor stats on a bad team, how a player does with good teammates arguments. I thought Garnett passed that test.

[acrossthecourt]

I think the only reason KG is up right now is due to RAPM preference.

FWIW, Dirk has been fairly dominant in RAPM as well, especially the prior informed version, where he has been top-10 ten times since 2003. He was #1 in both npi and pi rapm in 2011 and he's #5 in JE's 14 year rapm that adjusts for aging, etc (of course, Garnett is #1)...

That's great, but I don't value RAPM as a metric for comparisons. All RAPM data tells me is that KG was in better rotations/lineups for his team than anyone else. There has never been a connection shown between RAPM & Impact, so the over use of it just makes me disengage.

It's like we're supposed to throw out performances, and just focus on an experimental metric that has never bore out as reliable. If you ask any player, coach, scout, analysis, fan...they would look at you funny if you said KG was a Top 5 player ever. He's arguably not even a Top 5 player of his era, but yet with RAPM, here we are. Top player of the 00's....that phrase will yield names like Kobe, Duncan, and Shaq, but not KG. But again, I guess we watched the games wrong and didn't realize KG's impact as he lost seven straight times in the 1st round, and then two years in a row to the Lakers despite having HCA, or missing the playoffs 3 straight years in his prime. Somehow we missed this GOAT impact that RAPM is trying to explain to us.

Sorry in advance, this post isn't directed at you, its just a spill over from the last thread.

That is completely false. Where are you getting that from? RAPM is heavily tested. I can find links if you want. I've tested it myself.

I think a lot of people agree with you too, sadly, but where are you getting that from? If RAPM is untested, then so is everything, and we all know the human mind has terrible biases and poor judgement, so what are we going to do? Just throw darts?

[MacGill]

Anyway, my final thought on Shaq and what's been written.

I think Elgee did a great job addressing the regular season. And to those who value accolades, well 95/04 can hardly be blamed on Shaq from a production standpoint. At that point, had a few things perhaps gone differently he'd have his 5-6 titles, 5FMVP's and I doubt we'd be hearing the noise we are around this. Hell, prime Kobe's best 12 seasons are only about 5-6 games better than Shaq's from an injury standpoint, another quote on quote iron-man, yet I don't really think those games made a huge difference or would they had catapulted his legacy further.

So again, just so we're all clear. I recognize it as a negative...and maybe if longevity is your end all be all, you place a ton of stock here. But to me, you never go into a season thinking a player is going to play all 82 games. Especially the ones who are bigger than everyone else, and take a beating harder than everyone else. If it happens, great, but I know all his time missed wasn't on account to being out of shape and lazy.

My other point, even as vague as perceived is that Billups didn't come into the league a high impact player. Shaq his first season was very raw, but I am willing to bet that his impact on the court, with the right player mix lifts a good team into the great category. He never had a D-Rob teammate early on, and was partnered with players looking to be the next MJ, and while he wouldn't be the leader early on, he made his mark on the league from day 1. This is why after all he's in the conversation now. It doesn't matter what that looks like, as we seen him reach the nba finals just a few short years later, it was his basketball on-court maturity that needed to gain the experience. Not to be confused with his off-court immature rants, which again we know happened.

So while valid, I feel too much focus is being placed here and not enough around what he actually accomplished on the court. It's also funny to see some of the Wilt supporters harp on O'Neal about attitude but seemed much more reserved when discussing Wilt. So again, I sum it up to, Shaq's personality and how he carried himself is just much easier to dislike, especially when we have all the footage of it. Even with games missed his prime is more than long enough for your franchise to have it's chance at multiple titles. And for those who view it about the titles, you must be paying Magic a percentage for threatening to go back to college unless he joined KAJ in LA. But again, both of them weren't a diva like Shaq, so meh right.

FTR, I think LBJ will be the better player then almost all who we have spoken about and I have no problem for those who want to compare him to Shaq, even now. But for me to really place more stock into his health than I already have, I'd have to see evidence of exactly the turmoil this cost his team because if it is as devastating as mentioned, it should be plain as day to see. I'd also like to hear how much better they believed he could have been, if he was in the type of shape, year in and year, that they themselves thought he should be in? And then, how much better does this make him as a player? When your 320 pounds, and say go to 340-350, are you losing that much more mobility then what you already had to begin with? Especially when not all of the weight gain is fat cause you're working out?

We know he wasn't Hakeem, KG, Russell, hell neither was Duncan from a mobility standpoint, so why do we expect that? I guess I should expect a Ford Expedition to give me a 15 second quarter mile because that's what the explorer's and edge's are doing it in?

[Mutnt]

My take on KG:

I think his individual impact was good enough to put him on Duncan's level or to achieve similar success as Duncan did. Maybe not exactly in the same scenario, but I can absolutely see him as a cornerstone for a contending team with the right type of cast around him. With that said, it just how his career unfolded that makes me have to leave him outside of my Top 10. Having the right cast of players and coaching around you is instrumental and it's definitely fair to assume that KG was held back throughout much of his career.

Like I said, KG is better than a lot of people give him credit for, because they don't understand what type of player he is and what he brings to a team.

I'll probably add something more about KG when the time comes.