RealGM Top 100 List #11

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

G35
RealGM
Posts: 22,523
And1: 8,071
Joined: Dec 10, 2005
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#321 » by G35 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:40 pm

MacGill wrote:Question? Why are there people whining about where a player lands? If you want to discuss points, great do it, but it seems like some are sulking because others have made fantastic posts about other players, to help change perception, which to me is sad. For me, I am clear in that I'll take offensive and defensive balance versus the higher offense and more minimal defensive impact by position. What is wrong with that?

It's a choice....and obviously if certain players were such a lock they'd be in already because I don't think anyone is really strategically voting. And if they are, they are one vote. I mean we have KM, DN, Kobe, Oscar, West etc all as great players putting the basket in the net. This is no different than others dismissing other methods of gauging player impact and trying to say why we shouldn't. If you buy into it....great, if not, make your case and move on. It's not like posters are just focusing on one element of positivity or negativity. Everything is being looked over.


Hmmm, I'm probably going to get suspended for this but look at the highlighted words. Why is making an opinion sulking or whining? I would take all these "fantastic posts" with a grain of salt. It's still just opinion, with no basis in fact anywhere...because it can't proven.

Regul8tr made a "fantastic post" prior to this list, showing how the voting was likely to go and for the most part he was right. So really, there aren't any fantastic posts or radical new ideas. This is people spouting the same thing they have been saying for quite a long time. Posters tendencies are quite transparent despite the "cases" being made.

ThaRegul8r wrote:
EJaggit wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:
Why?


Because that would mean TD is a top 5 player, what would have have to do in order to top Bird?


I see you haven't been here long, and thus are unaware of the trends on this board.

  • Bird will fall. If one has been on this board for any length of time, this is an outcome that is completely predictable.
  • Jordan will stay where he is, obviously.
  • Russell will fall. #2 was the highest he could possibly reach, and he's going to fall with the next project. Some of the people who voted him #2 last time have lowered their opinions of him since then, which will help...
  • Kareem, who will rise to #2, taking Russell's spot. There are some people like MacGill who don't rank him highly, but more of the people in the project do, and there are people in the project like ronnymac2 and TrueLAfan who have him #1, so he'll finish behind Jordan
  • Magic will fall. There've been a lot of threads questioning his position in the time since the last project, and this is where we'll see it bear fruit.
  • Wilt will fall. There's a possibility he drops outside of the top ten, depending on who the participants are. Ardee's in, so he'll defend Wilt, but he's balanced out by bastillon.
  • Shaq will rise. Shaq's got colts18, I don't see RayBan-Sematra. He's ronnymac2's favorite player, so there's a higher vote for him. I forgot MacGill as well, who has him third, so that's another.
  • Duncan will rise, benefiting from the drop of Magic, Wilt and Bird, and also from the fact that his fifth title win is fresh in everyone's minds. Dr Positivity's in, and he had Duncan as his #3.
  • Hakeem has people who says he's as high as #2 (e.g. lorak, 90sAllDecade), as well as people who say he's overrated. He'll benefit from the drop of Magic, Wilt and Bird, but on the other hand, LeBron's rising as well and will probably surpass him. It depends on how much this Finals loss impacts him in the perception of the voters. There was just a lengthy Duncan/Hakeem argument (which was a "Who would you choose" question, not "Who's better"), which will likely carry over into the project when the time comes.
  • Kobe supporters will duke it out with LeBron backers, as the former will be fighting to keep Kobe's spot in the top 10, as he was #10 last time as it was. It'll be ugly. An Unbiased Fan is in, so Kobe can count on his support. I don't see The Infamous 1. Kobe'll need him.
  • LeBron's obviously rising. He was #18 last time, and he's one of the primary reasons people wanted to re-do the Top 100 project. He'll end up bumping Kobe out of the top ten, which Kobe backers will fight tooth and nail to prevent. Though if Wilt falls outside the top ten, then Kobe will still remain. It would be possible for Kobe backers to strategize to take advantage of the drops of players currently higher on the list to keep Kobe in the top ten if people thought that deeply about it.



Nothing is being looked over...it's just more of the same rhetoric being spouted...rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....until it becomes somebodies truth......
I'm so tired of the typical......
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,425
And1: 9,952
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#322 » by penbeast0 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:41 pm

Warspite wrote:
ElGee wrote:Question for the room: How do you see Oscar's defense? How do you think it compares to West? Or maybe put another way, how do you not see West as a better defender, and assuming that you do, what's the margin?


I hold Wests defense on the same level as Squids. Wilt believed that West was the 3rd best shot blocker behind him and Russell. I see no reason why West wasnt as good or better than Frazier.

Oscar was passable to above avg.


Having watched them both (at least from 69-72 for West), they aren't very comparable. West was a good on-ball defender but not really a shut-down guy. He was more a guy who would create turnovers with steals, blocks, and more off ball play. Sid wasn't really an off-ball defender to any great extent, he was a climb inside the shirt of the man you are guarding and dare him to try to get by you. You have a jump shooter, Sid was the GOAT defender; slashers could sometimes make him pay though few guys were quicker or better leapers. West's great defense rep was more about the steals and blocks; really good anticipation combined with good fundamentals and athleticism. Frazier was more like West, but quicker feet and hands, really got inside an opponent's head. Frazier was more likely to turn a game around with his defense and more of a shut down guy as well. I love Jerry West, but Sid (and Frazier) were a level above him defensively.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Melodabeast
Banned User
Posts: 76
And1: 87
Joined: Jul 25, 2014
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#323 » by Melodabeast » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:44 pm

.
ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,207
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#324 » by ElGee » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:45 pm

therealbig3 wrote:For the people looking at Oscar right now, what do you guys think of 1970...what exactly happened that year in Cincinnati? Before that, Oscar was putting up huge numbers on mediocre teams, which might suggest that they were somewhat empty...but now that BBR has ORatings and DRatings for that era, we see that Cincinnati WAS an elite offense pretty much every year under Oscar...except for 1970. Oscar was still doing his thing at 25/8/6, but the team really declined.

I see that Lucas was traded that year after just 4 games, but previous posts by I think bastillon painted him out to be a pretty ineffective player despite his big stats. However, that seems to be the major difference for this year, and the offense really declines big time.


If you play around the pace, you will see that Jerry West's offenses would, at times, eclipse Oscar's. I find this quite compelling because the overall team was significantly better as well...for example, if you look at 1968, and assume the Lakers played a constant pace with/without West then their ORtg would be +8.8 (!). If you think they played way faster (+10 pace) with West, the offense is still +5.7 with him and the defense would be 2 points better.
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
Purch
Veteran
Posts: 2,820
And1: 2,144
Joined: May 25, 2009

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#325 » by Purch » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:49 pm

Melodabeast wrote:Why is apparently OK to simply buy into jerry west as a great defender based on his reputation and some quotes but somehow Bryant getting voted into a bunch of all-defensive teams, getting ranked very highly in the GM and player polls about best perimeter defenders in the game, and having guys like Doc Rivers calling him one of the best team/help defenders since Pippen...doesn't matter?

In regards to Oscar...what makes him better offensively? Kobe's pace-adjusted numbers are better, and I don't understand how anybody can deny that he's getting those numbers in a era with better defenses and better competition. Their raw TS% numbers are very similar, but Oscar's TS numbers relative to league average are higher...is he supposed to get extra credit for playing in a league with much lower efficiency because the very concept of maximizing possessions didn't even exist and everybody was throwing up garbage from everywhere? Overall, Kobe has a pretty humongous edge in scoring volume, and Oscar beats him in APG/AST% though the gap isn't as big as their respective reps suggest it should be. I'm still not seeing what makes Oscar a better offensive player. Is it with/without?

Oscar's defense. Again, people seem to be simply be OK with accepting him as a solid/good defender based on...quotes/rep? So it's OK for Oscar/West but not for Bryant? :crazy:

I understand his royals had the best offenses in the 60's but why is nobody bringing up the fact that offenses in the 60's were generally terrible? Isn't it easier to separate yourself if everybody else is awful?

What about longevity? Kobe seems to have a pretty significant edge over both Oscar and West in that regard. Why is this being ignored?

I posted a quote about Barkley being unguardable inside the 3 point line, but it was cast aside on the basis that "quotes aren't legitimate enough to be taken into consideration". To me it's a clear example of people just buying into quotes based in their preference for a player, and downgrading them in other circumstances
Image
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#326 » by MacGill » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:54 pm

Barkley versus Kobe offensively? Does a fan of either want to draft an offensive comparison?
Image
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,583
And1: 22,554
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#327 » by Doctor MJ » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:58 pm

G35 wrote:Hmmm, I'm probably going to get suspended for this but look at the highlighted words. Why is making an opinion sulking or whining? I would take all these "fantastic posts" with a grain of salt. It's still just opinion, with no basis in fact anywhere...because it can't proven.


There are all sorts of facts in the posts. Obviously in the end everyone has an opinion and that determines they're ranking, but that doesn't change the fact there's plenty of indisputable stuff in here that virtually no one outside of a hard core community like this would know.

G35 wrote:Nothing is being looked over...it's just more of the same rhetoric being spouted...rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....until it becomes somebodies truth......


I'm actually not sure how to take this.

My first thought was: Just because you don't learn anything here doesn't mean others don't. My list changes every time we do this.

But then my second thought: "until it becomes somebodies truth", wait, doesn't that mean "until people come to conclusions after reflecting on the points made by other"? Which is, y'know, the point. Obviously you characterizing it is as mere rhetoric and using "rinse and repeat" repeatedly you're implying that no reasoning goes on in that "truth" process, but you obviously don't know that for everyone here.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Purch
Veteran
Posts: 2,820
And1: 2,144
Joined: May 25, 2009

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#328 » by Purch » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:05 pm

MacGill wrote:Barkley versus Kobe offensively? Does a fan of either want to draft an offensive comparison?

That wasn't really the point of my quote, but I made a general post about Barkley's offensive efficency earlier

Charles Barkley

Spoiler:
Image


The only player to win an Mvp over Jordan in his absolute prime.

Also, if we’re making cases for Malone I should probally put a post about the power forward that I rank above both Malone and Garnett. One of the single most efficient and effective scorers in Nba history.

Career Leaders and Records for Offensive Rating

1. Chris Paul 122.44 (G)
2. Reggie Miller 121.48 (SG)
3. Magic Johnson* 120.79 (PG-Point F)
4. John Stockton* 120.55 (PG)
5. Kiki Vandeweghe 119.49 (SF-SG)
6. Sidney Moncrief 119.40 (CG-PG)
7. Charles Barkley* 119.31 (PF)

SHOT MADE/MISS DIFFERENTIAL STAT-
(minimum 15,000 shot attempts)


1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: +3,367.5
2. Shaquille O'Neal: +3,200.5
3. Wilt Chamberlain: +1,865
4. Charles Barkley: +1,434

NBA & ABA Career Leaders and Records for Player Efficiency Rating


1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 26.91
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.65
7. Bob Pettit* 25.35
8. Chris Paul 25.22
9. Tim Duncan 24.84
10. Neil Johnston* 24.63
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63

NBA & ABA Career Playoff Leaders and Records for Player Efficiency Rating


1. Michael Jordan* 28.59
2. George Mikan* 28.51
3. LeBron James 26.31
4. Shaquille O'Neal 26.12
5. Hakeem Olajuwon* 25.69
6. Tim Duncan 25.43
7. Dirk Nowitzki 24.75
8. Tracy McGrady 24.66
9. Dwyane Wade 24.56
10. Charles Barkley* 24.18

Nba all time career leaders in True Shooting %

1. Cedric Maxwell .6294
2. Artis Gilmore .6227
3. Dave Twardzik .6184
4. James Donaldson .6177
5. Adrian Dantley .6166
6. Tyson Chandler .6166
7. Reggie Miler .6139
8. Charles Barkley .6120

Most seasons with a 2 point percentage of 60% or more ( playing at least 60 games)

1 Artis Gilmore 1981 1986 6
2 Charles Barkley 1987 1991 5
3 Tyson Chandler 2007 2013 5
4 Wilt Chamberlain 1967 1973 3


The common theme you see in a lot of these efficiency stats, is that role players who have a lot of baskets created for them are near the top. However, with Barkley you have a player near the top in all these effiency stats, who at the same time was one of the single most double teamed players in nba history.



Charles Barkley playoff games
Charles Barkley – 1 (50 point playoff game)
Charles Barkley- 5 (40 point playoff game)
Charles Barkley- 28 (30 point playoff games)

For comparison Kevin Garnett has only scored 30 points in 9 playoff games.

The more I watch of Barkley and Garnett, the more I'm convinced that the gap between them offensively, is just as substantial as the gap between them defensively. With Barkley you literally have a 6'4 power foward, scoring the ball with Shaq level efficiency during his prime.

For four straight years during his prime he led the league in True shooting percentage.

1986-1987- .660
1987-1988- .665
1988-1989- .653
1989-1990- .661


For comparison sake, Kevin Garnett does not have a single season of 60 TS% or better. Whiles Barkley is ranked #9 in career TS% and has a career TS% of .6120, Kevin Garnett is ranked #193 all time with a TS% of only .5472 for his career.


And he was doing this whiles being one of the most double teamed players in nba history.There's literally less than a handful of players in nba history who have been able to score as much at as high an efficiency against both playoff and regular season defenses as Charles Barkley. The only guys who have, have already been voted in as top 5 players in this project.

Also I forgot to add on, just how good Charles Barkley was on the offensive glass. For three straight seasons he led the league in offensive rebounds

1986-1987- 390 offensive rebounds
1987-1988- 385 offensive rebounds
1988-1989- 403 offensive rebounds

For his career he's ranked 6th all time in offensive rebounds

1. Moses Malone -7382
2. Artis Gilmore - 4816
3. Robert Parish -4598
4. Buck Williams- 4526
5. Dennis Rodman-4329
6. Charles Barkley- 4260

This is even more impressive considering he only played a 15 year career, and a lot of those weren't even in his prime.
Image
rich316
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,986
And1: 1,243
Joined: Dec 30, 2011

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#329 » by rich316 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:05 pm

Please people, it's a thread on an internet forum. Not an epistemology thesis. Nobody's HoF ballots are being punched, nobody's legacy is being defined. It's a fun project to pass the time in the summer, nothing more.

I'm leaning towards KG here, I've read a lot of really interesting posts in his defense. I will come back later in the afternoon to make my final vote. I've been trying to parse out what RAPM really means. Many people who have opinions that I trust put stock in its value. Tell me if this statement is basically correct, or basically incorrect:

We have lineup-based plus-minus data. It is difficult to parse out how Player X has contributed to the +/- data that is compiled in lineups that include him. Using the power of fancy math and large data sets, RAPM attempts to parse out what individual +/- effect Player X has on any and all lineups that include him. If Player X records a RAPM of +5 over 10 years, it means that over that time period, his team scored 5 more points than their opponents per 48 minutes with that player on the floor. Is this how it basically works? I've read some attempted explanations, but it would be valuable if we could get the "RAPM for 2nd graders" explanation here.
User avatar
DHodgkins
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,375
And1: 972
Joined: Jun 27, 2013
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#330 » by DHodgkins » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:15 pm

My vote is for Kobe Bryant

- Most All NBA selections ever with 16
- T-Most All NBA 1st team selections ever with 11
- T-Most All Defensive 1st team selections ever with 9
- 133 40 point games (3rd all time)
- 5x NBA Champion ... 2x Finals MVP

3 Peat Playoff Stats
25.3/5.7/4.9/1.5/1.1 as second option

08,09,10 Finals Runs Stats
29.8/5.7/5.5/1.6/0.7 as first option
GTGTPWTW
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#331 » by MacGill » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:15 pm

[quote="Purch"]That wasn't really the point of my quote, but I made a general post about Barkley's offensive efficency earlier[quote]

Thanks, ftr, I wasn't taking your post to have a direct meaning to anything of the sort. Just asking the respected fan bases of each if they had a write-up of comparison. I enjoy both players offensive games.
Image
G35
RealGM
Posts: 22,523
And1: 8,071
Joined: Dec 10, 2005
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#332 » by G35 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:17 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:
G35 wrote:Hmmm, I'm probably going to get suspended for this but look at the highlighted words. Why is making an opinion sulking or whining? I would take all these "fantastic posts" with a grain of salt. It's still just opinion, with no basis in fact anywhere...because it can't proven.


There are all sorts of facts in the posts. Obviously in the end everyone has an opinion and that determines they're ranking, but that doesn't change the fact there's plenty of indisputable stuff in here that virtually no one outside of a hard core community like this would know.

G35 wrote:Nothing is being looked over...it's just more of the same rhetoric being spouted...rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....rinse and repeat....until it becomes somebodies truth......


I'm actually not sure how to take this.

My first thought was: Just because you don't learn anything here doesn't mean others don't. My list changes every time we do this.

But then my second thought: "until it becomes somebodies truth", wait, doesn't that mean "until people come to conclusions after reflecting on the points made by other"? Which is, y'know, the point. Obviously you characterizing it is as mere rhetoric and using "rinse and repeat" repeatedly you're implying that no reasoning goes on in that "truth" process, but you obviously don't know that for everyone here.



If this was a thread with the premise of educating posters on the circumstances/history of each player that would be different. This is a ranking thread....and please don't act naive that people will not reference this thread as a point of proof when making future comparisons.

"Look at where ________ was ranked in the recent top 100 list....see! I'm right!"

You can learn a lot about anything...does not mean it changes your mind. In fact education is not an indication of compliance. The public is constantly bombarded with the benefits of eating healthier and exercising but we still have a lot of fat, out of shape people walking around. But the bright side is it provides job security to doctors, nutritionists and organic farmers.......
I'm so tired of the typical......
User avatar
Dipper 13
Starter
Posts: 2,276
And1: 1,439
Joined: Aug 23, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#333 » by Dipper 13 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:19 pm

Barkley versus Kobe offensively? Does a fan of either want to draft an offensive comparison?


Kobe is a much better perimeter jump shooter and from the foul line, but Barkley was so good on the inside he has the advantage. As a spot up shooter he may been a liability, at least according to the 84 game sample below.

http://i.imgur.com/V0TZP3e.png


However, he was so effective in the post and off the boards. In the low post the best he is the best I have ever seen, not in terms of moves, but certainly decision making. Nobody aside from perhaps Bird was as effective at passing under pressure, maybe because he was confident he could bust through most double teams and carry them right to the rim where he was finishing at over an 80% clip.


In the first link below we can see a behind the back wrap around pass to Gilliam. We can also hear Pippen telling Perdue to go double Barkley, "Go Will, Go Will", as he is ready to pick up Gilliam but not before the pass is out of Barkley's hands, since then he could also hit Pippen's man Ron Anderson at the top of the key for a jump shot. Pippen knows both players are only one pass away to Barkley out of the post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZtD0lej4Zc&t=3m40s



Right through Grant's legs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsTKc_AKSlU&t=3m35s



Takes Perdue & Grant to the rim from 18 feet out with tremendous ease

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsTKc_AKSlU&t=8m5s



Looks to hit Ruland in heavy traffic, who wasn't expecting it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAoHTHzaOk&t=5m6s




Below we can see how muscles Pippen and (2nd video) Levingston nearly off the floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAoHTHzaOk&t=3m57s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZtD0lej4Zc&t=10m44s



He could also out-quick or fake the opponent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b6athakY1w&t=1m28s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIz6nScvx94&t=1m35s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMygxSdvtlc&t=50s



Sports Illustrated - February 10, 1997

Toughest To Double-team?

The Rockets, though, had the clear edge at dishing off under pressure. According to the pollees, Barkley relies on his experience to make sound snap decisions, while the 7-foot Olajuwon's athleticism enables him to be the best at negating a double team. And, says one coach, "he has the rings to prove it."





Below we can see how compares to LeBron and Shaq around the rim (restricted area). While Shaq's percentage may not be as good, he did have more attempts at the basket. By finish I mean strictly in the half court. LeBron's best season shooting in the restricted area was this past season (2013-14).

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.ht ... mode=basic

If we use mysynergysports.com to eliminate all 2 Point FG's in transition, we can see the totals below for both Barkley & LeBron. No transition data is available for Shaq.


LeBron James (2013-14) *Including Playoffs

335/437 FG (76.7%), 4.51 Attempts Per Game



Charles Barkley (84 Game Sample)

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1274519

467/574 FG (81.4%), 6.83 Attempts Per Game



Shaquille O'Neal (1999-00) *Including Playoffs

*No transition data

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.ht ... on=1999-00

724/966 FG (74.9%), 9.47 Attempts Per Game
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,583
And1: 22,554
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#334 » by Doctor MJ » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:20 pm

ardee wrote:
FJS wrote:When you watch that Andrei Kirilenko was better at RAPM than KG in 2005 and 2006, and next to him in 2004, you should ask yourself:
1) AK was so good in that spawn?
2) Rapm it's not as good metric to decice which player it's better?

In Fact, Dikembe Mutombo was better than Olajuwon in 94, better than Jordan in 96, 97, 98... (in fact Jordan was nowhere near the top 5)... So I think that metric is overrated, and don't show the true dominance.

21 players above Jordan.
http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/1998.html


Or Amir Johnson being better than Shaq for the millennium.

Or KG being better than Wade in 2009.

Or Manu being comparable to Kobe.

Or Tony Parker being a better defender in 2013.

There's no way to explain these results but no one bothers to even consider that RAPM is really a pretty strange thing to go by.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app


2 things:

1) As has been noted many times, the data on that site isn't RAPM. At this point I wish we could just go full-China and block Engelmann's website until he actually labels the data properly.

2) As to the results "no one bothers to even consider", you're wrong. Folks like me have considered and considered and considered. There is basically nothing that's brought up nowadays that I haven't considered other than the most recent game tracking stuff most of which I don't have direct access to. That doesn't mean I'm right, but lack of consideration is certainly not my problem.

That might seem like a strange thing to object to, but it's crucial if you're looking to understand where people who disagree with you are coming from. This isn't some group of Dave Berri followers who aren't aware of the extent of the general basketball community they aren't apart of latching on to the first thing they ever hear about.

I'm fully aware of how weird some RAPM data looks, I'm fully aware how weird that makes me look when I talk about it, and I don't relish being such a contrarian. I would love for my views to be on the near side of the average person's cognitive dissonance threshold rather than on the far end. We'd get so much more done. But in the end my primary goal isn't to communicate to people here, it's to learn, and when you do that for years and years and years in anything, you typically end up with opinions that look strange to others.

I don't expect you or anyone else to agree with me, but do yourself a favor and assume that whatever my issues are, lack of consideration is not among them.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,583
And1: 22,554
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#335 » by Doctor MJ » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:27 pm

G35 wrote:If this was a thread with the premise of educating posters on the circumstances/history of each player that would be different. This is a ranking thread....and please don't act naive that people will not reference this thread as a point of proof when making future comparisons.

"Look at where ________ was ranked in the recent top 100 list....see! I'm right!"

You can learn a lot about anything...does not mean it changes your mind. In fact education is not an indication of compliance. The public is constantly bombarded with the benefits of eating healthier and exercising but we still have a lot of fat, out of shape people walking around. But the bright side is it provides job security to doctors, nutritionists and organic farmers.......


The most experienced posters in this project keep telling people to focus less on the actual rankings and more on the discussion. That doesn't mean we succeed in convincing everyone of this, but the whole ranking thing is just a gimmick. The community we have here, which we know exists because people say "only on RealGM", exists in no small part because of the projects we've run and how they turned out. What makes the projects special aren't the results - plenty of other forums emulate the projects and have their own results - but the stuff that gets said along the way.

Re: "does not mean it changes your mind". But as I said, my mind does get changed, and quite clearly I'm one of the more influential people here. There is all sorts of mind-changing going on things like this, and the fact you've missed that is telling, and goes right along with you not changing your mind.

There's something good here. Something that a lot of us find worthwhile. If you can't appreciate it, I feel sorry for you, but it would be best if you just ignored the whole thing rather than popping in just to be a Debbie downer.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#336 » by ardee » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:27 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:
ardee wrote:So random quotes and anectodes are ok to go by for Oscar and West's defense, but consistent voting results are not ok for Kobe?

This stuff is honestly disrespectful. Kobe not one of the best offensive anchors of all time? The guy led historic offenses with good casts and stunningly overachieving offenses when saddled with crap. Other than Jordan, Magic, Bird, LeBron and Nash, who is definitely better?

If you guys want to vote a guy with the worst Playoff record of anyone in contention with one of the most consistent and dominant players in history, then fine, I'm not going to argue anymore, because such a decision is beyond all reasonable logic :?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app


When we look at guys like Oscar & West we're looking for anything we can find to help guide us because it was so long ago, and hence it's good to see quotes. This doesn't mean those quote clinch anything. One quote said Oscar was better at everything in basketball than Michael Jordan, that's obviously absurd and shows why we always remain skeptical with anything like this.

Re: "historical offenses". I'm not sure what you mean. Only thing I can think of is the playoff performance of the '01 Lakers, but that wouldn't justify the plural you're using.


2008: Kobe and Pau together, the Lakers had a 114 ORtg. Remember, this was a team with Kobe, a pre-peak Pau, Odom in an average season for him (couldn't really shoot as well as he would), and a bunch of role players.

2009: 116.1 On-Court ORtg. Highest of anyone we know who didn't play for the Phoenix Suns.

2010: 114.5 On-Court ORtg in the Playoffs.

And since +/- in any form is your thing, 2006 Kobe had an 18.9 On/Off on offense and a 5.8 ORAPM. Since diminishing returns is not a thing with +/- stats, as per drza's analysis, who's there to say he could not have anchored even better team offenses than he did later, in '06 and '07 when he was still dragging a terrible team to the 7th and 8th best offenses in the league?
User avatar
Dipper 13
Starter
Posts: 2,276
And1: 1,439
Joined: Aug 23, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#337 » by Dipper 13 » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:36 pm

It is quite amazing how two of the best defensive forwards in the game couldn't do anything with Barkley. Below is an example of two consecutive possessions in the 3rd quarter of the elimination game.


Unsuccessful front by Pippen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgF4gj3LuEw&t=3m26s


Grant again taken to the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgF4gj3LuEw&t=4m02s



Even early in the game, it is too easy for Barkley to get the deep position

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt-_m4ROyec&t=8m48s
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,738
And1: 5,709
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#338 » by An Unbiased Fan » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:36 pm

ElGee wrote:Thanks for the reply. It's left me at sort of a loss though because it's not clear to me why you would use these methods here, and in my past (limited) exposure to, specifically, facial recognition machine learning algorithms, it was not used (although I can surmise an explanation). But just know that this really doesn't address in any way your concerns related to RAPM/lineups. If I'm the student on this, I still have no idea why you would use RR in those situations but not with lineup data. The first discussion I had with someone in this area I consider a subject matter expert (quite a smart Math PhD) who is also a basketball and sports fan, his response was essentially "cool!" not "you can't do that."

Maybe were just not clearly communicating here so let me simplify: Is it OK to use OLS regression on PBP data? And if not, why?

You "could" use OLS sure, but ridge would still be a better predictor for what you're going after with RAPM. Again, I'm not sure why people asking me about regularization methods as if I have a problem with them. My issue, is the interpretation of what RAPM results represent. This isn't aimed at you Elgee, because you've been more than cordial in discussions, but the constant inference that because I don't agree with RAPm, that I "simply don't understand", or "don't like ridge regression" gets tiresome.

I made it a point when discussing RAPM, to point out examples of why I think it has problems, and the causes of those issues(like I did with Divac near the beginning of the project). Even still, I have no problem with posters using RAPM for arguments. I just have a problem with RAPM taking over the whole discussion, and other criteria getting dismissed as inferior or biased. I compared KG/Kobe by age, and it was clear that Kobe was regarded higher in his early 20's, and had a longer longevity into their 30's. But....apparently RAPM trumps that, and even KG at low production levels, is rated higher in pre/post prime seasons than prime Kobe. The 98/99 KG to 06/07 Kobe comparison is just mind-boggling. Again, the use of RAPM would be fine if it was reasonably used. But at this point nothing else seems to matter in discussions. And I've spent half this project discussing RAPM, so lets move on.

Oh, and I'm using a more dynamic approach for facial recognition, specifically for smartphones/tablets. The learning datasets approach is limited, and I'm using some of my game programming experience to employ 3D type characterizations. I'm basically trying to reverse engineer faces, and its working surprisingly well. :)
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
Basketballefan
Banned User
Posts: 2,170
And1: 583
Joined: Oct 14, 2013

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#339 » by Basketballefan » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:39 pm

People really need to stop using +/- when evaluating players, its a garbage method that proves nothing at all. Bball is 5 on 5 not 1 on 1. You can have a garbage game and still have a positive +/- if your teammates pick up the slack. Its flawed as hell.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,583
And1: 22,554
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #11 

Post#340 » by Doctor MJ » Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:41 pm

ardee wrote:2008: Kobe and Pau together, the Lakers had a 114 ORtg. Remember, this was a team with Kobe, a pre-peak Pau, Odom in an average season for him (couldn't really shoot as well as he would), and a bunch of role players.

2009: 116.1 On-Court ORtg. Highest of anyone we know who didn't play for the Phoenix Suns.

2010: 114.5 On-Court ORtg in the Playoffs.

And since +/- in any form is your thing, 2006 Kobe had an 18.9 On/Off on offense and a 5.8 ORAPM. Since diminishing returns is not a thing with +/- stats, as per drza's analysis, who's there to say he could not have anchored even better team offenses than he did later, in '06 and '07 when he was still dragging a terrible team to the 7th and 8th best offenses in the league?


Okay, well, those are good things but I wouldn't call them "historical". For perspective here, Nash in '05 had an on-court ORtg of 121.7 according to 82games (looking at b-r, I see they have it a little lower). While a team hitting 115 is a big deal, an individual player doing it isn't something to record for posterity.

I will say that that stretch after Pau arrived was pretty damn awesome partial season thing, though I think making a point of calling that "pre-peak Pau" is a little much. Pau would never shoot with such efficiency again.

Re: +/- numbers. Well now you're just all over the place. I didn't say Kobe wasn't a great player, he is. I just asked about the historical aspect of things.

Kobe's impact on offense in '06 was quite huge, no doubt.

Re: diminishing returns not a thing. Pretty sure that what you're using that for isn't what he meant. There's no "diminishing returns" in the sense that a lift of +5 is a lift of +5, not in the sense that anyone would predict that someone in one situation giving you +5 would necessarily give you +5 in another. In general, it's simpler to lift weaker teams than to lift great teams.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!

Return to Player Comparisons