RealGM Top 100 List #12

[DQuinn1575]

Good post. What is career estimated impact?

It's my box score spm: http://shutupandjam.net/nba-ncaa-stats/estimated-impact/

Do you have any place where you show how it is computed?

It's hard for me to put value on a stat when I don't know the math that makes it up.

Thanks

[Senior]

Tony Allen barely played because he was limited, Rondo was 21 years old and he's one of the more overrated players of his era, and Posey was an unremarkable role player. I also rarely see people tout the virtues of Eddie House. Vujacic and Vladimir are high volume three-point shooters just like him, but bigger.

What's this in responding to?

I think me..Allen didn't play much in this Finals, I must've mixed that up with 2010.

Still, Posey played well defensively and hit half his threes (12/24), House played fine with his minutes, but Vujacic/Vlad and House weren't good defenders at all. Sasha hit 35% of his threes in the finals, Rad hit 39%. Perk played well. Farmar played well with his minutes. I don't know, my recollection is that the Celts got timely contributions from their role players and the Lakers fell just short in that area.

[Doormatt]

Tony Allen barely played because he was limited, Rondo was 21 years old and he's one of the more overrated players of his era, and Posey was an unremarkable role player. I also rarely see people tout the virtues of Eddie House. Vujacic and Vladimir are high volume three-point shooters just like him, but bigger.

There really wasnt much difference between guys like Vlad Rad, Vujacic, House and Posey, i agree. Tony Allen was the best of that bunch because his defensive impact was so much higher than any of these guys and his lack of offense wasnt hurting the celtics that much, but like you said he was limited to only 18mpg which fell to virtually no minutes in the playoffs.

and i think 08 Rondo is a bit underrated because to me this was his peak defensively due to a lack of offensive responsibilities (which in turn helped the Celtics offense since as his role grew the celtic offense became worse, which can also be attributed to the fall off of the big 3). overall Rondo is a super overrated player but 08 he fit perfectly into what the celtics needed, which was a stud defender in the back court capable of running the offense at times. he wouldve been the ultimate role player if he had a jumper at that time.

[acrossthecourt]

Tony Allen barely played because he was limited, Rondo was 21 years old and he's one of the more overrated players of his era, and Posey was an unremarkable role player. I also rarely see people tout the virtues of Eddie House. Vujacic and Vladimir are high volume three-point shooters just like him, but bigger.

What's this in responding to?

People talking about the 2008 series and how it should have been close.

And no one's made any good responses to Kobe's horrible stats versus good defenses yet. I'm still waiting.

[ronnymac2]

James Posey is getting underrated in this GOAT #12 thread.

[ceiling raiser]

Had a chance to compute with/without ORtg/DRtg for Oscar and West today. Thanks a ton to lorak for helping me gather the data!

Oscar:

Spoiler:

West:

Spoiler:

As with Wilt and Russell earlier in the project, I used the same method as B-R: http://www.sports-reference.com/blog/20 ... 1951-1973/. To find FGA for missing games, just used divided FGA by season FG% with and w/o both guys (same for FTA for missing games prior to 63-64), and scaled the estimates so the totals match those for the season.

[DQuinn1575]

Had a chance to compute with/without ORtg/DRtg for Oscar and West today. Thanks a ton to lorak for helping me gather the data!

Oscar:

Spoiler:

West:

Spoiler:

As with Wilt and Russell earlier in the project, I used the same method as B-R: http://www.sports-reference.com/blog/20 ... 1951-1973/. To find FGA for missing games, just used divided FGA by season FG% with and w/o both guys (same for FTA for missing games prior to 63-64), and scaled the estimates so the totals match those for the season.

So with this you are saying that Oscar and West both had a lot of impact on defense -
I've combed through old newspapers and can't really find too much other than statements that they were good on defense. West has some all-defense teams once they were established, and has one good year of steals.

Oscar would always have the best all-around player accolade, and then they would say he is very good on defense. Nothing really conclusive to base anything, plus his team was usually poor on defense.

To me, this validates Oscar as a pretty good defender- let me know if I am missing something.

[ceiling raiser]

So with this you are saying that Oscar and West both had a lot of impact on defense -
I've combed through old newspapers and can't really find too much other than statements that they were good on defense. West has some all-defense teams once they were established, and has one good year of steals.

Oscar would always have the best all-around player accolade, and then they would say he is very good on defense. Nothing really conclusive to base anything, plus his team was usually poor on defense.

To me, this validates Oscar as a pretty good defender- let me know if I am missing something.

I'm not sure what conclusions to draw about the two as individual defenders, but it does seem both of their teams hurt defensively when they were out of the lineups.

When looking at some of the larger samples, I do think it is safe to say that when they were out of their lineups, their teams' defenses fell off more than you'd expect from guards.

[lorak]

Really surprising results, because both of them look like very impactfull players on defense. That's not what would you expect. I mean, look (how much they improved offense and defense - negative is good on D):

Code: Select all

PLAYER   SEASON   ortg   drtg   net
Oscar   1968   -0,2   -12,1   11,9
West    1971   1,7   -9,9   11,5
West    1970   2,9   -7,7   10,6
Oscar   1961   0,0   -10,0   10,0
West    1968   1,9   -5,1   7,0
Oscar   1972   0,3   -6,4   6,7
West    1964   2,7   -4,0   6,7
West    1963   -0,7   -6,5   5,8
West    1973   2,2   -3,3   5,5
West    1967   2,4   -2,6   4,9
Oscar   1970   2,0   -2,7   4,8
West    1969   0,3   -4,2   4,5
West    1974   0,1   -0,5   0,6
Oscar   1974   -0,6   0,1   -0,8
Oscar   1973   -1,9   1,2   -3,1



That's insane how much better defenses were with them and how relatively small impact they had on offense. It looks almost like there was some mistake and we should switch ortg with drtg results - then it would make more sense

[ceiling raiser]

That's insane how much better defenses were with them and how relatively small impact they had on offense. It looks almost like there was some mistake and we should switch ortg with drtg results - then it would make more sense

I think there are three possibilities:

1) Small sample issue.
2) The FG% is so different with and w/o the two that it throws off the number of possessions, even with our adjustment in estimating FGA.
3) Teams drastically changed their style of play with them out of the lineup.

Though I do think there's a good chance that some of us--including myself-have severely underestimated them on the defensive end.

[Clyde Frazier]

I don't see why mentioning WS/48 is getting hounded on by some people. It's just another metric to look at, not the definitive stat for comparing players. If that's all you're looking at, then of course that's illogical. The claims about "oh it shows birdman had more impact than lebron in the 2014 playoffs" is a weak argument considering you shouldn't be comparing the 2 players in the first place.

I'm still surprised by how much PER gets mentioned on here, but I just let it be at this point and don't take it into consideration when comparing players. Those who are up in arms over WS/48 might want to do the same, although I still find it useful when comparing players who produced at similar levels.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Gonna repost my argument for West with some extra comps added at the end.
Feel like West is getting overlooked to some degree in this thread even though he is an extremely strong candidate for this spot.

West's Career
Regular-season = 27ppg
Post-season = 29.1ppg
NBA Finals = 30.5ppg

The Playoff Performer
2 year Peak : (25.1 PER) --- 31 / 5 / 7apg on 57%TS -- .277 WSP48
5 year Peak : (25.3 PER) --- 33 / 5 / 6apg on 56%TS --- .247 WSP48
11 year Prime : (23.1 PER) - 29 / 6 / 6.4apg on 54%TS --- .204 WSP48

Highest Scoring Average in NBA Finals (min 10 games)
(10 games) Rick Barry : 36.3ppg
(20 games) Shaq : 34.2ppg (out of date stat)
(35 games) Jordan : 33.6ppg
(55 games) Jerry West : 30.5ppg

West averaged 31ppg in the Finals over his career without the benefit of the 3pt shot.
Jordan made almost 42 treys in his 35 NBA Finals games. West had at least Jordan's range.
It is reasonable to say that West would have approached Jordan's 33ppg in the Finals if he had the 3pt shot.

He scored 53 points in Game 1 of the 1969 Finals and had a 45-point game in both the 1965 Finals and the 1966 Finals.

Chick Hearn called Jerry "Mr. Clutch," and the name was appropriate.

Regarding West defensively.
I am thinking that West was one of the greatest help defenders ever at the guard position.
He had underrated athletic ability combined with ultra long arms and amazing timing.

Even at age 35 while only playing 30mpg he averaged nearly 3spg/1bpg.
He was probably a lock for 3+spg / 1+bpg in his actual Prime.

Kobe VS West

-West is an even better volume scorer in the playoffs (can argue this is a wash due to era)
-West is more efficient (can argue this is a wash due to era)
-West has no negative personality traits on and off the court which do reduce Kobe's oncourt value to some degree over his career. Not gonna focus too much on personality stuff but it suppose it is worth mentioning.
-Arguably better defensively over his extended Prime.
-A better Finals performer
-Better VS the toughest defenses (Boston).
-Wests ability to throw down huge series VS the toughest defense he faced (Boston) impresses me greatly.
Kobe has his shot VS the modern day Russell C's (08/10 Boston + 04 Detroit?) and he didn't do so well in those series.

Kobe has an extra year or two in longevity (11-12) but I felt his value those two years was very low so it isn't nearly enough to tip the scales if West was the better player over their Prime years (they each have 11 Prime years).
I feel like Kobe from 2011-2012 was a +1-2 on offense but a negative 1-2 on defense so he wasn't having much impact. Advanced stats like RAPM seem to support that view.

West VS Oscar
I tend to feel more comfortable siding with West though I wouldn't scoff at anyone siding with Oscar.
Oscar just has a less impressive playoff career. His playoff Prime ended after 5 years and he only has 8 Prime level years in the playoffs as opposed to West who has 11.

[tsherkin]

With KG in already, the post I was planning to make about his playoff offense is now moot, so I'll deal with that another time.

For me, the next spot then becomes a toss up between Kobe, the Mailman, Doctor J, Oscar, West and David Robinson. It's a bit too early for legit consideration of Moses, despite his individual accolades, and I'm not quite ready to vote for Nash this high. There are a bunch of players all clumped together in this range, and surely there are arguments for many, but on those players, I'm presently focused.

Hmmm. No vote yet, just pondering and reading.

[acrossthecourt]

That's insane how much better defenses were with them and how relatively small impact they had on offense. It looks almost like there was some mistake and we should switch ortg with drtg results - then it would make more sense

I think there are three possibilities:

1) Small sample issue.
2) The FG% is so different with and w/o the two that it throws off the number of possessions, even with our adjustment in estimating FGA.
3) Teams drastically changed their style of play with them out of the lineup.

Though I do think there's a good chance that some of us--including myself-have severely underestimated them on the defensive end.

Are you sure you didn't get the offensive/defensive stats backwards? Maybe I'll go double-check the work later.

[ceiling raiser]

That's insane how much better defenses were with them and how relatively small impact they had on offense. It looks almost like there was some mistake and we should switch ortg with drtg results - then it would make more sense

I think there are three possibilities:

1) Small sample issue.
2) The FG% is so different with and w/o the two that it throws off the number of possessions, even with our adjustment in estimating FGA.
3) Teams drastically changed their style of play with them out of the lineup.

Though I do think there's a good chance that some of us--including myself-have severely underestimated them on the defensive end.

Are you sure you didn't get the offensive/defensive stats backwards? Maybe I'll go double-check the work later.

I'll PM you the spreadsheet.

[shutupandjam]

Good post. What is career estimated impact?

It's my box score spm: http://shutupandjam.net/nba-ncaa-stats/estimated-impact/

Do you have any place where you show how it is computed?

It's hard for me to put value on a stat when I don't know the math that makes it up.

Thanks

I haven't released the coefficients (or the ivs for that matter), and I don't plan to at this point. But it's basically pts*a + reb*b + ast*c, etc with some interaction terms (e.g., pts*ast) and nonlinear terms (e.g., pts^2). The weights were found through regression onto rapm. I have done lots of out of sample testing, and it predicts very well in all eras, consistently outperforming other metrics (like ws/48, per, etc).

[magicmerl]

I'm coming into this thread thinking that David Robinson is the right pick here (I did vote for him last pick as well). His competition at this slot for me are Karl Malone and Oscar Robertson. Because of the lack of possession stats in Oscar's era, we need to use per36 minute instead, which will slightly advantage Oscar due to the higher pace of his era.

Code: Select all

RS.. TRB  AST STL BLK TOV PF  PTS  TS%  USG% ORtg DRtg OWS   DWS  WS    WS/48
ORob  6.4 8.1 1.1 0.1 NA  2.4 21.9 .564 NA   NA    98  152.0 37.2 189.2 .207
Karl  9.8 3.4 1.4 0.8 3.0 3.0 24.2 .577 29.4 113  101  142.2 92.4 234.6 .205
DRob 11.0 2.6 1.5 3.1 2.5 3.0 21.8 .583 26.2 116   96   98.5 80.1 178.7 .250

PO.. TRB  AST STL BLK TOV PF  PTS  TS%  USG% ORtg DRtg OWS   DWS  WS    WS/48
ORob  5.7 7.5 0.8 0.2 NA  2.6 18.7 .544 NA   NA    99  10.2  3.5  13.6 .178
Karl  9.4 2.8 1.2 0.6 2.5 3.0 21.7 .526 29.9 106  103  11.3  11.6 23.0 .140
DRob 11.1 2.4 1.3 2.7 2.4 3.6 18.9 .547 25.1 110   96   7.8  9.7  17.5 .199

All three players suffered a statistical droppoff in the postseason, which is to be expected given the increased quality of opponents faced. They had fairly substandard rosters for the bulk of their primes, and Oscar and David only got over the hump and won a championship by playing second fiddle to a better player who has already been voted in (Duncan and Kareem respectively).

Oscar Robertson
Oscar seems to be the best offensive player, based on his presumed ball dominance as a rebounding point guard. It's interesting that Oscar projects with such a low DWS total given the indicators that most of the difference he made was on the defensive end. His first 7 years were an amazing display of offensive dominance as shown in win shares. His amazing 'triple double' stat is far less impressive when pace is taken into account. Then he looks like a homeless man's LeBron James.

Karl Malone
Staggering win share total. Just a stud that his team rode for 18 years. During the 'top 10' ranking, I got a feel for what constitutes a truly elite level of play, with 15 win shares in a season being a good barometer of a GOAT-level prime season. Karl has a 12 year run where he averaged over 15 pro-rated winshares per season from 89-00 (in fact, if you include 2001 as well, the average is still over 15). That's an amazing level of sustained brilliance. Of these three players, only Karl was still the primary focus of his team on offense during his playoff prime (both Oscar and David were playing second fiddle during their championship contention window). However, this is a little bit offset by the intertwined nature of the 'Stockton-to-malone' narrative, since Malone might never have turned out the way he did without his point guard.

David Robinson
David is easily the best defender of these three, with his elite rebounding and shot blocking numbers. Entered the league as a better player than either Oscar or Karl have ever been. From 94-94, had an unbelievable three year prime in the regular season, although he was defeated and outplayed in the playoffs during that period by Karl Malone twice, and the notorious series that built Hakeem's reputation. He had his prime in the golden age of centers in the NBA (Robinson, Hakeem, Ewing, Shaq), and was generally regarded as the best of them until the singular playoff series vs Hakeem in 95 that has defined in large part the legacy of both players. His high WS/48 scores are hurt by his relative lack of longevity, and when he was peaking as a phenomenal all-worldly talent, he wasn't able to catch lightning in a bottle and turn that into playoff success.

My pick here is for Karl Malone.

[ShaqAttack3234]

People talking about the 2008 series and how it should have been close.

And no one's made any good responses to Kobe's horrible stats versus good defenses yet. I'm still waiting.

Well, he really struggled against the '04 Pistons, and he struggled to a lesser extent against the '08 Celtics, but those are two defenses who will be brought up in the discussion for greatest ever. Then he struggled against an excellent Rockets defense in the '04 1st round(24/6/6, 39 FG%, 51 TS%), but rarely turned the ball over(only 6 turnovers in 5 games, 4.7 TO%) and that was a low-scoring series anyway that the Lakers won so certainly not like the '04 finals. And Kobe did struggle shooting in the 2010 finals vs a great Celtic defense, but he wasn't terrible either (29/8/4, 41 FG%, 53 TS%). He did also struggle vs the 2010 Thunder who had a top 9 defense, but I think it was clear that he was a different player from game 6 on when he got his knee drained, and immediately responded with a 32 point game 6 on 12/25 shooting with three 3s. Utah was actually top 10 again that year as well and Kobe destroyed them. You could bring up the Mavs and Hornets in 2011 who were 8th and 10th, respectively in defensive rating, but I think most would acknowledge this wasn't prime Kobe, but an aging Kobe limited by knee surgery.

But how about all of the Spurs teams he faced? They were elite every year he faced them in the playoffs and Kobe played very well against them in '02 and '04 and was truly great against them in '01 and '08. He struggled with efficiency and turnovers in 2003, but still averaged 32/5/4 vs the Spurs.

They aren't the only good defense he's played very well against either. Kobe played very well against the Nets in the '02 finals, and they had the best defense statistically that season. Played pretty well against the Kings in the WCF that year and they had the 6th best defense statistically, though Kobe's efficiency was admittedly poor(27/6/4, 42 FG%, 49 TS%). The 2001 Sixers were a great defensive team and while Kobe's efficiency was poor(25/8/6, 42 FG%, 50 TS%), but he played a good all around series and the numbers are made worse by 1 really bad game 1 when he scored just 15 on 7/22 shooting, he played very well against the Kings in 2001 and they actually had a top 7 defense. the Wolves had a really good defense that year, and Kobe wasn't horrible vs them. The '04 Wolves also had a very good defense and 24 ppg and 5.5 apg on 41 FG%/52 TS%, that TS% is actually above the regular season average that season.

And while I don't really think of the '08 Nuggets as a good defense, they were top 10 statistically and Kobe demolished them averaging 33.5 ppg and 6.3 apg on 50 FG% and 59 TS%. the '09 Jazz were actually top 10 as well and Kobe had no problem with them. Kobe wasn't great vs Houston(27/5/4 on 53.5 TS%), but not terrible either and the '09 Rockets were a top 4 defensive team. Denver was also an improved defensive team and their top 8 defensive rating in '09 actually doesn't seem like much of a stretch and Kobe had an incredible WCF vs them. Orlando also had the best defensive rating that year and while Kobe's efficiency was mediocre(43 FG%, 52.5 TS%), he did average 32/6/7 and was hardly horrible that series, though he wasn't nearly as good after his great game 1.

I'm not seeing this as horrible at all. His worst numbers were really in 2004, when he was clearly limited by injuries and off the court issues, but he was still solid vs a very good Wolves defense and very good vs a great Spurs defense. And the other glaring year is 2011, but that was clearly an aging, limited Kobe again, and we've seen a younger, healthy Kobe play great against much better defenses countless times.

I mean Kobe's bad series were around 52-53 TS%, which was normal for Karl Malone.

[Jim Naismith]

It's a bit too early for legit consideration of Moses, despite his individual accolades.

I don't think you can just airily dismiss accolades. 3 MVP's in 5 years is pretty dominant.

In terms of statistics (especially in the playoffs), Moses is comparable to DRob: http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/m/moses_malone_vs_david_robinson.htm

Moses is not a non-entity on defense either, make 2 All-Defense teams. In this regard, he is similar to Shaq: super offense, good defense.

Also it's not just individual accolades for Moses. He went the Finals twice, beating the defending champion Lakers both times. (This is similar to Dirk 2011.)

[penbeast0]

Among the guards that are serious contenders, the battle that has been fought out many times is Oscar v. the Logo. Oscar has the accolades and statistical edge mainly in assists and rebounds, he was also more durable. West has the team success, defense, and intangibles -- Oscar may or may not have been a good leader and locker room bonus; West was absolutely one. West's missed games didn't cause his team to miss a lot of playoff wins (sort of like Shaq, he tended to play at the end of the season). I just have to accept my winner's bias because I just was always more impressed with Jerry West.

West v. Kobe is tougher. I think the 60s were as tough an era to play in as the 00s; I think West was clearly a better teammate and classier act than Kobe as well. What is Kobe's advantage? He is a bit more of a volume scorer when you adjust for pace; but less efficient relevant to league average. He has a durability advantage as well, particularly since he has the extra years for coming in out of HS as opposed to West being barred from the NBA until his senior year was finished. I give Kobe major props for the Gasol/Odom teams winning rings but West made all those finals without a center appreciably better than Ray Krebs until 69 (though Rudy LaRusso was an underrated stretch 4) and without great coaches. So can't really give Kobe the advantage on team success either. So, it's close (Kobe over Oscar btw), and I go to tiebreaker . . . who would I rather have on my team to win championships. I think West is just able to win more rings for a championship talent team due to his varied skill set and outstanding personal characteristics.

So, of all the guards, I vote Jerry West.

Of the bigs, David Robinson is clearly the best . . . when healthy. Heck, until that one playoff series, he was considered better than Hakeem, beating him in head to head with equally bad teams about 75% of the time with equivalent numbers and, again, less complaining to the press and about teammates. However, his injury leaves him short on duration as a great relative to many of the others here.

Karl had more impressive numbers than Moses and was a top tier player longer. If I want to win rings, though, I think DRob still gives me more rings than Karl as great as Karl was. Pettit relative to his league comes across as similar to Karl Malone. For 10 years he was, quite simply, the best forward in the game with only Baylor as competition. Relative to Baylor, I rate Pettit higher -- his numbers are stronger against his leagues to a large degree because he started earlier and posted dominance in the 50s. When things changed drastically, in a large part because of Baylor (and the big 4 of Russell, Wilt, West, and Oscar) coming into the league, Pettit still managed to keep his status as the best forward in the league. HIs shooting percentages weren't great but he makes up for that with his ability to take bigger men outside and draw fouls inside. He's the NBA's all time leader in FT made per game so his TS% is appreciably higher than his FG%. He's also 3rd all-time in rebounds per game and although that stat is heavily era weighted, he was certainly Karl Malone like dominant in points and rebounds; unlike Karl, he rescued his sometimes questionable clutch reputation with probably the all-time greatest 4th quarter in NBA history; winning a ring and dominating the Celtics although Russell was out. Dirk gets a mention here too, though his defense seems a bit behind the likes of Karl Malone and Bob Pettit; still his ability to get his shot outside at 6-11 is unique and an incredible weapon the equivalent of Kareem's skyhook.

Barkley doesn't match up; his offensive numbers do, particularly his playoff numbers, but Barkley with his matador defense and screw around attitude is less than the sum of his numbers. He was unable to win with talent as a youngster in Philly, unable to win with Kevin Johnson and co. in Phoenix; while its not just about the rings, Barkley is one of those players whose teams don't measure up to what you would expect if he is Karl Malone/Bob Pettit/Dirk level. As for Walton, he gives you 1 season to suddenly build a team and catch lightning in a bottle. In the great peaks project, Walton is certainly top 10 . . . but 1 season is it. He never made it to the playoffs again as a star, only making it once as a hobbling reserve -- still talented enough to get SMOY but I would guess that in the chance to win a title metric, his one season chance gets surpassed by appreciably smaller chances of a LOT of players when aggregated over 10+ years.

So, David Robinson, the defensive anchor with a great offensive game but a relatively short run as a GOAT level player (and hurt by extremely weak teams around him during that span, similar to Hakeem). Jerry West, a player who did everything extremely well and was Mr. Clutch in the playoffs although not able to overcome the GOAT winner and dynasty in Boston. Or, Julius Erving . . . the man who carried an entire league on his back for 3-4 years, another truly great player with few real weaknesses.

Tough call, I will cast my vote for JERRY WEST