RealGM Top 100 List #12

[john248]

My vote goes to Kobe Bryant. TBH, I was going to go with Dr J, but it doesn't look like he's going to get any run here. Kobe is one of the most talked about and polarizing guys. I do agree with ShaqAttack that Kobe was better than Dirk for more years even if I think Dirk is better at his peak. It's easy to build an offense around Kobe since he's able to handle a dual duty like score and initiate the offense. Gives you an extra couple years of longevity over Oscar and West. His defense during 08-10 is underrated IMO. If an acceptable criteria is greatest, then Kobe's certainly had a great career given the accolades and team success. Probably why I voted Bird higher than most.

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

A few points I want to make about Moses statistically that are very concerning to me.

If you look at his numbers closely, he begins to look like a black hole on offense who doesn't get his teammates involved and turns the ball over a lot. In essence, there's something the other elite bigs had that he seemed to lack on offense in terms of finding the open man.

Yea, it's hard to get excited about Moses even if someone references the MVPs or a couple defensive teams. Defensively, he was never an anchor on that end which is what you want out of a big. So really, the 2nd big on the team should at least be defensive orientated who preferably doesn't clog the court offensively. Then you take a look at Moses offensively, and he is a black hole as you say. If a team wants to go inside-out, how do you do that with Moses if he sucks as passing the ball? You pretty much need a wing player who can create for themselves and another ball handler who can facilitate. This isn't to say that you wouldn't need this if Moses could pass; just rather things are more stagnant with Moses because he's not exactly a hub when it comes to ball movement.

The vote btw appears to be wide open. I count at least 41 participating voters this thread, so nobody is even close to a majority. A lot of the Oscar and ex-KG voters are also hovering before voting officially still (technically I count at least 11 Oscar votes thus far, based on poster comments in the last 2 threads). Thus far I have it:

Kobe- 7 (JBulls, Bballfan, Ardee, GC Pan, LArts, Shaqattack, Batmana)
K.Malone- 5 (Baller, Trex, realbig3, Merl, FJS)
Oscar- 4 (HBreak, Quo, Narigo, Quinn)
West- 2 (RayBan, Pen)
Dr J- 1 (Warspite)
D.Rob- 1 (Shutupandjam)

When lukekarts voted for Kobe?

My count is:

Oscar 7 ( DannyNoonan1221, DQuinn1575, Heartbreakkid, lorak, Narigo, Owly, Quotatious)
Kobe 6 (Ardee, Basketballefan, batmana, GC Pantalones, JordanBulls, ShaqAttack3234)
K. Malone 5 (baller2014, FJS, magicmerl, therealbig3, trex_8063)
West 2 (penbeast, RayBan-Sematra)
Dr J 2 ( Clyde Frazier, Warspite)
Drob 1 ( shutupandjam)

Wow, the votes are close for the the top 3. The run-off will be interesting.

[ShaqAttack3234]

And having Shaq, facing mostly weak teams, not trying as much on D, and having the rules changed all helped Kobe as well.

Just to step back from that, I don't see how Kobe was better in the playoffs even during his cherry picked stretch of 06-10. Like you say, he was putting up:
29.8ppg, 5.7rpg, 5.4apg on 57% TS% over a 5 year stretch
Karl Malone was putting up:
28.5ppg, 11.9rpg, 2.3apg on 56 TS% over a 6 year stretch, during which he had a significantly higher defensive impact, and none of Kobe's negative intangibles. So even this comparison of peak to peak, in the playoffs only, doesn't look to favour Kobe at all.

Except, I don't agree with the weak teams thing, especially defensively, in fact, I'd say Malone was facing the weaker defenses during the stretch you highlighted for him from '88-'93.

But again, you seem to be doing the same thing you pointed out with Kobe, which is crediting Malone for his later defense during this '88-'93 stretch and because we're talking playoffs in this comparison, you can't judge Kobe by his regular season defense during this time when he slacked off more frequently.

Those Kobe numbers look better, especially with context such as Karl not being a particularly good passer during this time while Kobe was an excellent playmaker, clearly one of the best wings of his generation in that regard, and that's in addition to the fact that his scoring was better during, both statistically, and more importantly, from watching the two play.

Except even comparing Kobe's best stretch, as identified by infamous, he still looks worse than Karl from 88-93. Then factor in all the other stuff and it's clearly Karl Malone ahead; he has the advantage in regular season O, regular season and playoff D, longevity and intangibles. Even his playoff offensive disadvantage looks slight (see above stats). You calling the 88 playoff performances of Karl Malone as showing "horrible mediocre efficiency" at 482 FG% and 537 TS% just seems weird given how Kobe has only one playoffs in his career with more than 482FG% and his career playoff TS% is 541 (and the selected sample sizes, such as those done above, don't really show much of an advantage for Kobe either).

There's no way Kobe looks worse there. He looks noticeably better.

I don't care what Kobe's career TS% is either. I haven't been using Malone's pre-prime and decline years, and I haven't been doing that for Kobe either.

You're right, Kobe has "media narrative" over Karl. Not so much in the accolades respect, because Karl has the same number of all-nba 1st teams and 1 extra MVP, but I guess I did miss this criteria... I guess if false media narratives are something voters want to factor in, then they should think about this. I keep wondering why Jordanbulls didn't give Karl more narrative points for helping to lead a historically bad franchise, maybe he didn't have a good enough record with HCA...

If you're going to bring up accolades/accomplishments then rings are far more significant than MVPs. Both are circumstantial, but rings are why you play the game, and they're not subjective, unlike MVP, which speaking of false media narratives, both of Malone's MVPs are among the most infamous examples of that.

I think the stats and performance speak for themselves, Karl Malone's 92 run was clearly more impressive than what Kobe did in 2001. I also totally reject the idea their defensive impact this year was comparable. Nor is it really true Karl never had a comparable year to 92. His 89, 95 and 00 runs all look comparably good in terms of overall performance (not as good, but certainly "close"). I also think you're really sleeping on some of his other years, like 88, where his TS% was "only" as good as Kobe's career playoff TS%.

This really doesn't look objective to me. Stats don't "speak for themselves." This isn't baseball, and Kobe's 29/7/6 is nothing to sneeze at, plus, I'd say the majority would agree Kobe's '01 run was better, so to say Malone's '92 was clearly superior is ridiculous.

And a HUGE no to '89 and '95. Those aren't even runs. They're first round series, and as I said, his '89 stats were inflated in a series his team was swept in 3 with HCA no less. 2000 had one great series vs Seattle in the 1st round, then Malone struggled vs a great Portland defense, so no, that doesn't stack up to his '92 run either.

Assumedly you'll be voting for Bill Walton soon then.

Not for a little while. I can't drop Walton THAT low because of how he peaked, but he is an extreme example because his prime was a bit less 2 seasons and I go by prime, not peak. Peak of course is a part of a players prime, but prime is a better sample size to use as opposed to 1 season.

[Jim Naismith]

Yea, it's hard to get excited about Moses even if someone references the MVPs or a couple defensive teams. Defensively, he was never an anchor on that end which is what you want out of a big. So really, the 2nd big on the team should at least be defensive orientated who preferably doesn't clog the court offensively. Then you take a look at Moses offensively, and he is a black hole as you say. If a team wants to go inside-out, how do you do that with Moses if he sucks as passing the ball? You pretty much need a wing player who can create for themselves and another ball handler who can facilitate. This isn't to say that you wouldn't need this if Moses could pass; just rather things are more stagnant with Moses because he's not exactly a hub when it comes to ball movement.

Shaq needed Kobe and Wade to help him win his titles, yet that criticism has not prevented Shaq from being regarded as #6 of all time at RealGM.

[Baller2014]

Well, I'm going to let it go there, because it's clear your criteria is just different to mine. You say you don't value longevity at all, even between similar players, whereas I do. That's up to you, though if that's the case I don't know why you're not voting D.Rob here. He doesn't have the extreme shortness of Walton's career, and he certainly peaked above Kobe.

I'm also a little tired of the "you hate Kobe" stuff I'm getting from his fans. I have Kobe in the top 15, and have said as much in the past, I just have a few more players ahead of him, and Karl Malone is one of them. I noted this in my pre-top 100 project list. I was far from alone in having Kobe ranked closer to slot 15 than slot 10, plenty of others did too. Karl Malone is an amazing player, and fully deserves to be considered here.

My vote goes to Kobe Bryant. TBH, I was going to go with Dr J, but it doesn't look like he's going to get any run here.

Yeh, I was pretty torn about voting for Karl over Dr J. Hopefully Dr J gets more consideration at #13.

[john248]

Yea, it's hard to get excited about Moses even if someone references the MVPs or a couple defensive teams. Defensively, he was never an anchor on that end which is what you want out of a big. So really, the 2nd big on the team should at least be defensive orientated who preferably doesn't clog the court offensively. Then you take a look at Moses offensively, and he is a black hole as you say. If a team wants to go inside-out, how do you do that with Moses if he sucks as passing the ball? You pretty much need a wing player who can create for themselves and another ball handler who can facilitate. This isn't to say that you wouldn't need this if Moses could pass; just rather things are more stagnant with Moses because he's not exactly a hub when it comes to ball movement.

Shaq needed Kobe and Wade to help him win his titles, yet that criticism has not prevented Shaq from being regarded as #6 of all time at RealGM.

If you had bothered to read further, I had also said that "this isn't to say you wouldn't need this if Moses could pass". Essentially the point is that Moses wasn't a good passer which does not help when it comes to ball movement. Just to elaborate further, the Spurs this year have a couple good passers in Manu and TP while Duncan is a good passer himself. Ball movement was great because there are times the Spurs would run a triangle play to get Duncan freed up on the weak side for what appeared to be an iso play. But many times, it would serve as the set up to sort of fake the defense into thinking it's Duncan when the play is set up somewhere else. This is absolutely because Duncan is a good passer that the Spurs can pull this off. Shaq is a great passer himself. Phil was able to run the triangle effectively due to his passing, hitting the open man/cutter.

Calm down with Moses. No one is saying he sucks. He's going to go soon and it'll be because of how good of a player he was. While it seems like I'm one of the few in this project to weigh accolades, I wouldn't rate Moses over Shaq because of MVP count. Nor am I going to minimize my thoughts just because Shaq played with Kobe/Wade.

[Jim Naismith]

Calm down with Moses. No one is saying he sucks. He's going to go soon and it'll be because of how good of a player he was. While it seems like I'm one of the few in this project to weigh accolades, I wouldn't rate Moses over Shaq because of MVP count. Nor am I going to minimize my thoughts just because Shaq played with Kobe/Wade.

What you've established that Duncan and Shaq are better than Moses, which I'm not disputing.

Those two have already been voted into the top 10.

Regarding accolades, I'm not relying on them to the exclusion of other things.

People like to talk about impact. Well, consider Moses' impact: He led a sub-.500 team to NBA finals. Later he leaves that Houston team, and they lose 32 more games. He joins the Sixers, and they win a championship.

What I'm saying is that when compared to the players remaining, Moses has a good case, especially because of his dominance and impact.

[acrossthecourt]

Calm down with Moses. No one is saying he sucks. He's going to go soon and it'll be because of how good of a player he was. While it seems like I'm one of the few in this project to weigh accolades, I wouldn't rate Moses over Shaq because of MVP count. Nor am I going to minimize my thoughts just because Shaq played with Kobe/Wade.

What you've established that Duncan and Shaq are better than Moses, which I'm not disputing.

Those two have already been voted into the top 10.

I'm not relying on accolades to the exclusion of other things. Consider Moses' impact: led sub.500 team to NBA finals. Later he leaves that Houston team, and they lose 32 more games. He joins the Sixers, and they win a championship.

What I'm saying is that when compared to the players remaining, Moses has a good case, especially because of his dominance and impact.

It's weird to argue for someone's value by saying his own team finished with a losing record.

The west was pretty bad that year. The west back in the 80's was like the east is now. The Rockets beat the Lakers in a three-game series, beat a 52 win team, and then beat another team with a losing record in the conference finals. The 52 win team had a 2 SRS and the Lakers 3.5. Some of the Lakers depressed SRS is due to Magic not playing the entire season, but it wasn't the hardest path to the finals. The Lakers were really good, but the series was so short upsets could happen.

And yeah, he won a title ... by joining a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people. The 76ers actually had a better SRS in 1981; they were at least a team of comparable strength.

[Jim Naismith]

And yeah, he won a title ... by joining a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people. The 76ers actually had a better SRS in 1981; they were at least a team of comparable strength.

Moses Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: Championship


Karl Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: No championship

[Clyde Frazier]

And yeah, he won a title ... by joining a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people. The 76ers actually had a better SRS in 1981; they were at least a team of comparable strength.

Moses Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: Championship


Karl Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: No championship

…Moses was 27 and Karl was 40. Why are you attempting to make a 1:1 comparison?

[Jim Naismith]

It's weird to argue for someone's value by saying his own team finished with a losing record.

You're missing the second half of the sentence, concerning the playoffs.

Moses dragged a weak team to the NBA finals, beating the defending champs in the process.

This is a strong indicator of Moses' impact.

[Jim Naismith]

And yeah, he won a title ... by joining a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people. The 76ers actually had a better SRS in 1981; they were at least a team of comparable strength.

Moses Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: Championship


Karl Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: No championship

…Moses was 27 and Karl was 40. Why are you attempting to make a 1:1 comparison?

It shows that winning a ring with a superteam is not a given. Thus Moses' achievement with the Sixers is a legitimate indicator of impact.

Just ask 2011 LeBron (age 26).

[acrossthecourt]

It's weird to argue for someone's value by saying his own team finished with a losing record.

You're missing the second half of the sentence, concerning the playoffs.

Moses dragged a weak team to the NBA finals, beating the defending champs in the process.

This is a strong indicator of Moses' impact.

And if he'd have played in the west this year he'd be mocked for not being a real star.

[john248]

Calm down with Moses. No one is saying he sucks. He's going to go soon and it'll be because of how good of a player he was. While it seems like I'm one of the few in this project to weigh accolades, I wouldn't rate Moses over Shaq because of MVP count. Nor am I going to minimize my thoughts just because Shaq played with Kobe/Wade.

What you've established that Duncan and Shaq are better than Moses, which I'm not disputing.

Those two have already been voted into the top 10.

Regarding accolades, I'm not relying on them to the exclusion of other things.

People like to talk about impact. Well, consider Moses' impact: He led a sub-.500 team to NBA finals. Later he leaves that Houston team, and they lose 32 more games. He joins the Sixers, and they win a championship.

What I'm saying is that when compared to the players remaining, Moses has a good case, especially because of his dominance and impact.

What I've established is you cherry pick lines by bolding and making it red while not understanding the point that I made.

And yeah, he won a title ... by joining a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people. The 76ers actually had a better SRS in 1981; they were at least a team of comparable strength.

Moses Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: Championship


Karl Malone joined "a team that had been to the finals multiple times before him with a lot of the same people."

Result: No championship

…Moses was 27 and Karl was 40. Why are you attempting to make a 1:1 comparison?

Karl was injured too which had some influence. Not sure what JimN is trying to prove here.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Well, I'm going to let it go there, because it's clear your criteria is just different to mine. You say you don't value longevity at all, even between similar players, whereas I do. That's up to you, though if that's the case I don't know why you're not voting D.Rob here. He doesn't have the extreme shortness of Walton's career, and he certainly peaked above Kobe.

Well, I don't think Robinson peaked above Kobe, and didn't have as good of a prime either, imo, primarily because of the playoffs. Considering how critical I've been of Malone in the playoffs, it'd be strange to pick Robinson above Kobe considering Robinson was worse than Malone in the playoffs.

It shows that winning a ring with a superteam is not a given. Thus Moses' achievement with the Sixers is a legitimate indicator of impact.

Just ask 2011 LeBron (age 26).

You're right, winning with a "super team" isn't a given, but this is a horrible example because as mentioned, Moses was 28 and at his peak while Karl was 40 and essentially had a career-ending injury. And despite that being Karl's last season, they got to the finals and were a much better team with him. They may have had a legitimate chance against Detroit had Karl been healthy.

I have Moses over Karl, but that's not a good example at all.

[therealbig3]

Well, I don't think Robinson peaked above Kobe, and didn't have as good of a prime either, imo, primarily because of the playoffs. Considering how critical I've been of Malone in the playoffs, it'd be strange to pick Robinson above Kobe considering Robinson was worse than Malone in the playoffs.

Well, this is where I disagree. Unlike Malone, Robinson's defense is a legitimately huge advantage in this comparison, and certainly closes the offensive gap imo.

EDIT: I'm only referring to a peak comparison between Robinson and Bryant...I think Bryant wins the all-time comparison (quite handily imo) due to far superior longevity as a superstar player.

[Baller2014]

The first thing I said about Karl Malone's D, when asked, was that he is not an interior anchor like Duncan or D.Rob. That said, his D is really getting slept on here. He wasn't just a thug enforcer (though he was definitely that too), he was really tough with his man D. Check this video out:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_ezVqa2Z8o[/youtube]
Karl Malone and his elbows deserve a whole other category. Players had to be really careful about going inside to score against Malone, he was an extremely sneaky cheap shot artist. Some highlights here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2KHn1un40g[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgM0Xm4E9UI[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bM-Y4UoiAY[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0nIHCR--Bg[/youtube]

[lukekarts]

Don't lump me in with those Kobe-only fanboys. I'm a fan of the team, not just him. You are correct in mentioning that Pau was more efficient than Kobe in that Finals. And I'm saying he improved immensely in 2009-2010. I love Pau for his huge part in the two runs. But he wasn't that guy in 2008. I really don't know how to make this clearer. He was assisted on 66% of his shots in his Laker games in 2008 and that number dropped by 10% in the next 2 years. He wasn't as familiar with the triangle yet. He didn't have Phil's mental wisdom. He didn't have the playoff experience. He wasn't as good in 2008 as he was in 2009-2010. If we can't agree on that then we're going nowhere. I was a little harsh on Pau for his play in the finals, fair. But you're making it seem like he was Shaq and Kobe was just shotjacking for the hell of it. Put 2010 Pau on the 08 Lakers and that series is going 7.

I'll concede that the KG/Pau matchup isn't as bad as I made it out to be. But the Lakers weren't as deep as the Celtics were and they really needed more offensively from Pau than they got. He couldn't provide that, in part due to KG. How much of KG's bad shooting %s can be attributed to Pau I don't really know, but I do know KG loved the mid ranges and he wasn't that hot that series.

This is much better. Those exaggerations and name-calling really add very little and certainly caused to me to get a picture of you that you clearly don't like. Im sorry if I got that wrong, but the appearances were there.

I don't doubt Pau was more effective in 09 and 10, but that didn't make him ineffective in 08. I never said Pau was Shaq-like. I said he was a great offensive player and that I was stunned to see Kobe taking 10 more shots a game. I also said I didn't criticize Kobe much for it because it obviously was working great for the Lakers. I mentioned the 08 Finals as an aside because Kobe struggled way more than Pau did offensively.

Enough with this Pau sidetrack as he really isnt relevant to the discussion for a long time other than again to show how effective Kobe was offensively when he didnt have a big like Shaq or Pau and which was my point to begin with.

Okay. I just have a pet peeve with the Kobe fanboys thing since we have to deal with those guys a lot

Kobe taking more than 10 shots a game than Pau would've been fine in 08. Truthfully the 08 Finals were an anomaly - there hasn't been a better defensive team since then and the only ones better or even comparable in this millennium were the 04 Pistons after the Sheed trade and early-mid 00s Spurs teams. They were good enough on offense to crush the West.

I wouldn't say Kobe struggled "way more", it's just that it was more visible because it's easy to see Kobe miss a shot, it's a little harder to see Pau be unable to get the easy shots he wants and having to pass back out because he can't quite do anything. Like I said, Pau averaged 10 shots a game in the Finals. Kobe can pass the ball to Pau all he likes, but he can't make him take the shot.

Anyway, I apologize if I came off as hot-headed.

I'm not even a Kobe fanboy It was news to me that Kobe was better efficiency-wise without Shaq or Pau, just something I'd never looked into before. I rate Wade's peak higher than Kobe's, I don't think Kobe deserved his 09 MVP etc. I'd be the one arguing against Kobe if he was being talked about 3-4 topics ago.

[lorak]

Some people were asking about Oscar's defense. I recently did video with Russell's passes from all available playoffs games with him and that includes 2 games against Royals with Robertson. Overall that's just 29 defensive plays for Royals, but if you don't want or don't have time to watch whole games that's good starting point:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvVsiOewS_U&feature=youtu.be&t=3m[/youtube]

3:00 good double and then recover, Sigfried unable to drive by Oscar and then his shot is blocked by Robertson
3:15 next play, again double and recover and KC is unable to drive by Oscar
5:21 after the switch Oscar guards Russell and Bill is unable to post up Robertson!
7:05 transition D, he defends two players and contest the shot very well

Overall he looks like very smart and fundamentally sound defender, almost always in position to help (and often he was main helper on his team), doesn't buy on fakes, even bigger players can't back him down and smaller aren't fast enough to drive by him even when he isn't in perfect position after recovering from double teaming. That all actually suggest that he was very good defensively, the only "problem" was that he wasn't (just like on offense) flashy player, so for example didn't have a lot of blocks or steals and maybe that's why so many people underrate him on defense?

[Dipper 13]

Oscar's defense

I recall a Sonny Hill story on his radio show of how Earl Monroe told him after his rookie year he had to bulk up in the off season after playing against Oscar, who could physically control him on the defensive end to the point where he couldn't do anything effectively. In 1971, Bullets coach Gene Shue even picked him as the Finals MVP. His defense, which is badly underrated, was a big reason for the easy sweep. Bucks coach Larry Costello said he was on par with Frazier defensively.

He did this while remaining a high level offensive player.

1971 Finals:

23.5 pts, 5.0 rbs, 9.5 ast, 52.3% FG, 59.4% TS



April 26, 1971

Oscar Robertson seemed to be everywhere as the Milwaukee Bucks crushed the Baltimore Bullets 102-83 Sunday and took a 2-0 lead in the National Basketball Association's best-of-7 title series.

Under the policing of Robertson, Monroe only made 4 of 18 from the field.

"Oscar has helped us on defense as much this year as on offense," Milwaukee coach Larry Costello said. "He plays defense as well as Walt Frazier of New York."

"He's as good as Frazier, and stronger. You didn't see Monroe get the ball in low like he did against the Knicks."

"Oscar should have been on the league's all-defense team," said Baltimore coach Gene Shue. "He got my vote. Oscar is strong, and he holds a little - let me get that in."




May 1, 1971

Oscar, still unstoppable at 32 years of age and giving perhaps the finest defensive effort of his career, pumped in 21 of his 30 points in the first half of the nationally televised finale as the Bucks surged ahead 60-47 by intermission, and never looked back.

Although the 7-3 Lew Alcindor was selected the Most Valuable Player in the championship series, Robertson had his own backers.

"The MVP? Oscar," said Coach Gene Shue of the Bullets, without hesitation. "He was the leader, he controlled the offense, he hit the open man and he played tremendous defense. I said when they got him they would be the best team in basketball."

[lorak]

^
I haven't watched whole series (1971 finals), so I don't know what were defensive matchups, but both Bullets guards shot terrible (Monroe 34.7 FG%, Loughery 37.3 FG%), so seems like Bucks backcourt did very good job and of course Oscar was big part of that backcourt.

EDIT
Well, whole Bullets team shot only 37.9 FG%, so Bucks as a team played great D.