1980 Named to the Associated Press All-Big Ten team, the first college freshman to receive the honor 1981 Led Indiana Hoosiers to the NCAA basketball championship; named tournament MVP 1982 NBA All-Rookie team 1982-93 Played in All-Star Game every season but his last 1984 All-Star game MVP 1984-85 Became first player in NBA history to average more than 20 points per game and make more than 1,000 assists in the same season 1984-85 Set NBA record with 1,123 assists 1985 Named Michiganian of the Year 1986 All-Star game MVP 1988 Set NBA Finals record for most points in a quarter (25), and most field goals in one quarter (11) 1989 Led Pistons to the NBA championship 1990 Led Pistons to the NBA Championship 1990 Named NBA Finals MVP 1996 Named to the NBA Greatest 50 Players of All Time Team 2000 Inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame; uniform No. 11 retired by Pistons
He was the leader of the only team that could rival the Showtime Lakers, 80s Celtics, and Jordan Bulls...
Well, okay so, I'm kind of dreading threads until Kobe gets in. That's not really a fair statement to make because the core people here voting for Kobe have been quite polite about it, but Kobe has a passionate fanbase and every spot he drops now takes him further away from where he was last time. I hope people say polite.
Between my long history of being called a "Kobe hater" and my vocal presence relating to Garnett, I'd really like to stay out of it to be honest. I don't intend to be in big discussions where argue against Kobe, and truly I don't think Kobe is a bad pick now, or even last thread. (Heck, even if you were one of the many who voted Kobe over Garnett, I wouldn't really call that a "bad" pick.)
I have to be honest though, there are still guys not inducted that I'm likely to pick ahead of Kobe, and rather than just breaking the news one at a time, I'm just going to do it here:
When I do this, make sure you hold your emotions in check if you're someone who is very passionate about Kobe. I may not like going all moderator on people who I've been in a debate with, but mods are going to need to step in the moment things explode if they explode, and since I've agreed to do that job, I've got to do it.
Know as always that this is just one guy's honest opinion. Maybe he's biased. Oh well. You can try to enlighten him, but righteous fury should have no place here.
Without further ado, guys I'm really thinking about right now:
Karl Malone - To me his regular season career is clearly the best of the guys here. The playoffs are the point of contention. I think many go too far on this front, but I could see being persuaded to drop the Mail below remaining guys based on this.
Jerry West - Pretty blown away by him. Always have been, but it's only increased. I think about what Wade would be if he was an outstanding shooter instead of bad ones, extremely high BBIQ instead of a minimalist, and was able to stay in his prime until 34 (at least) instead of 29. Longevity concerns are understandable, but I admire the hell out of this guy.
Julius Erving - People have already seen my takes on Dr. J quite a lot I think. I'm a huge fan of his peak and his temperament as a team player. I'm bothered though by what I see as a wavering impact through his prime. In comparison with some guys in our current generation who stayed good a long time, it's an issue.
Dirk Nowitzki - Yup. Good for a very long time, and an undeniable top tier superstar crest atop the arc.
Kobe's in there too. Could see the possibility of him getting my vote here, but I'll admit it's unlikely.
Other thoughts:
I'm pretty skeptical of Moses, though I'll admit to the kind of uncertainty in methods here that comes often with players from the past. He got All-D on a defense that was absolutely torched by the league (another case of people overrated individual rebounds?), while clearly having a length problem, and as a scorer, well, if Barkley had joined the 76ers a bit sooner, wouldn't they have been better off with him playing the role that got the MVP during the '83 season?
I saw the Nash references. I won't say I think that's impossible, but I do think he's got a longevity issue and his overall peak here is probably only comparable to the other guys.
EDIT:
D'oh, and David Robinson. He's definitely on my mind too.
Baller2014 wrote:I'm a huge Spurs fan, and I love D.Rob to death, and find Karl Malone to be an awful human being. That said, Karl Malone's longevity advantage is just too large for D.Rob to be fairly ranked over him. Even some of D.Rob's "sidekick" years are pretty dubious. I have seen a lot of people credit him for helping the Spurs take down the Lakers and win the 99 title. In the 99 playoff series v.s the Lakers D.Rob was averaging 13-6 in 28mpg. Pretty bad looking for a sidekick. He was the 3rd best player on those teams, even behind young Kobe. It was Duncan's huge impact that led to the title that year, not D.Rob.
Yes D-Rob didn't play great in the Lakers series but don't you think it would be better to take into account his playoffs as a whole and not just one series? Young Kobe may have outplayed D-Rob for this one series, but Robinson was better over the duration of the '99 playoffs. Below are their per 100 numbers comparatively and as you can see it isn't particularly close. Duncan was the main engine for that Spurs team but D-Rob was also a very important part of that team and a good 2nd option. In the playoffs Robinson was the Spurs leader in defensive rating and also tied with Duncan in defensive win shares as well as WS/48. He was also arguably the best player for the Spurs in the Portland series. All things considered I don't think '99 is one of the years that can be considered a "dubious" year for D-Rob as a "sidekick". Notable Playoff Games 5/13/99 vs Timberwolves: 17/18/7/3/3 on 62%TS 5/29/99 vs Trail Blazers: 21/10/2/1/1 on 61%TS 6/4/99 vs Trail Blazers: 15/9/5/2/7 on 66%TS 6/6/99 vs Trail Blazers: 20/10/3/3/2 on 63%TS 6/18/99 vs Knicks: 16/11/4/5 on 67%TS 6/21/99 vs Knicks: 25/10/1/2 on 64%TS
1980 Named to the Associated Press All-Big Ten team, the first college freshman to receive the honor 1981 Led Indiana Hoosiers to the NCAA basketball championship; named tournament MVP 1982 NBA All-Rookie team 1982-93 Played in All-Star Game every season but his last 1984 All-Star game MVP 1984-85 Became first player in NBA history to average more than 20 points per game and make more than 1,000 assists in the same season 1984-85 Set NBA record with 1,123 assists 1985 Named Michiganian of the Year 1986 All-Star game MVP 1988 Set NBA Finals record for most points in a quarter (25), and most field goals in one quarter (11) 1989 Led Pistons to the NBA championship 1990 Led Pistons to the NBA Championship 1990 Named NBA Finals MVP 1996 Named to the NBA Greatest 50 Players of All Time Team 2000 Inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame; uniform No. 11 retired by Pistons
He was the leader of the only team that could rival the Showtime Lakers, 80s Celtics, and Jordan Bulls...
[spoiler]
[/Spoiler]
We're still in the top 15. I don't think anyone's ready to start thinking about Isiah.
A lot of these accomplishments/accolades (college, All-Star game MVP, etc) are insignificant when it comes to ranking the all-time greats.
I really don't care about PER to be honest. I'm all for pace and minutes adjustment being used to give alternative angles at how the stats might be slanted, but not when the reason we need to do those things is because the player in question couldn't have physically played that much. D.Rob playing 28mpg for instance, it's literally all he was physically capable of playing still at a high level. That hurts him and makes minute/pace adjustment a bit pointless. It's not like when a player is getting rested or playing less minutes because his team is blowing everyone out and they have a good bench.
Doctor MJ wrote:I'm pretty skeptical of Moses, though I'll admit to the kind of uncertainty in methods here that comes often with players from the past. He got All-D on a defense that was absolutely torched by the league (another case of people overrated individual rebounds?), while clearly having a length problem, and as a scorer, well, if Barkley had joined the 76ers a bit sooner, wouldn't they have been better off with him playing the role that got the MVP during the '83 season?
So what you're saying is . . .
1) Moses lacks defense and length.
2) Charles Barkley would have been a better replacement.
Well, I do see Barkley as superior to Moses Malone, so I can't really vote for Moses until Barkley is in...and Barkley's #19 on my list as of right now.
I'm not voting but Kobe should come up here at 13 or 14.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
Congrats to Oscar for..... [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHDwRECFL8M[/youtube] ...movin' on up since the 2011 list (despite the ascent of Lebron James).
For #13, I tentatively will re-cast my #12 vote for Karl Malone.
I've posted on his stats and such in each of the last two threads, and also cited this great post from ronnymac:
Spoiler:
ronnymac2 wrote:I want to talk about the Mailman because he hasn't quite gotten the amount of representation that other players on this level have received. I voted for KG in this thread, so this isn't exactly my argument for Malone, but it's information and a perspective. I invite you to receive it and then do what you feel.
Early Years
Malone emerged as a 20-10 threat in his 2nd year in the league, but it was his 3rd year in 1988 where you can see the quantum leap to being a legit star player. Utah was the best defense in the NBA (their strength being eFG% Against) thanks to Mark Eaton's dominant defense.
Malone certainly helped though. He led the team in defensive rebound rate (10th in the NBA that year) and was named All-Defense Second Team. He also averaged 27 points on 52 percent shooting and got to the free throw line almost 10 times per game (56.8 percent True Shooting..Got his FT shooting up to 70 percent this year).
Then in the playoffs, Utah faces the defending champion LA Lakers (#3 in SRS at 4.81) and loses in 7 games, with Malone dropping 28.7 points and 11.7 rebounds on 53.5% TS. Malone seemed able to handle LA's defense better as the series wore on, putting up 27/11 (10/20 FG, 7/7 FT) in a Game 6 Elimination Game victory, and 31/15 (14/21 FG, 3/9 FT) in a Game 7 Loss.
Early-years Malone...from say 1987-1991...looks like prime Amar'e Stoudemire with slightly less offense but MUCH better defense and rebounding. Amar'e was built like a SF; Malone was built like a mack truck and actually pursued defensive rebounds. Early Malone turned the ball over more than prime Amar'e and didn't score quite as efficiently, but Amar'e got to play C and had a ton of shooters next to him while Malone had a giant negative at C (Eaton was a horrendous offensive player and clogged the paint) and did not have as much shooting around him. The only constant is Nash and Stockton were great at feeding the bigs.
Around '91-'93, Malone's passing from the mid-post, off the pick-n-roll, and with his back-to-the-basket improved to the point that it made his offensive utility greatly outstrip anything Amar'e has ever been capable of providing on that end. Mind you, Malone remained a strong defensive rebounder and defensive player.
RAPM
I've seen questions regarding Malone's longevity based on his RAPM scores post-1998. I get the impression that the skepticism is not extreme by any means, but more along the lines of "Malone does indeed have excellent longevity, but the boxscore stats saying he's a 20+ PPG player post-98 hide the fact that he most certainly is not a strong fulcrum for a successful team in a 20+ PPG role, and that he cannot provide significant lift in this role, which seems to be the only way Malone can be utilized."
Compared to somebody like KG, Malone does indeed look like he ages far less gracefully based on RAPM.
The way I see it, however, is that as Malone's body and raw talent declined, his role did not change. His coach did not change. His minutes and games played did not change. His USG remained high when on the court.
Here is KG's and KM's scoring average, MPG, and USG relative to other's on their respective teams from 1996-2003 and 2006-2013. I chose these years because we get to see when each was a prime-time MPG/USG/Scorer and see how they get to decline from that level.
Malone is giving superstar PPG, USG, and MPG, but not superstar impact for the Utah Jazz. It's fair to question why Malone's role/minutes did not change if he wasn't capable of providing significant lift after 1998. My response to this would be:
1. Malone was healthy. No reason to manage minutes any differently based on injury concerns. 2. The team clearly did not have a Plan B. Malone certainly wasn't holding a burgeoning star back. This clearly wasn't a team in any of these years where Sloan could pull a Pop and platoon guys and find equal or superior success. Whatever lift Malone was capable of providing for 35+ minutes was necessary to make the playoffs, in reality and in the eyes of Coach Sloan. 3. Stockton/Malone worked in Sloan's system in the REG SEA for over a decade. Changing things up would have been a huge adjustment for all parties involved and quite risky (likely not successful either in my opinion).
This should not be read as an indictment on Kevin Garnett. KG's focus was (correctly) pushed to the defensive side in his later years, and he excelled in a way that Malone wouldn't have defensively even if Malone were put in an optimal setting. This is actually part of the reason why I vote KG in this thread.
This should be read as an explanation for why Malone's decline might look more precipitous as measured by RAPM than it actually was. Malone didn't get to specialize or decrease his role/minutes the way KG and David Robinson and his teammate John Stockton did in their decline years.
Of course the counter to this is that Malone's skillset doesn't allow him to specialize in anything but volume scoring. To that, I must emphatically disagree. Cut his skillset down to the bone and he's very much a Horace Grant type...a mini-Kevin Garnett actually. KG/Horace/older Malone connect the goodness/impact of the players around them because of their spacing effect, passing, screens, off-ball movement, ability to run the floor, and IQ.
Despite being 40, and despite being oft-injured, I'd argue that Karl Malone, like Horace Grant in 1995, was the most valuable player on the 2004 Los Angeles Lakers. HoGrant and Malone were the third-best players, but the most valuable based on the team construction (Though Penny could be argued for Orlando because the Magic had no PG). Malone gave Kobe his first great pick-n-roll partner and gave Shaq the best or second-best entry-passing big man he ever played next to. And Malone's man defense in the 2004 playoffs was amazing, as he stifled Yao Ming, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Rasheed Wallace by shoving them 20 feet away from the basket, beating up on them, and stripping them cleanly of the ball or making them take tough shots. Even at age 40 and injured for half the season, 2004 Malone proved to me that 1999-2003 Malone could have shifted his role from volume scorer to role playing big man and been extremely impactful and great on a contending team.
Beyond that, I think I'll take a slightly different tack and give my subjective interpretation of what kind of player Malone was.
A common cliched criticism Mailman suffers from runs along the lines of "he'd be nothing without Stockton". Now some people really exaggerate this statement to imply Malone might only be like a 18-19 ppg kind of player if not playing in Sloan's system alongside John Stockton. Most people (at least on this forum) are a bit more realistic about the effect of Stockton, but I'm nonetheless going to respond to those who might buy in (even to a small degree) the former puffery.
To those who worry that Stockton may have in some way "carried" Malone's career, I ask you to consider exactly what you have offensively in Karl Malone: he was a 6'9" immensely strong (his name came up more than once in the "strongest ever player in NBA history" thread some months ago, iirc) individual with great hands, who could run the floor well (and who could do it A LOT, as his endurance/conditioning was fantastic), who was an outstanding finisher (both with thunderous dunk or soft finish at the rim), and who at least by the mid-point of his career could really stick an open J from 15-19 ft with excellent accuracy. He was excellent at getting to the FT-line (where after his 2nd year he shot a combined 75.7%).
While he didn't have an elite iso game, he wasn't completely without some iso weapons. Back-to-the-basket he was strong enough to often get deep position against as weaker defender. And if not, he had that nice right-handed jump-hook (maybe after one or two dribbles--->bear in mind he was generally quicker than the post player guarding him), and again was so strong he was excellent at finishing after contact. At least by the late 90's he had added that nice turnaround J that he could hit out to about 12-13 ft or so (and which he could hit turning over either shoulder). [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2edAvSLD5U8[/youtube] ^^^ After the initial dialogue it's all his jump-hook until about 2:00, then it starts in with his fadeaway (which at first are all turning left); by about 3:00 it starts showing some of his fadeaways turning right.
If receiving the entry pass far enough from the hoop, I recall him having a fairly nice face-up game. He'd often use that jab step and then just stick a 14-footer right in the defender's face. But he was also very savvy about taking it toward the rim if he could get them to bite on a fake.
Obviously a great (elite-class, even) off-ball finisher, too, whether off a cut, pick-n'-roll, or in transition (arguably the greatest ever big-man transition player).
All-in-all, when you look at these offensive tools, this is clearly someone who would have been among the league's leading scorers in nearly any circumstance. Take Stockton away from the Jazz and replace him with a more mediocre starting PG, Malone still probably averages like 25-29 ppg throughout his prime (his shooting efficiency might simply suffer a little, though would still likely be above average).
I'm trying to think of a "comparison title" to describe the kind of scorer he was. "Rich man's Chris Bosh", maybe??? Except he was also a much better passer, a better defender, and probably a marginally better rebounder, too.
And then there's the length of time he did this too (his PRIME lasted longer than most players' entire career, especially if measured in games played). A true iron-man where longevity and durability are concerned.
I still think Kobe has an EXCELLENT case for this spot, and I'd be perfectly happy if he takes 13. But for now, I'm going to stick with my vote for Malone.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
acrossthecourt wrote:Would like: -Full game video of Jerry West games pre-Wilt. -Full game video of Karl Malone pre-late 90's. -The best prime David Robinson games against good defenses? -An interesting breakdown of why the Pau-Lakers worked so well and what Kobe had to do with it.
Also, no one counted my vote in the last threat, not that it matters now.
I apparently missed an entire page . . . Baller says he posted a correct count.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0 wrote:I apparently missed an entire page . . . Baller says he posted a correct count.
Yup. 22-17 to Oscar, it's on the last page and your vote is included Acrossthecourt.
As for this contest, Karl Malone has the only 3 votes so far, but I imagine Dr J, Kobe, West and to a lesser extent D.Rob/Dirk are going to be the guys getting votes at this point. I haven't seen any other names thrown out thus far. A lot of the Oscar voters look to be pro-Dr J, so he might start getting some more play now.
penbeast0 wrote:It's an anit-Kobe conspiracy. You won't even accept that he is the real loser in multiple runoffs without dragging Shaq into it.
Clearly it's because of this board's anti-lakers bias. It's ridiculous that only 3 lakers made it into the top 10, and none of them as high as they should have been.
For people saying Karl Malone... I'm sorry but no. Not only Kobe hasn't been chosen yet, but we still have Barkley and Dirk who are superior PFs that haven't been voted too.
Barkley's longevity is underrated, and Karl Malone took a HUGE drop in his game in playoff time. I expect to see Malone in the top 20, but not top 16.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
Black Feet wrote:Interesting , wish more people would do this. Did you do this for any other players? Haven't been following this project that close.
I did this a few years back for Kobe vs the Suns in G5 of the 2000 WCSF (would love to get my hands on G4 where the Suns completely went off though). I've got notes on quite a few other games but didn't track each possession, but I've been meaning to do that when I have a little spare time.
Outside of stats, the biggest takeaway from this game is that both Kidd and Penny had a difficult time penetrating against Kobe (hence the low shot volume -- he stuck with them), and they rarely found good passing lanes (more of a team effort) to get guys good shots. Kidd, in particular, was forced to give up his dribble quite a few times. Both guys were ineffective off the ball as well despite a ton of screens. There were a couple of occasions where he let Kidd get by (didn't result in much), but it wasn't like this or anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UW6dBHDwRw
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan
For bigs, it looks to me like David Robinson is clearly the best player left . . . when he played. However, Moses and Karl Malone both had a huge longevity bonus over him. Dirk, Pettit, Mchale, Rodman etc. are a bit behind, and Barkley just isn't the caliber of Karl Malone, never was. His defensive and leadership lapses are far too great. If I can get a system to stay up while I research and the like, I will do a Pettit v. Barkley comp but it will basically show that Barkley is the more efficient (despite Pettit's ridiculous foul draw) while Pettit was a better defender (Elliot Kalb describes him as "relentless" and his BBIQ was never questioned -- unlike Barkley) and a much better leader (quoting Lenny Wilkens, Cliff Hagan, even Tommy Heinsohn). And Pettit's efficiency was excellent for his era up through 61 or so, and still above average all the way through to his retirement. Personally I lean to DRob, but can see the Malone arguments based on longevity.
For the rest, it looks to me like West, Erving, or Kobe. The 70s, unlike the 60s, were actually an era with watered down talent, the 60s talent concentration was as good or better than today at least up to around 68 due to the smaller number of teams. Of the rest, Frazier was clealry better than Nash, he was capable of carrying a team as the main scorer, was a defensive leader on great defenses as well as being one of the two greatest defensive PGs to ever play (Payton was the other), and scored on outstanding efficiency. Add in the two NBA finals where he was the best player on the court (it wasn't even close in 73) and that gives him another edge for stepping up his game where it mattered most. But, West still seems the strongest candidate. His combination of extraordinarily efficient scoring on high volumes, high BBIQ leading to strong offenses, excellent defense from all the evidence we have, and being a classy leader of his teams gives him the strongeest resume of all the players left . . . even over DRob.
VOTE: JERRY WEST
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Black Feet wrote:Interesting , wish more people would do this. Did you do this for any other players? Haven't been following this project that close.
I did this a few years back for Kobe vs the Suns in G5 of the 2000 WCSF (would love to get my hands on G4 where the Suns completely went off though). I've got notes on quite a few other games but didn't track each possession, but I've been meaning to do that when I have a little spare time.
Outside of stats, the biggest takeaway from this game is that both Kidd and Penny had a difficult time penetrating against Kobe (hence the low shot volume -- he stuck with them), and they rarely found good passing lanes (more of a team effort) to get guys good shots. Kidd, in particular, was forced to give up his dribble quite a few times. Both guys were ineffective off the ball as well despite a ton of screens. There were a couple of occasions where he let Kidd get by (didn't result in much), but it wasn't like this or anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UW6dBHDwRw
Baller2014 wrote:I feel pretty confident in saying that Isaiah Thomas is a long, long, long way from my thoughts. I doubt I'd even rank him over Tony Parker.
You are crazy, Isiah was far better than Tony Parker, no contest either.
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships." - Michael Jordan
Baller2014 wrote:I feel pretty confident in saying that Isaiah Thomas is a long, long, long way from my thoughts. I doubt I'd even rank him over Tony Parker.
You are crazy, Isiah was far better than Tony Parker, no contest either.
Not all of us judge players based off criteria like "record with HCA" and "how many titles had his team won decades before he was even drafted?"
