RealGM Top 100 List #22

[Ryoga Hibiki]

The infancy of basketball existed before pro-leagues were serious.
The expansion of basketball happened basically from the 40s to the 60s.
We've been in maturity ever since.

not against the S curve, but the 60s are waaaaaay too early as the time basketball reaches maturity. No sport I know did.
The improvements in training, defensive and offensive schemes, the three point shot... we could reach the mid to late 80s to actually have really reached the maturity for this sport.

[Texas Chuck]

Player I'm looking at for this spot that I haven't really seen mentioned much is John Havlicek. I won't go too much into him itt since he isn't getting any traction, but thought I'd post this since it has a random 1v1 game with Reggie Jackson, a few highlights, but most importantly him explaining a bit about why he had such legendary endurance.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiOsgv-pKX8[/youtube]

[Basketballefan]

A reminder of what Wade did against elite defenses in the playoffs. These were both the league's best defense at that time. Any evidence that the other candidates for this spot has done similar things?
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePZAj9ffagA[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTZ4zYgOAvM[/youtube]

[colts18]

Player I'm looking at for this spot that I haven't really seen mentioned much is John Havlicek. I won't go too much into him itt since he isn't getting any traction, but thought I'd post this since it has a random 1v1 game with Reggie Jackson, a few highlights, but most importantly him explaining a bit about why he had such legendary endurance.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiOsgv-pKX8[/youtube]

Havlicked said that today's players (referring to the 70's players) were less fundamentally sound than the 50's and 60's players. He said it was more 1 on 1 and slam dunks in the 70's, but not fundamentals. So even old guys back then were complaining about the alleged lack of fundamentals. I bet you 20 years from now some is going to complain that the players of the 2030's are less fundamentally sound than LeBron, or Andrew Wiggins.

[E-Balla]

Player I'm looking at for this spot that I haven't really seen mentioned much is John Havlicek. I won't go too much into him itt since he isn't getting any traction, but thought I'd post this since it has a random 1v1 game with Reggie Jackson, a few highlights, but most importantly him explaining a bit about why he had such legendary endurance.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiOsgv-pKX8[/youtube]

Havlicked said that today's players (referring to the 70's players) were less fundamentally sound than the 50's and 60's players. He said it was more 1 on 1 and slam dunks in the 70's, but not fundamentals. So even old guys back then were complaining about the alleged lack of fundamentals. I bet you 20 years from now some is going to complain that the players of the 2030's are less fundamentally sound than LeBron, or Andrew Wiggins.

Actually its strange because the league has constantly veered from fundamentals but after seeing the most recent successful teams (Dallas, San Antonio, Los Angeles) fundamentals and offensive systems are back in style. I think the "less fundamentals" thing correlates with younger rookies entering the league. The weakest fundamental era in terms of team basketball also saw a ton of players entering straight from high school.

[trex_8063]

Actually its strange because the league has constantly veered from fundamentals but after seeing the most recent successful teams (Dallas, San Antonio, Los Angeles) fundamentals and offensive systems are back in style. I think the "less fundamentals" thing correlates with younger rookies entering the league. The weakest fundamental era in terms of team basketball also saw a ton of players entering straight from high school.

Good point.
I made similar theory in recent thread where OP was wondering why the five worst seasons (since 1970) for league avg FT% all came in the 90's: one of my theories was the recruiting (in both mid-late 80's and all thru 90's) of raw(ish) athletes as opposed to well-developed (skilled) basketball players. i.e. a general favoring of athleticism over skill-set, which may have resulted in a temporary suffering of certain fundamental skills (like FT shooting).

[penbeast0]

Well, Havlicek does have a point. Between 1966 and 1976, the number of professional teams went from 8 to 27 and even with ABA contraction by 1977 leading to only 22 teams post merger, that's still like the NBA today taking in the NBDL and major Euro leagues to get to 80+ teams! With much more player movement and a lot more marginal players as well as more jobs so more job security, players are likely to play a less fundamental style of basketball. Add to that the Black Power movement which emphasized living your life in a black style rather than conforming to white norms and you get a very different brand of basketball (most of us would say better/more entertaining).

On the other hand, they deciphered an inscription on one of the pyramids complaining that the modern generation (2000 years BC or whenever) was lazy, rude, and lacking in the virtues of their elders. So colts18 is right in that there is always that perception by us old farts.

[colts18]

Well, Havlicek does have a point. Between 1966 and 1976, the number of professional teams went from 8 to 27 and even with ABA contraction by 1977 leading to only 22 teams post merger, that's still like the NBA today taking in the NBDL and major Euro leagues to get to 80+ teams! With much more player movement and a lot more marginal players as well as more jobs so more job security, players are likely to play a less fundamental style of basketball. Add to that the Black Power movement which emphasized living your life in a black style rather than conforming to white norms and you get a very different brand of basketball (most of us would say better/more entertaining).

On the other hand, they deciphered an inscription on one of the pyramids complaining that the modern generation (2000 years BC or whenever) was lazy, rude, and lacking in the virtues of their elders. So colts18 is right in that there is always that perception by us old farts.

Socrates was saying the same thing about the youth generation in ancient Greece:

“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”

I guarantee you that the first generation of cavemen lamented the laziness of the youth generation also. Every generation does it and will continue to do it. That's why I laugh when I see NBA players do it also. NBA players 100 years from now will talk about the degrading fundamentals of the current generation.

[Doctor MJ]

Where is the rest of the business cycle that is an inverse S? If you follow the business cycle correctly you see the NBA peaks around 1990 and then declines in the inverse S to the point that today is on par with the begining of the league.
.

That doesn't make any sense at all. Yes businesses and industries sometimes die, but there's no reason to assume it will happen, let alone on a particular timeline, and it sure as hell isn't happening while revenue explodes.

Are we talking about the business side or the talent side? There is no question that the talent pool is at an all time low demographically and thats why the NBA altered its rules to allow easier FIBA transition. W/O the 100 Int players the NBA would look pathetic.

Every occupation goes through the cycle. Once there is a saturation/maturity talent moves to other sports/occupations. That talent continues to drain until demand and access catch up. Sometimes it doesnt. If you look at demographics in China and the West its frightening. Not only are we running out of young people but we are running out of disposable income to support entertainment as we have to work harder to support the elderly.

Talent is not at an all-time low dude, talent follows the money and the fame. Ever since Jordan it's been crystal clear that if you can do anything in the US, you choose basketball. This whole thing where you're saying we're too poor to support basketball is obviously false given the money going into basketball.

One thing you bring up that's interesting, though I don't really understand your argument relating to it, is birth rate. Here's the birth rate in the US by year:



The birth rate explodes with the '50s. This might make one speculate that when those kids come of age the NBA will get much better. Interestingly though, they would have started to come of age in the '70s which is typically seen as the weakest modern NBA era. So the correlation there doesn't seem like much of a deal.

From your talk though, you're saying the '80s were the golden age of basketball, and I'd imagine you'd say that's where the baby boom truly hit the NBA. Okay, but don't go too far with it.

As you can see from the early '90s to the late '00s, the birth rate was right up there with the baby boomer era. Take that plus the globalization of the game, and it's really no contest what demographics says should be the peak even before you get into the far more powerful factors of money and fame.

[SactoKingsFan]

I’ve narrowed down my candidates to Ewing, Pippen and Wade. I see them as the best two-way players still available. Although I still consider Ewing a top 25 candidate, I’ve become less impressed with his prime and ability to anchor an offense. After taking a closer look at Pippen and Wade, I think I might give them the overall edge over Ewing. Like many other voters, I had downgraded Wade’s career due to significant longevity/durability concerns. However, I’ve recently started to view Wade’s great peak as strong enough to make up for his oft cited durability issues. Pippen hasn’t gained any real traction, but I see him as a legit 20-25 candidate since he was an extremely versatile defender (arguably GOAT perimeter defender) and had an underrated offensive game/ skill set.

PEAK

Top 5 ASPM Seasons
Ewing: 4.4 (90), 4.4 (94), 4.1 (92), 3.9 (89), 3.8 (91)
Pippen: 6.4 (94), 6.0 (95), 4.7 (97), 4.6 (92), 4.6 (96)
Wade: 9.9 (09), 8.8 (07), 8.3 (10), 7.3 (06), 5.9 (12)
http://godismyjudgeok.com/DStats/aspm-and-vorp/

Extended Peak Estimated Impact
Ewing: 90-94: 4.7, 4.2, 4.3, 3.5, 4.7
Pippen: 92, 94-97: 4.9, 4.8, 4.8, 4.8, 4.6
Wade: 06, 09-12: 5.1, 5.9, 5.3, 4.3, 3.8
http://shutupandjam.net/nba-ncaa-stats/ ... ed-impact/

Best Peak = Wade
----------

10 Year Prime

10 Year Prime ASPM
Ewing (88-97): 3.1, 3.9, 4.4, 3.8, 4.1, 3.4, 4.4, 3.6, 2.3, 3.2
Pippen (91-00): 4.2, 4.6, 2.7, 6.4, 6.0, 4.6, 4.7, 4.3, 1.9, 2.4
Wade (05-14): 4.7, 7.3, 8.8, 3.9, 9.9, 8.3, 5.5, 5.9, 4.7, 2.9

10 Year Prime Estimated Impact
Ewing (88-97): 2.8, 3.9, 4.7, 4.2, 4.3, 3.5, 4.7, 3.4, 2.4, 3.2
Pippen (91-00): 4.2, 4.9, 3.2, 4.8, 4.8, 4.8, 4.6, 4.1, 2.1, 2.7
Wade (05-14): 3.9, 5.1, 5.0, 1.3, 5.9, 5.3, 4.3, 3.8, 3.6, 2.1

Best 10 Year Prime = Wade
----------

Durability

Prime Ewing (89-94): 485 GP, 18290 MP
10 Year Prime Ewing (88-97): 800 GP, 29426 MP

Prime Pippen (91-97): 555 GP, 20994 MP
10 Year Prime Pippen (91-00): 731 GP, 27406 MP

Prime Wade (05-12): 535 GP, 20039 MP
10 Year Prime Wade (05-14): 658 GP, 24204 MP
----------

EXTENDED PRIME

Regular Season

Spoiler:

88-95 Ewing RS per 100: 33.1 PTS, 14.5 TRB, 3.0 AST, 5.5 STL+BLK, 4.4 TOV
88-95 Ewing RS: 22.8 PER, .571 TS%, .376 FTr, 109 ORtg, 99 DRtg, .179 WS/48

91-98 Pippen RS Per 100: 27.5 PTS, 10.0 TRB, 8.2 AST, 4.4 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen RS: 21.2 PER, .546 TS%, .286 FTr, 112 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .185 WS/48

05-13 Wade RS per 100: 36.5 PTS, 7.4 TRB, 8.9 AST, 4.1 STL+BLK, 5.0 TOV
05-13 Wade RS: 26.3 PER, .569 TS%, .484 FTr, 112 ORtg, 103 DRtg, .204 WS/48

Best Extended Prime RS = Wade

Postseason

Spoiler:

88-95 Ewing PS per 100: 30.7 PTS, 14.8 TRB, 3.4 AST, 4.7 STL+BLK, 3.7 TOV
88-95 Ewing PS: 20.6 PER, .526 TS%, .335 FTr, 107 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .145 WS/48

91-98 Pippen PS per 100: 26.1 PTS, 10.8 TRB, 7.5 AST, 4.1 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen PS: 19.5 PER, .521 TS%, .370 FTr, 109 ORtg, 101 DRtg, .157 WS/48

05-13 Wade PS Per 100: 33.4 PTS, 7.7 TRB, 7.1 AST, 4.0 STL+BLK, 4.8 TOV
05-13 Wade PS: 23.9 PER, .556 TS%, .432 FTr, 109 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .179 WS/48

Best Extended Prime PS = Wade

Although Wade’s durability issues prevented him from having an even greater impact during his prime, I still think Wade clearly takes the overall edge here. In addition to peaking higher, ASPM, EI, per 100 and advanced stats all suggest prime/extended prime Wade was a vastly superior playoff performer and a significantly more impactful player during the regular season than Pippen and Ewing.

VOTE #22: Dwyane Wade

[E-Balla]

I’ve narrowed down my candidates to Ewing, Pippen and Wade. I see them as the best two-way players still available. Although I still consider Ewing a top 25 candidate, I’ve become less impressed with his prime and ability to anchor an offense. After taking a closer look at Pippen and Wade, I think I might give them the overall edge over Ewing. Like many other voters, I had downgraded Wade’s career due to significant longevity/durability concerns. However, I’ve recently started to view Wade’s great peak as strong enough to make up for his oft cited durability issues. Pippen hasn’t gained any real traction, but I see him as a legit 20-25 candidate since he was an extremely versatile defender (arguably GOAT perimeter defender) and had an underrated offensive game/ skill set.

PEAK

Top 5 ASPM Seasons
Ewing: 4.4 (90), 4.4 (94), 4.1 (92), 3.9 (89), 3.8 (91)
Pippen: 6.4 (94), 6.0 (95), 4.7 (97), 4.6 (92), 4.6 (96)
Wade: 9.9 (09), 8.8 (07), 8.3 (10), 7.3 (06), 5.9 (12)

Extended Peak Estimated Impact
Ewing: 90-94: 4.7, 4.2, 4.3, 3.5, 4.7
Pippen: 92, 94-97: 4.9, 4.8, 4.8, 4.8, 4.6
Wade: 06, 09-12: 5.1, 5.9, 5.3, 4.3, 3.8

Best Peak = Wade

10 Year Prime

10 Year Prime ASPM
Ewing (88-97): 3.1, 3.9, 4.4, 3.8, 4.1, 3.4, 4.4, 3.6, 2.3, 3.2
Pippen (91-00): 4.2, 4.6, 2.7, 6.4, 6.0, 4.6, 4.7, 4.3, 1.9, 2.4
Wade (05-14): 4.7, 7.3, 8.8, 3.9, 9.9, 8.3, 5.5, 5.9, 4.7, 2.9

10 Year Prime Estimated Impact
Ewing (88-97): 2.8, 3.9, 4.7, 4.2, 4.3, 3.5, 4.7, 3.4, 2.4, 3.2
Pippen (91-00): 4.2, 4.9, 3.2, 4.8, 4.8, 4.8, 4.6, 4.1, 2.1, 2.7
Wade (05-14): 3.9, 5.1, 5.0, 1.3, 5.9, 5.3, 4.3, 3.8, 3.6, 2.1

Best 10 Year Prime = Wade

Durability

Prime Ewing (89-94): 485 GP, 18290 MP
10 Year Prime Ewing (88-97): 800 GP, 29426 MP

Prime Pippen (91-97): 555 GP, 20994 MP
10 Year Prime Pippen (91-00): 731 GP, 27406 MP

Prime Wade (05-12): 535 GP, 20039 MP
10 Year Prime Wade (05-14): 658 GP, 24204 MP


EXTENDED PRIME

Regular Season

Spoiler:

88-95 Ewing RS per 100: 33.1 PTS, 14.5 TRB, 3.0 AST, 5.5 STL+BLK, 4.4 TOV
88-95 Ewing RS: 22.8 PER, .571 TS%, .376 FTr, 109 ORtg, 99 DRtg, .179 WS/48

91-98 Pippen RS Per 100: 27.5 PTS, 10.0 TRB, 8.2 AST, 4.4 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen RS: 21.2 PER, .546 TS%, .286 FTr, 112 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .185 WS/48

05-13 Wade RS per 100: 36.5 PTS, 7.4 TRB, 8.9 AST, 4.1 STL+BLK, 5.0 TOV
05-13 Wade RS: 26.3 PER, .569 TS%, .484 FTr, 112 ORtg, 103 DRtg, .204 WS/48

Best Extended Prime RS = Wade

Postseason

Spoiler:

88-95 Ewing PS per 100: 30.7 PTS, 14.8 TRB, 3.4 AST, 4.7 STL+BLK, 3.7 TOV
88-95 Ewing PS: 20.6 PER, .526 TS%, .335 FTr, 107 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .145 WS/48

91-98 Pippen PS per 100: 26.1 PTS, 10.8 TRB, 7.5 AST, 4.1 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen PS: 19.5 PER, .521 TS%, .370 FTr, 109 ORtg, 101 DRtg, .157 WS/48

05-13 Wade PS Per 100: 33.4 PTS, 7.7 TRB, 7.1 AST, 4.0 STL+BLK, 4.8 TOV
05-13 Wade PS: 23.9 PER, .556 TS%, .432 FTr, 109 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .179 WS/48

Best Extended Prime PS = Wade

Although Wade’s durability issues prevented him from leaving more of an impact during his prime, I still think Wade clearly takes the overall edge here. In addition to peaking higher, ASPM, EI, per 100 and advanced stats all suggest prime/extended prime Wade was a vastly superior playoff performer and a significantly more impactful player during the regular season than Pippen and Ewing.

VOTE #22: Dwyane Wade

Scottie isn't getting any traction mainly because he wasn't that good. Even with Jordan anchoring the offense he still underperformed many times. I don't see the argument for him over Ewing on either side of the ball. Offensively they are both middling efficiency guys with Scottie looking better going off the regular season and Pat looking better going off the post season and defensively I don't think anyone will argue Pippen over Pat. These guys played head to head when Jordan retired and the Knicks won in 4 with Pat outplaying Scottie on both ends.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ml#NYK-CHI

[Doctor MJ]

The infancy of basketball existed before pro-leagues were serious.
The expansion of basketball happened basically from the 40s to the 60s.
We've been in maturity ever since.

not against the S curve, but the 60s are waaaaaay too early as the time basketball reaches maturity. No sport I know did.
The improvements in training, defensive and offensive schemes, the three point shot... we could reach the mid to late 80s to actually have really reached the maturity for this sport.

Don't take the words too literally here. The allegation with maturity is not an absolute plateau but rather that the speed at which the market in question experiences growth seriously slows down.

When you're imagining everything you think of in terms of developments in more recent decades, remember that in the 1930s the dominant center was 6 foot 4. The growth from then until the 60s was a night & day thing, the type of thing you expect to see when a sport goes from being something you can't realistically support yourself doing year round to being something that makes you well-to-do and potentially a celebrity.

I'll also emphasize that we're really coming at this from the other end here. I'm trying to convince people that the early '50s were in fact considerably weaker than what they expect. And the reason I have to do this is that people know that the NBA largely has a history were old past-prime stars of the prior era are still able to hang around with the next generation without issue. That there tells you that the gap between the generations is not that big. Whereas, I don't think anyone would doubt that that 6 foot 4 center form the '30s couldn't do his job today.

So then moving back to the '50s, where I come in is that given my expectations of an S-curve, that are born out from the rudimentary data we have, I feel uncomfortable saying that a guy who peak at a very young 25 shortly after 1950 in the pre-shot clock era should be given the benefit of the doubt here. To me either he was peaking young because the league was catching up to him, or because he had health issues even relative to his contemporaries that messed with his longevity.

None of that means I have an issue with him in the Top 100, but to compare him to Ewing or Gilmore is pretty crazy to me.

[Witzig-Okashi]

Don't have a vote in this list, but I do wonder if anyone could make any in-depth analysis of D-Wade during the 2012 and 2013 seasons (outside of a few reference of his games). Generally on the PC board, 11 Wade is reference as the last year of his prime, but I'm not so sure that that is entirely the case. I know injuries played a role in each season, but if I can recollect correctly, for example, Wade was playing quite will during that 27 game win streak, and didn't completely implode in the playoffs that year.

Of course, I need to revisit some of these games, so my thoughts on the issue is tentative.

[Witzig-Okashi]

Also, another question.

Some of Stockton's numbers in the late 80s and the early 90s look phenomenal, but how highly would they look if adjusted for pace (something that I need to learn how to do)? I assume that they still would look great, but for accuracy's sake (or an attempt at it at least), I would be quite interested.



On a side note, I'm glad to see the in-depth conversation of certain players that you wouldn't typically expect outside of the usual suspects such as KG or Nash. The Pettit one was among them as of late. Frazier will probably get more details in his career as he gains even more traction, and I also look forward to more talk about E. Baylor...

[Doctor MJ]

1969

Best WS/48 for any ABA player in history with 1,000 minutes

Better than Erving, Gilmore, Connie Hawkins, and Billy Cunningham

http://bkref.com/tiny/2mCOe

I think with Barry we need to get straight:

Barry's peak achievement according to almost everyone is the title in the mid-70s.
His big ABA stats came in the '60s when the league was weak.
Barry's ABA stats went down after that because the league got stronger, and when he was actually competing with someone like young Gilmore, Gilmore certainly impressed people more.

Personally I still rank Barry ahead of Gilmore because I have more faith in his sustained prime, but no one watching the ABA in 1972 was talking about how good Barry was. Gilmore came in like a tidal wave crushing the league.

(Of course as I say that, Gilmore's Colonels did get upset in the first round by Barry's Nets. Maybe someone can make more hay with that than me. I'd feel more comfortable trumpeting that if Barry had a proven track record of leading his teams to championships in the ABA instead of them winning without him. And again, none of this means that Barry wasn't great, but he wasn't a tier above Gilmore or McGinnis or Hawkins or Haywood in the ABA from what I can see even though I'll vote for him first above those guys.)

[90sAllDecade]

Like Durant, I need a few more seasons from Wade to move him up and I likely will then. I don't have time at the moment to post it or elaborate as much as I'd like, but I believe Wade's teams were worse than Ewing when both had to do without all-star and other team support.

I'll be voting for Ewing again.

He was a dominant defensive anchor and part of the collective team effort/coaching to lead the arguably the greatest modern defense ever. He had offensive abilities and had to shoulder the load for an anemic offensive Knick team. I think he had the strongest two way impact with some of the toughest competition.

[SactoKingsFan]

Scottie isn't getting any traction mainly because he wasn't that good. Even with Jordan anchoring the offense he still underperformed many times. I don't see the argument for him over Ewing on either side of the ball. Offensively they are both middling efficiency guys with Scottie looking better going off the regular season and Pat looking better going off the post season and defensively I don't think anyone will argue Pippen over Pat. These guys played head to head when Jordan retired and the Knicks won in 4 with Pat outplaying Scottie on both ends.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ml#NYK-CHI

Pippen and Ewing actually look comparable during the RS & PS, with Pip maybe taking a slight edge due to his passing/playmaking and defensive versatility.

Regular Season

88-95 Ewing RS per 100: 33.1 PTS, 14.5 TRB, 3.0 AST, 5.5 STL+BLK, 4.4 TOV
88-95 Ewing RS: 22.8 PER, .571 TS%, .376 FTr, 109 ORtg, 99 DRtg, .179 WS/48

91-98 Pippen RS Per 100: 27.5 PTS, 10.0 TRB, 8.2 AST, 4.4 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen RS: 21.2 PER, .546 TS%, .286 FTr, 112 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .185 WS/48

Postseason

88-95 Ewing PS per 100: 30.7 PTS, 14.8 TRB, 3.4 AST, 4.7 STL+BLK, 3.7 TOV
88-95 Ewing PS: 20.6 PER, .526 TS%, .335 FTr, 107 ORtg, 102 DRtg, .145 WS/48

91-98 Pippen PS per 100: 26.1 PTS, 10.8 TRB, 7.5 AST, 4.1 STL+BLK, 4.1 TOV
91-98 Pippen PS: 19.5 PER, .521 TS%, .370 FTr, 109 ORtg, 101 DRtg, .157 WS/48

And the 94 Bulls v Knicks series was very competitive with several close games and Pippen played well enough for the Bulls to have a chance to win the series.

I haven't decided to vote for Pippen over Ewing, but I think there should be some discussion since it's not a clear cut case of Ewing being clearly better than Pippen.

[toodles23]

Like Durant, I need a few more seasons from Wade to move him up and I likely will then. I don't have time at the moment to post it or elaborate as much as I'd like, but I believe Wade's teams were worse than Ewing when both had to do without all-star and other team support.

I'll be voting for Ewing again.

He was a dominant defensive anchor and part of the collective team effort/coaching to lead the arguably the greatest modern defense ever. He had offensive abilities and had to shoulder the load for an anemic offensive Knick team. I think he had the strongest two way impact with some of the toughest competition.

Seems odd to me that more seasons from Wade would make any significant difference. Barring a dramatic and unexpected turn of events, Wade's not going to be adding much value to his career from here on out. He was far the level of a superstar last season.

[Clyde Frazier]

Anyone have an updated count? Been out all day and just want to get an idea of which way I'll be leaning in the runoff. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[SactoKingsFan]

Anyone have an updated count? Been out all day and just want to get an idea of which way I'll be leaning in the runoff. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Not many have voted, but it looks like Ewing (5) and Mikan (4) are leading the pack with Wade (3), Stockton (2) and Frazier (2) getting some traction.