RealGM Top 100 List #23

[Clyde Frazier]

Definitely curious how a wade vs. nash runoff would've turned out. Oh well.

[Warspite]

So assuming that this is a runoff between Wade and Mikan, it's almost like we're comparing eras rather than players.

Because Mikan clearly wouldn't measure up as well if he played in Wade's era, yet Mikan unquestionably was more dominant in his era and had more success than Wade.

How much do we value what they actually achieved vs era portability?

Wade as zero portability to the 50s and almost none to the 60s. He cant dribble the basketball per NBA rules untill the late 80s and early 90s. His lack of fundamentals and inability to shoot outside of 15ft makes him a horrible player in any era except today.

I see many similarities between the 50s and today and think they are both sub par compared with 76-96. I however am not going to hold it against Durant for playing in a league that only has 3 SFs who could make a 1986 rotation. Its not Durants fault that he faces minor league SFs every night. All I can do is judge him by what he does with what he can control.

[Texas Chuck]

Definitely curious how a wade vs. nash runoff would've turned out. Oh well.

Im not sure at all Nash is the next leading candidate. He has a couple guys who promote him pretty hard, but he seems far from a consensus next guy at this point. It's been hard because I have tried I think in every thread since he was brought up to engage the guy pushing hardest for him and he won't. He just wants to post his same ortg talking points and get out. So I'm done. I'm much more interested in discussion rather than trying to get guys I like high up the list. Its a shame really because I think Nash deserves to be looked at for more than just otrg.

[tsherkin]

Wade as zero portability to the 50s and almost none to the 60s. He cant dribble the basketball per NBA rules untill the late 80s and early 90s. His lack of fundamentals and inability to shoot outside of 15ft makes him a horrible player in any era except today.

This is inaccurate on several levels.

One, you're assuming that he wouldn't be able to adapt backwards while implicitly suggesting that older players could adapt forward. He doesn't, and would not need to, palm the ball on every possession. He certainly hasn't needed to while posting up in Miami's more recent offenses, he doesn't need it for transition (and there were many more transition possessions in the earlier years) and you're baldly lying when you say he can't shoot outside of 15 feet. Wade has shot 40% or better from 16-23 feet in four different seasons, including each of the last two... as well as 06 and 09, when he was healthy and in his prime. Even in his down seasons, he has four seasons at 36.8% or better from that range, which is at least as good as any number of the guys from the 50s and 60s who were bombing away in the high 30s and low 40s from the field... and that ignores how much better a finisher around the rim he would be compared to many of them with his athleticism and length.

Meantime, he wouldn't be any worse off than someone like Jerry West, and West was able to drive relentlessly AND draw a ton of fouls.

[colts18]

Definitely curious how a wade vs. nash runoff would've turned out. Oh well.

Im not sure at all Nash is the next leading candidate. He has a couple guys who promote him pretty hard, but he seems far from a consensus next guy at this point. It's been hard because I have tried I think in every thread since he was brought up to engage the guy pushing hardest for him and he won't. He just wants to post his same ortg talking points and get out. So I'm done. I'm much more interested in discussion rather than trying to get guys I like high up the list. Its a shame really because I think Nash deserves to be looked at for more than just otrg.

I'm going to answer your questions regarding Nash, but I was waiting for a thread where Nash was a serious candidate. In the next thread, you will have the answer to your questions.

[tsherkin]

Meantime, Mikan/Wade reasons.

Mikan dominated basically the weakest, least developed era in league history and got progressively less effective as his career progressed. There are comparatively unathletic guys in the league who do well today (Al Jefferson comes to mind), and there is the notion that he might improve some moving forward with modern amenities and training, but we really haven't seen many players of that sort in the league. He's short for a 5, he didn't exhibit dominant finishing ability around the rim (although effective for his time, there were diminishing returns on that truth, especially once the lane was widened) and his most touted trait (scoring) dropped off remarkably as the game moved towards its more modern form. In that proto league, eh, I don't lend a ton of credit to that kind of performance. That wasn't even remotely similar to modern basketball, really, and I find it too different for his achievements to be ranked against guys who played in the style of game that has generally come to define "basketball" as a sport. Then you get into influx of talent, league growth, etc, etc, and he just really falls off of the map for me. I consider portability within a certain scope, and I don't think Mikan really belongs except as a narrative underscore to what came later. I feel he was important to the game, but while he has a fantastic winning legacy, it's hard for me to give weight ot that when his competition wasn't really that impressive or developed. His Mikan Drill was ahead of its time, but it didn't help him perform at a level which has been roughly standard for decades now, so he's almost more of a relevant footnote to me.

He doesn't really register on my top 100 players list at all, to be honest. I think too many players have come since his time and done enough to be considered ahead of him. I'll respect his place in the development of the sport, but eventually, the old usually gets surpassed, just like old records are overturned in time.

I don't really support Wade for this spot natively; I think a couple of guys should get in ahead of him, but they aren't options at this time, so Wade becomes my fallback. I think well of Wade, I think his lack of longevity is being overplayed just a little (and certainly not relevant versus Mikan) because people are considering post-prime stuff a bit too strongly (IMHO, of course), and Wade has proven effective against a variety of defenses... even the vaunted Celtics, who have played some of the most remarkable defense in league history recently as 4 or 5 years ago.

[Clyde Frazier]

Definitely curious how a wade vs. nash runoff would've turned out. Oh well.

Im not sure at all Nash is the next leading candidate. He has a couple guys who promote him pretty hard, but he seems far from a consensus next guy at this point. It's been hard because I have tried I think in every thread since he was brought up to engage the guy pushing hardest for him and he won't. He just wants to post his same ortg talking points and get out. So I'm done. I'm much more interested in discussion rather than trying to get guys I like high up the list. Its a shame really because I think Nash deserves to be looked at for more than just otrg.

Yeah, I'm not necessarily advocating for nash here, either. I said earlier in the thread that i'm even leaning toward stockton over nash just on its own.

I have noticed colts18 just posting the same thing each time for nash. There have been a few spots where i had to vote for the same guy for multiple threads, and always tried to add new info each thread until they got in. While that partially becomes frustrating, I also enjoy it as I may learn more about the player or there will be more discussion.

I was more interested in wade vs. nash for discussion. This hasn't happened to me much yet, but I just can't get behind wade or mikan here, for pretty different reasons. Guess i'll have to sit this one out.

[90sAllDecade]

Got distracted and I'll share my reasons and vote.

I'm going to vote Wade here because he's a better athlete, played better competition, has more skill and is an excellent two way player and all those things basically translate better across eras. I see his game translating similar to a West/Oscar hybrid with more athleticism. He can post up like Oscar, great passer/playmaker, can hit the midrange jumper like West, excellent defender, shotblocker for a SG, he's mentally tough and rises to the occasion under pressure.

Mikan is also very tough, playing hurt with broken bones, has pioneering low post skill and other traits I'll have to elaborate on in later threads outside of a runoff situation. But in short his game doesn't translate as well.

Young Wade was electric in his ability to take over games, and incredible to watch. It's been talked about before, but his finals performance was described as "burning nuclear" by others and was a sight to see.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEyo2P5dgec[/youtube]

[Usual Suspects]

Hey guys, I have followed some of you guys' discussion, but have not been keeping up completely. I was just curious as to how you guys are rating individual accomplishments v. team accomplishment. From glancing at the list thus far, it seems that individual is favored much more heavily (about 80-20). Just wanted to know what the common criteria is.

Main reason I bring this up now is because of Wade and how he dropped a spot from the old list in 3 years, while in those years getting to 3 Finals, and winning 2 of them as the 2nd best player on the team. I noticed a similar drop off for Russell as well.

Again, not critiquing the list, just trying to understand poster's philosophies in this list compared to the last one.

[Texas Chuck]

I'm going to answer your questions regarding Nash, but I was waiting for a thread where Nash was a serious candidate. In the next thread, you will have the answer to your questions.

Ahh very good---looking forward to it. And that explanation makes sense. Wish you had said something earlier as I had gotten the wrong idea.

Nash the Maverick fascinates me so I hope you and I can compare our impressions of him in Dallas. It's a far more interesting part of his career imo. Especially as we try and understand why the perception of Nash the Sun is so different from Nash the Maverick.

[90sAllDecade]

Hey guys, I have followed some of you guys' discussion, but have not been keeping up completely. I was just curious as to how you guys are rating individual accomplishments v. team accomplishment. From glancing at the list thus far, it seems that individual is favored much more heavily (about 80-20). Just wanted to know what the common criteria is.

Main reason I bring this up now is because of Wade and how he dropped a spot from the old list in 3 years, while in those years getting to 3 Finals, and winning 2 of them as the 2nd best player on the team. I noticed a similar drop off for Russell as well.

Again, not critiquing the list, just trying to understand poster's philosophies in this list compared to the last one.

Well, from what I've seen and heard there are new people with different criteria in this project including myself.

I personally rank according to who has the best combined individual two way impact and how their game translates future and past. Basically I want to find out who was the actual best player in history.

I do look at era dominance to some degree, but if I look at team success, I also look at team support (including coaching), competition and rules that inflated or deflated dominance. But I don't rank individual players on team based stats/accomplishments or resume/accolades pretty much.

Some go by in era dominance, accolades, advanced stats, helping a team win, rings, HCA, first player to turn around a losing culture to win etc. But I'm sure those posters could probably share it better than I could if they like.

[SactoKingsFan]

Hey guys, I have followed some of you guys' discussion, but have not been keeping up completely. I was just curious as to how you guys are rating individual accomplishments v. team accomplishment. From glancing at the list thus far, it seems that individual is favored much more heavily (about 80-20). Just wanted to know what the common criteria is.

Main reason I bring this up now is because of Wade and how he dropped a spot from the old list in 3 years, while in those years getting to 3 Finals, and winning 2 of them as the 2nd best player on the team. I noticed a similar drop off for Russell as well.

Again, not critiquing the list, just trying to understand poster's philosophies in this list compared to the last one.

My voting has been based primarily on individual performance and impact. I favor individual accomplishments and performance over team accomplishments even more than 80-20. Don't put much stock in accolades (All-Star, All Defensive Team, etc). I consider peak, prime, durability/longevity, skill set, competition faced and portability when deciding who to vote for.

I don't have a problem with Wade not moving up from his 2011 ranking even though he's since won 2 titles as the 2nd best player. The main issues that have prevented Wade from being ranked higher are his longevity/durability and lack of a consistent jumper throughout most of his career. However, I still think Wade deserves to be in the top 25 and have been voting for him since #22 due to his top 10-15 peak and impressive prime.

When comparing this list to the 2011 list you should keep in mind that there has been significant voter turnover and generally more in depth analysis. Therefore, seeing significant discrepancies between the lists shouldn't really be surprising.

[Moonbeam]

My runoff vote is for Dwyane Wade, as per this post: viewtopic.php?p=41015576#p41015576

For what it's worth, I would probably have picked Mikan if we could have counted his BAA season. If we could count his 2 NBL seasons, I would have had no problem placing him in the top 20. But with just 5 eligible full seasons and 2 prior to the leg injury that saw him reduced to merely being the strongest candidate for best player in the league instead of a no-brainer, I can't put him above Wade.

[john248]

Voting Wade. Made my points about Mikan on page 5. Wade gives 6 years vs Mikan's 4 while Mikan still has issues in regards to his era. Mikan's offense is overrated though he was a defensive anchor. Competition during his time just wan't quite there.

He's second in league in scoring with above average ts% and you say is offense is overrated.
Mikan has 5 years, 4 titles.

I don't count his 51 season when he was injured in the playoffs. Neil Johnston's offense looks better to me. His numbers took a dip after the lane widened and the league contracted which indicates that he had trouble adapting. Hard to get excited over that especially once you start considering how weak the 50s was. In 52 when the lane widened, league average ORTG went up 1,8 while Mikan's %ages went down. Team offense were always middle of the league where it was sometimes a shade better or a shade worse.

In 52 though, I did come away impressed with his team's defense; they were 7 DRTG points better than league average and 5 better than the next best team which looks like Bill Russell impact on defense. The other seasons, his team's defense were still at the top aside from 54, but that separation wasn't there like in 52. I do view him favorably as the best player of his time, a defensive anchor with solid offense. But again, don't think much of his era. I will be voting for him down the line, just not here.

Alright, here's more info on Mikan:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0SKebKJgAQ[/youtube]

Big George played at 6 ft. 10 in. and 245 pounds. He was quite
probably the strongest man then playing the game. ''He could raise
that left elbow and move to the basket, and the bodies would just
start to fly,'' says former teammate Swede Carlson. ''I used to like
to pass him the ball, cut out around him and then listen to the sound
the guy guarding me made when he ran into George.'' But it was not so
much his strength or the accuracy of his short hook shots, left- and
righthanded, that made him such a force -- it was his indomitable
will. Bud Grant, who is certainly better known as the longtime coach
of the NFL's Minnesota Vikings, played for two seasons, 1949-51, with
Mikan and the old Lakers. He had this to say about his famous
teammate: ''I have played with and coached many great players. And
I've seen and coached against some of the best -- Walter Payton, to
name one. But I'd have to say that George Mikan was the greatest
competitor I've seen or been around in any sport. I studied George
back before I realized I'd someday make my living studying athletes,
and he was amazing. He played hurt. He played when he'd had no sleep
because of our travel schedule. And he always played at one speed
-- top. Then, when things got tough, he'd turn it up. His will to win
permeated the whole team. It was a great thrill playing with such a
man.''

With Mikan at center the Lakers won championships in six of their
first seven seasons -- one each in the NBL and the BAA, and four in
the National Basketball Association, which was formed in 1949 after a
merging of the older leagues. Mikan averaged a comparatively modest
22.6 points per game for his nine-year professional career, which
started in 1946 and ended in '56 (he retired for one year before
playing his last season), but in his peak years, 1948-51, he averaged
28.3, 27.4 and 28.4 points, respectively. He was the NBA's first
official scoring champion, in 1949-50, and a four-time champion
overall, including his years in the NBL and BAA. He had more than a
thousand rebounds in both the '52-53 and the '53-54 seasons, when the
seasons were 10 games shorter than they are now. In the 1949 BAA
playoffs, Mikan averaged 30.3 points in 10 games, playing the last
two against Red Auerbach's Washington Capitols with a fractured
wrist. He played the final game of the 1951 playoffs against the
Rochester Royals with two fractures of the fibula and still scored 32
points in a losing effort, the one year in the first seven that the
Lakers failed to win a title. The next season he achieved a measure
of revenge by scoring his career-high 61 points against these same
Royals.

It was, to be sure, a different game then. There were a few
seven-footers in the league, but not every team had them, and none
was as mobile as the giants of today. The guards were more often 5
ft. 9 in. than 6 ft. 9 in., and none had the all-around skills of
Magic Johnson. And there were no Michael Jordans flying overhead.
Basketball is a much more vertical game today. In Mikan's day, 40%
shooting from the floor was considered effective. The defense was
more strictly a man-to-man and was mostly without disguised zones.
It was a white man's game when Mikan joined the Lakers in 1947,
and though blacks entered the NBA in 1950, it was still pretty much
that when he retired for good in 1956. In a sense, the Lakers
hastened integration with their rollicking series of games against
the Harlem Globetrotters in the late '40s and the '50s. The Trotters
were much more than showmen when they played the Lakers for the first
time, on Feb. 19, 1948, at Chicago Stadium. Indeed, they had most
of the best black players in the game, including Ermer Robinson, Babe
Pressley, the dribbling genius Marques Haynes and, yes, even their
chief clown, Reece (Goose) Tatum. The Globetrotters won the first two
games of the annual series before packed houses. But as the Lakers
steadily improved, the Globetrotters lost the next five before their
boss, Abe Saperstein, a close friend of Laker general manager Max
Winter, terminated the series. By then some of the Globetrotter
stars, including Nat (Sweetwater) Clifton, had moved to the NBA, the
Laker games having established what had long been suspected: Black
players could easily make it in the white man's game.

No one questions that it is a better game now, so much better that
there might not even be room in it for a player as slow-footed as
Mikan. ''I'm afraid if he played now, everybody would be coming back
from one basket while George was leaving the other one,'' says Jaros.
''We'd probably get the hell kicked out of us today,'' Pollard
acknowledges. ''They're so big and agile and such great shooters. But
I think I could've played in this game, and though George was a
little slow and not much of a leaper, I think he could've adjusted. I
do know this -- anyone who played against him would come out with
bruises.''

http://www.si.com/vault/1989/11/06/1209 ... pro-crowns


Rules changes bothered him, such as the initial widening of the lane to slow his dominance:



http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2 ... 679,265543

To his credit, league heathcare was terrible back then and injuries had taken a toll on his longevity and production (and some other info about that era):

The Lakers missed the title in '51 because of Mikan's leg injury,
but they won the next three years. They were the darlings of an
entire state, Minnesota's first major league team, the only game in
town, and champions of all they surveyed. But it wasn't long before
certain apparently unsolvable problems reared. The Minneapolis
Auditorium, the Lakers' home court, was an antiquated building with
an undersized court and a seating capacity of barely 8,000.
Furthermore, it was unavailable, because of trade show commitments,
during playoff time. The team was frequently obliged to play
important games either in the even more inadequate Minneapolis Armory
or in small college gyms. The owners had not had the foresight to
call their team the Minnesota Lakers, which miffed St. Paul
authorities, so it was always difficult to get bookings in that
adjacent community. And the University of Minnesota, jealous of the
Lakers' popularity, made its facilities scarce. Then Mikan and
Pollard, the big gate attractions, retired. Mikan quit after the 1954
season to become the team's general manager. He was only 29, but his
big body had taken a beating over the years. He had broken at least
10 bones, and he was about to have his left kneecap removed. More
important to him, he had become over the years of constant travel a
stranger in his own house. ''I came home one day and picked up my
second son, Terry, and he began crying,'' Mikan says. ''He was afraid
of me, because he didn't know who I was. It broke my heart.''

Mikan's retirement didn't last. Spurred by more than 1,500 fan
letters urging him to return, he left his desk job as general manager
for the Lakers and played the last half of the '55-56 season,
averaging 10.5 points and 8.3 rebounds in 37 games for a team that
finished under .500 for the first time in the history of the
franchise.

[Quotatious]

For what it's worth, I would probably have picked Mikan if we could have counted his BAA season. If we could count his 2 NBL seasons, I would have had no problem placing him in the top 20.

Wait, we're not allowed to take his 1948-49 season into account? (assuming that's the BAA season you're talking about). It doesn't make sense. I mean - if we're taking the ABA into account, why not the BAA? That's even a part of NBA history, as listed by basketball-reference, the BAA evolved into the NBA before the 1949-50 season.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

I'm voting George Mikan, because as much as the competition was lower in the 50s this guy was still the undisputed best player in the world, dominating his era like no one of the others left did.
For perspective, if that kind of dominance happened 10 years later he would have likely voted between #5 and #10.

My criterium for ranking is [actual dominance] x [in era competition]. Not big fan of era portability, becuase it ends up favoring too much the younger players.

[Moonbeam]

For what it's worth, I would probably have picked Mikan if we could have counted his BAA season. If we could count his 2 NBL seasons, I would have had no problem placing him in the top 20.

Wait, we're not allowed to take his 1948-49 season into account? (assuming that's the BAA season you're talking about). It doesn't make sense. I mean - if we're taking the ABA into account, why not the BAA? That's even a part of NBA history, as listed by basketball-reference, the BAA evolved into the NBA before the 1949-50 season.

I was under the impression we could not count the 1948-49 season as the main thread says "no pre-NBA". If we can count that season, I'd like to change my vote to Mikan. Another year of mega-dominance is enough for me to place him over Wade and at least a few others already in the list.

[Gregoire]

Sorry for absense for a long time. Anyway, my vote goes to Wade. With all Mikans dominance, I think era power plays huge role here. Wade game is transportable to 50s or any era. Mikans? Im not sure at all. If I pick better career - Mikan. Better player - Wade.

[Sasaki]

If we're going to be talking about Mikan because he was dominant in the league despite a short career...why not look at Bill Walton? Far worse career length, but dominant when healthy and the colossal portability issues don't exist - Walton would absolutely be a dominant player today if he wasn't wearing a suit.

I just can't take Mikan seriously. To me, the NBA doesn't really begin until 1954 with the introduction of the shot clock. What came before then was just too different for me to call it the NBA.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Sorry for absense for a long time. Anyway, my vote goes to Wade. With all Mikans dominance, I think era power plays huge role here. Wade game is transportable to 50s or any era. Mikans? Im not sure at all. If I pick better career - Mikan. Better player - Wade.

If you use this approach all young players will be better, by definition.
But you don't know what would have happened to Wade if was born 60 years earlier. He wouldn't have had the chance to play as much as a kid, watch the older generations, been exposed to good coaching and training, more likely to have career ending injuries... you can not transpose Wade as you know him could not have existed back then