RealGM Top 100 List #29

[Basketballefan]

Runoff vote: Barry

As i said, i don't think Paul deserves to be this high on the list and i've seen nothing to convince me otherwise. His playoff resume is too weak to be a top 30 player imo, who else in the top 30 has as little playoff success as him? Barry has the better longevity and led his team to a championship, along with other deep runs in which he was a dominant offensive player. Paul needs to show me he's capable of carrying his team deep into the playoffs, i don't want to see all the blame go on his teammates, he has a top 5-10 player in Blake Griffin, a good rebounding & defensive center in Jordan, along with good role players as well as a top 5 Coach in Doc Rivers. The Clippers are stacked. No more excuses for Chris Paul from here onward.

I don't think Paul should even be ranked ahead of KD or Dwight and neither are top 30 for me.

[ceiling raiser]

I don't think Paul should even be ranked ahead of KD or Dwight and neither are top 30 for me.

Where do you have the three ranked right now?

[Basketballefan]

I don't think Paul should even be ranked ahead of KD or Dwight and neither are top 30 for me.

Where do you have the three ranked right now?

Honestly i haven't really made a list past 30ish. I would put KD somewhere in the 36-40 range. Dwight and Paul would both probably go somewhere in the top 45.

[ceiling raiser]

I don't think Paul should even be ranked ahead of KD or Dwight and neither are top 30 for me.

Where do you have the three ranked right now?

Honestly i haven't really made a list past 30ish. I would put KD somewhere in the 36-40 range. Dwight and Paul would both probably go somewhere in the top 45.

Thanks. Just one more question (don't want to derail the thread so I'll throw Rick in too)...with how many years do you credit each of Paul, Dwight, Barry, and Durant?

[Texas Chuck]

Run-off Vote: Rick Barry

My concerns about longevity for Chris Paul remain. Again a guy with this little longevity needs to be so good for the time he gives you to make up for it, and I just don't think Paul is good enough. I'm not even convinced he was better at his best than Barry was at his.

Elite FT shooter
Tremendous scoring volume on reasonable percentages.
Very strong rebounder for his position
Great playmaker for his position

[Owly]

My official vote is for Rick Barry. Strong start as ROY then next season at the 67 Finals against Wilt's Sixers, put up 40.8/8.8/3.3 on 40% FG. That Sixers defense did a number on the Warriors. Went to the ABA and blew up though in a weaker league. Injury prone during his ABA time. Injured his knee in 71, then starts to be more perimeter orientated and more of a play maker as his 3pt and assist totals go up. 72 ABA post season, led the Nets over Dr. J's (avg 30/20 in PO) Squires in 7 games while hitting a clutch 3 to seal the game, Upset the Bucks in 73 playoffs. In 75 against the Bulls, together with Wilkes, led a scoring run to seal game7 while scoring 14 in the 4th. Biggest upset in 75 Finals against the Bullets (6.54 SRS), put up 29.5/4/5/3.5 on 44% FG while doing a carry job in this series. 74-76, GSW was 2nd in team ORTG. Looks like from 76 on though, Phil Smith took bigger role, and Gus Williams played solid minutes. Gambled on defense. Like every Barry as he was the 1st, retired with the Rockets. Doesn't appear to be a ball stopper offensively while being a good passer where I value passing highly. Can play both on and off ball. Personality seems well documented.

On the '75 "carry job" it's worth looking how primarily did the Warriors win. And first and foremost it's with D. The Bullets averaged 104.7ppg with a 98 Ortg, .462 fg%; to average 95.5 points; over the totality of the playoffs including versus the Warriors it was 102.8ppg, 98 Ortg, .472 fg% and versus the Warriors its 95.5 points and .434 fg%. That's a substantial difference from what it would have been versus non-Warrior opponents.

In retrospect, although Barry's offense was important to the team, the most important element was the Warriors' dedication to defense. That of course was largely due to Attles. The team mirrored the coaches personality

It follows with talk of Attles as a gritty defensive player, his character, how he's "a solid technical strategist with a nose for defense. And if Attles wanted anything from his teams, it was defense." Then onto them bringing in Bud Pressley at training camp to talk/coach defense. Their pressure D, platooning. The importance of the guards in the press (of Beard, Johnson, Dudley and Smith
Attles said "Those four just got after you. They played like a pack of wild dogs." .... Sharman and Lakers assistant coach John Barnhill praise the Warriors team play, hustle, rebounding and ball movement. After G6 (and series) win in Seattle Barry sets off a near riot clocking the boyfriend of a women who either hit him with a pocketbook or threw a beer at him. Barry "became confused over the 24-second clock and blew a critical game early in Chicago." G6 Barry had a good game,as did Bob Love and Chet Walker until Bill Bridges, acquired for just such a purpose slowed them down. Barry "struggled in the seventh game hitting only one of a dozen shots. Finally, Attles pulled him. Barry sat on the bench praying for his teammates to bail him out, which they did down the stretch. The Golden State defense forced the Bulls into a cold streak with about seven minutes to go, and the Warriors pulled even. Then Barry returned to the game and hit several key shots to send his team on to the championship round.

The story keeps going through the finals. The takeaway is Barry shoots a lot, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't (their Ortg is slightly below the playoff average, as in the RS the area where they're notably strong on O is crashing the offensive boards) but the thing that's consistently there is D.

It's not that there's no value in being the shot creator that helps take on offense to average (or substantially better in the RS, though, again see offensive rebounding). But because Barry is the "star", no-one else is close to that status and they won a title was won it seems like we have to give him huge credit. But in the playoffs they won with D, a lot of players contributed more on D than Barry (at that end) and they weren't in the RS a title quality team (SRS of 2.86).

[Basketballefan]

Where do you have the three ranked right now?

Honestly i haven't really made a list past 30ish. I would put KD somewhere in the 36-40 range. Dwight and Paul would both probably go somewhere in the top 45.

Thanks. Just one more question (don't want to derail the thread so I'll throw Rick in too)...with how many years do you credit each of Paul, Dwight, Barry, and Durant?

Quality seasons for Durant would be 09-14', Paul's 08,09,11-14, Dwight 07-12, 14, if i include Barry's ABA seasons i think he was an elite player for 9-10 years.

When i say quality or elite years i pretty much mean those are the years that a player was roughly top 15 player or better. These are the seasons that have the most weight in all time rankings to me.

[colts18]

His playoff resume is too weak to be a top 30 player imo, who else in the top 30 has as little playoff success as him?

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

[Texas Chuck]

His playoff resume is too weak to be a top 30 player imo, who else in the top 30 has as little playoff success as him?

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

Over 6 total games in 2 of those years tho. Sure he played great and that's to his credit, but I'm not sure how meaningful it is to lead the league in PER for the 1st round only.

[Basketballefan]

His playoff resume is too weak to be a top 30 player imo, who else in the top 30 has as little playoff success as him?

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

I prefer winning over pretty numbers. Also, 2 of those 3 times were just for one series so i can't put a ton of weight into one series especially when i don't weigh PER that heavily.

Now i'm not blaming him for the losses so don't take it the wrong way.

[penbeast0]

I'm not as high on the PG position in general, but for the moment I'm leaning CP3. Can anybody tell me more about Barry's:

1) shooting range
2) defense
3) passing ability
4) handles

?

1. As good a shooting range as anyone in the NBA other than long distance specialists like Freddie Brown. Almost certainly would have been an excellent 3 point shooter if that was something he worked on.

2. If you think Steve Nash is a good defender, you would like Barry. Good instincts in the passing lane, bad man defender, pushed around and posted up pretty easily.

3. Great passer with a caveat. Excellent court vision, good instincts, tended to play hero ball at times when he got pissed at his teammates -- if one would drop a potential assist, Barry might lose his temper and freeze that player out for a quarter or even for the whole game. Swung it around well too; didn't just pass when he saw an assist.

4. Good handles for his size though didn't really drive or dribble into traffic much. Not that he couldn't, just didn't like contact that much (by his own admission) and had such great range that he would rather step back to get free.

[penbeast0]

His playoff resume is too weak to be a top 30 player imo, who else in the top 30 has as little playoff success as him?

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

Over 6 total games in 2 of those years tho. Sure he played great and that's to his credit, but I'm not sure how meaningful it is to lead the league in PER for the 1st round only.

Doing it once, sure . . . pretty meaningless. 3 times/4 series in 5 years, that adds up to the equivalent of a finals run.

[john248]

My official vote is for Rick Barry. Strong start as ROY then next season at the 67 Finals against Wilt's Sixers, put up 40.8/8.8/3.3 on 40% FG. That Sixers defense did a number on the Warriors. Went to the ABA and blew up though in a weaker league. Injury prone during his ABA time. Injured his knee in 71, then starts to be more perimeter orientated and more of a play maker as his 3pt and assist totals go up. 72 ABA post season, led the Nets over Dr. J's (avg 30/20 in PO) Squires in 7 games while hitting a clutch 3 to seal the game, Upset the Bucks in 73 playoffs. In 75 against the Bulls, together with Wilkes, led a scoring run to seal game7 while scoring 14 in the 4th. Biggest upset in 75 Finals against the Bullets (6.54 SRS), put up 29.5/4/5/3.5 on 44% FG while doing a carry job in this series. 74-76, GSW was 2nd in team ORTG. Looks like from 76 on though, Phil Smith took bigger role, and Gus Williams played solid minutes. Gambled on defense. Like every Barry as he was the 1st, retired with the Rockets. Doesn't appear to be a ball stopper offensively while being a good passer where I value passing highly. Can play both on and off ball. Personality seems well documented.

On the '75 "carry job" it's worth looking how primarily did the Warriors win. And first and foremost it's with D. The Bullets averaged 104.7ppg with a 98 Ortg, .462 fg%; to average 95.5 points; over the totality of the playoffs including versus the Warriors it was 102.8ppg, 98 Ortg, .472 fg% and versus the Warriors its 95.5 points and .434 fg%. That's a substantial difference from what it would have been versus non-Warrior opponents.

In retrospect, although Barry's offense was important to the team, the most important element was the Warriors' dedication to defense. That of course was largely due to Attles. The team mirrored the coaches personality

It follows with talk of Attles as a gritty defensive player, his character, how he's "a solid technical strategist with a nose for defense. And if Attles wanted anything from his teams, it was defense." Then onto them bringing in Bud Pressley at training camp to talk/coach defense. Their pressure D, platooning. The importance of the guards in the press (of Beard, Johnson, Dudley and Smith
Attles said "Those four just got after you. They played like a pack of wild dogs." .... Sharman and Lakers assistant coach John Barnhill praise the Warriors team play, hustle, rebounding and ball movement. After G6 (and series) win in Seattle Barry sets off a near riot clocking the boyfriend of a women who either hit him with a pocketbook or threw a beer at him. Barry "became confused over the 24-second clock and blew a critical game early in Chicago." G6 Barry had a good game,as did Bob Love and Chet Walker until Bill Bridges, acquired for just such a purpose slowed them down. Barry "struggled in the seventh game hitting only one of a dozen shots. Finally, Attles pulled him. Barry sat on the bench praying for his teammates to bail him out, which they did down the stretch. The Golden State defense forced the Bulls into a cold streak with about seven minutes to go, and the Warriors pulled even. Then Barry returned to the game and hit several key shots to send his team on to the championship round.

The story keeps going through the finals. The takeaway is Barry shoots a lot, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't (their Ortg is slightly below the playoff average, as in the RS the area where they're notably strong on O is crashing the offensive boards) but the thing that's consistently there is D.

It's not that there's no value in being the shot creator that helps take on offense to average (or substantially better in the RS, though, again see offensive rebounding). But because Barry is the "star", no-one else is close to that status and they won a title was won it seems like we have to give him huge credit. But in the playoffs they won with D, a lot of players contributed more on D than Barry (at that end) and they weren't in the RS a title quality team (SRS of 2.86).

I do agree that the defense should get a lot of credit. Wilkes was doing a fantastic job on Hayes by turning him into a black hole of sorts. There were instances where the Warriors were down by double digits heading into the 2nd half where Barry did have to take on the scoring volume. I see it as you have a group of guys putting a lot of energy defensively where understandably the offense suffers, but you still have to get buckets to win. Few games where Barry does have to carry the scoring burden. Closing game, Warriors down 14 when Attles gets ejected (protecting his guy Barry who shouldn't have reacted). Barry goes on a scoring run to cut down the deficit.

I don't necessarily view or imply it as "oh Barry is the star. Screw defense." I know in many ways this is like giving credit to Iverson or Kidd during there Finals runs, both of which had great defenses. With teams like this, if a lot of energy is focused on one end of the floor, the other generally suffers. On this board, they like to knock the 2 down while citing how strong those Sixers and Nets defense were. I agree with it to an extent mainly because part of the success of playing that way is because there is a solid offensive player to hold things down on that end similar to Jefferson's role with the Bobcats this past season. I do treat Barry differently simply because I think he's a much more talented offensive player. Barry did have a team which in the RS finished 2nd in ORTG over a 3 year span with him as the lead guy which can't be said for someone like Iverson. Should the defense get a ton of credit? Absolutely. A substantial portion of that though is because they have a capable offensive player who has great BBIQ.

[Texas Chuck]

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

Over 6 total games in 2 of those years tho. Sure he played great and that's to his credit, but I'm not sure how meaningful it is to lead the league in PER for the 1st round only.

Doing it once, sure . . . pretty meaningless. 3 times/4 series in 5 years, that adds up to the equivalent of a finals run.

OK that's fine to look at like that I guess. But then you have the issue of how misleading it would then be to claim he did it 3x.

Im not trying to take anything away from his play or blame him specifically that his team didn't advance further, but the bottom line continues to be he has a fairly small sample of games and when comparing him to top 30 players its something that makes it hard for personally to rank him higher at this point. But of course I'm a guy who looks at players' entire careers and not just peak or prime. I hate removing productive years from players simply because those years aren't as good as their best years.

[G35]

You mean like leading the NBA in playoff PER in 3 different seasons?

Over 6 total games in 2 of those years tho. Sure he played great and that's to his credit, but I'm not sure how meaningful it is to lead the league in PER for the 1st round only.

Doing it once, sure . . . pretty meaningless. 3 times/4 series in 5 years, that adds up to the equivalent of a finals run.

It is impressive but the 1st round is not as impressive as each succeeding round.......

[DQuinn1575]

- I'm not sure where you're going discussing PFs who played in the ABA before Gilmore (Connie Hawkins, Spencer Haywood)
though in any case the use of WS alone is dubious here as for instance Hawkins goes from his ABA recents champs to the worst team
in the NBA (whose bad team level numbers artificially deflate his WS). McDaniels is worth acknowledging however the use in this context
is a little unusual (as implicitly acknowledged he isn't in the same tier as other players being discussed).
As noted before many ABA centers had productive years in the NBA. Particularly when (I think this is the point being put across) the ABA's early weakness

Connie Hawkins, Spencer Haywood, and Jim McDaniels were all centers in the ABA and were all all-stars.
The ABA was full of power forwards playing center.
These guys dominated the ABA, and couldnt do so in the ABA

- Whilst I generally acknowledge the strong crop of NBA 70s centers (indeed this is suggested in the previous post)
- the center listing you give are perhaps more about star name power than performance. Walt Bellamy - in mini renaissance -

is productive by the boxscore, though he has traditionally been considered (perhaps substantially) less than sum of his boxscore contributions.

Unseld is in what appears to be a down year. Hayes is Hayes, shooting (and missing) a lot, between his boxscore and his intangiables I'm not impressed.
Lanier seems quite good by the boxscore, some have concerns about his D over his career and, whilst I'm unsure of how conclusive team level stuff
isfor his career in general, when it chimes with negative reviews of his early career D, this suggests PER might overstate his impact (though WS probably
understates it).

All these guys were way better than Zelmo Beaty.

Then too it's worth noting the emphasis on top level talent, which was my main bugbear from the original post (see opening line)

Particularly as the NBA, as the larger league would be expected to have a better list of top talent even if it were spread evenly
throughout the teams in both leagues (which is not my contention).

The top talent was not even, and the big difference was the center position

Artis played with decent, not overwhelming talent in Chicago - 1st Van Lier, Scott May, Mickey Johnson, later
Theus, Kenon, RIcky Sobers, and David Greenwood.

His best was 45 wins with the second group.

Not super teams, but Lanier took a team with similar talent- an older Dave Bing, plus Curtis Rowe, Don Adams, and Chris Ford to 52 wins.

Barry's title team - similar talent


The Bottom Line is:

Guys like Havlicek, Barry, Baylor, Durant could carry a team to a long playoff run - Artis couldn't carry a team to a playoff series win.

[RSCD3_]

Vote for Chris Paul

He has the highest peak left on the board

( besides bill Walton whose longevity prevents me from taking him here )

His prime seasons 08/09/11/12/13/14 are consistently high in win shares and PER

He was a legit MVP candidate in 08 and a fringe candidate in all the other years

He has performed well in the playoffs

Going from (RS) 18.6/4.4/9.9 on 47.2/35.7/85.7 ( all together 57.5 TS%)

To (PS) 20.6/4.8/9.7 on 47.8/38.0/81.8 ( all together 57.5 TS )

Increasing his volume while keeping the same efficiency and assists from the regular season and he was injured in more than one of those postseasons

He isn't in the Gary Payton / Walt Frazier tier defensively but he is one below it and his offense is one tier down from GOAT offensive PG's such as Nash and Magic. It's a great balance and he can provide a lot of " lift "




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Basketballefan]

Vote for Chris Paul

He has the highest peak left on the board






Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Idk about that. I think guys like Dwight and KD say otherwise. I'm sure there are others who are debatable as well if i really looked into it, but as for canidates, i don't think CP3's peak was all that much higher than Baylor or Barry.

[colts18]

Idk about that. I think guys like Dwight and KD say otherwise. I'm sure there are others who are debatable as well if i really looked into it, but as for canidates, i don't think CP3's peak was all that much higher than Baylor or Barry.

At his peak, CP3 averaged 24-11-5, .565 TS%, 31 PER, 126 O rating, 6.1 AST-TO ratio

[trex_8063]

My run-off vote goes to Rick Barry.

I'd rate Paul's peak a little higher, but Barry's five additional seasons (three of them of All-Star (or near to it) caliber) give him a pretty substantial longevity case over Paul at this point. Barry's extended prime ('66-'78) lasted longer than Paul's entire career to date, by a pretty substantial margin. And that great playoff campaign in '75 is a consideration as well.