RealGM Top 100 list #33

[Jim Naismith]

Pace adjust that rebounding, though, and what happens? He wouldn't be a double-digit rebounder in any of th last 35 years or so, which compromises those PER values.

As for longevity, he's got 12 meaningful seasons (one a half season due to the reserves), sure, but at notably inferior quality in the same role. Not too sure that's a valuable commodity here.

I thought PER normed to the year so rebounding would be compared to similarly paced rebounders of his era

That's my thought as well.

Otherwise, how could Wilt's 1962 stats (50.4 ppg / 25.7 rpg) convert to a PER of just 31.7?

[tsherkin]

It's relative to the year , but there are still absolute trb terms in the formula. It's a linear box score summary, the values influences the final result.

Nevertheless, a lesser scorer with high volume and even less impressive postseason efficiency?

Bleh, what does Baylor have on KD but being worse for longer?

[RayBan-Sematra]

Yeah I am going to vote for Durant even though neither him nor Baylor would be my actual choice for this spot.
VOTE : Durant

My reasoning was already stated pretty well by tsherk.
Durant just seems like a vastly superior scorer and offensive threat.

Baylor was way ahead of his time in terms of style and I appreciate that but his offensive ineffiency and his huge drop in effectiveness after the early 60's bothers me.
I mean was late 60's Baylor on average even better then Prime Gasol (not like saying that is really much of an insult but still).

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Peak and longevity are fairly clear cut here. This basically depends on how you see Elgin Baylor's prime years. Are they more along the lines of one of the great 80's forwards? If Baylor had merely exhibited that level of play, I'd take KD.

But I think Baylor was more than that. In this project, I've learned Elgin was a better passer/playmaker than I had previously thought. His efficiency issues aren't as damning to me anymore. And he improved in the playoffs, despite playing the GOAT defense with the GOAT defender many times.

I'm taking Elgin here. Certainly respect the Kevin Durant argument though. KD is an amazing, amazing basketball player.

[Clyde Frazier]

I can't get behind durant's 5 seasons of all NBA play (and yes, with the better peak) over an entire career of baylor, where he was routinely considered one of the best players in the game. Durant's career is largely incomplete. He hasn't even played 10 seasons in the NBA, and even if you put less stress on longevity, it just doesn't add up to me.

It actually makes me think of mullin, who had one of the more impressive 4-5 year runs we've seen. And yet, he ranked 93rd in the 2011 top 100. He didn't have the team success compared to durant, so i'll acknowledge that it separates them, but you can't pin that all on one player.

I've shown that baylor had some very impressive playoff performances, even adjusted for 2014 average pace. No, he doesn't come close to west's efficiency, but there's a reason he got voted in 18 spots earlier. Baylor's increase in scoring and efficiency in the playoffs shouldn't be overlooked. He gets knocked for having not won a championship during an era dominated by 1 team, yet durant really hasn't come close, relatively speaking.

Players talking about other players should always be taken with a grain of salt, but I think these quotes are telling. First regarding his ability as a player, and second as a teammate.

Gene Shue on Baylor:

You couldn’t defend Elgin. He had such a good outside shot. He could stare you down. He had a quick jab step. He would catch the ball at the top of the key or further out, and he’d get you going back and forth. He’d just explode by you. He had a nervous twitch. He was very, very hard to defend. Not only was he a good outside shooter, but he had a good deceptive first step. He had incredible strength and could hang in the air with the ball. When you put all those things together, you couldn’t stop him.

Jerry West on Baylor:

It was an honor to play with him. I never considered Elgin Baylor as someone I competed against. He is without a doubt one of the truly great players to play this game. I hear people talking about great players today, and I don’t see many that compare to him, I’ll tell you that. He had that wonderful, magical instinct for making plays, for doing things that you just had to watch. I learned from him, from watching him. I was young, wanting to learn. I had an incredible appreciation for other people’s talents. It was incredible to watch Elgin play.

http://www.forumblueandgold.com/2011/09 ... in-baylor/

West specifically has always seemed sincere in interviews.

[Doctor MJ]

Wow, this is wild.

Vote: Kevin Durant

I'm going to refrain from going into too much detail. I don't think anyone wants me to elaborate more on Baylor than I already have.

Durant's got serious longevity issues, but at 5 years of serious star prime, he's already matched Baylor, and if it's a question who I'd have more confidence in dominating with his A-game in any era, there's no question. Durant's amazing.

[trex_8063]

Has anyone done a serious look at Baylor versus Durant/Gervin?

Best 5 years.....

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) rs
Per 100 Possessions: 38.7 pts, 10.0 reb, 5.1 ast on 61.7% TS% (+8.0% on league avg)
26.9 PER, .250 WS/48 in 38.8 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) rs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.3 pts, 15.8 reb, 4.2 ast on 49.9 TS% (+2.7%)
26.1 PER, .195 WS/48 in 42.1 mpg

Kevin Durant (‘10-’14) playoffs
Per 100 Possessions: 35.8 pts, 10.2 reb, 5.2 ast on .583 TS% (+4.6%)
24.4 PER, .189 WS/48 in 42.3 mpg

Elgin Baylor (‘59-’63) playoffs
Estimated Per 100 Possessions: 30.4 pts, 13.2 reb, 3.5 ast on 51.2 TS% (+4.0%)
25.1 PER, .183 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg


Overall, their respective five best seasons look VERY close, with Durant having a small edge in the rs, but with things evening out (maybe even slight advantage Baylor) in the playoffs.
But then considering Durant only has two developmental seasons to add to the above, while Baylor has SEVEN additional seasons---which range between "role player" to All-Star (even All-NBA material)---to add to the above......total career value pretty clearly in favor of Baylor, imo.

I might have second thoughts if, for instance, Durant's impact data was super-elite (alongside Lebron/Garnett).....but it's not (not even particularly close, actually).

EDIT (9/26 at ~8:50am MST): Realized made small calculation error in estimating Baylor's Per 100 numbers. Has been corrected, and only made marginal difference (rs rebound per 100 went from 15.7 to 15.8, playoff assists per 100 went from 3.4 to 3.5; other values (rounded to nearest tenth) remained the same).

[Doctor MJ]

I mean was late 60's Baylor on average even better then Prime Gasol (not like saying that is really much of an insult but still).

Eh, okay well I feel I have to respond to this.

Thing is: Gasol's special for precisely the reason Baylor's problematic. What Gasol did when he came to the Lakers blending himself in as a 2nd talent is extremely impressive. I mean, EXTREMELY so. It completely changed how I saw him given that he plays in an era where there are other guys who are comparable as alphas...but aren't good enough as alphas to realistically be counted on to get there team's anywhere.

And so then we have Baylor in the other direction. Imagine if Gasol had come to the Lakers and just shot and shot and shot. Team wouldn't have made their leap forward, and Gasol would be rightly derided for it. That's what Baylor did except that he didn't change teams, and in part because of that most don't think of it the same way.

So was he better than Gasol in his weak years? His talent may have been, but everything about Gasol that's worth talking about, all the synergistic effects, Baylor failed at that. There's zero question who was more valuable between the two in those years for me.

And, just to throw a bone, I'll vote Baylor over Gasol without issue, but it's inspite of Gasol having a huge edge based on the years being mentioned here.

[trex_8063]

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Baylor obviously laps Durant in terms of longevity.

Even as far as peak goes, it's not clear that Durant has the edge, especially in the playoffs.

Baylor Postseason PER
1960: 25.2
1961: 28.2
1962: 26.5
1963: 26.6


Durant Postseason PER
2011: 24.1
2012: 27.5
2013: 26.0
2014: 22.6

Pace adjust that rebounding, though, and what happens? He wouldn't be a double-digit rebounder in any of th last 35 years or so, which compromises those PER values.

Actually, if we're just pace adjusting raw numbers (straight-up linear relationship), it turns out he probably WOULD still average double-digit rebounds in his '59-'63 prime area......
Even if playing a more modern-era standard 37-ish mpg for a modest-paced team (like 90-91 pace)--->that would still come out to around 11 rpg (based on his rs numbers; ~9.25 rpg based on his playoff numbers).

Unless you're also suggesting that there are fewer rebounds to grab due to better shooting efficiency (which if so, it's reasonable to assume HIS shooting efficiency would also be a bit better--->which would cause a compensatory elevation in his PER).

But all of this rather invalid thinking anyway, because PER is an era-standardized stat. It's standardized such that the average player within a given year has a PER ~15.0. So if pace is down, it's not only his rebounds (and other numbers) that go down, but also that of ALL of his peers.

[Jim Naismith]

It's relative to the year , but there are still absolute trb terms in the formula. It's a linear box score summary, the values influences the final result.

Are you saying the TRB contribution to PER is not pace-adjusted and league-normalized ??

[Texas Chuck]

Bleh, what does Baylor have on KD but being worse for longer?

But "worse" doesn't equate to bad. Sure if you think Durant is that much better, and I know how much stock you put into efficiency above everything else, then vote for him.

I don't see the peak as being enough superior to give up all those extra great seasons Baylor gives you. Durant's really only had 2 seasons with much of an all-around game. Before that he was almost exclusively a scorer. Now he's a great scorer to be sure, but I think this is too early.

Run-Off Vote: Baylor

[tsherkin]

Bleh, what does Baylor have on KD but being worse for longer?

But "worse" doesn't equate to bad. Sure if you think Durant is that much better, and I know how much stock you put into efficiency above everything else, then vote for him.

True, if irrelevant. I don't care to label Baylor "bad," but worse than Durant by a massive margin, no doubt. 8 years of sucky volume scoring in quantities way too large to sensible but are the driving force behind his reputation just doesn't sell me on him.

I don't see the peak as being enough superior to give up all those extra great seasons Baylor gives you.

He doesn't give you great seasons, though; he gives you scoring only impressive based on horrendous league agerage efficiency and notably inefficient next to guys like Oscar and West, and which didn't scale with improving league aveage.

Durant's really only had 2 seasons with much of an all-around game. Before that he was almost exclusively a scorer. Now he's a great scorer to be sure, but I think this is too early.

That seems a narrow, assist-based comment IMO. He was always a solid passer and a very good rebounder who simply took upon greater playmaking responsibilities. It's also largely irrelevent in comparison with Baylor, who wasn't markedly superior at ball-handling or passing.

[Texas Chuck]

Its hardly assist-based. He wasn't an interested defender and he has improved his rebounding over the last several seasons considerably. He himself has spoken about how much work he has put into these other areas of his game. I mean it not as criticism of Durant. This is true of most young players--they have to work to develop their game and there is a reason a lot of guys have their best years in their late 20's early 30's. They may have lost a little athleticism but their game is just so much further along.

I hold Durant in very high esteem for how every single year he adds another major element to his game. I imagine in a year or two we will see him add a post game and when he does I think its game over for the league. I expect him to be the dominant player in the game and the Thunder to be clearly the team to beat in large part due to him. But I can't give him credit in a ranking for things he hasn't done his whole career.

And regards Baylor I know the hate he receives here due to the emphasis on efficiency and this idea that he should have stood back and let West do even more. That's fair to a degree, but I think it gets overblown. I mean just look at the language you use to describe him. It's so hyperbolic that I don't even really know how to respond.

[lukekarts]

VOTE: Elgin Baylor

As peak performances showed (thanks, trex_8063), there's not a huge disparity between Baylor and Durant, but Baylor has longevity on his side currently, and that to me is pretty conclusive.

Do I think Durant is better? Yes. But it is so marginal, that I have to go with Baylor for his career.

[SactoKingsFan]

I don't think Durant's 5 year peak/prime advantage is enough to make up for Baylor's sizeable longevity edge. I'd have to place almost no value on Baylor's post extended peak seasons to give the overall edge to Durant.

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Sent from my LG-D800 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Jim Naismith]

In the playoffs, Durant's edge in efficiency over Baylor is only big for a single outlier year of Durant's career, 2012.

Baylor 1960-63 Playoff FG%
.424
.430
.428
.453

Durant 2011-14 Playoff FG%
.449
.517
.455
.460

[DQuinn1575]

I don't think Durant's 5 year peak/prime advantage is enough to make up for Baylor's sizeable longevity edge. I'd have to place almost no value on Baylor's post extended peak seasons to give the overall edge to Durant.

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Sent from my LG-D800 using RealGM Forums mobile app

I don't think people are giving Durant any credit for competing in a much tougher league than Baylor was in 50 years ago. This was the argument that rightly delayed Pettit and Mikan.

Durant's peak stats are fairly even, done in a much tougher era.
Baylor was still in a semi integrated league -

[RayBan-Sematra]

I don't think Durant's 5 year peak/prime advantage is enough to make up for Baylor's sizeable longevity edge. I'd have to place almost no value on Baylor's post extended peak seasons to give the overall edge to Durant.

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Sent from my LG-D800 using RealGM Forums mobile app

I don't think people are giving Durant any credit for competing in a much tougher league than Baylor was in 50 years ago. This was the argument that rightly delayed Pettit and Mikan.

Durant's peak stats are fairly even, done in a much tougher era.
Baylor was still in a semi integrated league -

Do you think the early 60's were noticeably weaker then the late 60's and onwards?
I did notice that many big name stars from the 60's put up by far their best stats early in the decade and then tailed off noticeably afterwards.
Guys like Baylor & Oscar etc... Even Wilt had his best volume seasons in those years.

I tend to think the league was not used to such new and freakish talents at the time and it took a few year for them to catch up. Not to mention some rule changes that were made during that time period which was aimed at hampering some big name stars.

[Jim Naismith]

Do you think the early 60's were noticeably weaker then the late 60's and onwards?
I did notice that many big name stars from the 60's put up by far their best stats early in the decade and then tailed off noticeably afterwards.
Guys like Baylor & Oscar etc... Even Wilt had his best volume seasons in those years.

I tend to think the league was not used to such new and freakish talents at the time and it took a few year for them to catch up. Not to mention some rule changes that were made during that time period which was aimed at hampering some big name stars.

Much of the dropoff in Baylor's production can be attributed to his knee problems that began in the 1963-64 season.

[Texas Chuck]

I don't think people are giving Durant any credit for competing in a much tougher league than Baylor was in 50 years ago. This was the argument that rightly delayed Pettit and Mikan.

-

And its clearly already delayed Baylor.


I think there is some dispute over just how much difference in quality is in the leagues, but pretty much everyone has acknowledged that Durant has peaked higher. I think there is simply a difference in opinion as to how much weight Baylor's longevity should get. Those of us who find some meaningful value there are voting for him. Those who don't--or who see the peak gap as much higher are voting for Durant.