RealGM Top 100 list #33

[penbeast0]

Well Jim, I think your problem is solved pretty well by using TS% relative to league for that year (or team depending on the question you are asking); the way you are looking at it skews the data much more oddly.

It looks like Elgin Baylor wins this runoff easily.

[Jim Naismith]

I grant you that Durant is the master of the rip-through and the foul shots that it generates. That seems to be the lion share of his efficiency delta.

This is a needless reduction of Durant. A big part of his draw rate stems from being near-as 7 feet tall and an elite shooter. Only Dirk gets fouled more shooting jump shots. You have to challenge Durant's shot or he kills you and due to his length he gets hit on the arm a bunch. Add to that his ability to get to the rim and his draw rate is as legit as can be in a star-driven league(all stars get the benefit of the doubt and thus have slightly inflated draw rates)

Looking at playoff free throws:

Baylor 1960-63 .... 11.3 FTA @ .811 FT%
Durant 2011-14 ..... 8.9 FTA @ .836 FT%

Even in Durant's wheelhouse, his advantage is not obvious.

[drza]

Another thing I'd have you consider is that Baylor did what he did in a time when: a) there was no 3pt line (i.e. awful floor spacing), b) big-men defenders who were essentially allowed to camp under the rim if they wanted (and for the first 6 years of his career the lane was 4 feet narrower than today, too), c) many of the styles of modern ball-handling (elaborate cross-overs, shimmy-shakes, the "backing down" dribble in the post, etc) may have been called illegal (palming), and d) hand-checking was allowed if I'm not mistaken.

These circumstances were ALL disadvantageous to a penetrating/slashing type of perimeter scorer (like Baylor).

I think that this is a mega-wonderful point that hasn't seemed to gain much traction. By-far the biggest things that I've seen held against Baylor in this project is that his efficiency was poor, and that the fact that his relative efficiency vs. the league was ok shouldn't resonate because fellow stars like West, Oscar and Wilt were able to score at much more efficiency. However, West was known for his long-range jumper, Oscar was also strong with his mid-range jumper in addition to his size advantage to 1-on-1 post up his counterparts, and Wilt was...Wilt.

Of the offensive superstars of that time era, Baylor is the one whose efficiency would have been most negatively impacted by the elements that TRex laid out. Well, Baylor and Pettit, and as I pointed out way back int he Baylor and Pettit debates, Baylor's efficiency looked very comparable to Pettit's (especially in the postseason). At that time the counter-argument was that essentially Baylor had a more high-efficiency teammate while Pettit didn't, making Pettit the smarter scorer. I find that whole line of thought so wrong-headed as to be borderline insulting. I especially liked the post from a thread or two ago pointing out that, if Baylor was somehow holding West back, you'd have expected West's production and the Lakers' offensive production to consistently go through the roof in Baylor's absence. But that's not what happened. West's volume scaled up, yes, but the overall offensive results fluctuated. Tie that to the obvious and tangible positive impact that Baylor was having during his peak (that could be shown quantitatively), and I find the inefficiency arguments less and less convincing.

Going back to that Baylor vs Pettit comp I did about 10 threads ago, I found Baylor to be more impressive than Pettit even then. The only reason that I haven't been voting for Baylor since then is that a) Pettit went in earlier than I'd have voted for him and b) I have other candidates like Kidd and Zeke that I've been voting for. Plus, I haven't had the time to go in depth in this project for quite awhile now, which has kept me from delving more into Baylor.

Anyway, compared to Durant, I find Baylor more impressive. Interestingly, Durant's biggest calling card (hyper efficiency for volume scoring) is considered Baylor's biggest weakness...but I continue to be more and more convinced that individual scoring efficiency has become hugely over-rated in our evaluation process. As the +/- data expands back into the 90s, we're more and more inundated with examples of lower efficiency players making "surprisingly" good offensive contributions. Offense, and basketball in general, has a lot more moving parts for an individual offensive player than just scoring efficiency. And because TEAM scoring efficiency has proven valuable and the box-score-based "advanced" stats all majorly factor in scoring efficiency, I think focus on that area has gone too far.

Anyway, off my soapbox and on topic, Baylor's peak looked at least as valuable to me as the best 5 years that we've seen from Durant. Baylor's scoring prowess was obviously extremely impactful on his team during that period (a couple of quick measures to show that would be the huge jump they took in his rookie season, or his strongly positive WOWY scores during that period). He was also a major rebounding threat (even with pace accounted for) from the forward position, and as has been pointed out a positive ball-handler/passer as well. Durant is growing into the other aspects of the game beyond scoring, and his ceiling is tremendous with his physical gifts. But to date I'm more impressed with Baylor, especially when you factor in the obvious longevity advantage.

Vote: Elgin Baylor

[Laimbeer]

In terms of historical (published) rankings, Baylor is clearly the highest guy left. His average ranking is 11.47058824 with lowest rankings (highest number) of 15 (Book of Basketball paperback) and 16 (100 Greatest Basketball Players). Next is Cousy average 19.6875. Not saying we should follow this just putting something out there for discussion so I'm contributing something.

Do you have a link to these rankings and how they are making up the average?

No link, it's not online (though several of the constituent lists are). It's unweighted so skews pro older players (who don't have to compete with players since on the older lists).

100 Greatest Basketball Players
Pro Basketball Statistics
The Encyclopedia of Basketball Team Histories
SPORT Magazine (Fab Fifty)
Slam "The Real Top 50 of All Time"
Athlon 50 Greatest Special Magazine
Assoc Press Player of the Century
Slam
Who's better, who's best in basketball?
50 Sense
Heroes of the Hardcourt
Slam
The Book of Basketball
The Book of Basketball (Paperback)
Beckett Presents Basketball Greats
Slam (500 Greatest Special)
NBA List Jam!

Are the constituent lists from oldest to newest. At present it's basically double weighting Simmons' list most players don't really move. Ideally it would have the Basketball Digest players of the century list but whilst I've got the main contributing author's list and most of the official list, I wouldn't want to include it based on guesswork.

Any other questions?

Do you have a link that shows all their rankings and everyone's average?

[Basketballefan]

I don't understand all the Baylor hate.

How anyone can act like KD is far and away better are simply ignoring the facts.

[Doctor MJ]

Congrats to Baylor! Glad I don't have to be a hater any more.