RealGM Top 100 List #37

[RSCD3_]

Geez im really deadlocked on miller vs payton vs Thomas

Need some more input on Thomas vs Payton vs miller

[Quotatious]

Geez im really deadlocked on miller vs payton vs Thomas

Need some more input on Thomas vs Payton vs miller

Well, I'd put it this way - Payton is the best defender (by a huge margin) and the best all-around player of the three, but the worst playoff performer. Isiah is the best playmaker/creator on offense. and a pretty good playoff performer, but the worst longevity. Reggie is the best, most efficient scorer, with the best longevity and a great playoff performer, but he's the worst all-around player, and least capable of creating his own offense.

Before the project, I ranked Reggie just in the early 50s (basically even with Ray Allen), and both Payton/Thomas in the 35-40 range (Zeke marginally higher, but now I'm higher on Payton, than before), so Miller wasn't really in their class, in my opinion, but now I really appreciate the arguments for him. I still think that Ray should be mentioned as his equal (more or less), and I'm still not ready to put them in my top 40, because I'm not really comfortable putting second tier stars like Miller/Allen, over MVP candidates like Dwight, Zo or Cowens (even if their longevity is a lot better - same thing with Mutombo vs Dwight/Zo).

[Texas Chuck]

I still have a hard time with the idea that Reggie is a tier above Ray Allen too. I think he is great at what he does, put I think his portability in that heavily defined role is much less than has been portrayed.

[penbeast0]

Using trex's numbers, it looks like a runoff between Gary Payton and Reggie Miller:

Gary Payton (6) - penbeast0, trex_8063, tsherkin, SactoKingsFan, Quotatious, Clyde Frazier
Reggie Miller (3) - john248, RayBan-Sematra, Doctor MJ

[Basketballefan]

Vote Payton. This is a no brainer for me, Miller was too one dimensional to be put above Payton, who was more impactful with his defense and all around game.

I'm baffled at why Miller is even getting attention this high. I don't think he has any argument over Gervin, Thomas Pierce etc.

Sorry but theres just nothing impressive about 20 4 3 with bad defense.

[Clyde Frazier]

Regardless of whether you have Miller ahead of Allen or not, I think they're very clearly in the same tier. Both have great longevity, so take a look at their 12 year primes (00-11 for allen, 90-01 for miller) below.

REGULAR SEASON

Allen avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_game

Miller avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_game

Allen per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_poss

Miller per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_poss

Allen advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:advanced

Miller advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:advanced

PLAYOFFS

Allen avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_game

Miller avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_game

Allen per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_poss

Miller per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_poss

Allen advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_advanced

Miller advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_advanced

The only real outlier is miller's per 100 scoring output in the playoffs, but that can at least partially be attributed to allen's role changing once he got to boston. Even still, it doesn't scream "different tier" to me.

[Texas Chuck]

Run-off Vote: Payton

far better defender
better at creating his own shot
more portable

[Doctor MJ]

Regardless of whether you have Miller ahead of Allen or not, I think they're very clearly in the same tier. Both have great longevity, so take a look at their 12 year primes (00-11 for allen, 90-01 for miller) below.

REGULAR SEASON

Allen avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_game

Miller avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_game

Allen per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_poss

Miller per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:per_poss

Allen advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:advanced

Miller advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... m:advanced

PLAYOFFS

Allen avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_game

Miller avg - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_game

Allen per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_poss

Miller per 100 - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_per_poss

Allen advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_advanced

Miller advanced - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... s_advanced

The only real outlier is miller's per 100 scoring output in the playoffs, but that can at least partially be attributed to allen's role changing once he got to boston. Even still, it doesn't scream "different tier" to me.

I suppose it's all in how we look at tiers.

One thing though: We talk about Ray Allen as we do because he's more than just another guy with a good PER. He's an all-timer at what he does in a role few attempt to do, and which is more valuable than stats often indicate. So to then use stats to try to justify why another in that role isn't that much better than him is problematic.

The nature of this role is that the guy in question is not going to score at huge volume if things are going well, and he's not going to rack up assists or rebounds much either. So then, how do we judge him?

Efficiency is clearly the most salient thing. Ray Allen looks excellent on that front, but Reggie is considerably better. Ray's 5-10% TS more efficient than league norms, Reggie's another 5% on top of that.

Part of that of course is in the free throws. In the true off-ball roles Allen played everywhere but Seattle, he never broke 5 FTAs per game. Miller peaked at 7.6. Even in the more on-ball role (and hence typically free throw friendly) that Allen played in Seattle, he didn't break 6, and when he was at his peak in FT generation, his FTA/FGA ratio was only 27% while Miller in his FT generation peak had a ratio of 51%.

I don't want to double-count this ability, but obviously Reggie was doing tricky things that Ray just didn't have as part of his mental framework. Playing against Reggie felt like playing against a Kidd or a Magic, a guy who would find a way to mess you up that you could never predict. Ray never felt like that. Ray was more a workmanlike perfectionist than he was a "smartest guy on the court" player like Reggie was.

Circling back to finish up: The other big thing I'd want in this role is some manner of explosiveness. Not literally physically, but just - can the guy scale as needed. This is another thing where Ray's not bad, but Reggie's a legend for this. His playoff explosions were common and legendary, his clutch play too.

Does that make him a separate tier? All depends on how you see. What I'll say is that Ray Allen is good enough that were he voted in Top 50, I wouldn't bat an eye, and if he doesn't make it, there will be people voted in who I say "Him, over Ray? I don't know about that". But of that last group, Reggie wouldn't be in it. He's clearly better. And I think that's why I tend to call him "next tier". If I have no real debate going on between two guys, then what would it mean to put them on the same tier?

Last thing I'll note: Because I think like this, I'm probably more likely to talk about tier differences between two very similar players. Here we are debating Miller vs Payton, two very different guys. I can't claim that I see Miller over Payton as any kind of unassailable thing. They have way different roles. The only way I know to get serious player comparison closure over such different guys is with data, and we don't have enough data on these guys to make that call. But Miller vs Allen, yeah, I can figure that one out pretty confidently.

[Doctor MJ]

I'm baffled at why Miller is even getting attention this high. I don't think he has any argument over Gervin, Thomas Pierce etc.

Sorry but theres just nothing impressive about 20 4 3 with bad defense.

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

[Basketballefan]

I'm baffled at why Miller is even getting attention this high. I don't think he has any argument over Gervin, Thomas Pierce etc.

Sorry but theres just nothing impressive about 20 4 3 with bad defense.

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

[ceiling raiser]

I'm baffled at why Miller is even getting attention this high. I don't think he has any argument over Gervin, Thomas Pierce etc.

Sorry but theres just nothing impressive about 20 4 3 with bad defense.

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

[Basketballefan]

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

That's fair.

I think maybe you're taking what i said a little out of context. I'm not saying he isn't an impressive player in general, but when you are talking about the top 40 guys, i don't believe he fits the criteria.

[ceiling raiser]

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

That's fair.

I think maybe you're taking what i said a little out of context. I'm not saying he isn't an impressive player in general, but when you are talking about the top 40 guys, i don't believe he fits the criteria.

That's cool. I'm struggling here with my pick too. Finally caught up on the discussion from the last half dozen threads, I think I'll feel confident casting a vote this round.

[Basketballefan]

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

That's fair.

I think maybe you're taking what i said a little out of context. I'm not saying he isn't an impressive player in general, but when you are talking about the top 40 guys, i don't believe he fits the criteria.

That's cool. I'm struggling here with my pick too. Finally caught up on the discussion from the last half dozen threads, I think I'll feel confident casting a vote this round.

Yes, i have not had a whole lot of time to really put together a strong argument for a player at this point. However i have voted in the runoffs because it is simply picking between 2 players. I would really like to see Gervin, Pierce, and Mchale get in before Reggie does. There a quite a few others that i would have over him as well. I'm still not sure why Reggie should be getting in over Ray Allen.

[tsherkin]

I should point out hat Reggie generated his own offense just fine, he simply did not do it through dribble isolations or heavy PnR.

[Doctor MJ]

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

Right.

Fundamentally how I see Reggie is not through a lens of volume stats. I see him through his role. A very valuable role that I'd love to have a player play on my team.

How valuable is it compared to other roles? Well, among perimeter players, I'd rather a world class playmaker who can score alright certainly, and there are clearly scorers I'd rather have than Reggie. But do I want your classic volume scorer over Reggie? Not unless he's really, really good and doesn't mess up the flow of the offense.

Not a whole lot of guys left on the board who can claim to possibly be that.

What about defense? I don't see Miller as a serious issue on that front. Fine to give Payton a boost in this comparison based on that, but Payton gets that over most, right?

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Gary Payton

Miller and Payton would be a perfect backcourt fit-wise.

I'll take Payton because he's got strong longevity of and durability in his prime. Solid rebounder for a point guard. He was up and down with his playoff performances but was generally pretty good. Might be the best defensive point guard ever at his peak. Strong post game, could get hot from outside, kept the turnovers down, and was a good playmaker.

[penbeast0]

Gary Payton (9) - penbeast0, trex_8063, tsherkin, SactoKingsFan, Quotatious, Clyde Frazier. Basketballefan, Chuck Texas, ronnymac2


Reggie Miller (3) - john248, RayBan-Sematra, Doctor MJ

[trex_8063]

Right so, as long as you think that "20 4 3" lets you know what Miller was, you're going to miss a lot.

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

Two of the three things you mentioned are also accomplished by a player like Wesley Matthews. jsia....

I can see (even remember) Miller causing defensive miscues on potential screen switches as he's running his man ragged thru multiple screens. But ultimately this doesn't translate to anything near the "defense warping" effect that Dirk has/had.
Because ultimately Reggie is relatively one-dimensional in the way that he scores (even if he is the best of the best in that one method), almost never warrants a double-team, and doesn't create mis-match problems either.
Individually, there's no question he's near-impossible to guard; he's pretty consistently gonna get his, and generally pretty efficiently too.....but never a big volume that he's garnering so efficiently (even at his zenith it was ~15 FGA/game; the rest of the time the Pacers would have to settle for whatever efficiency the rest of the team can manage).

And given Miller's other short-comings, idk, I'm having trouble seeing the rationale for giving him top 40 credit. And this certainly isn't bias: I wore #31 in highschool (because of Reggie Miller), and Reggie Miller IS the desktop background on computer I currently have on my lap. He's on my short-list of all-time favorite players. I just don't think he was this good.

[RayBan-Sematra]

What exactly am i missing out on?

I value players who are more well rounded. He scores an efficient 18-22ppg i get that. Besides that not much else.

Helps space the floor, is difficult to follow when running off screens, isn't particularly ball-dominant.

All three things (among the other stuff he brings) make defending him a living hell, and allow teammates to more easily play their games.

Two of the three things you mentioned are also accomplished by a player like Wesley Matthews. jsia....

I can see (even remember) Miller causing defensive miscues on potential screen switches as he's running his man ragged thru multiple screens. But ultimately this doesn't translate to anything near the "defense warping" effect that Dirk has/had.
Because ultimately Reggie is relatively one-dimensional in the way that he scores (even if he is the best of the best in that one method), and almost never warrants a double-team.
Individually, there's no question he's near-impossible to guard; he's pretty consistently gonna get his, and generally pretty efficiently too.....but never a big volume that he's garnering so efficiently (even at his zenith it was ~15 FGA/game; the rest of the time the Pacers would have to settle for whatever efficiency the rest of the team can manage).

And given Miller's other short-comings, idk, I'm having trouble seeing the rationale for giving him top 40 credit. And this certainly isn't bias: I wore #31 in highschool (because of Reggie Miller), and Reggie Miller IS the desktop background on computer I currently have on my lap. He's on my short-list of all-time favorite players. I just don't think he was this good.

Yes but as mentioned earlier Reggie could raise his volume and usage rate without becoming less effective.
He has numerous playoff runs where he raised his average volume scorer to 23-25ppg and he has individual series where he went well beyond that.
He didn't seem to have a trouble creating his own offense even if his methods were different then other guys.

His combination of solid volume + super great efficiency & consistency makes him a pretty damn good offensive anchor.
No he obviously isn't Dirk but Dirk is one of the GOAT offensive anchors so being ranked behind him still leaves room for a high ranking.