RealGM Top 100 List #43

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Tracy McGrady

Defaulting to McGrady for now. His quality of prime is Kobe-level though much shorter compared to Bryant. In his prime, he combined amazing pick-n-roll play with low turnovers, 3-point shooting, super-high volume/USG%, and solid defense. He never got to prove it really, but I think his game would flourish next to offensive talent.

His final Toronto year shouldn't be discounted either. He was a really good 2-way player with great rebounding and defensive activity.

[trex_8063]

Great post. I did not follow much of Bill Walton's career but you seem to make a very good argument for him. Also he's the only MVP + FMVP guy left right? That's got to make a case for him too.

Nope. Willis Reed and Wes Unseld, too.

[E-Balla]

Then there's the matter that I feel the need to re-calibrate how I saw his '10-11 season. I made comments about this at the time, but gave him more benefit of the doubt: '10-11 represented his peak impact as a basketball player...precisely because his posturing made the team so desperate that they made some terrible trades which made the team worse but made the team need Dwight more than ever. He was my choice for MVP then, and technically that's just as accurate as ever, but I'm very reluctant to reward a guy that kind of off-court effect.

Additional RAPM data has become available, and it seems to make it all the more clear that his impact in general was a bit exaggerated.

This is not true at all. Neither is your bashing of his 2011 season. In 2011 Dwight Howard actually lead the league in xRAPM. This is xRAPM ranks during his prime:

08: 4th
09: 4th
10: 2nd
11: 1st
12: 2nd
13: 6th

He is doing fine in that stat.

You know as well as I do that Doc meant his RAPM not xRAPM. That said Dwight has always ranked high in RAPM.

I'm voting Tracy McGrady. To me it is TMac vs Dwight and that's a tough one. TMac is clearly the better player with a better prime but Dwight is at least equal as a playoff performer and he has less injury concerns through their primes. What made me change my vote from Dwight to Tracy (and if I was thinking right it would've changed my Zo vote to Tracy) is that Tracy has 7 great years to Dwight's 6 year prime (not counting his LA season because he wasn't that great). Its also hard to blame Tracy for constantly losing when he played great at almost all times.

[Texas Chuck]

Great post. I did not follow much of Bill Walton's career but you seem to make a very good argument for him. Also he's the only MVP + FMVP guy left right? That's got to make a case for him too.

Nope. Willis Reed and Wes Unseld, too.

Dave Cowens doesn't have a FMVP, but he certainly should have in 1976. He was certainly the best player on the team and in the Finals. And in 1974 its closer, but again you could argue him over Hondo for FMVP.

[Joao Saraiva]

Great post. I did not follow much of Bill Walton's career but you seem to make a very good argument for him. Also he's the only MVP + FMVP guy left right? That's got to make a case for him too.

Nope. Willis Reed and Wes Unseld, too.

Thanks for the information. That's why I don't vote on all time lists, anything that is earlier than the 80s (and I've watched a reasonable amount of stuff from late 80s but not early 80s) I just don't have enough info or the patience to watch it. Do you think they are going at such "low" places because they deserve to be there or do you think there is a tendency to vote more on current/not so long in the league players because people watched them more?

[RSCD3_]

Don't mean to interrupt or anything and I like the discussion but I was just wondering if anyone could either explain or more likely link to posts that made people sour on Dwight so much. He was higher on the previous list and he has added more seasons since. I figure it is more than just public perception that lowered his standing

Speaking only for myself:

Dwight Howard's on-court ability has seriously degraded since 2010 as a result of his desire to have the offense run through him in the post.

After reevaluating Howard's career, I now think of Howard's peak as being in 2010 instead of 2011. 2011 was fool's gold in the sense that his USG% and scoring volume increased to career-high levels while his effect on a team's offense went from super useful (historic offensive rebounder, amazing pick-n-roll finisher + vacuum effect, attacks in transition with full-court speed + pindown power, foul draw god) to borderline negative (poor passer, takes other teammates out of rhythm, using more possessions where fewer players are incorporated in a play). This was not the optimal way to use Dwight Howard.

Orlando was the 4th-best offensive team in the league in 2010 thanks in part to a super 53.6 eFG%, which trailed only Steve Nash's historic Suns in that category. This is with Dwight Howard taking the second-least amount of field goal attempts in his career, but taking shots that allowed him to lead the league in eFG%. His give-and-take with his teammates was as beautiful as it was frighteningly unstoppable in the sense that he was their ultra-efficient finisher who instilled feared in the opponents' defense when he was off-ball, sucking defenders to him with his horizontal movements and vertical finishing capabilities. I mean, it's as good as an assist for Howard if his off-ball dive off a pick-n-roll sucks two defenders in and Nelson fires a pass to Carter for an open 3.

The likelihood of Carter or Shooter X getting that open 3 decreases if you simply supply Howard with post-up possessions, because he's not a great passer, he doesn't read defenses quickly, and he doesn't demand triple teams that great post players of the past did.

But 2011 came, and as Howard's USG% and scoring volume ramped up, Orlando's ORTG (14th) and eFG% (52.1) swung downward. You see the gaudy scoring/efficiency in the playoffs that year, but also the 5.5 turnovers to just .5 assists. Orlando's playoff offense stunk, too.

Unfortunately, 2011 was fool's gold which Howard latched onto, as those same on-court problems have persisted the following 3 years. Quite frankly, it's depressing for me. Howard could have been the most dangerous off-ball C in history with his phenomenal athletic ability and spatial awareness. He's perfectly suited to be a moderate-volume super Tyson Chandler with a little bit of iso-scoring in spot situations thrown in. Combine that with DPOY defense and superstar minutes and you've got what should be a top-3 player in the game year in and year out.

Instead, his offense is neutral, and in my opinion perhaps a negative for the past 3-4 seasons, and his defense has slipped a tad as well. And it's completely tied to his desire to get away from being a pick-n-roll threat in the halfcourt and instead be a halfcourt post player.

Let me be clear: I have no problem with his power post arsenal. He's pretty efficient as an iso threat when he shoots. But delivering him the ball stymies ball movement, doesn't help anybody else, doesn't incorporate other players, and is a risky strategy as far as turnovers are concerned. He loosens a defense up much more as an off-ball player.

His direct sabotage of his team's optimal offensive/overall results, as a consequence of his on-court mindset and attitude, hurts his longevity in my eyes. These are not prime Dwight Howard seasons on the order of 2009 or 2010.

Why not 2009 instead of 2010, most of his box score stats went down, he was worse In the playoffs IMO





Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[john248]

Edited my post ... post #9 ... to vote for Dwight.

[penbeast0]

Dwight Howard -- penbeast0, john248

Dikembe Mutombo -- Jaivl, Chuck Texas

Tracy McGrady -- ronnymac2, E-balla

[Basketballefan]

(...)

Exactly my thoughs. I value '10 Howard more than any other version.

Vote: Dikembe Mutombo

-Better defensive player than Howard at everything.
-Better longevity than Howard.
-Can use him as your #2, your #3, your sixth man... in almost every team. Much more portable.
-No ego concers or off-the-court antics.

Dwight's prime is so much better than Mutumbo's that i'm not sure how much longevity should really matter.

Dwight from 09-2012 was a legitimate top 5 player in the league. Each of those years are better than Deke's peak. The offensive gap is bigger than the defensive one.

[Basketballefan]

So, I thought Dwight would be the favorite last time, and hence I really think of him as the favorite now. He'd be a reasonable choice.

Guy I'd most like to see discussed in more detail: Kevin McHale. Do you see him as a superstar in his own right who just lacked longevity (but still had plenty compared to the other bigs being bandied), or do you see him as something more limited?

I view Mchale as being a second option most of his career. He was elite at it no doubt though.

I couldn't really see him leading a team to a championship as the main guy.

To me the next 3 guys to get in should be Iverson, Mchale and Howard.

[trex_8063]

Well, I'm gonna go ahead and cast my vote for Dolph Schayes again....

Dolph Schayes (‘50-’61)---12-year span, 850 rs games
Estimate Per 100 possessions (rs): 23.8 pts, 15.7 reb, 3.8 ast @ 49.1% TS% (+4.4 to league avg)
*PER 22.9, .206 WS/48 in 36.9 mpg (for '52-'61).
Was even better in playoffs.....
Estimated Per 100 possessions (playoffs): 25.1 pts, 16.0 reb, 3.5 ast @ .507 TS%
*24.0 PER, .201 WS/48 in 36.0 mpg (for '52-'61).
Career rs WS: 142.4 (#26 all-time)
Career playoff WS: 14.0 (#44 all-time)

#44 all-time in MVP Award Shares (and MVP was not something that was even awarded during his first SIX seasons). He was in the top 5 in MVP voting three times, six times in the top 8. In ‘58 he finished 2nd only to Bill Russell (even ahead of Bob Pettit!).
In the RealGM RPoY project, he was rated the 3rd-best player in both ‘57 and ‘58 (behind only Russell and Pettit), was rated THE BEST player in the game in ‘55. Is at least top 6 two other seasons. Overall he’s #24 in RealGM RPoY Shares.

12-time All-NBA team (6 1st Teams, 6 2nd Teams).

Era considerations apply, but if I can piggy-back on Owly's internal consistency comments: this forum did vote George Mikan (whose career is even earlier, marginally, and whose career was barely half the length of Schayes's) in at #24. And while Schayes was not as dominant as Mikan, the above shows that he was indeed elite for many years: basically TWICE as long as Mikan, and did so through about half of the Bill Russell era. He only stopped being one of the league's elite when he was getting somewhat far north of age 30 (about 33 to be precise). fyi, some other players (already voted in) who were pretty diminished (if not out-right "fell off a cliff") by age 33 or sooner include: Walt Frazier, Bob Pettit (retired before hitting 33), George Mikan, Elgin Baylor, Isiah Thomas (retired at age 33), and I suspect Dwyane Wade. Realistically, I'm not sure we can hold fading effectiveness at age 33 against him.
And he did actually have two more fair-to-decent role player years after that. His only completely ineffectual year was his final season (was 35 going into it).

During his peak years, it could even be said that he was one of a few players who "dominated" the game (albeit to a smaller degree than Mikan).

During his best 5-year span ('54-'58), which is mostly in the shot-clock era....
Dolph Schayes (‘54-’58)
Estimate Per 100 possessions (rs): 24.7 pts, 15.5 reb, 3.6 ast @ .499 TS% (avg +4.8% to league)
PER 24.0, .231 WS/48 in 37.4 mpg
Again, looks even marginally better in post-season....
Estimated Per 100 possessions (playoffs): 25.0 pts, 16.8 reb, 3.6 ast @ .501 TS%
PER 25.6, .229 WS/48 in 34.8 mpg.


Regarding speculation on era-translation, I'd like to again just throw out that reminder that it is indeed just speculation.
Further, I think there's something to be said for the best of the best in your own time, and helping to carry forth the evolution and grow the popularity of the game. Leonardo di Vinci's understanding of physics and engineering would be considered pretty infantile relative to modern inventors and engineers. Doesn't change the fact that he was a genius. I tend to feel somewhat similarly about basketball's history.

"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."
--Isaac Newton

I can't find it in myself to disregard the achievements of past greats (especially when they were AS ELITE as the above indicates) based on statements like "meh, not athletic enough to dominate in the modern game" or similar.

[Doctor MJ]

Then there's the matter that I feel the need to re-calibrate how I saw his '10-11 season. I made comments about this at the time, but gave him more benefit of the doubt: '10-11 represented his peak impact as a basketball player...precisely because his posturing made the team so desperate that they made some terrible trades which made the team worse but made the team need Dwight more than ever. He was my choice for MVP then, and technically that's just as accurate as ever, but I'm very reluctant to reward a guy that kind of off-court effect.

Additional RAPM data has become available, and it seems to make it all the more clear that his impact in general was a bit exaggerated.

This is not true at all. Neither is your bashing of his 2011 season. In 2011 Dwight Howard actually lead the league in xRAPM. This is xRAPM ranks during his prime:

08: 4th
09: 4th
10: 2nd
11: 1st
12: 2nd
13: 6th

He is doing fine in that stat.

C'mon man, we've been over this.

When you know a person is using metric X you can't respond to a statement about X by saying "You're wrong, metric Y says this." There's nothing wrong with you sharing this data in response to my statement, but when you do so you need to being by acknowledging why we're using different metrics in some way.

Also your "fine" statement at the end is just another one of those things that makes you keep looking like you're just all about using cheap rhetoric to try to win an argument. (Obviously I think Dwight's RAPM is not only fine but very fine indeed, but it can still be that and also be less than what I previously thought of it as.) It's not just that it's not good for a sincere debate, this is a tight community, there are things you can do if people aren't paying attention that you don't want to do otherwise.

You've got a perfectly valid viewpoint on this stuff, I would suggest jump in in situations like this by just simply stating for the gallery why you philosophically disagree with me, and then show the data and reasoning behind your differing conclusion.

[ronnymac2]

Spoiler:

Don't mean to interrupt or anything and I like the discussion but I was just wondering if anyone could either explain or more likely link to posts that made people sour on Dwight so much. He was higher on the previous list and he has added more seasons since. I figure it is more than just public perception that lowered his standing

Speaking only for myself:

Dwight Howard's on-court ability has seriously degraded since 2010 as a result of his desire to have the offense run through him in the post.

After reevaluating Howard's career, I now think of Howard's peak as being in 2010 instead of 2011. 2011 was fool's gold in the sense that his USG% and scoring volume increased to career-high levels while his effect on a team's offense went from super useful (historic offensive rebounder, amazing pick-n-roll finisher + vacuum effect, attacks in transition with full-court speed + pindown power, foul draw god) to borderline negative (poor passer, takes other teammates out of rhythm, using more possessions where fewer players are incorporated in a play). This was not the optimal way to use Dwight Howard.

Orlando was the 4th-best offensive team in the league in 2010 thanks in part to a super 53.6 eFG%, which trailed only Steve Nash's historic Suns in that category. This is with Dwight Howard taking the second-least amount of field goal attempts in his career, but taking shots that allowed him to lead the league in eFG%. His give-and-take with his teammates was as beautiful as it was frighteningly unstoppable in the sense that he was their ultra-efficient finisher who instilled feared in the opponents' defense when he was off-ball, sucking defenders to him with his horizontal movements and vertical finishing capabilities. I mean, it's as good as an assist for Howard if his off-ball dive off a pick-n-roll sucks two defenders in and Nelson fires a pass to Carter for an open 3.

The likelihood of Carter or Shooter X getting that open 3 decreases if you simply supply Howard with post-up possessions, because he's not a great passer, he doesn't read defenses quickly, and he doesn't demand triple teams that great post players of the past did.

But 2011 came, and as Howard's USG% and scoring volume ramped up, Orlando's ORTG (14th) and eFG% (52.1) swung downward. You see the gaudy scoring/efficiency in the playoffs that year, but also the 5.5 turnovers to just .5 assists. Orlando's playoff offense stunk, too.

Unfortunately, 2011 was fool's gold which Howard latched onto, as those same on-court problems have persisted the following 3 years. Quite frankly, it's depressing for me. Howard could have been the most dangerous off-ball C in history with his phenomenal athletic ability and spatial awareness. He's perfectly suited to be a moderate-volume super Tyson Chandler with a little bit of iso-scoring in spot situations thrown in. Combine that with DPOY defense and superstar minutes and you've got what should be a top-3 player in the game year in and year out.

Instead, his offense is neutral, and in my opinion perhaps a negative for the past 3-4 seasons, and his defense has slipped a tad as well. And it's completely tied to his desire to get away from being a pick-n-roll threat in the halfcourt and instead be a halfcourt post player.

Let me be clear: I have no problem with his power post arsenal. He's pretty efficient as an iso threat when he shoots. But delivering him the ball stymies ball movement, doesn't help anybody else, doesn't incorporate other players, and is a risky strategy as far as turnovers are concerned. He loosens a defense up much more as an off-ball player.

His direct sabotage of his team's optimal offensive/overall results, as a consequence of his on-court mindset and attitude, hurts his longevity in my eyes. These are not prime Dwight Howard seasons on the order of 2009 or 2010.

Why not 2009 instead of 2010, most of his box score stats went down, he was worse In the playoffs IMO





Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

2009 works, too. They're pretty close. Howard played better than expected against a very good 2010 Boston team filled with players who had given him massive trouble in the past (Perkins and Sheed), so I tend to give 2010 the edge.

[SactoKingsFan]

Seriously thought about going with McGrady for his ATG peak, but I couldn’t convince myself that I should rank T-Mac higher than Dwight, who has been more durable, has an equally impressive prime, better pre and post prime seasons, won DPOY 3x and led a team to the Finals. I see McGrady’s career as much more of a what if case than Dwight’s since T-Mac peaked on a team with a terrible supporting cast and wasted much of his healthy prime seasons due to bad luck and generally unfortunate circumstances. Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that I was just more comfortable voting for Dwight due to his significant durability edge and higher quality pre and post prime seasons (14 Dwight looks great compared to 08-12 McGrady).

Vote: Dwight Howard

[RayBan-Sematra]

So, I thought Dwight would be the favorite last time, and hence I really think of him as the favorite now. He'd be a reasonable choice.

Guy I'd most like to see discussed in more detail: Kevin McHale. Do you see him as a superstar in his own right who just lacked longevity (but still had plenty compared to the other bigs being bandied), or do you see him as something more limited?

I view Mchale as being a second option most of his career. He was elite at it no doubt though.

I couldn't really see him leading a team to a championship as the main guy.

To me the next 3 guys to get in should be Iverson, Mchale and Howard.

Yeah I don't think McHale should get in just yet.
Very soon though. I view him as a slightly upgraded Gasol who is another guy I think should probably get in near the 50 mark.

I am leaning towards Dwight currently.
The LAL fiasco aside I have generally viewed him as a high impact player who trys to play to his strengths.

[Quotatious]

Vote - Dwight Howard

I'll stick to Dwight. I think he's a top 10 defender and rebounder of all-time, as well as one of the best finishers, and terrific in terms of drawing fouls. Underrated post game (not aesthetically pleasing, but very effective). Excellent playoff performer. Already decent longevity (9 All-Star level seasons, including 4 top tier superstar seasons, between 2008 and 2011). Arguably the best player in the league in 2011.

T-Mac seems like a good candidate at this point, also Iverson, but I'd take Dwight's great defense, rebounding and very competent offense (I mean scoring), over McGrady's/Iverson's ability to create offense, but usually weak efficiency and defense. 2003 T-Mac was definitely better than any season of DH12, but I'd take prime Howard (2009-11 for sure, arguably also 2008) over any other season of McGrady or Iverson.

Dolph Schayes deserves respect for being the prototypical PF, but he wasn't really elite at anything, even in his era. Very good at some things by 50s standards (rebounding, scoring, drawing fouls), but not quite as great as Howard as a defender, rebounder, or an efficient scorer (their scoring average is very similar, but Howard delivers on a much higher efficiency). Well, the only thing he was really elite at, was free throw shooting, but it doesn't really mean that much to me, in the grand scheme of things.
Dolph's longevity is still a bit better than Howard's, but the difference isn't big enough to make up for the gap in terms of skillset, in Dwight's favor.

Cowens may be fairly close, but he's rather mediocre as far as advanced metrics, not really an efficient scorer, Howard is a better rebounder than him (for sure, I mean look at their TRB% numbers) and also a better defender (Dave was great, but he wasn't much of a shotblocker, which is important for a defensive anchor). His only advantage over Howard is his passing ability and intangibles, but it's definitely not enough, for me.

Willis Reed had worse longevity than DH, roughly comparable peak (based on Reed's more diverse and versatile offensive game), but in terms of a more prolonged prime (let's say 5 years), I see Howard as the better player.

Bill Walton IMO definitely had a better peak than Howard, but his longevity is a joke, so I can't really put him that high.

I've already made it clear how I feel about Howard vs Mutombo - Dwight is on a different tier because of his much more potent scoring ability (Mutombo may be better defensively, but both are all-time great, top 10 defensive players of all-time, so it's not a big deal), Howard is also better on the boards (but to be fair, it's the same thing as defense - both guys were great rebounders). Neither is a good passer.
Mutombo may've had better intangibles and longevity, but to me, Howard is just a flat-out better two-way basketball player than him.

[RSCD3_]

Spoiler:

Vote - Dwight Howard

I'll stick to Dwight. I think he's a top 10 defender and rebounder of all-time, as well as one of the best finishers, and terrific in terms of drawing fouls. Underrated post game (not aesthetically pleasing, but very effective). Excellent playoff performer. Already decent longevity (9 All-Star level seasons, including 4 top tier superstar seasons, between 2008 and 2011). Arguably the best player in the league in 2011.

T-Mac seems like a good candidate at this point, also Iverson, but I'd take Dwight's great defense, rebounding and very competent offense (I mean scoring), over McGrady's/Iverson's ability to create offense, but usually weak efficiency and defense. 2003 T-Mac was definitely better than any season of DH12, but I'd take prime Howard (2009-11 for sure, arguably also 2008) over any other season of McGrady or Iverson.

Dolph Schayes deserves respect for being the prototypical PF, but he wasn't really elite at anything, even in his era. Very good at some things by 50s standards (rebounding, scoring, drawing fouls), but not quite as great as Howard as a defender, rebounder, or an efficient scorer (their scoring average is very similar, but Howard delivers on a much higher efficiency). Well, the only thing he was really elite at, was free throw shooting, but it doesn't really mean that much to me, in the grand scheme of things.
Dolph's longevity is still a bit better than Howard's, but the difference isn't big enough to make up for the gap in terms of skillset, in Dwight's favor.

Cowens may be fairly close, but he's rather mediocre as far as advanced metrics, not really an efficient scorer, Howard is a better rebounder than him (for sure, I mean look at their TRB% numbers) and also a better defender (Dave was great, but he wasn't much of a shotblocker, which is important for a defensive anchor). His only advantage over Howard is his passing ability and intangibles, but it's definitely not enough, for me.

Willis Reed had worse longevity than DH, roughly comparable peak (based on Reed's more diverse and versatile offensive game), but in terms of a more prolonged prime (let's say 5 years), I see Howard as the better player.

Bill Walton IMO definitely had a better peak than Howard, but his longevity is a joke, so I can't really put him that high.

I've already made it clear how I feel about Howard vs Mutombo - Dwight is on a different tier because of his much more potent scoring ability (Mutombo may be better defensively, but both are all-time great, top 10 defensive players of all-time, so it's not a big deal), Howard is also better on the boards (but to be fair, it's the same thing as defense - both guys were great rebouders). Neither is a good passer.
Mutombo may've had better intangibles and longevity, but to me, Howard is just a flat-out better two-way basketball player than him.

What say you about ronnymac's interesting viewpoint that Howard's offense in 2011 wasn't as beneficial as in the previous two years. That instead he was better utilized as a pick and roll, offensive rebound, alley oop machine rather than a more exclusive low post threat. This change caused Orlando's offense to suffer and that he was a near neutral on O because his style of attacking took his teammates out of rhythm




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Quotatious]

What say you about ronnymac's interesting viewpoint that Howard's offense in 2011 wasn't as beneficial as in the previous two years. That instead he was better utilized as a pick and roll, offensive rebound, alley oop machine rather than a more exclusive low post threat. This change caused Orlando's offense to suffer and that he was a near neutral on O because his style of attacking took his teammates out of rhythm

Honestly, I think that 2009, 2010 and 2011 Howard was at the same level. There are some pretty minor statistical differences in some areas (boxscore, RAPM, as well as team results on offense and defense). 2009 and 2011 looks better in terms of boxscore numbers, 2010 looks better in RAPM. Ronnymac may be right about Dwight being better suited as a pick & roll player than a low post threat, but it actually led to really similar results. I wouldn't draw any conclusions about Dwight's individual performance, based on his teams' results, because the 2010-11 season was quite turbulent for the Magic, because of the huge roster overhaul (basically, Dwight and Jameer Nelson were their only key players who remained on the team - Lewis, Carter, J-Rich, Hedo, all got traded, one way or the other, and there was also that Arenas experiment). It took some time for the team to adapt, but I think it was definitely for worse (everyone on the Magic was horrible in the first round playoff series against Atlanta - Dwight's huge number of turnovers in that series was certainly a negative factor, too, but his scoring and rebounding still kept Orlando competitive, so it was a good series for him).

i'd still lean towards 2011 as his peak, but I can easily see an argument for 2009 or 2010.

[penbeast0]

Dwight Howard -- penbeast0, john248, SactoKingsFan, Quotatious

Dikembe Mutombo -- Jaivl, Chuck Texas

Tracy McGrady -- ronnymac2, E-balla

Dolph Schayes -- trex_8063

[ceiling raiser]

pen and Q touched on him a little, but I'm wondering how you guys feel about the Reed-Dwight comparison? It looks like Dwight's going to make the runoff (or win outright), but I'd be interested in reading some thoughts on the two.