RealGM Top 100 List #53

[Owly]

Lanier('s impact) looks a little worse in '78
'78 Pistons
team points differential over the year -102 over 82 games, -1.243902439 per game
team points differential over 19 games without Lanier -100 over 19 games, -4.347826087 per game
team points differential over 63 games with Lanier -2 over 63 games, -0.031746032 per game

[D Nice]

Vote for Allen Iverson.

I'd like to get some arguments that don't include Iverson's ts%, since we got a C with less than 50ts% in the last spot.

At this point Iverson's accodales will look great against anyone, and so will his stat lines... I hope someone actually gives him the vote he deserves on the runoff since he has lost a ton of them.

I'd like to see some arguments that show Iverson as having a positive value outside of scoring since I think he's pretty much a negative everywere else except possibly playmaking.

Iverson was a below average defender, had personality conflicts with teammates and coaches, skipped practice frequently, and was often hurt. When it comes to two players who are below average effiency scorers and who are pretty comparable as playmakers, would you prefer the one I just described or the fiery team leader who had great playoffs, was one of the most effective defenders of the greatest player of his day (Kareem), and every one who ever played with described as a fiery and hardworking team leader (Cowens). Scoring and the accolades that come with it are Iverson's only claim to greatness.

Would you be receptive to any of them? There have been several posts covering Iverson’s ability in multiple areas. To say he was “maybe” a positive playmaker is ridiculous, he was one of the best shot-creators in the league every single year he was in or near his prime. Trex shows that prior to the arrival of Korver/Iggy he was having a fairly significant on teammate efficiency. Even in years like ’05 or’06 where there wasn’t a huge teammates TS% jump the team was 10 points better with him on the court, so obviously AI being on the court help keep turnovers down by a significant degree. I mean what more really can be said? His Assist% between ’98 and ’07 was 29%. That’s extremely high for a guy shooting that much. And contrary to the mis-characterization of him as a ball pounder he spent 2001-2003 and 2005-2007 (particularly the latter stretch) as primarily an off-ball player.

It’s kind of disconcerting and makes people not even want to try though when such strong goal-post shifting is being applied. You just spent several threads for chiding Iverson’s scoring efficiency and then voted in a guy who was 50TS% CENTER playing in the 70s…I mean seriously? That is anemic to the highest order. To be voted in ahead of AI you would need to be talking about a GOAT defensive anchor and you aren’t…you’re talking about a guy whose only standout (if you want to go that far) defensive attribute was in an area low on the defensive totem pole (post D). It’s not even like we’re talking about Shaq or Thurmond or Gilmore either…this project is the first time I’ve ever heard of Cowens being an exceptional post defender and (granted 95% of what I’ve seen is from the 1980 season) he certainly did not look like anything special to me there. I don’t know how you can call that “value-added” on D while not giving credit to one of the most prolific turnover-forcers in recent memory.

[Witzig-Okashi]

I don't have a vote here, but I must say I am impressed with Trex's case for Iverson, even if it runs conflict with some of my perceptions of AI.

I'm actually glad he's using those numbers instead of highlighting his play in Denver (efficiency). He scored more efficiently, but there were times that Melo and AI would wait around for each other to do their things on offense, which was unsettling at times. It didn't affect them too much I suppose, until the playoffs came around. It was his playing style being conducive to winning in the PS that troubled me during those years...

I've heard Elvin Hayes being called overrated, but that's mainly because of his offensive production relative to his position as an all-time scorer. I imagine he'd gain more traction soon, so I'll tune in to see more knowledgeable users delve into his career...

[Quotatious]

Okay, I'll cast an official vote for Kevin Johnson.

Absolutely elite offensive player in his prime (better offensive PG than guys like Kidd, Payton, Isiah, who are already in) - 20+ points on excellent efficiency, 10+ assists, led great teams (both offensively and overall). Between 1989 and 1992, before injuries became a problem for him, KJ averaged 21.2 points and 11.1 assists on 21.7 PER, 19.2 WS/48 and 58.7% TS, and even though he missed a ton of games after 1992, it didn't really affect his performance that much - he was still a great player when he actually played (basically averaged 20 points and 10 assists, on 21.5 PER, 18.7 WS/48 and 59.0% TS in the regular season for 9 consecutive seasons, 1989 to 1997, playing 81% of possible games during that stretch, so actually his longevity/durability isn't that bad, and he seems to have the best peak/prime/longevity/decent playoff career/high impact on his team's performance, of any player available at this point).

Honestly, it came down to KJ vs Alex English for me (then Iverson, Carter and Wilkins). I just think that Johnson is the best, most impactful offensive player in this group (I mean his combination of scoring, playmaking, and individual efficiency translating to team success on offense - between '89 and '97, KJs teams finished in the top 10 every year - 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 7th and 6th). Obviously KJ was just the second best player on his teams between '93 and '96 after Barkley, but he was extremely important for the Suns' offensive system.

[Basketballefan]

Vote for Allen Iverson.

I'd like to get some arguments that don't include Iverson's ts%, since we got a C with less than 50ts% in the last spot.

At this point Iverson's accodales will look great against anyone, and so will his stat lines... I hope someone actually gives him the vote he deserves on the runoff since he has lost a ton of them.

I'd like to see some arguments that show Iverson as having a positive value outside of scoring since I think he's pretty much a negative everywere else except possibly playmaking.

Iverson was a below average defender, had personality conflicts with teammates and coaches, skipped practice frequently, and was often hurt. When it comes to two players who are below average effiency scorers and who are pretty comparable as playmakers, would you prefer the one I just described or the fiery team leader who had great playoffs, was one of the most effective defenders of the greatest player of his day (Kareem), and every one who ever played with described as a fiery and hardworking team leader (Cowens). Scoring and the accolades that come with it are Iverson's only claim to greatness.

Would you be receptive to any of them? There have been several posts covering Iverson’s ability in multiple areas. To say he was “maybe” a positive playmaker is ridiculous, he was one of the best shot-creators in the league every single year he was in or near his prime. Trex shows that prior to the arrival of Korver/Iggy he was having a fairly significant on teammate efficiency. Even in years like ’05 or’06 where there wasn’t a huge teammates TS% jump the team was 10 points better with him on the court, so obviously AI being on the court help keep turnovers down by a significant degree. I mean what more really can be said? His Assist% between ’98 and ’07 was 29%. That’s extremely high for a guy shooting that much. And contrary to the mis-characterization of him as a ball pounder he spent 2001-2003 and 2005-2007 (particularly the latter stretch) as primarily an off-ball player.

It’s kind of disconcerting and makes people not even want to try though when such strong goal-post shifting is being applied. You just spent several threads for chiding Iverson’s scoring efficiency and then voted in a guy who was 50TS% CENTER playing in the 70s…I mean seriously? That is anemic to the highest order. To be voted in ahead of AI you would need to be talking about a GOAT defensive anchor and you aren’t…you’re talking about a guy whose only standout (if you want to go that far) defensive attribute was in an area low on the defensive totem pole (post D). It’s not even like we’re talking about Shaq or Thurmond or Gilmore either…this project is the first time I’ve ever heard of Cowens being an exceptional post defender and (granted 95% of what I’ve seen is from the 1980 season) he certainly did not look like anything special to me there. I don’t know how you can call that “value-added” on D while not giving credit to one of the most prolific turnover-forcers in recent memory.

Like i said i give up on trying to argue Iverson to his haters. You can't convince someone with confirmation bias. They will believe what they want to and ignore evidence.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #25 (about 12 hours from run-off deadline):

Alex English (2) - penbeast0, ronnymac2

Allen Iverson (2) - Joao Saraiva, trex_8063

Pau Gasol (1) - RSCD3_

Bob Lanier (1) - Owly

Kevin Johnson (1) - Quotatious


Am glad to see Quotatious again lending his voice to the project and vote. Still haven't seen votes from several people who I know are still paying attention or at least intermittently active in the project: Chuck Texas, Moonbeam, Basketballefan, Doctor MJ, fplii, lukeharts, Notanoob........7 votes is a pretty skimpy total derive a meaningful consensus or run-off from.
Would personally like to see DNice officially join the vote, too.

[SactoKingsFan]

My top candidates are English, Carter, Gasol, Wilkins, Iverson and Billups. Haven't decided who to vote for yet but I'm leaning towards Gasol for his impressive peak, two way impact and longevity. I'll try to cast a vote in a few hours.

Edit: Also looking at Manu

Sent from my LG-G2 using RealGM Forums

[Owly]

Vote for Allen Iverson.

I'd like to get some arguments that don't include Iverson's ts%, since we got a C with less than 50ts% in the last spot.

At this point Iverson's accodales will look great against anyone, and so will his stat lines... I hope someone actually gives him the vote he deserves on the runoff since he has lost a ton of them.

Well most people aren't voting against their non-choices just for the ones they are choosing ... here's the voted for

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y5=2015

By PER
Lanier 21.7
Gasol (active) 21.5
Iverson 20.9
Kevin Johnson 20.7
English 19.9

By Win Shares
Lanier 117.1
Gasol 114.1
English 100.7
Iverson 99
Johnson 92.8

WS/48
Johnson .178
Lanier .175
Gasol .168
English .127
Iverson .126

AI is (just) tops in playoff PER, but he played mostly in a crummy East and has (just) the worst WS/48. Lanier and Gasol playing the majority of their playoff minutes against tougher competition (Lanier, past his prime in the 80s East, Gasol in LA versus the recent West), have PERs close and are clearcut WS/48 leaders.


More broadly to Iverson voters. There's plenty of guys here who have been through backing multi-runoff losers. But it gets less easy to sympathize when members of the Iverson camp (sorry to lump everyone together) comes out with he (only he? maybe I'm reading too much here) deserves it, you can't use TS%, the implication that there are a bunch of "haters" who won't vote AI because they're close-minded etc. I might wonder why Lanier doesn't seem to even be on anyone's shortlist but I don't assume that it's because everyone else is jerk/participant in a conspiracy.

There have been criticisms of Iverson I'd consider harsh (of the contenders on the board his minutes are high, so the "often injured" seems harsh, for instance). But keep on making the case because that's more persuasive than the other stuff.

[trex_8063]

Vote for Allen Iverson.

I'd like to get some arguments that don't include Iverson's ts%, since we got a C with less than 50ts% in the last spot.

At this point Iverson's accodales will look great against anyone, and so will his stat lines... I hope someone actually gives him the vote he deserves on the runoff since he has lost a ton of them.

Well most people aren't voting against their non-choices just for the ones they are choosing ... here's the voted for

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y5=2015

By PER
Lanier 21.7
Gasol (active) 21.5
Iverson 20.9
Kevin Johnson 20.7
English 19.9

By Win Shares
Lanier 117.1
Gasol 114.1
English 100.7
Iverson 99
Johnson 92.8

WS/48
Johnson .178
Lanier .175
Gasol .168
English .127
Iverson .126

AI is (just) tops in playoff PER, but he played mostly in a crummy East and has (just) the worst WS/48. Lanier and Gasol playing the majority of their playoff minutes against tougher competition (Lanier, past his prime in the 80s East, Gasol in LA versus the recent West), have PERs close and are clearcut WS/48 leaders.


More broadly to Iverson voters. There's plenty of guys here who have been through backing multi-runoff losers. But it gets less easy to sympathize when members of the Iverson camp (sorry to lump everyone together) comes out with he (only he? maybe I'm reading too much here) deserves it, you can't use TS%, the implication that there are a bunch of "haters" who won't vote AI because they're close-minded etc.

Thank you for the disclaimer about lumping. I do think there are a few posters who simply place an abundance of importance on shooting efficiency, and thus lean toward a low opinion of nearly anyone whose ts% is sub-stellar, which obviously isn't specifically directed at Iverson.....he just happens to fall into that group. There may be one or two individuals who appear (to me) to be at least somewhat close-minded to any sound broad-based arguments in Iverson's favor. But 1 or 2 certainly does not equate to an epidemic of "Iverson-hate". And I agree that those kinds of broad generalizations ("you all are not voting the same as me because you all hate Iverson") is not helping the Iverson cause.

Adding to the broad general measures you've shown above, I'll add the following (*not counting Gasol's current season, since that wouldn't be fair to active players already voted in before current season started):

VORP
1. *Bob Lanier 39.0---I list him first because we actually don't have VORP data for his first three seasons, and he almost undoubtedly lead this group if data were available for those years.
2. Allen Iverson 43.4
3. Pau Gasol 42.0
4. Alex English 34.6
5. Kevin Johnson 26.7

Avg BPM
1. Bob Lanier +4.5
2. Pau Gasol +3.4
3. Allen Iverson +2.6
4. Kevin Johnson +2.2
5. Alex English +1.6

Expected Titles
1. Pau Gasol 1.4
2. Bob Lanier 1.3
3. Allen Iverson 1.1
4. Kevin Johnson 1.0
5. Alex English 0.6

[Texas Chuck]

Official Vote: Dennis Rodman

I'm not 100% convinced he should be next, but I certainly think he belongs in this range and I don't want to cast a strategic vote with so few votes tallied to this point. I'm happy to vote for one of the guys who ends up in the run-off but I don't feel right about influencing who gets there since I have several players so close here.

Reasoning for Rodman to make it count:

GOAT level rebounding
Elite defender with B2B DPOY who wasn't a center.
Only player to really be the primary defender on guys ranging from Shaq to PG's and everyone in between.
Not a scorer, but an underrated offensive player--smart passer, good screener, elite O-rebounder
Master of mind games getting guys focused on him instead of the game.
Big part of 5 champions

[RayBan-Sematra]

VOTE : Pau Gasol

-One of the greatest offensive PF's in league history.
-Solid defensive PF for the majority of his Prime with real rim protection ability.
-Solid rebounder (even this year he is around 18% TRB).
-Has excellent longevity for this stage of the project.
11 years of around 18 / 9 / 3+apg / 1.5+bpg on elite efficiency.

Beyond those 11 years he posted 17 / 10 / 3+apg / 1.5+bpg last year on 52%TS
So far this year he is posting 19 / 11 / 2apg / 2.5bpg on 55%TS

I really don't think there should be a large gap between McHale and Gasol on our list.
The truth is McHale wasn't that much better of a player.

Kevin was a slightly better scorer & defender.
Gasol was a slightly better rebounder and a far better passer.

Gasol also has a sizable edge in longevity.
He clocks in with 11 elite years compared to only 8 for McHale.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote for Allen Iverson.

I'd like to get some arguments that don't include Iverson's ts%, since we got a C with less than 50ts% in the last spot.

At this point Iverson's accodales will look great against anyone, and so will his stat lines... I hope someone actually gives him the vote he deserves on the runoff since he has lost a ton of them.

C'mon now, Cowens rates ahead of Iverson - to the extent we can agree he does - primarily based on defense. I don't have a problem with someone saying Iverson's the better offensive player, but Cowens was an All-D center and Iverson was a weakness on D.

[Doctor MJ]

Would you be receptive to any of them? There have been several posts covering Iverson’s ability in multiple areas. To say he was “maybe” a positive playmaker is ridiculous, he was one of the best shot-creators in the league every single year he was in or near his prime. .

When people talk about a volume scorer not necessarily being a positive playmaker, they're talking about passing.

Trex shows that prior to the arrival of Korver/Iggy he was having a fairly significant on teammate efficiency. Even in years like ’05 or’06 where there wasn’t a huge teammates TS% jump the team was 10 points better with him on the court, so obviously AI being on the court help keep turnovers down by a significant degree. I mean what more really can be said? His Assist% between ’98 and ’07 was 29%. That’s extremely high for a guy shooting that much. And contrary to the mis-characterization of him as a ball pounder he spent 2001-2003 and 2005-2007 (particularly the latter stretch) as primarily an off-ball player.

It’s kind of disconcerting and makes people not even want to try though when such strong goal-post shifting is being applied. You just spent several threads for chiding Iverson’s scoring efficiency and then voted in a guy who was 50TS% CENTER playing in the 70s…I mean seriously? That is anemic to the highest order. To be voted in ahead of AI you would need to be talking about a GOAT defensive anchor and you aren’t…you’re talking about a guy whose only standout (if you want to go that far) defensive attribute was in an area low on the defensive totem pole (post D). It’s not even like we’re talking about Shaq or Thurmond or Gilmore either…this project is the first time I’ve ever heard of Cowens being an exceptional post defender and (granted 95% of what I’ve seen is from the 1980 season) he certainly did not look like anything special to me there. I don’t know how you can call that “value-added” on D while not giving credit to one of the most prolific turnover-forcers in recent memory.

Look the bottom line is that what you're doing is using on/off stuff, and the overall on/off stuff (RAPM) makes Iverson look like a player who has no business being considered an MVP type of player. Not because he isn't a good offensive player, but because he's not as good as supporters think in terms of impact, and his defense is a negative.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: Manu Ginobili

So, as I've acknowledged I've been in a bit of a funk for a while. It's partly because I'm too busy to put the time in I want to, but it also has a lot to do with the fact that at this point there are a lot of guys who are just close, and I haven't put in the time ahead of time like, say, ElGee, to have a quantified approach to it, which means that I feel like I'm just latching onto guys for incomplete reasons.

This is compounded by the (very reasonable) project demand that we have to justify our picks, because whoever I pick, I don't really see my reasoning as adequately justified.

So what I'm going to do on this one, and maybe for a while, if vote for a guy who I think is considerably more impactful when he plays than the other major contenders (apologies to Walton when he gets traction, as he certainly has the edge by this measure, but longevity is a big deal).

Ginobili's impact has been huge for the bulk of his career. We know that his limited minutes need to be held against him in some way, but I think it's also clear at this point that Popovich just does things differently, and we shouldn't interpret Ginobili's work as somehow inherently flawed simply because he doesn't play huge minutes.

Of course by impact I'm referring to +/- stuff, which gives the objective basis, but Ginobili has always been remarkable to watch. An obviously great offensive player, who gets better when you look at him in more detail, and a very nice defender too.

Looking at a bunch of other contenders who quite frankly don't necessarily stand out from a bunch of other guys who simply haven't been mentioned in this thread, Ginobili stands out. I know he had rare impact, and I know that he kept it up over many years, so I'll vote for him.

[penbeast0]

Again, no runoff or consensus emerging. Love Pau, Rodman, and Manu getting some action, they are interesting players to compare. Always have held Lanier's terrible team defenses throughout his prime (except in 75) against him so the on-off numbers are making me look at him again. Never was as impressed with KJ as his numbers would indicate. Here's how it stands now:

Alex English -- penbeast0, ronnymac2

Allen Iverson -- Joao Saraiva, trex_8063

Pau Gasol -- RSCD3_, RayBan-Sematra

Bob Lanier -- Owly

Kevin Johnson -- Quotatious

Dennis Rodman -- Chuck Texas

Manu Ginobili -- Doctor MJ

[trex_8063]

Would you be receptive to any of them? There have been several posts covering Iverson’s ability in multiple areas. To say he was “maybe” a positive playmaker is ridiculous, he was one of the best shot-creators in the league every single year he was in or near his prime. .

When people talk about a volume scorer not necessarily being a positive playmaker, they're talking about passing.

While I can't claim to speak for him, I think DNice is aware of that, and that he was referring to creating shots for others. At least it would seem so, given the context---his post was in reply to a query of what else (aside from scoring) Iverson can do---and that he then immediately referenced my post (which was entirely about Iverson's effect on his teammates' shooting efficiency).

Trex shows that prior to the arrival of Korver/Iggy he was having a fairly significant on teammate efficiency. Even in years like ’05 or’06 where there wasn’t a huge teammates TS% jump the team was 10 points better with him on the court, so obviously AI being on the court help keep turnovers down by a significant degree. I mean what more really can be said? His Assist% between ’98 and ’07 was 29%. That’s extremely high for a guy shooting that much. And contrary to the mis-characterization of him as a ball pounder he spent 2001-2003 and 2005-2007 (particularly the latter stretch) as primarily an off-ball player.

It’s kind of disconcerting and makes people not even want to try though when such strong goal-post shifting is being applied. You just spent several threads for chiding Iverson’s scoring efficiency and then voted in a guy who was 50TS% CENTER playing in the 70s…I mean seriously? That is anemic to the highest order. To be voted in ahead of AI you would need to be talking about a GOAT defensive anchor and you aren’t…you’re talking about a guy whose only standout (if you want to go that far) defensive attribute was in an area low on the defensive totem pole (post D). It’s not even like we’re talking about Shaq or Thurmond or Gilmore either…this project is the first time I’ve ever heard of Cowens being an exceptional post defender and (granted 95% of what I’ve seen is from the 1980 season) he certainly did not look like anything special to me there. I don’t know how you can call that “value-added” on D while not giving credit to one of the most prolific turnover-forcers in recent memory.

Look the bottom line is that what you're doing is using on/off stuff, and the overall on/off stuff (RAPM).....

Ah yes, RAPM. That holy grail of stats, which we can always take at face value, dispensing with the need for any other measures because RAPM is wholly complete and never misleading (although in '12 in ranked Kevin Durant 43rd in the league, as well as 20th in '13, and only 8th last year; in '03 it ranks McGrady 71st!?!, and so on...)

.....makes Iverson look like a player who has no business being considered an MVP type of player.

I scanned his post twice, and I still don't see where DNice stated Iverson was an MVP type of player.......which shouldn't really be a prerequisite at this point regardless: with the possible exception of Bob Lanier, none of the other vote recipients for this spot have any business being considered an MVP type of player.

Not because he isn't a good offensive player, but because he's not as good as supporters think in terms of impact, and his defense is a negative.

His impact in Philly appears to have been comparable to KJ's in Phoenix based on collective team measures. And his defense is not as negative as Steve Nash's, but in Nash's case we were allowed to wave that away on the premise that PG defense is sort of masked by the team, and generally of small importance. If so, I don't quite get why this needs be a big consideration.

[Basketballefan]

Vote: Iverson

He led the Sixers to 5 consecutive playoff appearances and 6 appearances overall. He carried that franchise for many years without a lot of offensive help, he's constantly criticized for his low efficiency, high volume shots which is fair, but somewhat unwarranted, he didn't have anyone to take defensive attention away from him.

He won MVP, Scoring title, and led his team to the finals all in one season. Overall his resume is pretty impressive:

11 time all star
MVP
4 scoring titles
3 time All NBA first team
3 time All NBA second team
Rookie of the year
etc

He is 46th in career PER for NBA and 48th for ABA/NBA combined.
22nd all time in career points in NBA and 27th for ABA/NBA combined.

Several years as a top 10 player and arguably even top 5 in 2001.

7th all time in career ppg average.
2nd all time in career playoff ppg average.

His peak is impressive as well : 33 3 7 54 ts% 26 PER..his scoring efficiency is nothing special here but there's nothing wrong with high volume on average efficiency.

So aside from maybe his later years, Iverson had a positive impact on his teams, even though some will deem him as a cancer.

I also disagree that he isn't capable of leading his team to a title, he was 3 games away from doing so and he happened to be up against a dynasty that had 2 top 10 players ever.

[Moonbeam]

Sorry I haven't voted earlier. Great to see some support for candidates like KJ, Rodman, Lanier, and Ginobili, all of whom are well worthy of consideration, I think. I'm most tempted by Rodman out of that group - his incredible defense and rebounding were major, major boons to a number of title teams. While I agree that his rebounding started to come at the expense of team defense later on, I still feel he was a great, great defender overall.

I've loathed watching Ginobili and his on court theatrics, but there's no denying that he is a worthy candidate. I do feel that he was fortunate to play off of Duncan and with Pop's minute monitoring and general coaching acumen in a way that few others have, but he deserves a spot in the top 60, I think.

I'm not as familiar with Lanier, but those WOWY numbers Owly is posting make him certainly worth a big look. Still, I wonder whether he is a superior candidate to someone like Elvin Hayes.

I'm very close to voting for Pau Gasol. His contributions to the Lakers' success from 2008 to 2010 were very crucial. I won't go so far as to say he was more important than Kobe, but I do feel that the Lakers' amazing frontcourt tandem collectively was the most important cog in their success, and Gasol was the lynchpin. His playoff sweeps in Memphis are a little concerning (though he looks to have played well in 2004), but I don't think he was at his peak until he joined the Lakers.

I'm going to stick with Alex English for this vote. Incredibly durable player who was a great and versatile scorer who thrived as teammates (admittedly quite gifted on at least one side of the ball) changed around him. That 1985 run was pretty special - his playoff Score+ of 4.009 over the course of that postseason was a huge. Aside from Calvin Natt and little used Bill Hanzlik, every other player sported a negative Score+.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Again, no runoff or consensus emerging. Love Pau, Rodman, and Manu getting some action, they are interesting players to compare. Always have held Lanier's terrible team defenses throughout his prime (except in 75) against him so the on-off numbers are making me look at him again. Never was as impressed with KJ as his numbers would indicate. Here's how it stands now:

Alex English -- penbeast0, ronnymac2

Allen Iverson -- Joao Saraiva, trex_8063

Pau Gasol -- RSCD3_, RayBan-Sematra

Bob Lanier -- Owly

Kevin Johnson -- Quotatious

Dennis Rodman -- Chuck Texas

Manu Ginobili -- Doctor MJ

John didn't vote but we can assume he is still supporting Gasol.
BBFan voted for Iverson.
Moonbeam added a vote for English.

So
3 votes for Gasol (once John officially votes)
3 votes for Iverson
3 votes for English

[john248]

Official vote for Pau Gasol. He's got a strong decade's worth of play as an 18/9/3.5/1.5, 110+ ORTG guy. Lakers 3 Finals years were especially impressive with 22+ PER, .220+ WS/48, and his rebounding picked up. The championship years, he posted a 124 and 126 ORTG in the playoffs. Good post player, solid mid-range shooter, great passer for his position...much to like about his offensive game where he can pair with any #1 wing option. Spent the majority of his time at center with the Lakers and did very well there going against Dwight and KG. 09 Finals: 19/9/2/2, 65%TS, 132 ORTG, defending Dwight pretty well; 10 FInals: 19/12/4/3, 56%TS, 122 ORTG. 2011 playoffs was rough since Dirk did a number on him...defended Pau's face-ups and torched him on the other end.

Pau is a capable #1 option and someone that a franchise could build around. He's obviously not a transcendent talent, but that's not much of a concern at this part of the project. He never had stability at the head coaching position though however in 2004, his team was top 10 in ORTG (well 11th) and DRTG. And in 05 and 06, he was a part of top 5 DRTG teams. Now, I'm not implying that he's a defensive anchor since those Memphis teams had a good team approach, but he was a player who was solid as a man defender and used his length well. Gained some weight prior to 09 and played rather well on that end. Even with those mediocre Memphis teams, he was still able to be the main guy to lead them to the playoffs...1st round exits but nothing to be embarrassed of when losing to the Spurs, Suns, and Mavs during those years.

As the focal guy on offense during his time with the Grizz, he was between a 108-115 ORTG player which is pretty damn good. He's always been able to operate from the high post, face up, and was good at reading defenses while being a good passer. We were just able to see his skill set in an ideal environment in LA where he proved to be an elite #2 option where from the time he joined the Lakers to 2011, he was a 120+ ORTG player and absolutely key in those championship runs. Not any player can just go to LA and be an immediate fit in the Triangle offense, but Pau played almost flawlessly from the start. But this was who Pau was, the man who is best in the triple post and has shown he can be the focal guy to build around with Memphis (playoff though not super talented squads) and then slot in nicely as an elite #2.

These are the players I have coming up in alphabetical order: English, Gasol, Ginobili, Kevin Johnson, McAdoo.

Unofficial list that I won't discuss...

*40. Pau Gasol
41. Kevin McHale
42. Ray Allen
43. Dikembe Mutombo
44. Elgin Baylor
45. Tracy McGrady
46. Robert Parish
47. Willis Reed
*48. Manu Ginobili
*49. Kevin Johnson
*50. Bob McAdoo
51. Dave Cowens
52. Isiah Thomas
*53. Alex English
54. John Havlicek
*55. Dominique Wilkins
56. Adrian Dantley