Player Peaks #22

[Dr Positivity]

Can someone make a case for Paul over 03 Tmac? If you're using 08 his defense can't really be used as an argument. If you're using 2015 then his offense isn't really close to what Tmac was doing. You're talking about a super athletic, 6'8 efficient volume scoring machine with excellent ball handling and playmaking skills.

Sorry but i'm just not seeing the pro-paul argument over peak Tmac. Also people seriously overrate the absolute defensive impact that Paul has at 5'11. Paul is a better playmaker than Tmac. That doesn't make him a better player. I like Paul, but Tmac was clearly superior imo.

After looking at it, I think I have to put Tmac and Kobe right next to each other. Whether guys like Paul and Barkley are above or below them is another question

[thizznation]

Moses Malone has the reputation as a workhorse, which often carries along connotations that the player is unskilled. Moses Malone was very skilled offensively and had lots of different moves from close range. He was able to score on high volume with good efficiency while controlling the boards. We would see a boost in his assist totals in today's game with the increase in three point shooting. Malone was more then able to receive the ball down low and pass out of the double team to the corner three and be able to hit a cutting man as well. Moses Malone in his prime carried a lot of weight offensively. This can be seen when you look at 1983 when Moses left Houston for Philadelphia, Houston completely fell off the map.

1982 Houston (With Moses)

Record: 46-36
PTS/G: 105.9 (18th of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 105.9 (9th of 23)
SRS: -0.39 (14th of 23) ▪ Pace: 97.2 (22nd of 23)
Off Rtg: 108.3 (8th of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (16th of 23)
Expected W-L: 41-41 (14th of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1982.html


1983 Houston (Without Moses)

Record: 14-68
PTS/G: 99.3 (21st of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 110.9 (14th of 23)
SRS: -11.12 (23rd of 23) ▪ Pace: 102.2 (16th of 23)
Off Rtg: 97.0 (23rd of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (19th of 23)
Expected W-L: 14-68 (23rd of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1983.html


In 1981 Houston was dragged to the NBA Finals by Moses, by 1983 a Mosesless Houston was the worst team in the league.


This is a fun highlight I came across while I was searching for Moses videos. (I'm not trying to imply that he did this often, it's just a cool clip.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y79IAUDqiXc&feature=youtu.be&t=420


For now I'm going with 1983 as Moses Malone's peak year even though I have a feeling it could be a year or two earlier. I will edit my previous ballot to make it easier on trex.

[mischievous]

If you're using '09 you've got the best metric peak on the board, plus I would suggest better non-boxscore D.

PER, WS/48, BPM, WARP
Paul: 29.96, 0.2925, 11.2, 25.6
McGrady: 30.27, 0.2617, 9.7, 23.0

Obviously that's an uncharacteristically poor playoffs for Paul (and both guys are underrated -by some- playoff performers based on team performance),

RIght, but that's exactly why i'm not using 09 as his peak and nor do most people, because of how bad he was in the playoffs. He wasn't just poor he was downright awful.

though these are small enough samples that I wouldn't give them much weight (though in the context of one year based rankings, everything's smaller sample which is why I'm not so bothered about ranking peaks).

May be a small sample, but how you perform in your given playoff opportunity carries weight. Tmac played much better in his series than Paul did in 09, so to me to tips it in Tmac's favor even though Paul may have a slight regular season edge.

Then again if you're playoff inclined '08 Paul surely picks up a (further?) advantage over McGrady (and this is from someone who historically has defended McGrady from, IMO, asinine playoffs based criticism, because McGrady was an excellent postseason performer.

Possibly. But to me the regular season edge is pretty visible imo, anyway.

Also I wouldn't call McGrady an "efficient scorer" in the conventional sense (i.e. TS% is unexceptional)

Really? Mcgrady's ts% was +4.5% to the league average and on a ridiculous volume(32.1ppg), that's very efficient scoring indeed. You stick that scoring into last season and it's roughly equivalent to a 58 ts% or so.

This isn't to say I can't see a case for McGrady depending on how one weights different criteria, but I certainly don't see the "clear superior[ity]" for McGrady.

It's clear to me but that just has to do with preference and who i'd prefer leading my team. I generally prefer combo guards who score at high volume, high efficiency levels and who can also handle the ball and get others involved such as the peak Tmac, Wade, Kobe over point guards like Paul or Nash. I think when Paul's team needs scoring from him in the playoffs, he's oftentimes non-aggressive and at the wrong times. There's games in the playoffs, where you need a big scoring performance from your star in order to win in and i think Paul can be too reliant on his teammates.

[Owly]

Moses Malone has the reputation as a workhorse, which often carries along connotations that the player is unskilled. Moses Malone was very skilled offensively and had lots of different moves from close range. He was able to score on high volume with good efficiency while controlling the boards. We would see a boost in his assist totals in today's game with the increase in three point shooting. Malone was more then able to receive the ball down low and pass out of the double team to the corner three and be able to hit a cutting man as well. Moses Malone in his prime carried a lot of weight offensively. This can be seen when you look at 1983 when Moses left Houston for Philadelphia, Houston completely fell off the map.

1982 Houston (With Moses)

Record: 46-36
PTS/G: 105.9 (18th of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 105.9 (9th of 23)
SRS: -0.39 (14th of 23) ▪ Pace: 97.2 (22nd of 23)
Off Rtg: 108.3 (8th of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (16th of 23)
Expected W-L: 41-41 (14th of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1982.html


1983 Houston (Without Moses)

Record: 14-68
PTS/G: 99.3 (21st of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 110.9 (14th of 23)
SRS: -11.12 (23rd of 23) ▪ Pace: 102.2 (16th of 23)
Off Rtg: 97.0 (23rd of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (19th of 23)
Expected W-L: 14-68 (23rd of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1983.html


In 1981 Houston was dragged to the NBA Finals by Moses, by 1983 a Mosesless Houston was the worst team in the league.


This is a fun highlight I came across while I was searching for Moses videos. (I'm not trying to imply that he did this often, it's just a cool clip.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y79IAUDqiXc&feature=youtu.be&t=420


For now I'm going with 1983 as Moses Malone's peak year even though I have a feeling it could be a year or two earlier. I will edit my previous ballot to make it easier on trex.

To be fair though there is a bit of context with those numbers in terms of Houston being considered to have been tanking and thereby leading to the introduction of the lottery.

Possible other criticism based on that data - though not a strong one

Spoiler:

Depending on how one weights surrounding years (and I guess which year people are choosing, though I think it will be '83) the fact that they didn't really change on D might be considered harmful, though perhaps not for the following reason regarding the difficulty of using said numbers to measure Moses.

That and the roster differences ...

'82 top 7 by minutes
Moses Malone
Elvin Hayes
Robert Reid
Allen Leavell
Tom Henderson
Bill Willoughby
Mike Dunleavy

'83 top 7 by minutes
Allen Leavell
Caldwell Jones
Elvin Hayes
Wally Walker
Joe Bryant
James Bailey
Terry Teagle

... mean it's hard to use the two teams as a barometer of Malone specifically.

[Dr Positivity]

Ballot 1 - Tracy McGrady 2003

Ballot 2 - Kobe Bryant 2008

Ballot 3 - Chris Paul 2008

I wasn't giving Tmac his due in previous threads. A .564 TS% and 116 ORTG season is more impressive in a league with .519 average TS% and 103.6 average ORTG. In 2008 average TS% is .540 and average ORTG is 107.5. Compared to league average in 2008 Tmac's differential would be more like .585 TS% and 120 ORTG. Those numbers would be +.09 TS% and + 5 ORTG over 08 Kobe, while 2003 Tmac was in reality +.014 TS% and 5 ORTG more efficient than 2003 Kobe (.555 TS%, 111 ORTG) so the difference extrapolates pretty well. I am sold on voting for Tmac over Kobe. The argument for Tmac and Kobe over everyone else is otherwise pretty similar with excellent combination of high volume scoring, positive efficiency, playmaking and positive defense.

Speaking of how much of a case do you give 2003 as Kobe's peak season? It is his best 3pt shooting season and very possibly his best defensive season

I am willing to be swayed on Paul on my 3rd ballot vs guys like Barkley and Malone

[Clyde Frazier]

Ballot #2 - 93 Barkley

Spoiler:

Totally see a case for 90 being his peak, but I like Barkley’s more refined game in PHX where he was still an excellent athlete (and in amazing shape), but was a little less reckless. Of course he had more talent around him, but I think that slightly toned down version helped them get as far as they did in the postseason. I’m not quite sure 90 barkley gets them there.

93 WCF game 7 against the sonics - 44 PTS / 22 REB / 1 AST / 1 STL / 1 BLK / 74.1% TS / 167 ORTG

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP1MV2rSxIU[/youtube]

Ballot #3 - 03 McGrady

Spoiler:

Have to say... looking at 03 McGrady vs. 09 Kobe vs. 2014 Durant comes off as close of a comparison as we've had in the project thus far. I see a good case for all 3, and I decided to go with the 09 Wade thinking here in picking McGrady. He carried a weak supporting cast on his back for an entire season, putting up very impressive individual #s in the process.

His 3 best teammates were arguably pat garrity, 34 yr old darrell armstrong, and mike miller for 49 games. His on/off that season was a pretty staggering +13. McGrady then nearly led the magic to a major upset of the 5th ranked SRS pistons, eventually going down in 7 games. I just like his overall package that he brought to the table slightly more than Kobe and Durant that season.

[EDIT - grant hill also appeared in 29 games, but didn't play in the playoffs, and miller was traded for drew gooden midway thru the season]

Ballot #3 - 09 Kobe

Kobe is right there for me next to McGrady, and 09 was probably his best combination of reg season and post season play. Questioning his shot selection is a valid argument against him, but his playmaking and chemistry with pau made up for it as far as i'm concerned. This may sound like i'm stating the obvious, but i'm not sure kobe gets enough credit for the "pair him with a dominant big man and you're very likely going to win a championship" formula. Shows even with his huge ego that he's able to adapt to teammates and get results.

[thizznation]

Moses Malone has the reputation as a workhorse, which often carries along connotations that the player is unskilled. Moses Malone was very skilled offensively and had lots of different moves from close range. He was able to score on high volume with good efficiency while controlling the boards. We would see a boost in his assist totals in today's game with the increase in three point shooting. Malone was more then able to receive the ball down low and pass out of the double team to the corner three and be able to hit a cutting man as well. Moses Malone in his prime carried a lot of weight offensively. This can be seen when you look at 1983 when Moses left Houston for Philadelphia, Houston completely fell off the map.

1982 Houston (With Moses)

Record: 46-36
PTS/G: 105.9 (18th of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 105.9 (9th of 23)
SRS: -0.39 (14th of 23) ▪ Pace: 97.2 (22nd of 23)
Off Rtg: 108.3 (8th of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (16th of 23)
Expected W-L: 41-41 (14th of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1982.html


1983 Houston (Without Moses)

Record: 14-68
PTS/G: 99.3 (21st of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 110.9 (14th of 23)
SRS: -11.12 (23rd of 23) ▪ Pace: 102.2 (16th of 23)
Off Rtg: 97.0 (23rd of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.3 (19th of 23)
Expected W-L: 14-68 (23rd of 23)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1983.html


In 1981 Houston was dragged to the NBA Finals by Moses, by 1983 a Mosesless Houston was the worst team in the league.


This is a fun highlight I came across while I was searching for Moses videos. (I'm not trying to imply that he did this often, it's just a cool clip.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y79IAUDqiXc&feature=youtu.be&t=420


For now I'm going with 1983 as Moses Malone's peak year even though I have a feeling it could be a year or two earlier. I will edit my previous ballot to make it easier on trex.

To be fair though there is a bit of context with those numbers in terms of Houston being considered to have been tanking and thereby leading to the introduction of the lottery.

Possible other criticism based on that data - though not a strong one

Spoiler:

Depending on how one weights surrounding years (and I guess which year people are choosing, though I think it will be '83) the fact that they didn't really change on D might be considered harmful, though perhaps not for the following reason regarding the difficulty of using said numbers to measure Moses.

That and the roster differences ...

'82 top 7 by minutes
Moses Malone
Elvin Hayes
Robert Reid
Allen Leavell
Tom Henderson
Bill Willoughby
Mike Dunleavy

'83 top 7 by minutes
Allen Leavell
Caldwell Jones
Elvin Hayes
Wally Walker
Joe Bryant
James Bailey
Terry Teagle

... mean it's hard to use the two teams as a barometer of Malone specifically.

The team changed a lot but lets look at some of these faces here. Out of the top 5 minutes played for 1982 team, the guys who left were Moses Malone, Robert Reid, and Tom Henderson. I think it's a tough sell to say that the departure of Robert Reid and Tom Henderson was responsible for the majority of the decline of the 1983 Houston team.

Points still noted however. Although even if you don't take the difference in it's face value, it still is a drastic one. The point still largely remains the same, in 1981 Houston was contending for the title and by 1983 with no Moses they were on a Tank Mission. That speaks volumes in itself in my opinion.

[E-Balla]

Guessing we're going to have a full-on TMac/Kobe debate now. Good stuff.

Moses is really a tough call for me. The on/off offensive numbers for him are approaching a GOAT level, but it seems there's a good deal of skepticism about a guy whose game (seems to have) relied so much on offensive rebounding. In general, it's tough to make educated guesses for me about where guys stand in terms of relative impact on those pre-salary cap Philly/Boston/LA teams based on how much talent they had stockpiled.

Open question for voters...what's keeping Karl Malone off of your ballots at this point? I don't necessarily feel he should be in contention here, but I feel like he hasn't been mentioned all that much so far.

Re: Moses, I've been spending a lot of time thinking about his on/off numbers. The one thing that's giving me pause is the consistency, although we do see a relative spike in '83 which is something to consider. RebelWithACause directly asked me for my thoughts on the on/off splits at one point, and I didn't have a cogent answer at that point for a few reasons.

Here's where I'm leaning ATM: Moses is the GOAT offensive rebounder, but he's never impressed me as an offensive focal point. His post game is not great in terms of efficacy, he doesn't go to it often, and I think people haven't watched enough film of him if they're insinuating some type of dominant post scorer in Moses.

You must be referring to Sixers Moses (who did post up way less than he did in Houston) but in Houston he posted up regularly and efficiently.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUNGfF1ZqZQ[/youtube]
And he was moderately efficient too averaging 26 ppg on 55 TS in the postseason from 79-83. Not the greatest but consistent enough that you had to guard him. Outside of Shaq I don't think there's another player who got deep position like him and his running hook was amazing (watching the clips now it reminded me of Dwight in his prime).

And he was good in other ways too don't get me wrong. He had a good jumper, good handles, ran the floor extremely well, and like you said he was a beast on the boards. Still his most valuable offensive ability outside of his rebounding was the post.

I think his offensive rebounding has potential to make huge impact in precisely the situation it did in real life; surrounded by talented players who can take the load of initiating the offense and allowing Moses to clean up everything else, improving overall team efficiency with him capitalizing on basically every second chance. He also brings a lot of ancillary benefits in that he can exhaust opposing bigs and get them in foul trouble, as well as him being a player you really can't help off.

But portability is limited with this approach. I don't think he does all that much to improve an average team, given that he doesn't stand out against *good* bigs ITO shot creation, let alone great ones.

What? His whole Rockets career was him doing just that. The 82 Rockets had the 8th ranked offense, and a 46-36 record. The 83 Rockets had the worst offense in the league and a 14-68 record. He took a 40 win team to the Finals before (even beating Kareem and Magic to get there). Moses won 2 MVPs before ever playing on a stacked team and in 79 led the number one offense the one time Houston gave him a good offensive supporting cast (they stunk defensively). I really have no idea where this idea came from so if you could give some type of reasoning please do.

And frankly if we're going to use on/off numbers to justify Moses, we really have to acknowledge the elephant in the room: Moses looks great, but Mo Cheeks looks far better. My current thinking re this point is that both Moses and Erving had the potential to improve a team's offense immensely, but only if they weren't the primary creators. I think criticisms of Erving's ball handling are very prescient, and I don't buy the counter that "30 PPG wings don't have issues with ball handling" because it's far too categorical a statement for something we have limited evidence for. I think Cheeks was "driving" the offense in the sense that he was creating the opportunities for his cohorts Moses to dominate with his ORB and Dr. J with his cutting and off-ball action. I think this is consistent with Erving's bizarre year to year fluctuations in on/off and Moses' very defined peak in 83., as well as Mo looking like a savant.

But Mo's offensive on/off estimates were never really good at all. -3.0 in 80, +1.0 in 81, +1.6 in 82, +2.9 in 83. And overall he was great but Moses was better 2 of their 4 seasons together and one of those years Cheeks outperformed Moses was 86 (aka the worst year of Moses' prime). And again we don't have numbers for these years but he had a HOF career in Houston already before he ever touched the floor with Mo.

I don't know if any of them could've replicated their impact on a more neutral situation, although ironically I think Mo would be the most likely to.

Re: Malone, I just think Barkley was the better player. He should be a candidate if people are taking Kobe seriously IMO.

I love Mo (he's a better Rondo) but you're partially attributing the impact of Dr. J (who was already one of the ATGs before Mo came in the league) and Moses (who was a 2 time MVP before playing with Mo) to him right now. Its like attributing the impact of KG and PP on the 08 Celtics to Rondo...

[E-Balla]

1st ballot - Moses Malone 1983
2nd ballot - Charles Barkley 1990
3rd ballot - Bob McAdoo 1975

I know that Bob is controversial pick, but just look how good he was that year. He anchored 4th best offense with bad supporting cast. His scoring ability was amazing, all time great level. I don't think this season he was that much worse than Dirk or Barkley. Just look how he killed Hayes/Unseld duo in the playoffs. Wizards were the best defense in the league and they still can't stop him. Also, he was better defender than both from what I've seen.
I wanted to choose Tmac, but I decided to go with Bob. After them I have Kobe and CP3.

Good pick in Bob. Consistently underrated but I personally don't trust his defense at all and IMO Rick Barry was better that year (Artis was arguably better too).

So do you trust Barkley defense? I don't, and I have him still over Karl Malone and Bob Pettit (who were better defenders than both Charles and Bob).

I don't but IMO Chuck is a slightly better scorer and much better passer.

[Owly]

If you're using '09 you've got the best metric peak on the board, plus I would suggest better non-boxscore D.

PER, WS/48, BPM, WARP
Paul: 29.96, 0.2925, 11.2, 25.6
McGrady: 30.27, 0.2617, 9.7, 23.0

Obviously that's an uncharacteristically poor playoffs for Paul (and both guys are underrated -by some- playoff performers based on team performance),

RIght, but that's exactly why i'm not using 09 as his peak and nor do most people, because of how bad he was in the playoffs. He wasn't just poor he was downright awful.

though these are small enough samples that I wouldn't give them much weight (though in the context of one year based rankings, everything's smaller sample which is why I'm not so bothered about ranking peaks).

May be a small sample, but how you perform in your given playoff opportunity carries weight. Tmac played much better in his series than Paul did in 09, so to me to tips it in Tmac's favor even though Paul may have a slight regular season edge.

Then again if you're playoff inclined '08 Paul surely picks up a (further?) advantage over McGrady (and this is from someone who historically has defended McGrady from, IMO, asinine playoffs based criticism, because McGrady was an excellent postseason performer.

Possibly. But to me the regular season edge is pretty visible imo, anyway.

Also I wouldn't call McGrady an "efficient scorer" in the conventional sense (i.e. TS% is unexceptional)

Really? Mcgrady's ts% was +4.5% to the league average and on a ridiculous volume(32.1ppg), that's very efficient scoring indeed. You stick that scoring into last season and it's roughly equivalent to a 58 ts% or so.

This isn't to say I can't see a case for McGrady depending on how one weights different criteria, but I certainly don't see the "clear superior[ity]" for McGrady.

It's clear to me but that just has to do with preference and who i'd prefer leading my team. I generally prefer combo guards who score at high volume, high efficiency levels and who can also handle the ball and get others involved such as the peak Tmac, Wade, Kobe over point guards like Paul or Nash. I think when Paul's team needs scoring from him in the playoffs, he's oftentimes non-aggressive and at the wrong times. There's games in the playoffs, where you need a big scoring performance from your star in order to win in and i think Paul can be too reliant on his teammates.

Not doing this point for point, because I'm just giving an opinion on a topic you asked for (and reads slightly odd that you do given much of your reasoning is opinion-based "imo" "preference" "I think" etc; where that style tends to be used for picking apart - more argumentative style - at least typically, so far as I can tell).

But some responses ...

I wouldn't say awful, as before small samples make interpretations come in a lot more (and very very vague memories) but IMO awful is probably a judgement relative to his normal standards rather than an absolute standard, which I tend to avoid using as it penalises higher RS standards.

With McGrady at the margin I'm probably influenced by the fact that that year was (iirc) an outlier in TS% (and that being a fluctuating stat, somewhat attributing that to luck). I don't know how harsh or fair that is, as I say I'm not really that into measuring peaks (the case for including other data is everyone's going to do it anyway, whether knowingly and consciously or just by rooting for name recognition, and it includes additional data and is reasonable for rating the player with greater context, the against being it's not relevent for rating the year). In any case the point was, within this context (elite peaks), McGrady's offensive efficiency isn't coming primarily from shooting efficiency, but in terms of taking a enormous volume burden with miniscule turnovers. Maybe I wasn't sufficiently accounting for low era numbers or unexceptional is harsh (other than the literal, non-exceptional), but anyway that's the point I was getting at.

The numbers don't support a "visible" RS edge over '08 Paul (28.3 PER, .284WS/48, 9.2 BPM, 24.4 WARP - and for what its worth for individual years, McGrady's RAPM, so far as I can see - looks way worse than his boxscore, Paul's looks worse than boxscore but at least still amongst top 20 players). So I'd stand by if one does weigh playoffs heavily Paul's '08 playoffs is very hard to look past.

I don't like the anecdotal stuff about "wrong times" in the playoffs. Here's the hard numbers ...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_career_p.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_per_48_career_p.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_career_p.html

Players in the the top 10 NBA/ABA (or NBA it's the same) for playoff PER, WS/48 and BPM
Michael Jordan (1,1,2)
LeBron James (3,3,1)
Chris Paul (6,6,3)

That's it. BPM is from '74 on. Mikan is top 10 in the two for which the metrics can be calculated (2,2). So he belongs up there.

Players that are in 2 out of 3
Hakeem Olajuwon (5,17,6)
Tim Duncan (7,9,13)
Charles Barkley (9,11,5)

West (14,5) and Wilt (19,7) are in one, out of one and BPM ineligible.

Paul's career isn't finished, and what's to come shouldn't be as good as what's happened thus far. Still ...

[JordansBulls]

Been out of town so haven't been around.

1. Moses Malone 1983 (Dominant on the season and playoffs, led team to one of the greatest seasons of all time and the greatest playoff run considered by many)
2. Kobe 2008 (led team to the finals and best record in conference. Dethroned defending champions)
3. Tmac 2003 Dominant in the season and playoffs and nearly single handedly beat the Pistons.

[drza]

Vote:
2008 Kobe
2003 TMac
1983 Moses Malone

Never anticipated picking Moses over Barkley or Karl. I think he still has the most limited game of the trio. I could be persuaded to go with Barkley. But Moses was dominant on the boards, a strong offensive finisher, defended his position better than Barkley, and maintained his offensive effectiveness in the postseason better than Karl. So for now, this is where my vote stands.

[eminence]

1st Ballot Chris Paul 07-08

2nd Ballot Kobe Bryant 08-09

3rd Ballot Tracy McGrady 02-03

HM: Moses, Nash come to mind as my top two

Have Kobe just a hair over McGrady - feel he has a bit better case for fitting in on a great team (we've seen him do it) and I prefer his defense when he needs to crank it up.

Side note: Feel like some voters are being inconsistent with their criteria, letting the legends get to them. Magic got in a long time ago, but no other pass-first point guard has really gotten much traction until the last few threads. And in terms of peaks the gap between Magic and Paul/Nash in not huge at all in my opinion (Magic's got a fair sized lead for prime though).

[Narigo]

1. 1997 Karl Malone
Going with 1997 Karl Malone over 1990 Charles Barkley and 2006 Kobe Bryant.
Karl Malone is one of the greatest off ball big man ever. Excellent roll man and hes really good at getting in position to score. Pretty good spot up shooter.

2. 1990 Charles Barkley
Unguardable in iso and post situations. Good Ball Handler, Passer and good in transition. I pick 1990 over 1993 because he was more athletic and efficient from the field. Shot 63% on 2 point shots in 1990.

Was considered to be as good as prime MJ and Magic Johnson in 1990. In fact, he had the most first place votes for MVP.

3. 2008 Kobe Bryant

[MyUniBroDavis]

Very surprised to see Ewing beat out Kobe. Interesting stuff.

Yeah, I was a touch surprised too (but only a touch). If this is at all a flukey result of low voter turn-out, for my own part, I can't do much more to encourage timely participation.

Did you count RSCD_3's vote?

[thizznation]

1st Ballot Chris Paul 07-08

2nd Ballot Kobe Bryant 08-09

3rd Ballot Tracy McGrady 02-03

HM: Moses, Nash come to mind as my top two

Have Kobe just a hair over McGrady - feel he has a bit better case for fitting in on a great team (we've seen him do it) and I prefer his defense when he needs to crank it up.

Side note: Feel like some voters are being inconsistent with their criteria, letting the legends get to them. Magic got in a long time ago, but no other pass-first point guard has really gotten much traction until the last few threads. And in terms of peaks the gap between Magic and Paul/Nash in not huge at all in my opinion (Magic's got a fair sized lead for prime though).

I hate saying this because it's so unscientific, but Magic has the "it" factor. Size plays a big factor as well. Magic Johnson's huge body made it easier for him to impose his will on the game when compared to Nash and Paul in my opinion. Chris Paul doesn't have a shot as reliable and easy to get off as a baby hook from the post. If Steve Nash's Center gets injured in the finals, I don't think he will be able to fill in for him. Steve Nash nor Chris Paul have the leadership and charisma that Magic have. Also, I have a feeling that voters have a bias towards Chris Paul and Steve Nash for not making the finals while Magic won 5 times. Not saying that it is completely fair but I still think that fact stays in the back of people's minds.

[Owly]

1st Ballot Chris Paul 07-08

2nd Ballot Kobe Bryant 08-09

3rd Ballot Tracy McGrady 02-03

HM: Moses, Nash come to mind as my top two

Have Kobe just a hair over McGrady - feel he has a bit better case for fitting in on a great team (we've seen him do it) and I prefer his defense when he needs to crank it up.

Side note: Feel like some voters are being inconsistent with their criteria, letting the legends get to them. Magic got in a long time ago, but no other pass-first point guard has really gotten much traction until the last few threads. And in terms of peaks the gap between Magic and Paul/Nash in not huge at all in my opinion (Magic's got a fair sized lead for prime though).

I hate saying this because it's so unscientific, but Magic has the "it" factor. Size plays a big factor as well. Magic Johnson's huge body made it easier for him to impose his will on the game when compared to Nash and Paul in my opinion. Chris Paul doesn't have a shot as reliable and easy to get off as a baby hook from the post. If Steve Nash's Center gets injured in the finals, I don't think he will be able to fill in for him. Steve Nash nor Chris Paul have the leadership and charisma that Magic have. Also, I have a feeling that voters have a bias towards Chris Paul and Steve Nash for not making the finals while Magic won 5 times. Not saying that it is completely fair but I still think that fact stays in the back of people's minds.

It's peripheral to how good they were, but most who look at it tend to conclude Magic was playing the 4 (with Chones at the 5) though obviously Philly's bigs (Caldwell Jones and Dawkins) don't represent a conventional 4, 5 seperation (rather two "bigs"). Regardless Magic wasn't defending a post-up threat (Jones, as I recall, the initial matchup) so really a nominal defensive positioning as a big, wasn't something exceptional for Magic but a helpful variant on the norm. Magic often guarded 4s, but as such forced Worthy and Scott (and sometimes the PF) to guard a position below their natural matchup, which one assumes comes at some cost.

For what it's worth Nash would probably allow for a pretty good lineup without a conventional center (cf: 2006 Suns).

Which isn't to say Magic doesn't have advantages from his height (clearly he does, most obviously his rebounding) but that those are there in the boxscore and that there are costs too (higher turnovers than Paul, defensive mismatches). Or that he wasn't exceptional in that '80 Finals game (though, fwiw, he didn't deserve FMVP).

I won't go into how crude team playoff performance without context is for judging individual players.

I don't know how much you're giving reasons you believe and how you're explaining what you think others reasons are, I'm just not sure I see anything here to justify any real gap.

[thizznation]

1st Ballot Chris Paul 07-08

2nd Ballot Kobe Bryant 08-09

3rd Ballot Tracy McGrady 02-03

HM: Moses, Nash come to mind as my top two

Have Kobe just a hair over McGrady - feel he has a bit better case for fitting in on a great team (we've seen him do it) and I prefer his defense when he needs to crank it up.

Side note: Feel like some voters are being inconsistent with their criteria, letting the legends get to them. Magic got in a long time ago, but no other pass-first point guard has really gotten much traction until the last few threads. And in terms of peaks the gap between Magic and Paul/Nash in not huge at all in my opinion (Magic's got a fair sized lead for prime though).

I hate saying this because it's so unscientific, but Magic has the "it" factor. Size plays a big factor as well. Magic Johnson's huge body made it easier for him to impose his will on the game when compared to Nash and Paul in my opinion. Chris Paul doesn't have a shot as reliable and easy to get off as a baby hook from the post. If Steve Nash's Center gets injured in the finals, I don't think he will be able to fill in for him. Steve Nash nor Chris Paul have the leadership and charisma that Magic have. Also, I have a feeling that voters have a bias towards Chris Paul and Steve Nash for not making the finals while Magic won 5 times. Not saying that it is completely fair but I still think that fact stays in the back of people's minds.

It's peripheral to how good they were, but most who look at it tend to conclude Magic was playing the 4 (with Chones at the 5) though obviously Philly's bigs (Caldwell Jones and Dawkins) don't represent a conventional 4, 5 seperation (rather two "bigs"). Regardless Magic wasn't defending a post-up threat (Jones, as I recall, the initial matchup) so really a nominal defensive positioning as a big, wasn't something exceptional for Magic but a helpful variant on the norm. Magic often guarded 4s, but as such forced Worthy and Scott (and sometimes the PF) to guard a position below their natural matchup, which one assumes comes at some cost.

For what it's worth Nash would probably allow for a pretty good lineup without a conventional center (cf: 2006 Suns).

Which isn't to say Magic doesn't have advantages from his height (clearly he does, most obviously his rebounding) but that those are there in the boxscore and that there are costs too (higher turnovers than Paul, defensive mismatches). Or that he wasn't exceptional in that '80 Finals game (though, fwiw, he didn't deserve FMVP).

I won't go into how crude team playoff performance without context is for judging individual players.

I don't know how much you're giving reasons you believe and how you're explaining what you think others reasons are, I'm just not sure I see anything here to justify any real gap.

This is highly opinionated but I don't think 22 year old Chris Paul has anywhere near the leadership nor charisma as a 27 year old Magic Johnson. Their production is similar enough that this determines for me to put Magic over the top when it comes to a heads up ranking. If we were betting a lot of money on a team winning the championship and had to choose between 08 Chris Paul and 87 Magic Johnson, I would feel a whole lot better with my money on Magic. Chris Paul is great but he is unknown for the most part, it is unknown if Chris Paul can even handle the pressure of a Finals as of now. Magic Johnson has proven himself in that role a half dozen times or so. Chris Paul's basketball production and skills are amazing in a vacuum, but it still doesn't change the fact that they have never been fully tested. Each time the experiment has been cut short for one reason or another... While Chris Paul speculates out as better, people have more faith in the real thing.

I don't think better stats indicate the better player all of the time, and this is the case with Chris Paul vs Magic Johnson.

[trex_8063]

1st ballot: Chris Paul '15
Kinda went thru Paul a bit in post 15 of the #19 thread. Basically he's someone I don't put too far behind Nash as an offensive engine, and obviously better defensively (a clear net positive defensively by all available impact indicators, who also received All-D 1st team this year, fwiw). Had mentioned I'd consider putting him ahead of McGrady; well, now I've done so based on his more complete 2-way game. Am waffling a little wrt what year to call his peak ('08 is obviously phenomenal, too). Impact appears so massive in '15, though, where he logged the highest offensive on/off on record (even over '83 Moses), and the 2nd highest total on/off (behind---barely---only '09 Lebron). There's line-up noise to this, obv, but I'll be curious to see just how high his RAPM when it's released for '15.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17dNdxpgNHvOnMwnTmw65x5exfmQaA0C6T1w7KTmCiC0/edit?usp=sharing

5th offensively and 4th overall. I still don't think his slightly improved jumper makes up for his way better slashing in 08 but the defensive edge might give him the edge in the opinions of others I guess.

TY.
What's the source on this data?

Also, I believe you meant 3rd overall (since that appears to be his position), behind only Lebron and the player peak we voted in as #17 all-time (Curry).

[trex_8063]

Have been out of town, sorry for not being active. Have been catching up on some of the conversation. Have decided to bounce McGrady back up by one position (editing in my original ballot post).