RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7

[mischievous]

Vote: Shaquille Oneal.

I believe out of candidates left, he has the best body of work from peak/prime to longevity and accolades.

Best 3 year peak stretch left aside from arguably Hakeem, who i think is about equal or slightly under at worst.

00-02: 28.6/12.4/3.5 2.6 blks 58 ts%, 30.2 PER, 5.8 OBPM which is really high for a big man, for example that matches Dirk's career high in OBPM the guy who gets lauded by some as the GOAT offensive big. Very good defender even elite in 2000.

00-02 playoffs: Threepeat 29.9/14.5/3.0 2.4 blks 56.2 ts%, 29.3 PER 4.5 OBPM. Sustained or arguably raised his play in the postseason which is difficult for many players to do.

Overall career accomplishments and totals:

4 rings
3 FMVP
15 time all star
8 all nba first team
3 defensive 2nd teams
1 time mvp
10th on all time NBA/ABA scoring list
15th on all time NBA/ABA rebounding list

It is definitely fair to knock Shaq's durability for a lot of his prime, and post 09 he was pretty irrelevant. But i think his peak was goat level, and his longevity is still better than guys like Magic and Bird and was clearly better defenders than them. I think with even Duncan-like longevity Shaq is a strong goat candidate.

2nd vote: Hakeem, only slightly behind Shaq.

[Xherdan 23]

2. KG was one of the best offensive players of his generation too, RAPM or not

Was he really? He had only three seasons were he was in the top 10 in points per game:

1999-00, 22.9 PPG (10th)
2002-03, 23.0 PPG (9th)
2003-04, 24.2 PPG (3rd)

I recall him being primarily a very good mid-range jump shooter who, despite his length, never developed a good post game or was known for taking guys off the dribble. Looking at his percent of FGs by distance (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html#all_shooting), it looks like he took more than half his shots from outside 10 feet in every season. The biggest chunk of his field goal attempts came in the 16 to <3 range.

And for a mid-range jump shooter, he wasn't able to effectively extend his range out to the three-point line. He took very few of them (only 632 out of 21,142 total FGAs) and didn't shoot them well (27.5% for his career, only made 174 of them). That's a profile closer to LaMarcus Aldridge than all-time great.

I'm in the camp that Garnett is a second-tier all-time great. Great defender, great rebounder, fierce competitor, very good but ultimately complementary on offense from an all-time perspective. I've currently got him at 12th on my list. I've got Magic, Bird, Shaq, Olajuwon, and West ahead of him.

I'd like to see Hakeem voted in next but I'll try to make a point in favor of KG here.

Duncan only has 5 seasons being top 10 in PPG, highest finish being 5th (25.5, '01-'02).
You talk about KG's long 2s playstyle and not developing a post game but again, compared to Duncan who's a skilled ATG post player, KG's holds similar efficiency.

KG provided better spacing, playmaking and ball handling than Duncan on offense while being a similar scorer in terms of volume and efficiency.

Now, I'm not arguing KG is a top 5 player or Duncan is out of the top 10, but I think it's interesting so many people have them 10 over spots apart and why these concerns you brought up about KG only being a complementary piece on offense weren't being brought up when Duncan was voted in earlier.

This project really made me re-evaluate my own winning bias and I'm not very certain anymore that Duncan has a case for GOAT and a lock top 5, while KG doesn't have a case for top 10 like I was a few months ago.

[THKNKG]

2. KG was one of the best offensive players of his generation too, RAPM or not

Was he really? He had only three seasons were he was in the top 10 in points per game:

1999-00, 22.9 PPG (10th)
2002-03, 23.0 PPG (9th)
2003-04, 24.2 PPG (3rd)

I recall him being primarily a very good mid-range jump shooter who, despite his length, never developed a good post game or was known for taking guys off the dribble. Looking at his percent of FGs by distance (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html#all_shooting), it looks like he took more than half his shots from outside 10 feet in every season. The biggest chunk of his field goal attempts came in the 16 to <3 range.

And for a mid-range jump shooter, he wasn't able to effectively extend his range out to the three-point line. He took very few of them (only 632 out of 21,142 total FGAs) and didn't shoot them well (27.5% for his career, only made 174 of them). That's a profile closer to LaMarcus Aldridge than all-time great.

I'm in the camp that Garnett is a second-tier all-time great. Great defender, great rebounder, fierce competitor, very good but ultimately complementary on offense from an all-time perspective. I've currently got him at 12th on my list. I've got Magic, Bird, Shaq, Olajuwon, and West ahead of him.

Drza and SSB both in the past have made lengthy posts about KG's offense, that go into meticulous detail, and they explained it far better than I ever could.

Short version: offense is not just scoring, and KG did that dang well anyway (he was comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups). He did all of the non-scoring things on an all time great level. I would strongly suggest you read those posts. Look beyond the PPG.

[penbeast0]

Where do people put Bob Petit?

-10 time All-NBA 1st team
- 2 MVPs
- 8 Top 5 MVP seasons
- Career 26/16 PF
- Career 25.3 PER
- 1 ring

Did it in Russell's era too.

Behind Mikan; his playoff record, other than that one spectacular quarter where he singlehandedly took over the game to give the Hawks their only title (for which any Hawks fan would give him a lifetime pass), isn't nearly as great.

[penbeast0]

Where do we stand on Tom "never made the playoffs" Arsdale?

Who dis dude

Twin brother of Dick Van Arsdale. Both were 3-time all stars, although having seen both I always felt that Dick was the better player. Dick was the better shooter, better passer and better defender. Both were 6-5 and could play both the 2 or 3 position; Tom more suited as a 3 (better rebounder than Dick) and Dick more suited for the 2. Neither are in the Hall of Fame and neither are likely to make the RealGM Top 100.

Mama always liked Dick best (if you get this reference, you are OLD).

[An Unbiased Fan]

Drza and SSB both in the past have made lengthy posts about KG's offense, that go into meticulous detail, and they explained it far better than I ever could.

Short version: offense is not just scoring, and KG did that dang well anyway (he was comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups). He did all of the non-scoring things on an all time great level. I would strongly suggest you read those posts. Look beyond the PPG.

Again, where's the impact. KG's teams weren't particularly good offensive the vast majority of his seasons. They were Top 10 in offense 8 times his entire 20 season span. Not comparable at all to ATG offensive anchors.

Top 10 offense
99-13' Kobe - 14 times/15 seasons
93-06' Shaq - 13 times/14 seasons
80-91' Magic - 12 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 12 times/ 12 seasons
00-13' Dirk - 12 times/ 14 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons
^
Every ATG offensive player is about a 85%-90% certainty to at least lift their team to a Top 10 offense. Obviously depending on support they will trend toward the top, but I chose Top 10 to show that KG DID have impact on offense, just not at an ATG great level. All that offensive utility he possesed doesn't really have the same impact as offensive dominance from an ATG anchor. In the playoffs where opposing teams focus on the star and have better defenses this was apparent.

In fact, Prime KG in Minny had back to back season where Minny was #28 & #25 in offense.

[THKNKG]

Drza and SSB both in the past have made lengthy posts about KG's offense, that go into meticulous detail, and they explained it far better than I ever could.

Short version: offense is not just scoring, and KG did that dang well anyway (he was comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups). He did all of the non-scoring things on an all time great level. I would strongly suggest you read those posts. Look beyond the PPG.

Again, where's the impact. KG's teams weren't particularly good offensive the vast majority of his seasons. They were Top 10 in offense 8 times his entire 20 season span. Not comparable at all to ATG offensive anchors.

Top 10 offense
99-13' Kobe - 14 times/15 seasons
93-06' Shaq - 13 times/14 seasons
80-91' Magic - 12 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 12 times/ 12 seasons
00-13' Dirk - 12 times/ 14 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons
^
Every ATG offensive player is about a 85%-90% certainty to at least lift their team to a Top 10 offense. Obviously depending on support they will trend toward the top, but I chose Top 10 to show that KG DID have impact on offense, just not at an ATG great level. All that offensive utility he possesed doesn't really have the same impact as offensive dominance from an ATG anchor. In the playoffs where opposing teams focus on the star and have better defenses this was apparent.

In fact, Prime KG in Minny had back to back season where Minny was #28 & #25 in offense.

How many times did those same players you compared against finish in the top 10 on defense?

Also kinda funny that you say where's the impact, considering who we are talking about

[An Unbiased Fan]

Drza and SSB both in the past have made lengthy posts about KG's offense, that go into meticulous detail, and they explained it far better than I ever could.

Short version: offense is not just scoring, and KG did that dang well anyway (he was comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups). He did all of the non-scoring things on an all time great level. I would strongly suggest you read those posts. Look beyond the PPG.

Again, where's the impact. KG's teams weren't particularly good offensive the vast majority of his seasons. They were Top 10 in offense 8 times his entire 20 season span. Not comparable at all to ATG offensive anchors.

Top 10 offense
99-13' Kobe - 14 times/15 seasons
93-06' Shaq - 13 times/14 seasons
80-91' Magic - 12 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 12 times/ 12 seasons
00-13' Dirk - 12 times/ 14 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons
^
Every ATG offensive player is about a 85%-90% certainty to at least lift their team to a Top 10 offense. Obviously depending on support they will trend toward the top, but I chose Top 10 to show that KG DID have impact on offense, just not at an ATG great level. All that offensive utility he possesed doesn't really have the same impact as offensive dominance from an ATG anchor. In the playoffs where opposing teams focus on the star and have better defenses this was apparent.

In fact, Prime KG in Minny had back to back season where Minny was #28 & #25 in offense.

How many times did those same players you compared against finish in the top 10 on defense?

Top 10 Defense correlates more to bigs/defensive anchors. A perimeter player like Magic wasn't the defensive anchor for LA, so you will get noise from them.

Top 10 defense
80-91' Magic - 11 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 9 times/ 12 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons <- anchor
99-13' Kobe - 7 times/15 seasons <- primary wing defender but not as impactful on defense as a big
93-06' Shaq - 6 times/14 seasons <- anchor
00-13' Dirk - 6 times/ 14 seasons <- big who never was an effective defensive anchor

Now let's add some ATG defensive anchors....

85-97' Hakeem - 10 times / 13 seasons
98-15' Duncan - 17 times / 18 seasons
90-01' DRob - 11 times / 11 seasons

^
Again, like with the correlation of ATG offensive anchors to a Top 10 offense, we see that ATG defensive anchors are fairly similar. KG falls way short as a ATG offensive or defensive anchor.

[Doctor MJ]

So someone asked me about what I mean when I say Hakeem's impact was inconsistent, so I'll elaborate to clarify.

First let me say that I think having Hakeem over everyone left on this list is totally reasonable, and that while I have KG ahead of Hakeem, by no means am I utterly set on that.

Let's start with the superficial:

We know that Hakeem began raw and had to grow during his career like few others that aren't straight out of high school. That makes him by definition a bit less consistent than some.

We know that when Sampson fell off the Rockets did too and this eventually let to Hakeem wanting a trade, and probably also led to the lack of impact he was having around '91 when the team went nowhere with him, and then did pretty similarly when he got hurt.

We know that the '95 playoffs were glorious for Hakeem. Glorious on a level that peak KG doesn't match.

If you've been around the block though, you know that the fetishization of Hakeem in '94 is ridiculous. It was considered a joke at the time watching Houston vs NY and thinking "My god, one of these teams is going to be called a 'champion'.", and now some seem to start from the "champion" designation and credit Hakeem for his weak supporting cast as if they together would have had a prayer in the Western conference today.

We know that after '95 Hakeem basically ceases to be relevant. Houston fails to win 50 the next year, they super-team afterward at which point the most valuable player on Hakeem's team is Barkley rather than Hakeem, though Hakeem is still the lead scoring option despite being a weaker scoring option.

Longevity?

Well, the RAPM stats I've seen tell me in '98, Garnett's impact was elite and Olajuwon wasn't.

At Garnett's edge at the time (21), Olajuwon was still in college.
At Olajuwon's edge at the time (35), Garnett's impact was still elite.

So yeah, I see Garnett have longer prime impact, and more consistently elite impact.

That sounds strange because people tend to think of those last 3 years in Minnesota as something other than elite impact for KG, but they're just confused. His impact didn't seriously dip, context just changed.

I'll readily acknowledge though that this analysis of Hakeem doesn't cover everything. I welcome people going further and possibly convincing me of how wrong I am.

[Joao Saraiva]

1st vote - Hakeem Olajuwon

I think Hakeem and Shaq are a neck to neck comparison. I think both guys have a similar impact - Shaq was a better offensive player, but Hakeem was the better defensive player - both had great moments as two way impact players tough.

Shaq was the more successfull between them, but I think he was put in a better position to succeed. He played with Kobe, had an all time great coach in P. Jackson, played with Hardaway at his best, Wade at his best...

Hakeem usually had to carry a bigger loads than Shaq. And while I believe Shaq maybe could replicate Hakeem's success, I also think Hakeem could replicate Shaq's. I think, however, it would be most likely for Hakeem to replicate Shaq's. What Hakeem achieved between 93-95 is something that I don't see replicated by many guys. Winning with that roster in 94 was absolutely stunning.

I see that has the best 3 year spam among them, and I might give a slight edge to peak Hakeem (94) over Shaq (00). From the players I've seen, I'd say that year has a great case for the best peak (Altough others have a good case like LeBron 09, Jordan 91 or Shaq 00).

I think they have similar longevity, peak and prime... so I might decide that with the player I think peaked and had a slightly better 3 year prime - and I think that's Hakeem.

Outside their best years (3 years or 5 years) I see Shaq as the better guy on offense but I also think Hakeem's edge on D might be bigger. Shaq was a better passer than Hakeem for most of their careers, a bigger threat on offensive rebounds and a more efficient scorer. But Hakeem has also a clear edge on D, since he covered a lot more ground than Shaq on D, was a better PnR defender and a better rim protector.

This was one of my most difficult choices so far, maybe I'm being a bit unfair to Shaq... but I gotta go with one.

2nd vote - Shaquille O'Neal

[Joao Saraiva]

Vote: Shaquille Oneal.

I believe out of candidates left, he has the best body of work from peak/prime to longevity and accolades.

Best 3 year peak stretch left aside from arguably Hakeem, who i think is about equal or slightly under at worst.

00-02: 28.6/12.4/3.5 2.6 blks 58 ts%, 30.2 PER, 5.8 OBPM which is really high for a big man, for example that matches Dirk's career high in OBPM the guy who gets lauded by some as the GOAT offensive big. Very good defender even elite in 2000.

00-02 playoffs: Threepeat 29.9/14.5/3.0 2.4 blks 56.2 ts%, 29.3 PER 4.5 OBPM. Sustained or arguably raised his play in the postseason which is difficult for many players to do.

Overall career accomplishments and totals:

4 rings
3 FMVP
15 time all star
8 all nba first team
3 defensive 2nd teams
1 time mvp
10th on all time NBA/ABA scoring list
15th on all time NBA/ABA rebounding list

It is definitely fair to knock Shaq's durability for a lot of his prime, and post 09 he was pretty irrelevant. But i think his peak was goat level, and his longevity is still better than guys like Magic and Bird and was clearly better defenders than them. I think with even Duncan-like longevity Shaq is a strong goat candidate.

2nd vote: Hakeem, only slightly behind Shaq.

How do you feel about Hakeem 93-95 vs Shaq 00-02?

How do you feel about them in a defensive comparison and in a an offensive comparison?

How do you feel about them from a situational point of view? (given what they had trough their careers, did Hakeem over-achieve more than Shaq?)

Since I voted for them in a reverse order and it took me some time to think on who I was gonna vote, I'd be interested in reading your thoughts about this.

[THKNKG]

Top 10 Defense correlates more to bigs/defensive anchors. A perimeter player like Magic wasn't the defensive anchor for LA, so you will get noise from them.

Top 10 defense
80-91' Magic - 11 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 9 times/ 12 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons <- anchor
99-13' Kobe - 7 times/15 seasons <- primary wing defender but not as impactful on defense as a big
93-06' Shaq - 6 times/14 seasons <- anchor
00-13' Dirk - 6 times/ 14 seasons <- big who never was an effective defensive anchor

Now let's add some ATG defensive anchors....

85-97' Hakeem - 10 times / 13 seasons
98-15' Duncan - 17 times / 18 seasons
90-01' DRob - 11 times / 11 seasons

^
Again, like with the correlation of ATG offensive anchors to a Top 10 offense, we see that ATG defensive anchors are fairly similar. KG falls way short as a ATG offensive or defensive anchor.

But perimeter players more highly correlate with offense too. You can't dismiss magic's defensive numbers and hold Kg to perimeter offensive standards in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[Senior]

So someone asked me about what I mean when I say Hakeem's impact was inconsistent, so I'll elaborate to clarify.

First let me say that I think having Hakeem over everyone left on this list is totally reasonable, and that while I have KG ahead of Hakeem, by no means am I utterly set on that.

Thanks for the response, I'll do my best to address your concerns.

Let's start with the superficial:

We know that Hakeem began raw and had to grow during his career like few others that aren't straight out of high school. That makes him by definition a bit less consistent than some.

That's fine, although I don't believe that being raw precludes a player from being an elite superstar with devastating impact, even if he's less consistent. KG himself entered the league 4 years younger than Hakeem, so it's not as if he was a polished product right away either. I believe 1998 was the first year cited as an All-Star year impact-wise for KG (so 2 years) whereas Hakeem was on a superstar level from his sophomore year onward.

We know that when Sampson fell off the Rockets did too and this eventually let to Hakeem wanting a trade, and probably also led to the lack of impact he was having around '91 when the team went nowhere with him, and then did pretty similarly when he got hurt.

Those 86 Rockets didn't just lose Sampson, they lost Lewis Lloyd, John Lucas, and Mitchell Wiggins, all for coke suspensions. Robert Reid and Rodney McCray left after 88. Basically everyone who was part of that Finals team was gone in less than 2 years.

We know that the '95 playoffs were glorious for Hakeem. Glorious on a level that peak KG doesn't match.

If you've been around the block though, you know that the fetishization of Hakeem in '94 is ridiculous. It was considered a joke at the time watching Houston vs NY and thinking "My god, one of these teams is going to be called a 'champion'.", and now some seem to start from the "champion" designation and credit Hakeem for his weak supporting cast as if they together would have had a prayer in the Western conference today.

Neither of those teams were particularly good but I do think that line of thought has to do with MJ leaving. People weren't thinking that because of Hakeem, they were thinking that because the team around Hakeem wasn't great and the Knicks were in the Finals despite losing to MJ the last 2 years. No one was thinking the Houston/Orlando finalists were a joke when Drexler came on for Maxwell+Thorpe. That's a better cast than the 94 Rockets but not by 6 miles.

The Western conference is unusually strong because of the Warriors, and it isn't fair to compare because they'd crush 90% of the other champions anyway. But in a year like 2003 replacing Duncan's Spurs? They could win it. Or years like 05-07? It'd be tougher for sure, but certainly better than a prayer.

We know that after '95 Hakeem basically ceases to be relevant. Houston fails to win 50 the next year, they super-team afterward at which point the most valuable player on Hakeem's team is Barkley rather than Hakeem, though Hakeem is still the lead scoring option despite being a weaker scoring option.

I'd say Hakeem was relevant until at least mid-98 when he had his knee surgery in December 1997, taking what was left of his quickness. The 96 Rockets were horrifically banged up deflating their RS record; Hakeem missed 10 games and played with tendinitis in both knees in the playoffs; Drexler missed 30 games, Elie missed half the season with a broken wrist, Cassell missed 20, Horry missed 10, and Jet missed 14. And it's not like they went 40-42; they still won 48 and they were actually 1-9 without Hakeem. 53 win pace with.

I believe Barkley's impact is borne out in the ORAPM of that year, although it's likely he's giving a lot of it back with his defense. I'm not sure being worse offensively than Barkley is a failure, although Hakeem was way better in the playoffs than Chuck was, especially vs Utah. Hakeem's impact is still felt defensively (10th with old Chuck in the frontcourt is no easy feat).

Longevity?

Well, the RAPM stats I've seen tell me in '98, Garnett's impact was elite and Olajuwon wasn't.

At Garnett's edge at the time (21), Olajuwon was still in college.
At Olajuwon's edge at the time (35), Garnett's impact was still elite.

So yeah, I see Garnett have longer prime impact, and more consistently elite impact.

KG was 21 in his third season and Hakeem's third season was 1987. I have no reason to believe that 1987 wasn't an elite impact year for Hakeem. KG's prime is probably longer, but not by that long; you alluded to Hakeem's relevance ending after 1995 so you've probably got his prime as something like 86-95. I have it closer to 86-97 with a very good rookie year (he's knocking on the door).

That sounds strange because people tend to think of those last 3 years in Minnesota as something other than elite impact for KG, but they're just confused. His impact didn't seriously dip, context just changed.

I'll readily acknowledge though that this analysis of Hakeem doesn't cover everything. I welcome people going further and possibly convincing me of how wrong I am.

I agree. I'd say KG was making superstar impact until like 2012 from what seems to be 1998. I just don't think that those 14 years beats Hakeem's 12 by such a margin that it overrides Hakeem's superiority at his peak/scoring-wise/etc.

I also wanted to mention some thoughts on playoff scoring. A lot has been made of KG's ppg in the playoffs and there's been some pushback saying the volume scoring's not as important as others are making it out to be, which I sort of agree with.

To me, it's not about the raw ppg so much as it as about whether the player can maintain his basic stats in the playoffs from the RS - volume+eff. Scoring is done through different processes for each player, and some processes hold up better against the tougher defensive atmosphere of the playoffs. However, a team has been playing the entire RS based on that player's methods of generating points, and those methods might not reveal their weaknesses until the playoffs. If that player suddenly starts having trouble scoring, then it puts additional pressure on less talented teammates to produce points. They have to do things they're not comfortable doing, they have to shoulder additional scoring duties they may not be able to, and because they're not as talented, they might see a bigger drop-off than expected.

That's where I find value in the playoff scoring - if your star can score without many issues in the playoffs, then it allows the rest of the team to play the way they've been playing all year, they don't need to do anything out of their comfort zone, and their offense can function the way it needs to. That's why guys like MJ, Hakeem, Shaq, Kareem, even Kobe are so valuable - it takes the best defenses in the league to even slow them down. They just keep playing their game.

Relating back to KG's passing - I don't have game by game memory of KG's playoff passing, but passing at its base is attempting to create a better opportunity than what the passer has. That's good and all, but it is only an opportunity that the recipient MUST take advantage of or else no points are scored. With KG, I'm not exactly sure what the EV of the opportunities he was creating were, but just because the opportunity is there doesn't mean it'll be taken. Against higher level defenses, those opportunities might not even be *that* good. That's part of why I prefer my best player to be a 1st tier scorer - if my talented guy is the one handling a major bulk of scoring, then it simply removes the possibility of that passing opportunity to fail. KG can create open jumpshots or even easy layups all he wants for his teammates, but it doesn't matter for him and his team if those teammates miss. And at that point, whose fault is it really?

[Outside]

2. KG was one of the best offensive players of his generation too, RAPM or not

Was he really? He had only three seasons were he was in the top 10 in points per game:

1999-00, 22.9 PPG (10th)
2002-03, 23.0 PPG (9th)
2003-04, 24.2 PPG (3rd)

I recall him being primarily a very good mid-range jump shooter who, despite his length, never developed a good post game or was known for taking guys off the dribble. Looking at his percent of FGs by distance (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html#all_shooting), it looks like he took more than half his shots from outside 10 feet in every season. The biggest chunk of his field goal attempts came in the 16 to <3 range.

And for a mid-range jump shooter, he wasn't able to effectively extend his range out to the three-point line. He took very few of them (only 632 out of 21,142 total FGAs) and didn't shoot them well (27.5% for his career, only made 174 of them). That's a profile closer to LaMarcus Aldridge than all-time great.

I'm in the camp that Garnett is a second-tier all-time great. Great defender, great rebounder, fierce competitor, very good but ultimately complementary on offense from an all-time perspective. I've currently got him at 12th on my list. I've got Magic, Bird, Shaq, Olajuwon, and West ahead of him.

Drza and SSB both in the past have made lengthy posts about KG's offense, that go into meticulous detail, and they explained it far better than I ever could.

Short version: offense is not just scoring, and KG did that dang well anyway (he was comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups). He did all of the non-scoring things on an all time great level. I would strongly suggest you read those posts. Look beyond the PPG.

I'm fine with going beyond PPG to take an alternative look at players, and I'm fine with giving those players a boost based on other information, but as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have a problem with using those alternative looks as the sole basis for evaluating a player and discarding basic information such as PPG or secondary information like the percentage of shots taken inside 10 versus outside 10 feet.

Yes, there's more to offense than just scoring, but you'd better have remarkable impact in other areas to not be an exceptional scorer and still be "one of the best offensive players of his generation." It's not like KG was a great playmaker or had notable gravity to create offense for others, and his efficiency isn't remarkable compared to Shaq or Dirk or other players being discussed. I'm not saying KG wasn't good offensively, because he was, but I am pushing back against the notion that he was great offensively.

Saying KG is "comparable to Dirk/Shaq/etc. on PPP on post ups" may be technically correct, but when I've argued that he didn't post up that often, what does that really mean? It makes no sense to compare KG with Shaq on post-ups when Shaq made a career posting up -- 53.6% of all his shots coming inside 3 feet, 93.3% of all his shots from inside 10 feet -- and KG was relatively allergic to the paint --only 22.8% of his shots coming from inside 3 feet, only 42.5% coming from inside 10 feet. Further information would show that the majority of Shaq's shots inside 10 feet were post-ups while relatively few of KG's were.

The fact that KG was in the neighborhood of Shaq in efficiency on those shots -- 74.8% for Shaq inside 3 feet compared to 68.5% for KG, 42.6% for Shaq on shots from 3-10 feet compared to 44.2% for KG -- is dwarfed by the number of shots Shaq took there compared to KG.

Even though KG had 1,685 more FG attempts than Shaq (21,142 vs 19,457 for Shaq), Shaq had over twice as many inside shots than KG -- over 10,000 shots inside 3 feet and over 18,000 inside 10 feet, KG shot 4,800 shots inside 3 feet and 8,900 inside 10 feet. And again, if I had the data, I'd be positive that Shaq's total included a far higher percentage of post-ups.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Top 10 Defense correlates more to bigs/defensive anchors. A perimeter player like Magic wasn't the defensive anchor for LA, so you will get noise from them.

Top 10 defense
80-91' Magic - 11 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 9 times/ 12 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons <- anchor
99-13' Kobe - 7 times/15 seasons <- primary wing defender but not as impactful on defense as a big
93-06' Shaq - 6 times/14 seasons <- anchor
00-13' Dirk - 6 times/ 14 seasons <- big who never was an effective defensive anchor

Now let's add some ATG defensive anchors....

85-97' Hakeem - 10 times / 13 seasons
98-15' Duncan - 17 times / 18 seasons
90-01' DRob - 11 times / 11 seasons

^
Again, like with the correlation of ATG offensive anchors to a Top 10 offense, we see that ATG defensive anchors are fairly similar. KG falls way short as a ATG offensive or defensive anchor.

But perimeter players more highly correlate with offense too. You can't dismiss magic's defensive numbers and hold Kg to perimeter offensive standards in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

For a team its the primary offensive player who anchors the offense, and the primary defensive player anchoring the defense. Magic was never LA's primary defensive player, but he was a primary offensive player.

KG's role was that as the primary offensive & defensive anchor for his teams. This is a testament of his 2-way ability and versatility. But here's the problem......he wasn't an ATG great offensive nor defensive anchor. Again, dominance > versatile. Shaq was an ATG offensive anchor which was more impactful than KG's more balanced game. Even though Shaq wasn't a great defender, his teams didn't do all that worse than KG's defensively(both hover around 50% rate of Top 10 defenses). Offensively Shaq blows him away 90% vs KG 50% rate of top 10 offense.

Great individual offense also is greater than individual defense. So this gap is even more demonstrative when you factor that in.

[Joao Saraiva]

Top 10 Defense correlates more to bigs/defensive anchors. A perimeter player like Magic wasn't the defensive anchor for LA, so you will get noise from them.

Top 10 defense
80-91' Magic - 11 times/ 12 seasons
80-92' Bird - 9 times/ 12 seasons
98-13' KG - 8 times/ 16 seasons <- anchor
99-13' Kobe - 7 times/15 seasons <- primary wing defender but not as impactful on defense as a big
93-06' Shaq - 6 times/14 seasons <- anchor
00-13' Dirk - 6 times/ 14 seasons <- big who never was an effective defensive anchor

Now let's add some ATG defensive anchors....

85-97' Hakeem - 10 times / 13 seasons
98-15' Duncan - 17 times / 18 seasons
90-01' DRob - 11 times / 11 seasons

^
Again, like with the correlation of ATG offensive anchors to a Top 10 offense, we see that ATG defensive anchors are fairly similar. KG falls way short as a ATG offensive or defensive anchor.

But perimeter players more highly correlate with offense too. You can't dismiss magic's defensive numbers and hold Kg to perimeter offensive standards in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

For a team its the primary offensive player who anchors the offense, and the primary defensive player anchoring the defense. Magic was never LA's primary defensive player, but he was a primary offensive player.

KG's role was that as the primary offensive & defensive anchor for his teams. This is a testament of his 2-way ability and versatility. But here's the problem......he wasn't an ATG great offensive nor defensive anchor. Again, dominance > versatile. Shaq was an ATG offensive anchor which was more impactful than KG's more balanced game. Even though Shaq wasn't a great defender, his teams didn't do all that worse than KG's defensively(both hover around 50% rate of Top 10 defenses). Offensively Shaq blows him away 90% vs KG 50% rate of top 10 offense.

Great individual offense also is greater than individual defense. So this gap is even more demonstrative when you factor that in.

While I think Shaq > KG it's not really fair comparing Shaq's teams numbers with KG's... I mean, even in 04 (KG's peak) Shaq had a far better cast. Trough their careers Shaq always played in elite teams... the same doesn't apply to Kevin Garnett.

And I'm not even biased towards KG... I have him out of my top 10.

[andrewww]

Of the remaing candidates its down to Hakeem/Magic/Bird/Kobe/Shaq imo. I've seen KG's entire career and he's a 6-11 version of Scott Pippen (not a slight on Scottie). Had close to same impact on offense as Duncan, and Duncan's calling card wasn't on offense either, though he was a better post scorer when it mattered compared to KG. Another guy I think of when discussing KG is the Admiral. I have both of them in the lower teens on this list pre-project.

Hakeem - best overall peak of the bunch, elite on offense and defense.

Shaq - perhaps the bully ball scorer in history along with Lebron, played with a lot of elite wings in his prime where he may have gotten a bit too much of the credit (Kobe, Wade, Penny). Questionable on defense esp against the PNR which is why a lot of his Orlando teams didnt ring.

Magic - perhaps the GOAT offensive player in history, but a lot of what has been raised in this project has kind of shed new light on playmakers who are the sole engine of the attack being easier to defend (would be seen mainly against the best teams to exploit this).

Bird - similar to Magic but with an even shorter prime.

Kobe - longest extended prime, perhaps the best combo of offensive scoring/playmaking of this bunch. Could fill the defensive stopper role in his younger days where he earned his reputation that netted him a few too many all-defensive team nominations later on in his career. Had arguably the best career of the bunch too. Can't say his teams didn't get results. He was at the very least a co-anchor on a top heavy team in 4/5 title winning teams for anyone who actually watched his career and doesnt just go on narratives. Peak season is consistently tremendously underrated (put 06 Kobe on any of his title winning teams and the winning margin grows).

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon
Alternate: Kobe Bryant

[drza]

Who dis dude

Twin brother of Dick Van Arsdale. Both were 3-time all stars, although having seen both I always felt that Dick was the better player. Dick was the better shooter, better passer and better defender. Both were 6-5 and could play both the 2 or 3 position; Tom more suited as a 3 (better rebounder than Dick) and Dick more suited for the 2. Neither are in the Hall of Fame and neither are likely to make the RealGM Top 100.

Mama always liked Dick best (if you get this reference, you are OLD).

Sounds like Smothers Brothers, to me.

"MOM LIKED YOU BEST!"

"Lower your voice!"

(Barry White voice) "Mom liked you BEST!"

[oldschooled]

For those guys having Hakeem over Shaq, was it just the issues/mental focus that Shaq caused the team? Every explanation was that Shaq was detrimental to the team blah blah. But are we just going to forget Hakeem on his pre-title Hakeem version? Shaq was playing on Hakeem's level in just his 3rd year (3RD YEAR!) against Hakeem on the peak of his powers.

Code: Select all

                                                                                                                                             
Rk             Player  Season Age  G   PER  TS%  TOV%  USG% OWS DWS   WS   WS/48 OBPM DBPM BPM VORP
1    Shaquille ONeal* 1994-95  22 79  28.6 .588   9.4  31.9 9.6 4.4 14.0    .230  4.5  0.9 5.4  5.4
2    Hakeem Olajuwon* 1994-95  32 72  26.0 .563  11.7  31.7 5.1 5.6 10.7    .181  1.3  4.0 5.3  5.3


Then Shaq went toe to toe against Hakeem in the Finals. This was the Hakeem that outplayed the MVP David Robinson in the series. The Rockets then sweep the young and inexperience but talented Magic team but i cant pin that down on Shaq with Nick Anderson missing those ft's etc.

[An Unbiased Fan]

While I think Shaq > KG it's not really fair comparing Shaq's teams numbers with KG's... I mean, even in 04 (KG's peak) Shaq had a far better cast. Trough their careers Shaq always played in elite teams... the same doesn't apply to Kevin Garnett.

And I'm not even biased towards KG... I have him out of my top 10.

Shaq has had great support his whole career, much like Magic and Bird, I completely agree with you there. The Top 10 metric works regardless of support. Top level support with an ATG anchor will be at the top(like Magic on the Lskers where he has multiple #1 offenses). Weak support with an ATG anchor trends down around the #10 spot(Kobe with the 06 & 07 Lakers). An offensive superstar player is so valuable to a team that they pretty much guarantee that you'll be better than at least half the teams in the league offensively(around #15), and ATG superstars usually push that to the top third (#10). GS is ridculous because you have two potential ATG offensive anchors AND a top level offensive support cast. Only Showtime can compare on that side of the court.