RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #14

[scrabbarista]

14. Karl Malone

15. Julius Erving

I. Karl Malone Bob Pettit are tied among remaining players in my MVP voting metric. Julius Erving is next after them.

II. Malone is second among remaining players in my "Honors" metric, after Jerry West.

III. Malone is the only player, along with Kareem, to have over 60,000 career regular season points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks. Kevin Garnett, in fourth all-time, has 50,074. This gigantic number for Malone is a major part of his case for being so high despite his relatively "lackluster" playoff resume.

IV. Speaking of the playoffs, Malone is 9th all-time in playoff points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals. He is above all remaining players, as well as Bill Russell, Larry Bird(!), Hakeem Olajuwon, Kevin Garnett, and Oscar Robertson.

V. Significant parts of Erving's case come from his time in the ABA, which I penalize pretty heavily (I think I have the penalty at minus 30% for most accomplishments). Even with that penalty, his numbers are impressive, as is the fact that he was the best player on two championship teams while in his prime (also penalized at 30%). The only players left who have that on their resumes are Mikan, Isiah Thomas, and Dave Cowens, none of whom I would personally consider this high, meaning he is unique among players in consideration.

VI. Even with a 30% penalty for his ABA numbers, Erving is 12th all-time in postseason points, rebounds, blocks, steals, and assists. He finishes above Hakeem Olajuwon and Oscar Robertson as well as with over 38% more than Kevin Garnett (6800 to 4900 - that's with a 30% penalty for ABA totals).

[andrewww]

Its nice that Dirk met the Heatles in their first year together.

Now have him meet the Jordan Bulls after they had dominated the league for half a decade. Do you still think Dirk's "gravity" wins him that title? Or in the end are guys just a little lucky or unlucky in the opponents they draw?

I've said before: Mailman was better than Dirk at EVERYTHING, except that 1 on 1 scoring. Dirk better absolutely blow away everybody in history to overcome such an all around talent gap.

That one really is frustrating. Flip the faces on the numbers and I don't think there's a chance in the hot place that people saying Dirk here would argue for Mailman. This is about recency, hype, and familiarity. For modern fans of Dirk of course, some homerism.

But none of that stuff should matter. Dirk Nowitzki was better at almost NOTHING than Karl alone. Malone whips him across the board. Outpoints him at Dirk's very own traits. He's as efficient an scorer, he scores more, rebounds more, assists more, defends more. He dominates him in advanced stats. Lasted longer at prime level. Won more MVPs. Won more All NBAs. Won more MVP shares. And you know what? He won more games too.

The cognitive dissonance is massive. I didn't even like Karl Malone. My guy was Barkley, and if not Chuck, then Hakeem. But hell if I'm going to fly in the face of history to annoint somebody who did not achieve as much.

I'm neutral on both Dirk and Mailman. I do think Mailman was better at a lot more things than Dirk, but perhaps most importantly and this is why I've nominated Dirk over Mailman, is that in the playoffs Mailman's production and scoring efficiency drop considerably, even before the 97 and 98 Finals. The 98 Bulls were also quite vulnerable to be honest, and if not for a couple of key plays going the Bulls' way in game 6, we're looking at a game 7 back in Utah.

Either way, to me the debate after West is between Dirk and Mailman regardless of where you stand.

[RCM88x]

Vote: Jerry West

Jerry is most certainly the unluckiest star in NBA history, always going up against the Celtics or dealing with injuries and poor performances by his teammates despite often heroic performances by himself. To me, I think a lot of the argument against West and for Russell over the years has simply been titles... which by and large are often more a function of supporting cast than actual performance by the star player, especially when West usually played at an elite level and far exceeded what should have been asked of him to win.

He ranks 11th in RS WS/48 and a very impressive 7th in PS WS/48. He was also extremely efficient for his time and position, posting a career TS% of .55 in the RS and .541 in the PS, and also ranks in the top 25 all time for both RS and Playoff PER, a feat rare among perimeter players of his era.

To me, Jerry was the guy that made LA the great team they were in the late 60s and early 70s, Wilt was great still, but often times was not as productive as his younger self and at times was not able to lead teams like he once did. Jerry was the constant, reliable performer for that team and despite his efforts more often than not came up short due to simply playing against better team to little fault of his own.

2nd Vote: Julius Erving

[Outside]

Vote: Jerry West
Alternate: John Havlicek

West was an elite player on both offense and defense, upped his game in the playoffs, was a great leader and teammate, combined athleticism and skill, had competitive fire. The only thing he didn't have was size, as in center-size. Dominated games from the guard position. Mr. Clutch. The Logo. An iconic figure in the sport.

People seem to forget Havlicek, who was the bridge between the Russell and Cowens eras. He was an all-around wing player (forward or guard) who did everything well and nothing spectacularly. He ran beat opponents with skill, endurance, and determination.

RS career averages: 20.8 points, 6.3 rebounds, 4.8 assists
PS career averages (172 games): 22.0 points, 6.9 rebounds, 4.8 assists
8 titles
Averaged 27.1 points, 6.1 rebounds, and 6.0 assists in the 1974 title run

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: Jerry West
Alt: Dirk Nowitzki

Doesn't look to me like it's going to matter which way I order Jerry or Dirk so I'm going to go with my heart here.

Some thoughts:

I admire the hell out of Jerry West. I consider him basically the GOAT basketball mind when you consider on & off the court stuff, and the fact that the game NEVER seems to pass him by. Like literally, Byron Scott sees the game like an old man, but actual old man West sees the game as it is.

When ElGee first start doing his WOWY stuff, West was the guy who popped out more than any other. Really both he and Oscar did like crazy. It's basically a given to me that they lifted their teams more than contemporary Wilt did over the course of their careers. But West was particularly astonishing because he dealt with a poor fit, because the team really never adapted like it should have when he surpassed Elgin Baylor. They just kept letting Baylor act like the first option for years. Meanwhile, it was West's presence that made the team work in a variety of systems, to say nothing of his clearly superior efficiency statistics.

I've said before: Were I drafting a guy from that era for today's game, I'd draft West first. Ahead of Baylor, Oscar, Wilt, or even my GOAT Russell. He played in a horrendous era for his skillset, and he still had astonishing impact while having an attitude that basically took nothing off the table.

But y'know, longevity is a thing. If that's the thing making him lower on this list for you, I totally get that.

Let me speak about Dirk vs Malone here, and the more I think about it, this will probably end up being more about Malone. In Dirk you've got a guy who wasn't Jerry West good, but he was really damn good, and like West, he really took nothing off the table. Yeah Nash could have been better used next to Dirk, and that would have meant Dirk playing a slightly different role, but he'd have done it with enthusiasm if Don Nelson had understood what he had in Nash. (Ironic given that Donnie Nelson is the guy who fell in love with Nash in the first place.)

The thing about Malone is that he gets placed by default based on his volume scoring, as does his teammate Stockton..and yet all the on/off data we have favors Stockton over Malone, and that's from an era before we realized that floor generals who made great decisions and could shoot 3's and play defense were incredibly valuable and had been under-utilized before.

To be clear, I'm not saying Stockton "made" Malone. Malone would have been great no matter what, but other guys we're talking about here didn't have a teammate next to them who was arguably better, so when people talk about Dirk as if he did less than Malone it's just weird to me. I won't pretend there aren't solid rebut points that can be made back in the other direction, but if you think Malone is just on another tier above Dirk, I really just don't see it that way.

Other guys getting some buzz:

Dr. J. This one is tough for me. I named myself after Dr. J here. I love the ABA, and I love Dr. J's style, attitude, you name it. I also think the value he had on the '75-76 Nets was GOAT peak territory, and he'd be seen very differently if he had been take from that team and pushed to a team with about the worst fit imaginable. And for these reasons I used to have Erving above Oscar and West on peak alone, let alone longevity. The more I see data though in the NBA years, he's just not in the same league as Oscar & West impact-wise and I can't justify it by saying the fit was bad, because they fixed that when they got rid of McGinnis. I see Oscar & West as quite easily the two best offensive players in history until the arrival of Bird & Magic, and I also see West as a superior defensive player.

Robinson. I have Dirk & West above Robinson, but I could see arguments in the other direction. I think Robinson is absolutely incredible.

Moses. The problem with Moses is that he's a specialist that teams didn't actually seem to love having that much. The top tier of guys are franchise players. Given Moses 3 MVPs and his lead role on the '83 76ers, he seems like a franchise player and then some. I tend to see him though as a guy who just focused on simple things that in the right context could make him very valuable, but don't make him as "build around able" as really any of the other guys we've discussed so far. I mean Wilt & Shaq have headcase issues, but Moses actually seems to be just limited in what he does out there.

Hondo. I like Havlicek a great deal, but the volume scoring on weak efficiency at high pace I think paints a picture that is a little too rosy. You would not want Havlicek trying to volume score in today's game. He'd be more of a specialist.

[Jaivl]

People seem to forget Havlicek, who was the bridge between the Russell and Cowens eras. He was an all-around wing player (forward or guard) who did everything well and nothing spectacularly. He ran beat opponents with skill, endurance, and determination.

RS career averages: 20.8 points, 6.3 rebounds, 4.8 assists
PS career averages (172 games): 22.0 points, 6.9 rebounds, 4.8 assists
8 titles
Averaged 27.1 points, 6.1 rebounds, and 6.0 assists in the 1974 title run

That doesn't look better than, for example, Nowitzki, who did everything well and a couple of things spectacularly. Or Malone, who did everything well too and did it for longer.

[therealbig3]

The thing is, these advantages for Karl Malone over Dirk are really quite small, and might not even exist tbh. Prime vs prime, I'm not convinced that Malone was a significantly better defender or rebounder or passer. Dirk was a comparable defensive rebounder to Malone, the difference mainly exists with regards to offensive rebounds, which are of questionable value when you weigh the benefits of extra possessions vs the risk of transition opportunities given up. Either way, these are small advantages for Malone at best.

Meanwhile, Dirk was a significantly better #1 option. I'm a big proponent for Garnett and I've made it clear that I don't view his go-to scoring ability as a big deal, because most big men aren't capable of doing that at an elite enough level to warrant that being the game plan, and that's why his other skills are far more important.

But Dirk is the exception to that. He actually is that good...one of the ATG offensive anchors in history, not just among big men. The reason I still give Garnett the edge is because he was clearly A LOT better defensively, while retaining a lot of really good things offensively as well, such as his shooting and passing. K. Malone on the other hand has the same weakness as KG, but it's a bigger deal for him, because he doesn't do anything else at an elite level. His scoring IS his major form of impact, and it falls way short of Dirk. He's not an anchor on defense like KG, and he's not an all-time great playmaker at PF like KG.

So when scoring is the one thing you do at an elite level, and everything else is merely above average, and that scoring doesn't match up to Dirk's, it's hard for me to take that player over Dirk...you need to be pretty much outstanding at all other areas of the game to compensate for that disadvantage, which someone like KG does imo...Malone does not.

[rebirthoftheM]

The thing is, these advantages for Karl Malone over Dirk are really quite small, and might not even exist tbh. Prime vs prime, I'm not convinced that Malone was a significantly better defender or rebounder or passer. Dirk was a comparable defensive rebounder to Malone, the difference mainly exists with regards to offensive rebounds, which are of questionable value when you weigh the benefits of extra possessions vs the risk of transition opportunities given up. Either way, these are small advantages for Malone at best.

Meanwhile, Dirk was a significantly better #1 option. I'm a big proponent for Garnett and I've made it clear that I don't view his go-to scoring ability as a big deal, because most big men aren't capable of doing that at an elite enough level to warrant that being the game plan, and that's why his other skills are far more important.

But Dirk is the exception to that. He actually is that good...one of the ATG offensive anchors in history, not just among big men. The reason I still give Garnett the edge is because he was clearly A LOT better defensively, while retaining a lot of really good things offensively as well, such as his shooting and passing. K. Malone on the other hand has the same weakness as KG, but it's a bigger deal for him, because he doesn't do anything else at an elite level. His scoring IS his major form of impact, and it falls way short of Dirk. He's not an anchor on defense like KG, and he's not an all-time great playmaker at PF like KG.

So when scoring is the one thing you do at an elite level, and everything else is merely above average, and that scoring doesn't match up to Dirk's, it's hard for me to take that player over Dirk...you need to be pretty much outstanding at all other areas of the game to compensate for that disadvantage, which someone like KG does imo...Malone does not.

Do you have any information/detail on whether Karl Malone's tendency to get more offensive rebounds hurt his team in any way? This would help make the argument IMO.

And Karl Malone has the same weaknesses as KG? Although he dips in TS% in PS for example, he is still better than KG in terms of scoring production and efficiency. From 90 to 99 he still gives you per 100, 35 PPG on 53.3% TS, down from 37 PPG on 59% TS. 99-04 PS KG meanwhile gives you 29 PPG on 51% TS, and even accounting for era issues, Karl still cannot be conceivably be seen as having similar problems as KG. KG and Karl started from different bases.. just because one dude fell from his lofty standards, does not mean he should be treated the same as a dude who started from a lower base and saw declines.

Karl's AST%/TOV% stuff also get better in the PS, and he was better than 02-11 Dirk in this regard. Honestly, the fact that Karl was able to produce assist numbers like he did, with Stockton by his side, is very impressive. Dirk's AST% only increased when Nash left. And despite all the hoopala about Dirk, it seems even late 90s Malone was having major offensive impact, undercutting the claim that he was a dude with inferior offensive impact (DOC's spreadsheet seems to have 98 Malone peaking higher on ORAPM than Dirk ever did). And the concrete offensive areas we can confidently determine... that is points, AST% and TOV%, all have Karl looking excellent.

[JoeMalburg]

Dr. J. This one is tough for me. I named myself after Dr. J here. I love the ABA, and I love Dr. J's style, attitude, you name it. I also think the value he had on the '75-76 Nets was GOAT peak territory, and he'd be seen very differently if he had been take from that team and pushed to a team with about the worst fit imaginable. And for these reasons I used to have Erving above Oscar and West on peak alone, let alone longevity. The more I see data though in the NBA years, he's just not in the same league as Oscar & West impact-wise and I can't justify it by saying the fit was bad, because they fixed that when they got rid of McGinnis. I see Oscar & West as quite easily the two best offensive players in history until the arrival of Bird & Magic, and I also see West as a superior defensive player.

I wonder why we can't use the same critical thinking we do to realize that KG's lack of playoff success has little to do with him and more to do with things beyond his control to see that Julius Erving didn't get worse in 1977-79, but it was simply a toxic situation for any player. It seems like you are almost there already based on your post. Erving was the best player in Basketball in 1975 and 1976 on a team where his best teammate was Billy Paultz, an average to slightly above average undersized center. I won't explain why the post-merger 76ers were poorly constructed, you already well know. But there they were in 1977 Finals nonetheless and Dr. J led the way averaging 26/7/5/2 on 58 ts%. The 76ers won 55 games and lost to the eventual Champions in 1978 and by 1979 Dr. J was putting up superstar box numbers with Bobby Jones level impact stats. And then of course from 1980-83 he was a top three player every year, probably the best in the league in 1981 and 1982 and his team made the Finals three of four seasons.

Point is, I think your first instinct was right and if the data is telling you something else now, it's because you're putting too much stock in it.

Oscar and West spent most of their prime seasons clearly behind Wilt and Russell, Doctor J was Kareem's rival during their mutual peak and seemed to be the superior of Bird and Magic during their early prime seasons.

I think the three of them each have their various advantages over one another and weaknesses unique to themselves. I think they are three in the same class, I'm fine with ranking them in any order, but within the same 4-6 spots all-time I believe.

Moses. The problem with Moses is that he's a specialist that teams didn't actually seem to love having that much. The top tier of guys are franchise players. Given Moses 3 MVPs and his lead role on the '83 76ers, he seems like a franchise player and then some. I tend to see him though as a guy who just focused on simple things that in the right context could make him very valuable, but don't make him as "build around able" as really any of the other guys we've discussed so far. I mean Wilt & Shaq have headcase issues, but Moses actually seems to be just limited in what he does out there.

You said it. Three MVP's and a primary role on one of the greatest Championship teams ever. Arguing he wasn't a superstar is just not doable. Every time the Lakers slipped up from 1980-1983, it was because Moses was on the other side. He may be the least traditional franchise superstar we have and he may have had one of the shortest primes/peaks, but there is no doubt he was a superstar from 1979-1983. For those five years, cumulatively, he is questionably the best player in basketball. Can we say the same about Dirk, West, Oscar, KG, Malone, Robinson or any other player that went after Bird? (aside from Mikan and maybe Kobe if you're very generous) I don't think so. And I think that should matter.

[Joao Saraiva]

The thing is, these advantages for Karl Malone over Dirk are really quite small, and might not even exist tbh. Prime vs prime, I'm not convinced that Malone was a significantly better defender or rebounder or passer. Dirk was a comparable defensive rebounder to Malone, the difference mainly exists with regards to offensive rebounds, which are of questionable value when you weigh the benefits of extra possessions vs the risk of transition opportunities given up. Either way, these are small advantages for Malone at best.

Meanwhile, Dirk was a significantly better #1 option. I'm a big proponent for Garnett and I've made it clear that I don't view his go-to scoring ability as a big deal, because most big men aren't capable of doing that at an elite enough level to warrant that being the game plan, and that's why his other skills are far more important.

But Dirk is the exception to that. He actually is that good...one of the ATG offensive anchors in history, not just among big men. The reason I still give Garnett the edge is because he was clearly A LOT better defensively, while retaining a lot of really good things offensively as well, such as his shooting and passing. K. Malone on the other hand has the same weakness as KG, but it's a bigger deal for him, because he doesn't do anything else at an elite level. His scoring IS his major form of impact, and it falls way short of Dirk. He's not an anchor on defense like KG, and he's not an all-time great playmaker at PF like KG.

So when scoring is the one thing you do at an elite level, and everything else is merely above average, and that scoring doesn't match up to Dirk's, it's hard for me to take that player over Dirk...you need to be pretty much outstanding at all other areas of the game to compensate for that disadvantage, which someone like KG does imo...Malone does not.

You're not convinced Malone was a better rebounder...

Dirk's best RS as a rebounder: 9.9 RPG // 14.8 TRB%

Karl Malone has 10 seasons above 10 RPG and one at 9.9 RPG.
Karl Malone has 16 seasons above that TRB%.

In the playoffs:
Dirk's best was at 13.1 RPG.
Karl Malone has 3 seasons above that.

If you do a top 10 seasons among them:
1. Malone 16.3
2. Malone 13.3
3. Malone 13.2
4. Dirk 13.1
5. Malone 12.4
6. Dirk 12
7. Malone 11.8 Dirk 11.8
9. Dirk 11.7
10. Dirk 11.5

So Malone has 6 of the best 10 including 4 in the top 5.

Dirk's best TRB% is 16.5.
Malone has 4 seasons above that. 2 equal.

Now the playoffs have a lot more small samples, but even there Malone is clearly the best one.

I'd say he's comfortably the best rebounder between them.

Also Malone has more ORPG than Dirk's best for almost his entire career! And in the playoffs he has the best ORPG between them - 9 of the top 10 seasons in that regard belong to Malone. I don't see how this is even a debate.

[mdonnelly1989]

VOTE 1: Jerry West


One of the all time greatest shooters, one of the top 10 greatest defensive guards and one a great playmaker.

VOTE 2: Dr. J


The original MJ, and if it wasn't for ABA would be looked at as a better player.

[Dr Positivity]

Jerry West - Case for: Good argument for being offensive player left based on playing a more offensive position than players like Barkley and Dirk, elite efficiency for his era, good passer, floor spacer. Great accolades defensively. Great intangibles. Elite playoff and Finals cred. Case against: Less longevity than others when considering lack of post prime years and missing the playoffs in one of them (74). Regular season injures including miss 67 playoffs.

Dirk Nowitzki - Case for: Excellent RAPM career making him a peer of players like Kobe and Garnett, while other candidates have absence of +/- information. Strong longevity considering post prime Dirk still makes impact due to floor spacing and arguably can still be 2nd best player on a title in years like 2012-2016. Great intangibles. Style of offensive game may help his team's defense. Pretty good playoff performer on the whole, a few lows but some terrific highs as well. Highly skilled offensive game appears to translate against playoff defenses. Case against: Non elite defensive anchor, rebounder or passer. Offense first player but plays less of an offensive position/more of a defensive position than other options here. Less physical force of will than other candidates.

Julius Erving - Case for: One of the GOAT peak seasons in 76 when considering his playoff/Finals performance. A high value defender compared to other candidates here considering he plays more of a defensive position than West while appears to have been better on D than some players like Barkley, Dirk and Moses. Beloved teammate. Excellent longevity considering he still adds a lot of value from 83-87. Case against: Average floor spacing wing. Portability questions in late 70s and with McGinnis. For his boxscore defensive stats does not do too great on All-Defense teams. May have been less dominant in NBA than ABA because of less transition play.

Karl Malone - Case for: Dominant longevity and durability. 99-04 still adds a lot of value. Good defender and rebounder at a high value defensive position, therefore likely higher defensive impact than a player like West for example even if West is better for his position. Strong passing PF. Great intangibles and helped develop culture of showing up every night. Good floor spacer after a certain point in his career. Case against: Playoff shooting efficiency drops and glaring what if playoff losses on his record if he had done better. Late career RAPM not as impressive as Stockton.

Moses Malone - Case for: Cred of people watching him in time as 3x MVP and won MVPs when his team wasn't even that dominant. Stepped up in playoffs to defeat Kareem. Long career with many all-star level seasons. Makes a few all-defensive teams. Appears to have been a good defender with Sixers when he got to save energy more. Made 1st team All-D in 83 and 2nd in 79. If a good defender in 83 as C is most defensive position this could put his defensive peak in value up there with candidates like Karl Malone, Erving and West. Case against: Non floor spacer and passer. "Building an offense around him" is less easy when he's not as much of a facilitator either through passing or spacing like Dirk. Houston DRTGs record is very concerning with him manning the middle. While having long overall longevity, the meat of his career is 8 seasons in 79-86 which is a little on the light side for a prime.

For me the pick is between Erving and Dirk as I am concerned about playoffs and RAPM for Karl Malone and West's heatlh/longevity makes it hard to pick him over Erving/Dirk. Moses in 83 is potentially on this level, but the Rockets version I am too concerned about his defense for a C and as an offensive player, a C who plays near the rim and doesn't pass often just doesn't fit with what appears to be the highest impact offensive players in RAPM/RPM. Erving's peak looks higher than Dirk's from my vantage point so I'll go with him

Vote: Julius Erving

2nd: Dirk Nowitzki

[Pablo Novi]

14. Karl Malone

15. Julius Erving

I. Karl Malone Bob Pettit are tied among remaining players in my MVP voting metric. Julius Erving is next after them.

II. Malone is second among remaining players in my "Honors" metric, after Jerry West.

III. Malone is the only player, along with Kareem, to have over 60,000 career regular season points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks. Kevin Garnett, in fourth all-time, has 50,074. This gigantic number for Malone is a major part of his case for being so high despite his relatively "lackluster" playoff resume.

IV. Speaking of the playoffs, Malone is 9th all-time in playoff points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals. He is above all remaining players, as well as Bill Russell, Larry Bird(!), Hakeem Olajuwon, Kevin Garnett, and Oscar Robertson.

V. Significant parts of Erving's case come from his time in the ABA, which I penalize pretty heavily (I think I have the penalty at minus 30% for most accomplishments). Even with that penalty, his numbers are impressive, as is the fact that he was the best player on two championship teams while in his prime (also penalized at 30%). The only players left who have that on their resumes are Mikan, Isiah Thomas, and Dave Cowens, none of whom I would personally consider this high, meaning he is unique among players in consideration.

VI. Even with a 30% penalty for his ABA numbers, Erving is 12th all-time in postseason points, rebounds, blocks, steals, and assists. He finishes above Hakeem Olajuwon and Oscar Robertson as well as with over 38% more than Kevin Garnett (6800 to 4900 - that's with a 30% penalty for ABA totals).

In my GOAT list I have Dr J and Karl Malone in the same set of 5 GOAT Spots: GOAT #s 6-10 (Wilt, Dr J, Kobe, "O", K. Malone) - so I really don't have a gap between the two of them and could "live" with either ranked slightly ahead of or behind the other.

I will SUGGEST one thing about the ABA of Dr J's playing days.
1. THE ABA OUTPLAYED THE NBA IN THEIR MANY EXHIBITION GAMES, MORE SO EACH YEAR. Exhibition games seldom mean much; but back then, they meant more than they ever did at any other time. Why? Because so very much was at stake. Was the NBA really the dominant League (as they had been during the ABA's earliest years)? Had the upstart ABA caught up? The ABA "beat up" on the NBA in those later exhibition years to gain an over-all Dual-League period advantage (despite starting off losing decidedly more games in the earliest years).

2. EX-ABA SUPER-STARS GOT THEIR FAIR SHARE OF ALL-NBA 1st-Team & 2nd-Team honors.

3. Three of the four ex-ABA teams held their own in the NBA; with the fourth, the Nets having been raped (along with the remaining ABA teams that weren't allowed in thru the merger).

These three things tell me that the two Leagues, particularly their super-stars, were about equal during Dr J's ABA years.

So "equal" that I wouldn't deduct 5% from Dr J's ABA totals in any category - I basically treat them, like Basketball-Reference does - as stats equal to NBA stats.

I got to see a couple of ABA games - in that direct eye test, the level looked darned close to what I was seeing on TV with the NBA games.

[Pablo Novi]

Dr. J. This one is tough for me. I named myself after Dr. J here. I love the ABA, and I love Dr. J's style, attitude, you name it. I also think the value he had on the '75-76 Nets was GOAT peak territory, and he'd be seen very differently if he had been take from that team and pushed to a team with about the worst fit imaginable. And for these reasons I used to have Erving above Oscar and West on peak alone, let alone longevity. The more I see data though in the NBA years, he's just not in the same league as Oscar & West impact-wise and I can't justify it by saying the fit was bad, because they fixed that when they got rid of McGinnis. I see Oscar & West as quite easily the two best offensive players in history until the arrival of Bird & Magic, and I also see West as a superior defensive player.

I wonder why we can't use the same critical thinking we do to realize that KG's lack of playoff success has little to do with him and more to do with things beyond his control to see that Julius Erving didn't get worse in 1977-79, but it was simply a toxic situation for any player. It seems like you are almost there already based on your post. Erving was the best player in Basketball in 1975 and 1976 on a team where his best teammate was Billy Paultz, an average to slightly above average undersized center. I won't explain why the post-merger 76ers were poorly constructed, you already well know. But there they were in 1977 Finals nonetheless and Dr. J led the way averaging 26/7/5/2 on 58 ts%. The 76ers won 55 games and lost to the eventual Champions in 1978 and by 1979 Dr. J was putting up superstar box numbers with Bobby Jones level impact stats. And then of course from 1980-83 he was a top three player every year, probably the best in the league in 1981 and 1982 and his team made the Finals three of four seasons.

Point is, I think your first instinct was right and if the data is telling you something else now, it's because you're putting too much stock in it.

Oscar and West spent most of their prime seasons clearly behind Wilt and Russell, Doctor J was Kareem's rival during their mutual peak and seemed to be the superior of Bird and Magic during their early prime seasons.

I think the three of them each have their various advantages over one another and weaknesses unique to themselves. I think they are three in the same class, I'm fine with ranking them in any order, but within the same 4-6 spots all-time I believe.

Moses. The problem with Moses is that he's a specialist that teams didn't actually seem to love having that much. The top tier of guys are franchise players. Given Moses 3 MVPs and his lead role on the '83 76ers, he seems like a franchise player and then some. I tend to see him though as a guy who just focused on simple things that in the right context could make him very valuable, but don't make him as "build around able" as really any of the other guys we've discussed so far. I mean Wilt & Shaq have headcase issues, but Moses actually seems to be just limited in what he does out there.

You said it. Three MVP's and a primary role on one of the greatest Championship teams ever. Arguing he wasn't a superstar is just not doable. Every time the Lakers slipped up from 1980-1983, it was because Moses was on the other side. He may be the least traditional franchise superstar we have and he may have had one of the shortest primes/peaks, but there is no doubt he was a superstar from 1979-1983. For those five years, cumulatively, he is questionably the best player in basketball. Can we say the same about Dirk, West, Oscar, KG, Malone, Robinson or any other player that went after Bird? (aside from Mikan and maybe Kobe if you're very generous) I don't think so. And I think that should matter.

About Dr J's ABA days. I have him as the #2 best player in either League, after Kareem.
Post-merger, as you do, I too have (Dr J ...) "and seemed to be the superior of Bird and Magic during their early prime seasons" He was still so great that he WAS better than either of them during those years.

I just LOVE this:
"I think the three of them each have their various advantages over one another and weaknesses unique to themselves. I think they are three in the same class, I'm fine with ranking them in any order, but within the same 4-6 spots all-time I believe. "
I have Dr J as my GOAT #7, "O" as my GOAT #9, and Jerry West as my GOAT #12 - so "within the same 4-6 spots all-time". I too would not object to seeing them in any other order "within the same 4-6 spots all-time".

[Pablo Novi]

Jerry West - [SNIP]
Dirk Nowitzki - [SNIP]
Julius Erving - Case for: One of the GOAT peak seasons in 76 when considering his playoff/Finals performance. A high value defender compared to other candidates here considering he plays more of a defensive position than West while appears to have been better on D than some players like Barkley, Dirk and Moses. Beloved teammate. Excellent longevity considering he still adds a lot of value from 83-87. Case against: Average floor spacing wing. Portability questions in late 70s and with McGinnis. For his boxscore defensive stats does not do too great on All-Defense teams. May have been less dominant in NBA than ABA because of less transition play.

Karl Malone - [SNIP]
Moses Malone - [SNIP]
Vote: Julius Erving

2nd: Dirk Nowitzki

What you say about Dr J hits things square on the head. His 76 campaign was a truly GOAT PEAK season. In the ABA Finals that year, he feasted on a top-ranked defensive TEAM, headed by probably THE best defender in either League in Bobby Jones.

He WAS a high-value defender. He DID have excellent longetivity.

For me, MOST importantly, "Beloved teammate". He was one of the All-Time best TEAM-mates (talk about someone getting over themselves). One of the classiest guys of all time.

He was a terror in transition play - could and did beat most of if not all of entire teams, weaving his way between packs of defenders by dribbling between his legs - the handles this guy had!

About "average floor spacing wing" and "Portability questions" - I think it CAN appear that way - but, keeping in mind his total commitment to TEAM-work; give him a different coach/system to play in - and he's the near-perfect TEAM-mate under those circumstances too.

[Pablo Novi]

VOTE 1: Jerry West


One of the all time greatest shooters, one of the top 10 greatest defensive guards and one a great playmaker.

VOTE 2: Dr. J


The original MJ, and if it wasn't for ABA would be looked at as a better player.

Jerry West in TODAY'S game? He'd be Steph Curry - with that "unlimited" range of his; quick release; spacing; cold-bloodedness.
He's average 25 ppg on high efficiency.

But he'd out-defend Curry.

[Pablo Novi]

An interesting NBA-related quirk for Karl Malone.
If the NBA treated its two Conferences the way that MLB does - Karl Malone would have a SLEW of scoring awards the NBA's "Western 'League'". Talk about virtual long-career-long consistency.

[mikejames23]

What are people's thoughts on 88-95 Jazz teams? I am not exactly a Malone critique but this time period generally gets swept under the rug for whatever reason. Are his team playoff shortcomings thought to be acceptable? Once Jerry Sloan became coach I'd generally think Malone had plenty to get things done. I think this will turn into a supporting cast bashing series but I am curious either way.

[Dr Positivity]

For those KG supporters here, why is David Robinson still not gaining traction? He has similar (or maybe better) eye-test, advance stats, accolades than KG. David Robinson can be argued as a better regular and post season performer than KG also.

Regular Season

Code: Select all

                                                                                                                                                 
Rk            Player   PER  TS%  WS/48 OBPM DBPM BPM
1      Kevin Garnett  22.7 .546   .182  2.1  3.3 5.4
2    David Robinson*  26.2 .583   .250  3.0  4.3 7.4


Playoffs

Code: Select all

                                                                                                                                           
Rk            Player   PER  TS%  WS/48 OBPM DBPM BPM
1      Kevin Garnett  21.1 .525   .149  0.5  4.1 4.6 
2    David Robinson*  23.0 .547   .199  1.8  4.5 6.3 


Even MVP shares, shows DRob played an elite level for a longer time even KG has the longevity advantage.

Code: Select all

Rank                   Player MVP Shares
1.            Michael Jordan*      8.115
2.               LeBron James      7.336
3.       Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*      6.105
4.                Larry Bird*      5.612
5.             Magic Johnson*      5.104
6.              Bill Russell*      4.748
7.           Shaquille ONeal*      4.380
8.               Karl Malone*      4.296
9.                 Tim Duncan      4.278
10.               Kobe Bryant      4.202
11.         Wilt Chamberlain*      4.173
12.            Julius Erving*      3.551
13.           David Robinson*      3.123
14.              Kevin Durant      3.119
15.             Moses Malone*      2.854
16.              Mel Daniels*      2.795
17.             Kevin Garnett      2.753
18.               Bob Pettit*      2.671
19.          Hakeem Olajuwon*      2.610

The short version is longevity combined with many of us KG supporters valuing his offense more than DRob's in a way not reflected by the boxscore because Garnett is a high post facilitator and greater floor spacer which allows him to make an impact on the offense even when he's not scoring.

[trex_8063]

(re: Dirk) I have him #33.

Wow. That’s…….well that’s a tough sell. I read some of your argumentation for this (rebounding, lack of shot content coming <10 feet, deflated appreciation of the importance of big-man spacing, etc) and wish to reply to a few things.

Re: Rebounding (and spacing and shot selection criticisms, because they’re kinda related in Dirk’s case)
therealbig3 I think already responded to some of the rebounding, but I’ll just re-iterate that his DREB% and DRebs/100 are right in line with that of Karl or Charles or Moses (especially if we include his playoff numbers in our comparison). It’s his OREB rate that lags behind.

Some of this may be by design (get back on defense), and some is because he’s often operating on the perimeter (and thus not in position to bang the offensive boards). As has been stated, however, there’s a tangible offensive benefit to the latter factor of having a big man who is a threat from the outside (stretches the floor for the rest of the team; theoretically could raise the OREB% of some of his teammates, too, as he’s drawing a big defender out).

One could try to argue that the lack of individual offensive rebounding cancels out any benefit from spacing, but frankly, the burden of proof would be on you, given the offensive results for the Mavs during Dirk’s prime:

‘01 Mavs: 4th/29 ORtg, 29th/29 OREB%
‘02 Mavs: 1st/29 ORtg, 25th/29 OREB%
‘03 Mavs: 1st/29 ORtg, 27th/29 OREB%
‘04 Mavs: 1st/29 ORtg, 3rd/29 OREB% (addition of Danny Fortson likely primary reason)
‘05 Mavs: 4th/30 ORtg, 17th/30 OREB% (Fortson and Nash gone, added Dampier, but he misses 23 games)
‘06 Mavs: 1st/30 ORtg, 2nd/30 OREB% (Dampier healthy, added Diop)
‘07 Mavs: 2nd/30 ORtg, 8th/30 OREB%
‘08 Mavs: 8th/30 ORtg, 16th/30 OREB%
‘09 Mavs: 5th/30 ORtg, 16th/30 OREB%
‘10 Mavs: 10th/30 ORtg, 26th/30 OREB%
‘11 Mavs: 8th/30 ORtg, 26th/30 OREB%

Their offense was pretty consistently at or near the top of the league during Dirk’s prime, with or without Steve Nash and regardless of what their OREB% was. This is not to say that offensive rebounds don’t bring a lot of offensive value; but rather I’m suggesting that big man spacing does too. And again consider that his presence near the perimeter (drawing his defender out to him) could theoretically reduce the DREB rate of the opposing team (because one of their primary rebounders has been pulled out away from the basket); this could [again, theoretically] increase the OREB% of his teammates (while decreasing his own).

The other major factor to consider is that if you’re going to bang the offensive glass as a general strategy, you are (of necessity) going to give something up by way of transition defense. I don’t think it’s any coincidence that here in the modern----very scientific and analysis-based strategy/game philosophy----era that team offensive rebounding rates are the lowest they’ve ever been. As a general rule today, teams err more toward getting back on defense rather than banging the offensive glass.
However, it’s true that a lot of the lower OREB% are probably related to the increased 3PAr; but if so, that’s another fly in the ointment as far as comparing their rebounding rates straight up in the first place.

But suffice to say, it’s a difficult road to prove that Dirk as an individual averaging ~1.5 more offensive rebounds per game (some of them potentially cannibalized from his own teammates, if he’s no longer drawing an opposing big man out) would outweigh the loss of spacing and the sacrifices in transition defense.


Re: not enough shots from <10ft
I’ll be honest, this strikes me as a bizarrely arbitrary (read: personal preference) type of criticism. You’d noted how for his career (or since 2000, anyway) that only 22.8% of his attempts have come from <10 feet, iirc, making some derogatory implication (“allergic to the paint” or similar). The implication seems to be that playing in the mid-range makes him “soft”, and he should be banging away inside (because hey: you’re so tall!).

But I’m reminded of a quote from the Harry Potter series: “Play to your strengths, Harry.” How does it make sense to ask Dirk to play in a way that makes him LESS effective, just so he can better fit a “traditional” mold or expectation of a big man?

And further, why does this matter? You noted that (compared to Dirk’s 22.8% of attempts that come from <10 feet) that Tim Duncan had 30.9% of his attempts coming from <3 feet, and seemed to imply this makes Duncan intrinsically better as a big man scorer. How, exactly?

Single best scoring years (for rs).....
‘02 Duncan: 33.5 pts/100 possessions @ 57.6% TS (+5.6% rTS)
‘07 Dirk: 36.4 pts/100 possessions @ 60.5% TS (+6.4% rTS) *’06 is roughly equal to this, too

Duncan ‘98-’13: 30.6 pts/100 possessions @ 55.2% TS (+2.23% rTS)
Dirk ‘00-’14: 33.1 pts/100 possessions @ 58.4% TS (+5.22% rTS)

Despite any preferences on where the shot attempts come from, or how often that shot selection gets him to the FT line----(his prime FTr in rs is only slightly behind that of prime Duncan, btw, and his FTr in the playoffs in his prime is slightly HIGHER than prime Duncan’s)----it’s clear Dirk was a more effective scorer than Duncan.

And he had the spacing effect that Duncan generally does not. AND he generally scales UP in the playoffs (whereas most others do not).


And the the other MAJOR factor about Dirk’s offensive game is that he has a substantially lower turnover rate than just about everyone (this is in part related to his mid-range preference). I’ve railed against the mid-range shot in other places as a relatively low-efficiency shot (though ‘07 and ‘11 Dirk turned that generalization up on its head); however, I’ve also noted that a definitive benefit or advantage the mid-range game has going for it is that it carries a very low probability for turning the ball over.

Dirk has a ridiculously low turnover rate, turning the ball over just 1.8 times per 36 minutes played for his career. His career TOV% is just 8.5%.

One might try to counter by saying he doesn’t make a ton of assists or plays for others, though. And fwiw, I’ve always been annoyed that TOV% doesn’t factor in play-making at all. It’s formula is simply:

TO / [TO + TSA]

In response to my irritation, I’ve gone and generated a “Modified Turnover %”, which is as follows:

TO / [TO + TSA + (Ast * 2) + (Reb * 0.04)]

Note this includes assists (multiplied by 2, figuring for every assist made, there is another potential assist that doesn’t occur because the teammate missed the shot); and it also include total rebounds (multiplied by very small modifier) figuring a player is occasionally stripped or throws it away on the outlet pass, etc…...the modifier assumes this happens once every 25 boards.

So Dirk’s modest assist rate and his [in your opinion] mediocre rebounding rate works against him in this formula (relative to guys like Duncan, Barkley, or Karl Malone). And yet here are their respective career rs Modified TOV%:

Duncan - 9.26%
Karl - 9.50%
Charles - 10.64%
Moses - 12.90%
Dirk - 6.73%

I haven’t run EVERYONE thru this formula, but so far the ONLY player I’ve found whose career rs Mod TOV% is lower than Dirk’s is Chris Paul (6.30%). The only other guys I’ve found who are even close are Michael Jordan (6.82%), Horace Grant (6.91%), and Tracy McGrady (7.18%).
And guys like Duncan or Mailman obviously were NOT at all turnover-prone. And yet they still lag that far behind Dirk where turnovers are concerned.

Looping full-circle back to the lower offensive rebound rate criticism, I would say his lower turnover rate very nearly cancels out any deficit on the offensive boards (i.e. while he’s not retaining possessions as often via OREB, he’s also not turning the ball over as often, and by a similar number, too).


Anyway, coming back to the #33 thing……..
Objectively, I just don’t see how this is tenable. Dirk’s played nineteen seasons (the last few---years many players never got around to---are dragging his career avg’s down), and yet:
*He’s still 25th all-time in career rs PER.
**He’s 11th all-time in career playoff PER.
***He’s 22nd all-time in career rs WS/48 and is 8th all-time in career rs win shares.
****He’s 19th all-time in career playoff WS/48 and is 13th all-time in career playoff win shares.
*****He’s 18th all-time (or since ‘74) in career rs VORP.
******He’s 22nd all-time (or since ‘74) in career playoff VORP.

EDIT: I also have a formula to figure up cumulative value over a roughly replacement level player as measured by PER and WS/48 in both rs and playoffs (each playoff minute played weighted 3.25x heavier than each rs minute), assuming when they're not on the court it's a replacement level player subbing in for them......Dirk is 8th all-time by this formula.
I've noted there was greater parity in these metrics in certain earlier eras, and figured out some standard deviations for each (year-by-year); from this created a "scaled" PER and WS/48 for everyone, and again calculated cumulative career value above replacement level based on scaled PER and WS/48.......Dirk is 10th all-time by this version.
I have other much more complex formulations which include A LOT more data; without going into a ton of detail, I'll just state that those formulas rank Dirk 16th, 10th, and 15th all-time, respectively.

And one cannot say it’s empty stats (lacking impact). If we look at RAPM, best 10 years combined, only five players have a better 10-year combined (this is in the last 24 seasons, data back to ‘94 if we use colts18’s rs-only regressions; plus have RAPM for Barkley from ‘88 to ‘92, provided by Dipper, iirc): Shaq, Lebron, KG, Duncan, and *Manu Ginobili (*important to note Manu’s comes with a lot of minute-restriction, though).
Now given the data cuts off before ‘94 (except for Barkley), some players are missing huge chunks of their primes (DRob, Jordan, Hakeem, Mailman, Stockton, etc). But if we look at the best 7-years combined, it’s still just the same five players who had better than Dirk.
If we look at best 5-year combined, it’s again the “pantheon four” of Lebron, Shaq, KG, and Duncan, plus *David Robinson [*barely, and with ps numbers excluded from ‘94-’96].
If we look at best 3-year combined, only “the pantheon four” rated higher than Dirk.

In short: the impact is there (probably even goes at least marginally above what his box-based metrics indicate).


Additionally (narrative/accolade stuff)…..
*He’s been an MVP and is 26th all-time in NBA MVP Award shares.
**He’s won a title as “the man”, and won FMVP.
***He’s a 13-time NBA All-Star.
****He’s made 12 All-NBA teams (4 1st, 5 2nd, 3 3rd). Note this is also in one of the toughest eras in NBA history, and with a prime that exactly coincides with all or some of the primes of Lebron James (voted in #3), Tim Duncan (voted in #5) and Garnett (voted #12), as well as forwards like Pau Gasol, Chris Webber, Paul Pierce, Elton Brand, Chris Bosh, Carmelo Anthony, Shawn Marion (Tracy McGrady occasionally counted as a forward in award voting, too), and later Kevin Durant.


This is simply not the resume of a player who is appropriately ranked at #33 all-time. There are just NOT thirty-two careers better than what I’ve just outlined. Frankly, there are not even twenty-two careers better than that.