RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #17

[Joey Wheeler]

Dantley performance in Staple Center was almost as impressive but people don't remember it because AD was never liked by casual fans. Nevermind, this is not my point. Neither Dantley nor Thomas deserves to be mentioned in top 20 ever. Definitely not before Stockton.

At the end of the day, Isiah Thomas was drafted by a franchise in disarray and became the face and leader of a dynasty that took out Bird, Magic and Jordan.

You can point out every obscure stat you want and try to rewrite history as much as you like, the reality is guys like Paul and Stockton have achieved nothing even remotely comparable. And it sure wasn't because they didn't have any help, in Stockton's case he was never even the best player in his own team ever, what with Malone around.

[pandrade83]

Because of what Isiah said about Larry Bird in the playoffs the spring after 1987. He was blacklisted by most NBA writers from everything after that. It helped that John was white and so were over 90% of those voting.

So were those same writers who you mentioned earlier racist against Isiah and black-balling him from All NBA or were they the ones who thought he was better than Stockton? Consistency matters.

It's my interpretation that you'd rather assume something that isn't clear to make a point than ask clarification.

If I'm you believe I'm as off base and inconsistent as you suggest with your response, why start a dialogue?

It's not personal for sure, but I can only read what you've written. The internet isn't always the best medium for discussion/dialogue - no offense/malice intended

[pandrade83]

With Chris Paul I legitimately suspect he's already Top ~22 caliber

Give me the list of top 25 guys who haven't seen a conference finals. Heck name one who gang been to the Finals?

Top 50 without a conference finals? Is there one?

That seems like an impossible exception to the rule don't you think?

If I have a chance tomorrow, I'm going to look at how Paul has done in close-outs. The narrative around Paul feels like:

"He's a great player, all the advanced metrics say he's a Top (insert wherever you feel like he goes) player and it's not his fault they don't advance further."

I suggested that stats over-rate him in another thread and got blasted by a couple guys for it. I want to see how he performed in the clutch. On intangibles, he doesn't do well for me. I've seen him play a couple times in person and he just doesn't look fun to play with.

[pandrade83]

I got curious.

Paul in closeout/elimination games: 21 games.

20.5 pts, 5.2 reb, 9.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 2.6 TO, 59.4% TS

"Stud" Games (9): 2008 vs. SAS Game 7, 2012 vs. SAS Game 4, 2013 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 7, 2014 vs. OKC Game 6, 2015 vs. SAS Games 6 & 7, 2015 vs. Houston Games 6 & 7
"Dud" Games (3): 2012 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 6, 2017 vs. Utah Game 7

It's not as good as his advanced metrics would have you think he is from the regular season, but it's still pretty impressive. Isiah has 2 games better than Paul's best - but a much higher rate of having bad games.

[mikejames23]

With Chris Paul I legitimately suspect he's already Top ~22 caliber

Give me the list of top 25 guys who haven't seen a conference finals. Heck name one who gang been to the Finals?

Top 50 without a conference finals? Is there one?

That seems like an impossible exception to the rule don't you think?

Western Conference is strong.

If this is the East, he has to compete with John Wall, etc. Once you hit the 20's, it's not as big of a black mark frankly. With Paul his defense got stronger as he aged. In 08/09 he was too weak of a defender by a good amount of data, and by 2015 he was genuinely elite impact at the perimeter. That combined with his perfect O for about 9 prime seasons, you've one of the greatest ever.

[Joey Wheeler]

With Chris Paul I legitimately suspect he's already Top ~22 caliber

Give me the list of top 25 guys who haven't seen a conference finals. Heck name one who gang been to the Finals?

Top 50 without a conference finals? Is there one?

That seems like an impossible exception to the rule don't you think?

Western Conference is strong.

If this is the East, he has to compete with John Wall, etc. Once you hit the 20's, it's not as big of a black mark frankly. With Paul his defense got stronger as he aged. In 08/09 he was too weak of a defender by a good amount of data, and by 2015 he was genuinely elite impact at the perimeter. That combined with his perfect O for about 9 prime seasons, you've one of the greatest ever.

He's not losing to Spurs and Warriors. He's losing to the Jazz, Blazers, Rockets, Grizzles; long story short, he keeps losing to clearly inferior/less talented teams with home court advantage year after year.

Pretending he didn't have enough talent in the Clippers to make it past those teams above is just silly; his teams are just always less than the sum of their parts because Paul's pretty stats are produced at the expense of marginalizing everyone else in the roster. The one time the Clippers had a big win in the playoffs (Spurs 2015) it was because Blake actually took over some playmaking duties and was clearly the best player in the series.

[dhsilv2]

Give me the list of top 25 guys who haven't seen a conference finals. Heck name one who gang been to the Finals?

Top 50 without a conference finals? Is there one?

That seems like an impossible exception to the rule don't you think?

Western Conference is strong.

If this is the East, he has to compete with John Wall, etc. Once you hit the 20's, it's not as big of a black mark frankly. With Paul his defense got stronger as he aged. In 08/09 he was too weak of a defender by a good amount of data, and by 2015 he was genuinely elite impact at the perimeter. That combined with his perfect O for about 9 prime seasons, you've one of the greatest ever.

He's not losing to Spurs and Warriors. He's losing to the Jazz, Blazers, Rockets, Grizzles; long story short, he keeps losing to clearly inferior/less talented teams with home court advantage year after year.

Pretending he didn't have enough talent in the Clippers to make it past those teams above is just silly; his teams are just always less than the sum of their parts because Paul's pretty stats are produced at the expense of marginalizing everyone else in the roster. The one time the Clippers had a big win in the playoffs (Spurs 2015) it was because Blake actually took over some playmaking duties and was clearly the best player in the series.

You listed a lot of teams that in the east in this era would be top 3 teams in the east most years. He's been on a team with a historically awful bench, and with a coach who is VERY polarizing. I'm biased as I can't think of a better offensive half court point guard and his defense has become just amazing over the years.

[JoeMalburg]

I got curious.

Paul in closeout/elimination games: 21 games.

20.5 pts, 5.2 reb, 9.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 2.6 TO, 59.4% TS

"Stud" Games (9): 2008 vs. SAS Game 7, 2012 vs. SAS Game 4, 2013 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 7, 2014 vs. OKC Game 6, 2015 vs. SAS Games 6 & 7, 2015 vs. Houston Games 6 & 7
"Dud" Games (3): 2012 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 6, 2017 vs. Utah Game 7

It's not as good as his advanced metrics would have you think he is from the regular season, but it's still pretty impressive. Isiah has 2 games better than Paul's best - but a much higher rate of having bad games.

The only thing I object to is counting Games that the Pistons won as duds for Isaiah. Often times he would spend most of the first three quarters getting other players involved primarily. Then in the fourth quarter if they needed him he would try to carry them. That's part of what made him a better player from 88 to 90 despite diminished statistics.

[penbeast0]

,,,
At the end of the day, Isiah Thomas was drafted by a franchise in disarray and became the face and leader of a dynasty that took out Bird, Magic and Jordan....

When Stockton came to the Jazz, they had had one season with a record of better than .400 in their history and the star of that season, Adrian Dantley, was feuding with coach Frank Layden. As a rookie, he didn't play that much and the team dropped back to .500, but then with Karl Malone replacing Dantley (a big friggin deal admittedly!) they went on a run of sustained excellence for 15 years.

Pistons at least had a better history than the hapless Jazz to the point where those teams drafted those PGs though I agree they were a mess before adding Isiah, Kelly Tripuka, and Laimbeer but it was only two years since the decade long stability of the Lanier, Bing era which had some good teams if no true contenders.

[pandrade83]

I got curious.

Paul in closeout/elimination games: 21 games.

20.5 pts, 5.2 reb, 9.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 2.6 TO, 59.4% TS

"Stud" Games (9): 2008 vs. SAS Game 7, 2012 vs. SAS Game 4, 2013 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 7, 2014 vs. OKC Game 6, 2015 vs. SAS Games 6 & 7, 2015 vs. Houston Games 6 & 7
"Dud" Games (3): 2012 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 6, 2017 vs. Utah Game 7

It's not as good as his advanced metrics would have you think he is from the regular season, but it's still pretty impressive. Isiah has 2 games better than Paul's best - but a much higher rate of having bad games.

The only thing I object to is counting Games that the Pistons won as duds for Isaiah. Often times he would spend most of the first three quarters getting other players involved primarily. Then in the fourth quarter if they needed him he would try to carry them. That's part of what made him a better player from 88 to 90 despite diminished statistics.

I took a look. The reason I still would classify them as duds because:

1) It wasn't the lack of gross production that made those games duds. It was more about the shooting. He combined to shoot 41% TS in those 5 games. That's really bad and when you're supposed to be the offensive anchor, that is crippling.

2) He still had a lot of assists in those games (averaged 8 - not bad at all) and had low TOVs to boot (2.2) plus more than his normal steal output. So, I then checked advanced stats to see if they contradicted the more traditional stats - he could be having a strong impact that isn't going to show up in the box score. Unfortunately his ORtg - DRtg stats look pretty bad.

3) Looking more broadly at the games themselves - the general theme is that Detroit won because their defense really clamped down and other guys stepped up. Aguirre comes off the bench to pour in 25 while they hold Ewing to 7/23. Vinnie heats up for 25 while Parish gets 4 points. No Magic/Scott in the '89 Finals. THe maligned Dantley gets 22 while Vinnie & Edwards combine for 39 off the bench and Bird goes 4/17. Stuff like that. Isiah isn't driving the team to victory in those specific situations. None of this is to say he didn't step up in the clutch in general. But those games happen and with the caliber of team that they had, they could survive those once in a while. And that's OK.

[pandrade83]

I got curious.

Paul in closeout/elimination games: 21 games.

20.5 pts, 5.2 reb, 9.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 2.6 TO, 59.4% TS

"Stud" Games (9): 2008 vs. SAS Game 7, 2012 vs. SAS Game 4, 2013 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 7, 2014 vs. OKC Game 6, 2015 vs. SAS Games 6 & 7, 2015 vs. Houston Games 6 & 7
"Dud" Games (3): 2012 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 6, 2017 vs. Utah Game 7

It's not as good as his advanced metrics would have you think he is from the regular season, but it's still pretty impressive. Isiah has 2 games better than Paul's best - but a much higher rate of having bad games.

The only thing I object to is counting Games that the Pistons won as duds for Isaiah. Often times he would spend most of the first three quarters getting other players involved primarily. Then in the fourth quarter if they needed him he would try to carry them. That's part of what made him a better player from 88 to 90 despite diminished statistics.

I took a look. The reason I still would classify them as duds because:

1) It wasn't the lack of gross production that made those games duds. It was more about the shooting. He combined to shoot 41% TS in those 5 games. That's really bad and when you're supposed to be the offensive anchor, that is crippling.

2) He still had a lot of assists in those games (averaged 8 - not bad at all) and had low TOVs to boot (2.2) plus more than his normal steal output. So, I then checked advanced stats to see if they contradicted the more traditional stats - he could be having a strong impact that isn't going to show up in the box score. Unfortunately his ORtg - DRtg stats look pretty bad.

3) Looking more broadly at the games themselves - the general theme is that Detroit won because their defense really clamped down and other guys stepped up. Aguirre comes off the bench to pour in 25 while they hold Ewing to 7/23. Vinnie heats up for 25 while Parish gets 4 points. No Magic/Scott in the '89 Finals. THe maligned Dantley gets 22 while Vinnie & Edwards combine for 39 off the bench and Bird goes 4/17. Stuff like that. Isiah isn't driving the team to victory in those specific situations. None of this is to say he didn't step up in the clutch in general. But those games happen and with the caliber of team that they had, they could survive those once in a while. And that's OK.

[JoeMalburg]

I got curious.

Paul in closeout/elimination games: 21 games.

20.5 pts, 5.2 reb, 9.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 2.6 TO, 59.4% TS

"Stud" Games (9): 2008 vs. SAS Game 7, 2012 vs. SAS Game 4, 2013 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 7, 2014 vs. OKC Game 6, 2015 vs. SAS Games 6 & 7, 2015 vs. Houston Games 6 & 7
"Dud" Games (3): 2012 vs. Mem Game 6, 2014 vs. GSW Game 6, 2017 vs. Utah Game 7

It's not as good as his advanced metrics would have you think he is from the regular season, but it's still pretty impressive. Isiah has 2 games better than Paul's best - but a much higher rate of having bad games.

The only thing I object to is counting Games that the Pistons won as duds for Isaiah. Often times he would spend most of the first three quarters getting other players involved primarily. Then in the fourth quarter if they needed him he would try to carry them. That's part of what made him a better player from 88 to 90 despite diminished statistics.

I took a look. The reason I still would classify them as duds because:

1) It wasn't the lack of gross production that made those games duds. It was more about the shooting. He combined to shoot 41% TS in those 5 games. That's really bad and when you're supposed to be the offensive anchor, that is crippling.

2) He still had a lot of assists in those games (averaged 8 - not bad at all) and had low TOVs to boot (2.2) plus more than his normal steal output. So, I then checked advanced stats to see if they contradicted the more traditional stats - he could be having a strong impact that isn't going to show up in the box score. Unfortunately his ORtg - DRtg stats look pretty bad.

3) Looking more broadly at the games themselves - the general theme is that Detroit won because their defense really clamped down and other guys stepped up. Aguirre comes off the bench to pour in 25 while they hold Ewing to 7/23. Vinnie heats up for 25 while Parish gets 4 points. No Magic/Scott in the '89 Finals. THe maligned Dantley gets 22 while Vinnie & Edwards combine for 39 off the bench and Bird goes 4/17. Stuff like that. Isiah isn't driving the team to victory in those specific situations. None of this is to say he didn't step up in the clutch in general. But those games happen and with the caliber of team that they had, they could survive those once in a while. And that's OK.

Again, you're being very fair and showing your work so that gets credit. Let me spin the stats the way i want to in my upcoming post and see if that doesn't bring us a lot closer together.

Isiah changed his game and with Daly's persuasion, agreed that the structure of the team needed to be changed. When this happened, a great deal of the burden of the offense fell to Isiah in the sense that they were going to be a team with limited offensive weapons and really just one guy (until Dumars matured) who could create his own shot. Instead of having shooters and finishers around him, Isiah had defensive specialists and one dimensional scorers who liked the ball in their spot. Isiah took a lot of shots with the clock winding down, when the offense broke down etc. When it came to the fourth quarter, that was his time and he was exceptional in those moments far more often than not. That's part of what I'll highlight.

Have a good day.

[Clyde Frazier]

Watch on YouTube

This video was made just over a week ago, and thought this was an apt place to post it for people looking back on these threads. It's very well done. The Attention to Detail videos in general are worth checking out, too.