RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 (Wes Unseld)

Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,704
And1: 8,342
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#21 » by trex_8063 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 4:55 pm

Thru post #20 (6 votes):

Willis Reed - 2 (Clyde Frazier, dhsilv2)
Dikembe Mutombo - 1 (micahclay)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Robert Parish - 1 (trex_8063)
Wes Unseld - 1 (pandrade83)


Thread will go to runoff in a little less than 24 hours.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#22 » by pandrade83 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 5:02 pm

In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.
User avatar
Outside
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,173
And1: 16,954
Joined: May 01, 2017
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#23 » by Outside » Thu Oct 5, 2017 5:29 pm

Vote: Thurmond
Alternate: Sam Jones


Thurmond is among the greatest defenders and rebounders in the league's history. Had a 20/20 season. Was a primary scoring option for most of his career and had five straight 20 PPG seasons. Great locker room presence.

Including Sam Jones to give him a little visibility. One of the great clutch players.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
scrabbarista
RealGM
Posts: 20,391
And1: 18,141
Joined: May 31, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#24 » by scrabbarista » Thu Oct 5, 2017 5:38 pm

49. Elvin Hayes
50. Dave Cowens


For combined (RS) points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals, Elvin Hayes is 9th in the history of the NBA and ABA combined. 9th and 49th! C'mon! Let's not go so far down the analytics rabbit hole that we forget that the simple numbers matter, too.

Hayes was the most productive player on the '78 Bullets title team, although Unseld was generally more heralded. By my count, there are only a few players remaining who were the best player on a title team, so Hayes at least needs to start receiving consideration.

Hayes' MVP finishes, in spite of the fact that apparently not a single person with a vote actually liked him:

1971-72 NBA 0.006 (17)
1972-73 NBA 0.021 (10)
1973-74 NBA 0.082 (5)
1974-75 NBA 0.299 (3)
1975-76 NBA 0.018 (8)
1976-77 NBA 0.020 (7)
1978-79 NBA 0.126 (3)

Hayes also led the league in scoring in '69 (his rookie season), and was a 12x All-Star.

For me, his combination of longevity and production for a championship team make him too hard to ignore.
All human life on the earth is like grass, and all human glory is like a flower in a field. The grass dries up and its flower falls off, but the Lord’s word endures forever.
User avatar
Dr Positivity
RealGM
Posts: 62,987
And1: 16,444
Joined: Apr 29, 2009
       

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#25 » by Dr Positivity » Thu Oct 5, 2017 5:58 pm

On Billups, Tmac, Mourning, Iverson, Unseld, Westbrook, Hayes, Reed, Thurmond, English, Mutombo, Parish, Harden, Manu:

Spoiler:
Chauncey Billups - Case for: Combination of passing, getting to the line and free throw line all of which is highly valuable on offense. Somewhat ahead of his time in appreciation for his skillset and value of 3pt spacing. Very good boxscore player with a few top 5s in WS (3rd/5th) and other top 10s and solid but would do better in VORP if his defense was rated better as it probably should've been. Leads Pistons to some strong seasons even without Ben Wallace. Iverson for Billups trade looks terrific for his case with his impact on the Nuggets both as a player and leader and Pistons decline without him. Case against: Ok longevity with about 8 strong years. Good but not great RAPM career, mainly peaking later in his prime. Felt less talented than other players in contention here. Not rated a superstar in his time, not even a star on the level of players like Pierce, Allen and Kidd. His reasonable MVP/All-NBA career somewhat misrepresents the lack of real star labelling there was for Billups. Seen somewhat like the game manager QB on an elite football defense, great at it, but still a game manager. Doesn't necessarily "put pressure on the defense" athletically.

Tracy McGrady - Case for: Amazing statistical peak in 2003 right up there (9.7 BPM!) that’s up there with any Kobe season. Great playmaking wing increasing his value throughout his career along with high volume scoring. Good playoff performer. Case against: Weak longevity and health. Poor intangibles and often seemed half asleep. TS average outside of 03. Never makes it past 1st round as a real player. Him and Yao never seemed to reach their potential together and the Rockets suspiciously overperformed whenever one got injured.

Alonzo Mourning - Case for: One of the best defensive centers remaining, as elite shotblocker and 2x DPOY. Plays the right position to be defense first. Peaks at 2nd in MVP voting in 00 and 1st in 99 RAPM (ascreamingacrossthecourt). Solid 8 years before kidney problems, decent play in 02 and valuable few years as mega shotblocking backup C in 06 and 07. 20 point scorer with above average TS and has midrange floor spacing. Outstanding intangibles, he is both the anti-Dwight and anti-Gilmore in a way. Case against: Not a great offensive threat. Terrible passing numbers and assist to turnover rate. Visually a Meh scoring skillset. May have got the job done in the regular season but to win a title there needs to be a more dynamic offensive player on the team.

Allen Iverson - Case for: Rated well in his time, MVP winner with two other top 5 finishes. Tremendous volume scorer, on ball playmaker which is high value offensive role. For an advanced stats lightning rod, is a respectable 42nd in VORP. Solid longevity compared to other options here, a solid decade. Made Finals with role players. Efficiency problems somewhat connected to context. Played on defense first team with terrible spacing, in pre handcheck rules era. TS improved in Denver when this was rectified. Imagine if he played with the spacing Harden has right now. Case against: Not a great advanced stats player. Rated as overrated by RAPM and WS on the whole. TS when it dips low enough in PHI makes it harder to say he's worth it. Weak defense. Poor intangibles. Very weak portability both for his style of game and his attitude.

Wes Unseld - Case for: Impact not captured by his boxscore. His outlet passes don't always end in assists, GOAT level screen setter and defends well without it showing up in blocks. More than his MVP, his Finals MVP averaging 9/12/4 looks even crazier in terms of impact he must have shown without stats. Even with that in mind, his boxscore is still decent, he finished top 10 in WS and VORP 5 times each. Fantastic intangibles. Relevant for over a decade. Leads his team to 4 Finals and a title. Case against: Very mediocre volume scoring threat when you take into account pace as well. Combined with playing center it's hard to believe he has a great offensive impact despite the passing. Never makes an all-defensive team. Never makes All-NBA after his MVP season or finishes higher than 8th in MVP again. As soon as he gets there Hayes is voted on as the best player on the team by MVP votes.

Russell Westbrook - Case for: High peak dropping a crazy 32/11/10 MVP season. His last 2 seasons would've ranked high for peaks at this range too. Broke BPM/VORP. A monster talent who puts a ton of physical pressure on the opponent. Plays hard every minute. Has excelled as both 2nd option and 1st. Very good in the playoffs and has come out on the better end of several high profile PG battles. Case against: Rates as top 10 not top 5 peak in RPM. Average longevity, has been a star level player for 7 years, one of them he played 46 games in, and it's only the last 3 where he went to MVP level peak. Low portability both emotionally and style of play, is not taking a backseat to anyone and wants to shoot as much as possible. Mediocre 3pt shooting and floor spacing. Average TS throughout his career and turnover prone.

Elvin Hayes - Case for: Strong longevity and perfect durability leading to high total career marks in points and rebounds. Rated as a star in his time with 2 3rd place MVP, a 5th and several other top 10s and makes 3 1st team All-NBA. Good defensive player and makes a few 2nd team all-defense. Successful in Washington and arguably most talented or best player on a champion, and making 2 other Finals. Case against: Underwhelming TS and a poor passer for his volume, which combines for only ok performance in stats like OWS or OBPM. Terrible intangibles, reviled by many teammates and coaches and has been compared to Chinese water torture, and has been called the worst person they've met in sports. Overall playoff stats are decent, but had choker reputation.

Willis Reed - Case for: High level peak. A player who at different points win MVP and leads league in WS. Outside of the boxscore which is great on its own, has non box value as a 1st team all-defense C who is a great floor spacer for his position. Rated the best player on a team with Frazier. Good intangibles. Quality playoff performer with two Finals MVP. Case against: Short longevity with about 5 prime years and some other decent ones. Not a great passer or dominant offensive player overall, plays weakest offensive position in center. Support as best Knicks player over Frazier may be because white people preferred the quieter black man.

Nate Thurmond - Case for: Rated a high level defender in his time at a key defensive position in C, both man to man where he is supposed GOAT level in an era where it matters a lot, and late career block numbers are promising. With high baseline of value on defense does not need much more on offense to be great. Volume scorer, floor spacer and above average playmaker. A quality decade's worth of longevity. Peaks at 2nd in MVP. Case against: Poor TS while taking a lot of shots for his role. Due to inefficiency weak WS numbers for a player this high.

Alex English - Case for: High volume scoring threat, once leads league in PPG and finishes top 3 several other times. Above average efficiency. Good passer. Durable and has an over decade long prime. Makes 3 2nd team All-NBAs and finishes top 10 in MVP twice. One of the best mid range shooters in history, in era without 3pt this counts for elite floor spacing for his position. Case against: Not a great defensive player. Plays on the fasted paced team of his era with not much defensive responsibility asked for allowing him to put up inflated stats. Ranks 81st in WS and 72d in VORP, despite being an accumulation friendly player (durable with a long career).

Dikembe Mutombo - Case for: 4 time DPOY and some of the highest DRAPM on record. Plays most defensive position so is starting with very high baseline of value from defense alone. Good in overall RAPM including 3rd in ascreamingacrossthecourt numbers. Solid longevity with some good role player years on the back end. Case against: Weak offensive player compared to candidates here as reflected in ORAPM. Low volume scoring, mediocre passing and solid efficiency as a finisher but not elite like Tyson Chandler. Never considered a superstar or finishes top 10 in MVP voting.Never finishes top 10 in BPM/VORP and peaks at 8th/9th in WS.

Robert Parish - Case for: Excellent longevity and durability with a strong 15 years of starting to all-star play. Peaks at 4th in MVP vote/2nd team All-NBA and with good WS/48 (.228) and BPM (5.0). 26th all time in Win Shares and 15th in DWS. Fits pretty well with other stars as a finisher with a little floor spacing. Case against: Peaks at 7th and 10th in BPM and 7th and 8th in WS and only finishes in top 10 in MVP twice at 4th and 7th. Not a great passer. Offensively is a good but not elite player at a low value offensive position in center. Defensively is solid but never makes an All-NBA team.

James Harden - Case for: Legitimate MVP credentials finishing a close 2nd twice. Tremendous offensive value as a playmaking, high efficiency high volume scoring wing with 3pt range and has won mid 50 games with role players. Case against: Some very sketchy showing in big playoff moments. His game relying on 3s and FTs and his tricks to get the latter may be easier to guard in the playoffs. Questionable body language. Below average defense. Ball dominant player. Below average longevity.

Manu Ginobili - Case for: Amazing per minute player including leading the league in RAPM at one point and other top 2/3 finishes. WS and BPM also have him as phenomenal per minute. Skillset wise handling, passing, shooting is high value on offense. Good defender. Great intangibles and effort level. Clutch playoff career. Good longevity continuing to be a high impact SG even in his late 30s. 35th in VORP. Case against: Less minutes than other players leading his raw stats to be a lot lower. Because of this is still only 75th in WS. Weak durability. Had the benefit of playing against 2nd units. Usually not rated a top 10 player peaking at 8th in MVP and 3rd team All-NBA.


+ Bob Lanier: Outstanding advanced stats player at his peak, finishes 2nd in BPM twice and 3rd twice, 3rd in WS once and 5th twice. High level scoring, rebounding, passing and strong blocks the first few years they were tracked. Peaks at 3rd and 4th in MVP. Good longevity with 11 years of Detroit at a high level and then continuing to contribute in Milwaukee. A victim of "winner bias" - never had the iconic champion team to elevate his profile. Case against: Never makes 1st team All-NBA. Anchored some poor defenses in Detroit. Detroit was not talentless with a perennial all-star in Dave Bing but never could get over the hump in terms of being a contender.

My vote is between Westbrook, Manu and Lanier. I have Manu over Westbrook as I feel per minute he is the better player (Nothing against Westbrook but Manu per minute is just that good), and while he didn't have great durability and Westbrook he's still played more MP than him in his career. Manu is also a playoff killer.

While there's more evidence of Manu being a superstar per minute, Lanier's minutes and raw averages are high enough compared to Manu and is a superstar in the stats we have like WS and BPM himself. I'll go Lanier who I think it's very arguable is better than Pau

Vote Bob Lanier

2nd Manu Ginobili
It's going to be a glorious day... I feel my luck could change
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 50,801
And1: 27,408
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#26 » by dhsilv2 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 6:26 pm

pandrade83 wrote:In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.


Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#27 » by pandrade83 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 10:27 pm

dhsilv2 wrote:
pandrade83 wrote:In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.


Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.


I agree - I thought it would've been unfair to say something like "He's one of just Ten guys to achieve a 30 PER season - meanwhile Reed only peaked out at 21" (or whatever it was; off-hand I think that's right). I only referenced Westbrook's peak because hitting that level puts him in rarified air and you see it discussed in various columns. If he had merely hit 29.9 and led the league, I would've just referenced that.
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#28 » by pandrade83 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 10:29 pm

Dr Positivity wrote:On Billups, Tmac, Mourning, Iverson, Unseld, Westbrook, Hayes, Reed, Thurmond, English, Mutombo, Parish, Harden, Manu:

Spoiler:
Chauncey Billups - Case for: Combination of passing, getting to the line and free throw line all of which is highly valuable on offense. Somewhat ahead of his time in appreciation for his skillset and value of 3pt spacing. Very good boxscore player with a few top 5s in WS (3rd/5th) and other top 10s and solid but would do better in VORP if his defense was rated better as it probably should've been. Leads Pistons to some strong seasons even without Ben Wallace. Iverson for Billups trade looks terrific for his case with his impact on the Nuggets both as a player and leader and Pistons decline without him. Case against: Ok longevity with about 8 strong years. Good but not great RAPM career, mainly peaking later in his prime. Felt less talented than other players in contention here. Not rated a superstar in his time, not even a star on the level of players like Pierce, Allen and Kidd. His reasonable MVP/All-NBA career somewhat misrepresents the lack of real star labelling there was for Billups. Seen somewhat like the game manager QB on an elite football defense, great at it, but still a game manager. Doesn't necessarily "put pressure on the defense" athletically.

Tracy McGrady - Case for: Amazing statistical peak in 2003 right up there (9.7 BPM!) that’s up there with any Kobe season. Great playmaking wing increasing his value throughout his career along with high volume scoring. Good playoff performer. Case against: Weak longevity and health. Poor intangibles and often seemed half asleep. TS average outside of 03. Never makes it past 1st round as a real player. Him and Yao never seemed to reach their potential together and the Rockets suspiciously overperformed whenever one got injured.

Alonzo Mourning - Case for: One of the best defensive centers remaining, as elite shotblocker and 2x DPOY. Plays the right position to be defense first. Peaks at 2nd in MVP voting in 00 and 1st in 99 RAPM (ascreamingacrossthecourt). Solid 8 years before kidney problems, decent play in 02 and valuable few years as mega shotblocking backup C in 06 and 07. 20 point scorer with above average TS and has midrange floor spacing. Outstanding intangibles, he is both the anti-Dwight and anti-Gilmore in a way. Case against: Not a great offensive threat. Terrible passing numbers and assist to turnover rate. Visually a Meh scoring skillset. May have got the job done in the regular season but to win a title there needs to be a more dynamic offensive player on the team.

Allen Iverson - Case for: Rated well in his time, MVP winner with two other top 5 finishes. Tremendous volume scorer, on ball playmaker which is high value offensive role. For an advanced stats lightning rod, is a respectable 42nd in VORP. Solid longevity compared to other options here, a solid decade. Made Finals with role players. Efficiency problems somewhat connected to context. Played on defense first team with terrible spacing, in pre handcheck rules era. TS improved in Denver when this was rectified. Imagine if he played with the spacing Harden has right now. Case against: Not a great advanced stats player. Rated as overrated by RAPM and WS on the whole. TS when it dips low enough in PHI makes it harder to say he's worth it. Weak defense. Poor intangibles. Very weak portability both for his style of game and his attitude.

Wes Unseld - Case for: Impact not captured by his boxscore. His outlet passes don't always end in assists, GOAT level screen setter and defends well without it showing up in blocks. More than his MVP, his Finals MVP averaging 9/12/4 looks even crazier in terms of impact he must have shown without stats. Even with that in mind, his boxscore is still decent, he finished top 10 in WS and VORP 5 times each. Fantastic intangibles. Relevant for over a decade. Leads his team to 4 Finals and a title. Case against: Very mediocre volume scoring threat when you take into account pace as well. Combined with playing center it's hard to believe he has a great offensive impact despite the passing. Never makes an all-defensive team. Never makes All-NBA after his MVP season or finishes higher than 8th in MVP again. As soon as he gets there Hayes is voted on as the best player on the team by MVP votes.

Russell Westbrook - Case for: High peak dropping a crazy 32/11/10 MVP season. His last 2 seasons would've ranked high for peaks at this range too. Broke BPM/VORP. A monster talent who puts a ton of physical pressure on the opponent. Plays hard every minute. Has excelled as both 2nd option and 1st. Very good in the playoffs and has come out on the better end of several high profile PG battles. Case against: Rates as top 10 not top 5 peak in RPM. Average longevity, has been a star level player for 7 years, one of them he played 46 games in, and it's only the last 3 where he went to MVP level peak. Low portability both emotionally and style of play, is not taking a backseat to anyone and wants to shoot as much as possible. Mediocre 3pt shooting and floor spacing. Average TS throughout his career and turnover prone.

Elvin Hayes - Case for: Strong longevity and perfect durability leading to high total career marks in points and rebounds. Rated as a star in his time with 2 3rd place MVP, a 5th and several other top 10s and makes 3 1st team All-NBA. Good defensive player and makes a few 2nd team all-defense. Successful in Washington and arguably most talented or best player on a champion, and making 2 other Finals. Case against: Underwhelming TS and a poor passer for his volume, which combines for only ok performance in stats like OWS or OBPM. Terrible intangibles, reviled by many teammates and coaches and has been compared to Chinese water torture, and has been called the worst person they've met in sports. Overall playoff stats are decent, but had choker reputation.

Willis Reed - Case for: High level peak. A player who at different points win MVP and leads league in WS. Outside of the boxscore which is great on its own, has non box value as a 1st team all-defense C who is a great floor spacer for his position. Rated the best player on a team with Frazier. Good intangibles. Quality playoff performer with two Finals MVP. Case against: Short longevity with about 5 prime years and some other decent ones. Not a great passer or dominant offensive player overall, plays weakest offensive position in center. Support as best Knicks player over Frazier may be because white people preferred the quieter black man.

Nate Thurmond - Case for: Rated a high level defender in his time at a key defensive position in C, both man to man where he is supposed GOAT level in an era where it matters a lot, and late career block numbers are promising. With high baseline of value on defense does not need much more on offense to be great. Volume scorer, floor spacer and above average playmaker. A quality decade's worth of longevity. Peaks at 2nd in MVP. Case against: Poor TS while taking a lot of shots for his role. Due to inefficiency weak WS numbers for a player this high.

Alex English - Case for: High volume scoring threat, once leads league in PPG and finishes top 3 several other times. Above average efficiency. Good passer. Durable and has an over decade long prime. Makes 3 2nd team All-NBAs and finishes top 10 in MVP twice. One of the best mid range shooters in history, in era without 3pt this counts for elite floor spacing for his position. Case against: Not a great defensive player. Plays on the fasted paced team of his era with not much defensive responsibility asked for allowing him to put up inflated stats. Ranks 81st in WS and 72d in VORP, despite being an accumulation friendly player (durable with a long career).

Dikembe Mutombo - Case for: 4 time DPOY and some of the highest DRAPM on record. Plays most defensive position so is starting with very high baseline of value from defense alone. Good in overall RAPM including 3rd in ascreamingacrossthecourt numbers. Solid longevity with some good role player years on the back end. Case against: Weak offensive player compared to candidates here as reflected in ORAPM. Low volume scoring, mediocre passing and solid efficiency as a finisher but not elite like Tyson Chandler. Never considered a superstar or finishes top 10 in MVP voting.Never finishes top 10 in BPM/VORP and peaks at 8th/9th in WS.

Robert Parish - Case for: Excellent longevity and durability with a strong 15 years of starting to all-star play. Peaks at 4th in MVP vote/2nd team All-NBA and with good WS/48 (.228) and BPM (5.0). 26th all time in Win Shares and 15th in DWS. Fits pretty well with other stars as a finisher with a little floor spacing. Case against: Peaks at 7th and 10th in BPM and 7th and 8th in WS and only finishes in top 10 in MVP twice at 4th and 7th. Not a great passer. Offensively is a good but not elite player at a low value offensive position in center. Defensively is solid but never makes an All-NBA team.

James Harden - Case for: Legitimate MVP credentials finishing a close 2nd twice. Tremendous offensive value as a playmaking, high efficiency high volume scoring wing with 3pt range and has won mid 50 games with role players. Case against: Some very sketchy showing in big playoff moments. His game relying on 3s and FTs and his tricks to get the latter may be easier to guard in the playoffs. Questionable body language. Below average defense. Ball dominant player. Below average longevity.

Manu Ginobili - Case for: Amazing per minute player including leading the league in RAPM at one point and other top 2/3 finishes. WS and BPM also have him as phenomenal per minute. Skillset wise handling, passing, shooting is high value on offense. Good defender. Great intangibles and effort level. Clutch playoff career. Good longevity continuing to be a high impact SG even in his late 30s. 35th in VORP. Case against: Less minutes than other players leading his raw stats to be a lot lower. Because of this is still only 75th in WS. Weak durability. Had the benefit of playing against 2nd units. Usually not rated a top 10 player peaking at 8th in MVP and 3rd team All-NBA.


+ Bob Lanier: Outstanding advanced stats player at his peak, finishes 2nd in BPM twice and 3rd twice, 3rd in WS once and 5th twice. High level scoring, rebounding, passing and strong blocks the first few years they were tracked. Peaks at 3rd and 4th in MVP. Good longevity with 11 years of Detroit at a high level and then continuing to contribute in Milwaukee. A victim of "winner bias" - never had the iconic champion team to elevate his profile. Case against: Never makes 1st team All-NBA. Anchored some poor defenses in Detroit. Detroit was not talentless with a perennial all-star in Dave Bing but never could get over the hump in terms of being a contender.

My vote is between Westbrook, Manu and Lanier. I have Manu over Westbrook as I feel per minute he is the better player (Nothing against Westbrook but Manu per minute is just that good), and while he didn't have great durability and Westbrook he's still played more MP than him in his career. Manu is also a playoff killer.

While there's more evidence of Manu being a superstar per minute, Lanier's minutes and raw averages are high enough compared to Manu and is a superstar in the stats we have like WS and BPM himself. I'll go Lanier who I think it's very arguable is better than Pau

Vote Bob Lanier

2nd Manu Ginobili


The way I've reconciled Lanier's stats with the team success is that I believe he's roughly equivalent to a marginally better Pau Gasol of his day. Does that seem fair?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,704
And1: 8,342
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#29 » by trex_8063 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 11:14 pm

dhsilv2 wrote:
pandrade83 wrote:In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.


Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.


fwiw, I'd done some limited studies to sort of break PER and WS/48 down to standard deviations from the mean (year-by-year) to determine scaled PER and WS/48 values.

Here is the link to rs results and here are the playoff results.**
**I have NOT updated this to include the '17 season, fwiw.

Pertaining to Reed....
'69 Reed measured out as a scaled PER of 23.39 and scaled WS/48 of .2553 in the rs (that's in 37.9 mpg). He was a 24.22 scaled PER and .2739 WS/48 in the playoffs (42.9 mpg).
'70 Reed was a scaled PER of 21.90 and scaled WS/48 of .2651 in rs (in 38.1 mpg). Didn't figure his playoff numbers for that year.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,704
And1: 8,342
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#30 » by trex_8063 » Thu Oct 5, 2017 11:17 pm

pandrade83 wrote:The way I've reconciled Lanier's stats with the team success is that I believe he's roughly equivalent to a marginally better Pau Gasol of his day. Does that seem fair?


Make note of his lesser longevity, and that's probably not far off. Gasol's offensive game seems perhaps slightly more varied/dynamic, though (just by virtue of added range, if nothing else).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#31 » by pandrade83 » Fri Oct 6, 2017 12:54 am

trex_8063 wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
pandrade83 wrote:In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.


Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.


fwiw, I'd done some limited studies to sort of break PER and WS/48 down to standard deviations from the mean (year-by-year) to determined scaled PER and WS/48 values.

Here is the link to rs results and here are the playoff results.**
**I have NOT updated this to include the '17 season, fwiw.

Pertaining to Reed....
'69 Reed measured out as a scaled PER of 23.39 and scaled WS/48 of .2553 in the rs (that's in 37.9 mpg). He was a 24.22 scaled PER and .2739 WS/48 in the playoffs (42.9 mpg).
'70 Reed was a scaled PER of 21.90 and scaled WS/48 of .2651 in rs (in 38.1 mpg). Didn't figure his playoff numbers for that year.


Thanks for sharing! Good stuff. I saw Beaty relatively high. He will be an interesting one at some point.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,704
And1: 8,342
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#32 » by trex_8063 » Fri Oct 6, 2017 2:45 am

Thru post #31 (9 votes):

Willis Reed - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Dikembe Mutombo - 1 (micahclay)
Nate Thurmond - 1 (Outside)
Elvin Hayes - 1 (scabbarista)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Robert Parish - 1 (trex_8063)
Wes Unseld - 1 (pandrade83)
Bob Lanier - 1 (Dr Positivity)


~12-14 hours more before this one goes to runoff.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 50,801
And1: 27,408
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#33 » by dhsilv2 » Fri Oct 6, 2017 2:53 am

trex_8063 wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
pandrade83 wrote:In terms of what's tangible (not going to say how much you should value the intangible):

Westbrook already has Reed beat on career WS. It's not huge - but it is a 7% differential, and for me that already puts Reed behind the 8 ball in terms of the quality longevity argument.

So, from a tangible standpoint, Westbrook has a higher peak for because . . .

* - he's one of Ten guys to hit a 30 PER season
* - he has a pair of the Top Ten BPM Seasons ever
* - Westbrook has had a 3 year "next level" type impact run; I'd give Reed two of those caliber years ('69-'70).
* - Reed did lead the league in WS in '69 - that's something for sure and I'd be dis-honest to not note it.
* - Westbrook did all of this in a stronger league.

For me, the peak is higher & longer. I don't view Westbrook as a negative intangible guy - and obviously everyone weights intangibles differently. But off what is tangible, give me Westbrook.


Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.


fwiw, I'd done some limited studies to sort of break PER and WS/48 down to standard deviations from the mean (year-by-year) to determine scaled PER and WS/48 values.

Here is the link to rs results and here are the playoff results.**
**I have NOT updated this to include the '17 season, fwiw.

Pertaining to Reed....
'69 Reed measured out as a scaled PER of 23.39 and scaled WS/48 of .2553 in the rs (that's in 37.9 mpg). He was a 24.22 scaled PER and .2739 WS/48 in the playoffs (42.9 mpg).
'70 Reed was a scaled PER of 21.90 and scaled WS/48 of .2651 in rs (in 38.1 mpg). Didn't figure his playoff numbers for that year.


The 70's are still not passing my sniff test. Outside of Kareem the results still seem oddly flat and perhaps the 2 league issue was a cause, not sure. This is a nice Bob McAdoo shout out, who imo if you're looking at Lanier, I think he's got a case to be ahead of him. Though he's interesting in that he's got more games played and seemed to switch over to being a role player to be a contributor on a title team. Some of his PER numbers at least hint that he could have still had a bigger more "stats friendly" role elsewhere without winning. I'll leave it to the voters if that's a "winners bias" of mine or if I'm just such a fan because of his 2-3 year peak, which was outstanding.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,818
And1: 22,735
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#34 » by Doctor MJ » Fri Oct 6, 2017 4:06 am

Vote: Wes Unseld
Alt: Alex English

I keep going back and forth. This marks the first time I've included English. He's not a player I have a deep sense of, but I do get the sense that we underrate him.

Going to side with Unseld though. I just really think his game and attitude were special for a long time. I don't mind the lack of scoring emphasis, I see that as ahead of its time. It would be great he could shoot the 3 of course, and it would be great if he could block like Deke, but you don't get everything. What Wes brought was enough to be the foundation of a successful team for a long time, and that's not a minor accomplishment.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
User avatar
Dr Positivity
RealGM
Posts: 62,987
And1: 16,444
Joined: Apr 29, 2009
       

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#35 » by Dr Positivity » Fri Oct 6, 2017 4:42 am

dhsilv2 wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
Not the quibble over this, but PER can't be directly compared year to year outside of the league average should be 15ish. The top end however seems to have wide variance. Reed has 4 top 10 PER seasons. Westbrook has 6. Reed peaked at 4th in PER. So I'm fine if you want to value westbrooks PER peak, leading the league as better, but looking at Reed's 19's and 20's doesn't tell the full story was to where he was vs peers at the time.


fwiw, I'd done some limited studies to sort of break PER and WS/48 down to standard deviations from the mean (year-by-year) to determine scaled PER and WS/48 values.

Here is the link to rs results and here are the playoff results.**
**I have NOT updated this to include the '17 season, fwiw.

Pertaining to Reed....
'69 Reed measured out as a scaled PER of 23.39 and scaled WS/48 of .2553 in the rs (that's in 37.9 mpg). He was a 24.22 scaled PER and .2739 WS/48 in the playoffs (42.9 mpg).
'70 Reed was a scaled PER of 21.90 and scaled WS/48 of .2651 in rs (in 38.1 mpg). Didn't figure his playoff numbers for that year.


The 70's are still not passing my sniff test. Outside of Kareem the results still seem oddly flat and perhaps the 2 league issue was a cause, not sure. This is a nice Bob McAdoo shout out, who imo if you're looking at Lanier, I think he's got a case to be ahead of him. Though he's interesting in that he's got more games played and seemed to switch over to being a role player to be a contributor on a title team. Some of his PER numbers at least hint that he could have still had a bigger more "stats friendly" role elsewhere without winning. I'll leave it to the voters if that's a "winners bias" of mine or if I'm just such a fan because of his 2-3 year peak, which was outstanding.


McAdoo has a great peak but I don't value his NY, DET and brief BOS tenures right now, he looks more like a good stats bad team guy. He is a poor defender so once his offensive stats go down it's harder to have a star's impact. I think the Detroit and Boston version was considered a cancer and having him and Bad News Barnes was a low point for the Celtics culture wise before Bird. Without those as really valuable I see Lanier as having a big longevity difference. I believe even with the Braves McAdoo's intangibles were said to never be great. Here is some quotes from a Sports Illustrated article at the time

Bob McAdoo's problem is both geographical and personal: he plays in Buffalo and he has a genuine talent for remaining inconspicuous. When aroused he can be as spectacular as the colored lights on Niagara Falls. But mostly he is not aroused. He is, his wife Brenda says, "moody."


Today McAdoo roams the court head down, eyes up—a stringy package of endless arms and legs. His face appears too small for his 6'10", 205-pound frame; it is concave in profile and dominated by thick muttonchops and huge eyes. Fans sometimes mistake his low-key bearing for indifference.


Like the languid eyes that contradict the intensity with which he plays, McAdoo's lamppost demeanor is also misleading. Even his teammates know little about him. "He's just quiet," Ramsay says. "If I tell him something, he nods." Yet he is not without a certain quirkiness. He married former classmate Brenda Newsome one afternoon last season and played a game against the Knicks that night. Back home in Greensboro, N.C. he advanced to lead saxophone in the high school band, and then skipped the annual concert to high jump for the track team. He complains long and loudly about injuries, though he has missed only two games this season. And he utterly loathes flying.


https://www.si.com/vault/1974/03/18/619274/mcadoo-about-something-boffo-in-buffalo

The whole sleepy eyes thing and the feeling that he's on cruise control, kind of reminds me of Tmac
It's going to be a glorious day... I feel my luck could change
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 50,801
And1: 27,408
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#36 » by dhsilv2 » Fri Oct 6, 2017 4:59 am

Dr Positivity wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
fwiw, I'd done some limited studies to sort of break PER and WS/48 down to standard deviations from the mean (year-by-year) to determine scaled PER and WS/48 values.

Here is the link to rs results and here are the playoff results.**
**I have NOT updated this to include the '17 season, fwiw.

Pertaining to Reed....
'69 Reed measured out as a scaled PER of 23.39 and scaled WS/48 of .2553 in the rs (that's in 37.9 mpg). He was a 24.22 scaled PER and .2739 WS/48 in the playoffs (42.9 mpg).
'70 Reed was a scaled PER of 21.90 and scaled WS/48 of .2651 in rs (in 38.1 mpg). Didn't figure his playoff numbers for that year.


The 70's are still not passing my sniff test. Outside of Kareem the results still seem oddly flat and perhaps the 2 league issue was a cause, not sure. This is a nice Bob McAdoo shout out, who imo if you're looking at Lanier, I think he's got a case to be ahead of him. Though he's interesting in that he's got more games played and seemed to switch over to being a role player to be a contributor on a title team. Some of his PER numbers at least hint that he could have still had a bigger more "stats friendly" role elsewhere without winning. I'll leave it to the voters if that's a "winners bias" of mine or if I'm just such a fan because of his 2-3 year peak, which was outstanding.


McAdoo has a great peak but I don't value his NY, DET and brief BOS tenures right now, he looks more like a good stats bad team guy. He is a poor defender so once his offensive stats go down it's harder to have a star's impact. I think the Detroit and Boston version was considered a cancer and having him and Bad News Barnes was a low point for the Celtics culture wise before Bird. I believe even with the Braves his intangibles were said to never be great. I get the impression he's kind of like the Tmac of his era in terms of having amazing but short peak, and frustrating personality and health/longevity. Here is some quotes from a Sports Illustrated article at the time

Bob McAdoo's problem is both geographical and personal: he plays in Buffalo and he has a genuine talent for remaining inconspicuous. When aroused he can be as spectacular as the colored lights on Niagara Falls. But mostly he is not aroused. He is, his wife Brenda says, "moody."


Today McAdoo roams the court head down, eyes up—a stringy package of endless arms and legs. His face appears too small for his 6'10", 205-pound frame; it is concave in profile and dominated by thick muttonchops and huge eyes. Fans sometimes mistake his low-key bearing for indifference.


Like the languid eyes that contradict the intensity with which he plays, McAdoo's lamppost demeanor is also misleading. Even his teammates know little about him. "He's just quiet," Ramsay says. "If I tell him something, he nods." Yet he is not without a certain quirkiness. He married former classmate Brenda Newsome one afternoon last season and played a game against the Knicks that night. Back home in Greensboro, N.C. he advanced to lead saxophone in the high school band, and then skipped the annual concert to high jump for the track team. He complains long and loudly about injuries, though he has missed only two games this season. And he utterly loathes flying.


https://www.si.com/vault/1974/03/18/619274/mcadoo-about-something-boffo-in-buffalo


How about his 250+ regular season laker games and 60+ laker playoff games?

I'd agree that the middle of his career he was injured and didn't play that well.

It's funny, I'm realizing that there's a certain high value I have for guys who become impact role players after having massive peaks. A Vince Carter I expect I'll be higher on than some here (his peak clearly not at this level). I tend to not value allstars who aren't super stars as they tend to be the key pieces of the old "treadmill teams". This project has perhaps pointed that out to me. And I think I have 4-5 people to go but McAdoo's certainly on my radar and if he gets a push unless there are more cases against him, I think I'd consider pushing for him sooner.

As for good stats bad team. That's always so hard to judge. I however feel that winshare normally addresses this and his winshare peak is crazy high. I can't think of too many people that we say that about who had a winshare over 14, let alone 17.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,226
And1: 25,494
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#37 » by 70sFan » Fri Oct 6, 2017 11:19 am

iggymcfrack wrote:Ok, time for everyone to get on the Westbrook train. The whole construct of the NBA is set up to favor elite production due to the maximum salary. Therefore, a player who's worth $20MM/year is just providing fair market value to his team, but a player who's worth $60MM/year gives huge excess value to his team in comparison to what he's paid giving him much much more added value in terms of what it might take to win a championship.

Even beyond that, asking who is the best in my opinion should be on some level about who refined their skills the most and got them to the highest level. Westbrook's no flash in the pan. His 3-year peak holds up with anyone and I think at this point, it's safe to say he's not a fluke. In swimming or track, who would you consider to be better? The athlete who won a Olympic gold and set a world record or the one who consistently got a bunch of 3rds and 4ths over more years? You'd go for the person that reached the highest peak, no questions asked, right?

Well Westbrook's reached an incredibly high peak. Had the best BPM season ever last year while winning the MVP. Became one of 8 players to put up a PER over 30.5 in NBA history. Led the league in postseason BPM as well with his team outscoring the Rockets when he was on the floor despite little help. And it's not just last season. Each of the last 3 years, he's been at an elite level in both the regular season and postseason.

If you're comparing him to Willis Reed, Westbrook's already played more games and actually has a much longer peak as Reed was only really good for 4 or 5 years tops while Westbrook's played at a high level for 6 or 7. Not to mention that Reed played in one of the weakest eras in NBA history with 7 of his 10 years coming while the ABA was competing with the NBA and diluting the talent pool, and his entire career being played before the salaries raised enough to make everyone that had the talent to be an NBAer even want to play.

If you look at portability, I think a 6'9" post scorer like Reed would struggle to have the same impact today, and would maybe at best be a Zach Randolph type while if you take Westbrook back in time, he's a better, faster, more explosive Oscar Robertson. He'd be utterly unstoppable in the 60s and doesn't even really have the caveat of most modern perimeter players that he'd struggle without the 3-point line as that's really a weakness of his game anyway. I don't have a vote but I think the case for Westbrook is pretty clear here and I wanted to lay it out. Personally, I would have had him going much, much higher, Top 20 for sure.


Reed would be much better than Randolph today. His defense alone would make the difference. Add to that more efficient and effective offensive game and you have 1st NBA team member. Reed wasn't much shorter than Howard and he was built like a tank. Not to mention that his main strength was faceup game, not low post game. He was so advanced offensive center that I can't imagine him struggling in any era.

Secondly, comparing RW to Big O doesn't make any sense. Yes, he's faster and more explosive but that's it. He's not better and he's much different type of player. Oscar was 6'6 CP3 with all-time great low post game. He's opposite of Westbrook style and you wouldn't make this comparison without TD averages. You need to understand what kind of player Oscar was before taking him below Westbrook who (despite playing 50 years later) has less advanced skillset and lesser BBIQ than Big O.
User avatar
Outside
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,173
And1: 16,954
Joined: May 01, 2017
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#38 » by Outside » Fri Oct 6, 2017 2:47 pm

70sFan wrote:
iggymcfrack wrote:Ok, time for everyone to get on the Westbrook train. The whole construct of the NBA is set up to favor elite production due to the maximum salary. Therefore, a player who's worth $20MM/year is just providing fair market value to his team, but a player who's worth $60MM/year gives huge excess value to his team in comparison to what he's paid giving him much much more added value in terms of what it might take to win a championship.

Even beyond that, asking who is the best in my opinion should be on some level about who refined their skills the most and got them to the highest level. Westbrook's no flash in the pan. His 3-year peak holds up with anyone and I think at this point, it's safe to say he's not a fluke. In swimming or track, who would you consider to be better? The athlete who won a Olympic gold and set a world record or the one who consistently got a bunch of 3rds and 4ths over more years? You'd go for the person that reached the highest peak, no questions asked, right?

Well Westbrook's reached an incredibly high peak. Had the best BPM season ever last year while winning the MVP. Became one of 8 players to put up a PER over 30.5 in NBA history. Led the league in postseason BPM as well with his team outscoring the Rockets when he was on the floor despite little help. And it's not just last season. Each of the last 3 years, he's been at an elite level in both the regular season and postseason.

If you're comparing him to Willis Reed, Westbrook's already played more games and actually has a much longer peak as Reed was only really good for 4 or 5 years tops while Westbrook's played at a high level for 6 or 7. Not to mention that Reed played in one of the weakest eras in NBA history with 7 of his 10 years coming while the ABA was competing with the NBA and diluting the talent pool, and his entire career being played before the salaries raised enough to make everyone that had the talent to be an NBAer even want to play.

If you look at portability, I think a 6'9" post scorer like Reed would struggle to have the same impact today, and would maybe at best be a Zach Randolph type while if you take Westbrook back in time, he's a better, faster, more explosive Oscar Robertson. He'd be utterly unstoppable in the 60s and doesn't even really have the caveat of most modern perimeter players that he'd struggle without the 3-point line as that's really a weakness of his game anyway. I don't have a vote but I think the case for Westbrook is pretty clear here and I wanted to lay it out. Personally, I would have had him going much, much higher, Top 20 for sure.


Reed would be much better than Randolph today. His defense alone would make the difference. Add to that more efficient and effective offensive game and you have 1st NBA team member. Reed wasn't much shorter than Howard and he was built like a tank. Not to mention that his main strength was faceup game, not low post game. He was so advanced offensive center that I can't imagine him struggling in any era.

Secondly, comparing RW to Big O doesn't make any sense. Yes, he's faster and more explosive but that's it. He's not better and he's much different type of player. Oscar was 6'6 CP3 with all-time great low post game. He's opposite of Westbrook style and you wouldn't make this comparison without TD averages. You need to understand what kind of player Oscar was before taking him below Westbrook who (despite playing 50 years later) has less advanced skillset and lesser BBIQ than Big O.

Also, regarding heights, players in Reed's day were listed as their actual height without shoes, so that Reed at 6'9" was the same actual height as Dwight Howard, who is listed at 6'11" but is 6'9" without shoes.

This comes up all the time regarding players from that era, that they couldn't compete in today's NBA because they're so short and slight based on their listed heights and weights. But Bill Russell, who was slightly under 6'10" without shoes, was variously listed as 6'9" or 6'10" but would be listed as 6'11" or 7'0" today. Compare Bill Russell next to Kevin Durant at the finals MVP presentation:

Image

Everybody keeps trying to call Durant a 7-footer, but like Dwight, he was measured at 6'9" before the draft.

Reed would do just fine today.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,704
And1: 8,342
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49 

Post#39 » by trex_8063 » Fri Oct 6, 2017 4:08 pm

Thru post #38 (10 votes, 6 required for majority):

Willis Reed - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Wes Unseld - 2 (pandrade83, Doctor MJ)
Dikembe Mutombo - 1 (micahclay)
Robert Parish - 1 (trex_8063)
Elvin Hayes - 1 (scabbarista)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Bob Lanier - 1 (Dr Positivity)
Nate Thurmond - 1 (Outside)


Eliminating all those with one 1st place vote (none transfer to Reed or Unseld) leaves us with our runoff: Reed vs Unseld.

Willis Reed - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Wes Unseld - 2 (pandrade83, Doctor MJ)


If you’re name isn’t shown there, please state your pick between these two and reasons why.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,861
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #49: RUNOFF! Reed vs Unseld 

Post#40 » by drza » Fri Oct 6, 2017 4:12 pm

I haven't voted for several threads, as I haven't had the time to dig in and do research on the main guys up. Here, though, I feel like I could go either way on a 5-year peak comp between Willis and Unseld. But, Unseld has such a longevity edge that it's hard not to go with him, in this particular case

Vote: Unseld
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz

Return to Player Comparisons