RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #50 (Robert Parish)

[penbeast0]

Just by way of playing devil's advocate (since I believe you're in the camp of believing the pre-merger 70's NBA to somewhat of a water-down era), could it simply be declined level of competition that, in part, provides the perception that Hondo improved significantly in the 70s?
Also (and I've elaborated on this at some point in the past, iirc, and this applies to Havliceck as well as Cousy et al), I believe hyper-inflated pace has a deleterious effect on team offensive performance/efficiency. And I have the correlation studies to back up this opinion. This bears relevance because it's in the 70's that league average pace began to return to earth (also worth noting that in the mid-60's and earlier, the Celtics typically had one of the fastest paces in the league).

Both of those are true to some degree. But you are comparing Sam Jones to Havlicek in identical years and Sam looks better (to me, at least offensively). And, the pace argument would imply that in a different offense (with similar teammates) he would score less at greater efficiency (as would Havlicek). Not sure whether that makes him more impressive or less, it would depend on the degree. What I can say is that of the Celtics, limiting comparison to just the Russell ear, Sam Jones looks like the best offensive player.

[trex_8063]

Just by way of playing devil's advocate (since I believe you're in the camp of believing the pre-merger 70's NBA to somewhat of a water-down era), could it simply be declined level of competition that, in part, provides the perception that Hondo improved significantly in the 70s?
Also (and I've elaborated on this at some point in the past, iirc, and this applies to Havliceck as well as Cousy et al), I believe hyper-inflated pace has a deleterious effect on team offensive performance/efficiency. And I have the correlation studies to back up this opinion. This bears relevance because it's in the 70's that league average pace began to return to earth (also worth noting that in the mid-60's and earlier, the Celtics typically had one of the fastest paces in the league).

Both of those are true to some degree. But you are comparing Sam Jones to Havlicek in identical years and Sam looks better (to me, at least offensively). And, the pace argument would imply that in a different offense (with similar teammates) he would score less at greater efficiency (as would Havlicek). Not sure whether that makes him more impressive or less, it would depend on the degree. What I can say is that of the Celtics, limiting comparison to just the Russell ear, Sam Jones looks like the best offensive player.

That I agree with.

I mostly brought up the pace argument as a subtle defense of criticisms aimed at Cousy. Lack of high team rORTG's (at least in the championship years) are often brought up as a big criticism of him; but the insane pace (both in raw and league-relative terms) being played once Russell arrived makes high quality offense a very difficult thing to achieve. And again, that's not just speculation; my correlation studies bear that to be fairly factual declaration. And I personally speculate that perhaps no one had his individual shooting efficiency (wrt "brick-laying") effected more than the guy who would most often have the ball in his hands (that is: Cousy).
But anyway, this is a touch of a derail here, so I probably shouldn't go into it further here.

[Outside]

...
-- Top scorer in multiple seasons for a championship team known for distributed scoring
-- Very good efficiency for his era
-- Came up big in the postseason, particularly in elimination games...

For those who argue that Russell played on stacked teams, Sam Jones is probably the best player he played with. Cousy was declining and a playoff bricklayer during the Russell years; Havlicek shot poorly and was not the player he would eventually become in the 70s (one of the rare players who improved after 30). Sam Jones was the main offensive weapon of the Celtics during their great run.

Just by way of playing devil's advocate (since I believe you're in the camp of believing the pre-merger 70's NBA to somewhat of a water-down era), could it simply be declined level of competition that, in part, provides the perception that Hondo improved significantly in the 70s?
Also (and I've elaborated on this at some point in the past, iirc, and this applies to Havliceck as well as Cousy et al), I believe hyper-inflated pace has a deleterious effect on team offensive performance/efficiency. And I have the correlation studies to back up this opinion. This bears relevance because it's in the 70's that league average pace began to return to earth (also worth noting that in the mid-60's and earlier, the Celtics typically had one of the fastest paces in the league).

It's fair to consider competition during the NBA/ABA era as watered down compared to the pre-ABA era, but that's just one of the factors that led to higher percentages in later seasons. Let me suggest a couple of others:

-- The introduction of the breakaway rim. Havlicek may not have benefited much from this, but it's an overlooked factor. Breakaway rims "give" on shots that hit the front of the rim compared to rigid rims, and the result is a softer bounce that has a greater chance of going in.

-- The change in enforcement of palming/carrying the ball and traveling. In the 1960s, if you brought your hand down onto the side of the ball at all, you were called for carrying the ball, and traveling was likewise called more strictly. This began to change in the 1970s, and the result was that more players than ever could evade defenders to get better quality shots.

This kind of thing had an impact, too.

[trex_8063]

For those who argue that Russell played on stacked teams, Sam Jones is probably the best player he played with. Cousy was declining and a playoff bricklayer during the Russell years; Havlicek shot poorly and was not the player he would eventually become in the 70s (one of the rare players who improved after 30). Sam Jones was the main offensive weapon of the Celtics during their great run.

Just by way of playing devil's advocate (since I believe you're in the camp of believing the pre-merger 70's NBA to somewhat of a water-down era), could it simply be declined level of competition that, in part, provides the perception that Hondo improved significantly in the 70s?
Also (and I've elaborated on this at some point in the past, iirc, and this applies to Havliceck as well as Cousy et al), I believe hyper-inflated pace has a deleterious effect on team offensive performance/efficiency. And I have the correlation studies to back up this opinion. This bears relevance because it's in the 70's that league average pace began to return to earth (also worth noting that in the mid-60's and earlier, the Celtics typically had one of the fastest paces in the league).

It's fair to consider competition during the NBA/ABA era as watered down compared to the pre-ABA era, but that's just one of the factors that led to higher percentages in later seasons. Let me suggest a couple of others:

-- The introduction of the breakaway rim. Havlicek may not have benefited much from this, but it's an overlooked factor. Breakaway rims "give" on shots that hit the front of the rim compared to rigid rims, and the result is a softer bounce that has a greater chance of going in.

-- The change in enforcement of palming/carrying the ball and traveling. In the 1960s, if you brought your hand down onto the side of the ball at all, you were called for carrying the ball, and traveling was likewise called more strictly. This began to change in the 1970s, and the result was that more players than ever could evade defenders to get better quality shots.

This kind of thing had an impact, too.

Good points. I have a video link that I think is a great representation of both. It's of a game from '68 (Warriors vs Sonics), and you can see [if you're paying attention] as well as hear the dull rattle of the unforgiving rims on all the misses (in part because it's this utterly silent apathetic crowd ).
And at ~3:24 there is a carries called......and you'll note that this would never ever ever ever get called anytime in the last 20 years. Not being hyperbolic; I think literally if this play happened a million times in a modern(ish) era, it would get called for carrying precisely ZERO times.

Watch on YouTube

[Dr Positivity]

Vote Russell Westbrook

MVP caliber peak the last three years and all-star before that. While he has portability concerns he proved he can play with a superstar in Durant. A good case can be made we've waited too long on him.

[dhsilv2]

Just by way of playing devil's advocate (since I believe you're in the camp of believing the pre-merger 70's NBA to somewhat of a water-down era), could it simply be declined level of competition that, in part, provides the perception that Hondo improved significantly in the 70s?
Also (and I've elaborated on this at some point in the past, iirc, and this applies to Havliceck as well as Cousy et al), I believe hyper-inflated pace has a deleterious effect on team offensive performance/efficiency. And I have the correlation studies to back up this opinion. This bears relevance because it's in the 70's that league average pace began to return to earth (also worth noting that in the mid-60's and earlier, the Celtics typically had one of the fastest paces in the league).

It's fair to consider competition during the NBA/ABA era as watered down compared to the pre-ABA era, but that's just one of the factors that led to higher percentages in later seasons. Let me suggest a couple of others:

-- The introduction of the breakaway rim. Havlicek may not have benefited much from this, but it's an overlooked factor. Breakaway rims "give" on shots that hit the front of the rim compared to rigid rims, and the result is a softer bounce that has a greater chance of going in.

-- The change in enforcement of palming/carrying the ball and traveling. In the 1960s, if you brought your hand down onto the side of the ball at all, you were called for carrying the ball, and traveling was likewise called more strictly. This began to change in the 1970s, and the result was that more players than ever could evade defenders to get better quality shots.

This kind of thing had an impact, too.

Good points. I have a video link that I think is a great representation of both. It's of a game from '68 (Warriors vs Sonics), and you can see [if you're paying attention] as well as hear the dull rattle of the unforgiving rims on all the misses (in part because it's this utterly silent apathetic crowd ).
And at ~3:24 there is a carries called......and you'll note that this would never ever ever ever get called anytime in the last 20 years. Not being hyperbolic; I think literally if this play happened a million times in a modern(ish) era, it would get called for carrying precisely ZERO times.

Watch on YouTube

My EARS!!!

But without seeing the ball at the time I can't really say if that would or wouldn't be called. Certainly would be SHOCKED if he would be though given well...palming just doesn't get called.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #46:

Willis Reed - 3 (Outside, Clyde Frazier, dhsilv2)
Russell Westbrook - 3 (penbeast0, pandrade83, Dr Positivity)
Robert Parish - 2 (trex_8063, janmagn)

This runoff will conclude or be reduced to two players in about 11-12 more hours.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[THKNKG]

Vote: Robert Parish

Russ only has 6 prime seasons so far, and Reed has even less to speak of. Parish had lots and lots of years that were highly effective. Of course, they weren't on the same level, but they were still pretty high impact. It won't take long until Russ is in the conversation with Parish for me, but it's not that time yet, and I don't think Reed is close at all.

[LA Bird]

Run off vote: Robert Parish

Westbrook has the highest peak but longevity is lacking since his 2013~15 seaons were all affected by injuries either in regular season or playoffs. Parish is by far the best in terms of longevity and played more minutes in the NBA than both Reed and Westbrook combined. However, I think Westbrook's top MVP-level seasons are disproportionately more valuable than Parish's All-Star type seasons which means they are much closer than the accumulated career totals would suggest (Westbrook could pass Parish as early as next season for me). My list does not account for futue potentials though so at this point, I'll still go with Parish. Reed again has no case here since he has neither the best longevity, peak or a long prime.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #49:

Robert Parish - 4 (micahclay, LABird, trex_8063, janmagn)
Willis Reed - 3 (Outside, Clyde Frazier, dhsilv2)
Russell Westbrook - 3 (penbeast0, pandrade83, Dr Positivity)

Still no outright majority for anyone, and I can’t eliminate anyone as we have a tie for 2nd. So will have to wait and hope we get another vote or two before I can take action.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[scrabbarista]

50. Robert Parish

16th all-time in RS points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks
21st all-time in PS points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks

26th all-time in RS WS
9-Time NBA All-Star
Finished as high as 4th in the MVP vote, 7th another year (and three other seasons between 11th-14th)
4 NBA titles

[drza]

Of these three, I'd vote Willis Reed for now.

It appears to be two MVP-level players with short longevity vs a solid All Star with outstanding longevity. I'll side with the MVPs, here.

And Reed's strong 2-way big man impact with strong leadership and intangibles that was the foundation of his squad seems to be more robust and portable than Westbrook's do-everything-monster-usage style. Plus, kind of like with Elgin Baylor, I feel like Reed's career is longer and better with modern day medicine and circumstances, so I can only hold that against his longevity up to a certain degree.
That said, Russ is a dog and I'd have him over Parrish, too. But for this thread


Vote: Willis Reed

[trex_8063]

Thru post #52:

Robert Parish - 5 (scabbarista, micahclay, LABird, trex_8063, janmagn)
Willis Reed - 4 (Outside, Clyde Frazier, dhsilv2, drza)
Russell Westbrook - 3 (penbeast0, pandrade83, Dr Positivity)

Will eliminate Russell Westbrook from the runoff. Anyone who did not pick one of Parish/Reed, would like you to take a stand with one of them (with reasons why).

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[pandrade83]

I'm bummed out that Westbrook didn't make the cut-off but Parish was coming up in the next 5 or so spots for me.

I respect Reed's peak over Parish's, but this is a bit too early for me for Reed and here's why. Let's pick Parish from '79-'87 - that by itself gives me about equal value to Reed's entire career; even sacrificing the peak.

Then you're telling me I get '88-'93 - 6 more very solid years from Parish - for nothing? For me, that makes it easy.

Run-off vote: Robert Parish

[Lou Fan]

I'll take Reed over Parish for peak MVP and best on champ.

[penbeast0]

Very close peak/prime advantage v. big longevity advantage. I wanted to find a reason to vote for Willis Reed but the numbers just don't support much of an advantage even ignoring era differential.

VOTE: ROBERT PARISH

[pandrade83]

Reed's tough for me to support for a while. He has a relatively high peak - but there's still others left who exceed it by a reasonably comfortable margin. His longevity is amongst the worst; it's at parity or worse than some current players either gaining traction or coming up. He only has era advantages over Beaty & Daniels amongst centers.

The case for him is:
1) You value intangibles a lot.
2) You go against the metrics that we have (WS, PER) & key outcomes (Game 7 1970, the entire 1973 season) to believe he was the most impactful player on any title team.

[dhsilv2]

Reed's tough for me to support for a while. He has a relatively high peak - but there's still others left who exceed it by a reasonably comfortable margin. His longevity is amongst the worst; it's at parity or worse than some current players either gaining traction or coming up. He only has era advantages over Beaty & Daniels amongst centers.

The case for him is:
1) You value intangibles a lot.
2) You go against the metrics that we have (WS, PER) & key outcomes (Game 7 1970, the entire 1973 season) to believe he was the most impactful player on any title team.

His peak WS stands very well here. His PER isn't bad when scaled, it's not killer either. Unless you mean just the career numbers. Reed stands firmly above both Westbrook and Parish for peak WS numbers for example.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #58:

Robert Parish - 7 (penbeast0, pandrade83, scabbarista, micahclay, LABird, trex_8063, janmagn)
Willis Reed - 5 (twolves97, Outside, Clyde Frazier, dhsilv2, drza)

The last voting post was I think >4 hours ago, and at 12 votes we've more or less hit our usual expected participation at this stage of the project. So if there are no major objections, I'm going to give this thread just another ~4 hours before calling a victor and moving on (rather than leave it up an extra 12 hours where essentially nothing happens, because everyone who is participating is ready to move on).

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[Dr Positivity]

Vote Robert Parish

After looking at it closer I've been swayed by Parish's longevity advantage here and in early 80s he did have a respectable peak in WS/BPM/MVP vote. The point was made in a previous thread that early on his career the Knicks were near the bottom of the league defensively with Reed. I always thought his 1st team All-Defense was a sign of great D but it's plausible it was DeBusschere who was the DPOY caliber big on that team and Reed got some credit for being the C and leader.