RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #51 (Russell Westbrook)

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote 1 - Willis Reed

Vote 2 - Elvin Hayes

On their way to the championship in 1970, willis helped the knicks knock off 2 of the most dominant centers of all time in wilt and kareem. Undersized for a center at 6’9”, his brute strength and good defensive instincts were still able to deter them. He also had a great outside shot for a big man, which was very effective against wilt in his later years. He would again get the best of wilt in 73 when the knicks took down the lakers in the finals.

I don’t have a problem with questioning his 2 finals MVPs relative to Clyde’s level of play in those series. However, I don’t doubt that reed was a player whose impact went beyond the box score, and I’d say that’s what voters were recognizing when selecting him as finals MVP in both seasons. This was best exemplified in the famous moment when reed came through the tunnel in game 7 of the 70 finals:

Watch on YouTube

As the lakers were warming up, they froze as they saw willis coming onto the court (he had previously missed game 6 with a torn muscle in his thigh, and no one expected him to play). He hit his first 2 jumpers, and the rest was history. Dramatic narrative? Of course, but Clyde himself said they wouldn’t have had the confidence to go out there and perform like they did without their captain leading the way. When you have the talent to back it up as willis did, that makes a difference.

He was certainly deserving of winning reg season MVP in 1970, leading the knicks to a 60-22 record and the #1 ranked SRS in the league. He put together season averages of 21.7 PPG, 13.9 RPG, 2 APG, 50.7 FG, 75.6% FT, 55.2% TS (+4.1% above league avg) and .227 WS/48.

From 69-73, reed would anchor a knicks defense that ranked in the top 3rd of the league for 4 seasons:

69 - 4th
70 - 1st
71 - 2nd
73 - 4th

The season after reed retired, the knicks dropped to 11th (of 18) in DRTG. His impact on that end of the floor was clear, as was the ability to lead a group of players to what’s often considered one of the best stretches of “team play” in NBA history.

[dhsilv2]

If you're just looking for which player will gain more traction, I think Reed has a much better chance than Iverson. I don't see Iverson going remotely soon. I think Reed will probably end up going somewhere in the 50s.

The one player you mentioned I actually like though is Ginobili. I'd give him very strong consideration once Westbrook and Zo go.

Goal isn't to look to build deals on who to take next

We had Iverson and Reed in a run off not too long ago, and then someone else slipped in and stole the show

And westbrook can't make my list till Iverson and likely wilkens go (not sold yet on wilkens).

[trex_8063]

Thru post #62:

Russell Westbrook - 3 (trex_8063, iggymcfrack, pandrade83)
Willis Reed - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Elvin Hayes - 1 (scabbarista)
Bob Lanier - 1 (Dr Positivity)
Alex English - 1 (penbeast0)
Dominique Wilkins - 1 (JordansBulls)
Dikembe Mutombo - 1 (LABird)
Tracy McGrady - 1 (twolves97)

All those with one vote are eliminated; none of those transfer votes to the remaining candidates, but that leaves us with our runoff:

Russell Westbrook - 3 (trex_8063, iggymcfrack, pandrade83)
Willis Reed - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)

If your name isn’t shown there, please state your pick between Westbrook and Reed, with reasons why.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[Doctor MJ]

Runoff Vote: Willis Reed

This vote will likely look ridiculous in a relatively short amount of time, but what can I say, I just think that Reed had a more consequential career for his team than Westbrook to this point.

While I do think Reed got overrated by the MVP/Finals MVP, and I do believe Frazier is the great Knick from the era, Reed was undoubtedly a star and the leader of one of the greatest season runs in history and part of a very strong half decade-ish run.

I see someone like Westbrook as someone with a legacy very much in flux. What he did last year was amazing...but how does it translate to a healthy system on an elite team? I realize many have no doubts about that translation, but I do. I really don't know what will happen next, and that puts Westbrook's legacy not quite on Reed's level.

[iggymcfrack]

Side-by-side statistical comparison for RW vs. WR


Russell Westbrook: regular season career
668 GP, 22786 MP, 22.7 PPG, 6.2 RPG, 7.9 APG, 23.8 PER, .533 TS%, .169 WS/48

Willis Reed: regular season career
650 GP, 23073 MP, 18.7 PPG, 12.9 RPG, 1.8 APG, 18.6 PER, .523 TS%, .156 WS/48


Russell Westbrook: postseason career
87 GP, 3288 MP, 25.3 PPG, 6.5 RPG, 7.8 APG, 23.9 PER, .518 TS%, .150 WS/48

Willis Reed: postseason career
78 GP, 2641 MP, 17.4 PPG, 10.3 RPG, 1.9 APG, 17.8 PER, .511 TS%, .144 WS/48


Russell Westbrook: peak season
81 GP, 2802 MP, 31.6 PPG, 10.7 RPG, 10.4 APG, 30.6 PER, .554 TS%, .224 WS/48

Willis Reed: peak season
82 GP, 3108 MP, 21.1 PPG, 14.5 RPG, 2.3 APG, 21.4 PER, .562 TS%, .227 WS/48


Now I don't want to hear about "scaled PER" here since if the numbers should be adjusted for anything, it shouldn't be that the better players tend to exceed their peers more now possibly due to getting more of a focus in the offense. It should be for the fact that players are much, much better at offense and defense now than they were back in the dual-league era where Reed played the vast majority of his career. I don't think anyone could possibly with a straight face say that it's easier to put up big numbers now than it was back in Reed's day. If you do feel that way, you need to watch some game tape from now and then to see just how much bigger, faster, stronger, and all around better players are now.

As for Reed having better defense, yes he does, certainly, but he only ever made one all-defensive team so it's not like he was dominant on that side of the ball, and while Westbrook had a bad defensive year last season carrying an all-time heavy load, he's been an above average defender by DRPM/DRAPM over the course of his career. Since Westbrook compares most closely to Kobe in both role and overall stats, I used the search function on B-Ref to try to find a very good defensive player who had the same level of gap in stats from Kobe as Reed has from Westbrook. The closest comparison was Scottie Pippen.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Scottie+Pippen&player_id1_select=Scottie+Pippen&y1=2004&player_id1=pippesc01&idx=players&y2=2015&player_id2=bryanko01&idx=players

Now I kind of overshot here since Pippen has 8 all-defensive 1st teams compared to just one for Reed, but I think you'll agree those stats compare very similarly to Westbrook's and Reed's in terms of their respective gaps. Well Pippen went #30 here compared to #11 for Kobe, and I think we should see about that big of a gap between Reed and Westbrook in their eventual placements.

[Dr Positivity]

Vote Westbrook

Feels like Westbrook has the more dominant peak to me as Reed's MVP is in a weak-ish era. Reed is a great offensive threat but I'm unconvinced he's ELITE defensively. He made a 1st team all-D but earlier Knicks teams aren't as good on D. Is DeBusschere the real DPOY of the team?

[LA Bird]

Run off vote: Russell Westbrook

Still voting against Reed but this is the closest he has been in a run off. Both have similar career length and I have Westbrook ahead practically every season if we sort each of Reed and Westbrook's seasons from best to worst. Reed had a short run as a strong 2-way player but I never felt his offense or defense was particularly dominant due to him not being a major shotblocker or passer. Westbrook is a below average defender but his offense is much better. He is a 2 time scoring champion (both times on above league average shooting efficiency) and his passing has been much improved the last few seasons. There were times since 2014 when one could argue Westbrook was very close to or even better than Durant when they were playing together.

[penbeast0]

Vote: Russell Westbrook

He has shown himself a solo star and a strong second star that went to the finals. His numbers are clearly superior to Reed's in a stronger era. Despite his less efficiency, most advanced stats rate him highly. Reed has a clear edge in intangibles but I don't think it's strong enough to overcome the measureable impact of Westbrook.

[drza]

Same vote as last thread runoff, for same reasons:

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'm loving watching his career play out. But for this thread, for now:


Vote: Willis Reed

[trex_8063]

Now I don't want to hear about "scaled PER" here since if the numbers should be adjusted for anything, it shouldn't be that the better players tend to exceed their peers more now possibly due to getting more of a focus in the offense. It should be for the fact that players are much, much better at offense and defense now than they were back in the dual-league era where Reed played the vast majority of his career. I don't think anyone could possibly with a straight face say that it's easier to put up big numbers now than it was back in Reed's day. If you do feel that way, you need to watch some game tape from now and then to see just how much bigger, faster, stronger, and all around better players are now.

This is a touch dismissive of many potential factors mentioned (there were several suggested) in the scaled PER and WS/48 studies.

wrt players being much much better today, that doesn't really explain higher rate metrics for our stars.....unless you're suggesting that ONLY the star-level players have gotten much much better, and all the below average, average, and slightly above average players of today are no better than the below average/average/slightly above average players of circa-'70. But that sort of phenomenon would be a little hard to explain (except by that which you have already dismissed: more focus in the offense).

If the below average/average/slightly above average players today are all much better than the below average/average/slightly above average players of circa-'70, then theoretically today's [much better] stars would not be able to distance themselves from the league average any more so than stars in Reed's era did (because the average itself has been elevated).

Other possible explanations should be considered.
Even beyond some of the more "speculative" suggestions for what might account for the greater parity in Reed's era, there a couple that I don't think are even all that debatable: pace and minutes.
Minutes - When star players are playing 37-40 (sometimes more) mpg vs 33-36 mpg for most of today's stars, fatigue was almost certainly more of an issue. Which quite obviously would effect rate metrics.
Pace - I certainly feel it's evident just in watching games of the 60's and 70's that there was less "shot discretion". Some of this is very likely related to poorer understanding of game theory, but if that's too ethereal a suggestion for you, the simple fact of the extreme pace played in those days almost necessitates a certain degree of indiscretion [at the team level] as to who is taking the shots. And if we look at shot attempts per 100 possessions---estimates available for pre-'74---we do see an historic trend of shot attempts for stars falling as pace rises (beyond a certain point at least, like pace significantly above 100).


wrt players being bigger, stronger, faster....
Bigger (taller) - Not really (at least not by any substantial amount). Avg height according to bbref has been 6'7" in recent years (rounded to the nearest inch). However, one must bear in mind they tend to list height IN SHOES these days (and round up---sometimes wildly so---in most instances). Avg height listed circa-'70 was 6'6" (in a time when height WITHOUT shoes was more commonly cited).
Stronger - Without a doubt, yes. And average player weight is about 15 lbs heavier than it was circa-'70. But one must ask why this is the case. Humans haven't evolved in two generations to be naturally stronger/bigger. Evolution doesn't work that way; this isn't an X-Men movie. They're bigger/stronger due to better weight-lifting coaches/methods, greater emphasis on weight training, dieticians (PED's???), etc. i.e. players of 50 years ago would have similar physiques if exposed to the same external influences/circumstances.
Faster - To some degree, this can be related to above considerations (regarding training advantages, etc). Perhaps more than that are considerations about things like footwear: do we think Westbrook would be flying around like he does if he was wearing old-school Converse All-Stars (flat sole, no cushion, canvas shoe the only thing providing ankle support) on poorly-kept floors (public was allowed on to the courts after games)? I certainly don't (or at least I suspect he's going to bust his ankle fairly quickly if he tries).
I'd also make note of how ball-handling was officiated at the time: Can ANYONE take off with the dribble as quickly as players do today if they're not allowed to put their hand on the side of the ball when dribbling?


I'm on Westbrook's side in this runoff; but some of your observations are mitigated by certain realities that it doesn't sound like you've really considered.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #70:

Russell Westbrook - 6 (trex_8063, Dr Positivity, LABird, penbeast0, iggymcfrack, pandrade83)
Willis Reed - 4 (Doctor MJ, drza, dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)

Winner will be declared in ~9 hours.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

No change, so calling for Westbrook. Will have the next up in a moment.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[SpreeS]

So childish put Westy over Reed.

[iggymcfrack]

So childish put Westy over Reed.

Sure, it's "childish" to put a guy who averaged the pace adjusted to Reed's era equivalent of 40/15/15 against modern stars over someone who peaked at 21/14/2 and played less total games. Whatever you say guy.

I think this was a bit overdue, but I feel very happy that Westbrook's been deservedly taken so that we can focus on closer, more interesting debates instead of making sure a player with one of the best peaks of all-time makes the Top 51.

[SpreeS]

So childish put Westy over Reed.

Sure, it's "childish" to put a guy who averaged the pace adjusted to Reed's era equivalent of 40/15/15 against modern stars over someone who peaked at 21/14/2 and played less total games. Whatever you say guy.

I think this was a bit overdue, but I feel very happy that Westbrook's been deservedly taken so that we can focus on closer, more interesting debates instead of making sure a player with one of the best peaks of all-time makes the Top 51.

One played against Wilt, KAJ, Cowens and Unseld and won 2 championchips, other f.... up with one of the best scorer of all time. Yea but stats is the most important as always. Lets look how many reb Westy and Adams will have this year.

[iggymcfrack]

Reed's team may have beaten Wilt and Kareem's teams but he got thoroughly outplayed in both series. Wilt averaged 24.1 RPG to Reed's 10.5 RPG and outscored him while shooting 14% better from the field. Ben Wallace "beat" Shaq in the Finals, does he merit automatic inclusion on your list at this point? How about Dumars for the years he "beat" Jordan.

Westbrook's gone against a lot of elite PGs in the playoffs and actually outplayed them including Chris Paul, James Harden, and a younger and better Tony Parker.