RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #69

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote 1 - Bob McAdoo

Vote 2 - Paul Arizin

Can obviously go in a lot of directions at this point. McAdoo’s prime isn’t as long as I’d like, but he had some really solid production during those years and peaked highly in 75:

Regular Season (won MVP)
34.5 PPG, 14.1 RPG, 2.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 56.9% TS (+6.7% vs. league average)

Playoffs
37.4 PPG, 13.4 RPG, 1.4 APG, .9 SPG, 2.7 BPG, 52.8% TS

The Braves would lose in 7 games to the #1 SRS ranked Bullets, with a valiant effort by McAdoo

As he transitioned into a role player for the Lakers, he was integral in their 82 championship run in his first season there:

16.7 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 1.6 APG, .7 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 58.6% TS, 108 ORTG, .126 WS/48

[Outside]

I put a lot of emphasis on playoff performance, which means I have a tough time including Anthony Davis and Boogie Cousins on this list. They're obviously talented players, but they both have issues beyond the postseason one. Davis has only 335 RS and four PS games prior to this season, and he's constantly getting hurt. Cousins has only 511 RS and zero PS games, and while undeniably talented, his behavior issues impact his ranking -- for me, it's not the technicals and ejections themselves but more about pouting on the floor and how destructive his negative behavior is to team chemistry.

Kawhi obviously doesn't have those PS and chemistry issues, but he only has 398 RS games to go with his 87 PS games. He's only been in the league six seasons, and he's been an elite player since his coming out party in the 2014 finals, but that's only three regular seasons and four postseasons. It's not that he was bad before that, but he was merely good, not top-100 great. I fully expect him to get on this list eventually, but I have a tough time putting him there now with such a short peak and lack of overall longevity.

We have numerous players with extensive careers who should get in before these guys.

Kawhi was elite from 14? 15 he most certainly was a quality guy, allstar level, but elite? Really imo at least he has 2 elite seasons and really only last year was he what I'd generally think of as elite (though his defense in 16 justifies the upgrade).

How do you compare that to say a Chris Webber? I'm not so sure, but it's difficult.

Kawhi was elite starting with the 2014 finals. You may use a different definition, but I'd call him elite in 2014-15 (DPOY, 10th in MVP voting). I don't see any question about him being elite in 2015-16 (DPOY, All NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP).

I have Chris Webber easily over Kawhi at this point. Kawhi has a better peak over the last two seasons, but Webber's overall production and longevity trump that. Webber had durability issues, but he has 831 RS games and over 30K RS minutes compared to Kawhi's 398 RS games and 12K minutes. Even Bill Walton has more RS games and minutes than Kawhi.

Considering how important most people consider longevity for the rankings, I don't understand how Kawhi can even be considered. He can crack the top 100 the next time we do this project in 2020, but even then, he'll be on the low end for longevity.

[dhsilv2]

I put a lot of emphasis on playoff performance, which means I have a tough time including Anthony Davis and Boogie Cousins on this list. They're obviously talented players, but they both have issues beyond the postseason one. Davis has only 335 RS and four PS games prior to this season, and he's constantly getting hurt. Cousins has only 511 RS and zero PS games, and while undeniably talented, his behavior issues impact his ranking -- for me, it's not the technicals and ejections themselves but more about pouting on the floor and how destructive his negative behavior is to team chemistry.

Kawhi obviously doesn't have those PS and chemistry issues, but he only has 398 RS games to go with his 87 PS games. He's only been in the league six seasons, and he's been an elite player since his coming out party in the 2014 finals, but that's only three regular seasons and four postseasons. It's not that he was bad before that, but he was merely good, not top-100 great. I fully expect him to get on this list eventually, but I have a tough time putting him there now with such a short peak and lack of overall longevity.

We have numerous players with extensive careers who should get in before these guys.

Kawhi was elite from 14? 15 he most certainly was a quality guy, allstar level, but elite? Really imo at least he has 2 elite seasons and really only last year was he what I'd generally think of as elite (though his defense in 16 justifies the upgrade).

How do you compare that to say a Chris Webber? I'm not so sure, but it's difficult.

Kawhi was elite starting with the 2014 finals. You may use a different definition, but I'd call him elite in 2014-15 (DPOY, 10th in MVP voting). I don't see any question about him being elite in 2015-16 (DPOY, All NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP).

I have Chris Webber easily over Kawhi at this point. Kawhi has a better peak over the last two seasons, but Webber's overall production and longevity trump that. Webber had durability issues, but he has 831 RS games and over 30K RS minutes compared to Kawhi's 398 RS games and 12K minutes. Even Bill Walton has more RS games and minutes than Kawhi.

Considering how important most people consider longevity for the rankings, I don't understand how Kawhi can even be considered. He can crack the top 100 the next time we do this project in 2020, but even then, he'll be on the low end for longevity.

I felt the hype over Leonard in 15 and 16 were far more than what I saw on the court. If you want to say 16 and 17 he was elite that's perfectly reasonable. I don't buy 15 at all though.

[iggymcfrack]

Kawhi was elite from 14? 15 he most certainly was a quality guy, allstar level, but elite? Really imo at least he has 2 elite seasons and really only last year was he what I'd generally think of as elite (though his defense in 16 justifies the upgrade).

How do you compare that to say a Chris Webber? I'm not so sure, but it's difficult.

Kawhi was elite starting with the 2014 finals. You may use a different definition, but I'd call him elite in 2014-15 (DPOY, 10th in MVP voting). I don't see any question about him being elite in 2015-16 (DPOY, All NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP).

I have Chris Webber easily over Kawhi at this point. Kawhi has a better peak over the last two seasons, but Webber's overall production and longevity trump that. Webber had durability issues, but he has 831 RS games and over 30K RS minutes compared to Kawhi's 398 RS games and 12K minutes. Even Bill Walton has more RS games and minutes than Kawhi.

Considering how important most people consider longevity for the rankings, I don't understand how Kawhi can even be considered. He can crack the top 100 the next time we do this project in 2020, but even then, he'll be on the low end for longevity.

I felt the hype over Leonard in 15 and 16 were far more than what I saw on the court. If you want to say 16 and 17 he was elite that's perfectly reasonable. I don't buy 15 at all though.

Top 5 RPM leaders in 2014-15:
1. Stephen Curry 9.34
2. LeBron James 8.78
3. James Harden 8.50
4. Anthony Davis 8.18
5. Kawhi Leonard 7.57

I seem to remember Haralabob raving about him that season too and listing him among the top 3 or 4 players in the league before Kawhi love was really fashionable. He had a career-high 7.2 RPG that year and led the league in steals as well. He may not have been the same volume scorer he’d develop into later in his career, but defensively I think it may have been his best season even ahead of his DPOY campaign, and I’d say he was absolutely having a superstar impact in that season.

[dhsilv2]

Kawhi was elite starting with the 2014 finals. You may use a different definition, but I'd call him elite in 2014-15 (DPOY, 10th in MVP voting). I don't see any question about him being elite in 2015-16 (DPOY, All NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP).

I have Chris Webber easily over Kawhi at this point. Kawhi has a better peak over the last two seasons, but Webber's overall production and longevity trump that. Webber had durability issues, but he has 831 RS games and over 30K RS minutes compared to Kawhi's 398 RS games and 12K minutes. Even Bill Walton has more RS games and minutes than Kawhi.

Considering how important most people consider longevity for the rankings, I don't understand how Kawhi can even be considered. He can crack the top 100 the next time we do this project in 2020, but even then, he'll be on the low end for longevity.

I felt the hype over Leonard in 15 and 16 were far more than what I saw on the court. If you want to say 16 and 17 he was elite that's perfectly reasonable. I don't buy 15 at all though.

Top 5 RPM leaders in 2014-15:
1. Stephen Curry 9.34
2. LeBron James 8.78
3. James Harden 8.50
4. Anthony Davis 8.18
5. Kawhi Leonard 7.57

I seem to remember Haralabob raving about him that season too and listing him among the top 3 or 4 players in the league before Kawhi love was really fashionable. He had a career-high 7.2 RPG that year and led the league in steals as well. He may not have been the same volume scorer he’d develop into later in his career, but defensively I think it may have been his best season even ahead of his DPOY campaign, and I’d say he was absolutely having a superstar impact in that season.

I struggle with that year, RAPM is a nice smell test for good year if you think someone is good. Not so much if you're unsure.

[penbeast0]

Vote 1 - Bob McAdoo

Vote 2 - Paul Arizin

Can obviously go in a lot of directions at this point. McAdoo’s prime isn’t as long as I’d like, but he had some really solid production during those years and peaked highly in 75:

Regular Season (won MVP)
34.5 PPG, 14.1 RPG, 2.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 56.9% TS (+6.7% vs. league average)

Playoffs
37.4 PPG, 13.4 RPG, 1.4 APG, .9 SPG, 2.7 BPG, 52.8% TS

The Braves would lose in 7 games to the #1 SRS ranked Bullets, with a valiant effort by McAdoo

As he transitioned into a role player for the Lakers, he was integral in their 82 championship run in his first season there:

16.7 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 1.6 APG, .7 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 58.6% TS, 108 ORTG, .126 WS/48

What is the main theory behind rating Arizin over Daniels (since the Daniels alternative is something people are scoffing at)?

[trex_8063]

I struggle with that year, RAPM is a nice smell test for good year if you think someone is good. Not so much if you're unsure.

Forgive me, but this sounds like you're giving yourself license to ignore RAPM whenever it disagrees with your pre-conceived ideas about a player.

At any rate, he was citing RPM, not RAPM. Though Kawhi also rated quite well in PI RAPM (+5.26, 5th in league, behind only Lebron, Steph, CP3, and Draymond Green). Doesn't disagree too strongly with box-based metrics: he was a 22.0 PER, .204 WS/48, +6.1 BPM, +17 efficiency differential in 31.8 mpg that year, and did finish 10th in MVP vote during a fairly top-heavy year. Hard to look at all that, collectively, and not conclude that he wasn't at least "kinda elite" that year. It was a year that provided some pretty significant career value anyway.

[dhsilv2]

I struggle with that year, RAPM is a nice smell test for good year if you think someone is good. Not so much if you're unsure.

Forgive me, but this sounds like you're giving yourself license to ignore RAPM whenever it disagrees with your pre-conceived ideas about a player.

At any rate, he was citing RPM, not RAPM. Though Kawhi also rated quite well in PI RAPM (+5.26, 5th in league, behind only Lebron, Steph, CP3, and Draymond Green). Doesn't disagree too strongly with box-based metrics: he was a 22.0 PER, .204 WS/48, +6.1 BPM, +17 efficiency differential in 31.8 mpg that year, and did finish 10th in MVP vote during a fairly top-heavy year. Hard to look at all that, collectively, and not conclude that he wasn't at least "kinda elite" that year. It was a year that provided some pretty significant career value anyway.

Elite is tricky, but I struggle with him being a top ~5 guy at 16 a game and without the ability to create his own shot which as memories servers is where he was that year. RAPM doesn't care if a guy can create or not if the system gets him shots which the spurs did. As for his defense, that again falls into if Duncan / system were bigger factors than RAPM identified.

I'm not saying I"m ignoring the metric, but it's coming off overly favorable imo. He was an allstar level guy without a doubt. Elite which is not an exact term, for me I'm not sure I buy that.

In context of rankings, if that was his peak year, he'd likely not be someone I'd look at here unless he did that for 5+ years (more without playoff results, less with titles). An elite season to me, would push someone into consideration off just 2 seasons.

[Owly]

Vote 1 - Bob McAdoo

Vote 2 - Paul Arizin

Can obviously go in a lot of directions at this point. McAdoo’s prime isn’t as long as I’d like, but he had some really solid production during those years and peaked highly in 75:

Regular Season (won MVP)
34.5 PPG, 14.1 RPG, 2.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 56.9% TS (+6.7% vs. league average)

Playoffs
37.4 PPG, 13.4 RPG, 1.4 APG, .9 SPG, 2.7 BPG, 52.8% TS

The Braves would lose in 7 games to the #1 SRS ranked Bullets, with a valiant effort by McAdoo

As he transitioned into a role player for the Lakers, he was integral in their 82 championship run in his first season there:

16.7 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 1.6 APG, .7 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 58.6% TS, 108 ORTG, .126 WS/48

What is the main theory behind rating Arizin over Daniels (since the Daniels alternative is something people are scoffing at)?

Not at me but my take (some mental shortcuts here for conciseness - I'm a career value type guy)

Arizin probably has stronger metrics saying he was exceptional in the best league in the world. Arizin peaks at 25.5 PER, .261 WS/48 (and this in a league in which metrics seem heavily pro-bigs). Daniels probably peaks in '71 with 21.9 (he'd posted 22.4 as rookie, but lower WS48 that season, and that year's PER was more driven by usage on non-great efficiency and in a weaker league) and .173 in early to mid ABA.

I can see how you've got to where you are with Daniels, I think that maybe he just needs too many leaps of faith, big and small, for many of us (was he clearly better than his boxscore and a bigtime defender? Was he really ever the best player in the ABA? Was he really (or clearly) his team's MVP, or strongest driving force for the titles (Brown?)? Was he great in absolute terms or just playing well in weak league with weak big man - and was Zelmo Beatty better; he seems more productive otoh, and if his NBA career just makes it seem less impressive what does that mean for Daniels, who, otoh, has weaker longevity)? Was he unfortunate timing-wise (I know there were injuries, not sure otoh when) or did he get found out as more NBA calibre bigs joined the ABA? Those are the things that bother me, anyway.

I haven't looked back into it except to hunt out those bkb-ref numbers but that's where I'd come from in my hesitancy on Daniels. Areas where criteria might matter are what to do with Arizin's military service years and how one treats era (for myself per the above, it's a lot about proving yourself versus your chronological peers, with some marginal era quality accounting - though talent pool discussions could complicate this for the early Big League pro game).

[penbeast0]

....

Thanks, I do think Daniels was a legit best player in the early ABA, though it may be more because I didn't like Rick Barry and always thought that Dan Issel, as good as his numbers were, was a weakness in Denver as a mediocre defender when they needed more.

When the Pacers added George McGinnis who became the centerpiece for the franchise (until jumping leagues), Daniels was also able to transition to support and win another ring. I tend to think the Warriors underachieved with Wilt/Arizin/Gola in the later years of Arizin's career. Only a very minor point and not one that I feel strongly about but it does help add to the Daniels intangibles argument for me.

[dhsilv2]

Vote - Bob McAdoo

2x all nba, 2x nba champ, 5x allstar, and 1x MVP

A really sound as high value peak, I believe of people in consideration he's the only guy with peak win(s) in the 15+ range with a peak of 17.8. Career PER over 20, while playing in a partially deflated PER era. Titles came post prime with the lakers but at least for the first one he looked to be a high impact starter. Yes there are rumblings about personality and "empty stats" talk for a period. Still 900+ regular season and playoff games combined. He did win the MVP. He had a nice jumper can created spacing with it.

I don't have time today to think of an alt that I feel good about. I'm oddly thinking about Rodman and Webber, but they feel off. Parker seems ok around here as well, but I don't like his peak. I might watch some Moncrief tonight and see what I feel after that. I'd vote KJ if not for injuries and so so 93 playoffs.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #31:

Bob McAdoo - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Kevin Johnson - 1 (trex_8063)
Sidney Moncrief - 1 (penbeast0)
Grant Hill - 1 (pandrade83)

Some OK discussion, though only five votes cast. McAdoo is in the runoff for sure; will go to the secondary votes to determine who else: Kevin Johnson is the only one of those with one 1st place vote who also has a 2nd place vote. So we will now enter runoff between McAdoo and KJ:

Bob McAdoo - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)
Kevin Johnson - 2 (pandrade83, trex_8063)


If your name isn't shown here, please state your pick between McAdoo and KJ with reasons why. Will conclude in ~24 hours (or as close as I can come tomorrow evening).

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

No one else going to chime in?

I'll provide some bare bones of their respective primes (might be worthwhile as they have relatively similar longevity; maybe marginal edge to KJ---->shorter total career and games/minutes played, but significantly longer prime)......

McAdoo '74-'78 rs Per 100 Possessions (385 games)
31.5 pts, 14.2 reb, 3.2 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.2 blk @ +5.59% rTS; turnovers not recorded until the final year of this sample (4.8 tov per 100 that year) in 41.6 mpg.
KJ '89-'97 rs Per 100 Possessions (599 games)
26.6 pts, 4.5 reb, 13.4 ast, 2.1 stl, 0.3 blk, 4.5 tov @ +5.35% rTS in 36.3 mpg.

McAdoo '74-'78 ps Per 100 Possessions (28 games)
30.6 pts, 13.1 reb, 2.6 ast, 0.9 stl, 2.2 blk @ +0.63% rTS (4.2 tov per 100 in '78 playoffs) in monster 44.4 mpg.
KJ '89-'97 ps Per 100 Possessions (92 games)
26.7 pts, 4.5 reb, 12.3 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.4 blk, 4.6 tov @ +2.50% rTS in 39.4 mpg.

[Dr Positivity]

I'll say KJ. Not a fan of McAdoo's intangibles or longevity and Johnson is a great offensive PG who carried teams to success before Barkley.

Vote Kevin Johnson

[trex_8063]

I'll say KJ. Not a fan of McAdoo's intangibles or longevity and Johnson is a great offensive PG who carried teams to success before Barkley.

Vote Kevin Johnson

Semantics, but I think "led" would be a more accurate word choice than "carried". Otherwise generally agree.

[LA Bird]

Run-off vote: Kevin Johnson

McAdoo was the 3rd best player behind Kareem and Dr J in the mid-70s but his career after leaving the Buffalo Braves was underwhelming. He continued to put up big numbers for a while but the impact was lacking and he was playing for the 5th franchise in 5 years before finding a role as 6th man on the Lakers. I think Davis has been a better player and will likely surpass McAdoo in a few years time.

Case for KJ same as before: One of the best offensive players left and a strong record of leading elite offensive teams. His injuries and missed games during the middle of his prime is a negative but he was generally healthy and playing well during the playoffs. KJ has the second most seasons of 20/10 (rounded up) behind only Oscar and a great scoring efficiency thanks to his foul drawing ability by attacking the paint. Phoenix slightly underperformed IMO with the Barkley/KJ duo but that was kind of to be expected given the poor fit between the two and the lack of defense. KJ's longevity isn't great but it's at least better than other guys in contention right now (eg. Sam Jones, Sidney Moncrief)

[penbeast0]

I will throw in a vote for KJ too; Mac's defense was a problem and I value defense, particularly big man defense, very highly. And, I remember him having problems in NY and Boston to the point where Boston considered him a negative despite his talent. KJ's prime seasons that he wasn't injured for long stretches are only roughly equal to Moncrief's but they were strong and he did throw in a few partial seasons where he continued to play well when on the court.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #37:

Kevin Johnson - 5 (penbeast0, LABird, Dr Positivity, pandrade83, trex_8063)
Bob McAdoo - 2 (dhsilv2, Clyde Frazier)


I'm about three hours early, but at this point we'd need four more votes (bringing the total to 11, which we haven't had for awhile), and ALL FOUR would have to be for McAdoo in order to turn the result.
And since if I don't do it now, I otherwise won't be able to get to this for another 6-7 hours, I'm gonna call it for KJ and maybe allow an extra hour or two for the next thread. Have it up in a minute.....

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.