RealGM 2017 Top 100 #97

[trex_8063]

Thru post #20:

Bill Walton - 3 (Outside, pandrade83, HeartBreakKid)
Vlade Divac - 2 (dhsilv2, SactoKingsFan)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)
Tiny Archibald - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Walt Bellamy - 1 (trex_8063)

Lot of secondary votes for Daniels, but afraid he'll miss the runoff again. We move on with Walton vs Divac:

Bill Walton - 3 (Outside, pandrade83, HeartBreakKid)
Vlade Divac - 2 (dhsilv2, SactoKingsFan)


If your name isn't shown here, please state your pick between these two^^^. Conclude in ~24 hours.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

[quote=”HeartBreakKid"].[/quote]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

A few years ago I would have had their relationship flip-flopped. But I've come around a long way on Vlade. His fundamentally sound team defense and excellent big-man passing (with a tiny bit of shooting range and nice hands; reasonably respectable scoring and rebounding) has translated into consistently solid impact in multiple different scenarios, and he's got pretty respectable longevity.

When looking at his impact (or other) metrics, it is important to note he's somewhat limited minutes; but still......I'm inclined to go with him vs the ultra-short/hampered career of Walton.

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

[penbeast0]

Thru post #20:

Bill Walton - 3 (Outside, pandrade83, HeartBreakKid)
Vlade Divac - 2 (dhsilv2, SactoKingsFan)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)
Tiny Archibald - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Walt Bellamy - 1 (trex_8063)

Lot of secondary votes for Daniels, but afraid he'll miss the runoff again. We move on with Walton vs Divac:

3 more chances!

[penbeast0]

like most Walton comps, Walton was better but just doesn't play enough to give a team more career value.

VOTE: THE EUROFLOPPER

[Clyde Frazier]

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

A little frustrating as Vlade is another guy I wouldn't have in my top 100, but I'd still have him ahead of Walton. Also thought we'd have enough alternates to get Daniels in the runoff, but oh well.

Vlade was a solid all around center who gave you a little bit of everything. Decent longevity and durability, and the impact stats are on his side. It doesn't put him on some higher level than I would have had him before, but he's the clear choice to me here nonetheless.

[dhsilv2]

A few years ago I would have had their relationship flip-flopped. But I've come around a long way on Vlade. His fundamentally sound team defense and excellent big-man passing (with a tiny bit of shooting range and nice hands; reasonably respectable scoring and rebounding) has translated into consistently solid impact in multiple different scenarios, and he's got pretty respectable longevity.

When looking at his impact (or other) metrics, it is important to note[b] he's somewhat limited minutes;[/b] but still......I'm inclined to go with him vs the ultra-short/hampered career of Walton.

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

Limited minutes by those days standards, yes. That said we're talking from 91-04 he played ~30 minutes a game every year, did miss most of 92.

[trex_8063]

A few years ago I would have had their relationship flip-flopped. But I've come around a long way on Vlade. His fundamentally sound team defense and excellent big-man passing (with a tiny bit of shooting range and nice hands; reasonably respectable scoring and rebounding) has translated into consistently solid impact in multiple different scenarios, and he's got pretty respectable longevity.

When looking at his impact (or other) metrics, it is important to note[b] he's somewhat limited minutes;[/b] but still......I'm inclined to go with him vs the ultra-short/hampered career of Walton.

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

Limited minutes by those days standards, yes. That said we're talking from 91-04 he played ~30 minutes a game every year, did miss most of 92.

Just sayin'.
He never once played as many as 36 mpg, only 4 seasons >/= 33 mpg, and just 7 seasons >/= 30 mpg; career avg of 29.8 mpg. Considering the majority of players being compared (though not specifically Walton) average >30 mpg for their careers (often substantially over), and we're so frequently talking about rate metrics (RAPM, WS/48, PER, BPM)----and how those compare to contemporaries----limited minutes need to be acknowledged.

[trex_8063]

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

A little frustrating as Vlade is another guy I wouldn't have in my top 100, but I'd still have him ahead of Walton. Also thought we'd have enough alternates to get Daniels in the runoff, but oh well.

Those 11th hour votes for Vlade pushed him ahead. If SactoKingsFan participates again in the following thread, he would presumably be casting his primary for Mel Daniels (which along with penbeast0 and any other alternates Daniels receives, should guarantee him a runoff).

[HeartBreakKid]

This is basically Bill Walton versus the field from here on in

[penbeast0]

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

A little frustrating as Vlade is another guy I wouldn't have in my top 100, but I'd still have him ahead of Walton. Also thought we'd have enough alternates to get Daniels in the runoff, but oh well.

Those 11th hour votes for Vlade pushed him ahead. If SactoKingsFan participates again in the following thread, he would presumably be casting his primary for Mel Daniels (which along with penbeast0 and any other alternates Daniels receives, should guarantee him a runoff).

Unless of course I change my mind.

[penbeast0]

A few years ago I would have had their relationship flip-flopped. But I've come around a long way on Vlade. His fundamentally sound team defense and excellent big-man passing (with a tiny bit of shooting range and nice hands; reasonably respectable scoring and rebounding) has translated into consistently solid impact in multiple different scenarios, and he's got pretty respectable longevity.

When looking at his impact (or other) metrics, it is important to note he's somewhat limited minutes; but still......I'm inclined to go with him vs the ultra-short/hampered career of Walton.

Runoff vote: Vlade Divac

That and someone had to carry Chris Webber's overrated butt

[Doctor MJ]

Runoff Vote: Bill Walton

Ouch. I get not feeling like Walton has the longevity to be in the Top 100, but Divac is an afterthought as a player. I'd expect to rank any number of current players not mentioned yet ahead of him.

If you want one guy to seriously help you win a championship, only one of these two guys does that.

[dhsilv2]

Runoff Vote: Bill Walton

Ouch. I get not feeling like Walton has the longevity to be in the Top 100, but Divac is an afterthought as a player. I'd expect to rank any number of current players not mentioned yet ahead of him.

If you want one guy to seriously help you win a championship, only one of these two guys does that.

The guy who was on two contenders, Vlade? Basically every year of Vlade but his first 1 or 2 and last were as good or better than 86 Walton.

[Owly]

Runoff Vote: Bill Walton

Ouch. I get not feeling like Walton has the longevity to be in the Top 100, but Divac is an afterthought as a player. I'd expect to rank any number of current players not mentioned yet ahead of him.

If you want one guy to seriously help you win a championship, only one of these two guys does that.

Seems like an oversimplification, no?

Arbitrary examples to somewhat reflect Walton, Divac without any claim that these figures are right:
If one guy, guy A gives you a 15% chance of title added in one year (but is still in the league, being paid, for a further 14) and another guy B gives a 1.5% chance of a title added each year for 15 years ...
15<22.5

(if this were to an exact analogy we could quibble hugely about the values, about value in Walton's marginal years [which this particular model leaves some room for adding some of and still comeing out pro-"Divac" player - but these numbers are arbitrary], about the value of '78 Walton, maybe whether you give Vlade 15 good year and of course the trajectory isn't that flat though it is fairly so, that Walton was only paid for 14 years so that last one you get money to spend again).

This also goes without any consideration of relative contract costs (which may or may not factor into the reckoning - but has a fair shout to be so if talking about championship probability). And whilst I'm, as ever, not quite certain how to use +/- stuff, Vlade comes out pretty strongly there ('97-'14 he's just slightly behind Sheed [per possession] on this model https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2).

Which is all just to emphasise the above seemed a bit of an oversimplification of things.

[dhsilv2]

Runoff Vote: Bill Walton

Ouch. I get not feeling like Walton has the longevity to be in the Top 100, but Divac is an afterthought as a player. I'd expect to rank any number of current players not mentioned yet ahead of him.

If you want one guy to seriously help you win a championship, only one of these two guys does that.

Seems like an oversimplification, no?

Arbitrary examples to somewhat reflect Walton, Divac without any claim that these figures are right:
If one guy, guy A gives you a 15% chance of title added in one year (but is still in the league, being paid, for a further 14) and another guy B gives a 1.5% chance of a title added each year for 15 years ...
15<22.5

(if this were to an exact analogy we could quibble hugely about the values, about value in Walton's marginal years [which this particular model leaves some room for adding some of and still comeing out pro-"Divac" player - but these numbers are arbitrary], about the value of '78 Walton, maybe whether you give Vlade 15 good year and of course the trajectory isn't that flat though it is fairly so, that Walton was only paid for 14 years so that last one you get money to spend again).

This also goes without any consideration of relative contract costs (which may or may not factor into the reckoning - but has a fair shout to be so if talking about championship probability). And whilst I'm, as ever, not quite certain how to use +/- stuff, Vlade comes out pretty strongly there ('97-'14 he's just slightly behind Sheed [per possession] on this model https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2).

Which is all just to emphasise the above seemed a bit of an oversimplification of things.

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/xrapm-points-above-average-91-14

Just to piggy back this.

Since this has his full career (not sure how the early years work) it's an interesting snap shot. Everyone above Vlade is in already and the next 5 are in as well with AK47 being out first player who likely won't make it. Then the next 4 players are all in.

Vlade lost out on accolades due to playing less minutes (still around 30 a game) and was on a very bad team during the middle of his career. he was a huge value to those early 90's laker teams and he was a leader for the kings teams at the end of his career. If he'd been on a better team during the middle of his career he'd absolutely be more highly regarded. Further had those kings been an eastern conference team, he'd have made more allstar games and would have been in the finals most years.

[trex_8063]

Runoff Vote: Bill Walton

Ouch. I get not feeling like Walton has the longevity to be in the Top 100, but Divac is an afterthought as a player. I'd expect to rank any number of current players not mentioned yet ahead of him.

If you want one guy to seriously help you win a championship, only one of these two guys does that.

Seems like an oversimplification, no?

Arbitrary examples to somewhat reflect Walton, Divac without any claim that these figures are right:
If one guy, guy A gives you a 15% chance of title added in one year (but is still in the league, being paid, for a further 14) and another guy B gives a 1.5% chance of a title added each year for 15 years ...
15<22.5

(if this were to an exact analogy we could quibble hugely about the values, about value in Walton's marginal years [which this particular model leaves some room for adding some of and still comeing out pro-"Divac" player - but these numbers are arbitrary], about the value of '78 Walton, maybe whether you give Vlade 15 good year and of course the trajectory isn't that flat though it is fairly so, that Walton was only paid for 14 years so that last one you get money to spend again).

This also goes without any consideration of relative contract costs (which may or may not factor into the reckoning - but has a fair shout to be so if talking about championship probability). And whilst I'm, as ever, not quite certain how to use +/- stuff, Vlade comes out pretty strongly there ('97-'14 he's just slightly behind Sheed [per possession] on this model https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2).

Which is all just to emphasise the above seemed a bit of an oversimplification of things.

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/xrapm-points-above-average-91-14

Just to piggy back this.

Since this has his full career (not sure how the early years work) it's an interesting snap shot. Everyone above Vlade is in already and the next 5 are in as well with AK47 being out first player who likely won't make it. Then the next 4 players are all in.

Vlade lost out on accolades due to playing less minutes (still around 30 a game) and was on a very bad team during the middle of his career....

And simply because his forte wasn't volume scoring (which has historically been overvalued where accolades are concerned).

[trex_8063]

I could get behind Dave D in a run-off depending on who he's up against. Bellamy is a no-go for me - I don't think anyone has even been mentioned that I'd vote for him against.

Out of curiosity, how do you feel about Karl-Anthony Towns? Where do you rank him among today's centers?

I'm not a fan of KAT. A big who is weak defensively is problematic for me. And what's perhaps the most frustrating is that he has all the tools to be a strong defender . . . he's just not one. Same for Wiggins. It feels cultural and I thought Thibs & Taj would make it better. I hope they get bounced in round 1.

If all I care about is winning this year - long term doesn't matter to me - if healthy -

Embiid, Cousins, Gobert, Giannis, KP, Jokic - all guys I'd rather have. Draymond/Horford level is where I have to start to think more and then it depends on what does my team look like.

Fair enough. You are indeed consistent in your valuation of things. As you may have suspected, I was prepared to play a little "gotcha!" there .
KAT is probably the closest modern-day comparison to Walt Bellamy: scores moderate-high volume on elite-level efficiency, decent rebounding numbers, somewhat limited as a distributor, questionable/poor defensively, and putting up big numbers on mediocre or bad teams early in their respective careers.

If you'd said you consider KAT a top 3-4 (or perhaps even top 5) center in the league presently, then being so utterly against the inclusion of Walt Bellamy in the top 100 (given his strong longevity/durability profile) would be fairly inconsistent.


fwiw, I was watching a bit of the following game from the '71 season yesterday......

Watch on YouTube

.....mostly scrutinizing Bellamy on the defensive end, and watching for any other noteworthy tendencies.

Want to point out some plays, but first a preface: If you watch, bear in mind this is Bellamy's at age 31 and on the down-slope of his career, in his 10th season having missed just 5 games in the 9+ seasons to this point (which he more than made up for playing 6 extra games in '69---the season of 88 rs games), while averaging about 38 mpg in his career. jsia: 31, and a lotta miles on those legs, and we're looking at a post-prime version (though he would go on to have a somewhat rejuvenated [statistically] season in '72).

Few things I noted just based on this game.....
1) He seems like a good outlet passer. Not sure if this was the case his whole career, or something he picked up on a later, but it's partially on display in the very first Hawk possession: PHX wins the tip and has a semi-transition opportunity. Bellamy snares the rebound and immediately sees Maravich cherry-pickin', throws a nice outlet catching Pete in stride at half-court.
He has another superb outlet on the defensive rebound at 11:47.

2) Rebounding -- He boxes out.....pretty consistently. I like that in a big. I don't like the ones who chase the rebounding angles/bounces, potentially just poaching a rebound from a teammate while leaving their man without a body on him. From what I see, Bellamy is fairly consistently looking for his man and putting a body on him.

3) Defensively -- While I'm not happy with the quality of his post defense on display in this game, his help defense is often pretty good. Some examples:

2:54 - Bellamy sees the play developing, rotates at the ideal moment and blocks the shot on the help D, keeping it in play and igniting the fast break===>in which he hustles down the court on the break (showing pretty good foot-speed for a 31-yr-old high-mileage big man who's supposedly "eaten his way to mediocrity") beating most of the field downcourt and being the recipient of the fast-break pass (gets fouled, goes to line, though misses both iirc).

4:59 - So-so help on Dick Van Arsdale (Pete's man--->Pete does not look good defensively, fwiw; his man is frequently breaking free, scored on the previous play, in fact); could have been better, but does force him into a difficult behind-the-backboard reverse along the baseline, and appears ready to have swatted a more "conventional" shot attempt on the strong-side.

5:20 - OK, he didn't box out well on the first shot----although to be fair, is it necessarily a good idea to box a guy out 9 feet from the rim (someone else can easily slip inside your boxout when you're that far from the rim)----and Connie Hawkins gets the offensive rebound for PHX. But then Bellamy swats the lay-up attempt away (again keeping it in play: PHX recovers), challenges and severely effects the follow-up shot, and secures the defensive rebound. And then again note he's immediately looking up-court (with the ball above his head, ready to whip an outlet pass if available; they actually do get sort of a semi-transition opportunity, ultimately).

6:48 - Does a good job cutting off the drive by Dick Van Arsdale. Cuts off a second drive by Arsdale a few second later; though he seems a little slow to recover and contest his man (who receives the pass from DVA), it's really more a bash on Bill Bridges: who has Neal Walk in his field of vision as the play develops but makes not move at all to rotate; he's just sort of standing there defending no one.

8:50 - shades the drive decently on the help.

9:50 - a bit slow/inattentive on the transition D.


Anyway, I'll stop there. But his team defense is not awful based on this sample (especially for the time period); and this is the biggest criticism of him as a player.

[Outside]

Seems like an oversimplification, no?

Arbitrary examples to somewhat reflect Walton, Divac without any claim that these figures are right:
If one guy, guy A gives you a 15% chance of title added in one year (but is still in the league, being paid, for a further 14) and another guy B gives a 1.5% chance of a title added each year for 15 years ...
15<22.5

(if this were to an exact analogy we could quibble hugely about the values, about value in Walton's marginal years [which this particular model leaves some room for adding some of and still comeing out pro-"Divac" player - but these numbers are arbitrary], about the value of '78 Walton, maybe whether you give Vlade 15 good year and of course the trajectory isn't that flat though it is fairly so, that Walton was only paid for 14 years so that last one you get money to spend again).

This also goes without any consideration of relative contract costs (which may or may not factor into the reckoning - but has a fair shout to be so if talking about championship probability). And whilst I'm, as ever, not quite certain how to use +/- stuff, Vlade comes out pretty strongly there ('97-'14 he's just slightly behind Sheed [per possession] on this model https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2).

Which is all just to emphasise the above seemed a bit of an oversimplification of things.

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/xrapm-points-above-average-91-14

Just to piggy back this.

Since this has his full career (not sure how the early years work) it's an interesting snap shot. Everyone above Vlade is in already and the next 5 are in as well with AK47 being out first player who likely won't make it. Then the next 4 players are all in.

Vlade lost out on accolades due to playing less minutes (still around 30 a game) and was on a very bad team during the middle of his career....

And simply because his forte wasn't volume scoring (which has historically been overvalued where accolades are concerned).

A couple of counterpoints.

First, Walton isn't on either list, so that diminishes their usefulness in the Vlade-Walton comparison.

Second, I'm once again looking at RAPM lists and trying to rationalize what I'm seeing. Michael Jordan is no. 29 on the xRAPM points above average list. Amir Johnson is no. 17 on the 97-14 list, one spot ahead of Jordan, with both having about the same number of possessions. When I've discussed this previously, the consensus is that RAPM supposedly shouldn't be used as a straight-up "who's better" list and should come with context, but it seems like it's being used here as a straight-up "who's better" list where Vlade should get in because everyone around him on the list is in.

Having seen Vlade play a lot and knowing the basic stats for him, I can't rationalize why he would be no. 17 on one list and no. 27 on the other. This is the kind of stuff that makes me question the utility of RAPM.

[dhsilv2]

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/xrapm-points-above-average-91-14

Just to piggy back this.

Since this has his full career (not sure how the early years work) it's an interesting snap shot. Everyone above Vlade is in already and the next 5 are in as well with AK47 being out first player who likely won't make it. Then the next 4 players are all in.

Vlade lost out on accolades due to playing less minutes (still around 30 a game) and was on a very bad team during the middle of his career....

And simply because his forte wasn't volume scoring (which has historically been overvalued where accolades are concerned).

A couple of counterpoints.

First, Walton isn't on either list, so that diminishes their usefulness in the Vlade-Walton comparison.

Second, I'm once again looking at RAPM lists and trying to rationalize what I'm seeing. Michael Jordan is no. 29 on the xRAPM points above average list. Amir Johnson is no. 17 on the 97-14 list, one spot ahead of Jordan, with both having about the same number of possessions. When I've discussed this previously, the consensus is that RAPM supposedly shouldn't be used as a straight-up "who's better" list and should come with context, but it seems like it's being used here as a straight-up "who's better" list where Vlade should get in because everyone around him on the list is in.

Having seen Vlade play a lot and knowing the basic stats for him, I can't rationalize why he would be no. 17 on one list and no. 27 on the other. This is the kind of stuff that makes me question the utility of RAPM.

Well for Walton, nobody is trying to use the RAPM here to argue either way, but some are dismissing Vlade as if he weren't one of the best centers of the 90's and he absolutely was. Watching some more games, he's a LOT better as a man defender in the post then I remembered. He very clearly was a player who even bothered shaq...he's likely in part why Shaq went and bulked up in the early 00's. Meanwhile he was a strong team defender that provided surprisingly good rim protection despite being a bit slow. s

Offensively, he made his point guards job easier. His hands were excellent which made getting him the ball a lot easier on them. He had great instincts on when to pass, and used his hands to do a wonderful job passing.

For his career per 100 20.2 pts 14.0 trb 5.3 ast 1.9 stl 2.5 blk 3.7 TOV. That's over 1143 games.

Lets bring in walton per 100 21.6 pts 17.1 trb 5.5 ast 1.3 stl 3.6 blk 3.0 TOV (we don't have full career stats on turnovers) and this is in 468 games.

Now Vlade was a bit foul prone which was a factor in those minutes, but possession for their careers, Walton doesn't have a resounding lead, and for all the talk about him being a GOAT passing big man, the assists (something others have pointed out under sells Vlade's passing ability) numbers slightly favor Vlade.

As for RAPM

Not sure why MJ being kinda low is confusing you. MJ was down right bad his last year on the wizards and wasn't very good his first year. We're looking at 8 years with 25% thinking MJ is fairly bad. I'm not sure on Amir, RAPM isn't perfect always, but it wouldn't shock me if he had a lot more impact as a defender than most people think, his box score metrics are a lot better in terms of rate metrics than I think most would expect as well. As for the use, I was trying to put in context where he stands as an impact player. xRAPM fyi is box score informed, so it is not sure RAPM, which should only illustrate more than the Vlade's box score metrics are rather good. This is also why Vlade's WS and VORP are both essentially double Walton's for his career. Vlade is 40th all time in VORP and 92nd all time in WS.

[trex_8063]

Second, I'm once again looking at RAPM lists and trying to rationalize what I'm seeing. Michael Jordan is no. 29 on the xRAPM points above average list.

I'm not sure what to think wrt the 91-14 rankings; I didn't know any +/- was available prior to '94, so I don't know where/how those numbers are computed. However, bear in mind the order of that list is based on cumulative xRAPM points above average (Jordan's ranked 29th despite '85-'90 missing from the data sample); with his two retirements, everyone ahead of him has a larger dataset (in terms of seasons played).
To be fair, if the author had arranged the order according to Per 100 possessions averages, Jordan would still only rank like 34th (I suspect again because so much of his prime is missing from this sample--->consider that like 24% of Jordan's possessions in this sample were while wearing a Wizard's uniform).

But again, this all calls back to the common-sense advice that none of this should be the sole basis of argumentation; merely one more tool in the toolbox.
And fwiw, I've several formulations which utilize a lot of information, but DO NOT utilize RAPM, xRAPM, APM, BPM at all.......Vlade nonetheless ranks somewhere between #96 and #113 in all of them (usually around 101-106). Some of them also have [I think] a touch too much rs winners bias; but those same formulas also utilized awards/accolades as well as mpg (which as we just noted above: Vlade may have been short-changed on accolades; and as I noted previously, Vlade was somewhat limited minutes)......he still never gets placed lower than #113 by these.

So when you add his impressive impact profile to that, is a fringe top 100 ranking really so unreasonable?

Amir Johnson is no. 17 on the 97-14 list, one spot ahead of Jordan, with both having about the same number of possessions.

I wouldn't use Jordan as the barometer for the '97-14 rankings; literally half of Jordan's sample there is his Wizards years (and '98 is far from his best seasons, for that matter). Jordan was 2nd in the league in '97 NPI RAPM, 4th in PI RAPM in '98; but he was basically +/- 0 in both of his Wizard years.
And fwiw, he was 1st in the league in rs APM in '96.
The data we have for his Bulls years is more or less what one would expect, no?

When I've discussed this previously, the consensus is that RAPM supposedly shouldn't be used as a straight-up "who's better" list and should come with context, but it seems like it's being used here as a straight-up "who's better" list where Vlade should get in because everyone around him on the list is in.

True, and while it was worded that way, I'm not sure if dhsilv2 meant it exactly like that (idk). But Vlade wasn't paired with the same circumstance/roster thru his whole career; to his credit, he did demonstrate solid impact with multiple franchises/casts. So given his OTHER rate metrics (PER, WS/48, BPM) are all respectable and not out of line with many other players near this stage (such as Jerry Lucas, Jack Sikma, Joe Dumars, etc) AND with solid longevity.....

Having seen Vlade play a lot and knowing the basic stats for him, I can't rationalize why he would be no. 17 on one list and no. 27 on the other. This is the kind of stuff that makes me question the utility of RAPM.

Basketball's got a lot of nuance, and a LOT of things completely off the boxscore provide tangible value, as well as a few things which are not adequately represented in the boxscore.
A lot of this is backed up by watching the games, if you're watching for the right things. I've got no reservations whatsoever in declaring Vlade was a better defensive player than Chris Webber for those Kings teams, and yet the box-based metrics do not consistently reflect this.