EDIT: Regardless of who your 3 picks are, I'd advise everyone to make clear who your preference is between Dwyane Wade and Steve Nash (even if they're not among your picks). It'll likely end up saving us time.
Target stop time is ~6pm EST on Tuesday.
Moving forward, I want to make sure everyone knows EXACTLY what to expect in a future contentious vote; [size=110]so below is a flow-chart (which is consistent with precedent that has already occurred in this project):
1) ranked vote system (RVS) like we've been doing with three ordered picks. If a majority or **default victory is NOT obtained by a single player with this method.....
2) ....we go to Condorcet method [of the "finalist" players] among the original counted voters [which is a very natural "continuation" of a RVS, btw, given the entire point of the RVS is to better ensure everyone gets a counted vote] to determine a winner. BUT we will wait no longer than 24 hours after the original deadline to hear from everyone (and there's no mystery to figuring if you're one of the people I need to hear from: it's easy enough for any of you to tell without my asking each of you [if two or more of the three "finalists" were not on your original vote post, I don't know what your position is on them]).
IF the Condorcet method yields a tie OR I do not hear from every original voter wrt his player hierarchy within 24 hours of the original deadline and the tabulated Condorcet results still indicate undecided (i.e. that it could go either way if all votes were in).....
3) .....we will go to a "sudden death" runoff, wherein the first finalist to receive [at least] TWO ***new votes [which can come from one of the original Condorcet hold-outs] AND be in the lead by Condorcet method (including BOTH original voters and runoff voters) will be awarded the spot.
**All default victories will be "validity checked" via the Condorcet method. As long as the default victor does NOT lose to one of the other finalists via Condorcet, the default victory will be upheld, and he will be awarded the spot. IF, otoh, he loses to one [or more] competitors via Condorcet method [or failing to hear from all original voters within 24 hours, with the result still in question], we will enter a "sudden death" runoff that follows the same rules as indicated in #3 above.
*** "new votes" must come from posters who have previously been established on the voter panel [even if they haven't participated in awhile]. i.e. Brand new voices will not be allowed to jump in and decide the spot.
****In the event that these runoff criteria have NOT been satisfied within 24 hours of the start of the runoff, the Condorcet winner at the time the clock runs out will take the spot (or potentially will eliminate one or more contestants in a multiplayer runoff, and continue a second runoff between the two remaining, as may be appropriate based on Condorcet count).[/size]
Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.
Ambrose wrote:.
Baski wrote:.
bidofo wrote:.
Blackmill wrote:.
Cavsfansince84 wrote:.
Clyde Frazier wrote:.
Doctor MJ wrote:.
DQuinn1575 wrote:.
Dr Positivity wrote:.
drza wrote:.
Dutchball97 wrote:.
Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.
eminence wrote:.
Franco wrote:.
Gregoire wrote:.
Hal14 wrote:.
HeartBreakKid wrote:.
Hornet Mania wrote:.
Jaivl wrote:.
Joao Saraiva wrote:.
Joey Wheeler wrote:.
Jordan Syndrome wrote:.
LA Bird wrote:.
lebron3-14-3 wrote:.
limbo wrote:.
Magic Is Magic wrote:.
Matzer wrote:.
Moonbeam wrote:.
Odinn21 wrote:.
Owly wrote:.
O_6 wrote:.
PaulieWal wrote:.
penbeast0 wrote:.
PistolPeteJR wrote:.
RSCD3_ wrote:.
[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]
Senior wrote:.
SeniorWalker wrote:.
SHAQ32 wrote:.
Texas Chuck wrote:.
Tim Lehrbach wrote:.
TrueLAfan wrote:.
Whopper_Sr wrote:.
ZeppelinPage wrote:.
2klegend wrote:.
70sFan wrote:.
876Stephen wrote:.
90sAllDecade 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
Again there are a bunch of guys I could support and the last couple of picks and the next several could all be easily swapped around without my feeling someone is out of place. My next guys are Baylor, Frazier, Ewing, Harden, Gervin, Nash, and Wade. Nash created great offenses and there are a lot of strong Nash supporters who don't need me to make his case. Because they are close, I can go with my prejudices a bit and eliminate Harden who is a great offensive player but seems lacking on the defensive and leadership ends of the spectrum. Gervin is weak in both defense and playmaking though his teams do reasonably well considering the talent around him. Baylor and Wade are incredible players individually but seemed to have some issues with health and inconsistency. This leaves me with Ewing and Frazier -- both great defensively, both very good offensively, both strong leaders. Frazier's case would be based on his great playoff performances, particularly in the finals. Like Hakeem or Jordan, he stepped up his game on the biggest stage. Ewing, on the other hand, has a long prime as a great player and is a center in an era where center is still influencing more plays than any other position. If I was starting a team and could pick one of these guys to start it with, it would be Ewing so I will go with that.
1. Patrick Ewing 2. Steve Nash 3. Walt Frazier
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
So glad Stockton is in. He deserves to be at least in the top 30 players of all time.
On to this one and I'm thinking about Wade, Nash and Walt Frazier. Will cast it later.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
In the last peaks project Wade came in at #16, and in the last top 100 project he was 22 -- it seems strange that somebody this good hasn't gotten in yet, he is just better than any body left, and IMO better than the last few spots that have been filled before him. His longevity isn't as bad as some have made out. There seems to have been a strange backlash against him in this project because somehow his '06 title was not indicative of how good he was, that if he hadn't won the title his career would be seen differently. Well I can say the same thing about Dirk. The question is, did that title make us see them more clearly or did it give them some undeserved respect? In Wade's case, just as much as Dirk's, the answer is absolutely and unequivocally that it helped us see what an incredible player he was. And that is not considered by most to be his peak year, many consider that he was better '09 and '10.
There is a reason he was so hard to stop in the playoffs, and the answer is that he was incredibly unpredictable. Go back and watch highlights of prime Wade. You know he is going to attack the basket -- but the ways he could get there, the angles he could get a shot off, THAT was impossible to predict. Add to that he was a reliable shooter, from anywhere inside the arc. There is a reason that he routinely ripped to shreds elite defenses in the postseason -- plan as much as you might, you could never plan enough. He was similar to Kobe, Lebron, and Jordan in that respect.
The He didn't have a good 3 pt shot --that was the one weakness that he had. Although, to be fair to him, Spoelstra talked about how early on they basically told Wade not to bother shooting threes. No doubt that would not happen today, so this was largely a product of his era. His low 3pt shooting % is not indicative of what he could have done, as a lot of his attempts were end of shot clock attempts.It's also evidenced by the fact that he was a reliable mid range shooter. And, speaking about the playoffs, his 3pt% in the playoffs is actually pretty decent.
I'll also just include my write up from a previous round as well, because he should be in by now:
Spoiler:
Wade I think is not getting enough traction as I think he should. His peak was all time level, with the ability to raise his game in big moments like few players could. His ability to get to the rim in the half court is possibly second to none, and he did it for most of his prime in an era and on a team with no spacing and heavily congested paint. It's annoying to say a player from the past would be better today, but in Wade's case, he really would have a field day with the amount of spacing at the rim today. Which is why it's a shame a lot of people think he wouldn't be great today because he hardly shot 3s. And why it's also unfair to compare %FG at the rim with modern players -- very likely Wade's TS% and FG% would be higher if he played today.
I don't understand the point some have made that his success in '06 somehow taints the perception of him or gives him credit he didn't deserve, as Doctor MJ suggested. Dirk's ring in '11 might have made people realize how good he was, but that doesn't mean that ring gave him credit he didn't deserve. Especially since it's arguable Wade's '06 finals may not even be his best playoff series. A player doesn't rise to that occasion and take that kind of pressure down 2 games to none because of some fluke. He was an all time resilient playoff performer, which isn't reflected in his career stats because he made deep playoff runs when he was past his prime and injured alongside Lebron.
He is getting unfairly criticized for not leading all time offenses, when it is clear he has been on defensive minded teams his whole career, has never had a team that was catered to his offensive capabilities. Comparing the success of his offense with more modern players like Harden or Curry, who have had teams molded around their talents, is just not the right way to think of him. Had he played on teams like Harden, Curry, or Lebron in the second half of his career, there is every reason to think that his combination of attacking and passing would produce excellent offenses. Other underrated aspects of Wade's career is that he was much more portable than he is given credit for. Spoelstra called Wade a chameleon because of his ability to play any role he was asked. And it's surprising to me that more people don't recognize that he probably played more roles throughout his career than any other superstar -- he played the Kobe role of playing alongside a big man in Shaq (and throughout his career he played very well alongside a traditional big man), floor raiser on a trash team, and, what was perhaps the hardest thing of all, completely changed his game to play alongside Lebron, who occupied the exact space Wade was used to occupying. when Wade was healthy, that pairing was all time great -- think of mid season 2012 and mid-season 2013, when Wade was still healthy and close to prime. It's a shame people only remember injured Wade in the later playoffs, who didn't quite work well with Lebron because of those injuries (not because he couldn't adapt). Despite the lack of a 3 point shot, he had a very good off-ball game because of his slashing and his ability to "ghost" his defenders by catching them ball watching.
What is bad about him is his longevity and lack of a 3 point shot -- although his percentage was not indicative of his skill -- most of his 3 pt attempts were end of shot clock and he played in an era where he was told not to even bother with it.
His defense was also a very strong point but I won't get into that now so I can say something about CP3 and Curry.
James Harden
I don't think Harden is getting a lot of traction now so I'll keep this short, but he is incredibly skilled, incredibly smart, and he knows how to effectively and efficiently score. Never seen a player who can use the rules the way he does, love it or hate it, he's good.
Although I'm voting for him second here to me it is a clear drop off from my #1 vote in Wade, and my concern with Harden is 1) his huge scoring and assists are partly to do with the role D'Antoni has asked that he play, 2) defense has been a problem (although later he became a pretty good post defender), 3) Not a good off-ball player, and 4) he's had some struggles in the playoffs. One of the reason I think he has a struggled in the playoffs is that his offense is a little predicable. That is, pull up his shot chart for any prime year, and you'll see that his shots are almost all at the 3 point line or at the rim -- the most efficient shots. This produces, in my opinion, extremely efficient offenses, of course, but also makes it a little more predictable and easier to stop in the playoffs.
Steve Nash
As with Harden, he could produce some of the best offenses. One of the best passers ever, and could step up as a scorer when needed. As with Harden, I don't know what to do with the fact that he really took off under D'Antoni's system. I'm not at all impressed with Dallas Nash. Also, if I'm docking Harden for his defense, well Nash was even less useful on that end.
Same response as last time as it's a little embarrassing to see John Stockton so high
Voting for the #27 spot:
1. James Harden 2. Scottie Pippen 3. Steve Nash
1. Harden dropped 36 ppg in the modern era! He also accumulated three scoring titles, an MVP, and an assist title. Very few have won both an assist and scoring title in their NBA career. Not to mention he is an 8x all-star, but the thing holding him back the most is lack of Finals appearances and rings. He only has 1 Finals appearance, although I feel if CP3 didn't get hurt in 2018 playoffs then Harden most likely wins his first title and possibly the FMVP. I can't count LeBron out completely in 2018 but if Chris Paul doesn't get hurt in 2018 then Harden likely wins his 1st ring (finally). Harden also has 6x all NBA 1st teams (more than some guys voted before him such as: Barkley, Erving, Dirk, KG, Moses, Robinson, Russell, & Curry/Wade/Nash/Pippen [if people are voting them in]).
2. Talk about a true swiss army knife of basketball. The ultimate #2 option for a vast number of reasons. Capable of 20 ppg, a great rebounder, the team's playmaker (assist leader), the team's defensive anchor, and ultimate glue guy. His peak was 3rd in MVP voting (1994) so that matches Wade's best MVP run, but Pippen also has the 6 rings to Wade's 3. Additionally, Pippen's 8x all Defensive 1st teams is the second most all time and his 10 overall selections is 5th most in NBA HISTORY. He also has 3x 1st team all NBA selections, which is more 1st team all NBAs than: Wade, Stockton, Nash, Payton (2). Lastly, his ability to take a 57 win team after losing the greatest player in the world for lowly Pete Myers and only dropping off by 2 wins (to 55) was beyond incredible. I feel Pippen could have won a championship that year if he had someone good (but did not need Jordan) to win it. With a lesser talent than MJ he would have won, with someone like Reggie or Mitch Richmond could have been enough for Pippen to win that year. Pippen also won over 30 playoff series which is good for 5th all time (if I'm not mistaken). Big time winner, big time longevity.
3. Winning a RS MVP is the toughest, most prestigious award you could win in NBA history. And Nash has TWO of them. Back-to-back even. His 7x All-NBA selections is not great but winning 5 assist titles sure is, and not even Magic (4) or Kidd (5) or CP3 (4) have more than Nash. In fact, only 3 guys in NBA history have had more assist titles than Nash (Robertson, Cousy, and Stockton). And not that Nash was an amazing scorer, but he sure as hell could run an offense and he could run it efficiently! He is a member of the 50-40-90 club (50% fg, 40% 3p, 90% ft) along with 8 other players. The craziest part is that he has done with 4x for the most all time.
Since the visual in the #26 is just screwed, I’ll voice my object in here as well. I object to extending the voting process for further which got 2 votes later on.
Odinn21 wrote:What makes me uncomfortable that my on time vote was an actual factor since it was such a close result and it became a non-factor after an overtime we never had before (to this extent) with late votes. I think it’s natural that I’m upset with it. I know that those two votes came from very respectable posters on here. It doesn’t mean that I should overlook the fact that results were not dictated by ghost / on time votes and were dictated by (very) late votes.
Odinn21 wrote:So, it's OK to be this late in a project / thread that's been going on for days and I didn't see "if any objections for 3 hours". I'm still not those votes level late. I object.
The issue with per75 numbers; 36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins? The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine. Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
I am here for the process and the experience--the results are fodder for me. I didn't have Stockton in the same tier of player as Nash--I still don't. What I do have is a better understanding of Stockton's game and a fundamental understanding of his CORP and a better idea of who was as a player--thanks in large part to Colts and Trex.
I'm ready for Wade v Roe..I mean Nash--I have these guys very close.
Since Wade's lack of longevity is still such an issue for some, let's take a look at Nash's.
Wade career minutes: the 70th most minutes in history at 35775 Nash Career minutes: the 50th most minutes in history at 38069
Wade career playoff minutes: 19th with 6697 Nash career playoff minutes: 66th with 4289
Wade's career PER average: ranked 22nd in history 23.48 Nash's career PER average: ranked 79th at 19.95
Wade's career playoff PER average: ranked 25th at 22.37 Nash's career playoff PER average: ranked 53rd at 19.84
Curry who was voted ahead, has almost 12000 less regular season minutes than Wade
Wade's career total in VORP is 62.8(25h all time), Nash's is 48.23(37th ranked)
Curry's VORP was 50.74(33rd ranked)
Nash's career BPM is 3.02(ranked 65th)
Wade's career BPM is 4.98(ranked 23rd)
It's just box score stuff but you should get the point, if Wade's last few seasons were so detrimental to his career value, then why does he still manage to rank in the top 25 in career PER, BPM, career playoff PER and 26th in playoff BPM while Nash doesn't come close to those marks?
If Dallas Nash adds so much value I'd like to know why he looked mediocre by RAPM, judging by that he wasn't even close to superstar level.
The Dallas Mavericks in 05 without Nash, jumped 6 wins from the prior season, ortg may have dropped from 1st to 4th(still elite), but jumped from 26th to 9th in DRTG. SRS jumped from 4.86 to 5.86. How'd they get better swapping out Nash, Jamison and Antoine Walker for Jason Terry, Stackhouse and Erick Dampier if Nash was such a high impact player already?
Magic Is Magic wrote:I am a little embarrassed to see that John Stockton was ranked 26th to be honest.
0 MVPs 0 Rings 0 All Defensive 1st team 2 All NBA 1st team 0 RS WS/48 > .250 0 PO WS/48 > .250 2 Finals
He had amazing longevity, no doubt about it, but that's about it. He does not stack up to everyone else on the top 30 list and he has no reason to be there. But anyway, I digress...
Voting for the #27 SPOT is up next.
These seem like arbitrary and somewhat inconsistent benchmarks for you to bring up considering your vote for Nash over Wade.
Going by this criteria only:
MVPS- Nash 2, Wade 0(FMVP) Rings- Nash 0, Wade 3 Defensive 1st team- both have 0 but Wade has 3 on the 2nd team 1st teams: Nash 3, Wade 2 RS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher PS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher Finals: Nash 0, Wade 5
Wade generally fares better judging by these type of measures.
Magic Is Magic wrote:I am a little embarrassed to see that John Stockton was ranked 26th to be honest.
0 MVPs 0 Rings 0 All Defensive 1st team 2 All NBA 1st team 0 RS WS/48 > .250 0 PO WS/48 > .250 2 Finals
He had amazing longevity, no doubt about it, but that's about it. He does not stack up to everyone else on the top 30 list and he has no reason to be there. But anyway, I digress...
Voting for the #27 SPOT is up next.
These seem like arbitrary and somewhat inconsistent benchmarks for you to bring up considering your vote for Nash over Wade.
Going by this criteria only:
MVPS- Nash 2, Wade 0(FMVP) Rings- Nash 0, Wade 3 Defensive 1st team- both have 0 but Wade has 3 on the 2nd team 1st teams: Nash 3, Wade 2 RS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher PS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher Finals: Nash 0, Wade 5
Wade generally fares better judging by these type of measures.
So then Wade > Nash > Stockton? Either way you're proving my point. Stockton doesn't measure up but to each their own.
My apologies to anyone unhappy with how a spot was awarded to one player or another. There are circumstances that we did not anticipate, or at least anticipate the extent to which a flow-chart diagram of protocol would be required to avoid confusion and keep people [relatively] happy (but I'll add that below).
And of course, once we hit a snag [with no such flow-chart yet in existence], as the chair of the project I'm screwed: there is not a decision I can make that will keep everyone happy.
If I'd called the result in favour of Wade based a slim margin in a ballot system [which we had specifically opted against at the initiation of the project], I'm sure some people would have grumbled about "corrupting" our chosen voting system, and/or perhaps one of the posters I was waiting on would show up just after the fact and say they'd have picked Stockton.......and the result would have soured. And then maybe LA Bird and Cavsfansince84 come in and state they'd have picked Stockton, too......and the result is further soured.
If I'd said "no, we're just gonna wait out the two of the original 16 votes to see who they pick" [for who knows how long, in a project scheduled to last 8-9 months already], Odinn21 you still probably would have protested that I should just call it for Wade on the basis of a narrow ballot system lead. Or perhaps others [like LA Bird or Cavsfansince84] would have shown up and felt a little ostracized that they weren't allowed to have a voice to **break a deadlock (which is, after all, what would happen in a runoff anyway).
I literally have no road that keeps everyone happy.
**fwiw, the reason we have a schedule and deadline on the vote in the first place, and generally exclude late-comers [even if it would change the outcome] is to keep the project moving. It could be their vote(s) would have turned it to a different outcome; but if the spot was already decided, and we'd already moved on......then we've moved on. That hadn't happened in the last thread: at the time the late-comers came, we were still deadlocked. Given the list is supposed to be a reflection of the forum/panel consensus (and these were posters who had been participating), it seemed reasonable to use their votes to break a deadlock.
I'm learning as we go. Moving forward, I want to make sure everyone knows EXACTLY what to expect in a future situation [contentious vote] like this; so below is a flow-chart (which is consistent with precedent that has already occurred in this project):
1) ranked vote system (RVS) like we've been doing with three ordered picks. If a majority or default victory is NOT obtained by a single player with this method.....
2) ....we go to Condorcet method [among the "finalists"] of the original counted voters [which is a very natural "continuation" of a RVS, given the entire point of the RVS is to better ensure everyone gets a counted vote] to determine a winner. BUT we will wait no longer than 24 hours after the original deadline to hear from everyone (and there's no mystery to figuring if you're one of the people I need to hear from: it's easy enough for any of you to tell without my asking each of you [if two or more of the three "finalists" were not on your original vote post, I don't know what your position is on them]).
IF the Condorcet method yields a tie OR I do not hear from every original voter wrt his player hierarchy within 24 hours of the original deadline and the tabulated Condorcet results still indicate undecided (i.e. that it could go either way if all votes were in).....
3) .....we will go to a "sudden death" runoff, wherein the first finalist to receive [at least] TWO new votes [which can come from one of the original Condorcet hold-outs] AND be in the lead by Condorcet method (including BOTH original voters and runoff voters) will be awarded the spot.
I'm copying that to the project main thread, too.
ANTICIPATING where things are heading specifically in this thread, I'll state this [to hopefully save time]: regardless of who your three picks are, I think it would be wise to declare CLEARLY AND WITHIN YOUR SAME VOTE POST who your pick would be between Steve Nash and Dwyane Wade.
Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.
Ambrose wrote:.
Baski wrote:.
bidofo wrote:.
Blackmill wrote:.
Cavsfansince84 wrote:.
Clyde Frazier wrote:.
Doctor MJ wrote:.
DQuinn1575 wrote:.
Dr Positivity wrote:.
drza wrote:.
Dutchball97 wrote:.
Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.
eminence wrote:.
Franco wrote:.
Gregoire wrote:.
Hal14 wrote:.
HeartBreakKid wrote:.
Hornet Mania wrote:.
Jaivl wrote:.
Joao Saraiva wrote:.
Joey Wheeler wrote:.
Jordan Syndrome wrote:.
LA Bird wrote:.
lebron3-14-3 wrote:.
limbo wrote:.
Magic Is Magic wrote:.
Matzer wrote:.
Moonbeam wrote:.
Odinn21 wrote:.
Owly wrote:.
O_6 wrote:.
PaulieWal wrote:.
penbeast0 wrote:.
PistolPeteJR wrote:.
RSCD3_ wrote:.
[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]
Senior wrote:.
SeniorWalker wrote:.
SHAQ32 wrote:.
Texas Chuck wrote:.
Tim Lehrbach wrote:.
TrueLAfan wrote:.
Whopper_Sr wrote:.
ZeppelinPage wrote:.
2klegend wrote:.
70sFan wrote:.
876Stephen wrote:.
90sAllDecade 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
I had a PM in my outbox for 15 minutes to reach you. If you went with the 16 votes on time, I wouldn’t object. The deciding votes got to be extremely late and I got to object for 3 hours and didn’t see that post of you. Those two votes didn’t come out right away when you stated we need tiebreakers. That was an overtime we never had before. To me, personally, #26 should have been Wade because he had minor but some advantages over Stockton in votes on time and #27 should have been between Stockton and Nash.
But like I said in the pm, I know that it’s not easy for you and even though it’ll be my biggest disagreement in here by far, if your decision is to carry on, I can’t do anything but respect it. Cheers.
The issue with per75 numbers; 36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins? The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine. Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
1. Steve Nash -12 year prime where his teams were top 6 in ORtg 10x and top 4 8x -led league in apg 5x and ast% 5x -top 10 in mvp voting 6x, 2x winner -very durable on top of having a long prime, averaging 76g per year during 12 year prime -fair amount of playoff success(4x wcf) with Nash playing very well in those runs. Efficiency tended to hold up well. -very efficient scorer with career ts add of 2127 and 3 straight years over 200 during peak years
2. John Havlicek -11x all nba 1st or 2nd team(4 1st) -7x all nba defense(5 1st) and played 6 years before those were created -7x top 10 in mvp voting -8x champ and 1 fmvp(strong case in 69 as well averaging 28.1/11.0/4.4 on 52% ts) -led 3 title teams in playoff scoring, assists and win shares(68, 69 and 74) -great all around skills(led Celtics in scoring 7x, apg 7x, win shares 6x) -great chemistry/leadership/hustle guy
3. Dwyane Wade -this pick came down to 4-5 guys for me and it goes to Wade because I think his top 4-5 years are clearly the best out of the bunch. Plus his ability to carry teams both in the rs and ps which won him a ring in 06 and also his ability to play along as the #2 on two more title teams. I don't think anyone else can quite match his overall resume of remaining players(minus the two I have above him) -8x all nba(2 1st, 3 2nd) -3x all nba defense 2nd team -7x top 10 in mvp voting -25th in career vorp -incredible combination of strength, explosiveness and shot creation for a sg -5 years with a ts add over 100 during prime as a volume scorer -great 8 year prime where I would argue he was a top 5 player in the league for most of it(top 4 in bpm 6 times)
Magic Is Magic wrote:I am a little embarrassed to see that John Stockton was ranked 26th to be honest.
0 MVPs 0 Rings 0 All Defensive 1st team 2 All NBA 1st team 0 RS WS/48 > .250 0 PO WS/48 > .250 2 Finals
He had amazing longevity, no doubt about it, but that's about it. He does not stack up to everyone else on the top 30 list and he has no reason to be there. But anyway, I digress...
Voting for the #27 SPOT is up next.
These seem like arbitrary and somewhat inconsistent benchmarks for you to bring up considering your vote for Nash over Wade.
Going by this criteria only:
MVPS- Nash 2, Wade 0(FMVP) Rings- Nash 0, Wade 3 Defensive 1st team- both have 0 but Wade has 3 on the 2nd team 1st teams: Nash 3, Wade 2 RS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher PS WS/48: Nash 0, Wade 0 though Wade peaks higher Finals: Nash 0, Wade 5
Wade generally fares better judging by these type of measures.
So then Wade > Nash > Stockton? Either way you're proving my point. Stockton doesn't measure up but to each their own.
I’m not saying Win Shares are the end-all, be-all, but we have a very large sample size of postseasons of these three players. This specific metric shows that Stockton and Wade were consistently higher postseason performers than Nash. They are on one level, and Nash is on another entirely.
Again, this is only one metric. But it is one you chose.
After Nash and Wade, I don't see a clear candidate. However, Miller was mentioned before and his case looks pretty good too. Miller is the greatest player of his archetype (off-ball savant with elite shooting) and upped his production in the PS. He wasn't afraid to apply rim pressure either (high FTr) and was just a headache to keep track for the defending team. His skill set allowed him to maintain his impact well into his late 30s as well.
Harden and Ewing (two other guys I considered) are better individual players but Miller's longevity and PS impact edge them out for me.
I think some people are sleeping on Patrick Ewing's defensive impact. Yes, he was one of the better offensive players when he was playing with consistent 20 ppg performances with good efficiency and good range for a center in that era but that wasn't his primary value. Like most great centers, his primary value was defensive. When the Knicks were good, they did it mainly with defense (and cheap shots!), and had a couple of defenses in that time that were among the greatest statistical defenses of all time. That defense (and their offense) were built around Ewing.
Very willing to be talked out of it (voting for one Knick is bad enough, two . . . bleech!) but you are going to have to convince me anyone left dominated his era to the degree Ewing did.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0 wrote:I think some people are sleeping on Patrick Ewing's defensive impact. Yes, he was one of the better offensive players when he was playing with consistent 20 ppg performances with good efficiency and good range for a center in that era but that wasn't his primary value. Like most great centers, his primary value was defensive. When the Knicks were good, they did it mainly with defense (and cheap shots!), and had a couple of defenses in that time that were among the greatest statistical defenses of all time. That defense (and their offense) were built around Ewing. Very willing to be talked out of it (voting for one Knick is bad enough, two . . . bleech!) but you are going to have to convince me anyone left dominated his era to the degree Ewing did.
I would say that Ewing didn't really dominate his era. Only the 1 all nba first team(now granted it was a stacked time for centers and there's only 1 center spot available), 1 finals(where he played pretty bad), sort of inconsistent in the playoffs in general. Both Wade and Hondo who I am voting for I would say dominated in more of a fashion than Ewing did. Watching the Knicks in the 90's I never felt confident they could get it done and maybe the biggest reason i didn't think they could is having Ewing as the primary focal point of the offense especially with a guy like Starks as their #2.
Wade cannot go any lower. This is a guy who was comparable with Kobe and Lebron at his peak. Had one of the best finals performances ever. Had one of the most dominant individual seasons ever. He should have already been voted in.
I'm the only one who has even mentioned Kawhi as up for consideration so far so I'd like to ask people in what range they're thinking of voting for him.
He's 4th in career play-off WS/48 behind MJ, LeBron and Mikan. He's 3rd in career play-off BPM behind MJ and LeBron. Both these stats don't take longevity into account but in terms of WS and VORP in the play-offs he's 24th and 17th respectively as well. Which is better than several players who are already voted in and definitely good enough to complement his insane peak impact considering we're voting for the #27 spot now.
In the regular season he's not as legendary on a per game basis as in the play-offs but he still makes the top 10 for both career WS/48 and BPM once again. However, the main argument against him is his lack of regular season longevity.
When I look at what Kawhi has done in his career I'm looking at a guy who has elite impact in the regular season and somehow manages to step it up even further in the play-offs. Despite not having the best longevity, he more than makes up for it in my eyes with the accumulated play-off stats.
Are you guys just a few spots off for voting him or does his so-so regular season longevity keep you from voting him top 50? I can understand people being a lot lower on him than I am due to the regular season stuff but I'd like to know what I'm up against here. Don't want to vote for him for like 30 spots straight, while feeling like nobody is listening to my arguments like how I felt when I voted KD/Curry for like 10 spots straight, while things went more and more antagonistic as time went on.
1. Dwyane Wade: All-time Finals performance in 2006, all-time statistical single seasons in 2009 and 2010, outplayed LeBron on the same team in 2011, rings in 2012 and 2013. Elite scorer, great passer, great defender, great rebounder. Definitely seems like at least a top 20 player all-time IMO.
2. Kawhi Leonard: Had three seasons in a row of playoff numbers only matched for one season by LeBron James and Michael Jordan. Also won DPOY in back-to-back seasons. Longevity's the one weakness but has a playoff peak that's unprecedented by all but the very very greatest of all-time.
3. Anthony Davis: 3rd all-time in PER, tied for 3rd all-time in postseason PER, elite defender who finished 2nd in DPOY last season, incredible postseason in 2020 where he won the title as a near equal to LeBron James
