RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #28 (Dwyane Wade)

[penbeast0]

I think I have Havlicek a bit lower than many here. Loved him but inefficient scorer for 1st half of his career, good but not great defender and playmaker as a wing so I have him below the Baylor, Pippen level. Barry is a tough one for me because he comes across as such a jerk but you have that magical 1975 season. Gervin is the best scorer of the bunch, Miller second but they are more one dimensional.

Baylor
Pippen

Gervin
Miller
or
Havlicek
Drexler

Barry
Pierce

[70sFan]

I think I have Havlicek a bit lower than many here. Loved him but inefficient scorer for 1st half of his career, good but not great defender and playmaker as a wing so I have him below the Baylor, Pippen level.

Pippen wasn't more efficient scorer than Hondo career-wise though.

I have Pippen as a lesser scorer than 70s Havlicek (pre-65 Havlicek is another thing), but I have him as a more impactful defender and playmaker as well as a better rebounder as well as playing in a tougher era so I have him higher than Havlicek. Havlicek had better range and moved better off ball, Pippen was a more impressive finisher.

[Cavsfansince84]

I think I have Havlicek a bit lower than many here. Loved him but inefficient scorer for 1st half of his career, good but not great defender and playmaker as a wing so I have him below the Baylor, Pippen level.

Pippen wasn't more efficient scorer than Hondo career-wise though.

I have Pippen as a lesser scorer than 70s Havlicek (pre-65 Havlicek is another thing), but I have him as a more impactful defender and playmaker as well as a better rebounder as well as playing in a tougher era so I have him higher than Havlicek. Havlicek had better range and moved better off ball, Pippen was a more impressive finisher.

I can agree with this but Hondo also proved himself as a volume scorer on teams that won rings. Like I said above, he led 3 title teams in ppg, apg and win shares during their playoff runs and his playoff numbers in general all went up during that 68-74 period. In essence, imo he proved he could be the alpha/best player on a title team in a way that Pippen never did. That's why I have him over Pippen on my ballot. To me that has to count for something and is why Pippen is always seen as a #2 while Hondo I think belongs in the group of guys who got it done as a #1. Plus he has pretty great longevity as well.

[penbeast0]

I always thought of Cowens as the main main on those Celtics teams even though he wasn't the high scorer; Havlicek as the #2. I think Cowens ends up being a lot stronger on MVP voting too if I remember.

But then my first impressions often change as I read people's arguments and go . . mmm, yeah, that's right! (or . . . What? Seriously? Sheesh.) So, I may end up voting him above Pippen after all.

[70sFan]

I always thought of Cowens as the main main on those Celtics teams even though he wasn't the high scorer; Havlicek as the #2. I think Cowens ends up being a lot stronger on MVP voting too if I remember.

But then my first impressions often change as I read people's arguments and go . . mmm, yeah, that's right! (or . . . What? Seriously? Sheesh.) So, I may end up voting him above Pippen after all.

I think it's closer between Cowens and Havlicek than people wanted to admit back then. Boston wanted another Bill Russell in Celtics, so they decided that Cowens was their man when he grew up to that role.

I think that Havlicek was inarguably better and more impactful on offense, but it's true that Cowens was the better defender. The thing is that once Hondo led decent offensive teams in 1972-75 period and once he declined, their offense collapsed.

[DQuinn1575]

I always thought of Cowens as the main main on those Celtics teams even though he wasn't the high scorer; Havlicek as the #2. I think Cowens ends up being a lot stronger on MVP voting too if I remember.

But then my first impressions often change as I read people's arguments and go . . mmm, yeah, that's right! (or . . . What? Seriously? Sheesh.) So, I may end up voting him above Pippen after all.

I think it's closer between Cowens and Havlicek than people wanted to admit back then. Boston wanted another Bill Russell in Celtics, so they decided that Cowens was their man when he grew up to that role.

I think that Havlicek was inarguably better and more impactful on offense, but it's true that Cowens was the better defender. The thing is that once Hondo led decent offensive teams in 1972-75 period and once he declined, their offense collapsed.

Havlicek led world champs in playoff win shares in 68,69, and 74. Pretty sure no one left can match that

[Cavsfansince84]

I always thought of Cowens as the main main on those Celtics teams even though he wasn't the high scorer; Havlicek as the #2. I think Cowens ends up being a lot stronger on MVP voting too if I remember.

But then my first impressions often change as I read people's arguments and go . . mmm, yeah, that's right! (or . . . What? Seriously? Sheesh.) So, I may end up voting him above Pippen after all.

My own sense is that Cowens impact may be overstated a bit due to the Celtics going from missing the playoffs to becoming contenders again in the 72-77 period as Cowens was drafted and became a star player. Plus obviously he won the mvp in their 68 win season so I think it kind of grew out of that.

[Owly]

I always thought of Cowens as the main main on those Celtics teams even though he wasn't the high scorer; Havlicek as the #2. I think Cowens ends up being a lot stronger on MVP voting too if I remember.

But then my first impressions often change as I read people's arguments and go . . mmm, yeah, that's right! (or . . . What? Seriously? Sheesh.) So, I may end up voting him above Pippen after all.

I think it's closer between Cowens and Havlicek than people wanted to admit back then. Boston wanted another Bill Russell in Celtics, so they decided that Cowens was their man when he grew up to that role.

I think that Havlicek was inarguably better and more impactful on offense, but it's true that Cowens was the better defender. The thing is that once Hondo led decent offensive teams in 1972-75 period and once he declined, their offense collapsed.

To say it collapsed seems to overstate how good it ever was. The +2.3 in '75 was an outlier.

The efg% was only ever ... competent in '75 too, it's the offensive glass, where they shined more on that end.
The efg% did fall off in '76 but that seems as much about Nelson's huge drop and swapping Westphal for Scott as any Havlicek drop-off (TS% and TS-add slightly up in '76 - though his assists come down).


Also fwiw, a lot of Boston didn't want another Russell which played well for Cowens and Hondo. The fiery, white Cowens was a more acceptable, promotable, relatable face (with Hondo) of the team.

[Doctor MJ]

I'm really interested in Miller vs Drexler vs Gervin vs Pippen vs Barry vs Havlicek vs Pierce vs Allen vs Baylor when ranking wings.

This is a territory I always find challenging. Some thoughts on some subsets of comparisons:

Miller/Allen-types vs Drexler/Gervin-types: I'm really high on Miller/Allen types. I'm not looking to bash the Drexler/Gervin-types in the broadest sense because that kinda includes Jordan, but I think that these off-ball shooters are in the process of revolutionizing the NBA in a way they frankly could not before the 3 became prominent enough. My instinct is to put Miller ahead of Drexler/Gervin, and I may do so with Allen as well.

Miller vs Allen. While Allen is more proven in the more classic on-ball alpha role and I appreciate the versatility, it's his ability to thrive off-ball that really excites me. And on that front, I find Miller to be the more aggressive and more savvy player.

Pippen vs Havlicek. I just had Pippen #3 on my last vote but I have to say when I recall this comparison the argument for Pippen becomes tough. Seems like Pippen should have been able to stay relevant longer, and of course, Havlicek's longevity of relevance is legendary.

Barry vs Havlicek. While Havlicek has the longevity and versatility edge here, I find Barry to be the more impressive player and his longevity for his era is quite solid. It's interesting to note that the best NBA ORtg of the '70s came on the '79 Rockets with 34 year old Barry's arrival. So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Where I struggle with Barry is that I really think he should have been more efficient. Yes, he was above average in efficiency for his era, while Havlicek was not, but he seems like a guy with enough of a BBIQ to recognize when a better shot is available for a teammate in the same way Oscar/West did, but he jacked the shots anyway.

Pierce vs Allen. Intriguing because of their joint success. I've always given Pierce the nod despite a preference for Allen because frankly, the fact that Allen joined Pierce's team and Pierce seemed to have a more valuable role on that team feels like it should be the tiebreaker. I'm open to being swayed though. When I think about who I'd rather draft, I tend to focus more on Allen.

Baylor. As I've said, I'm trying to be positive right now and I'm on record for really being bothered by Baylor's efficiency. I think it's best if I abstain here from too much discussion, but I will say that among his contemporaries I would vote for the Frazier/Barry/Havlicek trio in some order over Baylor.

[Doctor MJ]

Re: Cowens and the comparison with Havlicek.

I do tend to side with contemporary observers when considering which teammate was more valuable unless I feel I see a clear cut mistake in their assessment. I don't see that here. I can see the argument that Havlicek may have been more valuable than Cowens, but the argument for Cowens over Havlicek is also clear, and Cowens was the guy who got the MVP despite the fact I'm pretty dang sure there was a pull to heap honors on the old savvy veteran from the Russell dynasty.

And if I thought high enough about Cowens in more absolute comparisons quite frankly I might give him the overall career edge over Havlicek despite Havlicek's longevity.

But while I respect the shape of Cowens game immensely - super-motor, savvy instincts, able to defend on the interior, able to space the floor to a degree on offense - it would be easier for me to take him seriously as a true MVP-level player if he were efficient with his scoring, which he was not. In general, it's kind of weird to me the way Celtics' volume scorers in the '70s continued to be inefficient, along with the fact that the Celtics seemed to not see the potential in Paul Westphal, who when he left the Celtics would immediately prove to be a better scorer than anyone on the Celtics.

It feels like they were thinking that because it "was working" in the sense of winning games, that there was no point in re-thinking their offensive approach. And yes, the offense relative to the league wasn't actually bad, but their approach statistically basically looks like 1) give it to Havlicek & Cowens to take a bad shot, 2) get the offensive rebound and score. And while I credit Havlicek & Cowens for their leading parts it leading the team to a championship, it does strike me as a clear cut historical case of "could have done better". I can say this about a ton of stuff from previous eras, but it's hard for me to go overboard praising Cowens for his range and ability to stretch the defense when he wasn't actually shooting that great.

This all leaves me in a position where I keep Havlicek well above Cowens, and among contemporaries would be inclined to rank Wes Unseld over Cowens too. Unseld's not going to be your scoring alpha, but he knows this, he's going to be playing the same role he has since high school and he's going to do so with a tight game that adds all sorts of positives like Cowens without taking anything off the table.

[Jordan Syndrome]

I'm really interested in Miller vs Drexler vs Gervin vs Pippen vs Barry vs Havlicek vs Pierce vs Allen vs Baylor when ranking wings.

This is a territory I always find challenging. Some thoughts on some subsets of comparisons:

Miller/Allen-types vs Drexler/Gervin-types: I'm really high on Miller/Allen types. I'm not looking to bash the Drexler/Gervin-types in the broadest sense because that kinda includes Jordan, but I think that these off-ball shooters are in the process of revolutionizing the NBA in a way they frankly could not before the 3 became prominent enough. My instinct is to put Miller ahead of Drexler/Gervin, and I may do so with Allen as well.

Miller vs Allen. While Allen is more proven in the more classic on-ball alpha role and I appreciate the versatility, it's his ability to thrive off-ball that really excites me. And on that front, I find Miller to be the more aggressive and more savvy player.

Pippen vs Havlicek. I just had Pippen #3 on my last vote but I have to say when I recall this comparison the argument for Pippen becomes tough. Seems like Pippen should have been able to stay relevant longer, and of course, Havlicek's longevity of relevance is legendary.

Barry vs Havlicek. While Havlicek has the longevity and versatility edge here, I find Barry to be the more impressive player and his longevity for his era is quite solid. It's interesting to note that the best NBA ORtg of the '70s came on the '79 Rockets with 34 year old Barry's arrival. So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Where I struggle with Barry is that I really think he should have been more efficient. Yes, he was above average in efficiency for his era, while Havlicek was not, but he seems like a guy with enough of a BBIQ to recognize when a better shot is available for a teammate in the same way Oscar/West did, but he jacked the shots anyway.

Pierce vs Allen. Intriguing because of their joint success. I've always given Pierce the nod despite a preference for Allen because frankly, the fact that Allen joined Pierce's team and Pierce seemed to have a more valuable role on that team feels like it should be the tiebreaker. I'm open to being swayed though. When I think about who I'd rather draft, I tend to focus more on Allen.

Baylor. As I've said, I'm trying to be positive right now and I'm on record for really being bothered by Baylor's efficiency. I think it's best if I abstain here from too much discussion, but I will say that among his contemporaries I would vote for the Frazier/Barry/Havlicek trio in some order over Baylor.

The best way I have approached the comparison is breaking them into archetypes and make comparisons from there.

Barry vs Pierce
Miller vs Allen
Drexler vs Gervin
Havlicek vs Pippen

Bolded are players I have ranked higher.

[70sFan]

Miller/Allen-types vs Drexler/Gervin-types: I'm really high on Miller/Allen types. I'm not looking to bash the Drexler/Gervin-types in the broadest sense because that kinda includes Jordan, but I think that these off-ball shooters are in the process of revolutionizing the NBA in a way they frankly could not before the 3 became prominent enough

Gervin was off-ball shooter, he had more in common with Miller/Allen types than Drexler.

[Owly]

So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Hmm ... on Barry's thriving ...

In his first two years ... statistically mostly so (though the Oaks won a title without him for what that's worth) but in that league he was no more dominant in his best statistical year than Hawkins in a much smaller sample -and not too far away from an old man version of Hagan in a small sample - year 2 a similar story with Haywood though the level of competition for the bigs might have been notably lower at that time). And then the numbers are worse in New York and health still isn't perfect (though there is a strong playoff run the last year, fwiw) ...

Put it this way '69-72 Barry numbers are better than Donnie Freeman's ... but by a lot less than you'd like for a player in contention/discussion here (and he's less available, circa 1500 RS minutes less) in prime or prime adjacent years.

Re: lead a team to a championship
I haven't dug too deep but wasn't that title won with defense and then offensive rebounding more than scoring efficiently or turnover economy ... the things a scorer-playmaker might affect. You can make a case for him bootstrapping them to competent (though his best numbers come against the distinctly poor Supersonics) and maybe there's an interpretation that floor raising is, when you happen to have the right defensive cast in a tightly packed era for competition ... well if it ended with a title then it's great. I don't know. Working with very incomplete information (e.g turnovers, game videos etc) of course. Yet I'm more impressed with '76 Warriors with a lesser role for Barry.

That's just me.

[Cavsfansince84]

Barry vs Havlicek. While Havlicek has the longevity and versatility edge here, I find Barry to be the more impressive player and his longevity for his era is quite solid. It's interesting to note that the best NBA ORtg of the '70s came on the '79 Rockets with 34 year old Barry's arrival. So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Where I struggle with Barry is that I really think he should have been more efficient. Yes, he was above average in efficiency for his era, while Havlicek was not, but he seems like a guy with enough of a BBIQ to recognize when a better shot is available for a teammate in the same way Oscar/West did, but he jacked the shots anyway.

I have to say I recently put a lot of thought into Barry v Havlicek and came away with Havlicek being 4-5 spots ahead for a few different reasons. Regarding Barry being more efficient, he had a great ts add from 66-72 at least 124 every year but then became barely above average and a negative from 76 on which isn't bad for a wing volume scorer. Havlicek from 67-76 when he became more of a volume scorer on the Celtics was actually a ts add all but two of those years peaking at +80 so he was actually pretty efficient. The three areas where I give Hondo a strong edge though are defense(I don't know that Barry was bad here but Hondo may very well have made 10 all defensive 1st teams had it been a thing in the 60's), chemistry and longevity but one of the main factors longevity wise working against Rick is he had to sit out 68(which may not really be his fault since he wanted to switch leagues but its still a zero games played for that year) and then the next 3 years he only plays in 35, 52 and 59 games. So we have a 4 year period in the middle of his prime where he only plays in 144 games. So that is why I put Havlicek higher though I would still say I am fairly high on Barry relative to most bb fans. I will probably vote for him fairly soon.

[Doctor MJ]

I wanted to write a short love letter to Wade after arguing against him so much.

I admire Wade as a player and team leader immensely.

I remember Wade's rookie season where he really came on as the year went along. I never seriously questioned whether he should rank ahead of the anointed LeBron/Melo during the season, but it would not be long before I came to the conclusion that Wade was the best player from the legendary 2003 draft through their first 3 NBA season.

The 2004 Olympics are now remember primarily for the US team's failure and rightly so, but one of the most interesting aspects of these national teams is seeing how the expected player ranking on the roster transforms.

The all-time thing here is the dirty secret that Charles Barkley was the best player on the Dream Team, the greatest team ever assembled, rather than Jordan.

I also remember one year where OJ Mayo got cut from the team while Eric Gordan was kept. That was a shock. To that point Mayo was still seen as the better player both in the present and for the future. When he got cut, I remember there being a lot of denial on RealGM. Either it was a mistake, or there was something very strange going on. As we look back it's just clear that Mayo really was never very good.

In 2004 the most noteworthy thing was that Wade got more run than LeBron or Melo, and I've really never seen reason to see that a mistake. (Basing the team offense around Iverson & Marbury on the other hand, HUGE mistake.)

The following year, '04-05, Shaq came to the Heat and the team became a contender. And while Wade had clearly emerged as the lead perimeter player on the team, we all wrote Wade off to some degree because of Shaq. There was a feeling that Shaq's presence was just making guards look like superstars wherever he went as nobody could be that lucky to keep having unexpected guard superstars as teammates, right? Turns out, nope, Shaq was getting incredibly lucky the whole time. Penny, Kobe, Wade - all of them were absolutely legit.

And we really realized that in the 2005 playoffs where Wade carried the team in Shaq's absence. I remember a debate at the time about who the best player in the playoffs was. Most agreed it was between Nash & Wade, which was not what any of us expected going in. I'll own up to giving my unofficial MVP vote to Shaq, rather than Nash, despite defending Nash to the heavens even at the time. I believed in Nash, but I also swallowed the narrative that Shaq was making Wade.

'05-06 comes around and the Heat are now Wade's team, and of course he delivers a championships cementing his legacy for the ages. I voted for Wade for POY in that season back when we did it, and I don't have cause to regret it. That year was always incredibly hard to come up with good rankings and other guys had arguments, but Wade certainly deserved to be in the mix.

The thing that fascinated me at the time about Wade was just how minimalist his game was. In terms of scoring, he was on the opposite end of the spectrum from Kobe. Kobe could hit any kind of shot and specialized in hitting harder shots than anyone else with virtuoso skill. Wade drove to the hoop and either shot or drew a foul, seemingly inevitably ending up with his body on the ground. Wade couldn't do all the things Kobe did, but he had this one thing, and he could do it over and over and over again. Frankly it seemed a lot smarter to me at the time!



Of course, when he started having injury issues, it was hard to see this as anything other than inevitable. I was always grateful that he emerged again a couple years later back roughly to his old self.

I was impressed that he delivered LeBron to Miami. Yes LeBron does what he wants, yes Riles was part of it, yes South Beach was part of it, but fundamentally it was Wade's stature that brought the superteam to Miami.

I was also impressed with the way he took a backseat to LeBron but was ready to take back over when LeBron struggled.

As we look back on the Heatle era, while I'll say things critical due to the fact that they never truly emerged as a "best possible basketball team", they were very successful, and there was a buy-in to culture that started with Wade, which has managed to stick around ever since then. Others deserve credit for this too of course, but I thought it was telling Jimmy Butler talking about the sense of mentorship and empowerment he got from Wade. Very few players continue to have such a prominent place in a franchise after their time as a player is over, but Wade is one of that select few.

[Doctor MJ]

Miller/Allen-types vs Drexler/Gervin-types: I'm really high on Miller/Allen types. I'm not looking to bash the Drexler/Gervin-types in the broadest sense because that kinda includes Jordan, but I think that these off-ball shooters are in the process of revolutionizing the NBA in a way they frankly could not before the 3 became prominent enough

Gervin was off-ball shooter, he had more in common with Miller/Allen types than Drexler.

That's a strange statement to me. I'll grant that you know the '70s better than I do and look forward to what you post further on the subject but:

1. To be the signature Gervin play is the finger roll, which was about him either driving or already being toward the interior.

2. I'll note that Gervin was not shooting 3's. If you want to say he was like Rip Hamilton I'll listen, but I'll also note that you won't find me voting for Rip anywhere in the Top 100. I think the more interesting question here is what Gervin would do if he had been made the 3 a major part of his game given that I think he likely had the shooting ability to do so.

[Doctor MJ]

So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Hmm ... on Barry's thriving ...

In his first two years ... statistically mostly so (though the Oaks won a title without him for what that's worth) but in that league he was no more dominant in his best statistical year than Hawkins in a much smaller sample -and not too far away from an old man version of Hagan in a small sample - year 2 a similar story with Haywood though the level of competition for the bigs might have been notably lower at that time). And then the numbers are worse in New York and health still isn't perfect (though there is a strong playoff run the last year, fwiw) ...

Put it this way '69-72 Barry numbers are better than Donnie Freeman's ... but by a lot less than you'd like for a player in contention/discussion here (and he's less available, circa 1500 RS minutes less) in prime or prime adjacent years.

Re: lead a team to a championship
I haven't dug too deep but wasn't that title won with defense and then offensive rebounding more than scoring efficiently or turnover economy ... the things a scorer-playmaker might affect. You can make a case for him bootstrapping them to competent (though his best numbers come against the distinctly poor Supersonics) and maybe there's an interpretation that floor raising is, when you happen to have the right defensive cast in a tightly packed era for competition ... well if it ended with a title then it's great. I don't know. Working with very incomplete information (e.g turnovers, game videos etc) of course. Yet I'm more impressed with '76 Warriors with a lesser role for Barry.

That's just me.

For the record:

I consider Connie Hawkins a superior player to Barry and every other player Jordan Syndrome put on a list with Barry, and at a certain point I expect to be championing Hawkins while most everyone else in the project says "Ugh, here we go again."

Obviously with Hawkins, longevity is an issue. It's not as glaring as people might think, but it is enough that I wasn't looking to bring him up for a while yet.

Re: Warriors won with defense. Well, they were 2nd in the league in ORtg so it's not like the offense was literally bad, and it really was running through Barry as a playmaker leading the team in assists. My feeling is that while Barry was calling his own number too much, the other players probably weren't really ready at the start to handle more of the decision making load, and their capacity increased with time. I do agree that the team was at its best with Barry shooting a bit less.

I'll also note that on defense, Barry was the guy getting steals. While a ballhawk can do more harm than good, if there's a defense that's working well and that team has a ballhawk, his defense is probably part of what makes the team work. Credit the backline that allowed Barry to gamble, but Barry in '74-75 was playing way more minutes than everyone else so I tend to think that if Barry were doing this really badly the team would be more clearly suffering from it.

[70sFan]

Miller/Allen-types vs Drexler/Gervin-types: I'm really high on Miller/Allen types. I'm not looking to bash the Drexler/Gervin-types in the broadest sense because that kinda includes Jordan, but I think that these off-ball shooters are in the process of revolutionizing the NBA in a way they frankly could not before the 3 became prominent enough

Gervin was off-ball shooter, he had more in common with Miller/Allen types than Drexler.

That's a strange statement to me. I'll grant that you know the '70s better than I do and look forward to what you post further on the subject but:

1. To be the signature Gervin play is the finger roll, which was about him either driving or already being toward the interior.

2. I'll note that Gervin was not shooting 3's. If you want to say he was like Rip Hamilton I'll listen, but I'll also note that you won't find me voting for Rip anywhere in the Top 100. I think the more interesting question here is what Gervin would do if he had been made the 3 a major part of his game given that I think he likely had the shooting ability to do so.

I meant that Gervin wasn't similar to Drexler at all. Sure, he didn't shoot threes but he played mostly off-ball. He was much different than Drexler. When I made my long Gervin video, I was shocked how little Gervin handled the ball for a high scorer:

Watch on YouTube

[Cavsfansince84]

That's a strange statement to me. I'll grant that you know the '70s better than I do and look forward to what you post further on the subject but:

1. To be the signature Gervin play is the finger roll, which was about him either driving or already being toward the interior.

2. I'll note that Gervin was not shooting 3's. If you want to say he was like Rip Hamilton I'll listen, but I'll also note that you won't find me voting for Rip anywhere in the Top 100. I think the more interesting question here is what Gervin would do if he had been made the 3 a major part of his game given that I think he likely had the shooting ability to do so.

I will say that as someone who likes Gervin relative to many other high scoring wings I am impressed with his versatility/skill/size combo. He just seems so good at scoring in so many different ways and being able to do it within the flow of an offense. Basically I think Gervin maybe more so than any other high scoring wing except perhaps MJ and West would excel in any era and compliment a team's offense. I also like that he seems to be a pretty easy going guy which isn't much on the surface but personality conflicts have brought down many good to great teams over the years including I would say GS and the Clippers most recently.

[Doctor MJ]

Barry vs Havlicek. While Havlicek has the longevity and versatility edge here, I find Barry to be the more impressive player and his longevity for his era is quite solid. It's interesting to note that the best NBA ORtg of the '70s came on the '79 Rockets with 34 year old Barry's arrival. So I see Barry as basically the #3 perimeter player in the world when he arrives in the NBA, who then goes to the ABA and thrives, returns to the NBA to lead a team to a championship in a role that could be considered proto-heliocentric, and then ends his career going to another team and helping them thrive.

Where I struggle with Barry is that I really think he should have been more efficient. Yes, he was above average in efficiency for his era, while Havlicek was not, but he seems like a guy with enough of a BBIQ to recognize when a better shot is available for a teammate in the same way Oscar/West did, but he jacked the shots anyway.

I have to say I recently put a lot of thought into Barry v Havlicek and came away with Havlicek being 4-5 spots ahead for a few different reasons. Regarding Barry being more efficient, he had a great ts add from 66-72 at least 124 every year but then became barely above average and a negative from 76 on which isn't bad for a wing volume scorer. Havlicek from 67-76 when he became more of a volume scorer on the Celtics was actually a ts add all but two of those years peaking at +80 so he was actually pretty efficient. The three areas where I give Hondo a strong edge though are defense(I don't know that Barry was bad here but Hondo may very well made 10 all defensive 1st teams had it been a thing in the 60's), chemistry and longevity but one of the main factors longevity wise working against Rick is he had to sit out 68(which may not really be his fault since he wanted to switch leagues but its still a zero games played for that year) and then the next 3 years he only plays in 35, 52 and 59 games. So we have a 4 year period in the middle of his prime where he only plays in 144 games. So that is why I put Havlicek higher though I would still say I am fairly on Barry relative to most bb fans. I will probably vote for him fairly soon.

I will say that Barry having a positive TS Add for his first 9 seasons tends to put him in a different category for me from Havlicek, but you're right that as their careers went along, that dynamic shifted more in favor of Havlicek.

I'll agree that Havlicek was considerably stronger on defense - I tend to see Barry as a positive on defense, but Havlicek was an all-timer.

Chemistry goes to Havlicek, but I never got the impression that Barry's temper got too much in the way of his team thriving. Feel free to show me I'm wrong. I guess I tend to think more that the basketball world hated Barry but his team appreciated him.

Longevity to Havlicek yes, but Barry's was good as well.

I would add that while Havlicek has a positive reputation for passing, I do tend to have Barry in a different category there. As mentioned, in that championship season, Barry was the brain through which the entire team worked around as they platooned in smaller minutes. I'm not saying definitively Havlicek couldn't have done that, but I've never been prepared to assert that he could.