RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #38 (Clyde Drexler)

[trex_8063]

Spoiler:

Votes
1. Kawih Leonard
2. Artis Gilmore
3. Chauncey Billups

I'm sorry 70sFan, I should have included Artis previously. I'm gonna give him a pass for #2 here. Still not above Kawih for me, but I've been reading and checking stats. He's not one of the players I've watched a ton, but I'm convinced he and Kawih should go next. But man, Kawih definitely deserves to go in the top 40!

Top 10 seasons by PER among guys getting traction and the ones I'm voting:
1. Kawih Leonard 27.6
2. Kawih Leonard 26.9
3. Artis Gilmore 26.6
4. Kawih Leonard 26
5. Kawih Leonard 26
6. Kawih Leonard 25.8
7. Artis Gilmore 24.1
8. Clyde Drexler 24.1
9. Clyde Drexler 23.6
10. Billups 23.6

No seasons in the top 10 for Isiah Thomas or Reggie Miller. Kawih clearly dominates PER wise in the regular season, having 5 of the best 6 seasons.

Top 10 seasons by WS/48:
1. Kawih Leonard 27.7
2. Kawih Leonard 26.4
3. Artis Gilmore 25.9
4. Chauncey Billups 25.7
5. Billups 25.4
6. Artis Gilmore 25.3
7. Kawih Leonard 22.6
8. Kawih Leonard 22.4
9. Artis Gilmore 22.2
10. Chauncey Billups 21.6

Yet again, Kawih Leonard dominates this category. I can't even see Reggie Miller, I can't even see Isiah.

Well, I don't want to make the post too long, but BPM goes the same way with Kawih dominating, followed by Artisand then Billups.

Top 10 seasons in playoffs PER:
1. Kawih Leonard 31.5
2. Kawih Leonard 28.6
3. Kawih Leonard 27.9
4. Kawih Leonard 27.8
5. Reggie Miller 24.6
6. Artis Gilmore 24.2
7. Artis Gilmore 23.5
8. Reggie Miller 23.4
9. Chauncey Billups 22.9
10. Clyde Drexler 22.8

Kawih Leonard, yet again stands out against the group. Followed by Gilmore, and then a mix of the others really close. Reggie raises in the playoffs, but for me he's still not sniffing Kawih's best as suggested by PER.
Among the ones I listed, I'm definitely way higher on Billups intangibles than on Reggie's or Isiah's.


I'm not gonna post the rest of the advanced stats, but man Kawih is definitely up there in a way the others aren't.

Accodales wise Kawih is among the best too, with 2 FMVPs and 2 DPOYs. He finished 3 times in the top 5 voting for MVP, losing slightly to Gilmore but well ahead of everyone.

Playoffs wise, I believe that Kawih, Isiah and Billups are the top 3 success wise.

Rate it as you wish, but Kawih is definitely a tier up from the other guys

.

Worth noting these are rate metrics, and thus associated playing time is relevant. Kawhi has much of the high-ground in the rate metrics......though he does so while claiming much of the low-ground in both mpg AND games played in a season [because teams walk on egg-shells to a certain degree where his durability is concerned].

Top 30 seasons in rs WS (*indicates in ABA)
1. *Artis Gilmore 19.8
2. *Artis Gilmore 18.5
3. *Artis Gilmore 16.2
4. Chauncey Billups 15.5
5. *Artis Gilmore 15.1
6. Kawhi Leonard 13.7
7. Kawhi Leonard 13.6
8. Chauncey Billups 13.5
9. Clyde Drexler 13.2
10. Clyde Drexler 12.8
t11. Artis Gilmore 12.7
t11. *Artis Gilmore 12.7
13. Clyde Drexler 12.6
14. Reggie Miller 12.5
15. Clyde Drexler 12.4
t16. Reggie Miller 12.3
t16. Artis Gilmore 12.3
18. Artis Gilmore 12.2
t19. Reggie Miller 12.1
t19. Artis Gilmore 12.1
t19. Chauncey Billups 12.1
22. Reggie Miller 12.0
t23. Reggie Miller 11.7
t23. Clyde Drexler 11.7
25. Clyde Drexler 11.6
26. Artis Gilmore 11.5
t27. Reggie Miller 11.4
t27. Chauncey Billups 11.4
t29. Chauncey Billups 11.3
t29. Reggie Miller 11.3

Though most of the top seasons are in the ABA, here Kawhi doesn't show up in the top 5, and has only two of the top 30 seasons among these five players (actually, only two of the top 38.......he has just three of the top 40 [next coming in tied for 39th]).

Reggie doesn't appear until 14th, but goes on to have SEVEN of the top 30; and he'd actually have TWELVE of the top 40 seasons among these players: while he can't best Kawhi's two best years, he has ELEVEN seasons better than Kawhi's 3rd-best (plus a TWELTH season that is tied with Kawhi's 3rd-best [tied for 39th overall among these five players]).

If we looked at BPM, Clyde makes a bigger imprint; and then if looking at VORP [the cumulative of BPM], it's Clyde who would sort of dominate the leader-board [he'd have FIVE of the top 10 spots, including #1].
Kawhi would have the #2 and #4 seasons by VORP, but again quickly fades from the leaderboard after that [doesn't appear again until #14, then again tied for #19, and only one other season even in the top 30].
Even Reggie [who's not overly loved by BPM] has FIVE seasons that are tied with or better than Kawhi's 4th-best VORP; he has EIGHT seasons better than Kawhi's 5th-best.

If we looked at a figure such as ([PER - 15] * minutes)-----basically total production above average as measured by PER----he again no longer totally dominates the leaderboards.

Just providing this by way of counterpoint on how others may be viewing this.

[Clyde Frazier]

Can someone kindly explain to me why someone like Reggie Miller is getting more traction than Kawhi Leonard? How can you rank Reggie over Kawhi? I'm genuinely curious where you came up with this?

Some of us value longevity and durability (AKA "total career value") over peak/handful of best seasons in this project. Kawhi's had a relatively short career as a star and his substantial load management and injury history is a negative. That said, the beauty of this project is everyone has their own criteria. The goal is to stick to that criteria with each vote.

The only advantage I see Reggie having over Kawhi is his Regular Season win share totals because even if we are looking at Playoff win share totals Kawhi has already passed Reggie. Not too bad for a guy with bad longevity?

I value longevity as much as most but having a long career with zero success should not be rewarded the same as someone who had a long career with success IMO. For what it's worth my top 5 in order goes: LeBron, MJ, Kareem, Duncan, Russell. So I certainly value longevity. Do you mostly value longevity even if the player does not dominate anything and just exists? I'm just trying to understand the Reggie Miller hype because I don't get it when I look objectively and compare him to all players with the same criteria.

Well you'll note Reggie isn't in my top 3 here (Drexler, Gilmore, Payton were my votes), so I don't quite have him in this range. However, Kawhi wouldn't be either. In Kawhi's 9 seasons, he's failed to crack 70 games played (or equivalent in shortened seasons) 6 times. And at best he's put together 6 star level seasons. That just isn't a complete enough career to me at this point and being able to stay on the court matters.

Compare that to Miller's 18 seasons where he didn't miss significant time until his last year, played in 79+ games or equivalent 14 times and had at least 12 star level seasons. I don't know how Miller would be classified as "just existing" solely because he didn't win a championship. He went on many deep playoff runs and was one of the few guys who scaled up their production in the playoffs. Not every player is fortunate enough to have good enough teammates to win a championship. It doesn't automatically disqualify a career from being all time great or significant.

[eminence]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

[Magic Is Magic]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

[Cavsfansince84]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

You are using somewhat arbitrary cut offs to decide which seasons essentially matter for comparative purposes here. Do seasons below the .250 ws/48 threshold not hold any value to you? Just as an example, Tim Duncan only had one season where he broke that threshold, does that mean that he only had one high level season in his entire career? Kobe had zero such seasons. Is Kobe's career now valueless? It would make more sense if you wanted to use some sort of system where .300 ws/48= 4 pts, .250= 3 pts, .200 ws/48= 2 pts and .150 ws/48 = 1 pt. That would sort of work for me but just using these cut offs you used above to try and define what has meaning is just a horrible way to do a comparison of career value imo. Its not useful.

[eminence]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

Why do you think he should have an advantage? I would expect if two players were at all comparable then the one who played with better teams would have a notable edge in playoff WS, and that's certainly Kawhi in this scenario.

I don't understand what you're trying to capture with that list of accomplishments or your cutoffs. PER/WS/BPM are essentially the same thing for 90% of players.

[Doctor MJ]

A guy I'd like to bring up is Billy Cunningham. Is it crazy to think he should be getting consideration pretty soon? Obviously he's a bit short on longevity but I think you could make a case he had a prime of 10 years during which he accomplished quite a bit. Won a ring with Philly then is all nba 1st team 3 times before going to the aba and winning an mvp there. Might be a bit early for him but I'm just throwing him out there for some discussion. McGinnis as well.

I don't mind Cunningham being brought up because I think he was a great player. I think it's worth going through and listing out all the players from that era to see who should be considered and in what order, but I'll say up front I've got a special place here for Connie Hawkins.

I'd imagine most people tend to think of Hawkins as a guy with longevity cut way short. While that's absolutely true, check out these numbers:

Career RS Win Shares:
Cunningham 78.6
Hawkins 76.7

Career TS Add:
Hawkins 1042.8
Cunningham 218.8

Now, if you actually think Cunningham was better than Hawkins, that's one thing, but my general assessment is that Hawkins was seen at the better player at his best than Cunningham, and to the extent Cunningham is winning by longevity, it's telling to me that Hawkins basically equals him by a metric like WS, and that Hawkins managed to accumulate quite the TS Add over his shortened career.

Other guys on my radar right now that haven't gotten a ton of discussion yet:

Willis Reed
Mel Daniels
Wes Unseld (and thus Elvin Hayes)
Dave Cowens
Tiny Archibald
Bob McAdoo
Bill Walton (granted, some are already talking about him).

I tend to see Reed/Unseld/Cowens as cemented on a level that Hawkins broken up career is hard to match.

I've got a ton of respect for Archibald, McAdoo, but would be inclined to put Hawkins & Walton over both.

I'd love to see a Hawkins vs Walton debate. Frankly, I'd probably go with Hawkins.

I'm not a big believer in McGinnis. I believe more in Mel Daniels. I think it's important to realize with McGinnis that he was one of the original heliocentric guys, and that he wasn't a great decision maker, which meant he was taking a lot off the table for his team even as he put so much on. A superficial reading of the Pacers in this time period is that McGinnis showed up and outclassed the other Pacers, but I would tend to see the Pacers as an outstanding team with Daniels as the guy who was always there and always essential adjusting a bit based on how Slick Leonard made the team go.

It's crazy to think though that, for example, Hawkins in his shortened career earned more Win Shares than Daniels whose career feels so much more complete. Part of that is that playing the entirety of the ABA feels like a complete thing without being that long of a career. And part of it is was just that Hawkins was an entirely different class of player than Daniels in his prime.

[Cavsfansince84]

A guy I'd like to bring up is Billy Cunningham. Is it crazy to think he should be getting consideration pretty soon? Obviously he's a bit short on longevity but I think you could make a case he had a prime of 10 years during which he accomplished quite a bit. Won a ring with Philly then is all nba 1st team 3 times before going to the aba and winning an mvp there. Might be a bit early for him but I'm just throwing him out there for some discussion. McGinnis as well.

I don't mind Cunningham being brought up because I think he was a great player. I think it's worth going through and listing out all the players from that era to see who should be considered and in what order, but I'll say up front I've got a special place here for Connie Hawkins.

I'd imagine most people tend to think of Hawkins as a guy with longevity cut way short. While that's absolutely true, check out these numbers:

Career RS Win Shares:
Cunningham 78.6
Hawkins 76.7

Career TS Add:
Hawkins 1042.8
Cunningham 218.8

Now, if you actually think Cunningham was better than Hawkins, that's one thing, but my general assessment is that Hawkins was seen at the better player at his best than Cunningham, and to the extent Cunningham is winning by longevity, it's telling to me that Hawkins basically equals him by a metric like WS, and that Hawkins managed to accumulate quite the TS Add over his shortened career.

Other guys on my radar right now that haven't gotten a ton of discussion yet:

Willis Reed
Mel Daniels
Wes Unseld (and thus Elvin Hayes)
Dave Cowens
Tiny Archibald
Bob McAdoo
Bill Walton (granted, some are already talking about him).

I agree with some of those guys and had also thought of Hawkins. Grant Hill and Tracy McGrady are two more along with guys like Pierce, Allen and AD(actually both AD's). This group from about 40-60 seems very hard to differentiate.

[Joao Saraiva]

Spoiler:

Votes
1. Kawih Leonard
2. Artis Gilmore
3. Chauncey Billups

I'm sorry 70sFan, I should have included Artis previously. I'm gonna give him a pass for #2 here. Still not above Kawih for me, but I've been reading and checking stats. He's not one of the players I've watched a ton, but I'm convinced he and Kawih should go next. But man, Kawih definitely deserves to go in the top 40!

Top 10 seasons by PER among guys getting traction and the ones I'm voting:
1. Kawih Leonard 27.6
2. Kawih Leonard 26.9
3. Artis Gilmore 26.6
4. Kawih Leonard 26
5. Kawih Leonard 26
6. Kawih Leonard 25.8
7. Artis Gilmore 24.1
8. Clyde Drexler 24.1
9. Clyde Drexler 23.6
10. Billups 23.6

No seasons in the top 10 for Isiah Thomas or Reggie Miller. Kawih clearly dominates PER wise in the regular season, having 5 of the best 6 seasons.

Top 10 seasons by WS/48:
1. Kawih Leonard 27.7
2. Kawih Leonard 26.4
3. Artis Gilmore 25.9
4. Chauncey Billups 25.7
5. Billups 25.4
6. Artis Gilmore 25.3
7. Kawih Leonard 22.6
8. Kawih Leonard 22.4
9. Artis Gilmore 22.2
10. Chauncey Billups 21.6

Yet again, Kawih Leonard dominates this category. I can't even see Reggie Miller, I can't even see Isiah.

Well, I don't want to make the post too long, but BPM goes the same way with Kawih dominating, followed by Artisand then Billups.

Top 10 seasons in playoffs PER:
1. Kawih Leonard 31.5
2. Kawih Leonard 28.6
3. Kawih Leonard 27.9
4. Kawih Leonard 27.8
5. Reggie Miller 24.6
6. Artis Gilmore 24.2
7. Artis Gilmore 23.5
8. Reggie Miller 23.4
9. Chauncey Billups 22.9
10. Clyde Drexler 22.8

Kawih Leonard, yet again stands out against the group. Followed by Gilmore, and then a mix of the others really close. Reggie raises in the playoffs, but for me he's still not sniffing Kawih's best as suggested by PER.
Among the ones I listed, I'm definitely way higher on Billups intangibles than on Reggie's or Isiah's.


I'm not gonna post the rest of the advanced stats, but man Kawih is definitely up there in a way the others aren't.

Accodales wise Kawih is among the best too, with 2 FMVPs and 2 DPOYs. He finished 3 times in the top 5 voting for MVP, losing slightly to Gilmore but well ahead of everyone.

Playoffs wise, I believe that Kawih, Isiah and Billups are the top 3 success wise.

Rate it as you wish, but Kawih is definitely a tier up from the other guys

.

Worth noting these are rate metrics, and thus associated playing time is relevant. Kawhi has much of the high-ground in the rate metrics......though he does so while claiming much of the low-ground in both mpg AND games played in a season [because teams walk on egg-shells to a certain degree where his durability is concerned].

Top 30 seasons in rs WS (*indicates in ABA)
1. *Artis Gilmore 19.8
2. *Artis Gilmore 18.5
3. *Artis Gilmore 16.2
4. Chauncey Billups 15.5
5. *Artis Gilmore 15.1
6. Kawhi Leonard 13.7
7. Kawhi Leonard 13.6
8. Chauncey Billups 13.5
9. Clyde Drexler 13.2
10. Clyde Drexler 12.8
t11. Artis Gilmore 12.7
t11. *Artis Gilmore 12.7
13. Clyde Drexler 12.6
14. Reggie Miller 12.5
15. Clyde Drexler 12.4
t16. Reggie Miller 12.3
t16. Artis Gilmore 12.3
18. Artis Gilmore 12.2
t19. Reggie Miller 12.1
t19. Artis Gilmore 12.1
t19. Chauncey Billups 12.1
22. Reggie Miller 12.0
t23. Reggie Miller 11.7
t23. Clyde Drexler 11.7
25. Clyde Drexler 11.6
26. Artis Gilmore 11.5
t27. Reggie Miller 11.4
t27. Chauncey Billups 11.4
t29. Chauncey Billups 11.3
t29. Reggie Miller 11.3

Though most of the top seasons are in the ABA, here Kawhi doesn't show up in the top 5, and has only two of the top 30 seasons among these five players (actually, only two of the top 38.......he has just three of the top 40 [next coming in tied for 39th]).

Reggie doesn't appear until 14th, but goes on to have SEVEN of the top 30; and he'd actually have TWELVE of the top 40 seasons among these players: while he can't best Kawhi's two best years, he has ELEVEN seasons better than Kawhi's 3rd-best (plus a TWELTH season that is tied with Kawhi's 3rd-best [tied for 39th overall among these five players]).

If we looked at BPM, Clyde makes a bigger imprint; and then if looking at VORP [the cumulative of BPM], it's Clyde who would sort of dominate the leader-board [he'd have FIVE of the top 10 spots, including #1].
Kawhi would have the #2 and #4 seasons by VORP, but again quickly fades from the leaderboard after that [doesn't appear again until #14, then again tied for #19, and only one other season even in the top 30].
Even Reggie [who's not overly loved by BPM] has FIVE seasons that are tied with or better than Kawhi's 4th-best VORP; he has EIGHT seasons better than Kawhi's 5th-best.

If we looked at a figure such as ([PER - 15] * minutes)-----basically total production above average as measured by PER----he again no longer totally dominates the leaderboards.

Just providing this by way of counterpoint on how others may be viewing this.

Couple of points:
1. Kawih doesn't dominate in minutes per game or games played, however, his production shows me a much higher ceiling than the other players. There is a reason why Kawih was a major piece in two championship teams and Reggie was not.

2. We can talk about that being so relevant against guys who play at the same level that Kawih does: this is not the case. Billups and Gilmore are the ones that can actually be argued. The floor raising of Artis gives him a case, but Reggie? He isn't a great floor raiser for sure. Billups? I believe that he is. But not so much to a level I'd put him over Kawih.

We gotta understand how important it is to miss those games and the context of it. Specially in Reggie vs Kawih I don't see a reason why that should hurt Kawih so much.

[trex_8063]

Couple of points:
1. Kawih doesn't dominate in minutes per game or games played, however, his production shows me a much higher ceiling than the other players. There is a reason why Kawih was a major piece in two championship teams and Reggie was not.

Yeah: he had better teammates.
Seriously, Reggie never had a supporting cast as good as Kawhi's on the '12-'14 Spurs or the '19 Raptors [or the '20 Clippers, for that matter]. Personally I don't doubt a prime/peak Reggie [with his typical ability to scale up in the playoffs] would have had a good shot at a title if his cast was Lowry, emerging Siakam, Danny Green, FVV, aging M.Gasol, Ibaka.......add peak Reggie and that's already an astounding 7-man line-up, and they still had depth behind that which included Norman Powell, Chris Boucher, and an emerging OG Anunoby [at least in the rs].

EDIT2: I should make clear I'm not saying Reggie = Kawhi for peak(ish) level play. But I am saying that a) ring v no ring is a bad measure of players, and b) Kawhi without a doubt [imho] had MULTIPLE years with a better supporting cast than ANYTHING Reggie saw in 18 years in Indiana.

We gotta understand how important it is to miss those games and the context of it. Specially in Reggie vs Kawih I don't see a reason why that should hurt Kawih so much.

Kawhi missing games didn't hurt things much due to the same factor I note in response to point #1: his team could continue to win and maintain high seeding even if he takes 25-30% of the season off. It's a luxury.

If Reggie took 25-30% of the season off, there were perhaps 4-5 years where the Pacers would not have made the playoffs at all. As it is, they made the playoffs 15 of 17 seasons in which Reggie was a starter, and were in the conference finals six times in his career.


EDIT: btw, I still need your pick between Drexler and Miller.

[Doctor MJ]

The floor raising of Artis gives him a case, but Reggie? He isn't a great floor raiser for sure.

Why do you say that? If you just mean relative to Kawhi, okay, but as a general principle about Reggie, what leads you to conclude Reggie wasn't a good floor raiser?

Just for context here, Miller first got featured in his 3rd year on the Pacers. In that year he scored 24.6 PPG on 64.5% TS and the team led the league in TS%. To me that's excellent floor-raising right there.

[Magic Is Magic]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

Why do you think he should have an advantage? I would expect if two players were at all comparable then the one who played with better teams would have a notable edge in playoff WS, and that's certainly Kawhi in this scenario.

I don't understand what you're trying to capture with that list of accomplishments or your cutoffs. PER/WS/BPM are essentially the same thing for 90% of players.

Well that's not true. Reggie Miller is 15th all time in regular season win shares but his PER peak...His peak...Is 21.2. That is very low. Especially for someone who was 15th all time in Regular season Win Shares. His regular season WS/48 peak is .212. That is very low. His BPM peak is 5.8. That is very low. Reggie Miller misses the mark on PER, BPM and WS/48 but he did very well in Win Shares.

What I am trying to capture is who are the greatest players in NBA history and where do they rank relative to their # of occurrences related to top producing achievements. A player with zero rings, zero MVPs, zero 1st or 2nd team All NBA or Defense being considered for top 40 with an absolute peak PER of 21.2 is bizarre.

The reason I chose those cutoffs is because I did not want to reward mediocre seasons or slightly above average seasons. A PER of 25 hits that mark in my opinion. Something too high like 28 would not include enough seasons, and a PER of 22 would let too many subpar seasons in.

[Magic Is Magic]

For me a metric like playoff win shares is a poor measure of playoff longevity, it's as much a function of team quality as individual player quality - see Derek Fisher #50. Kawhi in particular picked up ~1/3 of his before he was doing anything particularly relevant at this level (though '13/'14 do add some value to be sure). '17 ending in injury also doesn't help.

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

You are using somewhat arbitrary cut offs to decide which seasons essentially matter for comparative purposes here. Do seasons below the .250 ws/48 threshold not hold any value to you? Just as an example, Tim Duncan only had one season where he broke that threshold, does that mean that he only had one high level season in his entire career? Kobe had zero such seasons. Is Kobe's career now valueless? It would make more sense if you wanted to use some sort of system where .300 ws/48= 4 pts, .250= 3 pts, .200 ws/48= 2 pts and .150 ws/48 = 1 pt. That would sort of work for me but just using these cut offs you used above to try and define what has meaning is just a horrible way to do a comparison of career value imo. Its not useful.

The WS/48 in RS and PO is only one category segment in my formula so I would not rank a player solely based on WS/48. That's why I've created many categories such as Regular Season and Post Season: PER over 25, WS/48 over .250, BPM over 7.0, All 1st team, All 2nd team, All Defensive 1st, All Defensive 2nd, Top 3 in MVP, Top 5 in MVP, MVP winner, FMVP, Rings, And many others. So again, WS/48 is only one category of many.

[Cavsfansince84]

The WS/48 in RS and PO is only one category segment in my formula so I would not rank a player solely based on WS/48. That's why I've created many categories such as Regular Season and Post Season: PER over 25, WS/48 over .250, BPM over 7.0, All 1st team, All 2nd team, All Defensive 1st, All Defensive 2nd, Top 3 in MVP, Top 5 in MVP, MVP winner, FMVP, Rings, And many others. So again, WS/48 is only one category of many.

A lot of the other categories you are using as well as the cut offs you use are just the same thing as what I mentioned you are doing with ws/48. So anything over 7.0 bpm counts but anything below it is worthless. That's a horrible way to try and rate players imo. You can definitely argue that Kawhi's best 4 years hold more value than a guy like Reggie's but I think the way in which you are using metrics and other things presents a disingenuous attempt at trying to determine value. More so for a guy like Reggie for whom I think all league teams are a poor measure of him as a player. I mean you had Latrell Sprewell making all nba 1st team in 1994 with a bpm of 1.9 while Reggie made no teams with a bpm of 4.7. Sometimes the media gets things drastically wrong. More so before the days of advanced stats imo. Reggie should have made a lot more all league teams.

[Doctor MJ]

It is one measure in which Reggie should have had an advantage in, having a long durable career but Kawhi still passed him already. As mentioned prior, Reggie has been passed by Kawhi in really every measurable statistic. I chose the only one that could be "fair" at this point. Kawhi has beaten Reggie out in: 1st team all NBA, 2nd team all NBA, 1st team All-Defense, 2nd team All-Defense, DPOY winner, Rings, Finals MVPs, RS BPM over 7, RS WS/48 over .250, PO BPM over 7, RS PER over 25, PO PER over 25, I looked at a lot of factors. Reggie isn't ahead in any of these. I'm not hating on Reggie, I'm trying to be objective. Reggie's RS win share totals is his only major edge that I see when using my project ranking formula.

Why do you think he should have an advantage? I would expect if two players were at all comparable then the one who played with better teams would have a notable edge in playoff WS, and that's certainly Kawhi in this scenario.

I don't understand what you're trying to capture with that list of accomplishments or your cutoffs. PER/WS/BPM are essentially the same thing for 90% of players.

Well that's not true. Reggie Miller is 15th all time in regular season win shares but his PER peak...His peak...Is 21.2. That is very low. Especially for someone who was 15th all time in Regular season Win Shares. His regular season WS/48 peak is .212. That is very low. His BPM peak is 5.8. That is very low. Reggie Miller misses the mark on PER, BPM and WS/48 but he did very well in Win Shares.

What I am trying to capture is who are the greatest players in NBA history and where do they rank relative to their # of occurrences related to top producing achievements. A player with zero rings, zero MVPs, zero 1st or 2nd team All NBA or Defense being considered for top 40 with an absolute peak PER of 21.2 is bizarre.

I'm sorry MiM, I think I've already been harsh to you and I'm about to be again, but I think this is important:

You need to change how you think of these stats. Miller's PER is not mysteriously low, it is exactly what you should expect given his box score and the knowledge that PER comes from an era before people really thought about efficiency when they analyzed players, and thus when an outlier-level efficient player came in, they missed the boat. It's not Reggie Miller doing something wrong, it's John Hollinger doing something wrong - and I say that as a guy who appreciates the work Hollinger did and doesn't think he's a fool at all. His algorithm was bound to be flawed because basketball isn't an algorithm, but that doesn't mean his work wasn't valuable in its time, nor that it can't be valuable now if you understand it's infrastructure.

To me you really seem like someone who is trying to come in thinking like a scientist building on the established analytical tools that are available, and I'm telling you as someone who has been called a "statguy" for well over a decade, you need to use these as the start of analysis that lets you drill down into the actual play rather than looking to build-up from them as if they are actually building blocks. Use the data as a door to ask questions about actual basketball play, not as an end in and of itself.

[penbeast0]

You stat guy you!

[Doctor MJ]

You stat guy you!

lol, the sad thing is that I don't get along with stat guys either. I'm too persnickety for my own good.

[Cavsfansince84]

You stat guy you!

Nothing worse than stat nerds. Actually, I remember going to a Waldenbooks in 1990 as a teenager and seeing there something called the nba register which was a book that the nba sort of put out every year that had all the career box score stats of all the current players at the time along with stats for about 20 atg's in the back of it and I was so happy when I found that book and could easily see the stats for all of those guys. I actually started trying to come up with metrics back then but eventually gave up because I was like what's the point, no one's really going to be interested in this sort of thing. Fast forward 30 years and a lot has changed.

[penbeast0]

I remember that book, I loved it!

[Joao Saraiva]

The floor raising of Artis gives him a case, but Reggie? He isn't a great floor raiser for sure.

Why do you say that? If you just mean relative to Kawhi, okay, but as a general principle about Reggie, what leads you to conclude Reggie wasn't a good floor raiser?

Just for context here, Miller first got featured in his 3rd year on the Pacers. In that year he scored 24.6 PPG on 64.5% TS and the team led the league in TS%. To me that's excellent floor-raising right there.

Because Miller doesn't generate offense out of nowhere. He needs a team that can find him. His points are almost all assisted. Also he can't be the playmaker of a team. Of course Kawih isn't ideal in that role either, but he's better than Miller. Miller is not a difference maker on defense the way Kawih is.

Of course there will be some raise. But he's not the same floor raiser those two guys are in my opinion.

I believe both Artis and Kawih are better floor raisers than Reggie.