RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 (Dave Cowens)

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,511
And1: 8,152
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 (Dave Cowens) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 12:26 am

2020 List
1. LeBron James
2. Michael Jordan
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Bill Russell
5. Tim Duncan
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Magic Johnson
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Larry Bird
11. Kevin Garnett
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Jerry West
14. Oscar Robertson
15. Dirk Nowitzki
16. Karl Malone
17. David Robinson
18. Julius Erving
19. George Mikan
20. Moses Malone
21. Charles Barkley
22. Kevin Durant
23. Chris Paul
24. Stephen Curry
25. Bob Pettit
26. John Stockton
27. Steve Nash
28. Dwyane Wade
29. Patrick Ewing
30. Walt Frazier
31. James Harden
32. Scottie Pippen
33. Elgin Baylor
34. John Havlicek
35. Rick Barry
36. Jason Kidd
37. George Gervin
38. Clyde Drexler
39. Reggie Miller
40. Artis Gilmore
41. Dolph Schayes
42. Kawhi Leonard
43. Isiah Thomas
44. Russell Westbrook
45. Willis Reed
46. Chauncey Billups
47. Paul Pierce
48. Gary Payton
49. Pau Gasol
50. Ray Allen
51. Dwight Howard
52. Kevin McHale
53. Manu Ginobili
54. ????

So we'll look to conclude this one around 6-7 pm EST on Friday.
Expected front runners [I think] are Bob Cousy, Dave Cowens, and maybe Adrian Dantley (though others could emerge, too). So please state your ORDER between them, regardless of your picks, just to potentially save us some time.


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:.

euroleague wrote:.

Franco wrote:.

Gregoire wrote:.

Hal14 wrote:.

HeartBreakKid wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

iggymcfrack wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

Joe Malburg 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
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#2 » by sansterre » Thu Feb 4, 2021 12:38 am

1. Bob Lanier - I know next to nothing about his play, but I've loved his stats ever since I could read them. One of the highest WOWYRs remaining (+5.4/+5.8), he played on multiple teams and missed some time so we got a good sample of his impact, and it was considerable. He was a high-usage player (I'm eyeballing it in the mid-high 20s) but extremely efficient, averaging +5 rTS% through his peak. He was not a skilled passer, but he wasn't a liability with the ball either. He wasn't an historically great rebounder, but he commonly was in the top ten in rebounds per game, dominant on the defensive glass. He was a sufficient defender, but his unusually high efficiency combined with high volume made him unusually valuable, and it was value that he retained regardless of team. And in the playoffs his shooting, far from dropping, actually *increased* 2%. In fact, here are his per 100s for regular season and playoffs from '74 to '80:

Regular Season: 28.2 points on 24.8 TSA (56.2% TS), 13.9 TRB, 4.4 AST, 1.5 TOV
Playoffs: 28.9 points on 24.8 TSA (58.2% TS), 15.2 TRB, 4.4 AST, 0.7 TOV

So against playoff defenses his usage stays the same, but he's even more efficient, rebounds even more and drops his turnovers in half, without losing any assists. Seriously. Bob Lanier was fantastic. So why don't we hear about him? Because he played for the sad-sack Detroit Pistons through his entire prime and only ended up in Milwaukee a little past his peak. And Milwaukee happened to play in a murderous conference and could never make the Finals. He may never have been on a winner. But I'm telling you. Bob Lanier deserves serious consideration.

2. Dave Cowens - box score metrics don't appreciate his defense. Which is a problem, because his defense rocked. He was never one to rack up many blocks, but he anchored many strong defenses. He was never an efficient scorer, but he shot enough and at range which would pull opposing centers out of the paint. He was a formidable rebounder (especially defensively), a good passer for a big and a consummate team player. His career was fairly short, but he retained his value well in the playoffs and was a key player on two different championship teams.

3. Anthony Davis - I know his career has been fairly short, but he's put up some pretty insane defensive numbers; you don't see a blend of steals/blocks like that outside of Robinson and Hakeem. He's a solid passer, doesn't turn it over much (is an unusually skilled big man) and scores well at volume. He's never been the best at any one thing, but he's really good at a whole lot of things and really doesn't have weaknesses. And it's become clear that, when paired with a LeBron, he becomes one of the Top 5 players in the game (as it is he's probably had an argument for Top 10 for the last several years). I know he doesn't have longevity, but he's been so good that I really can't fault him. I think he merits some attention here.

But seriously. Take a look at Bob Lanier's stats. The only reason he isn't getting attention is because he played most of his career for a crappy franchise and he didn't get much love in his day.
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,034
And1: 9,703
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#3 » by penbeast0 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 1:43 am

1. Alex English -- Versatility, consistency, and character put English over the likes of Dantley, Nique, Tmac, etc. English doesn't have the stats of Adrian Dantley (though he's close) or possibly even Tmac, but English played many roles and always made his teams better no matter what role Denver played him in. One of the most underrated players in history despite having scored more in the 80s than Larry Bird, Isiah Thomas, Dominique Wilkins, Adrian Dantley, or well, anyone else in the game. Also won numerous citizenship awards, one of the great people to play the game.
2. Adrian Dantley -- The Wilt of wings, ridiculous numbers, some of his coaches (Chuck Daly) rave about him while others (Frank Layden) rip him. Just too good to let slide further.
3. Dave Cowens -- Was the 1A to Havlicek's 1B throughout the 70s and his team was competitive virtually every year. Very close with Anthony Davis; Giannis's prime is just a little short to quite match up to those two.
4. Paul Arizin, 5. Anthony Davis
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,034
And1: 9,703
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#4 » by penbeast0 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 1:52 am

sansterre wrote:1. Bob Lanier - ...
But seriously. Take a look at Bob Lanier's stats. The only reason he isn't getting attention is because he played most of his career for a crappy franchise and he didn't get much love in his day.


There's a reason Dave Cowens got an MVP and 3 2nd team All-NBA awards (behind prime Kareem) and Lanier never made an All-NBA team despite consistently better numbers . . . defense. Cowens was a high energy defender though not much of a rim protector; Lanier was bigger but soft and relatively low energy defensively. Not terrible, but not a difference maker on that end. He did have one outlier year in Detroit where his personal defensive stats and the team defensive stats were excellent and his writeups that year raved about his commitment to defense, but then he reverted back to being a big body and throughout his tenure outside or 74, Detroit's defensive stats were below average. He did play on some excellent defensive teams in Milwaukee after his body started to break down but they were led by Sidney Moncreif and Lanier was platooned with Harvey Catchings (or Alton Lister) in an offense/defense center platoon by Don Nelson. He was the Nicola Vucevic of his era, a terrific player but not up to the level of a Dave Cowens.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#5 » by sansterre » Thu Feb 4, 2021 2:24 am

penbeast0 wrote:
sansterre wrote:1. Bob Lanier - ...
But seriously. Take a look at Bob Lanier's stats. The only reason he isn't getting attention is because he played most of his career for a crappy franchise and he didn't get much love in his day.


There's a reason Dave Cowens got an MVP and 3 2nd team All-NBA awards (behind prime Kareem) and Lanier never made an All-NBA team despite consistently better numbers . . . defense. Cowens was a high energy defender though not much of a rim protector; Lanier was bigger but soft and relatively low energy defensively. Not terrible, but not a difference maker on that end. He did have one outlier year in Detroit where his personal defensive stats and the team defensive stats were excellent and his writeups that year raved about his commitment to defense, but then he reverted back to being a big body and throughout his tenure outside or 74, Detroit's defensive stats were below average. He did play on some excellent defensive teams in Milwaukee after his body started to break down but they were led by Sidney Moncreif and Lanier was platooned with Harvey Catchings (or Alton Lister) in an offense/defense center platoon by Don Nelson. He was the Nicola Vucevic of his era, a terrific player but not up to the level of a Dave Cowens.

I would never argue that Lanier was a better defender than Cowens. Or anything close.

Just as I would never argue that Cowens was better on offense than Lanier. Or anything close.

Cowens would never have sniffed an MVP on a bad franchise. That Cowens played for Boston and Lanier played for Detroit makes such things not entirely fair.
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,034
And1: 9,703
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#6 » by penbeast0 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 2:50 am

The MVP I agree with you, but I think he would have made Detroit more competitive than Lanier did. Detroit would still have had plenty of firepower with Cowens plus Dave Bing or Kevin Porter and guys like Jimmy Walker, Howard Porter, etc. to be at least average offensively but Cowens and Curtis Rowe (or Terry Tyler)/Chris Ford etc. would have given them an above league average defense and probably stronger playoff performances.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,682
And1: 11,254
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#7 » by Cavsfansince84 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 4:10 am

54. Dave Cowens
-Great combination of scoring, rebounding, defense and playmaking which led to very high win teams
-Very strong playoff performer, averaging 18.9/14.4/3.7 for his career. Led league in ps win shares in 76 despite not getting fmvp
-career treb% of 17.1 and ast % of 13.7 which are both good for a pf/c(Shaq's career %'s were 17.8/13.9)
-2x nba champ
-1x nba mvp
-4x top 4 in mvp voting(shows how highly regarded he was in his era)
-3x all nba 2nd team
-3x all defensive(1x 1st, 2x 2nd)
-Had 4 years with a ts+ above 100 in his prime so wasn't that inefficient as a scorer
-prime length of 9 years imo which is right there with most players despite career more or less ending at 31

55. Sam Jones

-Going with Jones here for sustained excellence in both rs and ps and obviously his role in the greatest dynasty in nba history which I think his role in is probably underrated in general. I'm just going to go through and post his rank on those teams in win shares for both the rs and ps from 62-67 to show what I am talking about. rs first and ps second(62-66 all being title teams)
62: 2nd 2nd
63: 2nd 2nd
64: 2nd 1st
65: 2nd 2nd
66: 2nd 2nd

So as we can see and which the actual numbers do a better job of showing is the degree to which it was Russell and Jones at the top and then usually quite a large gap between them and everyone else on those teams. His role on 5 of those title teams was very large which is something no one else left can match when it comes to contributing to post season success imo(granted Cousy could be argued but I think Jones was better).

-3x all nba 2nd team
-3x top 10 in mvp voting(high of 4th)
-10x nba champ
-6 seasons averaging over 19ppg with career ts+ of 104(highly efficient for a wing)
-5 playoff runs averaging over 23ppg all at or above .516 ts%(when league average was under 50%)
-career ws/48 of .182 which ranks 35th all time
-known as clutch playoff scorer
-from 1962-1966 the Celtics played in 6 decisive game 5 or game 7's and Jones averaged 32.5ppg in those games which were all wins(most by 3 pts or less).

56. Anthony Davis
-7 year prime imo at this point which I think on average is the strongest perhaps by far of any remaining player
-great athlete and combination of inside scoring/finishing, outside shooting, shotblocking and defense which is going to translate to any era
-4x all nba 1st team
-4x all defensive(2x 1st, 2x 2nd)
-4x top 10 in mvp voting(high of 3rd)
-ranks 12th in career bpm
-ranks 11th in career ws/48
-3x nba leader in bpg
-career 23.9ppg scorer on 107 ts+
-career playoff bpm of 7.4 would rank 6th all time if he qualified(only 3 playoff runs)
-1x champ
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,942
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#8 » by Odinn21 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 9:02 am

54. Adrian Dantley
His prime level is just too good at this point and his prime lasted long enough. I feel like he shouldn't be separated from Pierce by a tier, and he should be in the next tier right after George Gervin. This was what I wrote about him in the Pierce vs. Dantley thread;
Spoiler:
Odinn21 wrote:
Is Paul Pierce in the same category as either of these guys or is he the next level down with guys like Dominique Wilkins?

I feel like it goes something like this;
Pierce and Dantley in the same tier. English is half a tier below. Wilkins is at least one tier below than any of the other 3.

I never agreed with Dantley being a black hole or a ball stopper or being an ineffective 30 ppg scorer.
Interestingly, Magic's injury in 1989 NBA Finals has a huge impact on Dantley's career outlook.
The Bad Boys became contenders with Dantley's arrival in 1986. It feels very inaccurate to say Dantley was the problem when they went to game 7 in CF in '87 and game 7 in NBA Finals in '88 (could've won without the phantom foul on Abdul-Jabbar). Then Dantley was traded out for Aguirre and the Pistons win the title against one of the weakest competitions ever. Bam, Dantley's career outlook goes down the drain because there was no title with him but there's one without him at the first try.
Dantley's arrival, along with drastic improvement sophomore Dumars had, was the reason why the Pistons went from being 45-46W team with first or second round exit to being a contender.
And if his scoring wasn't impactful, the Jazz wouldn't be that successful in '84 and '85.

As for Dantley vs. English, I think Dantley peaked clearly higher for me. Prime to prime, I also see Dantley as clearly better than English. English just didn't match offensive quality and impact that Dantley had.
Also, I started a thread about similar comparison awhile back. You might want to take a look at the discussion on there.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1961034

Pierce vs. Dantley feels harder because Pierce wasn't the scorer Dantley was. OTOH, Pierce was in the top percentile in 10+ season RAPM. Yeah, we don't and can't have RAPM for the '80s but even though I'm high on Dantley's overall impact, I'm not that high. I can't put him in the top percentile impactful players in his time.
Pierce can't match Dantley's scoring, Dantley can't match Pierce's overall impact (defense and off-ball play being the major reasons). The era differences are always there to consider. I'd assume you ask about these SFs to figure out your preferences for the top 100 project? I currently have Pierce ahead of Dantley on there. That's probably because I usually have more confidence in my picks those I got to watch while their career was happening, not just relying on hindsight.


55. Alonzo Mourning
It's quite insane that we as a group have forgotten about Mourning. He had Walton-Reed like career in a way but the unlucky injury hit him much later. He had 8 good prime seasons with very very good peak. He still had 4 seasons of regular games after the injury, his overall longevity isn't great but it's there. His intangibles were great.
Dantley is the only pick I'm certain right now and I'm going through names to be more certain and I had Mutombo in my ballot before but I'm changing him to Mourning/Hayes.

56. Elvin Hayes
Well, my last vote had Dantley/McHale/Mutombo. I have Dantley as my top pick again and McHale got in but I'm changing my order with Hayes ahead of Mutombo. Hayes' overall longevity is already superior, considering he had that kind of longevity 20 years before Mutombo, it's almost given. Also, I'd probably take peak Hayes over peak Mutombo, so, Mutombo isn't coming ahead of in all my criteria, so, I have Hayes over Mutombo for sure as we go forward.
Hayes is one of Moses-esque figures in the game's history for me. He gets too much undeserved blames.

---

I'd like to get some opinions on following players because it feels too close and too crowded;
Mutombo
Mourning
Cowens
Unseld
Parish
Lanier

Mutombo; To me he was like the ultimate Ben Wallace. Not an offensive liability, better longevity and prime duration. Also arguably better defensive force.
Mourning; Considerable prime duration for this stage even though the injury hurts his overall longevity but it's still not awful entirely. Also, probably only 2nd to Willis Reed in terms of peak among those names.
Cowens; He has everything (peak, prime, prime duration) but not great at anything particularly. His longevity isn't great BTW.
Unseld; I'd rate his peak after Reed and Mourning. Good prime duration, OK longevity. In terms of quality, similar to Mutombo but worse on defense and better on offense.
Parish; Not a particularly great peak but talk about longevity. His peak and prime quality are in the bottom half among these names but it's easily can be said that his longevity makes up far more than that against the other names.
Lanier; Similar to Cowens, good peak, prime quality and duration. Plus better longevity.
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.
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,942
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#9 » by Odinn21 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 9:24 am

Changes so far compared to the previous project;

1. LeBron James (+2)
2. Michael Jordan (-1)
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (-1)
4. Bill Russell (0)
5. Tim Duncan (0)
6. Wilt Chamberlain (0)
7. Magic Johnson (0)
8. Shaquille O'Neal (0)
9. Hakeem Olajuwon (0)
10. Larry Bird (0)
11. Kevin Garnett (+1)
12. Kobe Bryant (-1)
13. Jerry West (+2)
14. Oscar Robertson (-1)
15. Dirk Nowitzki (+2)
16. Karl Malone (-2)
17. David Robinson (+1)
18. Julius Erving (-2)
19. George Mikan (+6)
20. Moses Malone (0)
21. Charles Barkley (-2)
22. Kevin Durant (+6)
23. Chris Paul (0)
24. Stephen Curry (+5)
25. Bob Pettit (-1)
26. John Stockton (-5)
27. Steve Nash (-1)
28. Dwyane Wade (-6)
29. Patrick Ewing (-2)
30. Walt Frazier (+8)
31. James Harden (+35)
32. Scottie Pippen (-2)
33. Elgin Baylor (-1)
34. John Havlicek (-3)
35. Rick Barry (-1)
36. Jason Kidd (+1)
37. George Gervin (+4)
38. Clyde Drexler (-5)
39. Reggie Miller (+3)
40. Artis Gilmore (-4)
41. Dolph Schayes (+4)
42. Kawhi Leonard (+54)
43. Isiah Thomas (-4)
44. Russell Westbrook (+7)
45. Willis Reed (+11)
46. Chauncey Billups (+9)
47. Paul Pierce (-4)
48. Gary Payton (-13)
49. Pau Gasol (-1)
50. Ray Allen (-3)
51. Dwight Howard (-7)
52. Kevin McHale (-12)
53. Manu Ginobili (+1)

Top 5 biggest drops;
Gary Payton 35 > 48 (-13)
Kevin McHale 40 > 52 (-12)
Dwight Howard 44 > 51 (-7)
Dwyane Wade 22 > 28 (-6)
John Stockton 21 > 26 (-5) & Clyde Drexler 33 > 38 (-5)

Top 5 biggest gains;
Kawhi Leonard 96 > 42 (+54)
James Harden 66 > 31 (+35)
Willis Reed 56 > 45 (+11)
Chauncey Billups 55 > 46 (+9)
Walt Frazier 38 > 30 (+8)
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.
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#10 » by Dutchball97 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 9:44 am

1. Paul Arizin - One thing I'd like to clear up again is Arizin's longevity. He's 69th in career WS with 108 WS, which is more than Cowens, Jones and AD have (all around 85-95 WS). His two years of military service kept him from having comparable longevity to the likes of Parish, Dantley, Hayes or Lanier but I find it strange how especially for Cowens and Sam Jones people don't tend to mention lacking longevity, while they do for Arizin. Meanwhile, Arizin's regular season peak is also one of the best left out there. The real difference maker for me is the post-season though. On first look his play-off resume doesn't look breathtaking but you have to remember the play-offs didn't have as many rounds back then. In 58 for example they beat Schayes' Nationals 2-1 and then lost 1-4 to the Celtics. That's only 8 games but those 8 games are worth much more than a modern second round exit imo. Arizin has multiple of these runs where he didn't play a lot of games but only because the only teams he faced in the play-offs were strong teams with elite players, no first round freebies like we have now.

2. Sam Jones - I've been considering him for a while now but at this point I'm comfortable with voting him in. His peak (both in the regular season and play-offs) is good but nothing special compared to most of the other contenders here and like I just showed, Jones also isn't the strongest longevity candidate (by WS at least, which I prefer over simply counting years). The thing is that pretty much everyone getting traction has limited play-off showings. You either get guys like Parish or Hayes who have good longevity in both the RS and PS but didn't have all that spectacular peaks or guys with strong peaks but limited PS experience like Lanier or Davis. Sam Jones was 1B for the dynasty Celtics for a while and racked up a lot of great post-seasons. His 64 play-offs especially remind me of something like a light version of 2005 Manu and unlike Manu, this wasn't quite an outlier for Jones. I still think Jones is a difficult player to rank because nobody else really has a career like him but having a strong play-off record really helps his case here against some questionable play-off performers.

3. Dave Cowens - Last round I had Elvin Hayes right behind Arizin and even though I'm still not completely decided between Cowens and Hayes, it makes more sense to use my 3rd pick to vote for someone with significant traction instead of someone who hasn't been mentioned by anyone but me so far. Cowens being mostly known for his defense probably means his advanced stats underrate him a bit relatively to more offense orientated players. This makes it easier to pick Cowens over Hayes, who I otherwise see as having similar career value.

We're getting to a point in the list where my opinions aren't as solid anymore and are likely going to change more per round because the candidates at this point all have some very impressive qualities but also some glaring weaknesses. For now my order for other players getting traction is: Adrian Dantley > Anthony Davis > Bob Lanier > Alex English > Bob Cousy
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,945
And1: 710
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#11 » by DQuinn1575 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 1:19 pm

Dutchball97 wrote:1. Paul Arizin - One thing I'd like to clear up again is Arizin's longevity. He's 69th in career WS with 108 WS, which is more than Cowens, Jones and AD have (all around 85-95 WS). His two years of military service kept him from having comparable longevity to the likes of Parish, Dantley, Hayes or Lanier but I find it strange how especially for Cowens and Sam Jones people don't tend to mention lacking longevity, while they do for Arizin. Meanwhile, Arizin's regular season peak is also one of the best left out there. The real difference maker for me is the post-season though. On first look his play-off resume doesn't look breathtaking but you have to remember the play-offs didn't have as many rounds back then. In 58 for example they beat Schayes' Nationals 2-1 and then lost 1-4 to the Celtics. That's only 8 games but those 8 games are worth much more than a modern second round exit imo. Arizin has multiple of these runs where he didn't play a lot of games but only because the only teams he faced in the play-offs were strong teams with elite players, no first round freebies like we have now.

2. Sam Jones - I've been considering him for a while now but at this point I'm comfortable with voting him in. His peak (both in the regular season and play-offs) is good but nothing special compared to most of the other contenders here and like I just showed, Jones also isn't the strongest longevity candidate (by WS at least, which I prefer over simply counting years). The thing is that pretty much everyone getting traction has limited play-off showings. You either get guys like Parish or Hayes who have good longevity in both the RS and PS but didn't have all that spectacular peaks or guys with strong peaks but limited PS experience like Lanier or Davis. Sam Jones was 1B for the dynasty Celtics for a while and racked up a lot of great post-seasons. His 64 play-offs especially remind me of something like a light version of 2005 Manu and unlike Manu, this wasn't quite an outlier for Jones. I still think Jones is a difficult player to rank because nobody else really has a career like him but having a strong play-off record really helps his case here against some questionable play-off performers.

3. Dave Cowens - Last round I had Elvin Hayes right behind Arizin and even though I'm still not completely decided between Cowens and Hayes, it makes more sense to use my 3rd pick to vote for someone with significant traction instead of someone who hasn't been mentioned by anyone but me so far. Cowens being mostly known for his defense probably means his advanced stats underrate him a bit relatively to more offense orientated players. This makes it easier to pick Cowens over Hayes, who I otherwise see as having similar career value.

We're getting to a point in the list where my opinions aren't as solid anymore and are likely going to change more per round because the candidates at this point all have some very impressive qualities but also some glaring weaknesses. For now my order for other players getting traction is: Adrian Dantley > Anthony Davis > Bob Lanier > Alex English > Bob Cousy


Jones also served in the military for 2 years, which did impact longevity. I try not to penalize players for longevity when it is factors like these.
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#12 » by sansterre » Thu Feb 4, 2021 1:32 pm

DQuinn1575 wrote:Jones also served in the military for 2 years, which did impact longevity. I try not to penalize players for longevity when it is factors like these.

When? I don't see any missing year - was it for two years before being drafted or something?
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#13 » by Dutchball97 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 1:36 pm

DQuinn1575 wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote:1. Paul Arizin - One thing I'd like to clear up again is Arizin's longevity. He's 69th in career WS with 108 WS, which is more than Cowens, Jones and AD have (all around 85-95 WS). His two years of military service kept him from having comparable longevity to the likes of Parish, Dantley, Hayes or Lanier but I find it strange how especially for Cowens and Sam Jones people don't tend to mention lacking longevity, while they do for Arizin. Meanwhile, Arizin's regular season peak is also one of the best left out there. The real difference maker for me is the post-season though. On first look his play-off resume doesn't look breathtaking but you have to remember the play-offs didn't have as many rounds back then. In 58 for example they beat Schayes' Nationals 2-1 and then lost 1-4 to the Celtics. That's only 8 games but those 8 games are worth much more than a modern second round exit imo. Arizin has multiple of these runs where he didn't play a lot of games but only because the only teams he faced in the play-offs were strong teams with elite players, no first round freebies like we have now.

2. Sam Jones - I've been considering him for a while now but at this point I'm comfortable with voting him in. His peak (both in the regular season and play-offs) is good but nothing special compared to most of the other contenders here and like I just showed, Jones also isn't the strongest longevity candidate (by WS at least, which I prefer over simply counting years). The thing is that pretty much everyone getting traction has limited play-off showings. You either get guys like Parish or Hayes who have good longevity in both the RS and PS but didn't have all that spectacular peaks or guys with strong peaks but limited PS experience like Lanier or Davis. Sam Jones was 1B for the dynasty Celtics for a while and racked up a lot of great post-seasons. His 64 play-offs especially remind me of something like a light version of 2005 Manu and unlike Manu, this wasn't quite an outlier for Jones. I still think Jones is a difficult player to rank because nobody else really has a career like him but having a strong play-off record really helps his case here against some questionable play-off performers.

3. Dave Cowens - Last round I had Elvin Hayes right behind Arizin and even though I'm still not completely decided between Cowens and Hayes, it makes more sense to use my 3rd pick to vote for someone with significant traction instead of someone who hasn't been mentioned by anyone but me so far. Cowens being mostly known for his defense probably means his advanced stats underrate him a bit relatively to more offense orientated players. This makes it easier to pick Cowens over Hayes, who I otherwise see as having similar career value.

We're getting to a point in the list where my opinions aren't as solid anymore and are likely going to change more per round because the candidates at this point all have some very impressive qualities but also some glaring weaknesses. For now my order for other players getting traction is: Adrian Dantley > Anthony Davis > Bob Lanier > Alex English > Bob Cousy


Jones also served in the military for 2 years, which did impact longevity. I try not to penalize players for longevity when it is factors like these.


Of course. What I'm arguing is that lacking longevity isn't a good argument against Arizin, as players with similar or even less longeviy like Jones and Cowens don't get penalized for it either.
sansterre
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,312
And1: 1,816
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#14 » by sansterre » Thu Feb 4, 2021 3:13 pm

Did you know that in the regular season Bob Lanier shot 6% better than Cowens, despite having a higher usage and playing with worse teammates?

But did you know that in the playoffs that difference jumped to 9.3%? Do you realize how nuts a 9.3% shooting advantage is? And despite Cowens consistently playing on better teams, Lanier leads Cowens in WS/48 in the regular season by a fair amount (0.175 to 0.140) and by a much larger margin in the playoffs (0.175 to 0.119)?

Granted, Cowens considerable defensive impact doesn't show up in blocks (where Lanier was actually superior) and so Win Shares absolutely undervalues Cowens. But Cowens also played on winning teams and Lanier generally didn't, and Win Shares definitely has a strong winning bias.

Lanier's career playoff BPM is +5.21, which is between Shaq, Kobe, Kareem and Wade above him, and Garnett, Reggie Miller, Draymond Green and Scottie Pippen below him. Box Score metrics are plenty flawed, and a fair amount of anecdotal evidence suggests that Lanier's defense was somewhat worse than his blocks/steals indicate. But his incredible scoring efficiency against playoff defenses is quite notable.

And don't get me wrong, I love Cowens, and I won't be sad if he makes it in before Lanier (as he is likely to do).

Here's a nuts comparison:

Lanier in the playoffs from '74 to '81 averaged a 118 offensive rating on 21.1% usage rate.
Julius Erving in the playoffs in the same timeframe (including the ABA) averaged a 112 offensive rating on 27.4% usage.

Using Neil Payne's Usage->ORating conversion (https://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/index9e74.html?p=5500) he assigns a value of 0.833 for each usage percent that a high-usage player goes up or down. Dropping Erving to Lanier's level (a drop of 6.3% would be worth an estimated amount of 5.2 ORating. So, in theory, Erving's ORating with Lanier's usage would go up to about 117.2, still below Lanier's 118.

I'm serious, Bob Lanier might well have been the 2nd best offensive player in the playoffs in the late 70s (besides Kareem obviously).
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."

"Trust one who seeks the truth. Doubt one who claims to have found the truth."
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,341
And1: 6,141
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#15 » by Joao Saraiva » Thu Feb 4, 2021 3:56 pm

Votes
1. Adrian Dantley
2. Sam Jones
3. AD


I'm voting for Dantley here.

He was a proven leader with the Jazz, taking us to the playoffs for the 1st time in franchise history.

He's among the best scorers ever, and his footwork and post play are among the elite ever.

I think his reputation is a little lower since the Pistons won after he left, but I'm still not convinced they weren't a better team in 88 than when they won... I guess the Lakers just got worse overall and the Bulls were still on the rise. Also Bird stopped being Bird after 88.

I'm also high on his longevity since I believe he had 10 good seasons.
“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
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,682
And1: 11,254
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#16 » by Cavsfansince84 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 5:02 pm

sansterre wrote:Did you know that in the regular season Bob Lanier shot 6% better than Cowens, despite having a higher usage and playing with worse teammates?

But did you know that in the playoffs that difference jumped to 9.3%? Do you realize how nuts a 9.3% shooting advantage is? And despite Cowens consistently playing on better teams, Lanier leads Cowens in WS/48 in the regular season by a fair amount (0.175 to 0.140) and by a much larger margin in the playoffs (0.175 to 0.119)?

Granted, Cowens considerable defensive impact doesn't show up in blocks (where Lanier was actually superior) and so Win Shares absolutely undervalues Cowens. But Cowens also played on winning teams and Lanier generally didn't, and Win Shares definitely has a strong winning bias.

Lanier's career playoff BPM is +5.21, which is between Shaq, Kobe, Kareem and Wade above him, and Garnett, Reggie Miller, Draymond Green and Scottie Pippen below him. Box Score metrics are plenty flawed, and a fair amount of anecdotal evidence suggests that Lanier's defense was somewhat worse than his blocks/steals indicate. But his incredible scoring efficiency against playoff defenses is quite notable.

I'm serious, Bob Lanier might well have been the 2nd best offensive player in the playoffs in the late 70s (besides Kareem obviously).


Let me just say as someone who had Lanier as 3rd on my ballot a couple of ballots ago but changed it to AD I just wanna say that the Celtics weren't that good when Cowens joined them(they won 34 games the previous season) and granted they had Red as gm and Havlicek but I think Cowens was a huge part of their turnaround from 70 to 72. Also that Cowens was a better rebounder and passer. I think when a team has as much success as the Celtics had from 72-76 and Cowens is the guy who's seen as their best player and finishing top 4 in mvp voting most every year that its not just coincidence or can be chalked up to him playing on better teams. You have to consider it much like the role Duncan had on the Spurs from 99-07 though he obviously never reached the peak that Duncan did. Certain guys impacts go well beyond metrics and I think Duncan, Russell and Cowens are a few of those guys. Walton too.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,511
And1: 8,152
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#17 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 5:41 pm

1st vote: Robert Parish
So yeah.....I'm a meaningful longevity guy. This is not a secret, nor new. And Parish is actually my clear top pick via my criteria; as my list stands now, there's actually no one left on the table who's even within 5 places of Parish.

But seriously:
Parish was an entirely fine two-way player [and was so for a really damn long time].
While I think he’s somewhat more remembered for his offense, he was also a very capable defender thru much of his career (especially early on).

For example, during his first SEVEN seasons in the league......
*He never averaged less than 2.8 blocks per 100 possessions (and as high as 4.4).
**In both ‘79 and ‘81 he was 4th in the league in bpg despite playing just 31.7 and 28.0 mpg; was 5th in ‘82 while playing just 31.7 mpg, too.
***He had a cumulative 97 DRtg, leading the league in DRtg in ‘79; had a DRtg in the top 8 four times (three times in the top 3).

Offensively, he was a 7-footer who ran the floor pretty well, while being a competent finisher (making him one of the more notable transition threats among the centers of his era). He was a very very good low-post scorer (could utilize a little hook shot, or that crazy high-arcing turnaround of his), and also had a tiny bit of range (out to about 12-14 feet, anyway, he was quite effective).
Was an entirely decent FT-shooter for a big-man (72.1% for his career).
The primary reason he was averaging just 16-20 ppg during his prime was because he was playing on an extremely stacked team thru most of it. I've little doubt prime Parish could have avg ~23-24 ppg for a less talent-laden club.

While I don't think Parish could have been “the man” on a contender, I think we’re well past the point on the list where that is a necessary consideration. Especially when one has the kind of longevity that Parish had: he had a prime that basically lasted 13 years (>1,000 rs games), and five other seasons as decent role player of varying (but certainly relevant) value; only 3 seasons (years 19-21) that were of negligible or nil value.

And while he couldn’t have been #1 on a contender, he certainly could have been the #1 on a 40-45 win playoff participant. I think this was more or less proven in '89 when Bird missed the entire season: Parish was arguably the best player [at worst a "1B"] on a 42-win team.....this was at age 35 (the single-oldest man on the Celtic roster). No Bird to feed him, but old-man Parish still averaged 18.6 ppg @ +7.0% rTS, to go with 12.5 rpg and 1.5 bpg.

And he was clearly capable of being the #2 on a contender. Indeed, he WAS either the 2nd or 3rd best player on MULTIPLE contenders.
He’s got one ring as the clear #2 ('81), another as---at worst---the #2B ('84), a third ring as the clear #3 ('86), and then a 4th ring as a sparsely used limited-value bench player ('97).

He was 7th in MVP voting in ‘81, 4th in MVP voting in ‘82.

A look at his prime production…….
Robert Parish (‘79-’91) (13 years: 1022 rs games!)
Per 100 (rs): 25.8 pts, 15.6 reb, 2.5 ast, 1.3 stl, 2.5 blk with 3.6 tov @ 58.4% TS
PER 20.2, .168 WS/48, 113 ORtg/102 DRtg (+11) in 32.4 mpg
Playoffs Per 100: 22.9 pts, 13.9 reb, 1.9 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.2 tov @ .551 TS%
PER 16.5, .121 WS/48 in 34.9 mpg

Robert Parish (full career)
Per 100 (rs): 24.6 pts, 15.5 reb, 2.3 ast, 1.3 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.5 tov @ .571 TS%
PER 19.2, .154 WS/48, 111 ORtg/102 DRtg (+9) in 28.4 mpg
**And note this is over 21 years, 1611 rs games (more than any other player in history)
Per 100 (playoffs): 22.6 pts, 14.2 reb, 1.9 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.5 blk, 3.1 tov @ .547 TS%
PER 16.6, .121 WS/48, 109 ORtg/105 DRtg (+4) in 33.6 mpg

Career rs WS: 147.0 (#26 all-time)
Career playoff WS: 15.6 (#39 all-time)
9-Time NBA All-Star
2-Time All-NBA (1x 2nd, 1x 3rd)

That’s an awful lot of career value, imo.


2nd vote: Bob Lanier
A big body with sweet shooting touch in the mid and close ranges, very good rebounder, fair passing big. Sporadically [like in '74] was a good defensive big, though overall probably not so much. But when looking at his production, efficiency, and signs of lift, as well as his totally decent longevity (generously might be said to have had a 9-year prime [so so], but 14 mostly durable seasons in which he was ALWAYS good).......he seems like a worthy candidate for this stage.

From '72-'80 (extended prime) he averaged roughly 28 pts/100 possessions [give or take a couple tenths], ~14.4 reb/100, and ~4.2 ast/100 @ +4.2% rTS with a fair/respectable big-man turnover economy [based on '78-'84].
This is all while averaging 37.4 mpg thru those 9 seasons.

In '74 he averaged 1.6 steals and 3.7 blocks per 100 possessions with a 27.1% DREB%, anchoring a -3.9 rDRTG [3rd of 17 teams]. He had both the league's best individual DRtg AND the league's best DBPM (this was a league that contained Dave Cowens and Kareem).

Granted, that year appears like a completely outlier for him [defensively], but it's still worth acknowledging.

His WOWYR is more than strong for this stage of the list, with a prime WOWYR of +5.4 (career WOWYR of +5.8).
This jives with some of my own more crude WOWY studies for Lanier [omitted his first four years since he only missed four games TOTAL in that span]......
With/Without Records and Wins added per season (pro-rated to 82 games)
‘75: 39-37 (.513) with Lanier, 1-5 (.167) without him/+28.4 wins
‘76: 30-34 (.469) with Lanier, 6-12 (.333) without him/+11.1 wins
‘77: 38-26 (.594) with Lanier, 6-12 (.333) without him/+21.4 wins
‘78: 31-32 (.492) with Lanier, 7-12 (.368) without him/+10.2 wins
‘79: 21-32 (396) with Lanier, 9-20 (.310) without him/+7.1 wins
‘80 Pistons: 9-28 (.243) with Lanier, 5-12 (.294) without
‘80 Pistons overall before trading Lanier for Kent Benson): 14-40 (.259)
‘80 Pistons after trade: 2-26 (.071)
‘80 Bucks before obtaining Lanier: 29-27 (.518)
‘80 Bucks after obtaining Lanier: 20-6 (.769) (Lanier played all 26 games)
‘81: 48-19 (.716) with Lanier, 12-3 (.800) without him/-6.9 wins
‘82: 53-21 (.716) with Lanier, 2-6 (.250) without him/+38.2 wins

The above data spans eight years, SIX different head coaches, and a fair amount of supporting cast turnover, fwiw.

He always took a back seat to some of the other great centers of his day, as he just never seemed to be on a team that could generate the narrative. I'll back-track to that '74 season, because it was a pretty impressive accomplishment (almost a "carry-job", I would say [and I HATE that term, and feel it's way over-used])......but they won 52 games with a +4.02 SRS [2nd of 17] with just Lanier, post-injury Dave Bing, and nothing much behind that [Curtis Rowe was probably the 3rd-best player].
They lost in the first round, though it was in 7-games to 54-win +3.20 SRS Bulls team that boasted Chet Walker, Jerry Sloan, Bob Love, and Norm Van Lier; and the Pistons actually outscored them by 2.3 ppg in the series. The Piston victories were by 9, 14, and 4; while their losses were by 5, 1, 4, and 2.
sansterre would probably say they merely lost a coin-toss, or even that they may have been the marginally better team.

I'm also going to refer to sansterre's post #14 itt (the #54 thread).



3rd pick gets hard.
I guess I'll go with [throws dart]......
3rd vote: Anthony Davis(???)
Was thinking really hard about breaking the ice on Allen Iverson, too. Bob Cousy and Elvin Hayes are guys I'd be more or less comfortable supporting here, too.
I think AD is arguably the best peak left on the board [imo it's between him, Giannis, and TMac, for that distinction]. Whereas TMac has a clear [almost outlier] peak season ('03), I think AD actually has a couple years of similar value (I think quite highly of his '15 campaign, which I think gets slept on).

He's proven to be a good floor-raiser, and fit nicely next to Lebron to be the best 1-2 punch in the league on what ultimately was the championship team.
Came into the league as pretty much a borderline All-Star as a rookie [and as mentioned was (imo) at least weak MVP tier by his 3rd season], so though he's got only 8 seasons, he's packed a considerable amount of value in there.
"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
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,614
And1: 3,132
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#18 » by Owly » Thu Feb 4, 2021 6:04 pm

Cavsfansince84 wrote:
sansterre wrote:Did you know that in the regular season Bob Lanier shot 6% better than Cowens, despite having a higher usage and playing with worse teammates?

But did you know that in the playoffs that difference jumped to 9.3%? Do you realize how nuts a 9.3% shooting advantage is? And despite Cowens consistently playing on better teams, Lanier leads Cowens in WS/48 in the regular season by a fair amount (0.175 to 0.140) and by a much larger margin in the playoffs (0.175 to 0.119)?

Granted, Cowens considerable defensive impact doesn't show up in blocks (where Lanier was actually superior) and so Win Shares absolutely undervalues Cowens. But Cowens also played on winning teams and Lanier generally didn't, and Win Shares definitely has a strong winning bias.

Lanier's career playoff BPM is +5.21, which is between Shaq, Kobe, Kareem and Wade above him, and Garnett, Reggie Miller, Draymond Green and Scottie Pippen below him. Box Score metrics are plenty flawed, and a fair amount of anecdotal evidence suggests that Lanier's defense was somewhat worse than his blocks/steals indicate. But his incredible scoring efficiency against playoff defenses is quite notable.

I'm serious, Bob Lanier might well have been the 2nd best offensive player in the playoffs in the late 70s (besides Kareem obviously).


Let me just say as someone who had Lanier as 3rd on my ballot a couple of ballots ago but changed it to AD I just wanna say that the Celtics weren't that good when Cowens joined them(they won 34 games the previous season) and granted they had Red as gm and Havlicek but I think Cowens was a huge part of their turnaround from 70 to 72. Also that Cowens was a better rebounder and passer. I think when a team has as much success as the Celtics had from 72-76 and Cowens is the guy who's seen as their best player and finishing top 4 in mvp voting most every year that its not just coincidence or can be chalked up to him playing on better teams. You have to consider it much like the role Duncan had on the Spurs from 99-07 though he obviously never reached the peak that Duncan did. Certain guys impacts go well beyond metrics and I think Duncan, Russell and Cowens are a few of those guys. Walton too.

Curious what you mean here. Impact metrics are a beyond the boxscore measure and Lanier shows at least solidly in a variety of approaches (WoWY, Trex's or my own attempts - see previous projects) whilst Cowens' WoWY is disappointing pedestrian. A very, very noisy measure to be sure but one pointing entirely in the wrong direction for a Cowens over Lanier because "non-boxscore".

I think a full boxscore would have captured a lot Russell's value if you also price in intimidation/deterrence with with high volume, high IQ shot-blockers.
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,945
And1: 710
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#19 » by DQuinn1575 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 6:11 pm

sansterre wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:Jones also served in the military for 2 years, which did impact longevity. I try not to penalize players for longevity when it is factors like these.

When? I don't see any missing year - was it for two years before being drafted or something?


Between junior and senior year of college. That’s why he was drafted again and why he started his career late.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,511
And1: 8,152
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #54 

Post#20 » by trex_8063 » Thu Feb 4, 2021 6:37 pm

Odinn21 wrote:
---

I'd like to get some opinions on following players because it feels too close and too crowded;
Mutombo
Mourning
Cowens
Unseld
Parish
Lanier

Mutombo; To me he was like the ultimate Ben Wallace. Not an offensive liability, better longevity and prime duration. Also arguably better defensive force.
Mourning; Considerable prime duration for this stage even though the injury hurts his overall longevity but it's still not awful entirely. Also, probably only 2nd to Willis Reed in terms of peak among those names.
Cowens; He has everything (peak, prime, prime duration) but not great at anything particularly. His longevity isn't great BTW.
Unseld; I'd rate his peak after Reed and Mourning. Good prime duration, OK longevity. In terms of quality, similar to Mutombo but worse on defense and better on offense.
Parish; Not a particularly great peak but talk about longevity. His peak and prime quality are in the bottom half among these names but it's easily can be said that his longevity makes up far more than that against the other names.
Lanier; Similar to Cowens, good peak, prime quality and duration. Plus better longevity.



Mutombo - More or less agree: not an offensive liability [or at least not a BIG one], and arguably better defensively than Big Ben [personally I think he was a little better during respective peak/primes]. And solid longevity besides. Because defense is so hard to valuate numerically, I could see a wide "appropriate" range for Mutombo: as high as 50(ish), as low as maybe 75(ish). Really can't see going lower than that [his longevity is just too good].

Mourning - again more or less agree. Very similar/near guys like Reed or McHale in terms of peak. Somewhat short prime [total career length a pinch on the short side, too]. One might say "but Reed did too, and he went in at #45", to which I'll reply: I didn't vote for Reed; imo, he went WAAY too early.
Interestingly, I think he's a little overrated offensively because he frequently flirted with that 20 ppg benchmark [going as high as 23.2 ppg once]. But he was REALLY turnover-prone (like Dwight Howard level) while generally having only "good" [as opposed to "elite"] shooting efficiency, a career assist-rate of <2 ast/100 possessions, and a merely decent OREB%.

Unseld - idk. He's another guy sort of like Mutombo with a potentially wide range of "appropriate" placement. He saw too much success follow him his entire career, WOWY studies look too good, and too well-thought of by his peers to not acknowledge that he was at least somewhat better than his boxscore. Some of it is visible on tape, too [e.g. screens, outlet passing, sound defensive positioning].

Cowens - Another toughy. I don't think the box is fully capturing his defensive value. Love his energy, his shooting range helps space things [though tbh I think he shot a little too often]. Solid big-man turnover economy based on '78-'83. Incidentally, his rate metrics do take a small jump upward in '78 relative to '77, which makes one wonder if it's because it's the first year with turnovers in the mix [though '77 was also a year with missed games]. '78 is arguably his best all-around statistical season when you factor in mpg.
Longevity is a bit lacking [which hurts things for him as far as I'm concerned]. It's also a pinch troubling [or at least puzzling] that for all the talk of intangible value, WOWY studies are fairly pedestrian.

Anyway, all of these four hover in the same vicinity (55-65 range) for me [and all of them above Willis Reed for me, too, btw].


Regarding Parish and Lanier, well......see my above post.
"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

Return to Player Comparisons