RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 (Horace Grant)

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

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 (Horace Grant) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:17 pm

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. Dave Cowens
55. Adrian Dantley
56. Sam Jones
57. Bob Lanier
58. Dikembe Mutombo
59. Elvin Hayes
60. Paul Arizin
61. Anthony Davis
62. Robert Parish
63. Bob Cousy
64. Alonzo Mourning
65. Nate Thurmond
66. Allen Iverson
67. Tracy McGrady
68. Alex English
69. Vince Carter
70. Wes Unseld
71. Tony Parker
72. Rasheed Wallace
73. Dominique Wilkins
74. Giannis Antetokounmpo
75. Kevin Johnson
76. Bobby Jones
77. Bob McAdoo
78. Shawn Marion
79. Dennis Rodman
80. Larry Nance
81. Ben Wallace
82. Hal Greer
83. Grant Hill
84. Sidney Moncrief
85. Damian Lillard
86. Chris Bosh
87. ???

Target stop-time around 10am EST on Thursday.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill 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:.

[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
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#2 » by HeartBreakKid » Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:22 pm

Criteria

Spoiler:
I'm a pretty big peak guy, I'm not that interested in value of total seasons. The value of multiple seasons to me is to give me a greater sample size to understanding how good they were on the court, not necessarily the totality of their impact through out the years.

I also value impact over all else, and I define impact as the ability to help a team win games. Boxscore stats, team accolades and individual accolades (unless I agree with them personally) have very little baring on my voting so some names will look a bit wonky. The reason why I ignore accolades and winningness is because basketball is a team game and the players are largely not in control of the quality of their teammates or the health of their team (or their own personal health in key moments), thus I don't see the value of rating players based on xx has this many MVPs versus this guy has this many rings. In addition, I simply find this type of analysis boring because it's quite easy to simply look at who has a bigger laundry list of accomplishments.



1) Bill Walton. He is the best player by far here. He was probably a top 3 player in the world during his last couple years in college as well, though I believe this is NBA only. I am quite certain that Bill Walton is a top 20 peak ever. He is a top ten defensive anchor which alone adds more value than anyone left, and his offensive passing can generate very efficient offenses without him needing to score.

2)) Nikola Jokic. #2 vote I'll give to the only guy who is large and passes better than Walton. I'm not a longevity guy but Jokic has actually been a star caliber player for longer than people think. He was greatly underplayed in his 2nd season and Malone was criticized for that even back then. He has 4 seasons of all-star impact and two seasons where I had him as the 2nd best player in the league. I do think his offense is so special from his position that it causes an imbalance that makes him more valuable than two way bigs. His scoring ability might be the best among all the bigs left, and what's great about him is that he doesn't need to score a lot to have impact. Walton's defense is so intense that I can't imagine taking Jokic over that, but everyone else left is a tier or 2 down from either Walton's offense or his defense.


3) Connie Hawkins - He was widely seen as the best player in the early days of the ABA and was believed that he would have been a dominant force had he been in the NBA. He was generally rated higher than Rick Barry while they were both in the ABA (a player who got in a long time ago), and the stats and results seem to back that up as well. His interior scoring, great passing and rebounding make him an easy candidate.












Porter > G Williams > Issel > Hornacek > H Grant > Cunningham > Dennis Johnson > Archibald > Lucas > C Anthony > Bellamy > DeBusschere
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 21,560
And1: 20,142
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#3 » by Hal14 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:26 pm

Hal14 wrote:1. Dennis Johnson
2. Tiny Archibald
3. Walt Bellamy

Johnson was Finals MVP in 79. The dude was an animal. Flying around the court like a bat outta hell, some of the best defense a guard has ever played. Going all out, hustling, taking it strong to the rim.

Next, let's look at 84. 83-84 was his first year on the Celtics. The year before that in 83 the Celtics got swept in the 2nd round by the Bucks. Yes, KC Jones taking over as coach was a factor as well, but the Celtics adding Johnson was a HUGE reason why they went from being swept in the 2nd round in 83 to NBA world champs beating the Lakers in the finals the very next year in 84 (with Magic and Kareem in their prime).

In both 84 and 86 Johnson was one of the team's top 4 players, came through in the clutch time and time again and Bird is on record saying that Johnson was the best teammate he ever played with (meaning Bird thinks Johnson was better than Parish and Mchale).

https://www.sportscasting.com/larry-bird-reveals-the-best-player-hes-ever-played-with/

Johnson was one of the best defensive guards of all time, easily one of the top 10 defensive guards ever. The guy had very good size and strength at the PG position which made him a tough matchup, early in his career had great explosiveness and athleticism, he could score inside, drive to the basket and as his career went on developed a deadly outside shot - especially in the mid range area, not as much from 3 because at the time 3's weren't being taken very much across the league (early in his career there was no 3 point line), plus he could rebound well, unselfishly looked to get the ball to his teammates but would make you pay dearly if you ignored him too much on offense, plus of course his outstanding defense.

Solid longevity, played 14 seasons (13 of which he played 27+ mins a game and all of them he played in 70+ games) which was solid for that era, especially considering he played in a ton (180 to be exact) of playoff games.

How about durability? The guy always played, he was always in the lineup. Out of his 14 seasons:
-he played 72+ games in 14/14 (100%)
-he played in 77+ games in 12/14 seasons (86%)
-he played in 80+ games in 7/14 seasons (50%)

How about Rasheed's durability?
-he played 72+ games in 14/16 (63%)
-he played in 77+ games in 8/16 seasons (50%)
-he played in 80+ games in 10/16 seasons (13%)

Here's a glimpse into how good Johnson was on defense:


Johnson was as good defensively as any guard to ever play. Only guards I might put over him on D are Jordan, Payton and maybe Frazier.

How clutch was Johnson? Take a look at this huge shot to beat the Lakers in the finals:


Want more clutch plays? Larry Bird made a great steal, but it wouldn't have mattered, the Celtics would have still lost that game (and the series) if Johnson didn't race in towards the basket, catch the ball in traffic and finish over a defender:


If you want a guys who put up some nice advanced stats in an era where advanced stats didn't even exist yet, sure go ahead and vote for Hornacek. But if you want to win, then DJ is your guy.

Tiny is a 6 time all-star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team. You want peak? Only player ever to lead the NBA in both scoring and assists in the same season. And he was a key piece on the 1981 NBA championship-winning Celtics. Solid defender. Very few point guards in the history of the game possessed his combination of scoring and distributing. And he did it in an era before it was easier for point guards to dominate the league (like it's been since 2005). He'd be even higher up this list if not for injuries, but still had 13 seasons which is pretty good longevity, especially for that era.

Bellamy was a dominant center who could do it all - hit shots, score with power inside, rebound, defend, run the floor. Good combination of size, strength and skill. Sure, his ability diminished in his later years, but that's why he's not a top 50 player. If you just look at top 1 or 2 years for peak, there are very few centers who can match Bellamy. It's about time he gets voted in:

1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#4 » by trex_8063 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:29 pm

1st vote: Horace Grant
See post 10 of the #80 thread for arguments, if you don't think he's a solid candidate here (at least if longevity of quality factors into your criteria AT ALL [and perhaps even if it doesn't, frankly; by this stage I'm not sure it matters all that much]).


2nd vote: Dan Issel
As was discussed in the #81 thread (circa-post 30), Dan Issel is sort of like Amar'e Stoudemire (not in style, but in substance)......except with good longevity/durability.
He wasn't much defensively [though probably better than Stat], but he scored and scored and scored (and fairly efficiently: +3.3% rTS for his entire 15-year career, with a solid turnover economy too).

We're talking about the guy who is 11th all-time in career ABA/NBA combined points scored. He's ahead of Hakeem and Elvin Hayes. He's ahead of guys who pretty much hang their hats on being great scorers [and not much else] and who've already been voted in [e.g. Dominique Wilkins, Alex English, Adrian Dantley], as well as Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, Reggie Miller, Oscar Robertson, John Havlicek, Rick Barry, etc etc etc.

He's also #31 all-time in career rebounds.
He's #23 all-time in career rs WS--->the highest ranked player still on the table; he's actually the ONLY player in the top 39 all-time still not voted on to this list (one of only TWO players [with Walt Bellamy] in the top 49 all-time who are not yet on this list).
Going into this current season he was #80 all-time [or since 1973] in career VORP.

He was only awarded an All-Star appearance once in the NBA [though 6 consecutive years in the ABA], but look at his numbers: he was posting All-Star calibre metrics year after year pretty much until his 14th season.

I don't think there's any way he can't at least be in the discussion.


3rd vote: Carmelo Anthony
For me this one has got to be one of Webber, LaMarcus, or Melo; I've tentatively landed on Melo.
As sansterre elaborated upon in his greatest teams project (#4 team), there is perhaps an edge in the modern era in having a reasonably efficient high-usage perimeter player.
I do think a prime/peak Melo COULD have been the 1st-option on a contender team; tbh, I think the '09 Nuggets more or less proved that [they were darn near a contender; just a pinch stronger extended depth could have done it, imo]. NOTE: I'm drawing a clear distinction between "1st option" and "best player"......they are NOT necessarily the same thing.

A title with Melo as your best player?......no, probably not. But with him as your 1st option scorer? Yes, I think it's possible.
And what's more, I think he more or less proved in playing next to Iverson, Billups, Amar'e, and on the Olympic teams that he can co-exist next to other high-octane superstar scorers.

And going into this current season, Melo was 14th in all of NBA/ABA history in total points scored. imo, there are simply not a lot of players who---in any circumstance---would have been capable of achieving that in a competitive era.

And fwiw, I think he's one of those players for whom the noise occasionally was not "filtered out" in his impact metrics. For example in '13: looking at the rest of the cast, I simply find it hard to believe that the Knicks achieved that degree of success [and the best offense in franchise history], without a fair chunk of it being tied to him.

So anyway, I'm going with him.


Among those who have received votes of any kind or traction:
Grant > Issel > Melo > Webber/LMA > Beaty > Cheeks > Sikma > Porter > Walker > DeBusschere > Hornacek > Hawkins > G.Williams > D.Johnson > Cunningham > Walton > Jokic > Tiny (may change the order on Walton/Jokic/Tiny as we go along, but this is how I'm currently feeling).
"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
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#5 » by Dutchball97 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:06 pm

1. Nikola Jokic - I might be voting for Jokic for a while but I think he deserves to make the list at least. Jokic' case is very similar to Giannis in my opinion. Both have 4 high level years along with 1 other positively contributing year. While both have 4 great regular seasons it is clear Giannis has the edge up till 2020, which is why I have him ahead. The difference in longevity is just Giannis' first two years when he was barely a replacement level player so if you're fine with Giannis being voted in this range, how can you justify not having Jokic not in your top 100 at all? Their play-off resumes are comparable at this point as well. Giannis has 5.8 WS and 3.4 VORP in the post-season so far compared to 5.5 WS and 3.5 VORP for Jokic. Giannis has reached the play-offs more often (5 times) than Jokic (2 times) but both have 3 play-off series wins at this point. While Giannis has played 10 more games than Jokic, the reason why the numbers are still close is that both of Jokic' runs were arguably better than any of Giannis' play-off outings. It's a shame some of the voters don't consider him for the top 100 project at all but at this point of the list we're all simply going to have to accept players will receive votes that others don't have among their next 25 picks at all.

2. Gus Williams - While another voter already has Dennis Johnson on his ballot, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned his teammate on the 79 champion Supersonics yet tbh. Gus Williams was only a 2 time All-Star so I understand he might fly under the radar for some people but this massively undervalues him. His prime quality and duration really isn't much different than Ben Wallace. It maybe shouldn't be a surprise I'm this high on Gus WIlliams because I've consistently put a big emphasis on play-off performance and Gus was a post-season savant who consistently stepped his game up when it counted most. After being the best player for the 78 Sonics that lost game 7 of the finals, he went on to post a 23.8 PER, .210 WS/48 and 6.7 BPM alongside a league leading 2.7 WS and 1.3 VORP on the way to a championship the next year. That isn't the end of Gus Williams being amazing in the play-offs though. In the 1980, 82, 83 and 84 post-seasons he had 20+ PER, .150+ WS/48 and 6+ BPM in every single one of those campaigns.

3.Terry Porter - Like Gus Williams, Terry Porter is only a 2-time All-Star but just like with Gus this underrates Porter's prime significantly. Porter's prime was cut short but he still managed 6 very strong seasons from 87/88 till 92/93. In the play-offs he was always solid but his main case there are 3 very strong consecutive post-seasons in 1990, 91 and 92. He played 58 play-off games over that 3 year stretch and was playing at a high level throughout. I think Gus Williams just has a few more really strong post-seasons but other than that I don't see much seperating them.

Anfernee Hardaway > Draymond Green > Jimmy Butler > Horace Grant > James Worthy > Paul George > Jeff Hornacek > Kyle Lowry > Billy Cunningham > Jerry Lucas > Walt Bellamy > Carmelo Anthony > Maurice Cheeks > Andrei Kirilenko > Eddie Jones > Bill Walton > Connie Hawkins > Dennis Johnson > Dave DeBusschere > Tiny Archibald
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,141
And1: 9,759
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#6 » by penbeast0 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:22 pm

1. Horace Grant -- 3 long, very good career guy are next on my list. Grant never graduated to "great" in my book but made very consistent contributions both as a very good (not great) defender and good offensive player. Grant's advantage comes from his superior passing and turnover economy.

2. Jeff Hornacek -- The Jazz offense improved so much when they added Hornacek to give them a 3rd competent offensive player next to Stockton/Malone; that impressed me a lot.

3. Terry Porter -- feels strange that Porter is getting a lot of mention and Derek Harper's name has not come up. I always felt they were very similar talents with Porter a bit better offensively and Harper a bit better defensively. I will probably put Harper into my list eventually but Porter has been looking better in hindsight while Harper has remained about the same.

Looking at the list from 2017, the following names have not been voted in yet:


80. Dan Issel
82. Worthy
83. Webber
86. H. Grant
87. Brand
88. T. Porter
89. Cheeks
90. Anthony
91. T. Hardaway
92. Sikma
93. Cunningham
94. Blaylock
95. C. Walker
97. Divac
98. Walton
99. Hawkins
100. Mel Daniels

I am looking at James Worthy, Connie Hawkins, Dave DeBussschere, Billy Cunningham, Dan Issel, Gus Williams, Derek Harper, Dennis Johnson, Carmelo Anthony, Bill Walton, Jokic in roughly that order.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#7 » by trex_8063 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:46 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
I am looking at James Worthy, Connie Hawkins, Dave DeBussschere, Billy Cunningham, Dan Issel, Gus Williams, Derek Harper, Dennis Johnson, Carmelo Anthony, Bill Walton, Jokic in roughly that order.


Care to elaborate on Derek Harper?
He just feels a little out of place: probably a top 200 player, and maybe even a darkhorse candidate for top 150. Top 100, though? I'm just not seeing it.

His longevity is sort of.....weird. He played 16 [durable] seasons, tallying up something like 1200 games and 37k minutes.......but his seasons that look good and truly like prime seasons number just 5-6: like '87-'91 [+/- '86??].

He's got several other of what I might call "peri-prime" years, wherein he's still playing OK, but they're substantially disconnected in quality from '87-'91, so I don't feel I can put them all under the same umbrella.

And even in that best 5-year span.......he was a guy who would net somewhere around 18 and 7 on basically average [or slightly above] shooting efficiency and a basically average [marginally better at best] PG turnover economy, while playing good [not great] defense.
It's a very good player, to be sure, and was probably snubbed of at least one All-Star appearance [just like Mike Conley until this year]. He's just not one that's blowing anyone's doors down, though. And again, that's over a merely 5-year period, with pretty much all of the rest of his career being at least one step down from that.

I know he got steals, and has an All-D 2nd team nod or two; though for whatever it's worth, his late-career DRAPM's are actually kinda bad.


idk, I guess I just ask why him over:

Mel Daniels
LaMarcus Aldridge
Chris Webber
Zelmo Beaty
Vlade Divac
Jack Sikma
Shawn Kemp
Bill Laimbeer
Al Horford
Elton Brand
Blake Griffin
Marc Gasol
Kevin Love
...just to name a mere handful of available bigs.

Or the following wings?:
Chet Walker
Marques Johnson
Bill Sharman
Andre Iguodala
Chris Mullin
Cliff Hagan

Or even among his own position, why him over?:
Kyle Lowry
Tim Hardaway
Mark Price
Mike Conley
Deron Williams


This is obviously just a very VERY partial list (could also include names like Bellamy, Stoudemire, Johnston, Dumars, McGinnis, Tiny, or Millsap [among still others]; but I suspect I already know why in some of those cases).
"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
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,141
And1: 9,759
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#8 » by penbeast0 » Tue Apr 20, 2021 11:29 pm

Threw him in there as a thought project to get feedback. When they were playing, I always thought it was pretty much pick-em between Harper and Porter though TP is getting more love as the value of his 3 point shooting became more evident so I wanted to throw him out there. But hadn't done any research yet. Might throw Bob Dandridge out there too of the guys you didn't mention.

Just like to see what people think of certain guys.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#9 » by trex_8063 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 12:55 am

penbeast0 wrote:Threw him in there as a thought project to get feedback. When they were playing, I always thought it was pretty much pick-em between Harper and Porter though TP is getting more love as the value of his 3 point shooting became more evident so I wanted to throw him out there. But hadn't done any research yet. Might throw Bob Dandridge out there too of the guys you didn't mention.

Just like to see what people think of certain guys.


Yeah, Bob Dandridge too I'd have comfortably ahead of Derek Harper.

tbh, I'm not sure he's even the best "Harper" on the table: Derek vs Ron all-time is a viable topic, imo.

That's more the calibre of guy Derek Harper falls in line with for me; guys like: Ron Harper, Byron Scott, Gail Goodrich, Rod Strickland [I know you're low on him], Calvin Murphy, Jimmy Jones [had 1 or 2 amazing seasons in the early ABA], Andre Miller, Terrell Brandon, Jason Terry, Mark Jackson, Richard Hamilton, etc. That's closer to his company (and I'm not sure I wouldn't have most of those guys ahead of him).
"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
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#10 » by trex_8063 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:02 pm

Thru post #9:

Horace Grant - 2 (penbeast0, trex_8063)
Nikola Jokic - 1 (Dutchball97)
Bill Walton - 1 (HeartBreakKid)
Dennis Johnson - 1 (Hal14)


About 24 hours left for this one.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill 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:.

[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
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,614
And1: 3,132
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#11 » by Owly » Wed Apr 21, 2021 3:28 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:Threw him in there as a thought project to get feedback. When they were playing, I always thought it was pretty much pick-em between Harper and Porter though TP is getting more love as the value of his 3 point shooting became more evident so I wanted to throw him out there. But hadn't done any research yet. Might throw Bob Dandridge out there too of the guys you didn't mention.

Just like to see what people think of certain guys.


Yeah, Bob Dandridge too I'd have comfortably ahead of Derek Harper.

tbh, I'm not sure he's even the best "Harper" on the table: Derek vs Ron all-time is a viable topic, imo.

That's more the calibre of guy Derek Harper falls in line with for me; guys like: Ron Harper, Byron Scott, Gail Goodrich, Rod Strickland [I know you're low on him], Calvin Murphy, Jimmy Jones [had 1 or 2 amazing seasons in the early ABA], Andre Miller, Terrell Brandon, Jason Terry, Mark Jackson, Richard Hamilton, etc. That's closer to his company (and I'm not sure I wouldn't have most of those guys ahead of him).

As much as you think Pen might be bullish on Derek I think you might be on Ron. In Cleveland he got to a nice SG season by year 3. Then traded, LA, injury and 91 to 95 (four and half years of games, 11889 minutes) provides 3.2 Offensive Win Shares. Total. Just one measure, mostly on bad teams. But still, I would argue, an empty calories scorer and thrice consecutively graded as D defender by the Barry Handbooks (after the seasons 93-95). In mitigation ... Sterling's Clippers (and some injury hangover) but still. After being exposed to expansion and turned down (no one wanted his contract) he does successfully reinvent himself and lasts deeper into his 30s.

I get that it's spitballing but I also know you got deep in your own list and for me having Ron in the same tier as say a Brandon or a Miller (otoh, for me ...) that too seems a bit ... generous.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#12 » by trex_8063 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:26 pm

Owly wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:Threw him in there as a thought project to get feedback. When they were playing, I always thought it was pretty much pick-em between Harper and Porter though TP is getting more love as the value of his 3 point shooting became more evident so I wanted to throw him out there. But hadn't done any research yet. Might throw Bob Dandridge out there too of the guys you didn't mention.

Just like to see what people think of certain guys.


Yeah, Bob Dandridge too I'd have comfortably ahead of Derek Harper.

tbh, I'm not sure he's even the best "Harper" on the table: Derek vs Ron all-time is a viable topic, imo.

That's more the calibre of guy Derek Harper falls in line with for me; guys like: Ron Harper, Byron Scott, Gail Goodrich, Rod Strickland [I know you're low on him], Calvin Murphy, Jimmy Jones [had 1 or 2 amazing seasons in the early ABA], Andre Miller, Terrell Brandon, Jason Terry, Mark Jackson, Richard Hamilton, etc. That's closer to his company (and I'm not sure I wouldn't have most of those guys ahead of him).

As much as you think Pen might be bullish on Derek I think you might be on Ron. In Cleveland he got to a nice SG season by year 3. Then traded, LA, injury and 91 to 95 (four and half years of games, 11889 minutes) provides 3.2 Offensive Win Shares. Total. Just one measure, mostly on bad teams. But still, I would argue, an empty calories scorer and thrice consecutively graded as D defender by the Barry Handbooks (after the seasons 93-95). In mitigation ... Sterling's Clippers (and some injury hangover) but still. After being exposed to expansion and turned down (no one wanted his contract) he does successfully reinvent himself and lasts deeper into his 30s.

I get that it's spitballing but I also know you got deep in your own list and for me having Ron in the same tier as say a Brandon or a Miller (otoh, for me ...) that too seems a bit ... generous.


It's a slight derail, but discussion is thin anyway, and I'm not sure a thread dedicated to Ron v Derek would garner much interest. So....

I might be bullish on Ron Harper, but I'll at least try to provide some reasons why.

Hard to say how much of an "empty calories" scorer he was. What I do note is that he seemed to be good for roughly a 22/5/5 statline on perhaps slighlty poor(ish) shooting efficiency for mediocre-to-poor teams; scaled to roughly a 19/5/5 player on kinda good shooting efficiency for a good team.
Take the '89 Cavs as an example: this was a 57-win team with a +2.8 rORTG. Harper averaged 18.6/5.0/5.3 on +3.3% rTS for this team; he was third in WS (behind Price and Nance [small margin to both], a little ahead of Brad Daugherty), and led the team in VORP.
I honestly don't remember what he was like on defense at that time; though he averaged a sort of monstrous 3.2 stl + 1.3 blk per 100 that year [without fouling over-much], this while leading the team that was the 2nd-rated -4.9 rDRTG (that's with Brad Daugherty in the middle) in total minutes played. And fwiw he states in The Last Dance that he feels he should have been called upon to guard Jordan for that final possession, not Ehlo.
Don't know what we can conclude from all of that, but it seems unlikely that he was a bad [D-grade] defender.

Post-injury he still managed some 18/5/5 seasons for some respectable teams (Clips were fair/decent in '92 and '93).

Again, I don't specificaly remember his defense in the years you specified, though he did avg 3.8 stl + 1.0 blk per 100 collectively in those three years [decent on the defensive glass for a guard, too] without fouling too much. They were a decent defense in '93, too.
Just the year before the '92 Clips had been the 5th-rated defense at -3.5 rDRTG with Ron Harper playing the most minutes on the team [by +240 over 2nd].

And I'll note that his all-around AuPM in '94 was +1.0, and +2.3 in '95.

Not definitively saying the Barry handbooks were wrong, though there is evidence to suggest they weren't spot-on.


Subsequently [well past his prime], he re-invents himself in some mold of the "quintessential Phil Jackson PG", who scores little, but doesn't make mistakes [that is: turn it over] while playing respectable defense (his DRAPM's would be pretty consistently strong thru '00)......and he does this as a consistent starter for FIVE title teams.

And his impact metrics look good for nearly all of them.....
'96: +3.3 AuPM
'97: +4.01 NPI RAPM
'98: +4.24 PI RAPM (26th in league), +3.40 NPI (22nd in league)
'99 (now for a terrible team): +3.88 PI RAPM (27th in league), +1.56 NPI
'00: +2.39 PI RAPM, +0.82 NPI
'01 (final season, 37 yrs old): -0.4 NPI RAPM


So idk......it might be bullish to rank him ahead of Derek Harper [which I never definitively said I do/would]; but he's got some considerable career value, imo.
"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
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#13 » by HeartBreakKid » Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:46 pm

I never would have thought of Ron Harper as a bad defender. That's interesting, from watching him he seemed pretty good. Maybe when he was younger he didn't give a damn about it.

I do like how we're talking about guys who might struggle to make a top 200 in this thread though lol
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,748
And1: 11,278
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#14 » by Cavsfansince84 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:58 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
Owly wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Yeah, Bob Dandridge too I'd have comfortably ahead of Derek Harper.

tbh, I'm not sure he's even the best "Harper" on the table: Derek vs Ron all-time is a viable topic, imo.

That's more the calibre of guy Derek Harper falls in line with for me; guys like: Ron Harper, Byron Scott, Gail Goodrich, Rod Strickland [I know you're low on him], Calvin Murphy, Jimmy Jones [had 1 or 2 amazing seasons in the early ABA], Andre Miller, Terrell Brandon, Jason Terry, Mark Jackson, Richard Hamilton, etc. That's closer to his company (and I'm not sure I wouldn't have most of those guys ahead of him).

As much as you think Pen might be bullish on Derek I think you might be on Ron. In Cleveland he got to a nice SG season by year 3. Then traded, LA, injury and 91 to 95 (four and half years of games, 11889 minutes) provides 3.2 Offensive Win Shares. Total. Just one measure, mostly on bad teams. But still, I would argue, an empty calories scorer and thrice consecutively graded as D defender by the Barry Handbooks (after the seasons 93-95). In mitigation ... Sterling's Clippers (and some injury hangover) but still. After being exposed to expansion and turned down (no one wanted his contract) he does successfully reinvent himself and lasts deeper into his 30s.

I get that it's spitballing but I also know you got deep in your own list and for me having Ron in the same tier as say a Brandon or a Miller (otoh, for me ...) that too seems a bit ... generous.


It's a slight derail, but discussion is thin anyway, and I'm not sure a thread dedicated to Ron v Derek would garner much interest. So....

I might be bullish on Ron Harper, but I'll at least try to provide some reasons why.

Hard to say how much of an "empty calories" scorer he was. What I do note is that he seemed to be good for roughly a 22/5/5 statline on perhaps slighlty poor(ish) shooting efficiency for mediocre-to-poor teams; scaled to roughly a 19/5/5 player on kinda good shooting efficiency for a good team.
Take the '89 Cavs as an example: this was a 57-win team with a +2.8 rORTG. Harper averaged 18.6/5.0/5.3 on +3.3% rTS for this team; he was third in WS (behind Price and Nance [small margin to both], a little ahead of Brad Daugherty), and led the team in VORP.
I honestly don't remember what he was like on defense at that time; though he averaged a sort of monstrous 3.2 stl + 1.3 blk per 100 that year [without fouling over-much], this while leading the team that was the 2nd-rated -4.9 rDRTG (that's with Brad Daugherty in the middle) in total minutes played. And fwiw he states in The Last Dance that he feels he should have been called upon to guard Jordan for that final possession, not Ehlo.
Don't know what we can conclude from all of that, but it seems unlikely that he was a bad [D-grade] defender.

Post-injury he still managed some 18/5/5 seasons for some respectable teams (Clips were fair/decent in '92 and '93).

Again, I don't specificaly remember his defense in the years you specified, though he did avg 3.8 stl + 1.0 blk per 100 collectively in those three years [decent on the defensive glass for a guard, too] without fouling too much. They were a decent defense in '93, too.
Just the year before the '92 Clips had been the 5th-rated defense at -3.5 rDRTG with Ron Harper playing the most minutes on the team [by +240 over 2nd].

And I'll note that his all-around AuPM in '94 was +1.0, and +2.3 in '95.

Not definitively saying the Barry handbooks were wrong, though there is evidence to suggest they weren't spot-on.


Subsequently [well past his prime], he re-invents himself in some mold of the "quintessential Phil Jackson PG", who scores little, but doesn't make mistakes [that is: turn it over] while playing respectable defense (his DRAPM's would be pretty consistently strong thru '00)......and he does this as a consistent starter for FIVE title teams.

And his impact metrics look good for nearly all of them.....
'96: +3.3 AuPM
'97: +4.01 NPI RAPM
'98: +4.24 PI RAPM (26th in league), +3.40 NPI (22nd in league)
'99 (now for a terrible team): +3.88 PI RAPM (27th in league), +1.56 NPI
'00: +2.39 PI RAPM, +0.82 NPI
'01 (final season, 37 yrs old): -0.4 NPI RAPM


So idk......it might be bullish to rank him ahead of Derek Harper [which I never definitively said I do/would]; but he's got some considerable career value, imo.


My view on Harper is that he was on his way to making a ton of all star teams while he was with the Cavs and then he went to the Clips where he only plays in 67 games his first two seasons there due to some bad injuries. In short, I think he was better suited to play within a more controlled offense with a guy like Price holding the reins then as a guy to just give the ball to and that was after he lost a decent amount of his athleticism. In Cleveland he had near elite level athleticism. I don't think he ever got back to that level after the knee injuries. I also think he semi reinvented himself with the Bulls as a defender/ball handler and that the Bulls staff were very good at teaching defense. Grant for instance was seen as terrible defensively his first 2-3 years with them then he worked at it and became a very good defensive player. So I think Harper likely improved a lot on that end once he focused on it and had MJ hollering at him in practices plus their coaches working with him.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#15 » by trex_8063 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 7:02 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:I never would have thought of Ron Harper as a bad defender. That's interesting, from watching him he seemed pretty good. Maybe when he was younger he didn't give a damn about it.

I do like how we're talking about guys who might struggle to make a top 200 in this thread though lol


That was my impression too, though admittedly most of that is from his Bulls 2nd 3-peat years; I don't really recall his earlier years (though the data I presented calls into question him being an actual "bad" defender in some/most of those years too).

Bit of a derail, but I didn't figure it warranted a topic of its own [maybe I'm wrong about the interest it has generated :)].
"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: #87 

Post#16 » by Owly » Wed Apr 21, 2021 7:05 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
Owly wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Yeah, Bob Dandridge too I'd have comfortably ahead of Derek Harper.

tbh, I'm not sure he's even the best "Harper" on the table: Derek vs Ron all-time is a viable topic, imo.

That's more the calibre of guy Derek Harper falls in line with for me; guys like: Ron Harper, Byron Scott, Gail Goodrich, Rod Strickland [I know you're low on him], Calvin Murphy, Jimmy Jones [had 1 or 2 amazing seasons in the early ABA], Andre Miller, Terrell Brandon, Jason Terry, Mark Jackson, Richard Hamilton, etc. That's closer to his company (and I'm not sure I wouldn't have most of those guys ahead of him).

As much as you think Pen might be bullish on Derek I think you might be on Ron. In Cleveland he got to a nice SG season by year 3. Then traded, LA, injury and 91 to 95 (four and half years of games, 11889 minutes) provides 3.2 Offensive Win Shares. Total. Just one measure, mostly on bad teams. But still, I would argue, an empty calories scorer and thrice consecutively graded as D defender by the Barry Handbooks (after the seasons 93-95). In mitigation ... Sterling's Clippers (and some injury hangover) but still. After being exposed to expansion and turned down (no one wanted his contract) he does successfully reinvent himself and lasts deeper into his 30s.

I get that it's spitballing but I also know you got deep in your own list and for me having Ron in the same tier as say a Brandon or a Miller (otoh, for me ...) that too seems a bit ... generous.


It's a slight derail, but discussion is thin anyway, and I'm not sure a thread dedicated to Ron v Derek would garner much interest. So....

I might be bullish on Ron Harper, but I'll at least try to provide some reasons why.

Hard to say how much of an "empty calories" scorer he was. What I do note is that he seemed to be good for roughly a 22/5/5 statline on perhaps slighlty poor(ish) shooting efficiency for mediocre-to-poor teams; scaled to roughly a 19/5/5 player on kinda good shooting efficiency for a good team.
Take the '89 Cavs as an example: this was a 57-win team with a +2.8 rORTG. Harper averaged 18.6/5.0/5.3 on +3.3% rTS for this team; he was third in WS (behind Price and Nance [small margin to both], a little ahead of Brad Daugherty), and led the team in VORP.
I honestly don't remember what he was like on defense at that time; though he averaged a sort of monstrous 3.2 stl + 1.3 blk per 100 that year [without fouling over-much], this while leading the team that was the 2nd-rated -4.9 rDRTG (that's with Brad Daugherty in the middle) in total minutes played. And fwiw he states in The Last Dance that he feels he should have been called upon to guard Jordan for that final possession, not Ehlo.
Don't know what we can conclude from all of that, but it seems unlikely that he was a bad [D-grade] defender.

Post-injury he still managed some 18/5/5 seasons for some respectable teams (Clips were fair/decent in '92 and '93).

Again, I don't specificaly remember his defense in the years you specified, though he did avg 3.8 stl + 1.0 blk per 100 collectively in those three years [decent on the defensive glass for a guard, too] without fouling too much. They were a decent defense in '93, too.
Just the year before the '92 Clips had been the 5th-rated defense at -3.5 rDRTG with Ron Harper playing the most minutes on the team [by +240 over 2nd].

And I'll note that his all-around AuPM in '94 was +1.0, and +2.3 in '95.

Not definitively saying the Barry handbooks were wrong, though there is evidence to suggest they weren't spot-on.


Subsequently [well past his prime], he re-invents himself in some mold of the "quintessential Phil Jackson PG", who scores little, but doesn't make mistakes [that is: turn it over] while playing respectable defense (his DRAPM's would be pretty consistently strong thru '00)......and he does this as a consistent starter for FIVE title teams.

And his impact metrics look good for nearly all of them.....
'96: +3.3 AuPM
'97: +4.01 NPI RAPM
'98: +4.24 PI RAPM (26th in league), +3.40 NPI (22nd in league)
'99 (now for a terrible team): +3.88 PI RAPM (27th in league), +1.56 NPI
'00: +2.39 PI RAPM, +0.82 NPI
'01 (final season, 37 yrs old): -0.4 NPI RAPM


So idk......it might be bullish to rank him ahead of Derek Harper [which I never definitively said I do/would]; but he's got some considerable career value, imo.

The '89 Cavs year looks somewhat like an outlier peak to me. At least in terms of production. Unless you're higher on the defensive value in Harper's second career (2nd year at Bulls and onward). So yeah on that team he was good. Even so the things I've seen (including Barry from that time - Defensive grade A, fwiw) are about having the tools (length, hops, lateral agility) but need focus, night-to-night consistency.

It was a good D. But 1) Citing Daugherty in the middle hides two of the best shot blocking forwards ever (especially to that point), 2) Lenny Wilkens was a good coach capable of driving RS (over-)achievement, 3) Daugherty wasn't a bad defender (at that point grading out as an A, though this itself is the most optimistic, looked up and all subsequent grades were in the B range - some B+ and B-), just not a rim protector (nor to be fair an agile penetration roadblock), 4) the two fringe-y centers that make the backup rotation at center Chris Dudley and Tree Rollins, were to put it mildly pretty fair defenders, 5) outside the top guys the rotation guys were more known for D than O (or production in general) - not great but said to be pretty good defenders (Ehlo, Sanders, Valentine). 1 and 2 are the main points here. But he's certainly playing a role in an effective defense.

The down year profiles have the same stuff noted as the Cavs but with greater emphasis on the negative. They note the tools ('94) or or the capacity when motivated (followed by "the problem, noted one wry observer, 'is you have to trick him into taking the challenge'") the production "Long arms and excellent anticipation lead to steals" ('93) but immediately follow with "but night-to-night, doesn't do the dirty work of D: getting through picks, stopping penetration. That particular edition despite the potential noted is pretty vicious opening with "Harper's D is embarrassing ... For the most part, he's not in the same zip code as his man... One reason: He pays little attention to defense; another is that he's compensating for the quickness he's lost as a result of the injury".

I'm not "all in" on he has to be a D. But the impression I'm given is that his D was considerably less than his box profile. And whilst I'm not too au fait with the newer box-y "PM" stats (and I may be missing something here), just glancing at Reference's DBPM he's needing that to do some heavy lifting to get his overall BPM to circa league average in this time (the 3 year window).

I've read Harper was heading out of the rotation in '95 even before MJ returned. Looking at it - that's an exaggeration maybe, but not a huge one as he's averaging 14.8mpg in the 10 games prior to MJ's return. Maybe this was a mistake on the Bulls' part.

There's a lot of noise in this so I'm open a range of possibilities (despite saying this, perhaps Barr's books anchor me too strongly and too low). But say, if the Barry books are a way off and he's a league average defender or a average starter defender or even a slight plus starter (and all of these would be the books being way off - but I can perhaps imagine) I don't see a compelling net package, because I don't really like the offense either.

Not saying it's a crazy thought, but for what little it's worthy It's pretty easy to say "I should have guarding MJ" after the fact.

I don't know whether LA (especially after Brown goes) is a cesspool for career motivation (I have an idea). Or even whether could have put together a career that sees him in consideration circa here if he stays with Cleveland, doesn't get injured, develops into say a circa Drexler-lite with better D (especially if he gets that savvy he had later earlier [Wilkens a good coach to help here], isn't injured etc.

But as it actually was, as I presently see it I don't see a compelling prime - again especially to compete with a Brandon or Miller. I do like the reinvention era (but if that is the prime ... well those impact numbers are from a great place to succeed in terms of impact metrics).
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,017
And1: 21,973
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#17 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:28 pm

Bumping players up after Bosh's induction.

[quote="Doctor MJ"]Alright...

1. Connie Hawkins
2. Bill Walton
3. Nikola Jokic

Other preferences in order:

Spoiler:
Nikola Jokic
Billy Cunningham
Tiny Archibald
James Worthy
Dave DeBusschere
Horace Grant
Dennis Johnson
Terry Porter
Jeff Hornacek
Jerry Lucas
Dan Issel
Walt Bellamy
Gus Williams
Carmelo Anthony


My love letter to the Hawk repeated from last time:

Spoiler:
I think there's never been anyone like him, before or since. I'm dying to see more footage of him, because honestly I think he's got a bunch of moves that we don't have names for.

The roots of Hawkins becoming what he became are a story not of some kind of inevitable success through sheer talent, but of a guy with great talent getting bounced around and picking up stuff as he went.

Hawkins was a star in each of the following places:
1. The Schoolyard
2. Golden Age NYC High School Basketball
3. ABL
4. Harlem Globetrotters
5. ABA
6. NBA

All 6 of these things are a big deal, though I'll note that I'd consider (1) and (4) the best for understanding how Hawkins became what he became where (5) and (6) represent the proof in the pudding.

To speak on (1), the thing to understand is that play in the school yard all day is what the "good" Black boys did in this era. You were either playing basketball, or you were getting involved in gangs, pimping, and eventually drugs. So if you had basketball talent, this is where your family wanted you. Stay on the court, where it's safe.

And from the perspective of these Black kids, when they played (white) kids from other places, they just always got the sense that those white kids were far less experienced, because they were doing a lot of things other than playing basketball.

So, while Hawkins was dominating the incredibly high quality ball of NYC back then too, the Schoolyard was always where he developed his game. Just trying different things.

Others noted that while Hawkins lacked confidence in general, and was a poor reader and a poor student, he was an extremely quick learner when he saw someone else do something on the basketball court. When an opponent did something with the ball against Hawkins, Hawkins seemed to instantly have a new tool.

It's also important to note that in the Schoolyard, Hawkins didn't start out as The Man. He learned to play by fitting in around others who were older and better. We're talking about a kid who was playing against NBA pros (in the NBA off-season) before he was a High School star, so when he was playing those games, he wasn't just going in as the star. He learned to fit in. He learned how to be an aware passer before he learned to be a scorer.

About (3), so as many of you know, Hawkins was banned from college due to point shaving scandal (he later won a lawsuit clearing his name), so he ended up getting an opportunity in Abe Saperstein's ABL, which had various former NBA pros and a 3-point line. In the lone full season of that league, Hawkins would win MVP.

This is obviously impressive for a guy basically straight out of high school - and speaks both to his talent and how much experience he'd already had beyond just playing against other high schoolers - but I'd also argue that if not for the existence of the ABL, there's a good chance Hawkins would have died on the vine. He didn't have any other great skills other than basketball, so most likely he'd have ended up like many of his other peers still in Brooklyn which was being taken over by a see of heroin.

But his performance in the ABL, led to an invitation to join Saperstein's flagship product: The Harlem Globetrotters.

And as fortune would have it, Sweetwater Clifton - former New York Ren, Globetrotters, NBA all-star - played in the ABL that year with Hawkins, and re-joined the Globetrotters at the same time as Hawkins. And he told Hawkins basically, "You don't realize what kind of things you can do with those big hands!"

He mentored Hawkins on the ways you can use your ability to easily palm a hand. More flexibility when driving, more ways to protect the ball when you're guarded, myriad tricky passes, and the ability to rebound with just one hand so you can use your other arm (ahem, elbow) to fend of opponents.

I've noted before that big hands seem to be a Harlem Globetrotter thing. Beginning with the team's first clown - Goose Tatum - along through Clifton, Meadowlark Lemon, along with Wilt Chamberlain, Hawkins, and others - the Globetrotters seemed to look for guys with big hands in a way that the NBA has literally never done. I've also seen it noted that a particular Globetrotter was held back by his hand size despite being naturally very comedic.

There's a kind of trickery you can do with hands like this that lends itself well to comedy through basketball actions, and this raises the question of whether these Globetrotters were much better at certain basketball skills than NBA players.

There the answer is yes with an asterisk. Most of the tricks the Globetrotters did, while they required great skill, were not designed to hold up against actual defenders, and this was a source of frustration for Hawkins who felt that he was becoming soft due to not playing in a real competitive league, which I'd say was true.

At the same time, he'd still go back to NYC and play in the Schoolyard testing out techniques. Basically, he mined stuff out from the Globetrotters, and the stuff he found could work against actual defenders, he made a part of his repertoire. And this is how he became truly unique.

As we look at Hawkins ABA & NBA years, one of the things to understand is that both when he joined Pittsburgh in the ABA and Phoenix in the NBA, the teams did not immediately re-shape their offenses around Hawkins, and between these ramp up times, Hawkins increasing tendency toward injury, and a tendency for Hawkins to get down on himself, when we look at his yearly stats, it has to be noted that there was far more variance over the course of the season in team and Hawkins-specific performance than you'd expect not simply as a modern observer, but as a contemporary observer. Hawkins wasn't the absolute rock that you'd expect from a Jerry West, and this certainly doesn't help his Top 100 case.

But what this context also means is that when you look at Hawkins' yearly stats those first few years, as impressive as they look, know that they underrate what he was doing at his best.

I've noted before that in his first year in the ABA, Hawkins led the league in PPG despite being 3rd on his team in FGA. He did this by also leading the league in TS%, and do so while also leading the team in APG, RPG, and almost certainly BPG & SPM had they had that data (but interestingly he did not lead his team in TOs, and was 11th on his team in terms of TOs per minute). To lead a team to the title like this is amazing, but it does give rise to the question: Why were other guys shooting more than Hawkins?

The answer seems to be that these guys were just flat out bad chuckers who the coach couldn't get to pass the ball even though he'd sometimes bench them just to ensure the ball went to Hawkins, but apparently the team couldn't get anyone better mid-season (neither would last that much longer in the ABA).

Now, I tend to read stuff that focuses on Hawkins' perspective rather than the perspective Chico Vaughn, so bias is a concern. But my conclusion is that even in a young ABA that wasn't what it would later become, the Pittsburgh Pipers had no business winning a title given the lack of team play. But what was the case is that when Hawkins played the pivot, the offense hummed with Hawkins both scoring incredibly well and passing incredibly well.

Hawkins suffered the defining injury of his career midway through his second ABA season, and most don't think he was ever as good again, yet still he ended up blowing away the NBA once he got going.

What precipitated him getting going? Mid-way through the season, Phoenix Suns GM Jerry Colangelo fired coach Red Kerr, took over as coach, and had the team play with Hawkins in the high post as the guy the offense would run through. Prior to that point, Hawkins had been positioned in the corner while team captain Gail Goodrich dribbled, dribbled, dribble, and then shot. Goodrich, it should be noted seems to have had a good attitude and was willing to play in an offense with Hawkins as the focus, but when left to his own devices, he tended to just iso.

A few more anecdotes in Hawkins first year in the NBA:

1. After the Suns beat the Celtics in Boston, Bill Russell - who had retired the previous year - came over and gushed "You can do things with the ball I've never seen before!". (Hawkins responded "If you'd have been out there, you'd have blocked half my shots". Russell then said "I don't think so".)

2. Hawkins drew rave reviews as the best passer in the league. Was he better than Oscar? I'm not prepared to say that, but what I can say is that Hawkins was doing things Oscar could not. One described play involved Hawkins having the ball in the high post and making two quick passing fakes in opposite directions (which he could do because had had the ball palmed), and then casually dribbling through the now open lane to the basket.

3. Another anecdote: Apparently Hawkins could dribble through press defense unaided. When a team pressed the Suns, they'd pass the ball to Hawkins, and get out of the way, while he dribbled his way through opponents. If this seems unrealistic for a player generally, I'd note that this skill was a major thing before the shot clock, and the team most famous for this ability was the Globetrotters back in their still-competitive days in the '40s. Against the Mikan-led Lakers, the Globetrotters famously gave the ball to master-dribbler Marques Haynes, and he dribbled what remained of the 4th quarter away so that his team could take the last shot.

While the shot clock rendered this specific ability moot, the Globetrotters used it as part of their act, and so this was something the Globetrotter players actually practiced, and Hawkins honed the ability there.

So I'd say the most amazing thing isn't that someone could do this, but that Hawkins at 6'8" could do this.

4. I'd note that Wilt said that Hawkins was the only guy in the world who could play "all three positions" - by which he meant guard, forward, and center.

I should also note that Hawkins's quickness and agility was tied to his lithe fame, so when Hawkins played center, he took a severe beating that made it hard for him to sustain that kind of play over a season.

I'll also note that Hawkins was a guy who got very little training in formal defense. With his long arms and quickness he could get blocks and steals, but he struggled beyond that.

5. Some people hated his "clown antics". Some refs in particular. I think this makes sense because the Globetrotters - while they may be clowns - spend their games making their opponents look like fools. What happens when you do that to someone who isn't paid to take it? Animosity.

6. Among players, Elvin Hayes in particular apparently expressed hostility toward Hawkins, and this led to a showdown in the very last game of the '69-70 season which Hawkin's Suns needed to make the playoffs. The Suns were down 19 points at half time, and in the second half Hawkins & Hayes matched up. Hawkins led the team back to a victory with a 44/20/8 night on 30 FGA, and was said to have had 5 blocks & 5 steals in the 3rd quarter alone. Multiple of those blocks came on Hayes who went for 23/18/2 on 25 FGA.

7. In the playoffs, the Suns would fight hard before losing in 7 to the West/Wilt led Lakers, with some making the comment that it was essentially "the Lakers vs Connie Hawkins".

After that year, Hawkins would still have great runs, but injuries took more of a toll. The general feeling was that his body was much older than his age suggested having played 250 Globetrotter games per year while others his age were playing 25 college games per year, to say nothing about all that time on the Schoolyard.

In the end, with Hawkins, I think it's very hard to know how to rank him and so I completely understand those who won't have him in the Top 100. More than anything else, I hope others can just appreciate how singular he was, and how significant on a level beyond simple career impact.

But I do think he warrants a place above Bill Walton, who is my #3 pick here. Love, love, love Walton, but as much as Hawkins had longevity issues, I'd say Walton had them worse, and I'm not comfortable saying that Walton was clearly the better player best vs best. I think Walton was amazing like this, and he certainly has the defensive edge overall, but in some ways I feel like you could look at Walton on offense as a poor man's Hawkins.

Part of what I'm saying here is that I believe that the pivot-and-cut offense that Jack Ramsay instituted for Walton in Portland is not some completely new thing, but rather something that was huge and never really made it to the NBA. Once the basketball world saw Mikan & Kurland, pivot-and-cut passing didn't seem as useful as just pass to low post and score. And when that paradigm got challenged, it got challenged by perimeter-oriented offenses that in today's game are dominant.

I would submit that we've never really seen the potential for a pivot-and-cut offense in the modern NBA until Nikola Jokic, and I might make a comparison between Jokic & Hawkins. And on that front, note that I have Jokic below Walton. Through the end of last season, I didn't think Jokic had done enough to surpass Walton, but with this season, well, things are changing.

I will note, with regards to context, I consider Jokic to be more of "random genius" than Hawkins. I think Hawkins became what he did because he was shaped by unique context and had specific, rare physical gifts. Jokic seems like he was born like this.


Alright, beyond Hawk I've got Walton & Jokic on my ballot.

So first, what that means is that I'm clearly right now siding on peak/prime over longevity relative to some other folks. As I always say, I'm not going to tell you that your longevity weighting is wrong - I think that's up to personal philosophy.

I will say on Walton I've had him all over my ballots through the years and really don't know where to put him...but I do think that he deserves to be higher than Jokic through '19-20. I understand that you can argue that Jokic should win based on a longevity edge, but Jokic is obviously weak there as well, and Walton being a key part of a championship team 7 years after the first really cements that indelible impression I have of him.

If you just think Jokic through last year was better than Walton, I get that, but I'd not feel comfortable saying that because Walton was the best defender on the planet.

On Jokic over other guys, the first guy I want to mention is someone I've not even been listing out because he hasn't had traction: Draymond Green. When I look at current players not in, those two are the next ones on my list and to be honest I expected to have Green ahead of Jokic.

If I felt strongly about Green over Jokic, I'd be arguing for that now, but I'm not. I can see arguments both ways, but Green really doesn't have much of a longevity edge, and as special as Green was at his best, I do think Jokic was more special by a smidge even before this year.

Next guy: Billy Cunningham. I think Cunningham is a strong candidate, but I definitely see him as less indelible than Hawk or Walton.

Looks like Horace Grant is getting a lot of momentum, and he's another guy I love so I'm not looking to argue against really, but clearly his argument over these other guys is longevity, and I struggle to talk about Grant as a big longevity guy.

On Tiny Archibald - I'm really convinced at this point that he was an absolute killer at his best. He feels like he should be easily a Top 100 guy for me, and I rank him above some guys already on the list, but obviously there are still guys left out there that I like even better.

On James Worthy - I don't really feel like I have a precise compelling case for Worthy, but I don't think we should forget about him. I see him as a guy who proved himself to be versatile while still capable of being a good alpha when needed.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,748
And1: 11,278
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#18 » by Cavsfansince84 » Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:31 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:Bumping players up after Bosh's induction.

Doctor MJ wrote:Alright...

1. Connie Hawkins
2. Bill Walton
3. Nikola Jokic

Other preferences in order:

Spoiler:
Nikola Jokic
Billy Cunningham
Tiny Archibald
James Worthy
Dave DeBusschere
Horace Grant
Dennis Johnson
Terry Porter
Jeff Hornacek
Jerry Lucas
Dan Issel
Walt Bellamy
Gus Williams
Carmelo Anthony



Looks like Horace Grant is getting a lot of momentum, and he's another guy I love so I'm not looking to argue against really, but clearly his argument over these other guys is longevity, and I struggle to talk about Grant as a big longevity guy.

On Tiny Archibald - I'm really convinced at this point that he was an absolute killer at his best. He feels like he should be easily a Top 100 guy for me, and I rank him above some guys already on the list, but obviously there are still guys left out there that I like even better.

On James Worthy - I don't really feel like I have a precise compelling case for Worthy, but I don't think we should forget about him. I see him as a guy who proved himself to be versatile while still capable of being a good alpha when needed.


I agree that Worthy is likely getting overlooked right now and I have him right outside my current ballot. What I think gets overlooked about Worthy even if you are of the opinion that he is semi one dimensional is that not only was he the second best player on two title teams(which many guys being ranked above him or on ballots were not able to do), he consistently raised his scoring in the playoffs from 85-91 and was just a guy that those Lakers teams could count on in big games. So that along with having a very consistent prime of about 7-8 years is why I think he should definitely make this list. From 85-91 he was second on the Lakers in playoff win shares every year except for one year where he tied Magic for 1st. Also regarding Grant, I agree on his combination of peak/prime not being that great. I can give him some credit for playing on a 3 peat but generally speaking he was ok to decent in those 3 finals and without that on his resume I seriously doubt anyone would have him on their top 100. Imo he was pretty limited offensively.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,553
And1: 8,182
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#19 » by trex_8063 » Thu Apr 22, 2021 12:14 am

Thru post #18:

Horace Grant - 2 (penbeast0, trex_8063)
Nikola Jokic - 1 (Dutchball97)
Bill Walton - 1 (HeartBreakKid)
Connie Hawkins - 1 (Doctor MJ)
Dennis Johnson - 1 (Hal14)


One final reminder since we're down to about 13 hours or so, and only the above six votes so far....


Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill 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:.

[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
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,942
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #87 

Post#20 » by Odinn21 » Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:02 am

87. Billy Cunningham
I initially thought of Bosh for this spot but Cunningham was also a borderline superstar, I think Cunningham as a player was on the same level as Bosh but he was on that level in a time being on that level was harder and more of an outlier. Also Cunningham's total prime duration, despite being less, comes off as bigger than Bosh's with a consideration for era standards.
Though this is definitely open to discussion and I'd like to get some feedbacks on Cunningham vs. players with traction already in Bosh, Grant, Bellamy and Issel.

88. Horace Grant
Immense impact with good enough output to have this spot for me. And he upped his game whenever necessary more often than not. His performances such as 1995 Bulls series, 1994 Knicks series, 1996 Hawks/Pistons series, 1992 Cavs series, 1991 Lakers series, (first 4 games of 1993 Suns series), this man had too many good playoff series over other impact players as Draymond Green.
He was truly better than his box numbers and he proved it over a longer stretch.

89. Gus Williams
It's interesting to me that a player with similar prime but worse postseason resilience made the list before Gus in Lillard.

W. Bellamy > D. Issel > D. DeBusschere > T. Porter > N. Jokic > C. Anthony > C. Hawkins > B. Walton > N. Archibald > N. Johnston > J. Hornacek > D. Johnson
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.

Return to Player Comparisons