Bob Lanier vs Dwight Howard

[Narigo]

Who do you rank higher all-time and who peak higher?

Personally, I think Bob Lanier is one of the most underrated players ever and would put him in a similar tier as Prime Gilmore and Ewing but he doesnt have the durability and longevity as the other two.

[Jaivl]

Howard, but not by much. He's around #50 for me, Lanier hovering around late 50s - early 60s.

[Gibson22]

Probably dwight? Lanier was obviously a better scorer than dwight, but does he have anything meaningful over dwight? I mean dwight had the defense and that finals run, lanier didn't have much playoff success. And dwight had a stretch of time in which he was the clear cut best big man in the league (obviously for lack of better talent) and a top 5ish, tier 1 player while lanier was behind KAJ and in the mix with a lot of other bigs.
But yeah, I can't claim to know lanier very well, so feel free to educate me

[Stalwart]

Bob Lanier in the early 60s seems a bit high. He never made an All NBA team although perhaps he should have.

[Jaivl]

Bob Lanier in the early 60s seems a bit high. He never made an All NBA team although perhaps he should have.

I mean, he did finish #3 and #4 in MVP voting with no All-NBA. Fighting for two total spots with a GOAT contender and a handful of other MVP caliber centers (Cowens, McAdoo, Walton) while playing in completely useless teams will do that for you.

[Stalwart]

Bob Lanier in the early 60s seems a bit high. He never made an All NBA team although perhaps he should have.

I mean, he did finish #3 and #4 in MVP voting with no All-NBA. Fighting for two total spots with a GOAT contender and a handful of other MVP caliber centers (Cowens, McAdoo, Walton) while playing in completely useless teams will do that for you.

True. But its still a bit of an indictment against his case for top 60-70 the fact he went his entire career with not even one All NBA. How many other greats can say that?

[migya]

Definitely Lanier. His prime lasted longer, he scored far better, the rest is fairly close.

[70sFan]

I have them in the same tier, for different reasons. Dwight had better peak and extremely high defensive value, but he also had weak post-prime career and he didn't bring up much value after 2015. He also had considerable playoff success.

Lanier was a bit different, he also had impressive peak but his prime was far more consistent and his longevity is also top notch. His impact is also extremely high on those weak Pistons teams. On the other hand, he missed a ton of games in his prime which often caused Detroit missing the playoffs. He also didn't have a lot of playoff success, but he always played very well against good competition. I like his game on offensive end far more than Dwight, but he isn't comparable defensively (even if underrated).

I think both are lock top 70 players.

[70sFan]

Bob Lanier in the early 60s seems a bit high. He never made an All NBA team although perhaps he should have.

I mean, he did finish #3 and #4 in MVP voting with no All-NBA. Fighting for two total spots with a GOAT contender and a handful of other MVP caliber centers (Cowens, McAdoo, Walton) while playing in completely useless teams will do that for you.

True. But its still a bit of an indictment against his case for top 60-70 the fact he went his entire career with not even one All NBA. How many other greats can say that?

Most centers from eras with only two all-nba teams?

[Stalwart]

I mean, he did finish #3 and #4 in MVP voting with no All-NBA. Fighting for two total spots with a GOAT contender and a handful of other MVP caliber centers (Cowens, McAdoo, Walton) while playing in completely useless teams will do that for you.

True. But its still a bit of an indictment against his case for top 60-70 the fact he went his entire career with not even one All NBA. How many other greats can say that?

Most centers from eras with only two all-nba teams?

Most centers or most all time great , potential top 60 centers? I see 0 of those. In fact Thurmond and Bellamy are the only ATG centers I can come up with and neither one of those guys challenging for a top 60 spot.

[70sFan]

True. But its still a bit of an indictment against his case for top 60-70 the fact he went his entire career with not even one All NBA. How many other greats can say that?

Most centers from eras with only two all-nba teams?

Most centers or most all time great , potential top 60 centers? I see 0 of those. In fact Thurmond and Bellamy are the only ATG centers I can come up with and neither one of those guys challenging for a top 60 spot.

Thurmond is definitely inside top 60. Artis Gilmore is another one who only has all-aba selections. Beaty and Bellamy also were all-nba worthy.

Your logic basically implies that DeAndre Jordan has better argument than Lanier, Thurmond or Gilmore for top 60.

[Stalwart]

Most centers from eras with only two all-nba teams?

Most centers or most all time great , potential top 60 centers? I see 0 of those. In fact Thurmond and Bellamy are the only ATG centers I can come up with and neither one of those guys challenging for a top 60 spot.

Thurmond is definitely inside top 60. Artis Gilmore is another one who only has all-aba selections. Beaty and Bellamy also were all-nba worthy.

Your logic basically implies that DeAndre Jordan has better argument than Lanier, Thurmond or Gilmore for top 60.

If I were only looking at All NBA selections then you'd have a point. I said it was an indictment against Bob Lanier's top 60 case. I didn't say it was a disqualifier. But as I look over the rest of his resume Im not seeing a top 60 ATG.

[70sFan]

Most centers or most all time great , potential top 60 centers? I see 0 of those. In fact Thurmond and Bellamy are the only ATG centers I can come up with and neither one of those guys challenging for a top 60 spot.

Thurmond is definitely inside top 60. Artis Gilmore is another one who only has all-aba selections. Beaty and Bellamy also were all-nba worthy.

Your logic basically implies that DeAndre Jordan has better argument than Lanier, Thurmond or Gilmore for top 60.

If I were only looking at All NBA selections then you'd have a point. I said it was an indictment against Bob Lanier's top 60 case. I didn't say it was a disqualifier. But as I look over the rest of his resume Im not seeing a top 60 ATG.

Well, if you go by your criteria which basically means looking at wikipedia accolades page, then of course Lanier doesn't have any case. You probably think that his teammate Dave Bing was better than him as well. That's why I often try to explain you that there is a context behind all accolades and it's not a good way to judge players across eras.

Lanier was often seen as top 5 player in the league, but he didn't win any accolades because his team was trash without him and he had to compete against Kareem, Walton and Moses who are all top 20 ever worthy.

[asindc]

Lanier.

[iggymcfrack]

Dwight has over twice as many MVP shares in a much tougher era, has better longevity, better playoff success, similar rate stats with MUCH greater defensive impact. Doesn't really seem close to me. Dwight's probably top 40 all-time IMO while Lanier would be lucky to be top 80.

[countryboy667]

Lanier played against comparatively better fives in an era when fives were the focus/center of almost every team's strategies. In Lanier's era, if your team lacked "the aircraft carrier" (naval comparison as the carrier being the focus in the fleet of offensive/defensive capabilities and impact) you were going nowhere as a team. As people here have noted ad nauseum, today fives, even the best ones, simply are not typically that kind of focus. Who are the premiere fives that Howard faced anywhere near as frequently as the premiere fives Lanier faced? (Remember--smaller league--Lanier saw premiere opposition at the five much more frequently than Howard in his era.) Players from earlier eras always face (IMO unfair) recency bias by posters here. It's easy to dismiss a player you haven't seenfirst hand compared to one that you have. And, in response to Iggy, being an old timer, I'll dispute that "in a much tougher era"--just more evidence of recency bias by younger fans. Today's games is different. Better? That's a matter of opinion that I don't share. To me, circle, circle, then jack up a three is the height of boring.

[70sFan]

Dwight has over twice as many MVP shares in a much tougher era, has better longevity, better playoff success, similar rate stats with MUCH greater defensive impact. Doesn't really seem close to me. Dwight's probably top 40 all-time IMO while Lanier would be lucky to be top 80.

What makes Dwight longevity better?

Realistically, Howard has probably 8 all-nba level seasons (4 strong 2008-11 seasons and a few weaker ones - 2007 along with 2012-14). Other than that, he was solid but injured in 2015 and after that he bring nothing relevant to the table.

Lanier was all-nba level in 9 seasons (1972-80, with 1974-77 being notably upper level). I'd also say that 1981-84 was better than anything Dwight did after 2015, with the exception of 1983 when he missed most of the season.

Dwight played more games in his career, but the gap in valuable years doesn't exist to me. Now if you want to say that Dwight's prime is so much better that longevity doesn't matter then fair, but then why mentioning longevity at all?

I'd also say that you definitely overlook what Lanier did in those poor Pistons teams if you don't have him inside your top 80. He was legit all-nba level player who suffered from poor teams and mediocre durability and he was absolutely fantastic playoff performer.

[70sFan]

Fun fact - Lanier accumulated higher VORP value without his first 3 seasons than Dwight in his entire career. I think it shows that Dwight definitely doesn't have longevity advantage.

[tsherkin]

Today's games is different. Better? That's a matter of opinion that I don't share. To me, circle, circle, then jack up a three is the height of boring.

Yes, there are notable differences between the eras. Different rules, different cultivated skills, different strategies. Decades and decades of selected drafting and training for specific kinds of athleticism. Permission for taller players to do what the small guys could, on the backs of what pioneer players did in earlier decades. The best teams don't actually play the way you mention, but then, the best teams back then didn't play quite how Iggy was implying either, so... xD

[Owly]

Dwight has over twice as many MVP shares in a much tougher era, has better longevity, better playoff success, similar rate stats with MUCH greater defensive impact. Doesn't really seem close to me. Dwight's probably top 40 all-time IMO while Lanier would be lucky to be top 80.

MVP Shares are somewhat tricky to compare across eras due to different balloting systems.

Taking each's best year (by MVP Shares)
2011: 2.599 total shares given out
1974 (NBA): 1.779

This is part of the reason that Lanier emerges with fewer MVP shares (0.436 to 0.531) despite claiming 37 of 181 first place ballots, whilst Howard did considerably worse in that respect 3 of 121.