RealGM Top 100 #35

[drza]

Vote: Jason Kidd

I'm still working on my nominee. Mourning and Iverson are the two front runners, but I'm listening to the case for others as well. And if time permits I think I'll be constructing a case for Mr. Ginobili.

[penbeast0]

Again, at the risk of pimpin my man Sidney, you have to show Manu had a better game since he doesn't have the longevity advantage of a Reggie Miller/Alex English type (and played less minutes per game besides).

[penbeast0]

[quote="ElGee"]vote: George Gervin
nominate: Chris Paul

How did Artis Gilmore just get voted in? He's like the 3rd "slip through the cracks" player recently. This project is craaaaazy.

Beast you were confused about my Chris Paul nomination.

Code: Select all

[quote]Now, Chris Paul is a name I don't think has really been mentioned at all, but he's right here for me...and I'll take him right now over the other candidates...actually by a pretty comfortable little margin. Why? First, the career:

2007 AS season
2008 weak MVP level season
2009 weak MVP level season
2010 ~AS season
2011 good all-nba level season

Yes, those 5 years, especially with the peak play, vault Paul's career above almost everyone left. I can make an argument for Miller and maybe Hayes ahead...Wilkins and Kevin Johnson are right there too. Howard not far off. But what else for Paul?

Well, he's arguably got the best peak of that lot. Howard is the only one who could challenge that. Then I look at my giant draft board and I have CP3 somewhere in the early 30s...near Frazier, Morning and Howard. I like him on a lot of teams -- he's an astoundingly good ball-dominant or PnR PG. He's a nice defender too.

We like to look at ORtg when we see a ball-dominant, QB-style offensive force...When Paul joined the Hornets they had the worst offense in the league. After some slight improvements, they jumped to 5th (111.5, +4.0) in 2008.

We can look at his team's offense with him on the court at 82games:
2007 109.7 +8.7
2008 116.0 +15.4
2009 113.6 +16.4
2010 110.7 +4.1
2011 110.4 +11.6

Even though it's 08 and 09 people associate with, Paul, including his injury-laden 2010 season, has the 4th-highest APM (Dirk, James, Durant) over the last 2 years using the Rosenbaum model. He's 8th in the Engelmann 6-year run.

Henry Abbot likes to point to Paul's teams as a beacon of success in the clutch. If we're buying that, I'm assuming that's a reflection of Paul's consistency/skill that is fairly indefensible regardless of the scenario or opponent. So his PS numbers shouldn't dip.

In the 08 playoffs, New Orleans had a 113.5 ORtg with Paul (+16.7).
In the 11 playoffs, New Orleans had a 106.7 ORtg with Paul (+22.9).

Sure enough, his ORtg, WS/48 and scoring all increase in those postseasons.

I again want to note that Paul is lifting an anemic offensive squad to right around average...but an APM model would just see the giant number (+22.9) and adjust for opponents+teammates. I have to yet to see any math that accounts for the phenomenon that that is not necessarily better than what Steve Nash did in 2010, which is move Phoenix's playoff offense from 113.1 without him...to 120.4 (+7.3).[/quote]

[quote]Let's revisit this longevity issue. I've got Paul and Howard right next to each other. They came into the league a year apart.

Paul's got 76 WS, is 35th in MVP shares 3 all-NBA's (5x WC POM).
Howard's got 80 WS, is 28th in MVP shares 5 all-NBA's (6x EC POM).

To summarily dismiss Paul because of longevity seems bizarre to me, just on the surface.

And it doesn't stop there. The contributions of Walton, Alonzo Mourning, Kevin Johnson, Marques Johnson, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, David Thompson and Bernard King are all significant when compared to the rest of this field. These players are typically downgraded on past lists bc (1) Their team's lost and (2) lack of longevity...but the spirit of this project is to deviate from past list criteria.

Everyone still has to weigh peak vs. longevity. But of course, everyone has been doing this in his own way since the beginning of the project. There is no reason to change now. 3, 4 or 5 really fantastic seasons are still just that...fantastic. And they provide more value toward a championship than 7 or 8 "good" seasons. Adding an AS to a team usually helps them a little (depending on fit). Adding a top-5 player always helps them A LOT. It's a difference maker. The people I mentioned have fit that description. The more celebrated, long-term players never did (mostly).

So, make what you will of Chris Paul. But I ask that people re-evaluate these players in the context of this project.

Aren't we at a point when two MVP-dominant seasons would be better than almost everything that's left? Would you rather have peak Jordan for two seasons or Ray Allen's contributions over his career? If your answer is "well, Allen gives me 10 good chances on a good team," I will remind you that the majority of teams you add Ray Allen to will *NOT* be good teams. But, in those 2 seasons, adding Michael Jordan will likely yield 2 titles in a number of settings -- he can lift average teams to title-contender. Because of this, I'd argue it's easier to win a single championship with Jordan twice with random team-building than with Allen 10x and random team-building.[/quote]
[quote]Just to quickly expand on this mathematically, so everyone understands where I'm coming from:

Using the normalization I've been using for the SIO numbers, we can give a player a rough value that he adds to a given team. I think it's fair in this example to use +7.0 SIO for Jordan and +3.0 for Allen. That means MJ takes a .500 team to ~7 SRS on average (60 wins) and Ray Ray a .500 team to ~3 SRS (49 wins). (You can judge the long-term SIO results posted in the statistical forum and see if that seems fair...)

If that's the case, adding each player to a random roster as constructed in 2011 would lead to the following SRS's:

At that rate, [b]Jordan would bring 23 teams over a 5 SRS[/b] -- 55 wins a fairly good historical cutoff (depending on season) for title contention. Conversely, [b]Allen would be on 8 teams over a 5 SRS[/b].

But the higher the SRS, the higher the probability a team wins the playoff. A player like Allen isn't usually going to lift a contender to dominant status. An MVP-level player will. [b]Jordan has 15 teams shifted to over 7 SRS in that example...to 0 for Allen.[/b][/quote][/quote]

I'm not confused, I just don't see Paul having that kind of Steve Nash effect on offenses other than in 2008 and see Moncrief as a player who has played the same amount of peak years but with equivalent offense (better scorer and rebounder, not in Paul's league as an assist man though good for a 2 guard) while Sid has a large edge defensively. I don't have a huge problem with short peak guys as long as they have at least a decent 5 year sample to judge them from although at least 8 is preferably (or I wouldn't suport Sid and Dwight Howard) but I just don't see Paul as having that kind of impact, again except maybe for 2008.

[Fencer reregistered]

I've been looking at Cousy's stats, and there's nothing wrong with his FG% compared to those of the other assist leaders from the mid-1950s. Where he falls short of some guys is in the ratio of FTA/FGA. Presumably he was attacking the rim a little less personally because he was dishing the ball more often.

According to Basketball Reference, he was also blowing away his fellow assist leaders in PER, with the sole exception of Maurice Stokes, a F-C with a 3-year career.

[lorak]

vote: Gervin
nominate: Iverson

[Fencer reregistered]

I thought I posted this before, but anyhow:

Vote: Pierce
Nominate: Cousy

[Lever2Beaver]

I thought I posted this before, but anyhow:

Vote: Pierce
Nominate: Cousy

Pierce ahead of Cousy is a spectacular mistake
Surely Celtic legends rolling over in their graves.

[drza]

Case for Manu Ginobili

Again, at the risk of pimpin my man Sidney, you have to show Manu had a better game since he doesn't have the longevity advantage of a Reggie Miller/Alex English type (and played less minutes per game besides).

This actually provided a great medium for me introducing Manu here, as it lets us compare him to someone that makes a really good contemporary. Squid had his 5-year peak, Manu is working on 7 years now of elite-caliber play (2005 - 2011). So, let's take a closer look.

First, the box score stats (averaged over Squid's 5 years and Manu's 7 years):

Code: Select all

        mpg   Pace   Total   PPG   %Pts   TS%  Ast%   RPG%   Stl%   PER   WS48
Manu   28.8   89.8   98.3   16.6   16.9   0.60  24.6   8.5   2.8   22.9   0.22
Squid  36.9   99.7   109.2  21.0   19.3   0.59  18.3   10.3  2.0   20.5   0.21


As you would expect, Manu's weakness is in minutes played. But once you adjust for the fact that the '80s Bucks were scoring a lot more points at a much higher pace than the '00s Spurs, we see that in fact Manu was scoring almost 17% of the Spurs' points vs Squid's 19% of the Bucks...not much difference in volume at all, considering Manu had a higher assist percentage. Both are high efficiency scorers per possession used, but Manu was producing offense more efficiently per minute played, and thus despite Squid playing more than 8 more minutes per game their net offensive volume per game was very similar according to the box scores.

Next, we go to defense, where Squid has a big advantage against just about every wing he is compared to. And while I'll take nothing away from a 2-time DPoY, I WILL say that Manu is a beastly wing defender in his own right. I think the consensus would be that he is good defensively, but when you look further into it he measures out at the top of his generation among wing defenders.

According to Ilardi's 6-year APM calculation ('04 - '09), the top-7 big minute wing defenders:
Ron Artest (5.09)
Shane Battier (3.92)
Thabo Sefolosha (3.75)
Andrei Kirilenko (3.51)
Manu Ginobili (3.24)
Tony Allen (3.23)
Bruce Bowen (2.95)

Englemann has a similar calculation from '06 - '11, and Ginobili is still in the top-10 among big minute wings in defensive APM (Deng, Tony Allen, Ronnie Brewer, LeBron, G. Wallace, Artest, Mbah a Moute, Iguodala, Lowry, Manu).

Sniff-test wise, this is a veritable who's who of the best defensive wings of the last decade. And the only defenders on both lists were Artest, Manu and Tony Allen. Manu is long, quick and awkward as a defender which serves him in good stead. He can defend from PG up to SF, is extremely aggressive, and has quick hands that let him get both steals and blocks on-ball without having to overextend and take risks. Again, I have no problem saying Squid gets the benefit of the doubt on defense compared to just about any wing we've ever seen, but Manu is at least holding his own here.

Impact I'll be referencing APM results here, so obviously this section will again be more pro-Manu than anti-Squid (since we don't have any Squid-related data points). But according to the various APM studies, Manu has been at the very top of the NBA in terms of impact for the 2000s.

Ilardi's '04 - '09: Manu +8.2 (3rd overall, behind KG and LeBron and slightly ahead of Duncan and Wade to round out the top-5)

Englemann's '06 - '11: Manu +7.6 (5th overall, behind LeBron, Dirk, KG, Nash)

Manu's single year RAPM since '05:
2005 KG, Duncan, Shaq, Kidd, Dirk, Manu
2006 Duncan, KG, Dirk, Shaq, Manu
2007 Manu, Duncan, LeBron, Baron, KG, Nash
2008 Manu, KG, Nash, LeBron, Duncan
2009 LeBron, KG, Kobe, Nash, Manu
2010 LeBron, Wade, Nash, Kobe, KG, Manu, Howard
2011 Dirk, Manu, KG, Nick Collison, Paul, Howard

A few things stand out to me. First, in the two different/overlapping multi-year APM measures that encompass the last 8 years, we see Manu in the top-5 of both lists next to a total of 6 players that we have long-since voted onto this list. Manu, LeBron and KG are the only 3 in the top-5 of both lists.

Next, when going through the yearly RAPM results, we see that Manu's impact has been rock-solid consistent for 7 straight years now. During that time period he never finishes lower than 6th in any season, finishes with the top mark overall twice, and is second in another season. Plus, look at the sniff test of that yearly list...only Nick Collison stands out as a fluke 1-year appearance from a role-player slot. Everyone else that makes this list even once were considered beasts that season with most of them annually in the MVP vote. And Manu is on the list all 7 years. Also of note, in 3 of those 7 seasons Manu was a full-time starter.

Bottom line: When separating into offense and defense, we see that Manu in his 7 years is very comparable to Squid in his 5 despite Manu playing fewer minutes. And impactwise, though we can't easily compare Manu directly to Squid, we CAN compare Manu directly to his peers and see that the only people even comparable to Manu in APM from his generation are the consensus BEST of the 2000s who have all long-since been voted onto our list. Manu has been a contributor to 3 title teams, including 2 as a huge cog and one in which he VERY arguably could have been both the postseason and Finals MVP for the Spurs (2005). I understand docking Manu for being a 30 mpg guy instead of a 38 mpg guy and his injury issues that have cost him games several seasons...but for me that penalty is just about covered. When he's on the court, Manu is one of the best players of his generation and it's translated to big-time team results. It's time that we seriously start thinking about slotting this guy in.

[penbeast0]

Good Post . . . and yes, he is almost as good offensively and defensively as Moncrief . . . so after we slot the Squid, let's start looking at Manu v. Chris Paul and the like

(longevity guys Reggie Miller, Alex English, Ray Allen and the like should go up soon too)

Problem is that superstar talent is a bell curse. We are out of the extreme end where there are only a few names and there are probably 25-30 guys who have legit arguments for the next slot (and twice that if we realize that other posters have other criteria)

[Lever2Beaver]

Only about 100 spots early for Manu
What about Zan Tabak he should be nominated soon...

[FJS]

Vote: Gervin
Nominate: Allen Iverson

[ElGee]

@Beast, What about 2007, 2009, and 2011 from Paul (even 2010)? As I've said, his basketballvalue APM for the last 2 years is 4th in the league. He was 4th using Ilardi's 03-09 weighting. He's 6th in Engelmann's 10-year rankings...

Not to mention the fairly obvious eye test, box stats, and team results I posted for 08, 09 and 11. His 07 season was clearly AS level and his 10 season is interpretable depending on how one weighs or injuries or how much he had in the thank if there were a PS to play. That's 5 years...

--

There are players that need mention before Manu IMO. Bob Lanier is coming up for me. He was an excellent offensive center, often battled toe-to-toe with the other premier bigs of his time, and I don't see his defense as being nearly as bad as some make it out to be.

Three more that haven't been mentioned that I have above Manu are Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway and Sam Jones. We'll get to them.

And of course, ahead of Manu and Moncrief I have Marques Johnson. Yes, I've been waiting all summer, but it is almost time for the Marques Johnson argument. http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/04/mar ... the-muoat/

[TMACFORMVP]

Vote: George Gervin
Nominate: Kevin Johnson

Damn, missed the past couple of threads. Have no idea who I want for the nomination, I'm glad some of the 70's big men have been nominated in, though little surprised to see McAdoo lose some of that steam he had earlier. Mourning, and Reed are candidates as well. I'm also on the Iverson bandwagon, his faults are clear, but his impact was felt. I get the CP3/KJ arguments; and similarly with Moncrief as well.

One thing about KJ that I feel often gets under-looked is the sort of team success the Suns had pre-Barkley years. It seems to me sometimes people often associate he and Barkley being a duo leading the Suns to success when they were just a mediocre team before. But the Suns won 53+ games four seasons in a row, including two WCF Finals births before Barkley joined them. In those years for the most part, the Suns ranked in the top 3 in ORTG (including being in the top 10 in DRTG). The only year they were really upset in the playoffs was in '91, and that's because KJ was playing with a hamstring(?) injury in that series which tremendously affected his play. Otherwise he's been a terrific playoff performer as well. In 1990, Magic famously scored back to back 40 point games in losing efforts of the WCSF, but KJ was amazing in those games as well, including dominating the end of the G4, including a clutch FT near the end of G1.

G4: 30 points, 16 assists (11 points in the final 10 minutes)
G5: 37 points, 8 assists on 14/23

He has 5 peak seasons at a level of 20/10 PG play on very good efficiency on 50+ win teams, along with 2-3ish more seasons of very solid PG play. In '93 versus that series against San Antonio, it's arguable KJ was the x-factor for that series, DRob/Barkley played nearly even; while KJ poured in a 6 game series average of 21/9 on 53%.

therealbig3 also had some nice points as well.

I like Paul's 2 season peak more, because he's slightly more efficient with the ball, and something I still marvel at when I watch him play is how he controls the tempo of the game (and that's the pressing argument I'd consider in a comparison with he and Moncrief offensively). I mean, these guys do that at a high level also, but Paul is just a master at that. Saying that, I don't how much he differentiates that peak with a guy like KJ, and his extra years probably count for a bit more.

I'm still evaluating the big men v. KJ, was initially going to post without a nomination, but I'll tentatively give KJ my nomination.

[Dr Positivity]

One point about Cousy, though I'm not nominating him yet - After watching his last non Cinci game in full (G6 of the 63 Finals), I did come off more impressed by him athletically than I thought, and this was when he was old. He was as explosive and fast as young West. I think it's reasonable to say he'd be one of the fastest PGs even today. The jumpshot is the major issue here IMO, not his athleticism not holding up. I have a hard time considering him a better player than KJ or Iverson still, at this moment

[Dr Positivity]

I'm leaning Willis Reed for the nomination, though I have zero issue with changing it to McAdoo, KJ, Hill or English. I'm willing to give Reed the benefit of the doubt because of how important a dominant C is, in comparison to those guys.

I've voted Pierce for 4-5 threads

So for now

Vote Pierce

Nominate Reed

[Dr Positivity]

Manu is definitely below Pau for me. Among others, but I can't put him over Gasol at the least. Gasol has proved more to me as both a #1 and #2.

[Dr Positivity]

Vote: George Gervin
Nominate: Kevin Johnson

Damn, missed the past couple of threads. Have no idea who I want for the nomination, I'm glad some of the 70's big men have been nominated in, though little surprised to see McAdoo lose some of that steam he had earlier. Mourning, and Reed are candidates as well. I'm also on the Iverson bandwagon, his faults are clear, but his impact was felt. I get the CP3/KJ arguments; and similarly with Moncrief as well.

One thing about KJ that I feel often gets under-looked is the sort of team success the Suns had pre-Barkley years. It seems to me sometimes people often associate he and Barkley being a duo leading the Suns to success when they were just a mediocre team before. But the Suns won 53+ games four seasons in a row, including two WCF Finals births before Barkley joined them. In those years for the most part, the Suns ranked in the top 3 in ORTG (including being in the top 10 in DRTG). The only year they were really upset in the playoffs was in '91, and that's because KJ was playing with a hamstring(?) injury in that series which tremendously affected his play. Otherwise he's been a terrific playoff performer as well. In 1990, Magic famously scored back to back 40 point games in losing efforts of the WCSF, but KJ was amazing in those games as well, including dominating the end of the G4, including a clutch FT near the end of G1.

G4: 30 points, 16 assists (11 points in the final 10 minutes)
G5: 37 points, 8 assists on 14/23

He has 5 peak seasons at a level of 20/10 PG play on very good efficiency on 50+ win teams, along with 2-3ish more seasons of very solid PG play. In '93 versus that series against San Antonio, it's arguable KJ was the x-factor for that series, DRob/Barkley played nearly even; while KJ poured in a 6 game series average of 21/9 on 53%.

therealbig3 also had some nice points as well.

I like Paul's 2 season peak more, because he's slightly more efficient with the ball, and something I still marvel at when I watch him play is how he controls the tempo of the game (and that's the pressing argument I'd consider in a comparison with he and Moncrief offensively). I mean, these guys do that at a high level also, but Paul is just a master at that. Saying that, I don't how much he differentiates that peak with a guy like KJ, and his extra years probably count for a bit more.

I'm still evaluating the big men v. KJ, was initially going to post without a nomination, but I'll tentatively give KJ my nomination.

Good points as always

I consider KJ vs Paul to be pretty close to a no brainer. And I'm not even nominating KJ yet

[therealbig3]

My count so far:

Vote:

Gervin-5 (Snakebites, ElGee, DavidStern, FJS, TMACFORMVP)

Pierce-3 (Fencer reregistered, therealbig3, Dr Mufasa)

Dominique-1 (JordansBulls)

McGrady-1 (ronnymac2)

Kidd-1 (drza)

D12-1 (penbeast0)



Nomination:

Iverson-4 (JordansBulls, ronnymac2, DavidStern, FJS)

KJ-2 (therealbig3, TMACFORMVP)

Moncrief-1 (penbeast0)

Miller-1 (mysticbb)

Mourning-1 (Snakebites)

Cousy-1 (Fencer reregistered)

Paul-1 (ElGee)

Reed-1 (Dr Mufasa)

[Fencer reregistered]

At some point we're going to have a Dwight vs. McHale discussion.

Who do you guys think achieved his efficiency in the face of more regular double-teams? It's natural to say "The one who didn't play next to Bird", but from the eye test I don't think that's actually true, even when starting line-ups were on the court.

[penbeast0]

@Beast, What about 2007, 2009, and 2011 from Paul (even 2010)? As I've said, his basketballvalue APM for the last 2 years is 4th in the league. He was 4th using Ilardi's 03-09 weighting. He's 6th in Engelmann's 10-year rankings...

Not to mention the fairly obvious eye test, box stats, and team results I posted for 08, 09 and 11. His 07 season was clearly AS level and his 10 season is interpretable depending on how one weighs or injuries or how much he had in the thank if there were a PS to play. That's 5 years...

--

There are players that need mention before Manu IMO. Bob Lanier is coming up for me. He was an excellent offensive center, often battled toe-to-toe with the other premier bigs of his time, and I don't see his defense as being nearly as bad as some make it out to be.

Three more that haven't been mentioned that I have above Manu are Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway and Sam Jones. We'll get to them.

And of course, ahead of Manu and Moncrief I have Marques Johnson. Yes, I've been waiting all summer, but it is almost time for the Marques Johnson argument. http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/04/mar ... the-muoat/

Watching them, I was always more impressed with Sid though Marques was very good -- he just didn't stand out from the crowd in the greatest era ever for SFs (Bird, English, King, Dantley, Nique, Aquiree, Worthy, etc. etc.). . . that and their offense actually improved when Marques went to the Clippers. Moncrief just impressed me because I would see great players come in averaging 20ppg and they would end up 3/15 for 11 points or something more regularly than with any other defender I've ever seen. He was the guy that put the hell into Nolan Richardson's 40 minutes of Hell concept (with Alvin Robertson who came in next); just a scary man defender.