RealGM Top 100 List #69

[ElGee]

I'll switch to Dumars -- someone probably not in my top 100 -- because I have him well ahead of Dantley.

[penbeast0]

Interesting how the people who feel PG defense is not terribly important are going for Dumars. ElGee, the case for Dantley is the same one that got him into the HOF, his individual numbers show a ridiculously great scorer. He scored more than 30ppg for 4 straight years (more than 25ppg for 7 straight) at ridiculous efficiency -- 5th all time and of the 5 ahead of him, only Artis Gilmore was a real scoring threat. Did he play defense? no. Was he a locker room leader? no . . . but if you can build a winning team around Allen Iverson (in a long time ago), surely a good coach/GM could figure a way to build around arguably the greatest one-on-one scorer of all time. The argument for him is purely that.

Joe Dumars argument is the opposite. He maxes out at less than 75% of Dantley's scoring and 75 points of efficiency lower; he's one of the weakest rebounding guards to ever play though a solid passer and very good defender . . . but to go for Dumars you have to value guard defense and intangible locker room type value over individual numbers. Dantley didn't play on great offenses maybe, but they were better than the Isiah/Dumars Pistons offenses -- so you have to assume his defensive/intangible impact is significant rather than assuming the defense was Laimbeer/Rodman/Salley etc. primarily. Normally the type of guy I go for but was never that impressed watching his defense -- the whole Jordan's rules things blew up his reputation more than anything I ever saw demonstrated.

I haven't been a Dantley guy to this point but I think I have to go with him -- as many posters keep saying, it's the individual player's demonstrated ability, not the situations he was in. Dantley's the poster boy for that so I'll break the tie for the local DeMatha HS boy.

VOTE:

Bobby Jones – penbeast0

Vince Carter – ronnymac2, therealbig3

Grant Hill – JordansBulls, DavidStern, Keeslinator, Doctor MJ, ElGee, Snakebites

Nate Archibald – Laimbeer

James Worthy – FJS


NOMINATE:

Jerry Lucas – (penbeast0) Laimbeer

Adrian Dantley – ronnymac2, DavidStern, Keeslinator, FJS (penbeast0)

Shawn Kemp – JordansBulls

Joe Dumars – Doctor MJ, Snakebites, therealbig3, ElGee

[bastillon]

doesn't it matter if he helped his teams though ? what's the point of having a great scorer when you can't build around him an effective offensive system ?

[penbeast0]

That's why he hasn't gone yet. His scoring numbers are top 10 all-time, maybe top 5 -- better than Kobe for example to say nothing of Iverson -- but they didn't seem to translate into team success. If you don't think a good team CAN be built around him, he doesn't belong in the top 100 (that's probably my take on Pete Maravich); if you think a good coach could have utilized him as a great offensive weapon and built a 60 win team around him with some effort and luck, then he belongs here (or higher).

I just find it hard to believe anyone that efficient can't get a team built around him with strong defense, rebounding, and spacing that let's him be the primary weapon -- put him on that Philly team with a Raja Bell instead of George Lynch to let him play his best position and I think that team that went to the finals is appreciably (+1 SRS or more) better than it was -- though still not Shaq/Kobe level. Obviously posters like ElGee disagree.

[bastillon]

That's why he hasn't gone yet. His scoring numbers are top 10 all-time, maybe top 5 -- better than Kobe for example to say nothing of Iverson -- but they didn't seem to translate into team success. If you don't think a good team CAN be built around him, he doesn't belong in the top 100 (that's probably my take on Pete Maravich); if you think a good coach could have utilized him as a great offensive weapon and built a 60 win team around him with some effort and luck, then he belongs here (or higher).

I just find it hard to believe anyone that efficient can't get a team built around him with strong defense, rebounding, and spacing that let's him be the primary weapon -- put him on that Philly team with a Raja Bell instead of George Lynch to let him play his best position and I think that team that went to the finals is appreciably (+1 SRS or more) better than it was -- though still not Shaq/Kobe level. Obviously posters like ElGee disagree.

but the question shouldn't whether he can be built around at all, but how likely it is to build a team around him ? the guy has visited tons of places and was repeatedly useless in terms of improving his team in the end we shouldn't look at him as a talent but at the net impact he made on his teams. otherwise Wilt > Russell. as you're one of the biggest Russell supporters you best know how Wilt's game translated into wins. when comparing Wilt to Russell are you asking yourself whether or not Wilt can be built around ? or are you looking at who actually helped his team more ?

you gotta wear Wilt-glasses and only then look at Dantley's career. his impact on his teams isn't one of the most important factors, it's THE ONLY factor. other guys may have scored less, but they helped their teams more. the 2nd criterion has some value here, first has value on ESPN.

[penbeast0]

Actually I support Russell based his actual impact which I think translates onto virtually any team during his career -- his defensive impact was ridiculous as some of our great stat guys have demonstrated. I do consider Wilt to be 3rd greatest player, better than Kareem though I acknowledge it's very very close.

I do see the problem which is why I hadn't nominated AD nor supported him to this point. Just trying to make the case because ElGee was saying no one had.