RealGM Top 100 List #26

[penbeast0]

Criteria: Take into account both peak and career play, era dominance, impact on the game of basketball, and how well their style of play and skills would transcend onto different eras. To be more exact, how great they were at playing the game of basketball.

Voting Will End In 2 Days at 10PM EST (note the new time as school is restarting)

Please vote and nominate

Newest addition:


George Gervin

5x All-NBA 1st team
2x All-NBA 2nd team
2x All-ABA 2nd Team
12x All-Star (3 ABA, 9 NBA)
All-Star MVP (1980)
Hall of Fame (1996)


Clyde Drexler

* NBA Champion 1994
* 1x 1st All-NBA
* 2x 2nd All-NBA
* 2x 3rd All-NBA
* 10x All-Star


Gary Payton

NBA Champion (2006)
2× All-NBA First Team Selection
5× All-NBA Second Team Selection
2x All-NBA Third Team Selections
NBA Defensive Player of the Year (1996)
9x 1st Team All-Defense
9× All-Star


Artis Gilmore

ABA MVP 1972
ABA Champion 1975
ABA Playoff MVP 1975
5x All-ABA 1st Team
4x ABA All-Defense 1st Team
1x NBA All-Defense 2nd Team
ABA All-Star Game MVP 1974
5xABA All-Star
6xNBA All-Star
ABA Rookie of the Year 1972
Hall of Fame 2011



John Stockton

2x All-NBA 1st Team
6x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x All-NBA 3rd Team
5x All-Defense 2nd Team
10x All-Star
All-Star MVP (1993)
NBA’s All-Time leader in Assists
NBA’s All-Time leader in Steals
Hall of Fame 2009


Isiah Thomas

2x NBA Champion (1989, 1990)
NBA Finals MVP (1990)
3× All-NBA 1st Team
2x All-NBA 2nd Team
12× All-Star
2x All-Star MVP (1984, 1986)
Hall of Fame (2000)


John Havlicek

* 8x NBA Champion
* Finals MVP (1974)
* 4x All-NBA First Team Selection
* 7x All-NBA Second Team Selection
* 5x NBA All-Defensive 1st Team Selection
* 3x NBA All-Defensive 2nd Team Selection
* 13x AllStar
* Basketball HOF Player (1984)


Patrick Ewing

* 1x All-NBA First Team Selection
* 6x All-NBA Second Team Selection
* 2x NBA All-Defensive 2nd Team Selection
* 11x All-STar
* Rookie of the Year (1986)
* Basketball HOF Player (2008)


Elgin Baylor

* 10× All-NBA First Team Selection
* 11× All-Star
* NBA All-Star Game MVP (1959)
* Rookie of the Year (1959)
* Voted to the Hall of Fame in 1977
* NBA's 50th Anniversary All-Time Team


Rick Barry

* NBA Champion (1975)
* NBA Finals MVP (1975)
* 5× All-NBA First Team Selection
* 1× All-NBA Second Team Selection
* 4× All-ABA 1st Team Selection
* Rookie of the Year (1966)
* NBA All-Star Game MVP (1967)
* 12× All-Star (8 NBA, 4 ABA)
* Voted to the HOF in 1987

[penbeast0]

From Lists:

Jerky Way
Vote -- Elgin Baylor
Nominate -- Elvin Hayes

JordansBulls
Vote -- Elgin Baylor
Nominate -- Bill Walton

mysticbb
Vote -- Elgin Baylor
Nominate -- Jason Kidd

[penbeast0]

Voting Candidates
The PGs are here. John Stockton is as efficient as just chosen Steve Nash and better assists and defense though less scoring. Isiah Thomas and Gary Payton are very similar statistically with Isiah having more team success and Payton having much greater defensive strength. I lean to Stockton and Payton over Thomas.

Among the wings, Baylor to my mind is clearly better than Barry who is no more efficient and doesn't have the great rebounding or resume outside of his one title; Havlicek is tougher call but again, if the knock on Baylor is efficiency, he is as efficient as Hondo with a lot more scoring and rebounding although Havlicek has defense, rings, and picked up his game in the 70s.

Elgin Baylor – Raw Numbers (league efg) then adjusted per36 numbers
Year Mpg Reb Ast Pts TS% (fg) Reb Ast Pts TS%
1960 42.9 19.8 5.1 34.8 .498 .415 9.7 4.0 25.5 .598
1961 44.4 18.6 4.6 38.3 .492 .426 9.0 3.5 26.6 .575 (only 48g due to military)
1962 42.1 14.3 4.8 34.0 .519 .441 7.8 4.0 25.7 .586
1963 40.6 12.0 4.4 25.4 .487 .433 6.8 4.0 20.8 .560
1964 41.3 12.8 3.8 27.1 .463 .426 7.1 3.5 21.9 .541


Rick Barry -- Raw Numbers (league efg) then adjusted per36 numbers
Year Mpg Reb Ast Pts TS% (fg) Reb Ast Pts TS%
1973 37.5 8.9 4.9 22.3 .508 .456 7.0 4.0 19.8 .555
1974 36.5 6.8 6.1 25.1 .515 .459 5.7 5.2 23.3 .559
1975 40.4 5.7 6.2 30.6 .509 .457 4.5 5.0 26.5 .555 (NBA Champion)
1976 38.5 6.1 6.1 21.0 .483 .458 5.0 5.3 18.8 .525
1977 36.8 5.3 6.0 21.8 .500 .465 4.6 5.3 20.0 .535

For Havlicek, I took a look earlier at his career (NOT peak) numbers and adjusted them to 2011 equivalents per 36 minutes.

Havlicek – Career
Scoring 20.8 (20.4/36 – 17.4 adj)
Efficiency .492 ts% (.537 adj)
Rebounding 6.2 (4.9 adj)
Assists 4.8 (4.2 adj)

As for Drexler and Gervin (and Paul Pierce):

Since they are all pretty comparable players in terms of positional ability, let’s do a statistical comparisom for Clyde Drexler, George Gervin, and Paul Pierce. Drexler played 15 years, Gervin 14, and Pierce 13 and still going so there isn’t a major longevity issue – I pulled the first 13 years for each from B-R.com’s Player Comparison Finder and am using per36 numbers for the comparison because Pierce has played almost 3min/game more than the other two over their careers (which gives him a slight edge to make up for any longevity edge) and I am wanting to see if adjusting the numbers gives Pierce an edge.

REGULAR SEASON – Gervin is the scorer but doesn’t have the playmaking

Drexler 6.5reb 5.9ast 2.2st 2.9to 21.7pts .548ts%
Gervin 5.8reb 2.8ast 1.4st 3.2to 27.1pts .566ts%
Pierce 5.9reb 3.7ast 1.4st 2.8to 21.6pts .569ts%

PLAYOFFS – All three perform at a similar rate in their playoffs (in 38-40 mpg)

Drexler 7.1reb 6.4ast 2.2st 2.9to 21.0pts .534ts%
Gervin 7.0reb 2.9ast 1.4st 3.2to 27.1pts .560ts%
Pierce 6.5reb 4.0ast 1.4st 2.8to 21.4pts .559ts%

ADJUSTED (pace adjusted points and efg adjusted ts%)

Drexler (league average 106.5) = 20.2adj ppg (.491 league efg) .556adj ts%
Gervin (league average 109.2) =24.7adj ppg (.482 league efg) .585 adj ts%
Pierce (league average 97.0) = 22.0adj ppg (.485 league efg) .584 adj ts%

ACCOLADES
Drexler – 1x1st, 2x2nd, 2x3rd All-NBA, .778 MVP Shares (2nd in 1992)
Gervin – 5x1st, 2x2nd All-NBA, 2x2nd All-ABA, .991 MVP Shares (2nd in 78 and 79, 3rd in 80)
Pierce – 1980 Finals MVP, 1x2nd, 3x3rd All-NBA, .040 MVP Shares (best is 7th in 09)


Ewing and Gilmore are the big men here. I still prefer Artis Gilmore to Patrick Ewing despite the various posts on him (almost all of which ignore his ABA prime to focus on his NBA years). Although his NBA career isn't overwhelming for anything but scoring efficiently, still a 20ppg scorer who it the MOST EFFICIENT PLAYER IN NBA HISTORY is pretty damnedintriguing. Artis was also the better rebounder, and in his ABA days, the better defender. Someone in another thread attacked him as not making a big difference on the teams he joined but when he joined a talented Kentucky team they went from 44 wins to 68, a difference of 24 wins and from a defensive rating of 9/11 to one of 2nd/11 in the league despite losing previous year starters Darrel Carrier and Goose Ligon to injury. When he joined Chicago in the merger, they went from 24 wins to 44 wins (playoffs) and from 9/18 defensively to 2nd/22 despite losing starters Tom Boerwinkle and All-Def/All-Star Bob Love to career ending injuries.

This is despite the coach making him tied for 4th among the 5 starters in fga shooting less than the appreciably less efficient Mickey Johnson, Wilbur Holland, and Scott May who were the remaining starters other than aging PG Norm Van Lier. Adding no-D gunners like Orlando Woolridge and Reggie Theus in later years continued this trend . . . and Artis was a shy guy who wouldn't complain or demand the ball (his greatest weakness). Just to compare, When Ewing was drafted by the Knicks they went from 24 wins to 23 though he played only 50 games. The next year he played 63 and they won . . . 24.


VOTE: Elgin Baylor

[penbeast0]

For the nomination:

PG -- It is between the great playmaking but really awful shooting Jason Kidd, the great playmaking but inefficient even for his era (especially in playoffs) Bob Cousy, and the young gun with 2 great years but only 5 1/2 years total, Chris Paul. Other candidates include the injury prone Kevin Johnson, the surprisingly efficient Chauncey Billups, and possibly Hal Greer or Lenny Wilkens from the 60s.

Wings -- On the wings, the statistical comparisom seems to favor Paul Pierce. I love Moncrief and would take his peak over that of Pierce quite easily but 5 good years v. 12 makes me pause. 5 years got Wade in though and my choice of Dwight Howard doesn't give you much more but I just can't help but feel that Howard dominates the game more than Moncrief ever did . . .

Big Men -- Dwight Howard is the best of the modern post players left and would probably be my choice here. Zo had health issues and was always a step behind the best like Shaq/Robinson/Duncan/etc. Willis Reed and Wes Unseld weren't as individually dominant and broke down faster too, while Neil Johnston and Mel Daniels played against inferior competition during their primes and were more limited besides. Dave Cowens was an inefficient scorer and not a great help defender though a super hustle guy. Bob McAdoo while his 5 year peak is spectacular, didn't play big man defense and his teams didn't dominante; Bob Lanier and Walt Bellamy had nice numbers but their teams weren't that much either and Detroit with Lanier sucked defensively for 9 of Lanier's 10 prime years which I consider pretty bad. Finally there is Dikembe Mutombo who was a great shot blocker and consistent player for years. Finally, Bill Walton had one great year but every other year he broke down and left the Portland and San Diego teams which had built around him destroyed until he made another 1 year comeback as a top reserve. I wouldn't choose a one in eight shot at catching lightning in a bottle at the expense of a virtually guaranteed team crash the other seven over any of the above named players.

At PF, McHale didn't rebound as well and doesn't beat out Howard for efficiency, McHale's main argument -- especially when Howard draws a lot more defensive attention. Hayes does rebound that well but was inefficient and a jerk, and Bobby Jones and Dennis Rodman may be the greatest pair of defensive forwards but Jones, while extremely efficient, didn't score or rebound that much while Rodman had no offense and for 1/2 his career, left his man at times to pad his defensive stats at the team's expense.


NOMINATE -- Dwight Howard

[Fencer reregistered]

Vote: Havlicek, as before
Expected strategic flip to: Baylor

Why Baylor? Because Baylor, West, and not that much support were very competitive against Russell, two excellent guards (a different two at different times), and a bunch of other good players.

Or to put it in terms more congenial to most of you, because Baylor had the more awesome peak in his day (and it's not close).

Why Havlicek over Baylor? Longevity. Doing what it took to win. Defense. Being pathbreaking as a relentless wing defender. At least as modern (in a very different way) offense, which was quite effective overall.

The longevity issue is real -- Baylor was so bad at the end that his team improved greatly through his retirement, while Havlicek was still a very effective player when he stopped.

Why Havlicek over Ewing? Clutch play. Being pathbreaking as a relentless wing defender. Assists + scoring.

[Dr Positivity]

I actually kind of like the Pippen over Baylor and Barry choice. But I feel like the consistent move here would be for Ewing and Havlicek to follow as getting in over Baylor and Barry. For Pippen, Havlicek, Ewing over those guys, the argument is roughly the same - the defensive help they bring makes up for whatever they lose offensively, which is not a whole lot since Pippen, Havlicek, Ewing are all very good offensively.

I'm voting Ewing still, I think the value of a C like him is too exceptional.

Vote Ewing

Nominate Pierce

Same as last time for me.

[drza]

My nomination will be easy, as I'm still nominating Kidd. But my vote will be more difficult. It seems that Baylor is the early favorite, with Hondo/Barry/Ewing all likely to get some play as well. I've seen some comps of Baylor vs Barry...anyone have any kind of in depth and/or quantitative comparison of the impacts of the others vs each other?

Also...I'm about ready to start seriously discussing Isiah as well. Like Gervin, on the surface he's not my kind of player. But living through it at the time, he absolutely FELT like one of the greats while I watched him. I'd be interested in seeing his case vs some of these players as well.

On the nomination horizon...as Pancake (I believe) mentioned last thread, there are some excellent defensive bigs/rebounders that we haven't really looked at much. We've recently had an ongoing point guard debate, and now a lot of the scoring swing men are getting run. When do the defensive stalwarts get their time? Thurmond, Rodman, Mourning, even Ben Wallace...not saying it's now, but when do they start getting some conversation?

[Fencer reregistered]

Nominate: Pierce

I don't buy the arguments for either Gervin or Drexler over Pierce, other than in terms of some of nominating-list balance (e.g. by position) that I don't recall anybody actually making. So by all means I'd like Pierce to be nominated to finish off this cluster. I don't object to Kidd or TMac on the nomination list, per se -- but let's take care of Pierce first, please. Barry's been on the nominee list for a long time and it's not even obvious to me that he should be voted on over Pierce.

As for Kidd, I think his rebounding numbers are misleading. Having the bigs block out while he got the ball probably didn't increase NJ's total rebounding rate much. What it DID accomplish is improving NJ's transition offense, but that effect is fully captured in traditional offensive stats as well. I'm sure there were games where, like Rondo sometimes does, he just went and got long rebounds other PGs might not have. But a huge fraction of Kidd's rebounds seemed to be due to scheme -- and wisely so -- rather than to his special rebounding talent.

For Kidd's apparent defensive impact to have been real, we probably need to make some kind of a tone-setting argument. So if you're not an intangibles guy, please don't look at NJ's defensive stats and necessarily assign them to Kidd. That said, charges-drawn and steals do indeed result in extra possessions now and then.

As for offense -- that transition offense was thing of beauty, and Kidd deserves the credit, through a combination of skills and, again, tone-setting. But I don't recall good optics on his prime half-court contributions as compared with, again, Rondo.

Good on Kidd for finally learning to shoot. Gives me hope for my boy Rondo. But why couldn't he do so before his other skills declined?

[ElGee]

Vote: Elgin Baylor
Nominate: Tracy McGrady

For the first time in the project, really, I'm extremely open to change here at the outset. Both for Ewing over Baylor, and for Pierce over McGrady. Not really decided on both...sell me on one of each!

[Doctor MJ]

Okay. Not voting yet. I've got some relatively strong feeling about Hondo vs Baylor vs Barry though:

I look at Hondo vs Baylor. Take scoring out of the picture, and I can't for the life of me imagine picking Baylor. Hondo is Mr. Defense, Mr. Indefatigable, better play making, and far more proven ability to adapt to new roles dependent on team needs.

Scoring? Hondo scored 28.9 PPG at 51.3% TS at his peak. Baylor managed to match that scoring/efficiency combo only once in his entire career. Hondo's efficiency was clearly hampered to some degree by the Celtic strategy for much of his career, but when he was given more freedom both his volume and efficiency improved, and his efficiency was better than Baylor ever really did reliably despite clearly playing in an offense that didn't prevent strong volume/efficiency combinations.

I'll give Baylor the scoring nod here, but not by a lot. Not enough to make up everything else, and it seems pretty clear to me that Hondo could have gotten quite a bit more heady accolades if he'd just been used differently.

You look at Barry's numbers, and you see something similar. Now, something I'll say is that Barry leading a team to a title with basically everyone around him being platooned impresses the hell out of me. I don't dismiss that lightly, but there still really isn't reason to think that Barry's scoring was really drastically better than Hondo's peak, and Hondo's got the edge everywhere else but playmaking where he's comparable.

Hondo vs Ewing is a tougher comparison to make, so still pondering that, and won't insist that the other candidates couldn't sneak in as well.

Additionally, I'm continuing to ponder Pierce more, and the more I think about him, the better his case gets. Really interesting. He's certainly among the people I'm considering for my next nomination. Not saying he's the favorite, but among current players, he's probably the next guy I nominate. Well say more, when I make some decisions.

[therealbig3]

Barry, Baylor, and Havlicek is kind of a toss-up to me, they're the next 3 guys on my list, with Gilmore and Ewing rounding it out.

I won't vote yet, but my nomination is pretty easy.

Nomination: Pierce

His biggest competition at this point is probably T-Mac and Kidd.

So compared to Kidd, we have a much better scorer. Kidd is a better rebounder (pretty amazing, because Pierce is a great rebounder himself), a better passer, and a better defender. But are his advantages there enough to offset the huge gap in scoring ability? Kidd offensively has never been anything special. He gets underrated compared to who you talk to, but his job as a PG is to lead as good an offense as possible...and he never led a great one. His defensive impact is pretty big for a PG, and he's a monster rebounder: he peaked at 13.2 TRB%!

I think on the glass and on defense, Kidd is better, while Pierce is better offensively. But I think Pierce is clearly a bit better offensively, while rebounding is almost close to even, while his defense isn't that far off either, especially in recent years. My reasoning really is as simple as that; I think they're pretty close.

Compared to T-Mac, you have (imo) a better scorer with Pierce. Outside of 03, which I admit is quite a bit better than anything Pierce has done, T-Mac didn't volume score at levels that Pierce wasn't capable of. And Pierce was always the more efficient scorer. I'd say Pierce was probably better as a rebounder, and at least equal to him defensively. T-Mac did have a big edge as a playmaker, and the question is, is that enough to offset Pierce's advantages? This is another close one for me, but personally, I think Pierce has done it just as well (outside of 03) for longer and has been a lot less injury prone. For what it's worth, Pierce finished ahead of T-Mac in both multi-year RAPM studies (drza did point out how the two multi-year RAPM studies do include years in which a player is out of his prime, and thus is the case for T-Mac from 09-11). However, it does mean that T-Mac's insane peak may not count for as much as Pierce's consistency and longevity. You really are only getting 7 All-Star caliber seasons from T-Mac, compared to 12 for Pierce.

EDIT: regarding the single-year RAPM studies that show Kidd being clearly better than Pierce...you have to consider that they suggest Pierce had almost no offensive impact, or even negative offensive impact, for a few of those years...intuitively, that makes no sense, and the multi-year RAPM studies and the on/off numbers completely contradict that.

They also suggest that Pierce had a bigger impact in 03 than T-Mac...not saying they have no merit, but the way some of the numbers line up makes me take it with a grain of salt.

[Fencer reregistered]

Vote: Elgin Baylor
Nominate: Tracy McGrady

For the first time in the project, really, I'm extremely open to change here at the outset. Both for Ewing over Baylor, and for Pierce over McGrady. Not really decided on both...sell me on one of each!

Pierce has performed well deep into the playoffs, at both ends of the court, including against teams with other elite wing players. He hasn't been wholly consistent in that, but it's far beyond fluke level.

McGrady, um, never had the opportunity to show he could do that.

Pierce has been the captain of a championship team.

McGrady, um, never had the opportunity to show he could do that.

Pierce has had better longevity/durability.

By every scoring efficiency metric I checked, Pierce has had only one or two seasons as low as McGrady's entire career average.

Other than in assists & turnovers, Pierce beats or matches McGrady in every statistical category I checked.

[lorak]

Vote: Elgin Baylor

Wow, I'm shocked. Really Baylor was more valuable than Ewing? Didn't you in your "Pippen vs Ewing" post said that they (Pip and Ewing) were very close?
What's the value of Baylor? Negative on defense and not so great on offense, when Ewing was all time great on defense and above average on offense.
And Baylor almost every year missed a lot of games. He played 80 only one time and 75 or more 3 other times. Also for ~half of his career he was ineffective scorer and his team played better without him.

vote: Ewing
nomination: Kidd

[therealbig3]

I think I'm going to have to bump Ewing up, drop Baylor, and re-evaluate Gilmore altogether.

I originally had it:

1. Barry
2. Baylor
3. Havlicek
4. Ewing
5. Gilmore

But it might change to:

1. Ewing
2. Gilmore
3. Barry
4. Havlicek
5. Baylor

And with the recent Pierce vs Gervin vs Drexler talk...maybe they should be compared to Barry, Havlicek, and Baylor and see how they stack up? Baylor is looking less and less impressive to me. Even towards the end of the 60's, when league efficiency started to go up, his efficiency remained really low. Wasn't a good defender or playmaker, and DavidStern pointed out that his team did better without him.

Barry and Havlicek seems like a solid debate, but I think Barry was a little bit better all-around, aside from defense.

All three of these guys get criticized for their low efficiency, so how would they compare to very efficient scorers like Pierce, Gervin, and Drexler? How do they compare to another guy who was also criticized for low efficiency but was pretty dominant everywhere else in T-Mac?

Still thinking, and I'll probably get to Barry vs Havlicek vs Baylor vs Pierce vs Drexler vs Gervin vs T-Mac later, but I think Ewing has risen to the top here.

Vote: Ewing

[penbeast0]

Baylor's lack of efficiency increase relative to the league average as the late 60s came in is pretty typical for players of this period. Few late 50s stars really kept up with the huge offensive explosion in efficiency from 1955-1965. It makes sense intuitively -- you learn your skills as a teenager and once you become a star, you don't change what got you there, you just refine it for most people.

So, people like Pettit, Russell, and Baylor who had reasonably efficient games when they came into the league probably shouldn't be expected to change to match the new advances in offensive play that changed offense so much -- and people like Cousy or Thurmond that came in already only average efficiency will look worse than they really were against their peer groups they grew up with. But, the younger players are their peer groups to some degree as well since we can only evaluate people against their actual competition.

Havlicek and Kidd are among the few that really changed their offensive games for the better after being a star instead of scoring less and that's something to really respect about them.

[Laimbeer]

Consensus rating of players nominated
13 Elgin Baylor SF
17 John Havlicek SG/SF
21 Isiah Thomas PG
23 Rick Barry SF
26 John Stockton PG
39 Patrick Ewing C
41 Gary Payton PG
42 Clyde Drexler SG
38 George Gervin SG
72 Artis Gilmore C

Probably fair to ask why an outlier like Ewing is getting such heavy consideration now. How has he really distinguished himself? I don't see why he's getting significantly more love than guys like Reed or Cowens, who each have a pair of titles. Reed is a two-time Finals MVP and Ewing's performance was less than stellar in his one Finals.

[Laimbeer]

Consensus Rating of Top Players Not Nominated

22 Bob Cousy PG
32 Willis Reed PF/C
33 Elvin Hayes PF/C
34 Kevin McHale PF
35 Dave Cowens PF/C
36 Jason Kidd PG
37 Allen Iverson G
40 Dolph Schayes PF
44 Tiny Archibald PG
45 Dominique Wilkins SF

This seems to back my Cousy push, though there's no traction here - the guy was dominant and defined his position for a decade, while performing a Pippen type role on the front end of a dynasty.

[lorak]

^
"consensus rating" based on what?

[Laimbeer]

^
"consensus rating" based on what?

A blooger did a consolidation of major top 100 lists. Not defining, but can serve as a sense check.

http://basketballjournalist.blogspot.co ... story.html

[Gongxi]

Based mostly on accolades and team success. Next.

Ewing is my easy choice here, I may rethink Cowens just so my vote "counts".