RealGM Top 100 List #12

[penbeast0]

players I am considering, by position:

C David Robinson to me is the best left in terms of peak. Moses has great longevity though and the third possibility is George Mikan who is the only player left that was the undisputed best player in basketball for a reasonably long stretch of time (5 years +). I rate Robinson higher at the moment because Moses's defense is solid on ball but he isn't a defensive anchor and defensive anchors like the Admiral (anchor, Admiral, oh never mind) tend to have an impact out of proportion to their numbers.

PF Karl Malone is the obvious choice, though I have seen Dirk, Petit, Barkley, and even Rodman rated over him by various posters.

SF Erving again is the obvious choice. Durant is interesting.

SG Kobe is the obvious choice.

PG Oscar v. West with Frazier, Stockman, and Nash as long shots. Like the Kobe v. Oscar debate, I am more impressed with West's career than Oscar's because I tend to see West's teams as consistently performing up to or exceeding expectations while Oscar's teams generally didn't live up to their talent. I saw a tremendous amount of traction for Oscar in the last thread though and would like to see him compared to West by those posters -- a relatively straightforward comp since they were contemporaries who played the same position.

So, DRob, Moses, Karl, Doc, Kobe, Oscar, West . . . . let the POLITE DISCUSSION begin.

[colts18]

I'm really leaning towards Steve Nash in this spot. He might just be the greatest offensive player in history. If so, he has to be discussed in this spot.


Team impact:

2004 Suns- 29 wins, 101.4 O rating, 21st (No nash)
2005 Suns- 62 wins, 114.5 O rating, 1st (with Nash)

Thats a huge transformation with just Nash being the main piece added. In 2004, Marion/Amare/Johnson had a 104.8 O rating when they were on the court together. In 2005, those 3+Nash equaled a 122.2 O rating. Thats how much impact Nash had on the offense.


2012 Suns- 0.29 SRS, 106.2 O rating, 9th (with Nash)
2013 Suns- -5.75 SRS, 101.2 O rating, 29th (no Nash)

The Suns went from a top 10 offense with Nash to almost the worst offense without Nash.

According to NBA.com, From 02-10, Steve Nash's offensive teams were ranked #1 every single year in offensive rating. 9 straight years of #1 offenses


Missed games from 2005-2012:
11-26 record (.297, 24 win pace)
-5.87 SRS (Equivalent to the 2013 Suns SRS)
105.2 O rating vs 106.1 Opp D rating (-0.87 offense )

So the Suns offense was actually below average in the games Nash missed. For all the talk about Nash's crap defense, the Suns had an astonishing 113.5 D rating in these games. That would be by far the worst in the NBA this year.

Here are the missed game numbers from 2005-2007, Nash's Peak:
4-12 record
-6.45 SRS
104.7 O rating vs 105.7 opp D rating (-0.99 offense)

The Suns allowed a 112.6 D rating in these games. This is peak Nash where the team played like a 60 win team when he was on the court, yet acted like one of the worst teams when he is off.


Best offenses:

Here are the top offenses in NBA history by O rating, includes playoffs

Rank Year Team eORtg Offense
1 2007 Phoenix Suns 116 3.25
2 2005 Phoenix Suns 116.1 2.92
3 1971 Milwaukee Bucks 108.2 2.72
4 2010 Phoenix Suns 116.4 2.59
5 1982 Denver Nuggets 113.4 2.56
6 2004 Dallas Mavericks 110.8 2.49
7 1975 Houston Rockets 104.1 2.4
8 1987 Los Angeles Lakers 115.9 2.34
9 2004 Sacramento Kings 110.3 2.33
10 2006 Phoenix Suns 113.1 2.31
11 2009 Phoenix Suns 114.4 2.13
12 1988 Boston Celtics 114.7 2.12
13 1998 Seattle Supersonics 113.2 2.07
14 1996 Chicago Bulls 116.3 2.02
15 1985 Los Angeles Lakers 114.6 2.01
16 1978 San Antonio Spurs 106.8 2
17 1995 Seattle Supersonics 116 2
18 2004 Seattle Supersonics 109.3 1.99
19 2002 Dallas Mavericks 110.4 1.98
20 1997 Seattle Supersonics 114.4 1.94


7 out the top 20 offenses of all-time belong to a Steve Nash team. No one in history has done anything like that.

The most common criticism of Nash is his playoff offenses, yet his teams played amazing offense in the playoffs.

Best playoff offensive ratings relative to opponents D rating:
1. Suns 2005 16.2
2. Suns 2010 12.6
3. Lakers 2001 12.2
4. Suns 1992 11.8
5. Suns 1995 11.5
6. Bulls 1991 10.9
7. Lakers 1987 10.5
8. Nuggets 2009 10.2
9. Mavericks 2003 10.0
10. Lakers 1985 9.8
11. Lakers 1998 9.5
12. Kings 2003 9.5
13. Magic 1996 9.3
14. Rockets 1997 9.3
15. Lakers 1989 9.1
16. Mavericks 2002 9.0
17. Spurs 2006 9.0
18. Suns 2006 9.0
19. Bulls 1993 8.9
20. Mavericks 2005 8.7

Here are Nash's playoff on court Offensive rating

05: 118.7
06: 116.5
07: 112.5
10: 120.6

05 vs Grizzlies: 124.1 Ortg vs 102.9 Drtg (+21.2)
05 vs Mavs: 118.1 Ortg vs. 104.1 Drtg (+14)
05 vs Spurs: 115.7 Ortg vs 98.8 Drtg (+16.9)

06 vs Lakers: 115 Ortg vs 105.7 Drtg (+9.3)
06 vs Clippers: 115.1 Ortg vs 103.8 Drtg (+11.3)
06 vs Mavs: 113.3 Ortg vs 105 Drtg (+8.3)

07 vs Lakers: 111.8 Ortg vs 105.6 Drtg (+6.2)
07 vs Spurs: 109.6 Ortg vs 99.9 Drtg (+9.7)

10 vs Blazers: 111.5 Ortg vs. 107.1 Drtg (+4.4)
10 vs Spurs: 124.5 Ortg vs 104.5 Drtg (+20)
10 vs Lakers: 122 Ortg vs 103.7 Drtg (+18.3)


RAPM:

Best offensive RAPM's in the RAPM era:

Year Rank Name Offense per 100
2007 1 Steve Nash 7.9
2010 2 Dwyane Wade 7.6
2007 3 Baron Davis 7.5
2008 4 Steve Nash 7.4
2010 5 LeBron James 7.1
2007 6 LeBron James 7.1
2009 7 LeBron James 6.6
2007 8 Manu Ginobili 6.5
2010 9 Steve Nash 6.3
2007 10 Tim Duncan 6.3
2011 11 Steve Nash 6.2
2009 12 Steve Nash 6.2

5 out of the top 12 belong to Nash. This doesn't even include his 2005 season where he had a 121.7 On court offensive rating, the highest ever since 1997


System/conventional lineup argument:

There is an argument that somehow Nash can only succeed in 1 system (Dantoni). D'Antoni left after 2008, yet Nash still had 2 of his best offenses in the next 2 years. Here is how D'Antoni's offenses ranked in the years after leaving Nash:

17th
17th
7th
17th
9th
21st

Looks like Nash deserves more of the credit than D'Antoni.

Nash has had success with more conventional lineups. In 2006, He succeeded with Kurt Thomas as his center. In 2008, Nash had a 119.1 O rating with Shaq/Amare on the court. That's a traditional big lineup and Nash was as good as ever.

Here is how certain players did with and without Nash. Nash showed huge impact on these players and it could be argued that Nash made them stars.

Marion:
Before Nash: .513 TS%, 107 O rating
Nash comes to Phx: .566 TS%, 116 O rating

08 w/Nash: .594 TS%, 119 O rating
08 after Nash: .503 TS%, 99 O rating

Amare:
Before Nash: .536 TS%, 102 O rating
Nash comes to Phx: .617 TS%, 121 O rating

with Nash 2010: .615 TS%, 117 O rating
after Nash 2011: .565 TS%, 109 O rating

Shaq:
08 before Nash: .577 TS%, 100 O rating
08 with Nash: .605 TS%, 103 O rating

09 with Nash: .623 TS%, 117 O rating
10 leaves Nash: .565 TS%, 104 O rating

[ceiling raiser]

I might be biased here, but I think Kobe has a pretty good argument at this point. I still need to learn a lot more about Oscar, and West as well, considering some of what was posted/suggested in the past thread.

I'd love to some some arguments for Robinson and Dirk, I feel like they should be much closer to the guys selected/being argued than the rest of the pack.

Dr. J is interesting as well. I know there have been some posts suggesting he was a plus defender, and I think I've seen some quotes posted on the board recently (could be mistaken) from contemporaries that suggested the same.

penbeast0 threw out a few interesting long shots in the PGs he mentioned, so I think I will as well:

How do we feel about Ewing? Should he be part of the conversation sooner than later?

[Sasaki]

I haven't discussed at all, so I can't/won't vote, but I would be voting Oscar. That said, I know Kobe's up for discussion, but I feel Baller brought up a very relevant point: what's the argument for Kobe over Karl besides "Count the rings" and "clutch"? Most of the things which people use to accredit Kobe - his ridiculous volume, his All-Star and All-NBA selections and the like - apply to Malone as well. Only Malone did it for even longer than Kobe, he has two MVPs ( one undeserved, but well Kobe didn't deserve his either), and he's probably the better defender.

[Doctor MJ]

Okay, I'm going to take a step back for a bit if I can make myself.

I'll still be voting, but I'm going to try to take a back seat and just let people convince me of things.

It makes sense partly because I honestly haven't made up my mind, but also obviously because of how prominent I was in earlier threads. Especially as a mod, it can be problematic.

[HeartBreakKid]

Some recent post about West have made me consider taking West over him, but for now my brain still says Big O, mainly based on eye test. Watching Oscar Robertson play was pretty amazing, he looked every bit as dominant as any modern player, and I only watched him during his Bucks days. His mid range game and post game were excellent, and he had the type of body that would make him an elite athlete in the modern era as well.

It's hard for me to ignore him and West's awesome efficiency during a time when every shot well below the curve. That type of mid-range dominance and slashing ability is pretty impressive, even if the defenses they went against may have been inferior, they faced very different problems from modern players, primarily the clogging of the paint, which meant Big O was either an amazing mid range player or amazing at getting to the rim, from what I've seen it was both.

His passing ability I think goes without saying, he's as good as a passing guard as most PGs, probably better than most score first PGs I would say. His off/on offensive impact is quite impressive with the Royals, to be honest watching Big O, there was really nothing that made me think he was any inferior to Magic Johnson, and I have Magic 10th on my all time list.



The team stats are nice evidence, but the primary reason why I don't rank Dr.J, West and Bryant over Oscar is really from the eye test. I could be convinced, more so of Dr.J and West, as I know quite a bit about Bryant already, but it doesnt seem like there are too many people pulling for Dr.J and West to be put over Robertson.


As for Bryant, what Big O gives up in scoring, I think he makes up with superior playmaking. His PNR play was really impressive considering the time he grew up in. His playoff run the year he won the title with Kareem was an awesome show. I think Big O could hurt an opponent in more ways offensively than Bryant could, which made him more portable and probably harder to game plan against. There's also the chance that Bryant may shoot himself out of games if defenses really key in on him, as he will tend to settle for bad shots instead of trusting his teammates or giving them better looks (which he is capable of, but his IQ and ego get the best of him I believe).

So my vote goes to Oscar Robertson.

Bryant, West and Dr.J have the best chance of taking the vote away from Oscar.

[Baller2014]

Vote- Karl Malone
I may change this later, I almost typed Dr J here, but couldn't quite do it. For the moment I think I'll go with the Mailman.

To me this comes down to Karl Malone and Dr J. I'm not sure either is going to be a shot to win, I counted more than 11 voters from last thread who are going to first preference Oscar, who I'm not thrilled about getting voted in here to be honest (like Colts I'd rather take Steve Nash over Oscar), but I'll give my thoughts here briefly anyway.

Karl Malone has been a strange exclusion from the discussion to date. Kobe just got 8 primary votes and Karl got 0, yet Karl Malone is a comparably good offensive player (especially factoring in efficiency), a vastly more impactful defensive player, has much more longevity, has comparable or better accolades (if you're into that), and doesn't have Kobe's massive negatives which poison his on court impact to some degree. I can understand the argument for Kobe over Oscar or Dr J (I don't agree with it at all, but I can understand it), but what's the argument for Kobe over Karl Malone? There doesn't seem to be one except ring counting, which is silly. The more I think about it, the more I favour voting for Karl Malone. He's being massively slept on here.

Meanwhile I've been asking Kobe's supporters for 7 threads now to respond to his negative impact, and how they're accounting for it, and I've basically received no reply (except ones that indicate they are ignoring it). I think it's a serious issue, and should be responded to (it's covered in detail later in this post).

I'll outline again my thoughts on Dr J v.s Kobe:

I was thinking about these two RE: the top 100 project:

The case for Dr J

Spoiler:

It’s odd that there has not been more traction for Dr J to this point. He has probably the highest peak of any remaining player, tonnes of longevity, great intangibles and could play both ends of the floor. The only real argument against him is that the ABA doesn’t count, and that’s an absurd argument which I’ll cover.

To begin with, let’s look at a post from Truelafan I found while searching realgm on this very subject:

Julius Erving has a higher peak. Kobe Bryant is a great player. He had had some amazing years. He has never had a year like Julius Erving had in 1976, where Doc led his team in...well, everything. He averaged 29.3 ppg, 11.0 rpg, 5.0 apg, 2.5 steals and almost 2 blocks per game. The kicker is that he played [better in the postseason and led a pretty nondescript team to a title. In the finals, he had Bobby Jones defending him. Bobby Jones has a legitimate claim to being one of the 5 best defensive players of all time. He was at his peak when he went up against Julius Erving in 1976. Erving dismantled him. Erving's 1976 season is one of the all time dominant seasons in every way. Kobe has never had a year like that. He's had some that were close...but so has Erving. So you kind of have to go with Erving's peak.

How much “better” did Dr J play in the playoffs? The guy was putting up 35-13-5-2-2 on a FG% of 53.3%. Ridiculous.
Dr MJ made this post on the #7 thread RE: Dr J:

It was me talking about Erving, and I'll confirm: There's no good reason at all to rate the NBA as clearly ahead of the ABA right before the merger. 5 years earlier sure, but the reason the merger happen had everything to do with the fact that the ABA kept gaining and gaining. By the end the ABA was winning more of the cross-league games than the NBA, and as I mentioned even the NBA's battlecry of "we played both sides of the ball" looks silly when you see how the ABA teams did when they came over and played with NBA rules.

Re: Declining numbers when he switched over. There were injuries yes, and there was a general decline that seems to me to come from a player whose game peaked more closely with his athleticism than your average all-timer - which says something about how special his athleticism was, and also says something about his BBIQ being good but not genius

The big thing though is simply that he was put onto another team with the worst fit imaginable. Philly's star George McGinnis was the knock off version of Erving: Both guys did it all, and both were used to their entire team being built around them in a unipolar manner. It was kind of like LeBron coming to Miami if you were to imagine Wade as a guy with no intention of sacrificing for build a great team around the new superior talent, except that the gap between LeBron & Wade as first option was smaller than the gap between Erving & McGinnis.

So Erving goes there and does what's asked of him, which is quite a bit less than he's used to because the team is essentially alternating between he and McGinnis. Over time, as the 76ers realized this just wasn't good enough, McGinnis got phased down and then traded, and so by the time we get to the '80s Erving's basically doing what you can expect him to do in that time period - which is very impressive, but it's not what he looked like in his peak.

If the New York Nets had been able to come over to the NBA intact, there's every reason to believe that the progression of Erving's stats from '76 to '80 would have been much more of a straight line, and he'd have been been doing his thing leading what would have been a strong contender without anyone seeing his teammates as particularly strong. Good chance that if this happened, Erving's something of a GOAT candidate.

Nor did Dr J fade off in the way some assert:

For those saying that Dr. J declined in the NBA.

Per 100 possession numbers:
74-76 (ABA): 32-13-6, 5.1 stl/blk
77-79 (NBA): 28-10-5, 4.0 stl/blk
80-82 (NBA): 34-10-6. 5.2 stl/blk

His rebounding numbers dropped off which can be explained by the ABA being a smaller league, but Dr. J's numbers from 80-82 are very comparable to his 74-76 ABA peak. Even his steals and blocks, an indicator of athleticism, went up in the NBA despite the fact that he was age 29-31 in that span compared to 23-25 from 74-76.

So Dr J actually has the highest peak left, and great longevity, the guy was still an MVP candidate into the early 80’s, and didn’t drop off the map right after that either. And of course he was putting up 32-12-4-3-2 on 50% shooting back in 1973 at age 22. Dr J was simply a more talented individual than Kobe- he was bigger, stronger, and more athletic. He had huge hands that let him palm the ball to do ridiculous stuff, which combined with his awesome body control made him near unstoppable going to the basket. He was a fantastic defender as well, with natural talents like size, strength and length that Kobe simply lacked (not to mention effort). Check out this video showcasing some of Erving’s ridiculous body control and athleticism, all of which he makes look effortless:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DebtVv87jDc[/youtube]

Does the ABA “Count”?

Spoiler:

In addition to the usual arguments about exhibitions games and players who switched in and out of the ABA, let's look at the most compelling argument; the 2 teams whose rosters changed the least from ABA to NBA. The first is one I know well, my own Spurs.

In the 3 years prior to the merger the Spurs had a win% of 53.6%, 60.7% and 59.5%. In the first 3 years in the NBA the Spurs had a win% of 53.7%, 63.4% and 58.5%. They actually did better in the NBA. Some people criticise their SRS dropping in 1977, but that's easily explainable; James Silas, an all-aba 1st teamer in 1976, suffered a catastrophic injury (from which he never fully recovered) and played only 22 games in 1977. He barely played in 78 either. Despite that, the Spurs SRS kicked it back up to ABA levels in 1978, and by 1979 (when Silas returned at a reduced capacity) they recorded a higher SRS than they had ever recorded in their history and tragically lost in the conference finals (if they'd won, they were the likely champs that year). So with a healthy Silas the Spurs wouldn't have just been breaking even with their ABA results leading into the merger, they'd have been significantly outperforming them.

Then look at the Nuggets. Despite losing some players they were still an awesome NBA team. Not quite as good as they'd been in the ABA, that was a combination of a number of factors (and not every team is going to transition as smoothly as the Spurs), but they were still an awesome team. Just like the Spurs, critics mention that the Nuggets SRS dropped in 1977, and it did drop marginally, but what they don't seem to know is that the Nuggets actually had the 2nd highest SRS in a 22 team NBA in 1977. The team with the best SRS? The one who beat them, and who won the championship that year. Lots of ABA players showed much the same thing on an individual level. Sure, Dr J's stats went down on arriving to the NBA, but that was a combination of both his injuries and the team he was on. There were three 30 pt scorers and one 20 point scorer. That wasn't going to work, so the coach said they'd all have to take less shots to make it work, and it almost did, the 76ers were consistently ripping it up despite the presence of way too many gunners, on their talent alone.

In some ways the ABA was a tougher league. There were plenty of weak teams in the NBA by 1976, but in the ABA in 1976 there was exactly one weak team (the Squires). The other 5/6ths of the time you played either one of 3 teams who’d have been NBA contenders, or 2 other teams that would have made the NBA playoffs that year probably. The two titles Dr J carried his team to, especially in 1976, were won in an league that was as strong as the NBA.

The case against Kobe

Kobe’s impact is lower than guys currently being discussed

Spoiler:

Kobe was never the best player in the league in any year…and yet people here want to vote him in the top 15 of all-time. Just think about that for a sec…nor is that my opinion, that’s also the opinion of the RPOY project on realgm (with Laker fans making up one of the largest voter groups).

As I've been elaborating on throughout the top 100 project, the best way to tell how much a guy can impact a team is often to look at how he does with bad team mates, because it removes all the variables of how much star X really did. All the top 10-15 type guys we're talking about did that, heck even some non-top 15 type guys like Nash and Walton and Dwight have shown that sort of impact. Kobe never did that. He not only never did that, but he demonstrated pretty conclusively he couldn't do it. From 99-04 the Lakers record when Shaq was hurt, but Kobe played, was 23-26 (a 38 win pace). Shaq led the same support cast his fans will call "bad" to a 30-10 record over this period (good for a 61 win pace). In 05-07 without Shaq, Kobe's teams were never contenders, winning between 34 and 45 wins. In 05 Kobe's team wasn't that bad, he had an all-star quality player in Odom, a very good player in young Caron Butler, and several decent role players to round out the starting line-up (Mihm, who was a solid role playing big before his injuries, and Atkins, who was a starter on a 50 win team the following season). Nor can you blame the 05 season on Kobe's injuries (they were 28-38 in games Kobe played), or Odom's (because Odom was only rested once the Lakers knew the playoffs was out of sight; they had an unbelievably tough schedule leading into the playoffs, mostly against 50 win teams).

The 06 and 07 teams were worse, but were they really worse than the sorts of bad teams Dr J had in 1976, or Walton in 77, or Oscar’s Royals, or Rick Barry’s 1975 title team? I doubt it. Odom would easily have been the best non-Duncan player on most of those teams. In the 2008 season the record without Bynum or Pau was also a mediocre 9-7. Basically Kobe couldn't get anywhere with bad teams. You know who could? The guys he's being compared to. I won’t even get started on what advanced stats say about Kobe (especially in regards to his horribly overrated D). There are multiple years where the Lakers really underachieved if Kobe is the player he’s being made out to be; 03, 04, 05-07, 08, 11, and of course 2013, for which Kobe has to shoulder his share of the blame too.

People are trying to give props to Kobe for his volume scoring, but that makes little sense. Dantley was probably a better scorer, and nobody is seriously considering him for a long while. We should be less interested in volume, and more interested in impact.

So right off the bat Kobe’s at a disadvantage with most of the guys he’s being compared to. But it gets worse because of the next thing…

Kobe’s horrible intangibles- bad team mate, bad leader

Spoiler:

This post is from a recent thread:

It's basically because Kobe has a pretty horrible record as a team mate, perhaps one of the worst of all-time for any star, and in some ways it's worse than ever. Why? Because in the old days you could rely on Kobe to play like a star at least, but now with the injuries and his age? You're basically stuck in a soap opera about whose team it is, and how Kobe gets to close his career. It wasn't fun, just ask Dwight Howard. I suspect that's why we're seeing so much Kobe twitter activity all of a sudden, taking pot shots at people (like the ridiculous tweet where he claimed the Hornets snubbed him in the draft, when in fact it was the exact opposite way around). I won't focus on Kobe's decisions to force his way to the Lakers, but here are some tidbits from Kobe's career.

Getting into the NBA Kobe had grand dreams about how his career would pan out, and was not shy about telling his team mates how great he would become. This led to obvious tension in the team, most particularly with Shaq:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2 ... biography/

“It pained me to see how much of a struggle it was for them me,” West writes, “how unwilling Kobe was to defer to Shaq in any way.”

Phil Jackson writes how West first alerted him to the issue when West called him into his office and confided that Kobe had come to talk to Jerry, to ask him for advice. What advice did Kobe want from one of the Laker greats?

Kobe had asked him how he had averaged 30-plus points a game when his team mate, Elgin Baylor, was also scoring 30-plus points per game.

To try and teach Kobe what it meant to be part of a team, Phil arranged an introduction between Kobe and his former student, Michael Jordan, who had to learn to sacrifice for the team. It didn't go the way Phil hoped:

I orchestrated a meeting between the two stars, thinking that Michael might help shift Kobe's attitude toward selfless teamwork. After they shook hands, the first words out of Kobe's mouth were "You know I can kick your ass one on one."

Phil goes on to say how he admired Kobe, but that:

Kobe had yet to reach out to his teammates to try to get to know them. Instead of spending time with them after games, he usually went back to his hotel room

.
Later in Phil's first season he pulled the team together so they could watch some game tape. He pointed out that the triangle couldn't work with selfish play, and opened the floor to the team:

Shaq spoke up... "I think Kobe is playing too selfishly for us to win". That got everyone fired up. Some of the players nodded in support of Shaq, including Rick Fox, who said, "How many times have we been through this?" No one in that room came to Kobe's defense... As Rick Fox put it, "Kobe's me-first attitude was a landmine that was about to explode. We all knew somebody had to step on it, but nobody wanted to. So Phil did it, and we all walk a lot more freely now

Things got so bad that Phil wrote:

One night that week I had a dream about spanking Kobe and giving Shaq a smack.

Even after winning a ring, Kobe's attitude hadn't settled much, in fact Phil worried each year that it got worse:

One player whose agenda wasn't hard to figure out was Kobe Bryant...Kobe was building his resume at the expense of the rest of the team. Early in the season I'd asked him to keep playing the way he had the year before, running the offense through Shaq and sticking with the system until the final minutes of the game, Kobe responded by nearly doubling the number of shots he took each game and adapting an erratic style of passing- or more often, not passing- that infuriated his teammates, especially Shaq. Kobe's selfishness and unpredictability gave the other players a sinking feeling that he didn't trust them anymore, which further eroded team harmony...

The previous year Kobe had embraced the triangle offence. He couldn't wait to test drive the system that had turned Michael and the Bulls into champions. But at the start of this season he told me he thought the offense was boring and too simple, and it prevented him from displaying his gifts. I understood, but I told him we needed to win the most games with the fewest mishaps, including injuries and end of season fatigue. I don't think he bought it... he wasn't interested in becoming Shaq's Pippen. He wanted to create shots for himself....

In his mind he had it all figured out. His goal was to become the greatest basketball player of all time. He was certain he knew what he had to do to get there. Why should he listen to anybody else? If he followed my advice and cut back his scoring, he'd fall short of his ultimate goal. How was I going to get through to this kid?

To try and stop Shaq and Kobe feuding Phil encouraged them to become friends off the court, but:

Kobe balked at the idea of getting too close to Shaq and was appalled by the big guy's attempts to turn him into his "little brother". As Kobe explained, they came from different cultures and had little in common. Shaq was an army brat from the South by way of Newark, New Jersey, and Kobe was the worldly son of a former NBA player from Philly by way of Italy.

Later that season, after Shaq made a (private) trade demand to Buss, Kobe responded by giving a (public) interview to Rich Bucher, where he ripped into Shaq for his free throw shooting, and remarked:

"Turn my game down? I need to turn it up. I've improved. How are you going to bottle me up? I'd be better off playing somewhere else."

Things didn't get easier from there:

During the next few weeks, Shaq and Kobe took their soap opera to absurd extremes. If Kobe noticed Shaq sliding up to one reporter, he'd refuse to talk to him or her, then promise an exclusive to someone else. And if Shaq saw that Kobe was getting his feet taped by one trainer, he'd insist on having his feet taped by another trainer. And so it went...

Brian Shaw, who had played with O'Neal in Orlando, said it reminded him of the clash between Shaq and rising start Penny Hardaway, except that Penny was ok playing Robin to Shaq's Batman, and Kobe wasn't.

Later that season, while discussing the subject with reporter Rick Telander, Phil mentioned that he'd heard a rumour about how Kobe would sabotage his HS team in games early on, so he could help them make a dramatic comeback. When this was published Kobe's mature response was to have his lawyer threaten to sue Phil.

The Lakers won a 3-peat anyway, but it wasn't enough. Rather than win, Kobe was worried about how he was perceived during these wins. He was, in his own words, sick of being Robin.

early signs indicated that Kobe wanted to move to another team where he could be the main man and not have to compete with Shaq for that honor. The team he seemed most interested in was our local rival, the Clippers. Early in the season he had made an awkward attempt to discuss his future with Clippers coach Mike Dunleavy- a violation of NBA rules. To his credit, Mike didn't let the conversation get very far.

This wasn't the last time Kobe would demand a trade in public. As soon as the going got tough in LA he tried to force his way to Chicago.

After another (private) team fight in the 2004 season Kobe responded by going public with Jim Gray, again ripping on Shaq, for being out of shape, and for his "childlike selfishness and jealousy". Charming.

For years Phil had tried to get through to Kobe, but despite 3 titles in 4 years, things just seemed to get worse. Phil wanted Kobe traded

"I can't coach Kobe...He won't listen to anyone. I can't get through to him".

A few days later Phil details how Kobe got him fired:

Dr Buss, who worried that his young star might jump to another team, visited Kobe in Newport Beach, and tried to persuade him to remain with the Lakers... shortly thereafter Kobe told Derek Fisher [about Jackson] "Your man's not coming back next year."... I felt completely blindsided... Kobe seemed to be revelling in it.

.
when asked by the media if Phil's departure affected his free agency Kobe told reporters "I don't care". This is while Phil was trying to coach the team to a championship. The 2004 defeat of course was largely Kobe's fault. Rather than pass to Shaq, who was playing outstandingly, Kobe gunned it and shot horribly. The team lost, but Kobe seemed to prefer losing "his way" than winning another title as Shaq's Robin. He wanted to be the finals MVP this time, and taking as many shots as he felt he needed to in order to do that. After the loss Rick Fox summed it up:

"A team always beats a group of individuals... we picked a poor time to be a group of individuals"

Jackson was fired right after, and Shaq was moved to placate Kobe, who signed immediately afterwards. Sure, Magic got his coach fired once too, but at least that turned out to be the right move. Kobe wasn't doing this for the right reasons, indeed he had to swallow his pride and agree for Phil to come back after things fell apart without him. Forcing the team to move Shaq in a rush, so he would agree to re-sign, almost certainly hurt the Lakers in their quest to get fair value back (and indeed, keeping Shaq would have been more sensible).

Kobe had games where he would refuse to shoot to make "a point", often hurting the team as the opposing team reacted accordingly.

During the final week of the season, Kobe, who had never been shy about shooting, took just one shot in the first half of a game against Sacramento, allowing the Kings to take a 19-point lead and win handily. The media concluded that Kobe had intentionally tanked the game to improve his negotiating position with Dr Buss. Kobe said he was just doing what the coaches had asked him to do- share the ball- but nobody bought it. One player, speaking anonymously, told the LA Times... "I don't know how we can forgive him."

This led to an ugly scene at practise the next day. Kobe burst into the training facility in a rage and polled every player, one by one, trying to find out who was responsible for the quote. It was a wrenchingly painful episode.

Nor was this sort of thing confined to minor games. Who could forget game 7 v.s the Suns where Kobe responded to media criticism that he shot to much by refusing to shoot. Seriously?
http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/chris.b ... out_the_mo

The problem with Kobe's attitude is it has a very real effect on the team's on the court performance.

And who could forget Kobe's horrible leadership in regards to Dwight Howard, who was reportedly hesitant to come to LA in the first place after Kobe's pitch to him was for him to come "be my Tyson Chandler". The two clearly had issues during the season, much of it revolving around Dwight feeling that Kobe was shooting too much. Kobe's pitch for Dwight to stay at his meeting with the Lakers was not much better. After promising to "teach Dwight how to win" Kobe was asked by Dwight:

Was this going to be his last year? "No," replied Kobe. "I'm planning to be around for three of four more years."

At that point, according to others in the room, Dwight's eyes went blank and he drifted away. In his mind the game was over.

Can anyone think of another top 15 player who other star players and coaches reacted thusly to? I sure can't, and it hurts him a lot.

[Jaivl]

Gonna vote for Oscar again I guess... but not yet. Waiting to hear opinions about Karl, West and Julius (and Kobe of course).

How do we feel about Ewing? Should he be part of the conversation sooner than later?

Not before D-Rob is in IMHO.

[The Infamous1]

Comparing oscar and wests numbers to Kobe is tricky because they played in an era with a significantly higher pace and worst team defenses particularly on the perimeter. Plus the competition at guard and wings overall is superior in the 00's

[Notanoob]

Bill Walton was a better player than David Robinson, IMO, but oh well.

I'd also suggest that Chuck had a better peak than the Mailman, and should get some consideration for being so utterly dominant on offense.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Comparing oscar and wests numbers to Kobe is tricky because they played in an era with a significantly higher pace and worst team defenses particularly on the perimeter. Plus the competition at guard and wings overall is superior in the 00's

While that is true I don't see any reason why West or Oscar couldn't maintain their volume in more recent years.

Just citing pace is not a strong enough argument I would think considering they were both highly efficient and didn't struggle with shot creation.

West for example took 20-22 shots in many of his high scoring years.
That is extremely comparable to other modern day volume scoring guards.

Regarding competition well... I also agree with you to some extent but they did fine h2h VS other elite guards from their era and a guy like West often torched Boston who had one of the best defenses ever so for that reason I am hesitant to say either would struggle to adapt to more modern defenses/defenders.
Maybe their efficiency would drop slightly but one must also remember their are also clear advantages to playing in more modern eras (spacing, better offensive schemes, 3pt shot etc...) to go along with disadvantages.
Plus even if I drop West's Prime playoff TS% slightly it is still on the same level as Bryants over his extended Prime.

[ronnymac2]

I'll leave this here and continue talking about Karl Malone:

Spoiler:

I want to talk about the Mailman because he hasn't quite gotten the amount of representation that other players on this level have received. I voted for KG in this thread, so this isn't exactly my argument for Malone, but it's information and a perspective. I invite you to receive it and then do what you feel.

Early Years

Malone emerged as a 20-10 threat in his 2nd year in the league, but it was his 3rd year in 1988 where you can see the quantum leap to being a legit star player. Utah was the best defense in the NBA (their strength being eFG% Against) thanks to Mark Eaton's dominant defense.

Malone certainly helped though. He led the team in defensive rebound rate (10th in the NBA that year) and was named All-Defense Second Team. He also averaged 27 points on 52 percent shooting and got to the free throw line almost 10 times per game (56.8 percent True Shooting..Got his FT shooting up to 70 percent this year).

Then in the playoffs, Utah faces the defending champion LA Lakers (#3 in SRS at 4.81) and loses in 7 games, with Malone dropping 28.7 points and 11.7 rebounds on 53.5% TS. Malone seemed able to handle LA's defense better as the series wore on, putting up 27/11 (10/20 FG, 7/7 FT) in a Game 6 Elimination Game victory, and 31/15 (14/21 FG, 3/9 FT) in a Game 7 Loss.

Early-years Malone...from say 1987-1991...looks like prime Amar'e Stoudemire with slightly less offense but MUCH better defense and rebounding. Amar'e was built like a SF; Malone was built like a mack truck and actually pursued defensive rebounds. Early Malone turned the ball over more than prime Amar'e and didn't score quite as efficiently, but Amar'e got to play C and had a ton of shooters next to him while Malone had a giant negative at C (Eaton was a horrendous offensive player and clogged the paint) and did not have as much shooting around him. The only constant is Nash and Stockton were great at feeding the bigs.

Around '91-'93, Malone's passing from the mid-post, off the pick-n-roll, and with his back-to-the-basket improved to the point that it made his offensive utility greatly outstrip anything Amar'e has ever been capable of providing on that end. Mind you, Malone remained a strong defensive rebounder and defensive player.

RAPM

I've seen questions regarding Malone's longevity based on his RAPM scores post-1998. I get the impression that the skepticism is not extreme by any means, but more along the lines of "Malone does indeed have excellent longevity, but the boxscore stats saying he's a 20+ PPG player post-98 hide the fact that he most certainly is not a strong fulcrum for a successful team in a 20+ PPG role, and that he cannot provide significant lift in this role, which seems to be the only way Malone can be utilized."

Compared to somebody like KG, Malone does indeed look like he ages far less gracefully based on RAPM.

The way I see it, however, is that as Malone's body and raw talent declined, his role did not change. His coach did not change. His minutes and games played did not change. His USG remained high when on the court.

Here is KG's and KM's scoring average, MPG, and USG relative to other's on their respective teams from 1996-2003 and 2006-2013. I chose these years because we get to see when each was a prime-time MPG/USG/Scorer and see how they get to decline from that level.

Kevin Garnett

2006: 21.8 points (1st), 38.9 minutes (2nd) 25.5 USG% (1st)
2007: 22.4 points (1st), 39.4 minutes (1st), 27.4 USG% (1st)
2008: 18.8 points (2nd), 32.8 minutes (3rd), 25.5 USG% (1st)
2009: 15.8 points (3rd), 31.1 minutes (4th), 23.4 USG% (2nd)
2010: 14.3 points (3rd), 29.9 minutes (4th), 22.1 USG% (2nd)
2011: 14.9 points (3rd), 31.3 minutes (4th), 22.3 USG% (2nd)
2012: 15.8 points (2nd), 31.1 minutes (5th), 24.9 USG% (2nd)
2013: 14.8 points (2nd), 29.7 minutes (3rd), 24.5 USG% (2nd)

**Garnett missed 92 games over this timespan.

Karl Malone

1996: 25.7 points (1st), 38 minutes (1st), 29.8 USG% (1st)
1997: 27.4 points(1st), 36.6 minutes (1st), 32.7 USG% (1st)
1998: 27 points(1st), 37.4 minutes (1st), 31.8 USG% (1st)
1999: 23.8 points (1st), 37.4 minutes (1st), 30.5 USG% (1st)
2000: 25.5 points (1st), 35.9 minutes (1st), 31.9 USG% (1st)
2001: 23.2 points (1st), 35.7 minutes (1st), 30 USG% (1st)
2002: 22.4 points (1st), 38 minutes (1st), 28.8 USG% (1st)
2003: 20.6 points (1st), 36.2 minutes (1st), 27.8 USG% (1st)

**Malone missed 6 games over this timespan.

Malone is giving superstar PPG, USG, and MPG, but not superstar impact for the Utah Jazz. It's fair to question why Malone's role/minutes did not change if he wasn't capable of providing significant lift after 1998. My response to this would be:

1. Malone was healthy. No reason to manage minutes any differently based on injury concerns.
2. The team clearly did not have a Plan B. Malone certainly wasn't holding a burgeoning star back. This clearly wasn't a team in any of these years where Sloan could pull a Pop and platoon guys and find equal or superior success. Whatever lift Malone was capable of providing for 35+ minutes was necessary to make the playoffs, in reality and in the eyes of Coach Sloan.
3. Stockton/Malone worked in Sloan's system in the REG SEA for over a decade. Changing things up would have been a huge adjustment for all parties involved and quite risky (likely not successful either in my opinion).

This should not be read as an indictment on Kevin Garnett. KG's focus was (correctly) pushed to the defensive side in his later years, and he excelled in a way that Malone wouldn't have defensively even if Malone were put in an optimal setting. This is actually part of the reason why I vote KG in this thread.

This should be read as an explanation for why Malone's decline might look more precipitous as measured by RAPM than it actually was. Malone didn't get to specialize or decrease his role/minutes the way KG and David Robinson and his teammate John Stockton did in their decline years.

Of course the counter to this is that Malone's skillset doesn't allow him to specialize in anything but volume scoring. To that, I must emphatically disagree. Cut his skillset down to the bone and he's very much a Horace Grant type...a mini-Kevin Garnett actually. KG/Horace/older Malone connect the goodness/impact of the players around them because of their spacing effect, passing, screens, off-ball movement, ability to run the floor, and IQ.

Despite being 40, and despite being oft-injured, I'd argue that Karl Malone, like Horace Grant in 1995, was the most valuable player on the 2004 Los Angeles Lakers. HoGrant and Malone were the third-best players, but the most valuable based on the team construction (Though Penny could be argued for Orlando because the Magic had no PG). Malone gave Kobe his first great pick-n-roll partner and gave Shaq the best or second-best entry-passing big man he ever played next to. And Malone's man defense in the 2004 playoffs was amazing, as he stifled Yao Ming, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Rasheed Wallace by shoving them 20 feet away from the basket, beating up on them, and stripping them cleanly of the ball or making them take tough shots. Even at age 40 and injured for half the season, 2004 Malone proved to me that 1999-2003 Malone could have shifted his role from volume scorer to role playing big man and been extremely impactful and great on a contending team.

Here are Utah's ORTG, DRTG, and SRS numbers and rankings throughout Malone's peak years:

1994:
SRS= 4.1, 7th out of 27
ORTG= 108.6 (7th, +2.3)
DRTG= 104.1 (7th, -2.2)

**In February of 1994, Utah trades for Hornacek mid-season. This is a major upgrade offensively.

1995:
SRS= 7.75, 2nd out of 27
ORTG= 114.3 (4th, +6)
DRTG= 105.7 (8th, -2.6)

1996:
SRS= 6.24, 3rd out of 29
ORTG= 113.3 (2nd, +5.7)
DRTG= 106.1 (8th, -1.5)

1997:
SRS= 7.97, 2nd out of 29
ORTG= 113.6 (2nd, +6.9)
DRTG= 104 (10th, -2.7)

1998:
SRS= 5.73, 5th out of 29
ORTG= 112.7 (1st, +7.7)
DRTG= 105.4 (18th, +0.4)

**1998: Normal 3-point line; Stockton misses 18 games.

***Malone missed 1 game over these 5 seasons.

A few things:

1. The 1995 Utah Jazz might be just as good as the 1997 Utah Jazz, which I hear everybody laud as one of the GOAT teams to never win a title. Better versions of John Stockton and Jeff Hornacek, afforded Malone a better opportunity to use his power post game. '95 Jazz were a problem for teams, they just matched up with the wrong team at the wrong time.

2. For the most part, these teams are above average offensively and defensively (not '98), and they're all decent title contenders. What sucks about them is their offensive centers and their defensive wing players. Drexler, Jordan, and even Pippen ripped them up. Payton torched them in 1996. These are legitimate roster flaws that doomed them in certain matchups.

During this time period, Utah lost to NBA champions (Houston in '94 and '95; Chicago in '97 and '98) or NBA Finalists (Seattle in '96 in a 7-game Western Conference Finals). Utah got at least as far as the WCFs 4 out of 5 years.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I'll go with Oscar again. But it's a damn near coin flip between him and Kobe, but again, my opinion is based primarily on Oscar's incredible offensive impact, his fundamentals and intelligence both getting his own high percentage shot or passing, his size and versatility, and especially, the general thoughts about his game among his peers. I mean, especially considering how high Russell and Wilt are when it really wasn't that unusual for someone to think Oscar was the best, though to me, Russell is the clear top player of the 3.

Edit: I'm changing my vote to Kobe. The man was the consensus best player for at least 3 years from '06-'08, and many were saying it through 2010, though I disagree with that, as would most here. Now, if the Shaq years are such a big problem, look at the post-Shaq years and how consistently he led good to great offenses.

2005- 7th best offense/+2.0 offensive rating (and this was while Kobe himself missed 16 games, Odom missed 18 and the Lakers had a midseason coaching change
2006- 8th best offense/+2.2 offensive rating (Cast was Odom, who was inconsistent throughout the first half with plenty of single digit scoring games, Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Luke Walton ect.)
2007- 7th best offense/+2.1 offensive rating (Odom missed 26 games and Walton missed 22 games)
2008- 3rd best offense/+5.5 offensive rating (Bynum went down after 35 games, and LA then only had Gasol for 26 games during the regular season)
2009- 3rd best offense/+4.5 offensive rating (A better cast than previous years, but Kobe was still surrounded by mediocre shooting as LA had the 12th worst 3P% at 36.1%)
2010- 11th best offense/+1.2 offensive rating (This is a bit of anomaly due to Kobe's bad slump from January on due to injuries after a great start to that point as well as Pau and Bynum each missing 17 games, Kobe missing 9 games and LA was also the 8th worst 3 point shooting team)
2011- 6th best offense/+3.7 offensive rating (And this was a limited Kobe coming off his 3rd knee surgery, while Pau wore down a bit after having to carry too much of the load early and Bynum missed 28 games)
2012- 10th best offense/+1.4 offensive rating (Aside from Mike Brown being a poor offensive coach, the Lakers also had very little outside of Kobe, Bynum and Gasol, and Kobe did miss 8 games while Bynum missed 6, which is somewhat significant in a lockout season. Plus, while Kobe brought the percentage down himself, LA was still the 6th worst 3 point shooting team
2013- 9th best offense/+1.9 offensive rating (This was actually a solid feat by Kobe, who was great offensively regardless of being 34. Mike Brown coached the first 5 games, then Bernie Bickerstaff was interim coach for 5 games before D'Antoni took over, plus, Dwight was pretty ineffective offensively struggling with the back injury and torn labrum, Pau missed 33 games and had his worst season by far due to injuries, while Nash often looked his age of 39 due to injuries that caused him to miss 32 games)

Kobe's great postseason career has been covered with 4 truly great playoff runs to the finals ('01, '08-'10) but Kobe is also one of the better players to lead your offense as evidenced by the fact that prime Kobe was dragging bad casts to top 7-8 offenses, then Kobe gets good casts, but not overwhelmingly good and they're top 3 offenses, and truly great relative to the league. Injuries and age were bigger factors after that, but even a post-prime Kobe kept them comfortably above average.

[ronnymac2]

Well, how did Karl Malone do in the playoffs at his peak?

1994 —

Spoiler:

1994 is one of his better extended playoff runs.

Utah actually had to face a strong SAS team in the first round without HCA (SAS was 3rd in SRS at 5.05). Utah beat them fairly convincingly with Malone going for 29.3 points and 12.3 rebounds (56%TS). He only averaged 2 turnovers per game and got to the foul line 11 times per game. Scoring champ David Robinson, meanwhile, averaged 20 points on 47.1%TS, with Malone playing a role in that decline with his physicality and defense. If you read the RPOY threads from 1994 and 1996, the poster Kaima does a good job of breaking down Malone’s D on Robinson. Quite frankly, it might be more impressive than anything Olajuwon did to Robinson.

Malone faced the Upset Kids next…those Denver Nuggets who upset Seattle in RD 1. ALL-NBA second Teamer Shawn Kemp got his ass whipped by Dikembe Mutombo in RD 1, dooming Seattle’s already overrated half-court offense by shooting under 38 percent for the series (43.8%TS) and scoring 14.8 ppg. Deke gave Utah all he could with over 5 blocks per game over 7 games, but Malone averaged 26.7 points, 12.3 rebounds (outrebounded Deke), 3 assists, 2 steals, 1 block, and 2.1 turnovers with a 53.3%TS. In Game 7, Malone dropped 31 points, 14 rebounds, and 6 assists (57.5%TS).

Then we get to the WCF against Houston…facing off against arguably the GOAT peak in Hakeem Olajuwon as well as Otis Thorpe…with Felton Spencer at his side. Houston was the #2 defense in the league.

Malone averages 26 points, 12.6 rebounds (better than Thorpe and Olajuwon), 5.2 assists and 2.2 turnovers per game (50.5%TS).

Here’s what I said in the RPOY thread:

I believe Karl Malone had the flu in games 3 and 4 of the WCF. I watched game 5 recently, and the announcers said he was suffering from the flu in those two games but was feeling better. He played very well in gm 5.

He actually played okay in games 3 and 4 overall, but his shooting slumped down a bit. I credit the heart and the rebounding, but I'm not sure if I'll dock him for that. Do I count it as an injury?

In Game 5, an elimination game, he did drop 31/10/7 on 56.2%TS.

1995 —

Spoiler:

In 1995, Utah faced Olajuwon and the Rockets again. Malone went off for 30.2 points, 13.2 rebounds (best rebounder in the series), 3.8 assists and under 3 turnovers with 55%TS. He dropped 35/10/3 on 58.7%TS in Elimination Game 5. Here’s what I said in the RPOY thread:

Karl Malone scored 9 points in the fourth quarter of that game 5 against Houston. He made some nice passes and grabbed rebounds. His presence was felt, but Hakeem scored 12 in the quarter, Elie and Cassell hit big 3's (Benoit missed big 3's for the Jazz), and Drexler abused Utah's wings in the post (think about what MJ and Pip did in 97 and 98).

…

Malone was a force inside. At this stage of his career, he was posting up with his back to the basket more than in 97 and 98. He was very good at finding cutters and shooters (yes, he assisted Stockton, too). He had moves inside, was awesome on the pick-n-roll, and could shoot. He was a constant force on offense.

1996 —

Spoiler:

In 1996, Malone truly disappointed with poor free throw shooting in the playoffs. This did hurt the Jazz.

Utah had a brush with disaster in Rd 1 vs. Portland, going 5, but they blew the Blazers out in Game 5. Portland was the 5th best defense in the NBA. Malone averaged 27.6 points, 9.8 rebounds, 3 assists and under 3 turnovers (50.2%TS). His USG% in these playoffs is off the charts btw. 37.4% here. Utah’s ORTG for the series was 113.4.

Next series vs. SAS (#3 Defense, #4 SRS), Malone drops 25, 9.3, and 4.7 with just 2.2 TOs per game (49.3%TS). His defense helps contain Robinson yet again (19 points, 9 rebounds, 52.6%TS). Malone’s USG% is 34.8. Utah’s ORTG is 114.1.

I point out the high USG% here because over 18 games, he led the 1996 playoffs in USG% at 34.9, and his TS% in these first 2 series isn’t meh, but Utah’s ORTG is strong. Make of it what you will; perhaps nothing at all.

Then they face Seattle (#2 SRS, #2 DRGT), which just contained Olajuwon as best it could and would do a decent job on MJ’s shooting percentages in the Finals. Malone averaged 27 points, 11.6 rebounds, 5.1 assists and under 3 TOs per game. Utah actually outscored Seattle in the 7-game series and had a 104.9 ORTG. Malone’s TS% was 50.5% thanks to terrible free throw shooting (39/70 for the series). I do not believe Malone was the cause for the loss…I believe it was more variance, a possible Stockton injury, and Payton going off. But Malone did miss an uncharacteristic amount of free throws, which usually give a boost to his TS%.

1997 —

Spoiler:

In 1997, Utah obliterated a poor Clipper team. Malone was awesome.

Then they face Shaq’s Lakers and beat them 4-1. Malone has a bit of an up-and-down series, but in the end, he was the dominant player in the series. 28.6 points, 12.6 rebounds, 2.2 assists and 3 turnovers (49.5%TS). He shot 2-20 in a Game 3 loss, but came back with 42/9/3 and 18/18 FTs (a then playoff record for most consecutive free throws made in a game) in Game 4 before dropping 32/20 in Game 5. Shaq, Rooks, Horry, Kersey, and Campbell all tried guarding him, and they all got torched in those final 2 games.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IK21NgYHC4[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHL85uWYMMA[/youtube]

He had everything working. Power post game, range out to 20 feet, amazing off-ball movement, quick passing. Just dominant.

Malone did his 23/11/3/49.4%TS against Olajuwon/Barkley. This was Stockton’s greatest series btw. Stockton was pretty awesome, and I say that as an ardent critic of Stockton.

Then in the finals, Malone does 23.8, 10.3, 3.5 and 2.3 turnovers (48.6TS%). Shoots 35-58 on FTs, again a bit disappointing. Chicago was the best 4th best defensive team in the league and did have Dennis Rodman.

1998 —

Spoiler:

In 1998, Malone had an even better series against Houston and LA (LA especially…30/10/4.5 on 59.3%TS). He struggled against Robinson/Duncan and the #2 defense in the league. 24.6 points, 10 rebounds, 3.8 assists and 46.3%TS. We all can see why any frontcourt player would struggle against this duo I would think.

As we all know, he kicked Chicago’s ass (#3 defense and Rodman again): 25, 10.5, 3.8, 55.3%TS including the 2 amazing final games.

[colts18]

I'll go with Oscar again. But it's a damn near coin flip between him and Kobe, but again, my opinion is based primarily on Oscar's incredible offensive impact, his fundamentals and intelligence both getting his own high percentage shot or passing, his size and versatility, and especially, the general thoughts about his game among his peers. I mean, especially considering how high Russell and Wilt are when it really wasn't that unusual for someone to think Oscar was the best, though to me, Russell is the clear top player of the 3.

Why would you rank Oscar over Nash? Nash was a better offensive player. His teams had better offenses and team success. Nash in his prime had more offensive impact than anyone in history.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Vote : Jerry West

West's Career
Regular-season = 27ppg
Post-season = 29.1ppg
NBA Finals = 30.5ppg

The Playoff Performer
2 year Peak : (25.1 PER) --- 31 / 5 / 7apg on 57%TS -- .277 WSP48
5 year Peak : (25.3 PER) --- 33 / 5 / 6apg on 56%TS --- .247 WSP48
11 year Prime : (23.1 PER) - 29 / 6 / 6.4apg on 54%TS --- .204 WSP48

Highest Scoring Average in NBA Finals (min 10 games)
(10 games) Rick Barry : 36.3ppg
(20 games) Shaq : 34.2ppg (out of date stat)
(35 games) Jordan : 33.6ppg
(55 games) Jerry West : 30.5ppg

West averaged 31ppg in the Finals over his career without the benefit of the 3pt shot.
Jordan made almost 42 treys in his 35 NBA Finals games. West had at least Jordan's range.
It is reasonable to say that West would have approached Jordan's 33ppg in the Finals if he had the 3pt shot.

He scored 53 points in Game 1 of the 1969 Finals and had a 45-point game in both the 1965 Finals and the 1966 Finals.

Chick Hearn called Jerry "Mr. Clutch," and the name was appropriate.

[ronnymac2]

How do we feel about Ewing? Should he be part of the conversation sooner than later?

I feel Ewing should be coming up somewhat soon. Not quite yet though. I've probably got Erving, Nowitzki, Bryant, West, Robertson, and Karl Malone above him. Ewing would be in the Barkley/Nash/Robinson/Moses tier for me.

Ewing has got very nice longevity and a strong, misunderstood peak, too.

[Clyde Frazier]

How do we feel about Ewing? Should he be part of the conversation sooner than later?

I think he's a clear cut top 10 center of all time, but trying to remain objective as a Knicks fan, I've always put Robinson 1-2 spots ahead in the center rankings.

I think what's lost on some is that Ewing peaked defensively before he peaked offensively, so his career as a whole almost came in 2 parts. When prime Ewing got his shot at a title in 94, he just so happened to face an Olajuwon who wasn't going to be stopped.

He also suffered the same fate as Robinson, never having a consistent 2nd option in his prime. Only difference being Robinson got to play with the best PF of all time post prime, and Ewing got to play with 2 fringe all star guards. Ewing also admittedly became more broken down during that span than Robinson.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Baller2014]

I think we're a long way from Ewing still. I thought Colts was being bold throwing out Nash's name at #12, but not half as bold as Fplii mentioning Ewing. Ewing really lacked that team carrying ability that even guys like Dwight and Nash clearly had. He couldn't lead the Knicks anywhere until he had a fantastic team around him, and he's the guy they named the Ewing Effect after for a reason. The team often didn't miss him. I think people would do better to think of Ewing as a kind of super role player, rather than a star. I'm not sure I'd take him over Pippen tbh, but it's close, because those 2 are the same sort of star role players who should get a look in around #25.

[Texas Chuck]

Here is how certain players did with and without Nash. Nash showed huge impact on these players and it could be argued that Nash made them stars.

Marion:
Before Nash: .513 TS%, 107 O rating
Nash comes to Phx: .566 TS%, 116 O rating

08 w/Nash: .594 TS%, 119 O rating
08 after Nash: .503 TS%, 99 O rating

Amare:
Before Nash: .536 TS%, 102 O rating
Nash comes to Phx: .617 TS%, 121 O rating

with Nash 2010: .615 TS%, 117 O rating
after Nash 2011: .565 TS%, 109 O rating

Shaq:
08 before Nash: .577 TS%, 100 O rating
08 with Nash: .605 TS%, 103 O rating

09 with Nash: .623 TS%, 117 O rating
10 leaves Nash: .565 TS%, 104 O rating

IF you are going to do this, at least put Dirk in there for consistency. Especially if you are going to try and give Nash credit for Shaq-Daddy.