Dolph Schayes peak

[70sFan]

Where would you rank Dolph among all power forwards in terms of peak? Who would you take over him?

[Goudelock]

How are we supposed to accurately rate him when there's almost no footage available of Dolph Schayes? There's one finals game from 1954 and that's it. This could be asked of any player who played before 1960; there's almost nothing in terms of video on them, so we're left with making judgements based off of old interviews and articles (that are often difficult to find), and stats.

[70sFan]

How are we supposed to accurately rate him when there's almost no footage available of Dolph Schayes? There's one finals game from 1954 and that's it. This could be asked of any player who played before 1960; there's almost nothing in terms of video on them, so we're left with making judgements based off of old interviews and articles (that are often difficult to find), and stats.

Watch on YouTube

Here are a bit more footage. I agree, its tough to rate players from 1950s. It doesn't mean we can just forget about them. That's disrespectful in my opinion.

Besides, there are some posters who watched NBA in early 60s and we have many knowledgeable people who read many books and understand impact of the early stars. It's not as fun as with players we can watch but it's still interesting.

I've watched as many footage about late 50s stars as possible and many of them are forgotten nowadays: Richie Guerin, Jack Twyman, Cliff Hagan, Dolph Schayes, Larry Costello, George Yardley... How many times have you seen this names when you see a disscusion about all-time greats?

In near future I will try to make them slightly more known, at least on this board. After a few other projects I'm going to make a video about Richie Guerin. We have more footage about him than you may think

[trex_8063]

I'll add this video:

Watch on YouTube

Rookie Red Kerr in this one, too (he's visually more impressive than Schayes in some of these videos; has a more modern-compatible style of play and a clear high bball IQ), as well as a few plays from historically relevant guys like George Yardley, Larry Foust, and Andy Phillip. Yardley looks pretty smooth on one take to the basket.

Will try to return later to answer question in OP...

[Clyde Frazier]

This isn't about his peak specifically, but here's my writeup on Schayes from the top 100 project to get a better idea of his player profile.

viewtopic.php?p=41414758#p41414758

[clyde21]

Stiff competition in those vids right there.

[Winsome Gerbil]

Its such a completely different era it's almost impossible to say. I mean, this is a "power forward" who went 6'8" 220 and shot .380 from the field for his career. His peak statistical year he probably shot .398. By any sort of modern standard you'd take virtually everyone over him.

Ranking him has to be something like what you do with Mikan and Cousy, except at a less iconic level. He was one of the first gen great players, but doesn't appear to have been ahead of his time like Petit. Was never the #1 dominant player in the league like Mikan. He put up very consistent numbers for a decade, there was no clearly standout peak. I'm comfortable with the normal process of having him out there somewhere near or just beyond the 10th best PF of fall time in the "oh, he was great too" pile. There just isn't any call or reason I can see to rank him over guys who proved they could dominate in the modern game. On the other hand where to place Schayes amongst the also rans is still unclear. I think you put Hayes over him, although Hayes' game itself seems obsolete today. Just less obsolete. It would seem disrepectful to put a guy like Kemp above him, even though I have no doubt Kemp would do better today (and would have utterly terrified them back in 1950). Then then Amare, Bosh...again guys who did very well for a long time today. Rodman is apples and oranges. I absolutely have Webber and Pau above him, etc.

[Amares]

How are we supposed to accurately rate him when there's almost no footage available of Dolph Schayes? There's one finals game from 1954 and that's it. This could be asked of any player who played before 1960; there's almost nothing in terms of video on them, so we're left with making judgements based off of old interviews and articles (that are often difficult to find), and stats.

(...)many of them are forgotten nowadays: Richie Guerin, Jack Twyman, Cliff Hagan, Dolph Schayes, Larry Costello, George Yardley... How many times have you seen this names when you see a disscusion about all-time greats?

We don't see their names, because they are long gone in the all-time discussions, unless we talk about top 500, but no one talks. Schayes is the only player who stays, but still only if you value players by how much they dominated their era.

[70sFan]

How are we supposed to accurately rate him when there's almost no footage available of Dolph Schayes? There's one finals game from 1954 and that's it. This could be asked of any player who played before 1960; there's almost nothing in terms of video on them, so we're left with making judgements based off of old interviews and articles (that are often difficult to find), and stats.

(...)many of them are forgotten nowadays: Richie Guerin, Jack Twyman, Cliff Hagan, Dolph Schayes, Larry Costello, George Yardley... How many times have you seen this names when you see a disscusion about all-time greats?

We don't see their names, because they are long gone in the all-time discussions, unless we talk about top 500, but no one talks. Schayes is the only player who stays, but still only if you value players by how much they dominated their era.

Cliff Hagan is a top 10 SF of all time.
Richie Guerin is around top 15 SG of all time.

[Amares]

(...)many of them are forgotten nowadays: Richie Guerin, Jack Twyman, Cliff Hagan, Dolph Schayes, Larry Costello, George Yardley... How many times have you seen this names when you see a disscusion about all-time greats?

We don't see their names, because they are long gone in the all-time discussions, unless we talk about top 500, but no one talks. Schayes is the only player who stays, but still only if you value players by how much they dominated their era.

Cliff Hagan is a top 10 SF of all time.
Richie Guerin is around top 15 SG of all time.

In case of career? Maybe, but at least for Hagan I would find 10 better SF.
For Richie it would be very difficult to place him top 100.

[feyki]

He's top 50 of all time, career wise. But his peak not much stronger as his career.

Probably, I would say Mchale level. Maybe a bit better. I'd take him over names of like Webber,Pau,Hayes,Aldridge,Griffin.

[Johnlac1]

One thing that hurt Schayes is that among the stars who came into the league in the early fifties and played well into the sixties, Schayes was among the few who didn't have a jump shot. Even Cousy had a jump shot (although he rarely shot them) by the sixties which he can be seen shooting on a clip of the Lakers-Celtics finals game from '62.
Schayes looks very mobile in the clips available. But he was best known for his two-handed set shot which he put a lot of arch on. If he could get it off today, he'd be one of the more effective players on a fifties all-star team playing under modern rules.
Although the Nats won the title in '55, maybe his peak moment came in the '59 EC finals when the Nats nearly upset the Celtics losing by five pts. in the seventh game. Schayes had 35 pts and almost a triple double.

[azcatz11]

(...)many of them are forgotten nowadays: Richie Guerin, Jack Twyman, Cliff Hagan, Dolph Schayes, Larry Costello, George Yardley... How many times have you seen this names when you see a disscusion about all-time greats?

We don't see their names, because they are long gone in the all-time discussions, unless we talk about top 500, but no one talks. Schayes is the only player who stays, but still only if you value players by how much they dominated their era.

Cliff Hagan is a top 10 SF of all time.
Richie Guerin is around top 15 SG of all time.

Based on what?

[Johnlac1]

He's top 50 of all time, career wise. But his peak not much stronger as his career.

Probably, I would say Mchale level. Maybe a bit better. I'd take him over names of like Weber,Pau,Hayes,Aldridge,Griffin.

No way in the world. All the players you mentioned were decidedly better than Schayes.

[70sFan]

We don't see their names, because they are long gone in the all-time discussions, unless we talk about top 500, but no one talks. Schayes is the only player who stays, but still only if you value players by how much they dominated their era.

Cliff Hagan is a top 10 SF of all time.
Richie Guerin is around top 15 SG of all time.

Based on what?

Based on career accomplishments, level of play, prime, peak... Basically everything. Well, maybe I'm too kind for Richie as he might be top 20 SG instead of top 15.

Cliff Hagan was a beast though. Look what he did against the Celtics in all finals he played. He was arguably better than Pettit in playoffs. He was top 10 player in the league in 1957-62 span. He has nice longevity and showed after retirement that he was still capable of making positive impact in ABA. He's definitely higher on all time list than guys like Wilkins or Melo.

Name 15 SFs greater than Cliff Hagan. It won't be easy.

[feyki]

He's top 50 of all time, career wise. But his peak not much stronger as his career.

Probably, I would say Mchale level. Maybe a bit better. I'd take him over names of like Weber,Pau,Hayes,Aldridge,Griffin.

No way in the world. All the players you mentioned were decidedly better than Schayes.

Dolph Schayes was a top 5 player in his prime. They were not.

[trex_8063]

Cliff Hagan is a top 10 SF of all time.
Richie Guerin is around top 15 SG of all time.

I gotta frown when contentious opinions are stated as absolutes. This is sort of uncharacteristic for you, too.

Anyway……
Respectfully, I disagree. Not even particularly close for me.


Where SF's are concerned......
Lebron
Larry
Dr. J
Durant
Pippen
Hondo
Baylor
Barry
Pierce
Wilkins
English
Dantley
Hill
and Hagan's own contemporary, Arizin

….there are 14 players (+ McGrady if one happens to call him a SF; I tend to lump him in with the SG’s, but it could go either way) for whom I'd have a very hard time ranking them behind Hagan all-time.

So that’s fringe top-15 even before I even get to guys like Carmelo Anthony, Shawn Marion, James Worthy, Chet Walker, and Marques Johnson……..we’re getting into increasingly debatable territory here, but I tentatively have all of these guys ranked ahead of Hagan, too.
That would put him fringe top 20 for me, and that’s before mentioning still others who are at least debatable (imo): Chris Mullin, Billy Cunningham, Bernard King, Connie Hawkins, Bob Dandridge, and now Kawhi Leonard.



As to Guerin as a top 15 SG, I again disagree.

MJ
Kobe
Wade
Drexler
Gervin
Miller
Allen
Iverson
McGrady
Carter
Ginobili
Harden
Moncrief
Sam Jones
Joe Dumars
Greer
Sharman
Richmond
…..that’s 18 guys, and I don’t see a particularly decent case for Guerin ahead of ANY of them. And while it may be a dark-horse pick, I’d put Jeff Hornacek comfortably ahead, too.
And then there’s guys like Walter Davis, Earl Monroe, and Gail Goodrich who I’d generally put ahead of Guerin by a semi-comfortable margin. And still other debatable candidates like David Thompson, Pete Maravich, Joe Johnson, Paul Westphal, Alvin Robertson, Jason Terry (if calling him a SG), Richard Hamilton, and Ron Harper, maybe Fat Lever.


Anyway, sorry to derail, but just wanted to provide a counter-point there.

[feyki]

Where SF's are concerned......
Lebron
Larry
Dr. J
Durant
Pippen
Hondo
Baylor
Barry
Pierce
Wilkins

These ten have better careers than him. But Hagan had a better career than Dantley, English, Hill and others, except maybe Melo.

Hagan was a top 10 player in his prime. Don't underestimate his impact. He and Pettit made their team second best next to Russell's stacked Celt in almost a decade.

[AdagioPace]

OFF TOPIC:
Richie Guerin mmm
Guerin is an interesting surname. It sounded familiar. I had to check on google!
there are currently 33 families in italy(in the northern region/county of Friuli) with that surname. It's not common
also,he grew up in the Bronx! I think this reinforces the hypothesis

I need to search all the american-italian players in the early stages of the NBA

[trex_8063]

As to question from OP……

Let me preface by stating my approach to a question about peak is somewhat different from my method for ranking players in an all-time sense. My approach to peak is more of a “qualitative analysis”, and much more like a scouting report. Still somewhat informed by statistical measures, but with a healthy dose of context consideration; and where I don’t make era portability speculation a too significant component of my method in ranking players all-time overall, I do think it’s an important component of peak evaluation.

The reason for this is that, for me, the two questions are asking very different things. “Where do you rank ‘Player X’ all-time?” is NOT asking “How good was ‘Player X’?”. To me, it’s asking “How good was his career?”

Included in that is a healthy dose of “how good was he” (which will be partially or heavily informed by statistical output and efficiency, impact indicators if available), but also how long was he good/useful, durability, as well as context/circumstance, career luck (good or bad), team success and other legacy factors which may include statistical footprint and awards/accolades…...all weighted against my subjective assessment of era strength.

As such, I might for example rank Player A ahead of Player B all-time, even if I think Player B was the better player at peak/prime.


“Where do you rank Player X’s peak?”, otoh, is a question I interpret as asking “How good was he?” and nothing else. And I further do not interpret “How good was he?” as “How dominant was he in-era?”
I do not, for example, have George Mikan near the tip-top of my all-time peaks list, even though he was clearly one of the most dominant [in era] that has ever been. I simply don’t think the athleticism and skill components he brings to the table justify that high of a rating (that’s where era portability considerations come into play).
NOTE: When evaluating the skillsets of early era players, I do think it’s very important to be as cognizant as possible of the extrinsic factors affecting the player. imo, the extrinsic factors----e.g. resources, facilities, mentors, coaching, other players available to model one’s game after (the stage of the skillset evolution of the time), prevailing game theory of the time, shoes, rules/officiating---are generally the LARGEST reasons (as opposed to the quality of players themselves) for the differences we see between today’s game and the game of the past.

It should go without saying that this becomes REALLY difficult to do an accurate scouting report the further back in time we’re looking.


With all that said, where would I put Dolph Schayes?
Well, wikipedia lists him as 6’7” and 195 lbs (that is the height/weight listing that used to be on bbref, too), though now bbref and nba.com list 6’8” and 220 lbs. Looking at the above video from 1961 (how he compares in size to Red Kerr and others), I definitely think the 6’8”, 220 lbs is probably more accurate (might be listed 6’9” today). So he’s a good sized guy, looks like he’s got reasonable mobility (considering the footwear of the time, and the fact that he’s in decline at 33 years old in that video), though appears fairly “Earth-bound”. Seems like he’s got a decent motor. That’s the athletic package we’re looking at.

Really disappointed in the lackadaisical transition defense in a couple spots in that 1961 video (sample size, though), though doesn’t look half-bad in the halfcourt. Rotated out to contest an outside jumper (not his man) at one point, too. Only semi-consistent in boxing out, though appears to have terrific rebounding instincts.

In that 1961 video we see him take FOUR set shots from >21 feet (misses all four, though by reputation he would hit that with some semi-regularity). At any rate that confirms his willingness to work on a [basically] 3pt distance shot even before there was a 3pt line. I remember an interview with him where he indicated his willingness [and ability] to shoot from the outside is what provided him with opportunities to drive the lane (when guys would bite on a shot-fake).....and Dolph did have a pretty high FTr. At any rate, I’ve confidence he could be at least a competent 3pt shooter in a modern context.

When penetrating, he looks pretty comfortable finishing with either hand (there’s the famous story---I forget which year it’s from---of him breaking his shooting hand and playing in a cast; had to become proficient with his left during that time). Indeed, in the 1961 video, we see him take THREE left-handed shots in the paint (little runners or jump-hooks), and he made two of them.

His handles look a bit limited, though actually probably fairly average for the time period. Adequate passer.

When judging how good he was, I definitely think it’s worth noting that in ‘61, at age 32 (no doubt at least on the front edge of decline), in a game that is rapidly changing from the game he’d grown up with, in a league that is now partially integrated (28% black, fwiw) and also has prime [if not peak] versions of Russell, Wilt, Baylor, Pettit, as well as rookies Jerry West and Oscar Robertson…….Schayes is still going for 23.6 ppg, 12.2 rpg, and 3.7 apg on above average shooting efficiency in this circumstance (he’s a 19.2 PER, .136 WS/48 in a big 38.1 mpg---while not missing a single game, fwiw).

That gives me confidence that he’d be capable of playing today, though not sure what level or who would be a good comparison. Better passing version of Ryan Anderson maybe, or something similar to that? Or maybe a better rebounding and better shooting, but worse defensively, version of Trevor Ariza?

I should point out here that I’m not necessarily saying Dolph Schayes is little better than Ryan Anderson or similar. Because where era portability is concerned, it goes both ways. I’m saying that I’m skeptical Schayes would be much better than someone like Ryan Anderson in today’s game…...but on the flip-side I don’t assume that Anderson---if born a half-century earlier and deprived the same coaching, mentoring, resources, etc that Schayes was deprived of----would be as good as he is in the modern setting. He may well have been a relative scrub in 50’s/60’s; whereas Schayes, well…...we saw what he did to that era (he tore it up).


But still, when it’s all said and done, there are plenty of PF peaks I’d take ahead of Schayes:

Duncan
Garnett
Nowitzki
Barkley
Mailman
McHale
Pettit
Anthony Davis
Elton Brand
Kevin Love
Blake Griffin
Chris Webber
Spencer Haywood
Chris Bosh
Amare Stoudemire

I’m fairly comfortable going with all of those peaks ahead of Schayes. There are at least a few others who are debatable, too (imo): Nance, Sheed, Kemp, McGinnis, maybe Horace Grant, LaMarcus Aldridge and Terry Cummings too. Others???