PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #30 Player of All Time



ManRam
09-10-2014, 02:50 PM
Voting for #29 has concluded and PSD's Official #29 NBA Player of all time is....

Rick Barry

The List:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?871758-PSD-s-Top-50-List-of-the-Greatest-NBA-Players-of-All-Time&p=28837457#post28837457

I added some nominations mostly based on how the voting went last time, as well as a few nominations from recent lists. If there's a glaring omission let me know.

Also, I am going to be out of town from tomorrow until Monday. I will NOT be able to get these up between then. If a mod would like to fill in, go ahead. If not, we're gonna slow down again. I'm sorry. Things have been wildly hectic lately.


I mixed up Drexler and Frazier. If you want Drexler, vote for Frazier and/or just manually post "I vote for Clyde"

Chronz
09-10-2014, 03:15 PM
Willis Reed or Drexler here for me. I seem to rate Reed more highly than most

todu82
09-10-2014, 04:12 PM
bill Walton.

ATX
09-10-2014, 04:14 PM
I'm going with Clyde Frazier!?

abe_froman
09-10-2014, 04:32 PM
manram,you need to update the master list as it still only has through 26.i think fraizer was already off the board(number 28).

so,its between drexler, thomas, or reed...
reed had an amazing peak,but career was very short
drexler-has the stats and longevity
thomas-has the rings as the alpha dog in a very tough era(including beating drexler in '90 and ending showtime),but the stats look unimpressive and, like reed,has a career cut short

think i'll go thomas by a very slight margin

ManRam
09-10-2014, 05:50 PM
I ****ed up the Clyde's. Sorry. I was trying to squeeze it in at work...and was quadruple tasking.

I'll PM a mod.

mrblisterdundee
09-10-2014, 08:18 PM
It's Cyde's time.

THE MTL
09-10-2014, 08:26 PM
Ppl have fell asleep on Isiah Thomas. He's won rings. Has the stats. Played in a tough era. All as the franchise player of his team.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-10-2014, 09:11 PM
Ppl have fell asleep on Isiah Thomas. He's won rings. Has the stats. Played in a tough era. All as the franchise player of his team.

I'm leaning towards Mchale-Isiah-Drexler but it is a real tossup between those 3 so I could understand any of them.

sixers247
09-11-2014, 08:14 AM
I'm leaning towards Mchale-Isiah-Drexler but it is a real tossup between those 3 so I could understand any of them.

I am the same way just backwards haha.

mightybosstone
09-11-2014, 08:50 AM
This is a good spot for Drexler. There are very few, if any, efficient, two-way scoring wings left on the board who accomplished more in their careers than Drexler. You could make a solid case for Thomas, McHale or Walton here, but Drexler posted far better numbers than Thomas, was more of a No. 1 than McHale and had a far longer peak and prime than Walton.

ShawnKemp and his many dupes can rest in peace now.

YAALREADYKNO
09-11-2014, 11:22 AM
whats with all the hate for isiah here? he's a better player than clyde and a few more dudes already on this list smh

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 06:25 PM
Willis Reed or Drexler here for me. I seem to rate Reed more highly than most

I don't even see how Drexler is in his league. Agree on Reed.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 06:26 PM
Willis Reed was a better 2-way player than Drexler, had more success, and was considered an elite player. Drexler was an after thought who was always better suited as a Robin. I would take Walton-Zeke and maybe more ahead of him. This is a terrible vote.

mightybosstone
09-11-2014, 06:49 PM
Willis Reed was a better 2-way player than Drexler, had more success, and was considered an elite player. Drexler was an after thought who was always better suited as a Robin. I would take Walton-Zeke and maybe more ahead of him. This is a terrible vote.

I love Willis Reed on paper more than most, and I think you're crazy overrating him here. Not only did Drexler play in 400+ more games than Reed and enjoy a far longer prime, but his peak and prime were both statistically superior to Reed. Also, it's worth noting that while Drexler did not win a title as a No. 1, he did take his team to the Finals twice in the Michael Jordan era as a No. 1. And although those Portland teams were very good, he didn't have a teammate remotely as good as Walt Frazier, who totally bailed out Reed in the 70 Finals and probably should have won Finals MVP that year. Reed was the better defensive player, but Drexler was also very solid on defense and had a substantial edge offensively in pretty much every statistical category.

I think you could make a decent case for Reed to go soon, but to say this is a "terrible vote" is pretty off-base. Drexler was the superior offensive player, had a better, longer peak and prime, played for far longer and had similar postseason success in his career as Reed.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 07:03 PM
I love Willis Reed on paper more than most, and I think you're crazy overrating him here. Not only did Drexler play in 400+ more games than Reed and enjoy a far longer prime, but his peak and prime were both statistically superior to Reed. Also, it's worth noting that while Drexler did not win a title as a No. 1, he did take his team to the Finals twice in the Michael Jordan era as a No. 1. And although those Portland teams were very good, he didn't have a teammate remotely as good as Walt Frazier, who totally bailed out Reed in the 70 Finals and probably should have won Finals MVP that year. Reed was the better defensive player, but Drexler was also very solid on defense and had a substantial edge offensively in pretty much every statistical category.

I think you could make a decent case for Reed to go soon, but to say this is a "terrible vote" is pretty off-base. Drexler was the superior offensive player, had a better, longer peak and prime, played for far longer and had similar postseason success in his career as Reed.

He didn't have a team remotely good as Frazier? :laugh: Aren't you old enough to have watched those Blazers? They were loaded.

Terry Porter (all-star)
Jerome Kersey (solid 2way player)
Cliff Robinson (all-star)
Buck Williams (all-star + all-defensive stud)
Kevin Duckworth (all-star)

While they did not all make the team during the season that the Blazers made the Finals they were all at or near their prime during those playoff runs. He had arguably more support than any other star of that era. To have all-star caliber players at PG, SF, PF, and C. The fact that he doesn't have a ring is pitiful. Give Durant that team and he's got 2 by now.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 07:04 PM
And this is all without me even mentioning Willis's league MVP, Finals MVP season or his historic comeback in Game 7 to swing a finals.

mightybosstone
09-11-2014, 07:17 PM
He didn't have a team remotely good as Frazier? :laugh: Aren't you old enough to have watched those Blazers? They were loaded.

Terry Porter (all-star)
Jerome Kersey (solid 2way player)
Cliff Robinson (all-star)
Buck Williams (all-star + all-defensive stud)
Kevin Duckworth (all-star)
Ummm... Do you really want to compare the supporting cast of those Blazers teams to the 70s Knicks?

Walt Frazier (Hall of Fame)
Dave Debusschere (Hall of Fame)
Earl Monroe (Hall of Fame)
Jerry Lucas (Hall of Fame)
Bill Bradley (All-Star)

Those Blazers teams were very good. They were not remotely as talented historically as the 70s Knicks squads, and you'd be crazy to try and prove otherwise.


While they did not all make the team during the season that the Blazers made the Finals they were all at or near their prime during those playoff runs. He had arguably more support than any other star of that era. To have all-star caliber players at PG, SF, PF, and C. The fact that he doesn't have a ring is pitiful. Give Durant that team and he's got 2 by now.
The supporting cast was still not as good as Reed's. And to say it's pitiful that he didn't win a ring with those Blazers teams is just ignorant. Look at the teams he was up against. Those Bad Boys Pistons teams had one of the most stifling defenses in the history of the league and had three Hall of Famers on the roster, not including other All-Stars. And the 91-92 Bulls were one of the 5-10 greatest teams in the history of the NBA.

Also, you keep forgetting the fact that he DOES have a ring. Yeah, it was a as a No. 2. But he was a very, very strong No. 2 that season. Hell, Reed certainly wasn't the No. 1 guy on that 72-73 Knicks team, but you're treating it like was because the guy won Finals MVP. Kawhi freaking Leonard has a Finals MVP. That doesn't mean he was the No. 1 on the Spurs last season.

mightybosstone
09-11-2014, 07:21 PM
And this is all without me even mentioning Willis's league MVP, Finals MVP season or his historic comeback in Game 7 to swing a finals.
The MVP season is worth mentioning and that's what makes this debate so interesting. But as fun a story as Reed's comeback in Game 7 of the Finals is, don't you think it's kind of overblown? The guy comes in and plays a handful of minutes and makes a couple of baskets. But if Frazier doesn't post of the greatest Game 7 performances in NBA Finals history, the Knicks lose that series and history wouldn't even remember Reed's comeback.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 08:05 PM
And this is all without me even mentioning Willis's league MVP, Finals MVP season or his historic comeback in Game 7 to swing a finals.
The MVP season is worth mentioning and that's what makes this debate so interesting. But as fun a story as Reed's comeback in Game 7 of the Finals is, don't you think it's kind of overblown? The guy comes in and plays a handful of minutes and makes a couple of baskets. But if Frazier doesn't post of the greatest Game 7 performances in NBA Finals history, the Knicks lose that series and history wouldn't even remember Reed's comeback.

Fraziers game 7 is overrated and has fabricated statistics. Any player quoted from either team credits Willis with swinging the momentum in that game.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 08:08 PM
He didn't have a team remotely good as Frazier? :laugh: Aren't you old enough to have watched those Blazers? They were loaded.

Terry Porter (all-star)
Jerome Kersey (solid 2way player)
Cliff Robinson (all-star)
Buck Williams (all-star + all-defensive stud)
Kevin Duckworth (all-star)
Ummm... Do you really want to compare the supporting cast of those Blazers teams to the 70s Knicks?

Walt Frazier (Hall of Fame)
Dave Debusschere (Hall of Fame)
Earl Monroe (Hall of Fame)
Jerry Lucas (Hall of Fame)
Bill Bradley (All-Star)

Those Blazers teams were very good. They were not remotely as talented historically as the 70s Knicks squads, and you'd be crazy to try and prove otherwise.


While they did not all make the team during the season that the Blazers made the Finals they were all at or near their prime during those playoff runs. He had arguably more support than any other star of that era. To have all-star caliber players at PG, SF, PF, and C. The fact that he doesn't have a ring is pitiful. Give Durant that team and he's got 2 by now.
The supporting cast was still not as good as Reed's. And to say it's pitiful that he didn't win a ring with those Blazers teams is just ignorant. Look at the teams he was up against. Those Bad Boys Pistons teams had one of the most stifling defenses in the history of the league and had three Hall of Famers on the roster, not including other All-Stars. And the 91-92 Bulls were one of the 5-10 greatest teams in the history of the NBA.

Also, you keep forgetting the fact that he DOES have a ring. Yeah, it was a as a No. 2. But he was a very, very strong No. 2 that season. Hell, Reed certainly wasn't the No. 1 guy on that 72-73 Knicks team, but you're treating it like was because the guy won Finals MVP. Kawhi freaking Leonard has a Finals MVP. That doesn't mean he was the No. 1 on the Spurs last season.

What does Leonard have to do with anything?

The idea that Drexler deserves a pass for not having a team of hall of famers makes no sense to me. Okay. Reed had more help. So what? Drexler didnt have enough to win a ring in Portland?

NYKalltheway
09-11-2014, 08:49 PM
So what? Drexler didnt have enough to win a ring in Portland?

Against Jordan and the Bulls? No.
Not even against the bad poy Pistons who are crazy underrated here.
And Drexler is underrated here. So is Thomas.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 09:34 PM
So what? Drexler didnt have enough to win a ring in Portland?

Against Jordan and the Bulls? No.
Not even against the bad poy Pistons who are crazy underrated here.
And Drexler is underrated here. So is Thomas.

So basically anyone in the 90s gets a pass bc comp was too tough? That seems like a blanket cop-out to me. Less talented teams have won the title. We are saying Clyde is a top 30 player of all-time despite the fact that only once during his career was he even considered a top 5 player in the league! He played with a team full of allstars-allstar caliber players in their prime and he couldnt even win one title. I am not impressed. Reed, Zeke , Walton, McHale. I would take all these guys over him without hesitation.

THE MTL
09-11-2014, 09:52 PM
As a knick fan I have trouble defending Willis Reed. His career was just too short. He is essentially the equivalent of Tracy Mcgrady only difference was he managed to win a couple rings thanks to great help around him.

He basically played 8 seasons in my book. Thats why I have trouble putting him over guys who have the ring, the allstars, and the longevity.

KnicksorBust
09-11-2014, 09:59 PM
As a knick fan I have trouble defending Willis Reed. His career was just too short. He is essentially the equivalent of Tracy Mcgrady only difference was he managed to win a couple rings thanks to great help around him.

He basically played 8 seasons in my book. Thats why I have trouble putting him over guys who have the ring, the allstars, and the longevity.

Lmao. Wills Reed is basically Tracy McGrady? Wtf. Yeah except for the fact that Reed was a two-way big man who won championships and a league mvp. You might want to consider those minor differences next time you make a comparison. :)

SLY WILLIAMS
09-11-2014, 10:07 PM
Are we including college? I was a huge Bill Walton fan. Every year I got excited to see him play hoping he finally could but the reality is he only played around 2-4 real NBA seasons. The rest were too injury riddled to count. Bill was a great player and is a funny guy but he did not have a NBA career that could be compared to these other guys because of his yearly injuries. That is not his fault but is a sad reality.

mightybosstone
09-11-2014, 10:27 PM
Fraziers game 7 is overrated and has fabricated statistics. Any player quoted from either team credits Willis with swinging the momentum in that game.
But he played like five minutes. You can only "swing the momentum of the game" so much by playing the first five minutes and sitting out the rest. The rest of the Knicks team still had to win the game against West, Wilt and Baylor. Also, where are you getting your information about Frazier's fabricated stats? Pretty much anything I've ever read about that game suggests he had 36 points and 19 assists.


What does Leonard have to do with anything?
My point is that winning a Finals MVP doesn't necessarily mean you were the No. 1 player on a championship team. Leonard was an example. Mainly, I was referring to Reed's second Finals MVP award in 72-73.


The idea that Drexler deserves a pass for not having a team of hall of famers makes no sense to me. Okay. Reed had more help. So what? Drexler didnt have enough to win a ring in Portland?
He doesn't deserve a pass, but guys like Stockton, Malone, Barkley, Robinson and Ewing also didn't win titles in the late 80s, early 90s and all five of those guys have gone already. Also, as good as those Portland teams were, I don't think they were ever better from the late 80s to the early 90s than the Showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtics, Bad Boy Pistons or MJ's Bulls. And those would have been the teams they would have had to beat to win a title.

NYKalltheway
09-12-2014, 05:24 AM
We are saying Clyde is a top 30 player of all-time despite the fact that only once during his career was he even considered a top 5 player in the league!


There's no cop out. There's context. Isolating this because I want you to name me the top 5 players of the league during Drexler's prime.
And I also want you to name me the top 5 players in Lebron's prime and the top 5 players's in Kobe's prime. And the top 5 players in Wade's prime (some years may collide).

I'm waiting.

mightybosstone
09-12-2014, 08:38 AM
We are saying Clyde is a top 30 player of all-time despite the fact that only once during his career was he even considered a top 5 player in the league!
Dude... The first half of his career was played with Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan. Are you really criticizing him for not being better than two of the arguably five best players in NBA history? Drexler peaked in 88-89, and those two years he would have probably been an All-NBA first selection in any other era of basketball. Except those two years were right in the middle of a five-year run in which Jordan and Magic both dominated the All-NBA first team.

Also, this argument's not a great one at this point in the voting. Consider that Patrick Ewing only made one All-NBA first team and he's already been voted in. Also you're arguing that McHale deserves to go here, but McHale only made one All-NBA team his entire career.

You also have to consider the context and the level of the talent playing during Drexler's peak. The late 80s may have been the most talented the league has ever been at any point ever. Look at the players who were playing at a high level in the mid-late 80s:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
3. Magic Johnson
4. Hakeem Olajuwon
5. Larry Bird
6. Moses Malone
7. Charles Barkley
8. Karl Malone
9. John Stockton
10. Patrick Ewing

That's 10 guys who have already gone in this list who were playing well about the same time that Drexler peaked. And you're suggesting that he should have been a top 5 guy in the league in that era? That doesn't seem fair at all, does it?

NYKalltheway
09-12-2014, 08:56 AM
MBT you;re confusing me. Now use the same logic you used to reply to KoB and tell me why Wade and Kobe are superior players to Drexler :)

Chronz
09-12-2014, 12:43 PM
But he played like five minutes. You can only "swing the momentum of the game" so much by playing the first five minutes and sitting out the rest. The rest of the Knicks team still had to win the game against West, Wilt and Baylor. Also, where are you getting your information about Frazier's fabricated stats? Pretty much anything I've ever read about that game suggests he had 36 points and 19 assists.

Point is, Reed got it done against heavy comp.

And his point about Frazier rings true, Im surprised its the first you've heard of it. Seriously, try watching the game, you wont come up with 19 assists. Maybe 12

THE MTL
09-12-2014, 03:38 PM
As a knick fan I have trouble defending Willis Reed. His career was just too short. He is essentially the equivalent of Tracy Mcgrady only difference was he managed to win a couple rings thanks to great help around him.

He basically played 8 seasons in my book. Thats why I have trouble putting him over guys who have the ring, the allstars, and the longevity.

Lmao. Wills Reed is basically Tracy McGrady? Wtf. Yeah except for the fact that Reed was a two-way big man who won championships and a league mvp. You might want to consider those minor differences next time you make a comparison. :)

Ok I'd admit that Tmac was a horrible comparison but u missed my point. My point was that Willis Reed had a unbelievable peak (ala Tmac) but his career just didnt last long. 8 seasons really isnt alot.

Especially when we're voting for #30 player to ever play the game. Drexler won a ring too and played 5 more seasons worth of basketball. Isiah Thomas won 2 rings and while his career was short too. He still managed a good 10 years.

All these players have the rings, the allstar appearances, and the leadership....but what Willis lacks is that longevity which is a major factor to me.

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 05:19 PM
Against Jordan and the Bulls? No.
Not even against the bad poy Pistons who are crazy underrated here.
And Drexler is underrated here. So is Thomas.

And all those other years where he didn't even make it to the Finals? How bout the fact that in 90 Terry Porter was their most important player? How bout the fact that in '92 Jordan sent him back to the JV team? Where is his career defining moment? I'm not here to build a shrine to the very good. At least not at #30.

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 05:34 PM
But he played like five minutes. You can only "swing the momentum of the game" so much by playing the first five minutes and sitting out the rest. The rest of the Knicks team still had to win the game against West, Wilt and Baylor. Also, where are you getting your information about Frazier's fabricated stats? Pretty much anything I've ever read about that game suggests he had 36 points and 19 assists.

I've watched that game a lot of times over the years. I'd rather not share my official statbook but let's just there is a friendly difference in my final numbers. Hey doesn't make me want to re-watch it any less. :)


My point is that winning a Finals MVP doesn't necessarily mean you were the No. 1 player on a championship team. Leonard was an example. Mainly, I was referring to Reed's second Finals MVP award in 72-73.

Out-playing Wilt Chamberlain and holding him to some of the worst games of his career doesn't warrant a Finals MVP? Who would you give it to?


He doesn't deserve a pass, but guys like Stockton, Malone, Barkley, Robinson and Ewing also didn't win titles in the late 80s, early 90s and all five of those guys have gone already. Also, as good as those Portland teams were, I don't think they were ever better from the late 80s to the early 90s than the Showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtics, Bad Boy Pistons or MJ's Bulls. And those would have been the teams they would have had to beat to win a title.

His prime was late 80s early 90s which is the absolute perfect time to sweep and and steal a title. Magic/Bird were falling off and it was before MJ and Pip had arrived. Can we stop protecting him?

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 05:36 PM
Ok I'd admit that Tmac was a horrible comparison but u missed my point. My point was that Willis Reed had a unbelievable peak (ala Tmac) but his career just didnt last long. 8 seasons really isnt alot.

Especially when we're voting for #30 player to ever play the game. Drexler won a ring too and played 5 more seasons worth of basketball. Isiah Thomas won 2 rings and while his career was short too. He still managed a good 10 years.

All these players have the rings, the allstar appearances, and the leadership....but what Willis lacks is that longevity which is a major factor to me.

I'm glad you backed of the T-Mac comparison. It's tough to argue against what you said here. I do agree (with the exception of Walton) that Reed's longevity probably is the weakest of the top competitors.

NYKalltheway
09-12-2014, 06:23 PM
And all those other years where he didn't even make it to the Finals? How bout the fact that in 90 Terry Porter was their most important player? How bout the fact that in '92 Jordan sent him back to the JV team? Where is his career defining moment? I'm not here to build a shrine to the very good. At least not at #30.

It's #30, not GOAT.. So what you're saying is not really important. I can say the same things about Lebron, Kobe and Wade btw and even more... Yet you happily placed two of them in the top 10 and one of them in the top 20something

And it's funny because Drexler's statistics are better than everyone in his position except MJ yet neither of them stat padded like Wade and Kobe did in recent years (and let's not forget the rules change that made it too easy for slashers to score]

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 07:17 PM
And all those other years where he didn't even make it to the Finals? How bout the fact that in 90 Terry Porter was their most important player? How bout the fact that in '92 Jordan sent him back to the JV team? Where is his career defining moment? I'm not here to build a shrine to the very good. At least not at #30.

It's #30, not GOAT.. So what you're saying is not really important. I can say the same things about Lebron, Kobe and Wade btw and even more... Yet you happily placed two of them in the top 10 and one of them in the top 20something

And it's funny because Drexler's statistics are better than everyone in his position except MJ yet neither of them stat padded like Wade and Kobe did in recent years (and let's not forget the rules change that made it too easy for slashers to score]

You can say what about Lebron-Wade-Kobe. Nothing I said in that post fits the description for those 3 players.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-12-2014, 07:19 PM
I still can not get over Wade being above so many guys. Sorry I just had to get that out of my system. :)

I went with Mchale but I think Drexler may get a bit under rated while his Portland Team/Teammates are getting a little over rated. I liked that Portland team but Kevin Duckworth was not a all star player. Yes I know he may have made it once but lots of players with average careers can say that. On the other side Buck Williams was such a hard worker and a legit all star as a NJ Net. By the time he became a Trailblazer his physical skills were already going down a bit. He still played hard and smart but he was not the same player he was in NJ. Cliff Robinson was a great guy to fill in at sf, pf, or even center. He had some strong years. Would I consider him a all star player? Probably not even though he also probably made it once. Porter probably was the closest to a real all star in Drexlers years in my opinion. Terry played the game right on both ends. I just hated when his ugly shot would rim out in key moments. Clyde was the only real perrenial all star of that group. Mchale-Isiah-Drexler-Willis all of them were very good. I'm not sure we can really say who was better between the 4 of them.

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 07:26 PM
I still can not get over Wade being above so many guys. Sorry I just had to get that out of my system. :)

I went with Mchale but I think Drexler may get a bit under rated while his Portland Team/Teammates are getting a little over rated. I liked that Portland team but Kevin Duckworth was not a all star player. Yes I know he may have made it once but lots of players with average careers can say that. On the other side Buck Williams was such a hard worker and a legit all star as a NJ Net. By the time he became a Trailblazer his physical skills were already going down a bit. He still played hard and smart but he was not the same player he was in NJ. Cliff Robinson was a great guy to fill in at sf, pf, or even center. He had some strong years. Would I consider him a all star player? Probably not even though he also probably made it once. Porter probably was the closest to a real all star in Drexlers years in my opinion. Terry played the game right on both ends. I just hated when his ugly shot would rim out in key moments. Clyde was the only real perrenial all star of that group. Mchale-Isiah-Drexler-Willis all of them were very good. I'm not sure we can really say who was better between the 4 of them.

How many of them won a league MVP? How many of them outplayed a top 5 player in the finals to win a ring?

SLY WILLIAMS
09-12-2014, 07:34 PM
How many of them won a league MVP? How many of them outplayed a top 5 player in the finals to win a ring?

Your questions are a bit selective (as a overall voting determinant) but I'm not arguing for or against any of the four players I mentioned. All four players have a solid case. I could see any of those four players being picked at this point. In fact I think all four players are better than some guys that were already picked.

KnicksorBust
09-12-2014, 08:10 PM
How many of them won a league MVP? How many of them outplayed a top 5 player in the finals to win a ring?

Your questions are a bit selective (as a overall voting determinant) but I'm not arguing for or against any of the four players I mentioned. All four players have a solid case. I could see any of those four players being picked at this point. In fact I think all four players are better than some guys that were already picked.

Are you running for PSD mayor? Why not pick a player and make a case?

SLY WILLIAMS
09-12-2014, 08:36 PM
Are you running for PSD mayor? Why not pick a player and make a case?

Why would I run for PSD Mayor when I'm already the PSD King? :)

I previously mentioned that I picked Mchale multiple times in this thread already but I'm not going to argue for something that I feel could go any of 4 ways. I would just be trying to win a argument in that case.

mightybosstone
09-13-2014, 09:41 AM
I've watched that game a lot of times over the years. I'd rather not share my official statbook but let's just there is a friendly difference in my final numbers. Hey doesn't make me want to re-watch it any less.
I've never watched the full game aside from highlights, but the point is that not matter how many assists Frazier had in that game, he clearly carried that team to a decisive victory in which the team's arguably best player was only on the court for a handful of minutes.


Out-playing Wilt Chamberlain and holding him to some of the worst games of his career doesn't warrant a Finals MVP? Who would you give it to?
But let's not act like that was vintage Wilt. It was Chamerlain's last offseason and the 11/19 he averaged in the series about the same as the 13/19 he averaged during the season.

Also, I never said Reed didn't deserve Finals MVP. I said he wasn't the No. 1 on that Knicks team anymore. There's a lot of guys who won Finals MVPs over the years who weren't the best player on their teams, and Frazier (who averaged 21/7/6 with 13 WS) was clearly the team's best player. In terms of the Finals, I've never watched the series, but based on the numbers it seems like stats were pretty evenly distributed across the starting five. Bradly led the team in scoring 19 a night, but Debusschere was fifth in scoring and still put up 16/12/2 in that series. They probably gave the award to Reed for his defense, but you could make a pretty decent case for any one of the starting five.

It's worth noting that Frazier was clearly the No. 1 guy in the playoffs that year as well. Reed was a 13/8 guy in that posteason on only 47% shooting while Frazier was putting up 22/7/6 shooting 51% from the floor.


His prime was late 80s early 90s which is the absolute perfect time to sweep and and steal a title. Magic/Bird were falling off and it was before MJ and Pip had arrived. Can we stop protecting him?
Wait a second... So you're suggesting that the Portland team was better than the Bad Boy Pistons? Also, why is Drexler taking all the blame for that squad not winning a championship? Have you seen his numbers in the Finals against Detroit? Drexler averaged 26/8/6/2 on 54% shooting from the floor and the Blazers still got beat in five games. The Pistons were just the better basketball team.

Also, you claim that Magic was "falling off" in the early 90s, but in the 90-91 season in which LA knocked out Portland in the Conference Finals, Magic was still averaging 19/13/7/1 with a .251 WS/48 and a .251 PER. The dude was still very much in his prime and I'm not sure how you can suggest otherwise. That was also the last season before the Bulls won their first title.

mightybosstone
09-13-2014, 10:00 AM
And it's funny because Drexler's statistics are better than everyone in his position except MJ yet neither of them stat padded like Wade and Kobe did in recent years (and let's not forget the rules change that made it too easy for slashers to score]

You keep mentioning this, but you've yet to actually provide ANY statistical evidence to back it up. Why? Because it's just totally wrong.

Drexler's arguably two best seasons (88-89), he averaged essentially 27/7/6/3 with a 24 PER and a .200 WS/48. That's very good. But he only ever topped 25 a game once again in his career, he only came close to a 24 PER once and he only topped a .200 WS/48 five times.

Kobe's peak is not only longer, but just far more impressive. With the exception of 03-04, Kobe essentially averaged at least 27/5/5/2 with a PER over 24 five times and a WS/48 over .200 five times from 03-10. Overall in his career, he posted a WS/48 of at least .195 nine times and a PER over 23 at least 11 times.

And Wade had probably the most impressive peak of all. From 06-10 (with the exception of 08), he averaged basically 27/7/5 with a PER of at least 27.5 four times and a WS/48 of at least .215 four times. Overall, he had seven seasons with at least a 24 PER and six seasons with a WS/48 of at least .215.

tredigs
09-13-2014, 11:22 AM
Pace adjusted for Drexler's late 80's Kobe's 35 point season would have been closer to 40/7/6. Food for thought.

NYKalltheway
09-13-2014, 11:40 AM
Pace adjusted for Drexler's late 80's Kobe's 35 point season would have been closer to 40/7/6. Food for thought.

Then use the same info with a per 36 minutes comparison and the difference is chaotic. And the funny thing is, stats don't even show half the truth!

flea
09-13-2014, 11:49 AM
Please stop with the PER.

tredigs
09-13-2014, 12:55 PM
Then use the same info with a per 36 minutes comparison and the difference is chaotic. And the funny thing is, stats don't even show half the truth!

Just use "per 100 possessions". 32/9/7 + 3 steals for Clyde and 46/7/6 + 2.5 stls for Kobe. Kobe's massive point differential on slightly higher efficiency due to being better from 3 and the stripe. Stats aside Kobe had a longer, better prime and a higher peak than Clyde - who is clearly a great player in his own right, just not quite as great as Kobe.

mightybosstone
09-13-2014, 03:26 PM
Please stop with the PER.

What's wrong with using PER as one of several barometer for judging a player's overall statistical production? You clearly have shown distaste for it in the past, and yet I've never really understood why.

flea
09-13-2014, 03:32 PM
It's a chucker stat. Maybe you can use it to compare two players who lead their teams in FGA, but not really across eras and it has nothing to do with defense. Even Hollinger, who created it, says people shouldn't use it. You can just as easily post a stat line, which is far more informative than a random raw number.

FlashBolt
09-14-2014, 01:30 AM
It's a chucker stat. Maybe you can use it to compare two players who lead their teams in FGA, but not really across eras and it has nothing to do with defense. Even Hollinger, who created it, says people shouldn't use it. You can just as easily post a stat line, which is far more informative than a random raw number.

PER has MJ as the GOAT. That has to say something.

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 09:39 AM
It's a chucker stat. Maybe you can use it to compare two players who lead their teams in FGA, but not really across eras and it has nothing to do with defense. Even Hollinger, who created it, says people shouldn't use it. You can just as easily post a stat line, which is far more informative than a random raw number.

What do you mean when you say it's a "chucker" stat? You do realize that it considers a player's scoring efficiency just like pretty much any other statistic, right? That's why guys like Durant and Lebron are on another stratosphere in terms of PER and high volume, low efficiency scorers like Rudy Gay and DeMar DeRozan are so much further down the list.

You're right in that it doesn't measure a player's defensive value, but that's not really the point of the statistic. The point is to measure a player's production in one all-encompassing statistic. That's pretty much what Hollinger has said multiple times in his explanation of the stat. In terms of him saying that people should never use it, I think you're pulling that out of your ***. If that was the case, I'm pretty sure ESPN wouldn't have it on their stats page.

flea
09-14-2014, 11:30 AM
It's a stat that says Kyrie Irving had an equal season to Kyle Lowry and a better one than Joakim Noah, Marc Gasol, Z-Bo, Kawhi Leonard, Chandler Parsons, and many others. What did he do better than all of them? Chuck, and that's it.

Again, the guy who created it doesn't even like it. Just because ESPN pushes it like they do QBR doesn't mean it's accurate or worthwhile.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-14-2014, 11:58 AM
PER has MJ as the GOAT. That has to say something.

It just says that PER sometimes gets it right but PER is not the be all end all of stats. If it were why even have a vote? We would just list the players in order of PER. Maybe that is why a guy like Wade is way too high on this list. Some people are blinded by PER. Although if we make PER the overall determining factor it is going to favor a lot more players from the last 10-20 years. Drob would move up to #4 Shaq to #3 Hakeem would drop a lot. So would Magic.

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 05:30 PM
It's a stat that says Kyrie Irving had an equal season to Kyle Lowry and a better one than Joakim Noah, Marc Gasol, Z-Bo, Kawhi Leonard, Chandler Parsons, and many others. What did he do better than all of them? Chuck, and that's it.

Again, the guy who created it doesn't even like it. Just because ESPN pushes it like they do QBR doesn't mean it's accurate or worthwhile.

:facepalm: Okay, no one is saying it's a perfect statistic. As I JUST SAID, it's a stat that determines how productive a player is statistically. Look at what Irving does well. The guy scores a lot of points at a relatively efficient rate (about average), put up solid assist and rebounding numbers, has a high rate of steals and a low turnover rate. Also, Irving DID have a better season than Leonard and Parsons, and probably Randolph, so that's a piss poor argument. As for Noah and Gasol, I ALSO just got done saying that the statistic does not judge a player's defensive impact outside of rebounds, blocks and steals. It's like you're just completely ignoring my posts altogether.

As for whether or not Hollinger "likes it," I think you're full of ****. You keep saying that, yet you have yet to provide a single piece of evidence to prove that it's true. I'll buy it when you source it.

flea
09-14-2014, 06:07 PM
I remember seeing a quote from Hollinger where he admitted PER has nothing to do with defense (in spite of including blocks and steals and therefore ostensibly trying to include defensive contributions) and therefore shouldn't be used by anyone for actual player evaluation - basically that it's just another fun number for the fans to look at. That's fine I guess if you're incapable of weighing the offensive impact of a 18 points/12 assist player versus a 25 point 4 assist player, but it's not even very good at that.

It includes efficiency, yes, but it's weighted in weird ways so that if you shoot more times inefficiently then you increase your PER. In other words, it's better to be a chucker than an efficient player with a 20% USG. That's not the case in real basketball, only in fantasy basketball world (which is really what PER is good for, fantasy teams).

So basically we have a stat that only takes into account one end of the floor, and only can be used to compare players who take a similar number of shots. How exactly is that any better than just looking at their stat line? It isn't, and that's why it's stupid.

And if you think Parsons and Leonard were worse than Irving in 2013-2014, I can't help you. Thinking like yours is how AI and Carmelo ended up on the same team, and how that team got better once they both left (not coincidentally, Hollinger thought that team would be great).

flea
09-14-2014, 06:13 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, just read (http://wagesofwins.com/2006/11/17/a-comment-on-the-player-efficiency-rating/) any of the vast number (http://skepticalsports.com/?tag=per) of legitimate criticisms all over the internet.

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 07:36 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, just read (http://wagesofwins.com/2006/11/17/a-comment-on-the-player-efficiency-rating/) any of the vast number (http://skepticalsports.com/?tag=per) of legitimate criticisms all over the internet.

Dude.... You can't possibly be this dense. Let me reiterate... I'm not saying that the statistic is infallible, perfect or does not have its own faults. It is what it is, and none of the things you have posted or have said have disproved anything I have said. However, you keep stating that Holinger himself discredits his own statistic. Yet you have not provided a single source for this point.

I don't give a **** about any criticisms of PER that you find on the Internet. I'm not disputing them or suggesting they have no merit. I want you to find me Hollinger himself discrediting his own stat, which you claim exists.

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 07:47 PM
I remember seeing a quote from Hollinger where he admitted PER has nothing to do with defense (in spite of including blocks and steals and therefore ostensibly trying to include defensive contributions) and therefore shouldn't be used by anyone for actual player evaluation - basically that it's just another fun number for the fans to look at.
This is literally the same thing I've been saying the entire time. It's not a true evaluation of an overall player's value, because it does not take defensive impact into consideration. It's like you took what I said, regurgitate it and then pretended like you said it first and are somehow refuting what I'm saying.


And if you think Parsons and Leonard were worse than Irving in 2013-2014, I can't help you. Thinking like yours is how AI and Carmelo ended up on the same team, and how that team got better once they both left (not coincidentally, Hollinger thought that team would be great).
You're being extremely dramatic here, bro. Were Parsons and Leonard more efficient than Irving last season? Of course. But you're totally overlooking the fact that they are the No. 3 options on great basketball teams with elite players. Kyrie was a No. 1 on a bad basketball team with very few other legitimate scoring options.

Of course they were more efficient. If they weren't, they wouldn't be very good at all. But Irving posted essentially 21/6/4/2 with a 28% USG%. Parsons and Leonard both posted stats more akin to that of a No. 3, each guy averaging about 17 points with decent rebounding numbers and a USG% around 18-19%.

You're just looking strictly at efficiency without considering any of the context behind those numbers and where they came from. If you want a fair comparison, we'll finally get that this season. All three guys should be No. 3 options on top 10 teams. I'm willing to be that Irving's numbers absolutely crush Parsons and Leonard.

flea
09-14-2014, 08:26 PM
I guess you're forgetting that Parsons and Leonard were their teams' #1 wing defenders, each of them in a playoff team that was top 10 defensively. You know, the other half of the game. Chucking shots for a bad team doesn't impress me, even if you do it with average efficiency. It probably won't surprise you that I don't like Carmelo Anthony as a player very much.

EDIT: Mispoke, Rockets were 13th defensively. Still a miracle considering they started 2 black holes defensively, and gave starter's minutes to another black hole as their 6th man, and had nobody on their bench worth much defensively except their backup center who played 20 MPG in just over half a season.

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 08:58 PM
I guess you're forgetting that Parsons and Leonard were their teams' #1 wing defenders, each of them in a playoff team that was top 10 defensively. You know, the other half of the game.
Ugh... Parsons was the No. 1 defender almost by default because Harden sucks so much on that end of the floor. Also, I don't buy the Rockets were a top 10 defense at all last season, and that's coming from a Rockets fan. Also, you're not considering how good the overall team defense of the Spurs is or how little of the offense sits on Leonard's shoulders. Leonard averaged less than 13 points per game in fewer than 30 minutes a night. Color me very unimpressed.


Chucking shots for a bad team doesn't impress me, even if you do it with average efficiency. It probably won't surprise you that I don't like Carmelo Anthony as a player very much.
I don't really care whether or not you like Melo. That doesn't make him a lesser player because some guy named "flea" on an Internet sports forum doesn't like him. Look at Melo's numbers the last two seasons and it's pretty damn hard to classify him as a "chucker" anymore. Melo posted a 56% TS% the last two seasons. That's well above league average, especially for wings.


EDIT: Mispoke, Rockets were 13th defensively. Still a miracle considering they started 2 black holes defensively, and gave starter's minutes to another black hole as their 6th man, and had nobody on their bench worth much defensively except their backup center who played 20 MPG in just over half a season.
That's mostly because they have top 5 defenders at PG and C. I assure you that Parsons had very little to do with it. I loved Parsons in Houston and he did a lot of things very well, but he was a very average defensive player.And there were times last season where calling him average on that end would have felt very generous.

flea
09-14-2014, 09:08 PM
I've watched plenty of Parsons, he got the job because of what he brings defensively. Rockets fans just started this whole "Parsons doesn't play D" crap once the Mavs signed him away. We'll see this season how Rockets compare to Mavs defensively. He'll still be the primary wing defender for his team, and the Rockets think they upgraded with Ariza. Mavs are going to be poor against quick guards, but I bet both teams end up in the same vicinity at the end of the year (8th to 12th in d rating).

mightybosstone
09-15-2014, 05:21 PM
I've watched plenty of Parsons, he got the job because of what he brings defensively. Rockets fans just started this whole "Parsons doesn't play D" crap once the Mavs signed him away. We'll see this season how Rockets compare to Mavs defensively. He'll still be the primary wing defender for his team, and the Rockets think they upgraded with Ariza. Mavs are going to be poor against quick guards, but I bet both teams end up in the same vicinity at the end of the year (8th to 12th in d rating).

As someone who watched probably 75-80% of Rockets games last year and has seen the vast majority of Parsons' games over his career, I'm going to agree to disagree on Parsons being some great perimeter defender. He's average on that end of the floor. Period. He brings far more to the court offensively and in terms of being a jack of all trades type guy.

In terms of who will be the better defensive team this season, that will depend on a lot of different things, but Ariza and Parsons are hardly the only two factors. I assure you that Ariza is the superior defender. If Houston is a poorer defensive squad than Dallas this season, Parsons and Ariza will not be contributing factors to that advantage.

KnicksorBust
09-16-2014, 04:47 PM
Next.

Willis Reed.

JTHunter
09-17-2014, 04:45 AM
So how is a player that started in 11 All Star Games, going to 12 overall, Led his team to three consecutive NBA Finals in the Golden Era, while winning two of and has a Finals MVP along the way not on the list yet?