Name your top 10 all time list of NBA players

[AHF]

Just now, Diesel said:

I would too.

That's why it's a definitely yes and a little no. 

I think it is definitely yes without reservation.  Just because Jordan didn’t rebound as well as Dennis Rodman doesn’t mean he wasn’t clearly the better player.  A worse player can be better at some aspects of the game.

As a complete aside for basketball trivia, I’ve been enjoying testing my memory playing this recently:

https://www.immaculategrid.com/basketball/mens
 

Figured you and some others on this thread might enjoy it as well.  I find it harder than I would have figured to get all of them.

[Diesel]

4 hours ago, AHF said:

I think it is definitely yes without reservation.  Just because Jordan didn’t rebound as well as Dennis Rodman doesn’t mean he wasn’t clearly the better player.  A worse player can be better at some aspects of the game.

As a complete aside for basketball trivia, I’ve been enjoying testing my memory playing this recently:

https://www.immaculategrid.com/basketball/mens
 

Figured you and some others on this thread might enjoy it as well.  I find it harder than I would have figured to get all of them.

That's true if it were rebounding.  And if you weren't talking about the GOAT.  Rebounding doesn't get much respect... But scoring does. 

For instance.. would you say that Rodman was a better player than Jason Tatum?

How about Rodman vs. Dominique Wilkins?

So when I say that Iverson is better at scoring around the bucket....It has some weight.. not much but some.   It's not the total route that you want it to be because we're talking about scoring. 

 

[AHF]

53 minutes ago, Diesel said:

That's true if it were rebounding.  And if you weren't talking about the GOAT.  Rebounding doesn't get much respect... But scoring does. 

For instance.. would you say that Rodman was a better player than Jason Tatum?

How about Rodman vs. Dominique Wilkins?

So when I say that Iverson is better at scoring around the bucket....It has some weight.. not much but some.   It's not the total route that you want it to be because we're talking about scoring. 

 

When Trae scores almost as much but is radically more efficient it just doesn’t move the needle much for me that AI is better at one aspect of scoring when he is so much worse as a total scorer let alone playmaker.

[Diesel]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

When Trae scores almost as much but is radically more efficient it just doesn’t move the needle much for me that AI is better at one aspect of scoring when he is so much worse as a total scorer let alone playmaker.

I agree there.. I didn't say that Trae was deficient at scoring... I didn't even say that Iverson was a better scorer.  I said that Iverson scored better going to the basket.   Bottom line, if Trae could score going to the basket the way that Iverson could, Trae would be a 35 ppg player and would be first team all NBA and probably considered the best player playing the game.  In one of his best years, Iverson's layup percent was 68.8%.   Trae's best year was 2021 at 55.5%.   In that comparison, Iverson hit 2 times as many layups as Trae did.   From everywhere else, Trae is a much better shooter... but scoring going to the bucket was really the value of Iverson because he didn't have any floor spacers on that team.  He didn't have any consistent 2nd options. 

 

 

[AHF]

On 8/23/2023 at 9:03 PM, Diesel said:

I agree there.. I didn't say that Trae was deficient at scoring... I didn't even say that Iverson was a better scorer.  I said that Iverson scored better going to the basket.   Bottom line, if Trae could score going to the basket the way that Iverson could, Trae would be a 35 ppg player and would be first team all NBA and probably considered the best player playing the game.  In one of his best years, Iverson's layup percent was 68.8%.   Trae's best year was 2021 at 55.5%.   In that comparison, Iverson hit 2 times as many layups as Trae did.   From everywhere else, Trae is a much better shooter... but scoring going to the bucket was really the value of Iverson because he didn't have any floor spacers on that team.  He didn't have any consistent 2nd options. 

 

 

Agree with all this.  It just doesn’t change my view that Trae is an unqualified better player than Iverson was.

[Diesel]

5 hours ago, AHF said:

Agree with all this.  It just doesn’t change my view that Trae is an unqualified better player than Iverson was.

I believe history will show this to be true... Just don't run out there today and try to convince the masses of this right now. 

Because this is what you will face...

• NBA Most Valuable Player (2001)
• 11× NBA All-Star (2000–2010)
• 2× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA First Team (1999, 2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA Second Team (2000, 2002, 2003)
• All-NBA Third Team (2006)
• NBA Rookie of the Year (1997)
• NBA All-Rookie First Team (1997)
• 4× NBA scoring champion (1999, 2001, 2002, 2005)
• 3× NBA steals leader (2001–2003)
• NBA 75th Anniversary Team

[NBASupes]

22 hours ago, Diesel said:

I believe history will show this to be true... Just don't run out there today and try to convince the masses of this right now. 

Because this is what you will face...

• NBA Most Valuable Player (2001)
• 11× NBA All-Star (2000–2010)
• 2× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA First Team (1999, 2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA Second Team (2000, 2002, 2003)
• All-NBA Third Team (2006)
• NBA Rookie of the Year (1997)
• NBA All-Rookie First Team (1997)
• 4× NBA scoring champion (1999, 2001, 2002, 2005)
• 3× NBA steals leader (2001–2003)
• NBA 75th Anniversary Team

Iverson has one of the most asethically pleasing games ever while many people are annoyed by Trae's game. 

[AHF]

On 8/24/2023 at 10:45 PM, Diesel said:

I believe history will show this to be true... Just don't run out there today and try to convince the masses of this right now. 

Because this is what you will face...

• NBA Most Valuable Player (2001)
• 11× NBA All-Star (2000–2010)
• 2× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA First Team (1999, 2001, 2005)
• 3× All-NBA Second Team (2000, 2002, 2003)
• All-NBA Third Team (2006)
• NBA Rookie of the Year (1997)
• NBA All-Rookie First Team (1997)
• 4× NBA scoring champion (1999, 2001, 2002, 2005)
• 3× NBA steals leader (2001–2003)
• NBA 75th Anniversary Team

Trae is never going to match those accolades - especially when he is turning down All-Star invites (he would be a 4x All-Star right now if he just went to the games where he was asked).  AI was seriously overrated in his time, imo, so naturally his list of awards overstates his impact. 

By way of example, his MVP season here are the Win Share leaders:

Shaq 14.9

Timmy 13.2

Karl Malone 13.1

Vince Carter 12.9

Tracy McGrady 12.2

David Robinson 12.1

KG 11.8

AI 11.8

Anthony Mason 11.6

Kobe Bryant 11.3

 

Shaq 100% deserved the MVP that season but AI goes down in history as an MVP winner when he was never the best player in the league.

[Diesel]

10 hours ago, AHF said:

Trae is never going to match those accolades - especially when he is turning down All-Star invites (he would be a 4x All-Star right now if he just went to the games where he was asked).  AI was seriously overrated in his time, imo, so naturally his list of awards overstates his impact. 

By way of example, his MVP season here are the Win Share leaders:

Shaq 14.9

Timmy 13.2

Karl Malone 13.1

Vince Carter 12.9

Tracy McGrady 12.2

David Robinson 12.1

KG 11.8

AI 11.8

Anthony Mason 11.6

Kobe Bryant 11.3

 

Shaq 100% deserved the MVP that season but AI goes down in history as an MVP winner when he was never the best player in the league.

I don't know how you can flat footed use a Stat that puts Anthony Mason in the same company as KG, Shaq, Kobe, and Tim Duncan.   The fact that Anthony Mason's name pops up on the leader board should tell everybody that this stat is BS. 

 

[AHF]

13 hours ago, Diesel said:

I don't know how you can flat footed use a Stat that puts Anthony Mason in the same company as KG, Shaq, Kobe, and Tim Duncan.   The fact that Anthony Mason's name pops up on the leader board should tell everybody that this stat is BS. 

 

That stat is absolutely not BS.  Mason was 13th among MVP vote getters in WS/48 and is helped by playing more minutes than just about everyone else.  Mason was an MVP vote getter that season (tied with Stockton and Finley) based on his impressive season that year where he led Miami to a 50 win season with his solid all around line (16, 10 and 3) and strong defense (he got All-NBA defense votes as well as MVP votes).  

It is kind of funny that you think this invalidates the stat when he was one of 15 players who received MVP votes that season (and was an All-Star, etc.).  Seems like that stat correlated pretty strongly with the guys who got MVP votes.

That said, I don't think it is a perfect stat or one that should be used in isolation if you are doing a deep dive on an issue.  It is a good shorthand but there are some known issues with it (the biggest of which for me is that it doesn't reflect positional defense at all).

But feel free to use any advanced stat of your choice.  All of them other than FGA/gm will tell you that AI was not the best player in the league and was closer to TMac than he was to Shaq.

PER

(True MVP) Shaq 30.2

TMac 24.9

AI 24.0

 

WS/48

Shaq .245

AI .190

TMac .189

 

BPM

Shaq 7.7

TMac 7.0

AI 6.1

 

VORP

Shaq 7.1

TMac 7.0

AI 6.1

[Diesel]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

It is kind of funny that you think this invalidates the stat when he was one of 15 players who received MVP votes that season (and was an All-Star, etc.).  Seems like that stat correlated pretty strongly with the guys who got MVP votes.

No I just believe that some of these types of stats are reboundcentric.   And it felt like that with Mason. 

[Diesel]

Let me put up a better Anti winshares argument. 

 

1995... Houston win Chip.   Hakeem = Finals MVP.  His season averages are:  27.8, 10.8, and 3.5  on 51.7% shooting with 3.4 bpg...

 

He was 14th in Win-Shares behind Schriempf, Drexler, Miller, Barros...

Say it with me...  WS is trash.

 

 

[AHF]

Now let's compare the 1995 MVP voting list against the Win Share list:

David Robinson - #1 MVP, #1 Win Shares

Shaq - #2 MVP, #2 Win Shares

Karl Malone - #3 MVP, #4 Win Shares

Ewing - #4 MVP, #18 Win Shares

Hakeem - #5 MVP, #14 Win Shares

Barkley - #6 MVP, #13 Win Shares

Pippen - #7 MVP, #7 Win Shares

Stockton - #8 MVP, #3 Win Shares

Payton - #9 MVP, #9 Win Shares

Penny - #10 MVP, #11 Win Shares

Overall, that is a pretty outstanding level of correlation.  Ewing and Hakeem are the biggest outliers and both are high rebound guys so if your idea is that Win Shares overinflates the number for people who are good rebounders that seems a bit odd.  What metric do you think will better correlate between MVP standings and measurement of productivity?

 

 

For Hakeem, his Win Share totals dropped pretty hard from the prior two seasons.  Why?

• Worst TS% 
• Worst rebounds per minute
• Worst blocks per minute

Is this isolated to WS/48?

No.  His BPM and VORP were also way down.   His PER was down from 1993.  So it makes sense why his personal WS and WS/48 numbers were materially down like these other metrics also say.

How about comparing him against others?

His TS% is so much lower than most of the top guys that you don't need to look any further than that.  Lower TS% combined with higher usage rate is going to hurt  your WS number and every other advanced metric.  Again, what better metric would you point to?  Bear in mind that WS/48 is a per minute metric and Hakeem playing roughly 40 minutes a game means his per game stats will be better than his per minute stats.

Again, I don't claim that Win Shares is a perfect metric but it is one of the best, imo.