Draft 12 players. Any position. Create the best team ever.
| Side-by-Side Draft results |
|---|
|
|
| Starting Lineups |
|---|
|
|
| First Off The Bench |
|---|
|
|
| Second Team |
|---|
|
|
| Small Ball |
|---|
|
|
| Overall Draft results |
|---|
|
| Side-by-Side Draft results |
|---|
|
|
| Starting Lineups |
|---|
|
|
| First Off The Bench |
|---|
|
|
| Second Team |
|---|
|
|
| Small Ball |
|---|
|
|
| Overall Draft results |
|---|
|
95 thoughts on “NBA G.O.A.T. 2 TEAM LEAGUE ”
I see you got this up, so I’ll get started with the draft choice commentary on pick #1. My choice came down to MJ or Wilt. What swayed me toward Wilt is that we probably are not looking at using a player’s entire career as your measuring stick, but a player’s prime or best season. Was there ever a more dominant player in his prime than Wilt? The four highest PPG seasons (and 5 of the top 6) belong to Wilt. The three highest RPG seasons (and 6 of the top 7) belong to Wilt. He was also a pretty fair passer and a good defender. I think if you had to choose one player for one season in his prime, Wilt is the best choice. So that’s why I drafted him number 1.
Well put. I would say that rather than selecting players in their 1 year prime, it makes more sense to say these should all be considered as players in their multiple year prime. That way we don’t get into a discussion about Bill Walton, Reggie Lewis, etc. Too bad neither of us knows enough to put Sabonis or Petrovic on one of these teams. That’s where some of this isn’t quite right.
OK. Picks #2 & #3.
Listing Bird at #2 instead of #3 is a statement that my team will be Bird’s team. He will be leader and floor general and at times PG. The pick was also made in the hope that I won’t have any guys in my top 6 that aren’t great scorers. The idea is well rounded players only that can be counted on in the clutch.
Listing Jordan at #3 is a statement that I could have gone with Wilt instead of Jordan here. My leader is Bird, and the only other leader I would consider in a top 24 talent league is Magic but I will go with shooting before beauty here;-) Two of the greatest players ever, but only one of them is among the greatest shooters ever. If we had gone 1-2-1-2-1-2-etc instead of 1-2-2-1-1-2-2-etc, I’m not sure what I would have done. I would still have wanted Bird at #2 but would probably have taken Jordan hoping that you followed with Magic at #3. If you took Bird we would have Wilt+Bird vs. Jordan+Magic. Interesting.
The reason I wasn’t expecting Wilt at #1? It’s not really a great reason. I think there are multiple guys that can slow down Wilt but no one to slow down Jordan. Kawhi is about the only guy I can think of that could really give him trouble. If you took Jordan first I would have been forced to take Kawhi much earlier. This would have weakened my team. On the other hand Wilt probably strengthens your team. So we both get stronger, because I get Kawhi and Jordan and you get Wilt.
Yeah, I agree that this is looking at players in their prime not just one season. I think that Wilt had both the best single season and best prime. You certainly picked up some defense (Russell, Hakeem & Kareem) that could slow him down. Only Russell actually played against Wilt in his prime. It would be interesting if one can go back and look at game by game stats in those seasons to see if Russell effectively slowed Wilt down in comparison to other centers at that time.
I knew you would take MJ with one of your two picks. I was less certain about Bird, but given the recent conversation about how complete a player Bird was, it doesn’t surprise me. You are probably right I don’t have anyone to give MJ trouble (because nobody could), but Kobe would do better than most others.
The one-two punch of Bird and Jordan effectively gave you an edge on outside shooting from the get-go and both players do really well going to the hoop as well. That scoring edge affected some of my later choices in an attempt to catch up.
As to picks #4 & #5:
The other player I thought you might take with your first two picks was Magic. Pairing the best PG of all time with the most dominant center of all time seemed like the best thing to do with my 2nd pick. I really had no other thought once I saw you hadn’t taken Magic. Magic is great at running the fast break and the half-court offense, so he works well with whoever my team has on the court. And with him in my starting 5, I should get a height advantage for my team. The shortest player in my starting 5 would be Kobe at 6’6″.
My third pick was a tougher call. I figured Kareem was the best available, but already having Wilt, I thought taking Kareem might leave my team depleted at another position. The choice came down to LeBron and the Big O. Oscar is a little duplicative of Magic, but I could play him at shooting guard. Both players are very well rounded, but I took LeBron because he’s bigger and probably has the better 3-pt shot. Granted, Robertson did not play in the 3-pt era, so we may not know that for sure. LeBron may also be one of the top 3 or so players that you would want with the ball in their hands and the game on the line.
The only reason I wasn’t going to take Wilt #1 is because IMO if I took Jordan you would be forced to take a great defender almost exclusively to slow down Jordan. Since there are so few of those that would qualify for our league, I was going to hope they fit in on *my* team before you got to them. So if you took Jordan first I would have tried to take all of LeBron and Kobe and Kawhi. Maybe Ray Allen even – an outrageously under-rated defender.
Here’s my NEW ALL NEW take on Wilt. He along with Jordan are the only two that can share the title of best player ever. He appeared to have one enormous problem though: most often he didn’t see any need to play at a high level on every possession. There’s nothing new there – team mates and opponents have said something similar. My NEW ALL NEW take is that if he was on a team of amazing players and knew that even if they played their best they still might lose …
In that case I think he would have played hard every possession (as much as anyone can) and left so much out on the floor that he would unquestionably be considered the best by anyone that didn’t think Jordan was the best. I think it would be a simple matter of flavors – do you like T-Rexs or Pterodactyls?
But he didn’t do that so we don’t know how many championships he could have won if he had. In contrast Jordan was a championship hog. He begot winning championships. Thrived on it and exerted everything he had to win. It seems clear to me that he did this more than Wilt did.
However, even without the same killer instinct he put up the numbers you cited. I’ve watched films recently that show how good Wilt was when it really mattered. He was much better and faster and complete than Shaq. He was a bigger Olajuwon but he did more than Hakeem. Smarter and a better passer. And well … bigger. He would have frustrated the hell out of Boogie and A.D. today. Embiid would be challenged like no other player can challenge him today. Going back a little he would have negated all the San Antonio teams – Duncan would have had no chance. Any team since Kareem that relied on their PF or C for a large % of their offense would have been severely weakened vs. Wilt.
I’m good to wait and take our time going through these. One more note about the choice I made between LeBron and Oscar. I felt pretty sure that if I passed up LeBron, you would take him with one of your next picks. I thought there was a better chance that Oscar would still be available when I next picked.
#4 Magic
The great thing about this pick is that I have Bird – you weren’t in a position to take both. There’s no one that’s going to get Magic playing at his best more than Bird. Magic had that other gear reserved for the great games and great moments. Found a way to get it done, often by barreling down the middle of the court with eyes and brain on everything around. One of the best quotes I’ve heard about Magic was from Kareem just last year “It was like he was able to see the floor from a helicopter above – knowing where everyone was in relation to each other and where the play was going ahead of time”. The Magic-Wilt pairing would have been ridiculous during any era, because Magic was running and Wilt was running. Showtime with more alley-oops than the league has ever seen, and with passing lanes open as wide as possible a single shooter will always be open before the defense can set. Curry may have easily been the best counterpart to Magic on the fast break, but honestly any great shooter who moves well without the ball instantly becomes a killer. As great as those Lakers teams were, they didn’t whip the ball around like the the Celtics did and I fault Worthy and the various PFs for that (because Kareem was an excellent and quick passer). Now pair Magic with quicker thinking passers – this is the recipe for high % offense.
Much has been said of Magic’s defense, but that wouldn’t have stopped me from picking him up if I hadn’t chosen Bird (I really wouldn’t want those two on the same team – one only should be the floor general otherwise the risk of pissing off the other). But Magic at 6′ 9″ and with the long reach is a defender simply by staying in front of his man. Like Bird, there’s no way he can cover the smaller quicker guys. That’s why a quicker defender should probably be in the backcourt alongside him.
#5 LeBron
I think the ultimate team player because he’s about delegating moreso than running the show. More accurately stated, he is best at positioning himself well to be able to delegate well, and that includes making it clear to teammates where they need to be when he catches the ball early in the offense. Clearly he can run the show as well if need be. Regarding pushing the ball down court with Wilt running on the wing, you don’t give up too much with LeBron pushing it vs. Magic and if Magic is ahead you have another option to take advantage of passing lanes. On teams like these LeBron becomes perhaps the most versatile player on either team. He can’t shoot like Bird or drive an draw fouls like Jordan, but he’s good enough at both those things AND can post up and pass out of the post as well as any PF he might be up against. When I think of LeBron in the post, I think of the best player of all time that can quickly get his spot and hold it. Consider 3 of the best at doing the same: Hakeem 6′ 11″ 255, Duncan 6′ 11″ 250, K. Malone 6′ 9″ 250 … LeBron at 6′ 8″ 250 is setting up and getting position faster than any of those and only Duncan was able to pass out of it quickly before the rest of the defense sets. What’s amazing is that this guy can just as quickly go from that post position vs. your PF or C straight into a shooting point guard role, or quickly face up and curl into the lane before any big man can possible be ready for it. That means a constant threat of drawing fouls on players that may not have fouls to give.
I think LeBron’s most unique quality has always been his patience. Conserving energy, both his own and his team’s. So when not on the fast break you can expect the right decision more often than not. If that means driving straight into Bird or Durant to draw the foul or to create space to alley-oop to Wilt then it’s almost a 2-man system in the half court set. Of course he’ll know where the shooters and slashers are at all times and you can be sure that if his PF is on the weak side while Wilt pulls Kareem or Russell out of the way, James will get that PF the ball at the perfect time either directly or by whipping it back through Magic or one of the other brainy passers..
No need to talk about the defense much. Huge mobile fast defensive juggernaut that can be played at PG, SG or SF. Would certainly make Jordan’s life harder if he could stay out of foul trouble. His mobility and height could possibly make life harder for Bird’s outside shooting as well, but that’s unclear: Bird may just adjust his shot or get it off faster. Or for that matter take the ball outside the 3 pt arc – he certainly had the range of Curry and no doubt would be encouraged to match Curry’s heroics from that range if it meant pulling James out of the paint.
#6. Kareem
As a huge Bill Russell fan, this wasn’t as easy as it might seem. I think Russell was the better passer, rebounder and competitor. And Russell could be counted on to always make the right play. The problem is that this right play at the clutch would need to involve delegating rather than taking that last shot. Fine, but that takes a few seconds off the clock and leaves Russell vulnerable to being fouled in the clutch. It’s ALMOST a wash, but not quite because I think what I give up wrt fiery competition and outstanding passing I make up for with a great shot out to 10 feet and of course the FT %.
But that’s not all – if I took Bill Russell you may have taken Kareem and put him at PF. Kareem was mobile enough and smart enough to get out of Wilt’s way and had the ability to shoot (or threaten to shoot) from 10′-12′. He really doesn’t look that different in films from Duncan to me – except for the quick passing and greater range that Timmy had. So I had to take Kareem, not that I’m complaining.
#7. Durant
My statement that regardless of how the game was played in any era, there is absolutely no one in the history of the game that could cover an almost 7 foot sharp shooter from any range. If Barry couldn’t be stopped how the hell could Durant be stopped? It would have mandated the extension of the opposing defense from the paint much further out, and then the game sees something it never saw before Durant came along: a 7 foot guy faking the shot and driving into the lane un-accosted. Sure the Wilts and the Duncan’s will quickly adjust and fly at him to stop the drive but that would only work to reveal one of Durant’s greatest qualities – his ability to very quickly make a decision and get rid of the ball, now with his man out of position: a 5 on 4 with your ball handler at 7 feet able to see everyone and quickly get rid of it to a great player. If those other guys are smart passers and scorers his job is done.
Consider that for a moment. This isn’t an all star game. These are teammates fired up against the greatest competition ever. If Durant makes a quick decision to release the ball after beating his guy and driving inside the arc, his QUICK pass goes to one of the greatest ever. 5 on 4.
Barry was clearly one of the best in history because of his shot and his his FT%. But it’s clear in video that it wasn’t impossible to stay in front of Barry. But if Barry was 3 inches taller and faster and took his game out another 6 feet from the basket, defenders would have needed to play off him some.
Can’t foul him, so you need to let him drive around you and hope your guys help out quickly enough. Unfortunately the help needed requires you to stop his ability to pass from the top of the key as he’s moving. It can certainly be done, but not consistently partially because of Bird. As much as Bird was great at this that and the other thing, even with his lack of speed he was still outstanding at moving without the ball and quickly getting to his spot. Bird’s ability to position himself as the play develops was uncanny. I see that 5 on 4 developing with Bird running out near the 3 pt line where Durant would be able to see him. That 5th defender still recovering and out of position.
Not surprised by the Kareem pick. While his defense was not as good as Russell, it was still quite good and Kareem is a much better player on offense. And you get the virtually unstoppable sky hook when you need a basket. Kareem, Bird, and MJ on the court together would have been amazing.
The Durant pick surprised me. Not because he wasn’t worthy of the pick, but because he’s got a lot of similarities to Bird. Both great shooters from any distance who can pass well. In retrospect however, I can see pairing Durant at PF with Bird and it gives your team a greater shooting edge over my team in the early picks. My team may need to put Wilt on the bench in games that are close late because of his poor FT%.
As your team is constructed so far, you’ve got 3 great outside shooters, so it would be impossible for my team to double down on Kareem in the paint and Kareem one-on-one against virtually anybody in the paint would be tough to stop. Further, since Kareem is athletic enough and a good enough shooter to wander out from the basket, it will open up the paint to drives and cuts by MJ, KD and Bird. This also makes Kareem a better choice for your team than Russell would have been.
#8. Tim Duncan
My starting five needs a PF and SG at this point, though I’m not worried about taking those specific positions with the next two picks since every player I draft will be great. Because your team is looking like a shooting juggernaut, I want to beef up my defense, so I’m looking at Duncan and Olajuwon mostly because they provide more offense than Russell does, although Russell is probably the best defender that I could draft at this point. I’m also a little uncertain about how Russell would handle all the outside shooters since he was primarily an interior defender. As between Duncan and Hakeem, I opted for Duncan because he was a better fit to play PF than Hakeem in my starting 5. I also figure that in my next set of picks, when I will begin picking back-ups, I am likely to get either Hakeem or Russell to back up Wilt because surely you would not choose two centers with your next two picks. Right? RIGHT?
#9. Oscar Robertson
If I had know that you would double-dip at center with your next two picks, I might have taken Hakeem or Russell here. But since that was not going to happen, I was looking to get another great shooter/scorer here. The choice came down to the Big O or Kobe. I think Robertson is the more complete offensive player and rebounder while Kobe may be a better long-range shooter and defender. It was pretty much a toss-up in my book, but frankly, I hate Kobe, so I took Oscar. Although Kobe is a natural SG, I figure Oscar playing SG with Magic at the point would help drive my running offense really well. I think my team would be pretty unselfish on offense (another reason for Oscar over Kobe) and find the best shot.
I’m guessing at this point that your next two picks will be either Hakeem or Russell and Kobe.
Not feeling well today which means things can go two ways – either I don’t respond much or I respond a lot. Either way I’ll likely be making mistakes/typos. Bear with me …
I’m pretty limited, but definitely into this today – easier to take small bites though. Regarding Oscar, tell me how he was known defensively. I know nothing – seriously. If he’s at SG which sounds like a good idea, was he quick enough to stay in front of Jordan? Again, I don’t know anything. If you have videos I’d like to see.
Robertson was not known as a top-notch defender. If you look at the defensive win shares (a stat that figures out the number of wins that a player’s defense is worth) career leaders, Robertson is the second lowest ranked among players on both of our teams, excluding Curry and Leonard who haven’t played long enough to show up on the top 250 list. The only lower ranked player on our teams is George Gervin. You’ll not be surprised that the top-ranked player in defensive win shares–by a wide margin–is Bill Russell.
So, yes, the Big O will have trouble guarding MJ. But it turns out I’ll solve that problem with my next pick (not that anyone could really guard Jordan well).
Understood. I doubt you’d be surprised to hear my opinion that, assume my starting lineup of Kawhi (PG), Jordan(SG), Bird (SF), Hakeem(PF), Kareem(C) you may be better off starting Kobe at SG. Unless you want to start both Kobe and Oscar along with Magic? Bron at PF?
Guess we’ll know soon enough.
#8. Duncan
There’s no need to make this long. If there is one thing making it clear how great Duncan was, it’s how he compared to David Robinson. It was all there for everyone to see – how he turned everything around even when Robinson was at his best. Like Wilt, here’s another case of “it is what it seems to be”. Steady passer, scorer, rebounder and winner. One of if not the best shooters at his position. Would he be taking many 3s if he was in his prime today?
Outstanding defender at PF – Hakeem maybe better only because he seemed the more natural shot blocker, assuming you’re ok with Hakeem as a PF (he was the year Sampson was at C). Duncan was one of the great competitors. Certainly had a similar fire to some of the greats. Not flying all over the floor kind of fire though but I’m struggling to think of someone at that size that was. Hmm … Hakeem I guess. Barkley and Malone weren’t quite that size.
Smarter and more versatile than Hakeem, which is why I always put Duncan ahead of Hakeem in my top 10. Maybe the highest praise I can give him is that he looks a bit like Kareem did. There really is no objective way to say any PF was better, and maybe even no way to say that he wasn’t better than Bill Russell. Put Duncan on those Celtics teams – what would they give up?
#9. Oscar
I’m not a hater, just a doubter. It’s common to say that over 40% of the greatest players of all time played in the 60s. Maybe Baylor is the one I’m overrating. I need to see more video. But first a question, if Westbrook continues to get trip-dubs and maybe even averages them for the rest of his career, but only wins one championship … will he be considered a top 10 player?
This is what is great about having all this in a blog. I say Sampson was the C while Hakeem was the PF, and yet recorded history tells me I’m wrong. I stand corrected. The 7′ 4″ Sampson was a PF while Hakeem played the C. That’s what’s in print anyhow. Now it makes this question even easier to answer: what is Wilt’s more natural position, PF or C? Heh.
Here’s another question: If the Jazz traded Malone to Houston for Hakeem, what would the lineup have looked like? Mark Eaton on the bench because Hakeem needed to play C and didn’t fit well at PF? Riiiiight.
By the way, pretty awesome site here for many reasons. I’m looking at stats for Mark Eaton here, but what I really want to know is who was on the roster for the year in which I’m interested.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/eatonma01.html
Easy peasy. Scroll down to the “Per Game” table, within the row for the year in question click on the team name. Cool eh?
#10. Hakeem
Amazing body control, shot blocker, fierce defender and was able to shoot the ball. Apparently no one knows how tall he was – I’ve heard there was no way he was 7′, and was closer to 6′ 10″, but for this guy it doesn’t matter. A freak at 255 he was as fast and had the quickest feet of any big man ever. The whole package, but mostly an instinctual defender that had a knack for getting perfect position and timing. Not the brain of Duncan though, but I’m not sure who was. Since you picked Wilt and Duncan this was a clear choice – if I allowed you to select Hakeem as well you would have too much post offense that couldn’t be defended, and I wouldn’t have had enough.
#11.Russell
I needed the post offense at #10 so Bill Russell had to wait. I wouldn’t be giving up much defense vs. Wilt if I didn’t pick up Russell, but I would be giving up way too many other things and given them to you. Fierce competitor and winner that was all about team. Emotional leader. Captain. Fast and quick both mentally and physically. Today we have the game evolving into quick think quick pass. In and out. Duncan seemed to be great in this role, but somehow I think Russell would have been even better. Like a larger (and nicer) version of Draymond Green. Maybe the most surprising thing about him are the assists. In every video of him I see outstanding outlet passes and quick releases. His assist numbers weren’t bad by any means, but I think this guy was much better in that regard than is reflected in the numbers. 4.5 assists a game – well, that’s a lot actually. With all those rebounds I assume most of his great passes were out from under the opponents basket, so his teammates would have scored much of the time before he could get back down court. In contrast, between ’66 and ’68 Wilt averaged over 8 assists a game. I don’t believe it was because he was the better passer. Certainly it had more to do with the offense going through him.
This is where you really threw me off. I fully intended to take either Hakeem or Russell with one of my next two picks and figured there was no way you would take them both when you already had Hakeem. This gives your team outstanding interior defense at all times. You already know that Russell seemed to have Wilt’s number come playoff time and with Hakeem and Kareem, Wilt is always going to be bothered.
What I see on your team right now is great shooters (Bird, MJ, KD) who all play really good defense, and great interior defenders (Kareem, Hakeem, Russell), two of who are really good scorers. At this point, I feel my team has great scorers (Wilt, LeBron, Oscar), a couple of great PGs (Magic and Oscar), one great defender (Duncan) and a lot of really good defenders (Wilt, LeBron, Magic), but we don’t have any what I would consider great shooters. LeBron is the closest, but he is more a great scorer than he is a great shooter. Your back-to-back center picks will inspire me to do back-to-back picks of a certain type.
#12. Kobe Bryant
As mentioned previously, I heavily considered taking Kobe at pick #9, but went with the Big O instead. I figured you would take Kobe, but since you didn’t, he is an easy call here. Both a great shooter and a great defender, so he will help equalize the shooting inequality your team has over mine at this point. And, as you noted, it will probably make sense to start Kobe over Oscar so that I can have Kobe guard Jordan.
#13. Stephen Curry
I figure to completely close the shooting gap between our teams by taking the greatest shooter to play the game. Curry will be a liability on defense against these greats, but I’m imaging an impossible to defend pick and roll with Duncan, alley oops to Wilt and his range opening up the lane for LeBron. Another reason I take Curry now is to prevent you from taking him because adding Curry to Bird, Jordan, and Durant would make for a shooting disadvantage that my team will not be able to overcome. Additionally, having Magic, Oscar, Curry, Kobe, and LeBron gives my team an advantage in ball handlers.
#12. Kobe
One of the more interesting players for me for two reasons: I completely missed two years of his greatness, partially because I was busy with other things than basketball and partially because I hated his game. Well three things I guess: I hated the Lakers as well. For years after the early 2000s I hated his game. Easily the most selfish player I’ve ever seen. Maybe this was his reaction to Iverson while he was trying to prove his Jordan-worthiness: take shots and more shots and be selfish as hell. But always play hard on both ends. Much later I started to see a different Kobe. He looked the same to me athletically, but he started distributing the ball. For my money, he became twice the player he was during the first 60% of his career. I had always heard that he was one of the smartest guys in the league, and studied the game like crazy. That’s why I couldn’t understand why he thought being a ball hog was the right way to play. Looking back on it now I know the answer: he was smart but he was completely wrong to take all those shots. Like he was addicted to playing that way.
So if we’re taking players in their primes for this league the only way I see Kobe as the awesome killer all around player is if I think of him post 2009. At that time he became more of a Bird then he did a Jordan, albeit with much more of Jordan’s defense. So that’s the guy that scares me on your team, because he’ll be on the front end of the ally-ooping just as often as on the back end of it. A top 5 or 6 smartest player ever, so no question he’d defer to anything Magic decided. Would finally be playing with someone like Duncan who was going to make quicker and smarter decisions than Pau Gasol did, and Gasol was great at these things in his prime.
I know it’s tempting to think this would end up being a Jordan vs. Kobe fest, but I think only because Kobe would need to be the one covering Jordan, but on the other end I see Kawhi covering Kobe. Clearly Kobe’s role of clutch shooter isn’t going to change. Why would it since he along with Curry are your shooters? But now he’s a shooter with way more options than he had before. I think the Kobe I liked is the one that would threaten to be the Jordan on his team but realize how the passing lanes would open possibly allowing him to take advantage of open team mates. Because Bird would be my defensive liability I could see Kobe in and Magic out at the end of the game, with Curry, LeBron, Wilt and Duncan all ready for Kobe’s penetrate and dish’n.
# 13 Steph (because Curry still means Dell to me)
This one’s easy, because I know Curry’s game better than any other. Why? Because I watched him go from being Nash to Nash at his very best to Nash at his very best but faster, quicker, tougher and with twice the rebounding knack that Nash never had.
Forget the talk of best shooter off the dribble. It’s obvious as is the range, but I see no reason to think he had more range off the dribble than Nash, and that’s simply because Nash wasn’t going to play that way as often. Remember that Curry wasn’t supposed to play that way, but he did and did some more and eventually did it so much he became the one player of all time that was allowed to do it as a rule. Am I saying Nash would have been as good if he had as many reps. No for one reason and it had nothing to do with his range or his %, rather he just wasn’t able to get space and get the shot off as quickly. What amazes me about Curry is that this part of the conversation which is only about shooting off the dribble has so few others that can be considered. Bird had that slow release. Durant isn’t quite as good or fast off the dribble. Nash wasn’t as quick. Kobe wasn’t as accurate. Abdul-Rauf is the ONLY guy I can think of that could do the same thing, but he didn’t have the range and was never quite as accurate as Curry or Nash or Bird from further out. He had the right idea though.
I would have picked up Curry at this same spot, but not because of the long range or the shooting off the dribble. That helps, but more than that is the all around game and the need for offense in the clutch. Curry is another one that compares to Bird. Maybe he’s the closest in comparison and maybe more so than Kawhi even. He shoots from outside because he’s the best, but along with Bird he seems to have just as much interest in penetrating, drawing contact and readying himself for the rebound. A truly great instinctual rebounder held back only by his height. Great vision as well. More ally-oop possibilities – in my opinion what you lose by going Magic-Kobe instead of Curry-Kobe is the passing at full speed ahead in the lane. What you gain is the stop on the dime threat to score from 18-20 which requires his man to stay on him the entire time, just in case he has something other than shooting up his sleeve.
Honorable mentions for guys that could quickly shoot off the dribble…
Vinnie Johnson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR1EFuoyrAc
I looked at footage for Sleepy Floyd, Calvin Murphy, Vernon Maxwell and Freddy Brown. Surprised that this wasn’t a big part of their arsenals. I actually googled this (yes – I was prepared for some really stupid names and arguments) and got names that define the contrast between good and great. Nash and Curry and Rauf were GREATS. Clearly it was a big part of Vinnie Johnson’s game, but there was no where near the quickness. Those other names …
Reggie Miller
Ray Allen
Chris Paul
Jeff Hornicek
Jerry West
No. Just no. Reggie Miller gets some votes, but quick release off the dribble? No. Hornicek yes, but that was withing 18 feet. Totally different thing. The fact that the list of these players is so short says it all.
Before moving on to my next two picks, here’s an intermission honoring the greats that could have been on our teams if not for life (and death) getting in the way.
Reggie Lewis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCQdzBmPuhk
Bill Walton
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGeI6ypgtP0
Arvydas Sabonis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06usV6451ik
Drazen Petrovic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLlPtBsGbYo&t=95s
Reggie Miller weighs in on clutch 3pt shooters here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7AhrUIc87o
You could add Ralph Sampson, Jay Williams, and Penny Hardaway to the list of great or potentially great players who had careers cut short by injuries. Gotta think that if Sampson had stayed healthy, he and Hakeem would have gotten an NBA title together. Penny & Shaq should have been perennial title contenders, but once Penny got injured, their title hopes were shattered. And who knows what Jay Williams could have been (he won all kinds college player of the year awards at Duke) but for the motorcycle accident that basically ended his career after his first season in the pros.
#14. Rick Barry
Another fiery competitor that was also one of the greatest shooters ever. Hard to know if he and Bird would get along though, so Barry is my spark plug coming off the bench. Big body that could move well. Decent defender. Liked to mix it up and tough as nails. Easy to see he would have been one of the great 3pt shooters if he had the chance. Clutch winner, but again the question is how would that have worked with Bird? Would it have made sense to have all my shooters in at the end of the game? Bird, Durant, Barry, Kawhi and Kareem? Heck … why the hell not;-)
#15. Baylor
This one should be hard but it’s the easiest pick to justify. All I’ll say here is this is the player that goes in every time Jordan comes out. Or just to see how fast one of these games might get take Bird out and have a lineup of Jordan, Baylor and Hakeem and whoever else you want. What amazes me is how such an excellent passing small forward can be underrated. Maybe people couldn’t believe what they were seeing?
I found an outstanding video on Baylor so check it out when you have time. In particular the timestamps below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqyNDsigbS4
1:52 on until you can’t stand it any more.Video doesn’t lie – he would be an MVP candidate even today with all the talent.
Just when I think I’ve evened things up as far as shooters go, you go grab Rick Barry. I agree with you that he would have been among the 3-pt leaders had he played in that era and yes, tough as nails. He will be someone that you have on the court at the end of close games because he’s among the best FT shooters of all time. He may not have the speed of a lot of other players picked, but he had surprising quickness.
I am also surprised that Baylor is so underrated. He was first team all-NBA for 10 of 12 years from 1957-58 to 1968-69. In his prime, he was averaging over 15 rebounds per game from the small forward position with 4+ assists to boot. All those years that the Lakers were losing in the finals to the Celtics, it was mostly just Baylor and West on those teams. They had a few other good players and then finally picked up Wilt who was no longer in his prime, but Jerry & Elgin drove those 60s Lakers teams. Elgin is a great guy to have if you want to clear out the paint, give him the ball and just let him beat the defender. It’ll be incredibly tough to defend when you’ve got Elgin and MJ on the court together. Two of the best one-on-one players of all time.
#16. Julius “Dr. J” Erving
So at this point, I’ve 3 PGs, 1 SG, 1 SF, 1 PF, and 1 C. So I need some front court players. Because you’ve already picked 3 centers, I figure I can wait on another center, so I’m looking at taking the best available SF and PF here. First up is Dr. J. A great scorer and a very good defender. He got a lot of rebounds and blocks out of the SF position and, of course, he could sky like few others. I’m looking forward to seeing Magic, Steph, and Oscar feeding him balls above the basket. If you hadn’t taken Elgin, I would have taken him here, but can’t complain about getting Dr. J here.
#17. Karl Malone
A little surprised that the Mailman is still available. You don’t have any natural PFs yet on your team (though a couple of players who could play there), so I’m a little surprised you hadn’t picked him before now. So by taking him, I keep him off your team and maybe give my team a small advantage at PF. Malone is another great scorer and very good defender, plus a model of consistency for a long time. He will also bring a huge amount of toughness off my bench and will make more than a few players pay for deigning to challenge him. He’s a master of the pick and roll and a good passer for a big man. The Mailman should thrive playing alongside Wilt, Magic, Kobe, Steph, and the Big O.
#16. Dr. J
A pick so obvious that it got lost in the forest. Although I consider Barry the better all around player, he was a redundant pick for me (I already had Durant alongside Bird, and decent shooting in Kawhi and Jordan as well). My team would have found another dimension with Erving, or Dominique or Connie Hawkins or James Worthy or (pogo-stick) David Thompson. (I am now reminded that we are already knee deep into all this and I believe neither of us has even mentioned Grant Hill? Bad omission – I’ll put something together soon.) If I had taken Dr. J and then you Barry after that, I could have lived with it since both players are coming off the bench.
So what makes Dr. J so much better at what he did than all the other high-flyers mentioned above? Well … apologies to Grant Hill who really does deserve way more respect pre-injuries, Erving was a consistent scoring and passing winner who also happened to have amazing hands and body control and a knack around the basket as good (or almost as good) as Jordan. A winning LEAPER who had to be defended while he was in the air. In today’s game that means an AND-ONE 50% of the time. 78% FT shooting isn’t the best, but if you can have it in volume then you’ve got yourself another G.O.A.T. clutch option. Nice guy – along with Duncan and Curry, I’m guessing the refs call it his way more often than not;-)
Maybe the most amazing stat for me wrt Erving? Played an average of 78 games per season for 16 seasons. How can anyone with a body that size play like that above the rim without constant threat of injury? During his NBA career never shot more than 7 free throws a game on average during the same period he took between 16 and 20 shots per game.
Much like Baylor does for my team, Dr. J significantly speeds up your full court offense.
Someone at http://www.nba.com did a very nice job with this listing. Pretty much no frills and objective, though I think we’d both agree that Iggy is better than #33 all time SF.
http://www.nba.com/magic/gallery/ranking-70-greatest-small-forwards-nba-history-20171005
#17 Karl Malone
While I’ve never been a fan because he was a bit too one-dimensional (spot up shooting and pick and roll finisher) he was the best there was at the PF position for those two features. Because I see a LOT of his finishing as directly related to accurate passing from one of the most accurate passers ever, I won’t ever put him ahead of Barkley on my list. While Malone may have been the better defender of the two, Barkley’s passing and enormous variety of offense was just better. Neither one of these guys is the all around player that most others are on our lists though. Comparing stats:
Peak year stat comparison:
Malone 52% eFG, 11 rpg, 4 assts, 29 ppg
Barkley 61% eFG, 11.5 rpg, 4 assts, 23 ppg
Barkley got a much higher % of those shots on his own. Regardless, I have Hakeem and you have Duncan at the starting PF spot. They didn’t have quite the range as these guys, but they had range and were way better at everything else except for Barkley’s passing.
In any case you picked up Moses after this pick, and I see no reason why he couldn’t move right into your PF spot when Timmy goes out. Or play Moses at C and Chambelain at PF.
BTW – I’m noticing that neither of us have a stretch 4 on our rosters. I have a lot of big SFs that could try and play a stretch 4, but without Nowitski on one of our teams neither of us has someone at that position that can pull the opposing PF or C way out of the paint. I think I made a mistake by piking up Garnett at #23 instead of Dirk who would have caused you immense trouble, especially if he was on the court at the same time as Durant.
Sorry to be a Malone hater, but I don’t see what you lose since you made the Dr. J pick which was significant.
I regret not taking Dirk for that same reason. But he always seemed to be a bit of a liability on defense and I think Hakeem and Garnett on your team would handle him just fine on the perimeter.
I agree and now remember why I didn’t take him. Defense for one, but I don’t think of Dirk as making that quick decision like Durant or Bird can. If he’s covered well on the perimeter by say … Duncan for instance, then what are his options? Both Durant and Bird could put the ball on the floor and drive quickly and under control to get space allowing for a pass or a pull up jumper at 16-20 ft. Dirk would likely not be able to get to that spot with Duncan on him, and would need to give it up right away.
#18. Kawhi
I considered taking him earlier to prevent you from taking him, but decided to play the odds that you aren’t quite the rabid fan that I am. Regardless, whether you think of him as less than a top 20 player or even less than a top 50 player, for these types of teams Kawhi is the perfect teammate. Not only does he do it all, he does whatever your team and its leader need.
Looking at the list I see only three other Kawhi-like players: Russell, Duncan and Curry. They aren’t just swiss army knives, they’re programmable swiss army knives – tell em what works best for the team on any given night and they’ll go out and do just that. As coachable as they come, they thrive on improving to the point that they’re never satisfied with their skill set unless and until it leads directly to consistent winning. Everything is about team.
Shane Battier
Bruce Bowen
Grant Hill
Bryant Stith
Kevin Garnett
Andre Iguodala
Scottie Pippen
PJ Tucker
These are just some of the names of similar players that are/were all about doing what’s needed, coachable and bring something else making it appear there’s more than just one guy out there. Glue guys that make stuff happen. Not just any stuff but stuff that consistently gives their team a chance to win.
That’s just a short list above – there were many others over the years, but here’s what sets Kawhi apart from just about everyone else except Grant Hill.
1. There appears to be no ceiling to his ability to improve
2. He’s extremely effective as the primary ball handler or shooter or both.
3. He can play the PG position.
4. 55% eFG 85% FT
5. Wins championships
6. Plays whereever he needs to and on both sides.
7. The quick feet, hands and brain make him both a tremendous pest reaching and jumping into the passing lanes, keeping his (incredibly large) hands in his opponents’ face, blocking shots from anywhere on the court and getting his hands on the ball whenever it gets too close to him.
8. Offensively an almost uncanny way of operating from well inside the arc. Collapse on him and you’ll pay dearly. Reminds me a lot of Curry but at 6′ 7″ the vision is better.
I wanted clutch players and this guy certainly satisfies that criteria. Look no further than his Finals MVP award. Not sure I’ve ever seen such a performance from one guy.
I can’t think of any player that Bird would likely rather play alongside. Does it all and makes everyone else’s job easier.
And he’s only 26. If you’re a true hoop fan you’re praying that this quad injury doesn’t recur. This kid has a lot more work to do before all is said and done wrt his career.
#19. Ice Man
I think this pick helps me a little but not much. I wanted to match your Dr. J pick by having another guy (in addition to Jordan) who could run the floor and rise above defenders. But I already have that in Durant and somewhat in Kawhi. And of course Jordan.
Gervin would only play when Jordan was out, and would keep your defense “honest” in the event that he gets to the rim. But at 84% FT he’s not the right guy, because there really wasn’t any hint of a long range shooting game. I think the right pick for me here was Grant Hill pre-injury who also had the body control but had so much else. Still only an average FT shooter though, but seems the better option than some others I might consider like Dominique, Pippen, McGrady.
I know you haven’t posted about Gervin yet, but a quick note about Kawhi. I would not have drafted Kawhi, not because I don’t think he’s a superstar, but only because he hasn’t proved it for long enough yet. He has only been a superstar for the last two, maybe three, years after first coming to prominence in the 2014 NBA Finals. I think if he can prove he can play at this level for another 2-3 years, then I would consider him. But it was too early in his career for me to consider drafting him to a G.O.A.T. team. His quad injury is indeed worrisome and I hope he is able to return to form when he gets back to the court.
Also, heard an interview with Jack McCallum, the legendary basketball journalist, when I went out to get some food for lunch. He’s got a new book out that links the Jerry West Lakers to today’s Warriors, which West helped build. It sounds like a book you would be interested in. Here’s a link to it on Amazon:
https://smile.amazon.com/Golden-Days-California-Reinvented-Basketball/dp/0399179070/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
In the interview, McCallum called Elgin Baylor, “Julius Erving before Julius Erving” and talked about how Baylor and West carried those 60s Lakers teams.
So you were posting about Gervin, while I was posting about Kawhi. With regard to Ice Man, while he did not necessarily have the range of some of your other shooters (though unclear if he really worked at getting good from distance since 3-pt shots were simply not shot as much then), there’s no question that he had a deadly mid-range jumper and drove to the basket extremely well. However, Gervin is probably the biggest defensive liability on either of our teams, so your team will have to do it’s best to hide him on defense since virtually every player on either of our teams could bring it on offense. Gervin also wasn’t a great passer, so unless your team is desperate for offense because other guys have gone cold, I doubt you’ll have him on the floor much.
#20. Jerry West
Although we’re filling out the ends of our roster at this point, I’m very happy to get Jerry West here. The Logo’s other nickname is Mr. Clutch, which he picked up for obvious reasons. Could shoot and pass and played tough defense. He didn’t play in the 3-pt era, but I suspect he would have quickly realized its value (as he did as an executive) and become proficient at it. With West, Magic, and Duncan, I also have three of the highest character/IQ players ever in the game, who will help keep the team focused and in line. Further, all of my guards (Magic, Big O, Kobe, Steph, and West) can work interchangeably at PG and SG fairly well, so I can match-up my guards in a variety of ways.
#21. Shaquille O’Neal
I needed a back-up center on my team and Shaq was the choice because he was virtually unstoppable around the rim, played tough defense and blocked shots, and rebounded well. However, he was an atrocious free throw shooter, which means I can’t trust him on the court late in close games. Shaq also wasn’t a great passer. In retrospect, I probably should have taken the Admiral, who had better shooting range, was a good FT shooter, and was an even better defender than Shaq. Like West, Robinson also has a character/IQ off the charts. Further, now that I’m really thinking about it, with Wilt and Shaq, I have two terrible FT shooting centers, so it would have been wiser to pair The Admiral up with Wilt so that I can have a center on the floor at the end of close games. Shaq was a bad call on my part here.
There are few reasons why I think Kawhi gets a pass with respect to the “hasn’t played long enough” argument.
1. We know it isn’t true for some players. Some are great and obviously great early in their careers. Kawhi is no Kareem or Wilt or Magic or Bird, so he wasn’t a great his first two years but he’s done way more in his short time in the league than Jordan or most others. He was finals MVP in his 3rd year.
2. He just keeps getting better. He is widely considered the best all around player in the game at a time when the league’s top talents are unquestionably better than ever.
3. He’s taken the leadership role and run with it. Somehow he went from someone that seemed like he wasn’t quite ready to lead one of the best franchises ever, to becoming one of the best leaders that franchise has ever had.
4. Name another player ever that a. played on one of the leagues best teams, b. ran that teams’ offense c. was the cornerstone of its defense d. was a clutch player
Oscar if he was the defender I’m told he was. Bird didn’t have quite the defense. Wilt and Jordan weren’t exactly running the offense. I don’t consider LeBron a clutch player.
Kawhi is already in elite company. But I will grant you that some of this is based on the crazy upwards trend. If his career is hampered by this or another injury any time soon, then my “sky is the limit” argument fails. On the other hand, I’m not sure why it matters. He’s already proven he’s the guy who satisfies all my requirements and as such belongs on a team that would be G.O.A.T.
#20. West
I’ll be doing a tribute to Jerry West somewhere here soon, so no need to make this a long one.
West was 6′ 2″, but there’s something about the way he played that made him seem so much taller. Was he really only 6′ 2″?? I don’t know why I needed to pick up Gervin or Stockton (who I very much like) when I could have gone with West. That was a mistake.
Smart competitive team playing clutch winner. Maybe my only question about him is his quickness, and I’m guessing he was plenty quick.
#21. Shaq
I think you had to pick him up because my guys would have lit up every time the Admiral came onto the court. On these teams, Robinson is the least of the big men and I don’t see him defending Kareem or Hakeem.
I think Shaq was a better defensive presence than Robinson and I think fits nicely on your team. You say Robinson was the better defender. I’m going to research that because that’s not the way I remember it – i remember him easily losing his position to bigger guys down low on the block.
So many ways Shaq compares to Wilt, arguably not as good at any one thing though. Mostly I have to wonder if Shaq would have been better at everything if he had to work harder. In any case, not sure what to say about this obviously top 20 player. Huge and mobile and could pass the ball well enough. Better than a lot of other big men I think.
The FT shooting was horrible and a problem. Did they ever hack-a-Wilt back in the day?
I don’t watch the Spurs enough to be sure, but how much does Kawhi run their offense? Last year was easily his best year for assists and he only averaged 3.5 per game. Patty Mills averaged the same in 12 less minutes per game and Parker averaged more (4.5) in 8 less minutes per game. The Dubs have 3 guys (Curry, Green, and Durant) who all average 5 or more assists per game. I realize that assists aren’t the be-all and end-all of determining who runs a team’s offense, but there is some correlation there.
I couldn’t resist;-) Shaq is 28 yrs old and Robinson 35, so this really isn’t fair but this is what I remember:
2:13 of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KfUy60IhwM
Whatever Robinson’s excuse is, even if he was slower and weaker that’s a ridiculous way to try and defend Shaq. Take the charge old man!!
Robinson blocked more shots in 14 seasons than Shaq did in 19 seasons (BTW Duncan and Robinson are 5 & 6 on all-time blocks list…how hard was it get shots off in the paint when they played together?). The Admiral also averaged 1.4 steals per game to Shaq’s 0.6. They have pretty similar rebound numbers. You are probably right that Robinson would have trouble with someone like Shaq who could muscle him inside just by sheer body weight. But Kareem and Hakeen were more finesse than muscle around the basket. I think Robinson would have been able to defend them okay.
I’m guessing some teams did employ a Hack-a-Wilt strategy back in the day. Remember he went to the line 32 times in his 100-pt game. That night, however, he hit 28 of 32 from the line. Looking at his game log from the 1961-62 season, he routinely had double figure FT attempts and got more than 20 and even 30 on a regular basis.
You wouldn’t know that Kawhi runs the Spurs offense unless you watched them last year especially in the playoffs. He didn’t run it before then, and was learning how to do so at the beginning of last year. By late last year he was playing the point and killing it with his penetration and decision making. His consistency making the right pass or taking the right shot was as good as it gets.
I’m glad you asked this because I never saw that first game vs. the Warriors so here he is in that game. The play starting at 1:51 of this video is where he is at his best, but usually this play results in a pass from the interior. As I look at these highlights I’m wondering what he had for breakfast – the dude was on a frickin mission. I’ve never seen him be such a dominating offensive threat. Arnold, I think this guy is better than even I think he is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdk2gYeNvPc
Kawhi got his numbers. Who knows why his assists were low on so many nights. Could have been due to matchups, or my guess is that there were many nights when Pop told him to just go out and score.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/leonaka01/gamelog/2017/
Good point about Robinson having better luck with the “smaller” guys like Hakeem and Kareem (heh). I think you’re right about that.
That game log definitely shows Kawhi routinely getting 4-6 assists later in the season, so if Pop was having him learn the PG position last year, it looks like he was getting the hang of it by the end of the year. Of course, having a lack of quality players around him means he had to bear the scoring load frequently too. It’s not like he had Durant, Curry, or Thompson to pass to.
#22. Stockton
I didn’t choke too badly missing the West pick. Stockton had so many great features that would have allowed him to fit right in. Another one of the toughest SOBs that ever played. Better than average defender. Great shooting % but no one can call him a great shooter when he typically took less than 11 shots a game. I think if he was playing today that would be closer to 18 or more. He could shoot the 3.
You listed your character/IQ guys, so here’s my list but I’m going to do a character/IQ/clutch list here:
Bird
Kawhi
Stockton
If we go non-clutch I add Russell. Not sure why you don’t have Curry on your list though. Explain?
#23 Garnett
A safe pick. My way of saying I’ll throw all my guys at Wilt and Duncan and see who is most effective. Who knows, Garnett might have been a bigger pest vs. those two than Hakeem, but I doubt it. Regardless, an excellent passer at the PF spot and a great competitor. A much better scorer in his prime than later in his career. Could be counted on to play as hard as anyone for 48 minutes.
Wish I could go back in time and replace McHale with Garnett on those Celtics teams. And I’m a big McHale fan. Was considering him at this spot also.
In any case, dude is known for being an awesome teammate who had everyone’s back. The only issue would be leaving him in at the end – not what I consider a clutch player.
Duncan v Garnett here. Both players show their strengths in this game. Garnett appears to be too small/light for Timmy though. Garnett was able to hit that longer shot though – forgot about that. Could be my guy when Karl Malone comes in the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYUVrHxRww8
I could probably include Curry on my team’s high character/IQ list, but he exhibits frustration at the refs a little too often. Granted, he’s got good reason to do so, as he gets held and hit without getting foul calls more than anybody I’ve seen. Still, he’s got to be better at sucking it up and taking it and not doing things like throwing his mouth guard in a ref’s general direction. Virtually everybody on our two teams has an incredibly high basketball IQ and I would say that Curry is close on the high character scale to Magic, West, and Duncan. The occasional shows of frustration are the only thing that led me to leave him off my character/IQ list (and he would definitely be high on the clutch list).
Stockton and Garnett were great final picks for you as they give your team a true PG and true PF which you didn’t have. Not that your team didn’t have guys who could run the offense or could play the big forward. But I think it will be a boon to your team to have guys to whom those positions come naturally and thrive in them. Both also provide plenty of both offense and defense and were very good FT shooters, so neither would be an end game issue. Few people were better passers than Stockton and in his prime, he was a better than 40% 3-pt shooter. Garnett provides great defense and while he wasn’t a long-distance shooting threat, he was pretty deadly inside of 12 feet. Really nothing wrong with your last two picks.
#24 Moses Malone
As noted earlier, I wanted a player who could play both PF and C here to fill out my roster. The names it came down to were Moses Malone and Dirk Nowitzki. Dirk is clearly the better shooter and can shoot from distance. So he, as you noted earlier, could stretch the floor for my team on offense. However, just as clearly, Moses is the better defender and much better rebounder. While Dirk is the better shooter though, Moses may be a better scorer as he was pretty dominant around the net. This tipped the balance for me. With all the great offense on your team, I thought it would be better to have the greater defender of the two who could also provide me a good deal of offense in the paint.
That’s right. I needed a PF here even though to me Hakeem will always be a PF just like I think of Duncan as a PF. That dream shake could start so far away from the basket, and then who knows what was next. Could be a 10 footer. Could be an up and under. I always saw more PF than C in Hakeem, although he was clearly covering the opposing C just about every night.
So I defnitely needed a smaller quicker guy that could handle the ball. Isaiah was my other choice. I almost always choose Isaiah when I think of the better PG, but on this team I wanted Stockton for the outside shot. Could have gone either way. I’m not sure which one was the better defender. I think they were both very good.
#24. Moses
Numbers don’t lie. He was a scorer a defender and a rebounder. But I just saw he’s listed at 6′ 10″ 215? I think I was close to 215 6 months ago. That can’t be right.
Here’s some vid showing how quick Moses was around the rim. Interesting to note around 10 FTA per game. More than Kareem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUNGfF1ZqZQ
So I’m not happy with my Gervin pick and you aren’t with your Shaq pick. I’d rather get this right. If you want to drop add a player then I’ll do the same. I’m not interested in Shaq.
I don’t have a specific player in mind so I’ll take my time on it. Not quite sure Grant Hill had the killer instinct I want.
From the Moses Malone wiki:
Malone stood 6 feet 10 inches (2.08 m) and weighed 260 pounds (120 kg).
215 was his weight when he entered the league right out of high school
I’ve been looking at Connie Hawkins video. I can’t figure out why he’s being called for an offensive foul here. Do you see it?
1:53
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl9Fo2GCcHQ&t=26s
No clue why Hawkins got called for an offensive foul on that play. He’s not putting his shoulder into the defender and there’s only minor contact between the two as Hawkins tries to drive down the lane. I guess refs made just as many bad calls then as they do now.
A lot of the weights listed on basketball-reference.com must be at the time they entered the NBA. Kareem is listed at 225. I was at that weight 3 or 4 years ago. Kareem was always pretty slim, but he was not 225 thin for his whole career.
Let me sleep on the idea of whether we should be allowed to drop a player and replace him.
Yeah. Let’s do this the right way. Drop/Adds with waivers or trade possibilities? I suppose now is a good time to explain the gist of all this. Keeping in mind that I’ll be deleting this …
The first idea is to have a good dialogue about the great players and learn about them. The second is to see how the talent might have influenced the game over the eras while noting what the biggest changes were across the eras.
I think there’s a way to put together teams that would be great in any era. Meaning, no one can legitimately come along and say something like “no way curry would be allowed to get his shot off”. I don’t believe that for a minute. I look at these old films and see guards breaking down defenses all the time. Getting in the lane and shooting the 15 footer.
There a lot that has changed, but not as much as the old timers want you to believe. IMO there are really only two major differences that have resulted in a big change to the game:
1. up through the mid-80s, guys weren’t able to carry the ball. Palming was strictly enforced. 2. the 1.5 steps rule wrt traveling became so relaxed that the “jump stop” and variations of it came into vogue.
I think those two changes were much bigger changes than the 3pt shot or hand checking. Or for that matter changes to how one can dunk, what is considered an offensive foul, illegal defenses, 3 pt fouling.
One argument I’d try to make is that Curry is going to get his shot off even without the palming/carrying. And he’s going to do it from very long range in every era. Durant would have easily been among the greatest scorers in any era, for similar reasons but even more so because of his height and quickness (which I would argue wouldn’t have changed much).
I think a lot of what has changed are offenses: the schemes and the types of plays. The Kawhi videos I pasted above: it shows Kawhi patiently dribbling between defenders to try and get a defender on his back. What are the arguments for why or how he wouldn’t have been able to do that as effectively then? I think there are none, aside from the “a defender wouldn’t have been caught in that position” argument. OK, well in that case you either try to cover that one on one and pick your poison with an excellent ball handler, shooter and passer waltzing into the lane or … you foul him?
I don’t buy any argument that would start with “kawhi (or oscar – there are similarities) would have been manhandled and would have to give up the ball”. I think I’ve already seen plenty of video that discredits this idea. So why didn’t we see this play more often? I think the answer is simple: not enough innovation in how the individual game is played back then. In other words, no one thought to try and introduce such a thing!
I think the same thing can be said of the alley-oop. Why don’t you see hundreds of instances dr. j or kareem flying in the air, catching a perfectly thrown pass and throwing it down? It was allowed after 1976, but even by the mid-90s it wasn’t a staple of the game. Why? There really doesn’t seem to be a good reason, just like there’s no reason why Steve Nash, or Larry Bird or Reggie Miller or Ray Allen shouldn’t have been shooting way way more threes.
I’m hoping all this goes in a direction that “doesn’t suck”. I’ll provide most of the commentary and vids unless you have the time. Maybe this all slows down and we don’t contribute much to the discussion on a monthly basis. That’s fine. What I’d like to do eventually is tweet this link out to Justin Termine who, if it’s good enough, will retweet it. Who knows where it can go from there. Or who might contribute? The nice thing about that is I can moderate who’s comments I’ll allow;-)
I’ll admit that one goal I have here is massive exposure of this domain name “everphase.net”. It’s not the primary goal wrt this posting, but it’s the reason for the existence of this domain (which is also an LLC). If it all goes the way I plan, this site will be be a pretty interesting place to “be”.
And in Termine’s words, I hope, it won’t “suck”.
Looking at the Connie Hawkins offensive “foul” again. I think I know what’s going on there. It’s very much a “black player” bias. I remember seeing this back in the day as a kid and thinking “the refs don’t want that kind of ‘stuff’ in the game”. What kind of stuff? Right … exactly. How do you define it? I remember thinking I knew what it was, and maybe I did because it does look different from the way the game was played in that era (1970).
Here it is again at 1:53
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl9Fo2GCcHQ&t=26s
THE GAME IS NOT GOING TO BE ABOUT RAZZLE DAZZLE. How the hell is that “razzle dazzle”??
Back then I think it was very clear – this thing that Hawkins is doing starts with his left arm INSIDE while he starts the drive. YOU CAN’T DO THAT – IT GIVES YOU TOO MUCH OF AN ADVANTAGE!!
LOL. That’s right! That’s not how the game was played so it must be wrong. Right? Not exactly. It would be right if Cousy had done this much earlier, or Jerry West later. Why? Because they would have INNOVATED. But isn’t Hawkins showing an innovation here? Or is he “trying to get around the rules?”
It begs the question regarding the “integrity of the game”. The more it looks like the Globetrotters the less legit which is such a bullshit whitey based bias. Too bad Naismith wasn’t available for comment. Did they ask John Wooden? Somehow I doubt it.
Now I’m thinking about the cross-over. A wiki I just read mentions that Oscar did this in the 60s from time to time. I wonder if anyone was protesting. Man, if only West had a cross over.
Of course, another reason for that Connie Hawkins foul could be the NBA telling refs to make things difficult for Hawkins, not because of black player bias, but because of Hawkins’ prior lawsuit against the NBA. Hawkins was on the periphery of a college basketball point-shaving scandal in the early 60’s (he borrowed $200 from an attorney at the center of the scandal, but money was repaid before the scandal broke). This happened while Hawkins was a freshman at Iowa and, thus, ineligible to play (no freshmen could play varsity then), so Hawkins was never accused of point-shaving nor could he have. Nonetheless, Hawkins was dismissed from the Iowa team and the NBA refused to allow him to play because of the scandal. It took a lawsuit by Hawkins against the NBA (which they settled for $1.3 million) and his playing in the ABA to even get Hawkins into the NBA. My guess is that the NBA instructed refs to go hard on Hawkins.
And, after sleeping on it, let’s go ahead and agree that each of us can drop one player and add a replacement. You know what mine will be.
I’m from Phoenix;-) The story was blown sky high and almost everyone I knew was aware by the mid 70s. Not sure when I read this book, but probably early high school.
http://www.nytimes.com/1972/03/26/archives/foul-the-connie-hawkins-story-by-david-wolf-400-pp-new-york-holt.html
At first I had considered that as a possible motive, but the question still remains how it happened on that particular play? The ref is calling something very specific as you see him wave his arm. The ref is saying that Hawkins “reached through” which WAS a foul back then if he was actually reaching through something. But he wasn’t, and that’s because he was apparently way better at this move than anyone at the time. In the NBA that is extremely easy to believe.
OK. You now have Admiral David Robinson (Lieutenant actually).
My next pick might take awhile, and the reason fits in perfectly with the spirit of what this “league” is about. A simple question: If Hondo was allowed to play above the rim, how good would he have been at it?
It’s essentially going to be my Grant Hill vs. Havlicek argument.
Much video to follow!
I wasn’t sure you were old enough to have known much of the Hawkins back story, but as a Suns fan and basketball junkie, I’m not surprised that you do. Makes you wonder how revered Hawkins might be now had he been allowed to play in the NBA in his prime years.
On a similar note, how revered would Grant Hill be now if his career wasn’t derailed by injuries? In his early prime, he was putting up 20 ppg, 8+ rpg, 7 apg, and almost 2 spg. He was also a really good defensive player before losing his speed and quickness to injuries. That being said, I don’t know who I would take between Hill and Hondo. Hondo’s numbers are a little bit better in his prime, but those numbers came after Russell retired. Did he step up his game a notch because Russell was gone or did he just not hit his prime until he was 30? Hill was the clear star of those mid-90’s Pistons teams, but they never achieved anything. Hondo wasn’t the “star” of the Celtics until 1970, but was a big part of the 60s championship teams and did lead them to a couple of championships in the 70s. I love Grant Hill’s game, but I think my choice would be Hondo.
This is fucking great stuff. Keep it coming. I’m only starting to scratch at the surface of the video archives, many of which involve Oscar. Eventually I’m going to have an excellent understanding of just how good he was.
All that bull about not being able to compare players across the decades – I no longer believe this at all. I think it’s easy to see many things that translate in both directions.
I’m watching Hondo and he’s possibly better than I thought. If his FT% was better I’d take him over Barry, because he was clearly much more of a well rounded player than Barry. Problem is I really want that other guy who can play above the rim (other than Jordan that is;-). Unfortunately, it’s clear to me that Hawkins didn’t quite have the thinking game to be on my team.
Now onto watching some vid of Reggie Lewis.
I think KD can play above the rim for your team as well. And with Jack McCallum’s description of Elgin Baylor being “Julius Erving before Julius Erving,” I feel certain that he could play above the rim as well. I think you’re team will play above the rim very well.
Sure, but I’m looking for the guys that live off the air. Durant doesn’t need to spend his time flying in from the baseline when he’s usually more effective from outside. Regarding Baylor, I’ve been thinking about that and I’m not sure he had the hops. Not like Grant Hill for instance.
I’m still working on that pick.
#19. Drop George Gervin. Add Grant Hill
Because I can find no better player to fill this spot reserved for an all around high flying SF with guts and “clutchiness”. His ability to leap and control his body in the air is as good as the best available. Great hands, great handle, scorer who could shoot and one of the smartest to ever play the game. When Bird and Kawhi are out, the offense moves through Hill via Stockton.
Hill was one of the greatest triple threats ever from inside the arc.
His top competition here is John Havlicek, Scottie Pippen and Tracy McGrady with Havlicek a close second. Hondo’s game was very similar – better even w.r.t. “clutchiness”, but Hondo lacked the 3rd dimension in the air. The “Dr. J Factor”, necessitating very quick adjustments by the defense to challenge alley oops caught 13-15 feet above the rim, and baseline approaches from the air. The message to the defense: “get position fast, or give up the play or foul.”
Hondo had a slight edge w/ FT% at 81.5% – Hill was at 77%
HIll had the edge w/ FG% at 48% (pre-injury) vs. Hondo at below 45%
Hill played 13 playoff games pre-injury over 3 seasons. During those playoffs he averaged:
21 pts, 5.8 assts, 7.1 rebs, 48% FG, 77% FT
From the Grant Hill Wiki…
“During the 1995–96 season, Hill showcased his all-round abilities by leading the NBA in triple-doubles.”
“In 1996–97 season, Hill averaged 21.4 points, 9.0 rebounds, 7.3 assists and 1.8 steals per game. He became the first player since Larry Bird in 1989–90 to average 20 points, 9 rebounds and 7 assists in a season”
“Between the 1995–96 and 1998–99 NBA seasons, Hill was the league leader in assists per game among non-guards all four seasons.”
“In 1999–2000 season, Hill averaged 25.8 points while shooting 49% from the field, the season’s third highest scoring average, behind MVP Shaquille O’Neal and Allen Iverson. He averaged 6.6 rebounds and 5.2 assists per game. “
#21. Drop Shaquille O’Neal, Add David Robinson
The reason for changing my back-up center is that Shaq is too similar to my starter, Chamberlain. Both Shaq and Wilt are truly dominant presences inside the paint, virtually unstoppable around the hoop. They each provide excellent rebounding and could block shots. Both are horrid FT shooters. I felt it would be better for my team to have a different type of center than a Wilt clone that does similar things to Wilt, just not quite as good. The Admiral fits that bill.
Robinson was also quite good around the net, but could back it up with some range out to about 10-12 feet with his jumper. He was an even better defender than Shaq as his 8-time all-defensive team and one time defensive player of the year awards show (compared to Shaq’s 3-time all-defensive team awards). Robinson had 200+ more blocks in his 14-year career than Shaq had in 19 years. Robinson might have trouble defending big centers who muscle defenders around (like Wilt and Shaq), but will do fine against more finesse type centers like Kareem and Hakeem on your team. So this move helps my team defensively and will help my team offensively by the Admiral’s ability to range outside of the paint for shots and his ability to hit free throws. The latter ability also allows me to keep a center on the floor late in close games as there won’t be a Hack-an-Admiral strategy like there might be a Hack-a-Shaq or Hack-a-Wilt strategy.
For some reason it’s not easy to find Grant Hill Playoff highlights from 99 vs. Hawks. There’s nothing special about this 1997 round 1 game1 vs. the Hawks, but there’s plenty of Hill to see here in his 3rd year. The all around game and especially the constant scoring threat is on display. I think this is Doc Rivers’ commentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t3_cMvE4jA&feature=channel_video_title
Next up…
1. Starting lineups
2. First two players off the bench
3. Second team (one starter allowed on the second team, but only one).
TEAM JA
Starting Lineup:
C – Kareem
PF-Hakeem
SF-Bird
SG-Jordan
PG-Leonard
6th Man – Durant
7th Man – Russell
Second Team:
C – Russell
PF-Hakeem
SF-Baylor
SG-Hill
PG-Stockton
Starting Lineup:
C – Wilt
PF- Duncan
SF- LeBron
SG- Kobe
PG- Magic
6th Man – Oscar
7th Man – Dr. J
Second Team:
C – Robinson
PF- Mailman
SF – Dr. J
SG – West
PG – Curry
excellent. i will put these in tables at top. feel free to let me know if you have edits.
What position for your guys off the bench? Let’s get more specific. I’m bringing in Durant as my SF and moving Bird to PF. Hakeem goes out. Russell will come in as my C with Kareem moving to PF with Bird going out.
Big O probably comes in at SG for Kobe most of the time. But depending on the match-up, may come in for Magic at PG. Dr. J comes in at SF, bumps LeBron to PF with Duncan coming out.
I’m thinking a Small Ball team as well. MIne …
Garnett C
Durant PF
Baylor SF
Jordan SG
Kawhi PG
I guessed at yours. How’d I do?
I took the liberty of changing your mind about Magic going out for 6th man Oscar;-)
I understand the matchup issue, but having Magic be your first guy out doesn’t seem right in any circumstance. You could move Magic to SF and LeBron to SG? Or just put Magic on Bird whether Bird is at SF or PF
I think my small ball team wouldn’t have Duncan as I need someone faster on the court. I think my team’s small ball line-up would be this:
C – LeBron James (much like Draymond in the Dubs’ small ball line-up)
PF – Julius Erving
SF – Kobe Bryant
SG – Stephen Curry
PG – Magic Johnson
And your change on my 6th man is fine, though I may be rolling over LeBron to guard MJ when that happens while having Magic guard Bird.
Video worth watching …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5kUALT8p9Y
Extremely biased against Oscar, but that’s what I was searching for so this would represent the most extreme viewpoint. Still, I did get one thing out of it: the claim and his admission that the ball was in his hands an inordinate amount of the time. Today, that’s hard to watch when Iverson, Kobe and now Westbrook do it.
In Kobe’s case, it was wrong and it took him years to understand that and get teammates involved.
In Westbrook’s case, the statistics show that the team seemed to do better when his teammates weren’t shooting bricks. The fact that he had a triple double for a season was a direct result of the ball being in his hands so often. The most remarkable stat there? OKC went 47-35 for the season and sealed a 6th seed in a tough Western Conference.
Iverson – we’ll need to revisit this guy. Very hard to understand how the Sixers went 56-26 in 2000-2001 his MVP season. Neither his FG% or FT% measured up with any of the greats, and for a playmaker hard to understand how his 4.6 assists a game could happen on a team that did so well.
Oscar- The Royals went 55-25 in the 63-64 season and 48-32 in 64-65, but then steadily declined afterwards. He was only 27 or 28 in 65, so I’m having some trouble wrapping my head around one of the greatest arguments when it seems pretty clear his greatest years came before this and there weren’t that many of them. Maybe 4?
Oscar was clearly one of the greatest all around players for about 4 years in the early 60s. He was known as being unpleasant and even mean spirited. Chip on his shoulder like no other (save Iverson I guess, but no one really knows why other than that he was pretty much a completely ignorant thug). But his teams declined badly for years. What all time great players are associated with such terrible declines?
I submit that the reverence bestowed upon Oscar was due to the way and the fact that he crashed the party in the early 60s and dominated opposing back-courts like had never been done. Coaches, players and fans had never seen such a thing from a strong and tall PG and when his teams started winning it became clear to everyone why: the most dominant force to ever grace the NBA at PG was taking over and possibly changing the game.
I suppose he may have changed the game more than I realize, but I’d like to see statistics wrt heights and weights of PGs who came after O’s first few years in the league. Or was he such a statistical anomoly that very few bigger guys played PG in the 60s?
It makes sense to me that almost any kid over 6’3″ in the 60s would NOT be playing PG at any level. The talent pool would have been light on big PGs then, and after Oscar appeared it would take some time for coaches to realize it might make sense to try bigger guys at PG. Of course that meant you were vacating another position (like SF) so you needed another big man there. Meanwhile you had all these 6′ 1″ and 6′ 2″ guys trying out for PG – all of them good and much fewer 6′ 5″ – 6′ 7″ skilled guys to play the SF.
So I submit my argument here that Oscar was clearly one of the greatest players ever for about 4 years in the early 60s. The surprise factor was enormous with him, just as it was for Wilt. Everyone one must have been talking about the huge dominating PG with skills that they had never seen before from such a big guy. He was intimidating. Mean. Clearly some players feared him. All these things resulted in a reputation like none other ever before him. Reputations last and they sure did with him – for a very long time.
I’ve heard some players say Oscar was the best ever. I’d like to dig a little deeper to find out which year they thought he was the greatest. I have a very hard time believing that he was as great as they say after bigger PGs came into the league.
I’m looking at the small ball lineups and imagining watching that part of the game. Funny to note that, given what we know about how Jordan and Kobe played the game, those two would be the ones slowing things down! For all the other players it would be ball movement and run and gun. Begs the question about how those two would adapt. I’m guessing quite well.
While the Big O’s first 4 years were his best (he averaged a triple-double with 30 ppg over those 4 years), his next 4 years were pretty damn good too. He was still averaging 30 ppg and 10+ assists per games in years 5-8, but his rebounding was down to 6+ per game for those years. You do have a point that Oscar was taller than others PGs back then. I took at look at the other notable PGs of the era (Cousy, West, Wilkens, Greer, Jones, Rodgers) and all were 6’1″ or 6’2″. But was three or four inches the reason why the Big O was the best PG of the era? Did smaller guys who would be PGs not work on their shooting and rebounding skills as much because they were simply expected to pass the ball to bigger men? Clearly Robertson was something unique for the time. A mid-sized basketball player who could pass like a PG, shoot like a SG or SF, and rebound like a PF or C.
So why did Robertson have these skills while other players did not? Coaching? Natural skill? Probably some combination of both. His high school coach apparently emphasized all-around fundamentals. As an aside, Robertson was Indiana’s Mr. Basketball in 1956 after leading his high school team to a perfect season and second straight Indiana state title (they nearly won 3 state titles, but lost in 1954 to tiny Milan high school, which became the basis for the movie Hoosiers). At Cincinnati, he was 3-time college player of the year, but I don’t know anything about his college coach, though he must have been doing some things right. On the other, Robertson was so dominant, maybe his coach just told other players to get the ball to Oscar and let him do his thing. It would be interesting to watch film of Oscar from college.
Awesome stuff. Question: what do you know about the Dialectic? Or Hegel for that matter?
Not much. I remember reading some Hegel for Sociology classes at Cal. I’m not sure we’re having a true Dialectic since we are not necessarily opposing viewpoints. We are, however, trying to arrive at the truth of the matter.
Good to know. Hegel was a huge part of my time at Berkeley, and many things about that exposure have become almost a way of life for me. Almost – some of the ideas might be important on a weekly basis but not much more than that. The idea of “the” dialectic has been so watered down since Hegel that the meaning is often less about dialogue/argument or political history and more about general processes. My go-to idea for something in nature that follows the dialectic (or some bastardized version of it) is related to plants trying to become what they are not: the sun. Few people know that the most prominent wavelength of light from the sun is green – the same color as chlorophyll. The example goes quite a bit deeper than this though, as anything which emits light of a certain color also is absorbing it. One can think of green as the wavelength of light at which plants are most reactive to the thing they are opposite to.
I know – this is a basketball forum. One of the reasons I bring up the concept is that I’m trying to gather a better understanding of Oscar. So I start with extremes and see where the middle lies after a lot of discussion and consideration. The dialectic makes sense in this case, because I’m clearly opposed to the idea of him being top 10. Hard to imagine I’ll remain this opposed.
Back to Robertson. It wasn’t his height – it was his weight and strength. The height didn’t hurt though.
One of the videos I linked to here involves discussion about the most prominent part of his offensive game: posting up. This is where he got a large % of his points. I don’t think those teams were double teaming to guard him. Were they?
No clue on whether teams were doubling up on Oscar without watching a lot of tape, but one thing to remember is that centers did not stray far from the basket back in those days. So if Oscar was trying to post up another team’s guard, it seems likely to me that the opposing team’s center would not be far away if they wanted to move over and double team Robertson. Of course that situation would put the opposing team’s center in the position of an unenviable Hobson’s choice. Does he let Oscar post up his guard or does he slide over to double-team which likely leads Oscar to pass to his now uncovered teammate for an easy shot (since Oscar was such a great passer)? I have to imagine that the other team would try to double-team Oscar on occasion and that led to a lot of his assists as he likely knew exactly who was uncovered when that happened and defenses back then did not switch defenders as efficiently as the Dubs do these days.
I’ve seen a lot of video of Oscar posting up and no help from anyone. But since I’m looking at someone’s version of a highlight reel it would make sense those are plays were Oscar scored at will. I think the only tool available for me that would get me more Oscar initiated is if I watched several full games from different periods of the 60s. Not an easy task since more than likely those will be pretty boring games and horrible video quality.
You’re probably not a baseball guy, but here are two sportswriters doing what we did….picking teams of the greatest players in the Negro Leagues.
https://www.mlb.com/news/drafting-negro-leagues-top-players/c-267339054