I think Isiah is overrated. And before you guys stomp on me for saying that I'll let you know than I'm from Detroit. His assist to turnover ratio for his career is just 2.46, and he was an average perimeter shooter and free throw shooter for a point guard. He also didn't make 1st or second team all NBA past 1987. Compare that with the resumes of Kidd and Payton.
Hey don't worry about getting stomped on for saying Isiah is overrated: many people on this board thinks that Zeke was an overrated player and all for the same reasons you said. Its like this, what do you prefer? His good play in the regular season or his great play in the post season? For all his deficiencies in the regular season, his reputation as a clutch playoff preformer is the truth.
The top two was absolutely correct. Lets face it: we haven't seen any greatest point guard list without seeing Robertson and Magic being 1 and 2 on the list. Personally you can flip a coin and decide who you want as number one because they are so close together. However, I do have some problems with this list.
I would have swiped Stockton for Isiah at the number 3 spot. He had a higher peak than Isiah and it was much longer to boot. There can be no question that in the regular season, Stockton was a far superior player than Isiah.
Also to be honest, Jason Kidd's placement is always a sense of controversy to me because it so hard to place him. If somebody put him in their top five I wouldn't argue, but if somebody put him at 8 or nine, I wouldn't argue either. The question about Kidd is how much are you going to penalize him for his sub-par shooting, especially since he plays a position that is defined by great shooting? However, we also must keep in mind that despite his shooting, he was great at everything else. Even his hooting doesn't look so bad once you consider the fact that he was so good at creating his own shot. Kidd's placement will always be controversial.
Joined: 27 Jul 2005 Posts: 54 Location: Durham, North Carolina
Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 12:14 pm Post subject:
capnhistory wrote:
I think it is absolutely criminal how little respect Bob Cousy is getting in this discussion.
This certainly sounds more vitriolic than I wanted it too. I apologize for the coarse tone, but I was feeling punchy last night after reading some of the comments on ESPN.com from the general public. I realize this board was made so people could have civil and evidentiary discussions, and I wouldn't want any post I wrote to disrupt that. However I stand by my assessment that many people are making a grievous error in judgement to place Cousy beneath so many other great point guards. I definetly believe this has more to do with our chronoligical distance from his greatness than anything else. I wasn't alive during Cousy's career (in fact, I may be younger than many others on this board), however from what I've seen and read Cousy's accomplishments seem under appreciated by ESPN's panel and the hoi palloi whose comments drove me to write the original post.
Mike G wrote:
From solitary confinement:
Cooz won two allstar game mvp's, but his only MVP was 1957, when Russell had come, to put them over the top.
D'oh. Mike has it right here; I got it wrong. Cousy may not be in the pantheon of multiple MVP-winners, but that's still one more than Stock, Isiah, Kidd, Payton, Frazier, and Tiny combined. So lets not ignore the fact for at least one season Bob stood out over the likes of Petit and Russell.
Quote:
Actually, he was the do-everything guard. Playmakers of the era included Andy Phillip, Dick McGuire, Bob Davies, Frankie Brian... Cousy added the scoring punch to the job . . . I'd say 9 titles from among 25-29 teams is better than 8 titles when there were 8-10 teams.
I grant that my knowledge of this era is imperfect, and there were other good playmaking point guards. However that doesn't explain why Cousy has such an exceptional reputation as a ball handler and passer. Also, it's not as if Cousy just happened to be the player with the most assists among the 8 or 10 guys who racked them up. He routinely dominated the category suggesting he was more than just a competent point guard who could score as well.
Mike G wrote:
Quote:
We know that the rules for awarding assists in Cousy's era translated to an artificial reduction of his numbers...
I've looked at this and made adjustments for every NBA/ABA season, into the late '70s when it seems to have levelled off. Here's how I've got the top PG ranked in order of assists/36 (enviro-adjusted):
Let's be clear what we're talking about here. I am not saying Cousy's numbers look small because of the enivronemnt or era in which he played. That kind of adjustment is useful for showing things like how Wilt's 50 ppg season, which seems superhuman in absolute numbers, would be the equivalent to something like a 35-36 ppg season at the pace of recent NBA seasons when the numbers are viewed as relative to their environment. What I was trying to touch on was a larger issue, that assists are awarded on a greater percentage of FG's today than they were in Cousy's era. The interpretation of what an assist meant has evolved overtime leading to more passes being labled as assists independent of the pace of the game. This means Cousy made an untold number of passes during his career that would be labled as an assist today of which we have no record. I am not saying Cousy's numbers appear low because of the illusions of context. I am saying they were low do to the constraits of the era. If your adjustment does account for this then all the better. This still doesn't diminish from the fact that in his prime Cousy's assists were head and shoulders above the other PG's of the time. That kind of evidence has come up when people discuss the merits of Stockton and Nash, yet I rarely hear it discussed in regards to Cousy.
Quote:
Cousy was one of those who went thru the advent of the shot clock (1954/1955) without any effect on his stats. Before and after, he had a year in which he made more FT than he did FG. As an 80% FT shooter (vs 38% FG), this was critical to his effectiveness as a scorer.
I find it odd that playing with the shot clock didn't alter his play as far as the stats describe it. I would be really interested to hear what others make of this.
As far as a being a bad FG shooter, Cousy absolutely was subpar. Yet despite this Auerbach still ran a great amount of the offense through him. So much so, that he finished in the top 3 in FG's made in four straight seasons even with his lousy shooting. The Celtics were amazingly lucky to be able to grow beyond their need for him with the additions of Russell and others, but that shouldn't refute their need for him early on.
Mike G wrote:
Quote:
Bob Cousy did more than anyone else to define the point guard position, and for that he has to rank above recent stars like Isiah and Stockton.
Stockton came along and 'refined' it
Ah the old "defined vs. redefined" argument, I go back and for on this one myself. In this case though, I went with the "defined" player, if only because I don't see evidence for Stockton having had the impact and influence on the league as much as Cooz, Oscar, and Magic. I don't want to knock Stockton and the others' accomplishments, merely give Cousy his due. We consider certain elements part of the PG cannon, yet we don't consider who made them cannon. I ask, if not Cousy then who? Who would have been the prototypical point guard that set the mold for later player to fill and later grow beyond? Andy Phillip? Dick McGuire? Bob Davies? Frankie Brian? Who really thinks the PG position would mean as much today if any of those players had set the foundation? I'm not saying you can't consider any of those players Cousy's equal; I would just be surprised if you do. Cousy set a bar that was later surpassed, but I believe too many on ESPN's site dismissed how much setting that bar meant. _________________ Throw it down big man!
More expansive basketball babble at a slower pace The Captain of History
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 971 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject:
In 1952, Cousy made his first all-NBA team, along with Bob Davies. For the next 3 seasons, Cousy was the only guard on the 1st team.
For the next 4 years (56-59), 1st-team guards were Cousy and his teammate Bill Sharman. They were, respectively, the best PG and SG, hands down, in the league.
Cousy's last 2 years got him on the 2nd team, behind Oscar and West. So for the years 1947-1963, a chart of all-NBA guards looks something like this:
So there was no comparable career among guards, in 1963. Yet Oscar had already 'redefined' the position. Oscar had raised Cousy's bar just 10 years after Cousy's rise to full stature. Big O wouldn't be challenged for 20-some years, by Magic.
I didn't mean to imply I somehow reconstituted 'uncounted' assists for those '50-'60s years when Ast/FG ratios were low. I've just estimated the difference; and I could be off, but probably not by much. _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Sun May 14, 2006 10:47 pm Post subject:
steve nash has had a nice run these past two seasons, but he's been in the league for a decade. i'd take maurice cheeks' first 10 seasons in the league over nash's in a heartbeat...
simulation shows cheeks' best seasons generate significantly more wins than do nash's...
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 971 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 5:48 am Post subject:
bchaikin wrote:
...
simulation shows cheeks' best seasons generate significantly more wins than do nash's...
I've got Cheeks' most influential year (1986, when he played 40 mpg) with 8.8 eWins. Nash this year gets 12.8 (in only 34 mpg). This doesn't even seem particularly close, and even more disparate if you give them equal minutes.
Granted, Cheeks was far the superior defensive player. This shows up, in part, in his steals rate (about 3X that of Nash). But does 1.5 Stl/36 (and other defensive stuff) more than make up for Nash's extra 6 Pts and 3 Ast?
Sometimes we come up with comparable conclusions. Other times, we don't jive. We seem to be at opposite ends on this one. And while I am aware my system doesn't capture the majority of a player's defensive value, I wonder if it could be so great as to switch the relative worth of these 2 players.
Specifically, maybe the '80s Sixers couldn't maximize the value of Nash like the current Suns can. Nor might Cheeks be interchangeable with Nash on the '06 Suns. Being skeptical, I don't really believe a simulation can predict these things. So I doubt your conclusions, in advance :) _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 1:31 pm Post subject:
I don't really believe a simulation can predict these things...
uh.... stand in line - you wouldn't be the first....
I've got Cheeks' most influential year (1986, when he played 40 mpg) with 8.8 eWins. Nash this year gets 12.8 (in only 34 mpg).
would that mean nash was generating about 30% more wins? or even more on a per minute basis?...
Granted, Cheeks was far the superior defensive player.... I am aware my system doesn't capture the majority of a player's defensive value...
does it try to account for any defensive differences other than steals, blocks, and def rebs? for example i have cheeks rated significantly better (lower) than nash in terms of FG% allowed (he was all-D 5 years, 4 on the 1st team). so not only does he get significantly more defensive stops than nash does with steals, but also with forcing misses (of which about 2/3 result in def rebs by his team and thus from a team perspective are also defensive stops)...
i think cheeks is often forgotten when the best PGs are mentioned simply because he wasn't (a) a high scoring PG, and (b) did not pile up tons of assists each year. but for the 9 year stretch of 1979-80 through 1987-88 he did tally the 3rd most total assists (behind magic johnson and isiah thomas), and simulation shows for that stretch of time there wasn't a PG in the league that generated more total wins other than magic johnson - he was very good, consistently, for a long time (over nash's last 9 seasons he has the 4th most total assists behind jason kidd, stephon marbury, and gary payton)...
during those 9 seasons cheeks averaged about 580 ast/yr, 185 st/yr, 185 to/yr, with a ScFG% of .574. also his points scored per zero point team possession he was responsible for (where he missed FGAs and FTAs that were rebounded by the defense, or where he committed a turnover) was better than magic and many other name PGs during that time (only brad davis, kyle macy, and jerry sichting as PGs were more efficient scorers)...
the 76ers had some great teams in the 1980s, and players like cheeks and bobby jones are not often mentioned as the reasons why. but both were great defenders that were also very efficient scorers...
if you look at cheeks' 1st 10 seasons in the league and compare them to the 1st 10 seasons of say john stockton, stockton got 900+ ast/yr versus cheeks with just under 600 ast/yr, but the steals were 203/yr for stockton versus 185/yr for cheeks, cheeks got 60 less turnovers/yr, stockton 13 pts/g, cheeks 12 pts/g, and while stockton shot a ScFG% of 59%, cheeks wasn't far behind at 57%...
i'm not saying cheeks was as good as stockton, just that his overall stats were close to stockton's. also while stockton made the all-D team five teams, each was the 2nd all-D team. during the early to mid-1980s i certainly remember cheeks as being labeled the premier defensive PG in the league...
and again nash has had two great seasons these past two years, but after his first 8 seasons in the league, would anyone on the planet have even suggested that steve nash was one of the nba's top 10 PGs of all time???...
but again after his first 8 seasons in the league cheeks was considered one of the very best PGs in the game, next to magic johnson - a defensive stud that could pass, penetrate, and score efficiently. his teams had won 70% of their regular season games, and had one title to boot, with two runnerups...
What does simulation show between Nash's 2005-2006 and the often mentioned 2002 Kidd season?
simulating both on the 02-03 nets and then on the 05-06 suns, on a 40 min/g and 82 game basis, kidd generates about 2.5 - 3.0 more wins in each case...
Last edited by bchaikin on Tue May 16, 2006 6:47 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 4:51 pm Post subject:
I've got Cheeks' most influential year (1986, when he played 40 mpg) with 8.8 eWins. Nash this year gets 12.8 (in only 34 mpg). This doesn't even seem particularly close, and even more disparate if you give them equal minutes.
in 90-91 terry porter was the starting PG on a 63-19 blazers team. that team had the league's 2nd best/lowest defensive pts/poss allowed, porter played the most minutes on the team, and he was, at that time, considered one of the top defensive PGs in the league (along with john stockton and perhaps derek harper - however stockton was the only PG on the all-D teams that year)....
porter that year played just 33 min/g vs. nash's 35 min/g in 05-06 (their total minutes played were within 5% of each other). normalize both's scoring to 35 min/g and porter got about 18 pts/g vs. nash's 19 pts/g. both shot a ScFG% of 62%, both blocked the same number of shots. i chose this season of porter's in particular because he scored and shot about as well as nash did in 05-06. porter also had the highest pts scored per zero point possession responsible for of all PGs in the league that year outside of john paxson (nash was 3rd in 05-06 among PGs but very close to billups and j.terry who were 1-2)...
but where nash had a 177 advantage in assists (826-649) porter had a 184 advantage in zero point possessions (158-61=97 more steals, 276-189=87 less turnovers, 97+87=184). simulation shows those zero point possessions are more valuable than the additional equal amount of assists. on top of this porter would have a significantly better/lower defensive FG% allowed, meaning even more defensive stops in his favor, and thus overall simulation shows porter's stats from 90-91 generate more wins than nash's 05-06 campaign, by as much as 5-7 wins (playing 40 min/g and 82 games), depending on which team you simulate them on...
just out of curiosity what do your eWins show for nash 05-06 versus say terry porter in 90-91?...
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 971 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 6:46 am Post subject:
bchaikin wrote:
...
just out of curiosity what do your eWins show for nash 05-06 versus say terry porter in 90-91?...
Unfortunately, when I made up eWins last year, I did the historic (back to 1978) stuff from a file that only goes thru 2002. In that interval (25 years), only 12 players had an Ast rate of 8.0/36 or better (an operational definition of PG -- cutting out Grant Hill, with his 7.7) in a season generating 10 or more eWins.
Listing only their best season (Magic owns the top 4 spots, Stockton and Payton the next 9), but also the number of seasons in the >10 eW group:
Code:
15.0 Magic Johnson 89 10
13.9 John Stockton 91 10
13.8 Gary Payton 00 4
12.2 Isiah Thomas 85 2
12.1 Tim Hardaway 97 3
11.7 Kevin Johnson 91 5
11.4 Andre Miller 02 1
11.3 Jason Kidd 02 2
10.9 Baron Davis 02 1
10.6 Mookie Blaylock 94 2
10.3 Terry Porter 91 1
10.1 Rod Strickland 98 1
Nash's 12.8 would rank him about 4th -- though that figure ranks equal to an average Stockton year. Kidd would rank higher with later seasons, and possibly others as well.
How does your sim like Mookie in various lineups? He had beaucoups steals, as well; and he's even less highly regarded than Porter (I think) in the 'pantheon' of PG's.
Sorry about the incompleteness of this 'study'. _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 7:58 am Post subject:
How does your sim like Mookie (Blaylock) in various lineups?
from 92-93 thru 97-98, simulation shows him generating wins at the rate of some of the best PGs of that time, as he was an excellent PG for the hawks...
during those 6 seasons he led the nba in total steals, and had more steals, assists, 50% more blocks, and less turnovers than gary payton - despite playing similar total minutes as payton. however he had a ScFG% of just 51% (payton was at 54%) and scored just 15 pts/g compared to payton's 18/19 pts/g. but for those 6 years he had more total votes for the all-D team than all guards (not just PGs) other than jordan and payton...
and these six seasons were not the hawks of dominique wilkins. wilkins played just the 92-93 campaign and 1/2 the 93-94 season. other than he the hawks had a 20 pts/g scorer in only two of those other seasons (steve smith) yet the team averaged 49 wins a year over that time. they went 57-25 in 93-94 (4th best/lowest defensive pts/poss allowed in the league) and 56-26 in 96-97 (3rd best/lowest def pts/poss allowed)...
kind of like cheeks in my previous post, for those 6 seasons blaylock averaged 580 ast/yr, 204 st/yr, with just 196 to/yr. he just didn't shoot as well as cheeks...
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:55 pm Post subject:
In that interval (25 years), only 12 players had an Ast rate of 8.0/36 or better (an operational definition of PG -- cutting out Grant Hill, with his 7.7) in a season generating 10 or more eWins.
just curious - in that interval were there any starting PGs with less than 8 ast/g that generated more eWins in a season than those on the above list?...
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 971 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:39 am Post subject:
[Bob: Why do you like to dig up old threads when you could be beating on dead horses with the rest of us?]
In Jordan's most Oscar-esque season of '89 (33-8-7), he had 19.7 eW -- the most in any list of players with at least 5.5 Ast/36 Min.
Some teams do without the PG designation, or the role is split up among players. When Larry Bird got an assist, often on that play he was the defacto PG. Ditto Pippen.
So rather than decide whether Drexler or Porter was 'the PG', here are the >5.5 Ast/36 leaders in eW; listing only their top eWinning season:
Code:
eWins yr tm sco reb ast
19.7 Michael Jordan 89 Chi 33.5 8.2 7.2
16.3 Larry Bird 85 Bos 27.9 11.0 5.7
15.1 Magic Johnson 89 LA 24.3 8.5 11.6
14.6 Grant Hill 97 Det 23.9 9.6 7.7
13.9 Gary Payton 00 Sea 22.7 5.7 8.3
13.7 John Stockton 89 Uta 19.3 3.1 13.0
12.8 Anfernee Hardaway 96 Orl 25.0 4.5 7.1
12.7 Scottie Pippen 92 Chi 21.4 8.5 6.5
12.5 Clyde Drexler 92 Por 25.8 7.3 6.4
12.5 Kobe Bryant 02 LA 26.5 5.6 5.5
12.2 Tim Hardaway 97 Mia 22.1 3.6 9.1
12.0 Isiah Thomas 85 Det 18.2 4.4 11.9
11.8 Kevin Johnson 91 Phe 23.8 3.8 9.4
11.5 Terrell Brandon 97 Cle 22.9 4.7 7.4
11.4 Dana Barros 95 Phl 22.6 3.3 7.3
11.1 Andre Miller 02 Cle 16.8 5.3 11.3
11.1 Jason Kidd 02 NJ 15.3 7.5 10.5
11.0 Steve Francis 01 Hou 21.0 7.0 6.4
10.9 Gus Williams 82 Sea 23.0 3.1 6.7
10.7 Baron Davis 02 Cha 17.8 4.5 8.6
10.5 Mookie Blaylock 97 Atl 19.3 5.7 6.2
10.5 Allen Iverson 98 Phl 22.0 3.7 6.3
10.5 Lafayette Lever 87 Den 15.9 8.2 6.8
10.4 Terry Porter 91 Por 20.8 4.1 8.0
10.3 Michael Richardson 85 NJ 17.5 5.7 7.4
10.3 Latrell Sprewell 97 GS 22.6 4.5 5.7
10.2 Kenny Anderson 97 Por 18.6 5.2 7.3
10.2 Paul Westphal 78 Phe 28.2 2.1 5.8
Again, this is only thru 2002; and some values are a bit different than previously listed. Mysterious. _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 27 Jan 2005 Posts: 423 Location: cleveland, ohio
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:55 pm Post subject:
looking at your first list i see rod strickland listed high for his 97-98 season in washington. but that season his total STs to TOs was -140, and he shot worse than the average PG that year. how many eWins do you have for players like:
derek harper in either 86-87 or 89-90?
maurice cheeks in 80-81, 81-82, 84-85, 85-86, or 86-87?
michael williams in 91-92?
these are all PGs who shot well, had close to as many STs as TOs, yet with a fair amount of assists...
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 2 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
