Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hakeem
Why Hayes but not Kemp? Looking at his stats, he was very inefficient and not an outstanding rebounder. His career high PER is 19.4. Was he a great defender or passer?
|
An excellent point you've got here. Minstrel is the supreme defender of prime-level PER as a great indicator for greatness. I’m shocked that a guy who’s resume strength is his longevity (Hayes) is better in his eyes than a guy who’s strength is his intangibles (Rodman) who is in turn better than a guy who’s strength is his high peak value (Kemp). I thought prime “ability” was supposed to take precedence over longevity and intangibles. Minstrel once told me that great defense can do no more than overcome “small differences in PER.” Rodman’s prime PER was 15.9. Hayes’ was 18.7. Kemp’s was 21.4. Those appear to the naked eye to be more than “small differences”. Do you have an explanation for these discrepancies? Do you think Rodman was the greatest defender ever? Do you think Hayes was
that much better defensively than Kemp?