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?

RollWithEm

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?

__________________
But that's just me.

Minstrel

There's no purposeful logical discrepency, I hadn't looked up all their PERs. As I said before, I don't simply list the top ten by PER...I do look at PER here and there, and am always open to looking at PER when a direct comparison arises. It would be boring to create a list purely by a statistic though.

Judging Hayes by PER, though, is tricky. PERs prior to 1976 are notoriously unreliable due to a lack of data. The guy who does basketball-reference has some approximations to get around that, but he's still working with a dearth of necessary data and specific PERs can be incorrect even if in general the approximation is quite good.

In general, I do weigh prime value more highly than career value. But the career and prime (assuming the player's prime and/or career are over) need to be of sufficient length. Otherwise Bernard King, Grant Hill and others would be much higher. I don't go solely by prime PER. Shawn Kemp would absolutely be ahead of Rodman based on prime, but I didn't consider him too much for the top ten because his prime cut off so soon.

Of course, like most cases, it's not hard-and-fast. Looking at the numbers, Kemp had about 7 prime seasons which is a couple more than I thought. So I could certainly see ranking Kemp ahead of Rodman.

I never said that, incidentally. I said that the differences in PER among the top players are small, therefore defense can quite easily drop or raise a player quite a few slots. That's not quite the same as saying defense can do no more than overcome small difference in PER.

__________________
Nothing ever burns down by itself
Every fire needs a little bit of help
Give the anarchist a cigarette.

TG2000

Alright guys, this is my first post so let me start off by saying that I like RollWithEm's GOAT lists, they're well thought out and fair to the players in every generation in NBA history (as evidenced by him putting Pettit at #1 on this list). However after reading everyone's lists I'm surprised by a couple of things:

1. After this watching this year's playoffs I don't understand how Dirk is so low on some of these lists. I understand he isn't even 28 ('til next week) and hasn't won a championship ('til next week) but he has evolved into, IMHO, the most dominant player in basketball right now. Longevity has a definite place when judging a player's greatness but it has it limits (I don't see Terry Cummings on anyone's list). I think legacies are better defined by a player's peak performance combined with playoff heroics and on both fronts Dirk has done enough in 2006 to put him WAY ahead of a choke artist like Chris Webber, at least in my eyes. He has almost no holes in his offensive skill set, and may cause more matchup problems than anyone in the history of the league. His ability to hit 3's is the obvious thing that sets him apart from other guys on this list, but I think his FT% is even more valuable to his team. How many times have other guys on these PF lists bricked important free throws? I understand he is playing far and away the best basketball of his life but its not like this year came out of nowhere, he's been at an elite level for 6 years. And the scary thing this he's only entering his prime now. Not only has he become a great rebounder, his passing and defense have steadily improved as well. Combine all that with the fact that he's on a talented Mavs team that has potential to become a dynasty with him leading the way, and I think it is inevitable (barring injury) that he will be considered the greatest PF of all time when its all said and done. What do you guys think? And will a title and Finals MVP bump him up on some of your lists?

2. Alot of you guys have Malone #1, and despite of his gaudy stats and resume, I just don't see how he could be considered greater than Pettit or Duncan. Regular season, sure. But in the playoffs when the Jazz needed him to come up big and carry them to the championship, he never delivered (no pun intended I swear). The Jazz were consistently one of the best teams in the league because of Malone, but they underachieved in the playoffs because of him as well. Excuses can be made of why they didn't win any titles, (the "Jordan was so good" one is tried and true, but it doesn't explain a 60 win team losing in the 1st round in '95) but they are just that, excuses. There is no doubt that Malone was an all-time great, but his inability to lead a team to a championship means that he cannot be considered in the same class as someone like Duncan, who has done it 3 times.

I'll post a top ten after the Finals, since Dirk's place can change depending on his and his team's performance (haha if they choke I'll probably take back all those nice things I said).

Hakeem

Nice post.

I'd hardly call him a great rebounder. His rebound rate is only around 14, which is easily the worst of all the top power forwards. One postseason doesn't change that. He is at best an average defender. If he continues to play at this level and the Mavs win a few titles, I still wouldn't call him the greatest PF of all time.

Barkley is probably the third-best I've seen. He was a similar scorer, while being a better passer and a much better rebounder. And he drew considerably more double teams than Nowitzki does. Garnett isn't the scorer Dirk is, but he's a terrific rebounder, defender and passer. Duncan probably isn't as good a scorer as Dirk, either. However, like Barkley, he draws a huge amount of attention from defenses, and, like Garnett, is a great rebounder, defender and passer. Malone was a superior scorer, defender, rebounder and passer to Dirk. So, basically, while Dirk is an elite scorer, he's the weakest of the bunch in every other area. Titles won't change that (though becoming a better player will).

I used to buy the "Malone was a choker" theory, too. But someone here suggested that it's a myth, so I started thinking about it. His playoff numbers are fine. I couldn't think of many games in which it could be considered that he choked (one or two during '97 and '98, a couple against the Rockets). Every player has bad games/moments occassionally. He led excellent teams for many years. In '95 they lost to a Rockets side that went on one of the greatest playoff runs of all time. Malone was 30/13 in that First Round series. In '97 the Jazz took arguably the best of all the Bulls teams to six games in the Finals. They repeated the performance the next year. You'd think if Malone was indeed a choker, that he'd have wilted at some points during the 100 or so games before his team reached the Finals. It's easy (and sometimes more fun) for us to dismiss these things as "excuses" without really thinking about them.

lw32

TG2000 welcome aboard. We need some more posters around!!

__________________
Charles Barkley: "I think it would have been an insult if they put Bird on me. He was the worst defensive player ever."

"Stanley's idea of a balanced meal is a Big Mac in each hand" -- then Orlando Magic GM Pat Williams on overweight Magic first round draft choice Stanley Roberts

jericho

A fine first post, TG2000. Glad to have you with us. I agree with Hakeem's response, though. Dirk should now be considered among the elite power forwards of all time, but I think he's near the bottom of that list and it's tough to see him climbing up much more. While he's gradually improved his game across the board, I've seen no indication that he'll ever become a truly dominant rebounder, defender, playmaker, shot-blocker, etc. He's a brilliant scorer, and I won't quibble with anyone who calls him the toughest matchup in the league these days. But the power forwards I put ahead of him are guys who excel (or excelled) more consistently in a variety of areas.

One factor that could inch Dirk up the rankings a bit more is if he hones his killer instinct to the point where he's demonstrating a Bird- or Miller-like knack for carrying his team with clutch play in key moments. I agree with Hakeem that Dirk leading the Mavericks to a couple of championships won't in itself vault him to the top of the list, but nailing some three-point daggers to send a game 6 into overtime or steal a game 7 at the last possible second--that could inch him up a couple of spots. I don't think his game will end up overshadowing that of Duncan, Garnett, etc., but he might be able to create a legend that puts him closer to their company.

RollWithEm

My initial post clearly states the reasons I think Cunningham was a PF for the majority of his career. As for McCauley, I think too many people forget about him. He was a great player in his generation. Now, I was mistaken about Schayes. I always thought Red Kerr was the PF on those Syracuse teams with Schayes at center. I just went back and checked. It seems as if Kerr was actually the predominant center on those squads while Schayes was the PF. Thanks for pointing that one out. I’ll revise my list.

I won’t, however, take McAdoo out. He did play center in his prime years (1974-1978), but he did not play center at all in his rookie year (1973). Also, Bob Lanier was the C when McAdoo was in Detroit (1980-1981), Kareem and Swen Nater played the majority of the center minutes when McAdoo was in LA (1982-1985), and Dave Cowens was the C when Mac was in Boston (1979). I guess he was a center during his absolute apex years, but he was not a center for the majority of the seasons in his career. You can feel free to rank him as a center, but I will hold fast to his positioning as a PF.

My revised rankings:
1) Bob Pettit – no one has yet convinced me he’s not the best PF ever
2) Tim Duncan – no one has shown why Malone is better than Duncan
3) Karl Malone
4) Charles Barkley
5) Kevin Garnett – will likely overtake Barkley by the time he retires
6) Kevin McHale
7) Bob McAdoo – could easily flip-flop with McHale
8) Jerry Lucas
9) Chris Webber
10) Elvin Hayes
11) Dirk Nowitzki – hasn’t done enough yet to be Top 10
12) Dolph Schayes
13) Shawn Kemp – I’ll try and defend the Reignman later in this post
14) Billy Cunningham
15) Connie Hawkins
16) Ed Macauley
17) Dennis Rodman – he’s lucky to be this high IMO

I agree with you with Schayes but Derrick Coleman? More talent? Outside of his four above average years in New Jersey, Coleman did nothing but hog the ball and kill team chemistry. He’s a Ewing Theory candidate if I’ve ever seen one. His Charlotte years were streaky at best, and his two stints in Philadelphia basically got him run out of the city permanently. His so-called “higher peak” was the four years in NJ from 1992 to 1995 when his PER was 20.4. Shawn Kemp had a 7-year prime period when his PER was 21.4. I fail to see how Coleman’s peak was higher than Kemp’s, and you’d have a very tough time convincing me he EVER had more talent.

The reason people have such a high opinion of Dennis Rodman as a mental performer in the playoffs is the fortunate situations he landed in. Rodman was never in his entire career more than a third-wheel on any team he played on. He was even lower on the totem pole than that in Detroit. He was an efficient specialist player at best.

His peak was significantly higher than Coleman’s peak and higher than Rodman’s peak as well. Even though he never made it to 20 and 10, he was a consistently efficient and effective force for a 7-year period. I really don’t think Rodman or Coleman was ever in his class at any point in their respective careers.

__________________
But that's just me.

kflo

"Ramsay moved McAdoo back to center for the second half of the season and McAdoo's performance soared. " that's from http://www.nba.com/history/players/mcadoo_bio.html about mcadoo's rookie year. he only played 64 games as a piston, and lanier missed many of those games. he played 20 games for boston. and mcadoo backed up kareem at center for much of his time in la (and swen was only there for 1 season). not sure why you're holding fast. the majority of his career was at the 5.