TG2000

Well I'm glad my first post was well received, if not necessarily agreed with. On my first point I think offense > defense in terms of evaluating overall greatness, and clutch offensive performances in the playoffs seem to stick out the most. Larry Bird was far from being a great defensive player, and Scottie Pippen might have been the best defensive player of all time, but was Pip better than Bird? Not even close, and judging from the SF GOAT lists, everyone agrees. Bird had all the intangibles it took to lead his team to the championship, and Dirk is displaying those same qualities this year.

Let's look at things from this persepective: let's say there was 1:00 left in a tight playoff game (within 3 points either way), and you could pick any PF from any year to be on your team- who would you pick? For me the choice would be Dirk from this year, and it would be fairly easy (take into consideration I never saw Pettit play). Alot of these PF's limitations in terms of shooting range and FT shooting ability meant they weren't even the go-to-guy on their own team! I feel like this definitely needs to be taken into consideration.

I guess the same type of reasoning prevents me from seeing Malone as the greatest PF ever, despite his impressive career. Hakeem makes a decent point, but stats don't really tell the whole story (and you did point out 4 times where he did did come up short). Notice I didn't outright call him a choker , but to be considered the greatest ever at your position I think the standard should be a little higher than "not a choker". The standard instead should be set to where you manage to lead your team victory in a crucial game they had no business winning, and Malone really never did that. And that '98 Bulls team was ripe for the picking, the Jazz were playing much better overall team ball then the Bulls and had homecourt in the Finals. Malone didn't even really have to play better than Jordan in that Finals as much as he had to show he wasn't intimidated by him, but he was. That factor more than anything else decided that series.

As far as Kemp and Coleman go, what wastes. Especially Coleman, he could have been as good as anyone on the list, but it seemed like he didn't even try. I personally think someone like Elton Brand has already carved out a legacy as a great player that surpasses both of them.

PS- What about Tom Chambers? Is he top 20?

different_13

LJ Larry Johnson?
i thought he only played PF in his first 3 or 4 seasons in charlotte?
and started at SF for the knicks for 5 seasons or so.. (or backed up both forward positions)


and speaking of derrick coleman, anyone know where to see the video of him dunking on shaq?

jericho

I agree about Brand, and with kflo's recent post about Larry Johnson.

As for Chambers, I think top 20 is a stretch for him. A great scorer for a span of 6-7 years, but he didn't excel at much else. For starters, I'd want more than 6.1 rpg as a career average from someone who's top 20 at the position. I might put some old-timers like Yardley and Twyman ahead of him.

jericho

Larry Johnson was indeed a PF for 5 seasons in Charlotte, and then, after injuries had annihlated his great explosiveness, was an all-purpose forward for the Knicks. When he started, it was at SF, since Oakley was the PF.

For the first part of his career, he was a very good undersized rebounder and an excellent scorer around the basket. He was also a bit of a punkhead. When injuries reduced him to a spot-up shooter and floor-burn kind of guy, he became a much more mature teammate, and was an important part of the Knicks' competitive teams in the late '90s. Not a stellar career impact by any stretch, but I'd probably take the LJ of his first two seasons over Coleman, and probably Kemp as well. Call me crazy.

RollWithEm

You're crazy. LJ's best season was 1996 (PER 19.8, RbR 12.7, TS% 56.3, 30 win shares). Kemp had at least 6 (but probably more like 7 or 8) seasons clearly better than LJ's best season.

1993 - PER 20.4, RbR 18.8, TS% 56.7, 26 win shares
1994 - PER 22.9, RbR 19.4, TS% 59.3, 34 win shares
1995 - PER 21.7, RbR 19.8, TS% 61.0, 29 win shares
1996 - PER 22.6, RbR 20.3, TS% 63.1, 34 win shares
1997 - PER 20.7, RbR 17.7, TS% 58.3, 27 win shares
1999 - PER 23.6, RbR 16.8, TS% 57.8, 19 win shares (in Cleveland!!!)

LJ's stats from his first two seasons:

1992 - PER 18.9, RbR 15.9, TS% 54.8, 24 win shares
1993 - PER 18.9, RbR 14.0, TS% 56.4, 31 win shares

Kemp and LJ are simply not in the same class of players historically. Kemp was always clearly the better, more efficient, more versatile player.

__________________
But that's just me.

kflo

lj was a post scorer. kemp was a garbage man. lj was a better offensive player - kemp was more dependent on others. kemp was better defensively and on the boards, but per doesn't tell the whole story.

jericho

My thoughts exactly. Kemp put up 17 ppg largely off of offensive rebounds, finishing breaks, and bounding in for power dunks. Johnson had a much more refined post game as I recall, and was a better shooter as well.

RollWithEm

So you two are saying that greatness lies in refinement of post game and in outside shooting? Kevin McHale had a more refined post game and a much better outside shot than Wilt Chamberlain. Was he a greater player?

__________________
But that's just me.

kflo

no. we're saying there's inherent value in being able to execute in a half court offense, to have an offense revolve around you and through you, that's not capured in per. shawn marion scored more and more efficiently than tim duncan and pau gasol this year, but that doesn't accurately measure their value on offense (recognizing it was a down year for duncan).

Hakeem

I think man defense and team defense combined are just about as important as offense, though obviously it's easier to have a huge impact offensively. But it isn't just defense with these guys. Passing and rebounding and drawing defensive attention, as well. Dirk is the worst in all these areas.

I'm not keen on getting into a long discussion on the value of clutch play and intangibles. I'll just say that I think their impact is marginal. I'd rather have the player who is better for 47 minutes than the guy who people think is cooler under pressure.
In fact, if I had to use the term "intangibles", I'd use it for those things I mentioned above -- defense, double teams, etc. And that's where Dirk is weakest.

Everyone has come up short at some point. Duncan didn't play well in last year's Finals. Dirk was horrible in the First Round last year despite the fact that the Rockets didn't have a power forward. Hakeem shot poorly in Game 7 against the Knicks in '94. MJ played pretty poorly in the '96 Finals. They were all just lucky to have been on teams that were good enough to win anyway.

Malone played about as well in the Finals as he did in the regular season. He wasn't guarding Jordan.

Hakeem