NLSC Greatest of All-time: #4

[Mandich]

-sixth number of the many

-#3 was won is currently being won by Dwyane Wade

-#4 has some players well deserving of the title. It will be interesting to see the results

-You can vote for players in any way you want: On-court impact, Off-court impact, championships etc.

Nominees:

1. Charles Barkley (1996-97 to 1999-00)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
17.0	12.6	4.1	.562	116	102	22.2	.200

* Even during his later years, Barkley was one of a kind. Just look at his numbers. You can clearly see the decline from his original prime, but he could still ball.

Sure, he had injury problems and the star studded Rockets didn't even get to the Finals, but Barkley remained an impact both on and off the court.

2. Chris Bosh (2003-04 to 2009-10)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
19.7	9.1	2.1	.571	113	107	21.3	.158

* Bosh makes a second appearance after being a part of the #1 voting. His number are just slightly better than his Heat day, but he has no titles. He was one of the best big guys during his
Toronto days.

Sadly for him, this competition is also strong.

3. Adrian Dantley (1977-78 to 1985-86)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
26.1	6.1	3.3	.625	119	109	23.3	.200

* Perhaps the greatest scorer of the three-point era, at least one of them. Certainly the most overlooked. Don't believe me?

He did 29.2 on 65% TS in 83/84. He was 6-5. He scored mostly in the post. He went to the line 10 times per/36 during his prime. I mean just look at his offensive stats and you'll be surprised how does a
player performing that good get overlooked so often.

Sure he played no D, but he didn't need to as he was almost a sure thing to overscore the opponent guarding him.

Dantley led the League in Orth twice, was in the top five in TS% six times (6-5 post player) and is most likely the best scorer in the three-point era. Jordan was obviously the better offensive player with
more ways to contribute,and you could slip a few more players into the discussion, but Dantley is a top 3 scorer of the three-point era without any question.

4. Joe Dumars (1985-86 to 1998-99)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
16.8	2.3	4.7	.554	113	110	15.3	.118

*It's unbelievable how overlooked Rodman and Laimbeer get next to Dumars and Thomas. Unbelieavable. He wasn't even that good of a scorer during the Pistons championship years. He clearly went off on offense in the 1989 Finals and is deserving of the Finals MVP.

Those Detroit Bad Boys are one of the 10 greatest teams ever assembled. Perhaps the best ever personality team as they really had it all in that locker room.

Dumars was an integral part to that team, but come on, everyone knows Rodman and Laimbeer should've gotten more recognition.

5. Chris Webber (1996-97 to 2005-06)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
20.7	9.6	4.1	.510	103	100	21.4	.136

* So I like Webber as a player, and I really like those Kings teams he played in. I love the Fab Five and I love his mean faces after dunks. But he really needs to shut up with that "best PF in the league in my prime" thing.

Let's just take the three best years he's had in the league because his real prime was cut short by injuries, which clearly are 1999-00 to 2001-02. I'm giving him just that three to make it as clear as possible than he wasn't the best PF in the league. 2nd best? Perhaps.

During those three years, I give you his, Duncans and Garnetts PER 36 raw stats in that order:

23.4/9.8/4.1
21.6/11.4/3.0
20/10.7/4.6

Just by looking at their raw stats you'd think Webber stand a chance. The thing is neither Duncan or Garnett hit their prime, yet one was clearly still ahead. How? Let's take a look at some advances stats
of Webber, Duncan and Garnett in that particular order during those three seasons:

107 Ortg, 97 Drtg, 24.1 PER, .527 TS%, .187 Ws/48
110 Ortg, 95 Drtg, 25.3 PER, .556 TS%, .226 Ws/48
109 Ortg, 100 Drtg, 23.8 PER, .537 TS%, .181 Ws/48

As you can see Duncan is head and shoulders above Webber, with Garnett being somewhat equal to Webber. The thing is Garnett played on bad teams that didn't even make it out of the first round. Webber played on a title contending team that finished 3rd on offense and 6th on defense in 01/02. Prime Garnett is way better than Webber.

Don't get me wrong, Webber was a pretty good player on a really good team, and the 2002 WCF will always be a stain on the NBA, but he wasn't the best PF in the league.

You should still consider voting for him though.

6. Dolph Schayes (1951-52 to 1963-64)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
19.6	12.3	3.1	.488	Nr	Nr	22.0	.136

*So he was voted by the NBA as the greatest player ever to wear #4. I mean, it's great to appreaciate history of the NBA as there were some pretty unbelievable players, but come on. Just look at the guys TS%. His Ws/48 isn't even that great. Sure he won a title in 1955 but that doesn't mean he was better than some guys who also weared the number. He surely won't win it here.

7. Sidney Moncrief (1979-80 to 1985-86)

P/36	R/36	A/36	TS%	Ortg	Drtg	PER	Ws/48
19.5	5.9	4.3	.593	120	104	19.8	.205

* Was an elite player both defensively and offensively. Just look where his teams finished on defense during his prime: 8th, 3rd, 1st, 6th, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd in the league.

He won two DPOYs in the progress. A lot of people just skip and ignore Moncrief. He even led the league in Ortg. Sad his body fell apart, as he he probably had some years left in his prime.



Other Notable Player Shoutout

Michael Finley was a 18/4/4 guy in his prime and played a ton of minutes. He was a good, not too efficient player offensively and even made a couple of All-star teams in the process.

Ron Harper didn't wear #4 in Chicago. But he did wear it when he won some titles in LA. He was a 20/5/5 guy in Cleveland and was a good offensive player, but he had gotten slightly worse by the team he played for the Clippers. His knees gave up on him.

Antawn Jamison was the player that should've helped LeBron bring a championship in Cleveland. Too bad he was just past his prime. He was really suited as a 6th man, where he thrived. During his lone Dallas season, he put up 18/8 Per 36 on 122 Ortg and .581 TS%. He also had a PER of 21.2. His Ws/48 was .183. Too bad he didn't remain as efficient when he was given a bigger role on some
later teams.

Chauncey Billups wore the number for a number of years. Spudd Webb managed to win a dunk contest while wearing it. Byron Scott won some titles and was a solid player for those 80s Lakers. Cliff Robinson had a pretty decent run with it. Paul Millsap is making a name the last couple of years. Kenyon Martin wore it during his Nuggets days. Moses Malone wore it with the Bullets, where he continued being a force.

[Andrew]

Normally I'd vote Barkley ahead of Dantley, but I don't feel he belongs here; he's a candidate for #34. To that end, my vote goes to Dantley.

[stereoxide]

Seeing Dantley's stats made me vote for him. Barkley's best years are at 34 but for sure he will be demolished by Laker Shaq at 34.
edit: Damn! Forgot that The Dream wore 34 well it will be an interesting matchup at that number.

[mp3]

I am going with Joe Dumars.

I loved watching him play in the 90's and watched him take Grant Hill under his wing at the end of his career.

I'd also vote for Barkley at #34 because his better days were with the Suns

[Kevin]

Dantley over Webber.

[Moz]

I'm torn between Dantley and Webber initially but I'm tad favoring Chris, after re-glancing their stats, since he's an all around player... I don't know perhaps I'm biased since I never saw Dantley play but I always take a Lebron over a Kobe anyday (though not actually referring the two are clones of the players I mentioned in this cathegory)...

[Spree#8]

This would be Barkley easily if those were his prime years. But since they weren't, I'm leaning towards Schayes.

For TS% fanatics: that was perfectly normal efficiency in the 50s, unfortunately. Schayes finished in top10 in the league in TS% five times. He was undoubtedly an elite player in his prime. What's special about him is that he excelled both before the shot clock era and with the shot clock as well. It's a transition many couldn't make, most notably George Mikan himself.

If you'll all excuse me for quoting myself from the other thread, I'd just like to advise against being fooled by Dantley's stats.

Are you crazy. Is he not a top 3 scorer in the 3pt era? Can't you read and acknowledge stats? Other than your whole post being consisted of really no important factor to the discussion, you question if Dantley was great offensively?

This reply tells me that all you know about Adrian Dantley is his PPG and TS%.

Adrian Dantley was a low-post scoring small forward. Very strong for his size, he had a knack for using his body to create contact and with contact, create space to get off a shot and/or draw a foul. He was quite exceptional at that, but this can be concluded from his TS% already.

The Utah teams in his prime were absolutely miserable. They struggled mightily to break 30 wins (let alone make the playoffs), which is already strange with a seemingly all-time great like Dantley on board. What's more strange is that the team didn't miss a beat (and actually got a tiny bit better) when Dantley got injured for most of the season in '83 and got better after getting rid of him in '86.

Then he went to Detroit, where the team had some success with him. Then they traded AD for Mark Aguirre and went from contenders to back-to-back champions. All that while Dallas (Dantley's new team) went from WCF to lottery to first-round sweep.

Point is, his impact was neutral to slightly negative in his Utah years and a big negative in his later years. He was a defensive sieve and his offense was a miniscule positive at best.

You're probably thinking "this makes no sense. 30+ PPG on 60+TS% - how can that not be helping a team?". The answer to that is simple, but it would require you to get out of basketball-reference and actually watch a basketball game.

It's all in his playstyle. He was a notorious ball-stopper and black hole on offense. He would get the ball posted up about 15 feet from the basket, back down, back down, back down, pump fake, pump fake, pump fake... if he got a shot off, he often drew a foul as well. Efficient offense. When he didn't, though? He would still burn the entire shot clock, then pass out to one of his teammates for an awful, contested shot at the end of the shot clock. Keeps his USG down, keeps his TS% high, tanks the team's offensive efficiency and record. Dantley completely killed any ball movement and turned his teammates into spectators on every possession. He functioned solely as a #1 option and you had two choices when he's on your team:

a) you give him the ball and play 1v5 - and he will take the entire shot clock to set up his moves to score (or pass out at the last second)
b) you don't give him the ball and play 4v5 - Dantley didn't move without the ball very well

For all the crap a guy like Melo gets for hogging the ball and not passing, let me tell you he's a LOT more willing to move the ball than Dantley was.

And it wasn't a case of doing what the team asked, either. His playstyle was upsetting members of the team and caused multiple clashes. First with coach Frank Layden in Utah, then with Isiah in Detroit. The Pistons wanted Dantley to move out to the mid-range area to space the floor better and avoid clogging the paint for their other interior scorers. He was unhappy about it and wouldn't. When Utah asked him to move the ball more, he wouldn't. Reportedly, he even kind of clashed with Abdul-Jabbar and Wilkes in LA, before the Utah years. Both of them not really known for being selfish or whatever.

The truth is, good teams that had Dantley didn't want him. Buffalo drafted Dantley, he averaged 20 PPG as a rookie... they traded him to LA. Lakers had Dantley right before drafting Magic and... they traded him. Utah was miserable with him for half a decade while he put up historically great scoring stats. When they got a good coach (Layden) and started improving... they traded him. Detroit wouldn't get him to fit, he clashed with Isiah... they traded him. He could definitely play the game, but only HIS way. Nobody wanted him for very long.

So, unfortunately for the TS% worshippers, Adrian Dantley is the ultimate "empty stats" player. He put up huge numbers on huge efficiency that weren't having an effect on his teams. He played no defense and his offense was ball-stopping on the level of Rondo and then some.

To answer your question: the problem isn't my stat reading capability. The problem is that not all of basketball can be expressed in a box score.

[Mandich]

Eye tests are subjective and incorrect. Only way to go is to check out stats which go way beyond TS% you're so desperately clinging on to. Please do your reasearch and read what people post towards you. They actually thing you'll try to read and comprehend it not just ignore it and call for the "watch the game" meaningless argument.

[airBerlin]

C-Webb.

[benji]

God Damn Dantley.

He was Utah's entire offense. It wasn't until they got Green, Bailey and Eaton to pull the defense out of the gutter that the team got any good. Griffith was a perfect example of a Mitch Richmond type who brought nothing else to the table but shot making. Though he was way ahead of the curve on the three pointer.

The offense was scraping the bottom of the barrel in his last two seasons even with Dantley and Stockton propping it up. And then Malone replacing Dantley. It would take the Jazz eight years to surpass the (9th!) offense of the 1984 season Dantley borderline created on his own. And it was only in 1990 that the team wasn't in shambles on that end. Utah won in that era with its defense, the dominating offense came in the late 1990s. Dantley's early period in Utah was reflective of Nissalke's desire to slow the pace (something he did everywhere else he coached), and since the team had no one else, why not give it to Dantley. When Layden opened things up and turned the Jazz into one of the fastest paced teams in the league year after year, Dantley maintained his % role and improved his offensive performance.

Dantley's situation in Detroit and eventual trade had more to do with his relationship with Isiah Thomas than his play. Dantley had bought into the time-share with Rodman (because he was also the fourth guard) that Aguirre also would do when he caved in completely because of his secret lovechild with Isiah. The other Pistons, including Rodman, have all been much more friendly towards Dantley than Thomas post-careers.

Keeps his USG down, keeps his TS% high

Which is odd, since it didn't keep his usage down, he just played when there were five other guys using it up a lot more and two of his years he didn't qualify. Dantley was a top player in eFG% too, his ability to get to the line and shoot near perfect there ala Billups is what sent his TS% skyrocketing.

Moving him out on the Pistons wouldn't have unclogged the paint as he was the Pistons primary interior scorer, next was James Edwards. Putting him into the mid-range would have put him right in the way of Isiah, Dumars, Laimbeer and Johnson.

[benji]

Moncrief was the better player of the #4's though.

[Spree#8]

Eye tests are subjective and incorrect. Only way to go is to check out stats which go way beyond TS% you're so desperately clinging on to. Please do your reasearch and read what people post towards you. They actually thing you'll try to read and comprehend it not just ignore it and call for the "watch the game" meaningless argument.

Just as I was wondering why you ignored many statistical arguments I've made in the other thread, this post clears it all up: you apparently didn't see them and keep repeating that I only say "watch the game" when the truth is, I've only said it once and only to help understand why Dantley's playstyle wasn't conducive to winning games (proved by numbers), despite being conducive to filling up his box score and making you consider him a god, when he is actually the biggest failure of box score stats.

By the way, impact is observable and even quantifiable provided there is play-by-play data of a given season (if not, with-without is probably all there is to go on). None of that is perfect or noise-free, but it's way more informative than box score. Maybe you will grow to appreciate it one day.


Now, on to actually discussing basketball...

The offense was scraping the bottom of the barrel in his last two seasons even with Dantley and Stockton propping it up. And then Malone replacing Dantley. It would take the Jazz eight years to surpass the (9th!) offense of the 1984 season Dantley borderline created on his own. And it was only in 1990 that the team wasn't in shambles on that end. Utah won in that era with its defense, the dominating offense came in the late 1990s. Dantley's early period in Utah was reflective of Nissalke's desire to slow the pace (something he did everywhere else he coached), and since the team had no one else, why not give it to Dantley.

I know that he had little offensive help. It just doesn't look like his uber efficient scoring had an impact on the team. I'm mainly getting at the '83 season which was right in his prime. He misses 60 games, the team improves by 5 wins. The only notable addition to the roster was John Drew, who scored well, but - in the box score - doesn't come close to touching Dantley's production, let alone looking like an upgrade.

One could try to explain away the improvement after Dantley was traded as just Stockton and Malone coming into their own and there might be some truth to that, but what about '83? And what about a team that has a scorer better than Jordan or James (according to PPG and TS%, obviously) often struggling to break 30 wins in a weak conference? Something is clearly off here if we are to take Dantley's worth as being sky-high, as his box scores suggest. A legit superstar player in this league is virtually a guarantee of at least hovering around the playoffs, if he stays healthy (as Dantley usually did), even with shitty support.

When Layden opened things up and turned the Jazz into one of the fastest paced teams in the league year after year, Dantley maintained his % role and improved his offensive performance.

That would be because he would often cherrypick in transition to get easy buckets. Then again, that was a frequent trend in the run'n'gun 80s.

Dantley's situation in Detroit and eventual trade had more to do with his relationship with Isiah Thomas than his play. Dantley had bought into the time-share with Rodman (because he was also the fourth guard) that Aguirre also would do when he caved in completely because of his secret lovechild with Isiah. The other Pistons, including Rodman, have all been much more friendly towards Dantley than Thomas post-careers.

Off the court, I hear Dantley was generally respected for his work ethic and mentality of a workman, always in great shape. However, I've also heard of him being notoriously selfish. Specifically, during the '88 Finals Dantley openly declared that if the wins Finals MVP, he would keep the entire bonus for himself. Thomas and Laimbeer declared that if one of them gets it, he'll share it with the team.

Yes, I know Thomas basically orchestrated Dantley's trade out of Detroit and things weren't well between the two of them. The trade elevating Detroit while worsening Dallas with no other significant moving pieces makes Dantley's on-court impact look pretty bad, though.

Moving him out on the Pistons wouldn't have unclogged the paint as he was the Pistons primary interior scorer, next was James Edwards. Putting him into the mid-range would have put him right in the way of Isiah, Dumars, Laimbeer and Johnson.

Why was Aguirre clearly a better fit, then? He operated in the mid-range area a lot. And his box score numbers, as expected, don't touch Dantley's.