My answer... nobody. MadMax, in another thread said I was over the top (not verbatim, mind you) for saying: "Francis is the best ALL-AROUND player in the NBA". I ain't homering, because the stats back it up. Think about it. It always seems like he puts up 19 pts. 8 reb. 9 asst. 3 stl. on a consistent basis. Night in, night out. I know there are several other players in the NBA game who have great all-around games such as Kobe, but honestly, when you consider his postion, et al. etc. being 6-3, rebounding like he does, putting across the board numbers consistently...it makes for a strong case that Francis is the best "all-around" player in the game today.
When completely healthy, I think Grant Hill was a more complete player. Tracy McGrady is pretty damn good all around as well. And since you didn't specify that the player is playing right now.....Oscar Robertson.
I'm afraid I don't quite agree. It would be nice if Steve were putting up those numbers regularly, but he's usually not that close to averaging a triple-double. I agree about McGrady and Hill being probably more fitting for the distinction. Odom's someone to consider as well. And what about Magic? But we're probably talking about in the league right now.
Well I started typing up a table comparing the players, but I've gotten way too lazy, but I did manage to make it through 4 players without getting bored. <table><TD>Name</TD><TD>Pts/G</TD><TD>Reb/G</TD><TD>Ast/G</TD><TD>Blk/G</TD><TD>Stl/G</TD><TD>TO/G</TD><tr><TD>Garnett</TD><TD>21.0</TD><TD>12.7</TD><TD>5.6</TD><TD>1.76</TD><TD>0.97</td><td>3.0</td><TR><TD>Francis</TD><TD>20.6</TD><TD>7.4</TD><TD>5.9</TD><TD>0.29</TD><TD>1.53</td><td>3.2</td><TR><TD>Kidd</TD><TD>14.3</TD><TD>7.0</TD><TD>10.0</TD><TD>0.27</TD><TD>2.12</td><td>3.4</td><TR><TD>Miller</TD><TD>16.2</TD><TD>4.9</TD><TD>10.2</TD><TD>0.55</TD><TD>1.58</td><td>3.2</td></table>
Francis - 20.6ppg, 7.4rpg, 5.9apg, 0.29bpg, 1.53spg, 3.2 TO/gm McGrady - 25.6ppg, 6.8rpg, 4.8apg, 0.82bpg, 1.27spg, 2.7 TO/gm Overall, McGrady is slightly better. When healthy, Grant Hill couldn't be touched in this area - he was the best all-around player the NBA had seen since Magic Johnson. But I'm not getting into the Hill argument again. Here's a simple formula to use: ppg+rpg+apg+bpg+spg-TO/gm. The best players will be at the top of that statistic. McGrady rates at 36.59. Francis rates at 32.52.
Based on sheer numbers alone, though, Shaq is not only the most dominant player in the league, he may be the most complete. Ignoring FT% for a bit, look at his numbers: 56% shooting 25.9ppg, 11.1rpg, 3.1apg, 0.81spg, 2.46bpg, and only 2.50 TO/gm. He puts up great steal and assist numbers for a big man of his stature and game, and in physically dominant in all aspects of the game. Though he may not seem like the most versatile player, he is probably the best all-around player.
Hey smeggy, get with the program, I already said that... By the way, in Hakeem's MVP year, his score was a 44.7! The highest score I've found for Jordan was a 45.7 in the 92-93 year...
I think it might be big man-weighted, but it's a simple formula, I guess. Shaq and Duncan are both over 40 using the formula. However, if you focus on the rarified aspects of the game - assists, blocks, steals, and limiting turnovers - and halve points and rebounds in the formula (1/2ppg + 1/2rpg + apg + spg + bpg - TO/gm), I think you'd get similar results. Garnett: 22.18 Francis: 18.52 McGrady: 20.39 A. Miller: 19.68 Kidd: 19.64 Shaq: 22.77 Duncan: 23.68 Even if you limit blocks, the big men numbers go down only slightly.
Shouldn't blocks be worth 2 then since they might prevent 2 points as well? Maybe not every time, so blocks should be worth 1.5 points if assists would go for 2...
Well, if assists are worth 2x, then points scored surely have to be worth their normal value (instead of half), as they directly contribute to the team's score. Rebounds, however, don't always lead to a bucket - just prevent another team from scoring, in most cases. I don't think they should be worth their full value, though something around 2/3 may be worthy. Blocks tend to prevent scoring, though the other team may return with the ball. Perhaps a 1 1/2 multiplier for them. Turnovers, however, lead to points for another team most of the time. Perhaps a 1 1/2 negative multiplier for them as well. Steals tend to lead to points for you team - again, possibly a 1 1/2 multiplier. Leading to... ppg + 2/3rpg + 2apg + 3/2spg + 3/2bpg - 3/2 TO/gm I'll work out some players here in a minute.
McGrady: 38.86 Francis: 35.29 Kidd: 37.42 A. Miller: 38.25 Shaq: 41.46 Duncan: 41.70 Garnett: 40.26 Of course, none of this takes in factors as to team record and non-statistical factors to their team, but it can (within reason, I supposed) show a player's worth to his team. It favors big men - but big men are typically more valuable to their team, especially contenders. All-around play by McGrady, Miller, and Garnett - all with high ratings for their spots - is still rewarded.
Not really. Big men get blks, smaller players gets steals. Big men get rebs smaller guys get asst. They come out to about the same. Francis is a very good player at any position, but I don't know if he's top 10 in the league, but he's very close maybe 11-15. Thats just my opinion though.
