Top 100 NBA Players: #40 - Walt Frazier

Walt Frazier

The New York Knicks have won only two championships in their entire history, in 1970 and 1973, and Walt Frazier was the biggest reason for both victories, despite the fact that Willis Reed was voted the MVP of both series. I believe that Walt should have won both times, and I'm going to show you why.

In 1970, Willis Reed was injured near the end of New York's game 5 victory and missed the entire game 6 due to a major leg injury. The Knicks lost that game and appeared to be in danger of losing the series, but Reed limped onto the court for game 7 and gave the Knicks a huge energy boost, and when the Knicks won the game and the title, everyone credited Reed for it. The truth is, Reed scored only 4 points in the game, all in the first minute, while Walt Frazier scored 36 points, handed out 19 assists, and grabbed 7 rebounds in that deciding game. Here are their overall stats for that year's playoffs:

Frazier - 16.0 pts, 7.8 reb, 8.2 ast, .478 FG%, .764 FT%
Reed - 23.7 pts, 13.8 reb, 2.8 ast, .471 FG%, .737 FT%

Reed outscored Frazier by quite a bit during the playoffs, and outrebounded him by 6 per game, although that  margin is kind of small considering Frazier was a point guard and Reed was a center. Walt had just as big a lead in the assist category, and somehow shot the ball better than the big man throughout the playoffs. When you consider that he played the single greatest game of his career in game 7, you have to give him the MVP.

While an argument can be made both ways for MVP of the 1970 Finals, giving Reed the 1973 Finals MVP is a complete travesty. It was by far the worst playoff performance of his career, but Frazier was still his usual productive self. Here are the stats from the 1973 playoffs:

Frazier - 21.9 pts, 7.3 reb, 6.2 ast, .514 FG%, .777 FT%
Reed - 12.5 pts, 7.6 reb, 1.8 ast, .466 FG%, .857 FT%

You'd have to know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball to think that Reed was the best player on that team. In fact, I would rank him as their worst starter in the playoffs, but somehow he was awarded the Finals MVP anyway. There has never been any example in history of a player deserving the MVP less, and Frazier was cheated again.

Frazier was not only a great playoff player, he was also great during the regular season. For six straight seasons he averaged at least 20 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists per game, something very few players do anymore. He was also named to the All-Defensive First Team for 7 straight seasons, which was a testament to his all-around skills.

From 1969 to 1974 Frazier got the Knicks at least to the Conference Finals, with three trips to the NBA Finals and two championships during that six-year stretch. Frazier was the best player on five of those teams, and was the second-best once. It was clear that Frazier was a winner as well as an amazing player. The thing that held him back on this list is how short his career was. After just his tenth season, he basically disappeared, leaving the Knicks for Cleveland, where he would play only 66 games over 3 seasons before retiring.

Top 100 NBA Players: #3

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

(Kalb: #5, Simmons: #3, BBR: #5)

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar dominated the 1970's in a way no decade has been dominated before or since, then adjusted to his role as sidekick to another superstar better than any other player in history, which allowed him to finish his career with 6 championships and 10 NBA Finals appearances.

There was no doubt that Kareem (then Lew Alcindor) would be the top pick in the 1969 NBA Draft, after he led UCLA to an 88-2 record in 3 seasons and 3 straight NCAA championships, where he was named the Most Outstanding Player each time. He easily won the Rookie of the Year trophy, and should have been given the MVP as well, but it was awarded to Willis Reed, who led the New York Knicks to the league's best record and their first championship that season. Here are how their numbers stacked up that year:

Alcindor - 28.8 pts, 14.5 reb, 4.1 ast, .518 FG%, .653 FT%
Reed - 21.7 pts, 13.9 reb, 2.0 ast, .507 FG%, .756 FT%

Although Reed may have led his team to a few more wins (Milwaukee had the second-best record), it's very easy to see that Kareem had the bigger impact, leading a team in its second year of existence to the league's second-best record and a trip to the Conference Finals. In fact, from 1969-1980, a span of 11 seasons, Kareem was the best player 8 times, with the only exceptions coming in two seasons in which he missed time with a broken hand and one season in which George Gervin was on top of his game. He holds the record for most MVP's won, with 6, but I believe he should have been awarded 8.

Even with how great he was for so long, he was only able to make it to 3 NBA Finals during his time as team leader, winning twice. There were even two seasons right during his peak seasons in which his teams missed the playoffs completely, which no other top 10 player can say. That all changed in 1981, when Magic Johnson became the center of the Lakers' offense and Kareem became their #2 star.

In the final 8 seasons of Kareem's career in Los Angeles, the Lakers made it to the Finals 7 times, and Kareem was a major contributor for most of those teams, although by the time he retired he was not near the player he had once been, posting just 10 points per game along with fewer than 5 rebounds.

Kareem is the NBA's all-time leader in All-Star appearances, MVP awards, points scored, and minutes played, and he is also one of only 3 players in history to win the scoring title, MVP, and Finals MVP in the same season, along with Michael Jordan and Shaquille O'Neal. That season was 1971, just his second season as a pro, when he averaged 31.7 points and 16.0 rebounds, took 133 out of 153 MVP votes, then led Milwaukee to the title by winning 12 of 14 in the playoffs and sweeping the Baltimore Bullets in the Finals. He was the first to do it, and it wouldn't happen again for 20 years, when Jordan won his first title.

In terms of longevity, Kareem and Karl Malone are basically even. When you look at playoff success, the edge goes to Abdul-Jabbar, who won a couple of titles as the star player and several more playing with Magic as the star. When looking at regular season dominance, there is no doubt that Kareem was better, as he was the best player 8 times, while Malone spent nearly as long as the league's #2 player. Overall, it's easy to see that Kareem was the better player, and deserves the #3 spot among the all-time greats.

Top 100 NBA Players: #39

Walt Frazier

(Kalb: #31, Simmons: #32, BBR: #24)

The New York Knicks have won only two championships in their entire history, in 1970 and 1973, and Walt Frazier was the biggest reason for both victories, despite the fact that Willis Reed was voted the MVP of both series. I believe that Walt should have won both times, and I'm going to show you why.

In 1970, Willis Reed was injured near the end of New York's game 5 victory and missed the entire game 6 due to a major leg injury. The Knicks lost that game and appeared to be in danger of losing the series, but Reed limped onto the court for game 7 and gave the Knicks a huge energy boost, and when the Knicks won the game and the title, everyone credited Reed for it. The truth is, Reed scored only 4 points in the game, all in the first minute, while Walt Frazier scored 36 points, handed out 19 assists, and grabbed 7 rebounds in that deciding game. Here are their overall stats for that year's playoffs:

Frazier - 16.0 pts, 7.8 reb, 8.2 ast, .478 FG%, .764 FT%
Reed - 23.7 pts, 13.8 reb, 2.8 ast, .471 FG%, .737 FT%

Reed outscored Frazier by quite a bit during the playoffs, and outrebounded him by 6 per game, although that  margin is kind of small considering Frazier was a point guard and Reed was a center. Walt had just as big a lead in the assist category, and somehow shot the ball better than the big man throughout the playoffs. When you consider that he played the single greatest game of his career in game 7, you have to give him the MVP.

While an argument can be made both ways for MVP of the 1970 Finals, giving Reed the 1973 Finals MVP is a complete travesty. It was by far the worst playoff performance of his career, but Frazier was still his usual productive self. Here are the stats from the 1973 playoffs:

Frazier - 21.9 pts, 7.3 reb, 6.2 ast, .514 FG%, .777 FT%
Reed - 12.5 pts, 7.6 reb, 1.8 ast, .466 FG%, .857 FT%

You'd have to know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball to think that Reed was the best player on that team. In fact, I would rank him as their worst starter in the playoffs, but somehow he was awarded the Finals MVP anyway. There has never been any example in history of a player deserving the MVP less, and Frazier was cheated again.

Frazier was not only a great playoff player, he was also great during the regular season. For six straight seasons he averaged at least 20 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists per game, something very few players do anymore. He was also named to the All-Defensive First Team for 7 straight seasons, which was a testament to his all-around skills.

From 1969 to 1974 Frazier got the Knicks at least to the Conference Finals, with three trips to the NBA Finals and two championships during that six-year stretch. Frazier was the best player on five of those teams, and was the second-best once. It was clear that Frazier was a winner as well as an amazing player. The thing that held him back on this list is how short his career was. After just his tenth season, he basically disappeared, leaving the Knicks for Cleveland, where he would play only 66 games over 3 seasons before retiring.

The only way in which Gasol can be seen as superior to Frazier is in career longevity, since he's played at an all-star level his entire career, while Frazier did for only about 8 seasons. Frazier was great and very steady at his peak, but it ended early. Both players participated in 3 NBA Finals, winning two championships apiece, but Gasol was the #2 guy on those teams, while Frazier was the star of his. That's what sets him ahead of Pau all time.

Top 100 NBA Players: Intro, Snubs, and #100

I have finally finished analyzing all of the data available from all 65 NBA seasons, and have compiled my listing of the 100 greatest NBA players of all time. As I mentioned in my previous post, players are awarded points based on their performance in each season of their career, as long as they are in the top 10 percent of players in that season. The factors that define these players are most often domination, longevity, all-around skill, and playoff success. Missing games for any reason counts against a player, meaning that several players whose careers were cut short by injuries are either ranked lower than you might expect or may have missed the top 100 altogether.

There are several players you would expect to find on this kind of list that did not have enough impact during their NBA careers to make an appearance here. I am highlighting a few of them here, along with some of the reasons each one is not in my all-time top 100.

Snubs

Dennis Rodman
Rodman misses out on this honor due to the lack of an all-around game. He led the league in rebounding 7 times during his career and won 5 championships, but he was lacking in most other areas. For example, his career averages of 1.8 assists, 0.7 steals, 0.6 blocks, and 58.4% free throw shooting show that rebounding was his only area of strength. Early in his career he led the league in field goal percentage once, but in what should have been the prime of his career, he was so focused on grabbing all the rebounds he could that he only hit over 50% of his shots twice in his final 8 seasons, which includes his 3 years with the Chicago Bulls. If this were a list of the greatest rebounders of all time, he would definitely make the list, but he doesn't make the cut as one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

Bill Walton
Bill Walton is an example of a great player who never reached his full potential due to multiple injuries derailing his career. He missed 3 complete seasons during his prime, and missed at least half of 4 others. In fact, the only time that he missed fewer than 15 games in a single season was 1986, when he was way past his prime and coming off the bench for the Boston Celtics. When he was healthy briefly in 1977 and 1978, he was a dominant player, winning an MVP award and a championship with the Portland Trail Blazers, but two seasons aren't enough to define a player as one of the all-time greats.

Willis Reed
Willis Reed is another former MVP who failed to make my top 100, and with good reason. When he was given the 1970 MVP award, there were several players more deserving of it, most notably Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who missed out on several MVP's for the same reason Michael Jordan did: because they were tired of giving the award to him. Reed also won the Finals MVP award that year and again in 1973, but in both cases the most dominant Knick was not the big man but was in fact their point guard, Walt Frazier. He may have provided the emotional charge the team needed to win in 1970, but Frazier led them to victory.

Tiny Archibald
In 1973 Tiny became the first and probably only player ever to lead the league in scoring and assists during the same season, but his accomplishment is overshadowed by the fact that the Kansas City Kings failed to make the playoffs that season. In fact, they only made the playoffs once with Tiny on the roster, so his big numbers don't really mean that much, do they?

Pete Maravich
Pistol Pete is kind of a combination of Dennis Rodman and Bill Walton as far as this list is concerned. Pete was a great scorer with great shooting range, but that was about it. His career lasted only 10 seasons, and the majority of those years saw numerous games missed due to injury. His teams only reached the playoffs 4 times, and never advanced very far, and his career shooting percentage was only 44%, which is kind of strange for a person whom many consider to be one of the greatest shooters ever.

Wes Unseld
The third and final MVP to miss my top 100, Unseld suffered from extreme overrated-ness. He led the Bullets to a huge turnaround as a rookie, for which he was named Rookie of the Year, but for some reason he was also named the MVP of the entire league that year also. I don't have an argument with him being awarded ROY that season, but there were at least 20 other players in the league that outplayed him that season, including immortals such as Don Kojis and Zelmo Beaty. His popularity earned him another award late in his career, the Finals MVP he was given in 1978, but he was probably only the 3rd-best player on that team, behind Elvin Hayes and Bob Dandridge. For some reason the voters loved the undersized and overrated center.

Robert Horry
I mentioned earlier that playoff success was an important piece of my formula, but it's more than just winning championships. Leading teams to the championship, or at least being a significant contributor to it, means much more than just getting a ring. Horry may have more rings than anyone who didn't play for the Celtics in the 60's, but he was never one of the top 2 players on a championship team, and he only made solid contributions to 5 of those 7 winners. In addition, he was never once among the top 10% of NBA players during a single regular season in his career. I guess that the number of championships won is not the only argument you need for greatness.

Now that I've run through several of the players who failed to make the cut, I'm now ready to unveil the final player who did reach the exclusive club consisting of the 100 greatest NBA Players of all time. I realize that several others have compiled similar lists in the past, and I have included rankings from 3 other sources for comparison's sake. Those 3 rankings come from Who's Better, Who's Best in Basketball by Elliot Kalb (top 50), The Book of Basketball by Bill Simmons (top 96), and the Elo-Player Rater at www.basketball-reference.com (top 500).

Without further ado, let's begin the fun with today's featured player, ranked at #100......

Cliff Hagan

(Simmons: #84, BBR: #189)

Many people today are probably not even aware of who Cliff Hagan is. This is probably due to the fact that he retired from the NBA in 1966, long before many of today's fans were around. Hagan's career didn't start until the age of 25, because the served 2 years in the Air Force before finally making his way to the NBA, and before he had even played a single game, he was traded, along with Ed Macauley, from the Boston Celtics to the Saint Louis Hawks for the rights to Bill Russell. That was only the start of his connection to Russell.

During his first 5 seasons in the league, Hagan and the Hawks made it to the NBA Finals 4 times, each of those times facing off with the man he was traded for and the team that traded him, Bill Russell and the Boston Celtics. Even though they won only one championship in those 4 tries, the fact remains that they were the only team to defeat Bill Russell in the NBA Finals. Much of the credit for that championship has always been given to Hagan's more famous teammate, Bob Pettit, but I believe that Hagan was the true catalyst behind their title. To prove my point, let's compare the two players' statistics for the 1958 playoffs.

Hagan - 27.7 pts, 10.5 reb, 3.4 ast, .502 FG%, .838 FT%
Pettit - 24.2 pts, 16.5 reb, 1.8 ast, .391 FG%, .729 FT%

These categories, along with personal fouls, were the only statistics recorded back then, and they tell the story very well. Pettit outperformed his teammate in only one category in the playoffs, while Hagan dominated Pettit in most of the others. Pettit may have been a better player for longer, but in the 1958 playoffs, it was Hagan who reigned supreme.

Hagan's career peak came in 1960, his 4th in the NBA, when he averaged 24.8 pts, 10.7 reb, 4.0 ast, .464 FG%, and .803 FT%. While those averages are all very good, they still don't compare to what he did during the Hawks' title run. Today a player with those averages in a single season would be considered a superstar, so there is no reason that Hagan should not also be added to that group. His total value is summarized in the graph below.

The value assigned in this chart refers to an adjusted version of all of a player's bad contributions subtracted from all of his good ones. It is adjusted for the player's position, and also for his shooting percentages and games missed. A value of 30 or more is generally enough to place a player among the top 10% for a season. Hagan reached this value for 5 straight regular seasons as well as 3 playoffs during his career, which is more than any of the snubs can say, which is why he is here at #100 instead of them.