Monday, August 20, 2018

No. 45 - Horace Grant

In the annual Michael Jordan-LeBron James debate, the arguments center around who had more help.
LeBron has had a rotating cast of sidekicks over the years, from Zydrunas Ilgauskas to Dwyane Wade to Kyrie Irving to Kevin Love. Jordan had Hall of Famers Scottie Pippen and Dennis Rodman and Phil Jackson on the sideline.
A player that rarely gets talked about from the early Jordan years will get talked about here – Horace Grant. How did a player with one all-star appearance, no MVP votes and a 11.2 career scoring average end up in the top 50 – because he was the missing link.
Jordan, Pippen and Grant were the Bulls big three who led Chicago to three straight titles in the early 1990s. When Jordan retired to chase a baseball dream, the Bulls still won 55 games and advanced to the Eastern Conference Finals without him. In 1994-1995, Grant signed with Orlando and even though the Bulls got Jordan back, the Magic knocked off the Bulls in that year’s conference finals.
Clearly, the Bulls need another Big Three, so the Bulls signed Rodman.
Even though Grant had modest traditional stats, he had strong advanced stats. His PER numbers were low compared to others on this list. He had a career PER of 16.0 and just two years above 19.0. He did have five seasons in a row of 9.0 win shares or above, including 1991-1992 when he had 14.1 win shares. His career win shares rank him 50th all time.
Grant played for four franchises in a 17-year career and never had a losing record. Unlike Pippen or Jordan, who only made the NBA Finals with the Bulls, Grant made the Finals with the Bulls, Magic and Los Angeles Lakers. Two of the greatest NBA playoff juggernauts in NBA history were the 1990-1991 Bulls (15-2 in the playoffs) and 2000-2001 Lakers (15-1) and Grant was the starting power forward for both. His teams won 65 percent of the regular season games he played in and 67 percent of the postseason games.
Despite all this, Grant is a long shot to make the basketball hall of fame, while Rodman is already there. In my system, Grant is clearly the better player, just not the flashy one. Here’s a look at Grant’s best seasons according to advanced stats – not including winning percentages – versus Rodman’s.
Horace Grant vs. Dennis Rodman
Grant
Rodman
Year
PER
WS
+/-
VORP
Year
PER
WS
+/-
VORP
91-92
20.6
14.4
7.3
6.7
91-92
17.0
12.6
4.9
5.8
93-94
19.8
10.0
5.2
4.6
88-89
16.3
8.1
4.7
3.8
90-91
17.6
10.3
4.4
4.3
89-90
15.4
9.3
3.4
3.2
92-93
17.5
9.1
3.7
3.9
87-88
17.4
6.8
3.3
2.9
94-95
16.9
9.5
3.5
3.7
93-94
13.4
8.7
3.5
4.2

Grant was a four-time all-defensive selection. He could guard centers, power forwards and small forwards. On offense, he could do some damage in the paint, on the break and in making the high post jump shot. He could shape his game to fit in with Jordan and Pippen, Shaquille O’Neal and Penny Hardaway and then Shaq and Kobe Bryant. He did all the little things that winning teams need someone to do. And he did it long enough to land in my top 50.
Horace Grant bio info
Career
1987-2004
Games
1,165
Points
11.2
Rebounds
8.1
Assists
2.2
FG Pct.
50.9%
All-Star games
1
NBA MVPs
0
NBA Titles
4
Playoff seasons
13
Playoff games
170
Points
11.2
Rebounds
8.6
Assists
2.1
FG Pct.
53.0%
Hall of Fame

Top 100 rankings

Points
Top 100 ranking
1-year
312.04
67th
5-year
1,425.33
52nd
10-year
2,515.88
47th
Career
3,362.53
41st

Horace Grant at his peak
1991-1992
Grant
Top 5
Points
PER
20.6
25.76

Win Shares
14.4
14.85
Box +/-
7.3
8.33

VORP
6.7
7.38

Total Advanced Stats
49.0
56.32
87.01
Playoff PER
16.3
24.01

Win Shares
3.3
3.53

Box +/-
6.7
7.80

VORP
1.9
2.09

Total Advanced Stats
28.2
37.42
75.37
Reg. Season Win %
81.48
81.48
Playoff Win %
68.18
68.18
MVP Voting (75 points)
0
0
Playoff MVP (25 points)
0
0
Total Score


312.04
               
Grant’s 10 greatest seasons
1991-1992
312.04
1995-1996
284.46
1990-1991
281.97
1993-1994
276.22
1992-1993
270.63
2000-2001
244.67
1994-1995
239.56
1989-1990
233.49
1988-1989
194.41
1987-1988
178.43

Career winning percentage

W
L
Pct.
Regular Season
758
407
65.06%
Playoffs
107
53
66.88%
                                                                                                                                         

No comments:

Post a Comment