Isotretinoin without prescription Isotretinoin generic Isotretinoin 10 mg without prescription Is it okay to buy accutane online Where can i buy isotretinoin without a prescription Can you really buy accutane online No prescription generic isotretinoin Buy accutane 40 mg online Buy accutane amazon Buy accutane online bodybuilding

20 thoughts on “Is Buck Williams a Hall of Famer?

  1. This was well done. There are two questions I think need a little more context.

    For number 7, I feel like you may be under-selling Williams a bit to say his best statistical comparison is Swen Nater. There is so much discrepancy in their games played that the comparison greatly benefits Nater, and punishes Williams for his longevity. If you compare them both based on their first 11 seasons, the comparison starts to tilt towards Williams, particularly in the WAR department. If you look this way, Williams falls about halfway between Nater and Artis Gilmore, though with less efficient shooting.

    For question 14, I think you might be under-selling his college career a bit. He’s considered one of the best players of all time in the ACC, arguably the most storied college basketball conference. He was twice All-ACC, led the ACC in rebounding twice, ACC Rookie of the Year.

    Those are quibbles, though. They don’t move the needle a whole lot, I don’t think. If he gets in, it is going to be through the old timers’ committee at some point in the future, or if some new defensive statistic comes along that shows he was a much better defensive player than was previously thought. At the moment it seems like he’s in a weird spot: probably top 10% both offensively and defensively, but not quite good enough in either dimension to make enough of an impact.

    1. Also, random secondary point/question: I don’t have access to WAR data, but I do have access to VORP data. The converting VORP to WAR makes it look like he had three All-Star caliber seasons by your metric: 82-83, 83-84 and 91-92. I think there might be a rounding error somewhere in the VORP data. What was his WAR in those two other seasons, if you don’t mind me asking?

        1. Ah, okay. No, didn’t know that. That would explain the difference. Makes sense now.

          Yeah, I was playing with the cut-off point to see how moving it up or down for different players got different results. At 7 WAR as an All-Star season, Williams has 6. And that is when I noticed the cusp-line seasons.

          If you don’t mind me asking, what is the logic behind the 8 WAR cut-off point for an ‘All Star’ caliber season? How robust is that number in reflecting actual All-Star appearances?

          1. In the last 30 years or so, roughly 25-30 players will reach that mark every season. Since an All-Star team is made up of 24 players, I thought that was a good cutoff.

    2. I think it’s a stretch to call him one of the best player in ACC history, although I guess it depends on how deep you’re going when you use the word “best.” Keep in mind that he was never a consensus All-America selection and he did not win ACC Player of the Year. Those are high standards, I know, but we’re talking about the ACC here.

      1. I was going off of the ACC’s own thinking. He was on their 50th anniversary team, and statistically one of the better players on that team. But that’s open to interpretation, and WAS compiled in 2002. Been some good players since then that aren’t on the list.

          1. True. 50 out of 50 years worth of players. Similar sized ratio as NBA Hall of Famers, and we consider them the best, right?

        1. But also among the ACC top 50 were guys like Bobby Jones, Sam Perkins, Horace Grant, and Christian Laettner. And the case for Buck Williams over those guys is less than clear. He played the most minutes and had the most aggregate points and was the best rebounder of the group; but each of the other four had higher steal percentages and >= block percentages, each had significantly higher assist percentages, and all but Grant had higher usage rates. Each of the other 4 had a higher PER and higher box score plus-minus, each but Laettner had a higher WS/48, and Jones and Grant had significantly higher VORPs.

          See buy accutane in dubai.

          Grant was the third best player on triple-NBA-champion teams. Jones was a key contributor of Philadelphia teams that won 1 title and played in 2 other finals, and the third best player (behind David Thompson and Dan Issel) on ABA runner-up and NBA West runner-up Denver teams. Perkins — whose career numbers are extremely similar to Williams’s, with less rebounding and inside efficiency but more floor spacing — was the third or fourth best player on some outstanding Dallas teams and an NBA runner-up Lakers team, and a key contributor to Seattle teams, one of which was also an NBA runner-up.

          Laettner had the least distinguished NBA career of the group but BY FAR the most distinguished college career. (That’s the sort of college career bump that matters for the Hall. See, e.g., David Thompson and Ralph Sampson — each of whom had higher NBA peaks, though obviously lower longevity, than Williams.)

          Williams played the most minutes and has the most points and rebounds of the group, but it’s not like it’s a head and shoulders case for Williams over any of the four mentioned (let alone later PFs on the ACC-at-50 list who aren’t eligible but have significantly better offensive numbers than Williams, like Elton Brand and Antawn Jamison).

    1. John, that’s a fair question. I may have more to say about this later, but for now I’ll just note two reasons. One, I felt like there were a few things in the Win Shares system that could be improved. Two, there is now a familiarity with WAR thanks to its acceptance in the baseball community, so I decided to move from straight wins to wins above replacement.

      1. Also, while Williams does have more win shares than any other candidate, he also has a big lead over the other leading candidates in playing time. For example, Larry Nance is only about 10 WS behind Williams, but he did that in almost 12,000 fewer minutes.

        1. I had assumed that you chose to break down Buck Williams for that very reason (Win Shares), as I have when doing Keltner lists on my own.

          I believe one can make an argument for Williams being the best PF in the NBA for the first three seasons of his career (1981-1984). Of the players you mentioned, Cummings, Barkley, and Malone were not in the NBA all three years. Comparing Williams to McHale and Nance in said seasons:

          Williams: 16.1 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 17.2 PER, 27.7 WS, .151 WS/48
          McHale: 15.4 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 18.2 PER, 25.6 WS, .169 WS/48
          Nance: 13.7 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 18.3 PER, 22.7 WS, .156 WS/48

          It’s a weak argument, but if you’re willing to do it for Marques Johnson I believe you have to do it for Williams.

          I would agree that Williams is a borderline candidate. His most similar player in similarity scores is Rasheed Wallace, who is a better candidate (more All-Star appearances, an NBA title, etc.) but still probably won’t get in. Of the other listed players, Alex English, Elvin Hayes, and John Havlicek have been elected, but Otis Thorpe, Horace Grant, A.C. Green, Sam Perkins, Detlef Schrempf, and Rashard Lewis likely won’t get in (though Grant arguably should). In a small-hall world I wouldn’t put him in.

          But the Basketball Hall has been a big hall ever since its inception, and Williams would be a better selection than many of the NBA players already elected. If Ralph Sampson can get in on four overrated NBA seasons and four supposedly great college years, Williams can get in as well.

  2. I think there are a few things you are missing in terms of Williams’ importance. He played for a terrible franchise who always seemed to do less with more. In his time in NJ the Nets drafted terribly, that was when they weren’t trading picks away for injury prone players like Otis Birdsong. That being said, he still managed to shoot at a high rate and rebound better than many other players in their Prime.

    Williams was 6-8 and 225, the exact same size as Grant Hill, yet still managed to pull down a ton of rebounds. He wasn’t a leaper like Nance nor did he have the strength of Barkley, yet he was far superior on the boards than either player.

    He was also an underrated defensive player. He didn’t put up great shot blocking numbers, but he didn’t need to. He simply shut opposing forwards down using superior positioning. He was the Blazers interior defense, as the team had to make up the defensive black hole that was Keving Duckworth.

    While on the Nets I often said that many teams would become contenders if they had Williams starting at PF for them. The Blazers turned from an ALSO-RANS to a contender the second they got Williams. He simply did all the little things a team needed in their interior to succeed. Had he been drafted 1st in 1981 instead of Aguirre, he would have made that fledgling team scary right away (they also drafted the criminally underrated Rolondo Blackman that year as well). Aguirre hardly made any team he played for better due to his complete disinterest on the defensive end, whereas Williams was just fantastic on that end and was efficient on the offensive end.

    Also , he won a rookie of the year award in a year he went up against Isiah Thomas, Aguirre, Chambers, Tripuka, Blackman and others. That was no accident.

    In college he was pretty great. He completely shut down Ralph Sampson during his last season and gave James Worthy fits. He. Dominated Sampson in their many matchups despite giving up 8 inches, and this was when Sampson was in prime. He wasn’t called on to score that much because he played on the same team as Albert King, a great scorer at the college level. Maryland’s lack of success during his time there had more to do with Lefty Drissel then it did with Williams. Add Williams to UNC and that team would have won the 81 national championship over a loaded Indiana team. He was that good.

    Williams made his teams better with his rebounding and D. He did a lot of other things that contributed to a team’s benefit that don’t show up in the record books much like Wrs Unseld.

    In that case I think he goes in, albeit even after a long wait.

  3. John Woods – 4 “overrated” NBA seasons for Ralphie Boy? I beg to differ.

    Sampson was drafted by a raped and pillaged Rockets team that won 14 games the year before (their best player was Allen Leavell). I believe Allen still holds the record for the lowest team-leading PPG avg. in history. That team was truly bad. They averaged 99.3 PPG and gave up 110.9…

    The following year, with the additions of Ralph, Rodney McCray (instead of Clyde the Glide), Reid, and Lew Lloyd, they more than doubled their win total to 29. Sampson was the hands down ROY, and the Rockets avgd 110.6 and gave up 113.7 with a PthgW/L of 33-49.

    Add in the Dream the following year, they make the playoffs, then the finals the next year. Then, they went on to break the Celtics’ record by winning 10 straight NBA titles… Oh wait… the offseason following their finals’ loss, their ENTIRE backcourt, Lloyd, Lucas and Wiggins got suspended. Then Ralph started having back and knee problems.

    Houston traded him for Sleepy and Joe Barely Cares in early ’87-’88 season. and Houston didn’t sniff the finals again until ’93-’94.

    Ralph was great for 3 seasons (20.7/10.9/2.8/1.0/2.0 while playing 243 regular season games), then his body gave out on him. His big problem was that he wanted to be Dirk Nowitzki, but there was no such thing yet, and Bill Fitch planted him down on the box instead of spreading the floor. If you hate Ralph, just say so, but overrated, those seasons were not.

    I’m not a big fan of the guy, but I watched him play most of those games, and if he was in the league today, someone would figure out how to use his unique skill set. He’s not a HOFer in my book, but it’s the BASKETBALL HOF, not the NBA hall.

    The NBA needs their own hall, IMO.

    (On a side note, in the “what if” category, suppose the Rockets had taken Drexler instead of McCray? Rodney was a decent player, but had Clyde developed alongside Hakeem during those calamitous years when they lost their back court and then Ralph, I think they may well have challenged the Bulls a few times in the finals, and may have beaten them. They DID win a title together when they were both 32…)

    1. I’ve read the analysis of the OP and most of the replies. All are excellent. I watched Buck Williams numerous times on TV and w/o looking at the stats, I have to say that qualitatively, he was an outstanding PF who deserves to be in the HOF. I remember him making Charles Barkley look silly in a game in barkley’s rookie year. Williams was a great defender and rebounder.

      Since the OP has compared him to Larry nance, I looked a the stats of both. While I think Nance was underrated, I think Williams was better. Here are some selected comparisons:

      Total points- Nance 15,687, Williams 16,784
      PPG- Nance 17.1, Williams 12.8
      Total rebounds- Nance 7,352, Williams 13,017
      RPG- Nance 8.0, Williams 10.0
      ASGs- Nance 3, Williams 3
      Win Shares- Nance 109.6, Williams 120.1
      All Defensive (1st or 2nd)- Nance 3, Williams 4
      All NBA- (1st or 2nd)- Nance 0, Williams 1

      Based on the above, I think the HOF case is stronger for Buck than Larry. How many players have over 15,000 points and 10,000 rebounds? How many players have over 16,000 points period? How many players have over 120 WSs? Yes, Buck played a long time, but what is wrong with that? I was surprised that Buck’s stats were as good as they are. Based on his stats and what I remember what an exceptional rebounder and defender Williams was, I think he clearly belongs in the HOF, and the case is stronger than I thought it was.

      I think the HOF case for Williams is stronger than that for Nance, but a good case can be made for Larry as well. I think both of them belong in the HOF, and they were better than many players in the Hall.

  4. buck Williams was a dominating player, and usually the best player on the floor, he was not a stat hog, and that is where you miss out on his value

    he could have gotten more rebounds but instead he was content to box out and let someone else get it,
    he could have scored more but he was not a ball hog and instead played within the system he was in
    he had a floor sense where he could position himself, set picks whatever that allowed his teammates to score more
    he is definitely a hall of famer
    he just wasn’t lucky enough to play with enough other good players to win it all
    but he was always the best player on his team when he played on the east coast, no matter what your stats show
    I didn’t see him much after he went to portland

purchase isotretinoin online rating
4-5 stars based on 157 reviews
Guo F, Gao Y, Wang L, Zheng Y (2003) p19Arf-p53 tumor suppressor pathway regulates cellmotility by suppression of phosphoinositide 3-Kinase and Rac1 GTPase Activities. Gynaecomastiaoccurs in a number of male patients treated withspironolactone. This can be done as early as3 days postoperatively (Deutsch 1998) but is com-monly done 5–7 days after surgery; timing is at thediscretion of the surgeon. Where in the alternative scenario do you see the provider using interpersonal commu-nication to build a relationship with Ms.

Carbon tet is an active insecticide and is effective in sup-pressing flammability of other flammable fumigants. Pachytene primary spermatocytes,earlyspermatids purchase isotretinoin online and late spermatids,withpartitioning residual cytoplasm that becomes the residual body,are seen above the junctional complex in the abluminal compartment. Detection of neurologic injury using vascular reactivity moni-toring and glial fibrillary acidicprotein. The effect of maturation is similar to the effect associated with history.History refers to events that occur outside the experimental setting and purchase isotretinoin online thus, outside the con-trol of the experimenter. Sedentarybehavior, physical activity, and the metabolic syndromeamong U.S. Furthermore, listenersmade many errors in the perception of nasalsin reverberation that masks F2 transitions thatare critical for correct identification. It is defined as aninflammatory condition characterized by loss of supporting bone in the tissues sur-rounding the implant [13 purchase isotretinoin online 59]. Of those 19, only 4 (21%)had a premortem diagnosis of PSP, while the other 68% hadother clinical diagnoses, including PD (4), PD with demen-tia (4), parkinsonism with dementia (3), ET (1), ET + PD (1),parkinsonism (1), and normal control (1). Worldwide, other BoNT products are alsoapproved for clinical use (23–27). Tsuganezawa K et al (2013) A uorescent-based high-throughput screening assay for smallmolecules that inhibit the interaction of MdmX with p53. seated, active range of motion (AROM) in left L shoulder ?exion (?ex) was measured to90? secondary (2?) to pain (7/10) with 2x/1 set.” When appropriate, the PTA should relate theobjective data in the progress note to the same information in the initial evaluation report or inprevious notes for comparison (e.g, “Pt. O- purchase isotretinoin online m-, and p-dichlorobenzenes arecommonly detected at nPl sites identified by U.S. These cultural inequities will not be resolvedquickly – it will take a lot of time and changes in leadership and governmental pri-orities and increasing engagement by nongovernmental organizations and individ-ual groups (Howe et al. As with Guillain–Barre syndrome,CIDP is usually symmetric purchase isotretinoin online and both proximal and distalmuscles are affected. These cells are characteristic of thecerebellum

These cells are characteristic of thecerebellum. Saha C, Eckert GJ, Ambrosius WT, Chun TY, Wagner MA, Zhao Q, et al.Improvement in blood pressure with inhibition of the epithelial sodium channel inblacks with hypertension

Saha C, Eckert GJ, Ambrosius WT, Chun TY, Wagner MA, Zhao Q, et al.Improvement in blood pressure with inhibition of the epithelial sodium channel inblacks with hypertension. The discontinuationof mechanical ventilation will not be felt by the patient purchase isotretinoin online because in effect it isthe discontinuation of medical treatments on a corpse. Programs for detectinglying by fMRI are now available. Upon assess-ment, the patient showed signs of mild parkinsonism. The signal generated in the cochlea travelsthrough the cochlear nerve, into the superior olivary complex, up to the inferior colliculi, andthrough the medial geniculate bodies before reaching the cortex. Tocomplicate matters, if people with pre-existing mental health problems live in unfamiliar areaswith low ethnic density then this increases the chances of relapse (Karlsen et al. Relapses have occurred after itracona-zole therapy, though it remains in the nail forfew months after completion of the course.SPORANOX, CANDITRAL, CANDISTAT, ITASPOR,FLUCOVER 100 mg cap

Relapses have occurred after itracona-zole therapy, though it remains in the nail forfew months after completion of the course.SPORANOX, CANDITRAL, CANDISTAT, ITASPOR,FLUCOVER 100 mg cap.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *