How on earth is three point percentage a better indicator of his scoring efficiency than his field goal percentage? He averaged 1.4 attempts per game in his career; he wasn't very good at a shot he rarely took. What does that even tell you? The fact is that Thomas was a very efficient scorer for a player his size, a few percentage points lower than some of his peers at the line, but was overall pretty efficient. In the modern game he would have needed a better three point shot, but if he was born 30 years later he probably would have had one anyway.
I said it's a better indicator of his shooting ability, not scoring efficiency. Obviously, guys back then seldom shot threes, so FT% was the much better indicator of shooting (heck, even today, FT% tends to correlate better with "real," predictive shooting ability than 3FG% does). Scoring efficiency, if that's what we're talking about now, can be measured a lot more simply — as True Shooting%, since TS% is just points per shot divided by 2. In that regard, Isiah was not "very efficient," even for his size and era.
Career True Shooting % (with points per 36 in parentheses, since it's not fair to compare TS among players with wildly different scoring volumes)
====
Magic .610 (19.2)
Stockton .608 (14.9)
Price .586 (18.3)
KJ .585 (18.9)
Ainge .555 (15.5)
Hardaway .530 (18.1)
Isiah .516 (19.1)
The difference between Isiah's and Magic's career scoring efficiency — at comparable volume — equates to 18.8 points per 100 possessions, or roughly the difference between the best team in the NBA and the worst team. I don't have the league average TS by season handy, but just going by league-wide scoring averages I'd guess in that era it was in the 54-56% range. Isiah was perennially well below that, except for one season (1985-86).
As I noted, Isiah aged poorly (I think largely due to injuries that slowed him down) so his career number is dragged down a bit by his especially inefficient age 28-32 seasons (.501, .507, .505, .488, .488 TS). Before that he was generally in the .520 to .530 range. Still pretty meh efficiency-wise. He cracked .530 TS only once in his career, which is remarkably lame for a reputed superstar, even in that era. Obviously, he made up for a lot of that by being an excellent floor general, passer, creator, leader, etc.
Still — again with the caveat that I would want to see their on-court impact numbers to be sure — I would submit a working hypothesis that he was not clearly a better player than Kevin Johnson or Mark Price, and possibly even a tiny bit worse than them. Put KJ or Price on those Pistons teams and I'd guess they'd have been at least as good. Who knows for sure, though. I'd at least like to hear the case for what Isiah did so much better than those two that it offsets the ~14 point per 100 possession advantage those guys gave you over Zeke as a scorer.
Rodman at that point was a very one dimensional player who grabbed a lot of rebounds and defended well
I'd call rebounding and D two dimensions. And I'd argue that Isiah had basically two dimensions as well — on-ball scoring and passing — and was not particularly great at the scoring part. Apples and oranges, of course, but, depending a bit on which Pistons season we're talking about, I think there's an argument that in a couple of those seasons a league-average PG + Rodman might have netted them as many wins as a league-average defender/rebounder + Isiah.
Of course, Rodman was initially a bench player who played 26-30 MPG until 1990-91, then exploded to 40.3 MPG — most on the team — in 1991-92. The case for Rodman over Isiah is stronger after that point, since those Pistons teams were a lot better on D than on O, and 40.3 MPG of probably the best defender in the league is a big deal. I do think it's fair to say Isiah was the bigger part of the two championship teams (1988-89 and 89-90) than Rodman, if those are what we're focusing on. Whether he was bigger part of them than Dumars is I think a much tougher call. In any case, both those Pistons championship teams were stacked outside of Isiah (and fwiw, the first one did have Dantley, till he was traded for Aguirre mid-season. He was basically their Nomar).
The fact that I was born the year Isiah retired I would hope at this point would be irrelevant.
Yeah, pretty much. Especially since you can see so much on YouTube, if so inclined. Personally, I try to temper my opinions about players who were before my time; but if you have watched a ton of clips and full games of Isiah recently, that is probably worth a lot more than my foggy, hate-filled recollections from my teen years, lol. A bigger concern for me is your continued use of "FG%" as a measure of scoring efficiency, which is exactly analogous to using "Batting Average" as a measure of hitting, which would get you raked over the coals over in the baseball threads, or at least would have back in the Eric Van days when we were meaner to each other.
