Mogspan wrote:That's fair. Individual offense is definitely more important than individual defense, but defensive impact isn't negligible (not that you think it is - I just remember that you wouldn't entertain that KG > Dirk because Dirk is the superior offensive player even though Garnett is miles better defensively and his impact stats are among the best ever).
Would you say that KG never led a team to a title? He didn't have the skillset to be the #1 offensive option on a championship team, but he was clearly the best player on the '08 Celtics. AD's a very similar player in that he can't warp defenses with his presence, but he's one of the best defenders in the league, a very good rebounder, and a very good scorer despite his limitations. Plus he has recently displayed his talent for passing and an improved handle that allows him to create for himself like he couldn't before. I don't think that you necessarily need to run a team's offense to be considered its best player, even though that's usually the case.
I think we're essentially saying the same thing. I do agree that KG was clearly the Celtics' best all-around player when factoring in defense. But did he lead them to the 2008 title though? Was he the main driving force behind their championship run? I wouldn't go that far personally. I can't isolate him like I can MJ, Dirk, Hakeem, LeBron, Shaq, Kobe or Wade for example.
Mogspan wrote:Everything said about AD as a person has been positive AFAIK. Calipari was nearly in tears talking about his selflessness. Charles Barkley said that he's one of the nicest people in the world. His teammates in NOLA said that he handled the circumstances following the trade request with the utmost class. Requesting a trade is pretty lame, but he seemed to have been sincere about trying to succeed with the Pels prior to them failing him for the last time. I'll give you that he isn't a leader of men nor face of the league material, but saying that he has the charm of a crustacean is kind of hateful.
You know I jokingly made that analogy, it wasn't supposed to be taken seriously... It's my sense of humor I guess. Anyways, I know that by all accounts he's a good guy and a pretty likable guy. I didn't mean to crucify him for how he handled the trade request, we all make mistakes and we're not talking about punching fans or bringing guns to the locker room. I just don't find him particularly relatable, lovable or charismatic, that's why in my opinion he's never going to become the face of the league. That's the only point I was trying to make, and you seem to agree with the conclusion of my argument. I'm no leader of men myself so I'm not killing him for his lack of leadership either. But it does matter in how I evaluate him as a player.
Mogspan wrote:I also consider it hate if you're unjustifiably low on a player. He's ranked top 7 in RPM the past two seasons (in suboptimal environments) and has the third highest career PER of all-time (while being an elite defender), yet he's outside of your top 10? Plus you are essentially rooting for him and the Lakers to fail since you've asserted that they won't even make the postseason. You claim that AD apologists are pretentious (Kellerman is tbf), but I think it's pretentious to act like potentially the most athletic and statistically dominant big since Wilt is the most overrated player you remember seeing and to imply that proponents of his just don't see the game the right way.
The RPM argument is solid, especially considering how mediocre the Pelicans have been. It's a fact that his environments were suboptimal as you said. I also believe conceptually speaking (feel free to disprove this evidence-free argument) that there are ceilings in how far certain players can lead their team. DeMarcus Cousins statistically improved the Kings as evidenced by how high he consistently ranked in RPM but I also believe that his teams hit a ceiling when he was on the floor because of his own individual limitations combined with his role/usage rate. He could improve them significantly but not past a certain level. I believe the same logic applies to AD (on a whole other level though) as the best offensive player on your team. His RPM numbers are insane, but I believe his impact on winning hits a ceiling after he reaches a certain level of competition as the "lead guy". Feel free to disagree, I'm not presenting this as truth.
PER however is completely unreliable when it comes to big men as it overvalues certain boxscore numbers like rebounds and blocks. The fact that bigs like Kanter, Harrell or Vucevic have ranked so high in recent years would prove that. I'm not saying it's a trash stat, but I only find it useful for guards and wings. So - while impressive - AD's all-time ranking in PER doesn't paint a picture that's particularly relevant to me (besides the fact that he's an incredible player, which I never denied).
I rank AD at the lower end of my top 10 at best, at worst just outside the top 10. LeBron, Curry, Kawhi, KD (if healthy) and Harden are clearly better than him in my opinion. I believe Giannis, Embiid and Jokic are more impactful players as well, for reasons I could explain if you want me to. Then AD's in the conversation with Lillard and Paul George. So he's number 9 at best, 11 at worst. I don't think it's an unreasonable take and I don't think I'm being unjustifiably low on him. I'm just lower on him than most.
We're all a little pretentious in our opinions here. I just see the game differently than you and it's at the heart of our disagreements, which I think is cool because contradiction helps us elevate. I'm not saying I'm right and you are wrong, although I do feel strongly about my views so I get why you would take it that way.