Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #27 - 2006-07 Steve Nash

[OhayoKD]

1. 2020 James Harden
(2019, or 2018)
Feel like he should have already been voted in but basically i see him as a better version of the dude who nearly knocked off the greatest team ever. Put up mvp-esque impact on a team bereft of spacing and then had a performance vs the eventual champs/elite defense between his playmaking and scoring that probably tops anything we've seen from durant, westbrook, cp3, ect.

Defense was also solid in 2020 so really a pretty clear cut pick. His playoff scoring is basically idential to non-gsw kd and his playmaking is signifcantly better. Succeeded in a situation without spacing, all in all, good stuff. Better individual season than multiple players above him(malone, durant) and we have proof of concept with a weaker harden pushing the best team ever to the brink.

2. 05 Steve Nash
(2007 or 2010)
Led the greatest offense ever in the regular season and playoff multiple times. Led a historically strong single season turnaround. Ws able to win 50+ games without his best teammate the next year. Was the second best playoff team multiple times and arguably could have won it all as far and away the best player if he had better health.

3. 17 Westbrook
(2016)
Having out-valued, out-box stat'd and out-played prime KD in the post-season while staying within range in the regular season, 2016 Westbrook(and to an extent 2014 westbrook) is a great peak aready. Adding in westbrook's tendency to get better vs stronger opponents and his significant playoff elevation on very strong playoff opponents(crushing the 70 win spurs, taking the warriors to 7, pushing the 14 spurs to overtime of game 6, beating the best clippersi iterations, ect, ect) and Westbrook accomplishing this without good spacing, 2016(and 2014 to a degree) sets a verty strong floor.

2017 Westbrook can claim a stronger regular season performance(second in impact stuff behind 2017 curry), a better skill-set(stronger catch and shoot) and nothing about the rockets first playoff exit really calls into questions Westbrook's track record as a playoff elevator.

[No-more-rings]

So even despite Embiid's offensive advantage, I have trouble seeing good reason for him to be voted over Dwight. I just don't think his offense ever really translated to more success. Again what Dwight managed to do with a good, but not overwhelmingly great supporting cast.

2009 Magic- 59 wins, 6.48 SRS, finals trip pretty impressive takedown of Lebron's 66 win Cavs
2010 Magic: 59 wins, 7.12 SRS, ECF losing to a very tough Boston team firing on all cylinders
2011 Magic: 52 wins, 4.92 SRS, this is actually Dwight's peak even though most will vote 2009 due to the finals trip, but this was a shaky season with that mid-season trade

Embiid's team were never that good in the regular season or playoffs, and Embiid is slightly overrated in the playoffs imo. He played well in 2020, but his team still got swept and as their defensive anchor allowed Boston a 118.4 ORTG, his scoring was elite but still had almost 3 times as many turnovers as assists. His offensive impact doesn't seem that great despite the scoring numbers. They lost to a better team, but still felt that should've been more competitive. Not too many complaints with 2021, although should definitely point out he had a ridiculous 21 turnovers combined in the last 3 games against Atlanta.

And I'll just say for 2019 and 2022 he was quite mediocre for his standards. If you want to chalk a good bit of it up to injuries fine, but if that's something that effects you every other playoffs that's a big deal too. Dwight was far more durable, and just a plain better athlete too.

Even if they're pretty comparable or even a small edge for Embiid in the regular season, I don't know by what objective measures you'd rather have Embiid than Dwight for a playoff run lasting 3-4 rounds. That's something that should matter a lot when debating someone as a top 30sih peak.

Embiid is just flat out not better than Harden either. You don't have to like Harden's game, but he is a workhorse and also had more notable playoff moments than Embiid.

[capfan33]

So even despite Embiid's offensive advantage, I have trouble seeing good reason for him to be voted over Dwight. I just don't think his offense ever really translated to more success. Again what Dwight managed to do with a good, but not overwhelmingly great supporting cast.

2009 Magic- 59 wins, 6.48 SRS, finals trip pretty impressive takedown of Lebron's 66 win Cavs
2010 Magic: 59 wins, 7.12 SRS, ECF losing to a very tough Boston team firing on all cylinders
2011 Magic: 52 wins, 4.92 SRS, this is actually Dwight's peak even though most will vote 2009 due to the finals trip, but this was a shaky season with that mid-season trade

Embiid's team were never that good in the regular season or playoffs, and Embiid is slightly overrated in the playoffs imo. He played well in 2020, but his team still got swept and as their defensive anchor allowed Boston a 118.4 ORTG, his scoring was elite but still had almost 3 times as many turnovers as assists. His offensive impact doesn't seem that great despite the scoring numbers. They lost to a better team, but still felt that should've been more competitive. Not too many complaints with 2021, although should definitely point out he had a ridiculous 21 turnovers combined in the last 3 games against Atlanta.

And I'll just say for 2019 and 2022 he was quite mediocre for his standards. If you want to chalk a good bit of it up to injuries fine, but if that's something that effects you every other playoffs that's a big deal too. Dwight was far more durable, and just a plain better athlete too.

Even if they're pretty comparable or even a small edge for Embiid in the regular season, I don't know by what objective measures you'd rather have Embiid than Dwight for a playoff run lasting 3-4 rounds. That's something that should matter a lot when debating someone as a top 30sih peak.

Embiid is just flat out not better than Harden either. You don't have to like Harden's game, but he is a workhorse and also had more notable playoff moments than Embiid.

Agree with all this, I don't really see how right now you can justify Embiid over Dwight. I like Embiid's offensive skillset a lot but it's more of a theoretical thing in the postseason at this point and his injury history alone puts him below Dwight IMO. Dwight was one of the best defensive players ever and this generally translated to the postseason for multiple seasons. Add in his finals run and I can't see a case for Embiid over him.

[trex_8063]

Barkley offensive rebounding is in great part already "accounted" for in his scoring and creation ( a lot of his scoring and assists come off ofensive rebounds)

Hmm.
I'm not sure if I agree with what you're saying here. Feels like you're saying "I already acknowledged his super-elite efficiency scoring, some of which came on put-backs......so I've already given him credit for the offensive rebound.
I mean, I get that some of his high% scoring opportunities [that propel his efficiency to those heights] come on put-backs.

But otoh, a lesser offensive rebounder in his shoes just sees the end of a possession [via the defense getting the board] in some of those instances.

As for the last point...i dont think is nearly as simetrical. Is true that shootinh guards usually are bettet offensively than power forwards. But you can rely offensively in a star big or in a star guard.

Barkley at the 4 heavily limits your defensive ceiling in a position on the court where a goof defensive player can have a big impact. You are sacrificing a fair amount of defense to get charles offense

Isn't this just another way of saying it's a big man's game (and you're essentially grading them on a [position-based] curve)?
In essence, it seems like you're willing to give Miller a pass on being a non-impact defender [because he's a SG], but indicting Barkley for it [because he's a PF], and using that as a launch-point to play devil's advocate for a Miller > Barkley argument (all while acknowledging Barkley > Miller on offense).

[falcolombardi]

Barkley offensive rebounding is in great part already "accounted" for in his scoring and creation ( a lot of his scoring and assists come off ofensive rebounds)

Hmm.
I'm not sure if I agree with what you're saying here. Feels like you're saying "I already acknowledged his super-elite efficiency scoring, some of which came on put-backs......so I've already given him credit for the offensive rebound.
I mean, I get that some of his high% scoring opportunities [that propel his efficiency to those heights] come on put-backs.

But otoh, a lesser offensive rebounder in his shoes just sees the end of a possession [via the defense getting the board] in some of those instances.

As for the last point...i dont think is nearly as simetrical. Is true that shootinh guards usually are bettet offensively than power forwards. But you can rely offensively in a star big or in a star guard.

Barkley at the 4 heavily limits your defensive ceiling in a position on the court where a goof defensive player can have a big impact. You are sacrificing a fair amount of defense to get charles offense

Isn't this just another way of saying it's a big man's game (and you're essentially grading them on a [position-based] curve)?
In essence, it seems like you're willing to give Miller a pass on being a non-impact defender [. he's a SG], but indicting Barkley for it [because he's a PF], and using that as a launch-point to play devil's advocate for a Miller > Barkley argument (all while acknowledging Barkley > Miller on offense).

I dont have miller ahead of Barkley necesarrily as much as i think there is better case than given credit for

Yes, i think is important to not double count thinghs.

Those two thinghs (barkley scoring and barkley rebounding) are not completely independent value adds.

They overlap a fair bit and counting them as completely different the way you would do with a player defense and a player half court offensewould overcount barkley value add

It doesnt mean that his offensive rebounding was not valuable, quite the opposite, it was so valuable that it led to barkley being a historically good scorer in spite of his weaker jumpshot, so-so dribble and small size

Yes i think being a bad defender at sg is worse than being a bad defender at pf. I stand by that. And most of the board probably would agree here

I also dont think reggie was as bad defensively as barkley,you misread my comment. I said reggie was a mediocre defender and barkley a pretty bad one.

Even if their positions were worth the same defensively (they were not) barkley would still be worse

[LA Bird]

Here are the results for round 27

Winner: 07 Nash

There were 11 voters in this round: AEnigma, trex_8063, rk2023, Proxy, trelos6, Dutchball97, Ron Swanson, falcolombardi, capfan33, DraymondGold, OhayoKD

A total of 34 seasons received at least 1 vote: 03 McGrady, 05 Nash, 06 Nash, 07 Nash, 08 Paul, 09 Paul, 10 Nash, 11 Howard, 13 Paul, 14 Paul, 15 Paul, 16 Paul, 16 Westbrook, 17 Westbrook, 18 Harden, 19 Harden, 20 Harden, 21 Embiid, 22 Embiid, 49 Mikan, 50 Mikan, 51 Mikan, 61 Baylor, 89 Barkley, 90 Barkley, 90 Ewing, 91 Barkley, 92 Malone, 93 Barkley, 93 Malone, 94 Ewing, 94 Malone, 97 Malone, 98 Malone

Top 10 seasons: 15 Paul, 07 Nash, 08 Paul, 19 Harden, 90 Barkley, 90 Ewing, 93 Barkley, 03 McGrady, 06 Nash, 05 Nash

H2H record (1 season per player)
07 Nash: 0.708 (34-14)
15 Paul: 0.707 (29-12)
19 Harden: 0.455 (20-24)
90 Barkley: 0.361 (13-23)
90 Ewing: 0.361 (13-23)
03 McGrady: 0.303 (10-23)