RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Kevin Durant)

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

DraymondGold
Senior
Posts: 606
And1: 787
Joined: May 19, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#101 » by DraymondGold » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:21 am

rk2023 wrote:
DraymondGold wrote:
Spoiler:
Re-posting my concerns with Giannis from last thread, adding Nash to the individual stats and slightly expanded team analysis (to include playoff net rating):

Some Concerns with Giannis

For those voting for Giannis: what are your criteria?

I have a hard time voting him above Barkley or Nash, much less Durant or Erving, just given the lack of cumulative career value. He only really has 5 MVP level seasons, he got injured in 3/5 of those postseasons, and his team got upset by an SRS underdog in 3/5 years (including one where he was healthy).

Don’t get me wrong: His peak is up there (I’d definitely take his peak over Barkley or Nash) and I weigh peaks heavily. His goodness when healthy is up there, and I tend to care less about health concerns. But is his peak really so much higher as to take him just yet?

Concern 1: A lack of career value (from a lack of prime longevity)

Let’s check PIPM as a ballpark estimate for total career value. It’s just one stat, it’s not perfect, but it does a fairly good job at capturing value (it’s like luck-adjusted RAPM), it includes playoffs, and it has one of the better box estimates on the market going back to the NBA Merger.

PIPM Career Value (1977–2020):
Giannis (through 2020): 74.1 wins
Giannis (estimate through 2023): 118.8 (assuming 2021–23 have the same value per game as 2019–2020)
Nash: 130.1
Moses (post 1977): 147.1
Moses (estimate for ABA years): 159.7 (assuming 1975–76 have the same value per game as 1977)
Durant (through 2020): 149.8
Durant (estimating through 2023): 182.1 (assuming 2021–23 have the same value per game as 2019–2020)
Barkley: 187.8

Some recent nominations and other (post-1977) Top 30 candidates are also ahead of Giannis:
Wade: 142.3
Pippen: 179.5
Stockton: +258.0
These estimates are obviously very approximate, but it does illustrate the point. Moses is 34% ahead, Durant’s 53% ahead, Erving and Barkley are 57% ahead in total career PIPM.

And it makes sense. PIPM grades Giannis as having 5 MVP years, 2 all NBA years through 2023. Compare that to Erving (likely 2 more MVP years, 1 more all NBA year including ABA), Durant (likely 5 more all-nba years through 2023), or Barkley (5 more all-nba years).

What about Moonbeam’s RWOWY? WOWY metrics have super wide uncertainty ranges, but they’re based on actual impact, and we have all the years for everyone.
Durant: 1-2 samples touching 100th percentile, 4 over 97th, 8 over 90th, 11 over 75th, 12 over 50th
Barkley: 1 touching 100th percentile line, 1 over 97th percentile, 8 over 90th percentile, 18 over 75th percentile, 18 over 50th percentile
Moses: 0 touching 100th percentile line, 0 over 97th percentile, 3 over 90th percentile, 8 over 75th percentile, 14 over 50th percentile
Nash: 5 touching 100th percentile line, 6th over 97th percentile, 9 over 90th percentile, 13 over 75th percentile, 17 over 50th percentile
Giannis: 0 touching 100th percentile line, 1-2 over 97th percentile, 4 over 90th percentile, 5 over 75th percentile, 5 over 50th percentile
So Durant and Barkley have better short peaks. Everyone has longer primes:
-Durant (4 more samples above 90th percentile, 6 more above 75th)
-Nash (5 more above 90th, 8 more above 75th)
-Barkley (4 more above 90th, 13 more above 75th),
Moses (2 less above 90th sample, but 3 more above 75th percentile

So… Giannis seems pretty significantly below most of these guys in career value. I would suspect Giannis will shoot up in career value the next time we do this project — 3 more seasons at this level do a lot for a career — but I’m also not sure we can credit him for those seasons just yet.

Concern 2: Health and a lack of playoff resilience

When a player doesn’t have the prime length or any longevity, they likely need to make up the value elsewhere. Since Giannis doesn't have the career value (yet!), is he a sufficient playoff riser to surpass these other players?

Not exactly, although some of the decline comes from frequent health problems. A quick overview of health and team level performance:
2018: 1st Round loss to Celtics without Kyrie.
2019: Upset, with major decline in performance. Beat by team with 2.55 worse SRS.
2020: Upset, with a major decline in performance. Beat by team with 6.82 worse SRS. Giannis was injured, but Bucks were down 0-3 even before Giannis’ injury. Although the Bubble makes this a very unusual circumstance.
2021: Championship! But Giannis injured, misses 2 games, and the Bucks were a KD shoe size away from being upset again by a team with 1.33 worse SRS. Still, great performance post injury in the finals.
2022: 2nd Round loss. Giannis shoots 10.2% worse (!) in relative True Shooting than his Regular season average, although his defense absolutely picks up against a strong opponent.
2023: Upset, one of the biggest upsets of the modern era as a 1st seed losing in the 1st Round. Beat by a team with 3.74 worse SRS. Giannis was injured and missed 2.5 games and returned unhealthy, although the Bucks played better without him.

So… not exactly the kind of stalwart playoff performance to make up for the longevity disadvantage. Now Giannis' team results may look better with more granular analysis, like playoff SRS or net rating. But Giannis does have poor playoff health (injured in 50% of his prime playoffs!), and his teams have had multiple playoff upsets to weaker SRS teams (significant SRS upsets by teams 2.55, 3.74, and 6.82 SRS worse in 50% of his prime playoffs!). Although to his credit, the defense is absolutely resilient when he's healthy.

What if we check more granular team data? Let's look at playoff Relative Net Rating, to capture both the fantastic defense and the concerning offense. Here are the best 3-year runs for each of the players:
-Giannis: +8.55 (2019-2021, 80th all time)
-Durant , +14.9 (2016–2018, would be 1st all time); if discounting GSW, +8.03 (2013–2014/2016)
-Nash: +8.26 (2008–2010)
-Moses: +7.07 (1983–1985)
This is obviously a very crude metric, highly dependent on teammates. But if you're looking for evidence that Giannis' team significantly outperform these rivals in the playoffs to make up for Giannis' lack of longevity and prime years, you're going to have to keep looking. Durant looks significantly better in the superteam years, and the other players aren't far behind Giannis at all. In fact, Giannis' team's all-time postseason ranking here (80th all time) is actually lower than their best regular season ranking, again suggesting there's a playoff decline.

This decline shows up in the individual data too. In Augmented Plus Minus, Giannis declines by -8% in the playoffs, which would be the 2nd biggest decline on record to be voted in. For context, Chris Paul declines -4% and Durant declines -1%, and both have overall more postseason value. Note that this data is only through 2021: he improved slightly in 2022 and likely declines in 2023, so the true average may look slightly better, but likely not enough to take him over Durant or make up for the longevity disadvantage.

Concern 3: His peak isn’t far enough ahead to make up for Concern 1–2.

We’ve voted for players with shorter longevity and poor playoff health and/or resilience. Curry was 11th and has far fewer impactful non-prime years… yet he still has ~50+% more prime years than Giannis, a higher peak, and less playoff impact decline (perhaps because better health). We just voted Chris Paul and Karl Malone, who have larger playoff health concerns or playoff decline than most… but they have an even greater prime length / longevity advantage over Giannis. As do Durant and Nash and Barkley and others, as I’ve shown above. So for us to pick Giannis, he has to have such a better peak or prime that it makes up for the longevity, poor playoff health, and larger playoff decline than most.

EPM is generally the best stat on the market for measuring current goodness/value. Here are the EPM ranks for Giannis:
2019: 6th
2020: 1st (2nd in total season value)
2021: ? (I don’t have a subscription, but Jokic was 1st)
2022: 3rd
2023: 8th
… which is great stuff! Absolutely one of the top players in the world right now. But not exactly domination by such an extreme extent that it makes sense to take Giannis over guys with 50% longer primes and careers than him. Giannis' best years are better than Durant per 100 possessions, but Durant’s minute/game advantage in 2014 actually gives him the best overall season. Durant is still ranked 5th in 2022 (only 2 spots behind) and 9th in 2023 (1 spot behind) while being 6 years older. Harden has actually has more total season value in his best years than Giannis in his best too.

Now Giannis likely does have a better peak than Moses or Barkley or Nash, but again they have significant prime length and longevity advantage. Does Giannis really have enough of a peak advantage to make up for the other disadvantages?



In sum, I’m not saying you can’t pick Giannis. There’s definitely certain criteria where he rises up… extremely peak heavy, less of a focus on playoff health or playoff decline, caring more about whether a player reached “that level” of goodness at some point even if it hasn’t been that long (yet!), caring much less about career value or prime length or longevity. But, me personally, given how many player have a career value advantage over Giannis (Concern 1), and given he doesn’t show enough playoff resilience/health (Concern 2) or have a significant peak advantage over the best of these players (Concern 3), I’m not quite ready to vote for him just yet.


So to address the points you put forth, and the years I feel are outright missing context:

Spoiler:
Not exactly, although some of the decline comes from frequent health problems. A quick overview of health and team level performance:
2018: 1st Round loss to Celtics without Kyrie.
2019: Upset, with major decline in performance. Beat by team with 2.55 worse SRS.
2020: Upset, with a major decline in performance. Beat by team with 6.82 worse SRS. Giannis was injured, but Bucks were down 0-3 even before Giannis’ injury. Although the Bubble makes this a very unusual circumstance.
2021: Championship! But Giannis injured, misses 2 games, and the Bucks were a KD shoe size away from being upset again by a team with 1.33 worse SRS. Still, great performance post injury in the finals.
2022: 2nd Round loss. Giannis shoots 10.2% worse (!) in relative True Shooting than his Regular season average, although his defense absolutely picks up against a strong opponent.
2023: Upset, one of the biggest upsets of the modern era as a 1st seed losing in the 1st Round. Beat by a team with 3.74 worse SRS. Giannis was injured and missed 2.5 games and returned unhealthy, although the Bucks played better without him.


2018 --> Why wasn't SRS brought up here? With or without Kyrie, the Bucks were a 3.7 pt SRS underdog heading into this series and took Boston the full distance (the same amount of games 2018 James' Cavaliers were able to take them, whom a lot tout as James' best self on offense, albeit Cleveland went into Boston and won to end the series. MIL had an ORTG of 109.5 (5.6 rORTG) against Boston's #1 ranked defense - where Giannis had 26-6 on 62.0% TS and solid TOV economy.
I appreciate the more productive tone in here rk! Much more fun to discuss :D I've been meaning to get back to this, but haven't gotten around to it since you posted in this last thread.

Why wasn't SRS brought up here? Because it wasn't an upset... I mentioned SRS to indicate which playoffs Giannis' team suffered an SRS upset (3/6 times, in 2019, 2020, 2023), and so didn't mention SRS in 2018 since it wasn't an upset. Agreed, the Bucks' offensive performance was good, as were Giannis' box stats. Of course, their defense was bad... they were below average at +1.8 rDRTG (where negative is better). But it's a positive overall showing, offense included.

However, to reiterate my general point, is it so positive that it makes sense to take Giannis just yet?

rk2023 wrote:2019 --> Using Regular Season SRS here to get your agenda off when the 19 Raptors are known to have translated very well to the PS - especially on the defensive end - and had a load managed, sort-of coasting, Kawhi who missed 20 games outright (known for his own amazing playoff resilience) doesn't capture the whole picture. Yes, Giannis had offensive struggles against Toronto's vaunted defense - but he was the anchor in what has been the best slate of PS defenses in the modern era (keying in on 19-22) including anchoring a very solid unit against the Raptors themselves - where they were held 5 points under their RS rating (including to a 105.6 ORTG in Giannis' minutes - which MIL won by 2.2/100). This is not to mentioning MIL, led by a tremendous 2-way series by Giannis, cremating the Celtics (this time with Kyrie :wink: ).

2019 Raptors then Bucks, h/t Sansterre:
Spoiler:
Playoff Offensive Rating: +1.72 (86th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -8.55 (15th)
Playoff SRS: +12.33 (30th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +4.59 (12th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.55 (40th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.12 (48th)

Round 1: Orlando Magic (+0.3), won 4-1, by +14.4 points a game (+14.7 SRS eq)
Round 2: Philadelphia 76ers (+4.8), won 4-3, by +2.7 points a game (+7.5 SRS eq)
Round 3: Milwaukee Bucks (+12.4), won 4-2, by +1.0 points a game (+13.4 SRS eq)
Round 4: Golden State Warriors (+9.2), won 4-2, by +5.7 points a game (+14.9 SRS eq)


Playoff Offensive Rating: +3.21 (70th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -9.21 (8th)
Playoff SRS: +13.71 (19th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.18 (38th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +1.31 (73rd), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.51 (38th)

Round 1: Detroit Pistons (-0.6), won 4-0, by +23.8 points per game (+23.2 SRS eq)
Round 2: Boston Celtics (+5.5), won 4-1, by +8.6 points per game (+14.1 SRS eq)
Round 3: Toronto Raptors (+8.0), lost 2-4, outscored by 1.0 points per game (+7.0 SRS eq)


Spoiler:
What to make of this series? First, Giannis really struggled to score. His efficiency had dropped from +8.4% in the regular season to -2.3% in the series. That is an incredible drop. Some of it was his free throw shooting. That season Giannis had shot 72.9% from the line. This series he shot 58.3% on 60 attempts. Do you know the odds that a 72.9% shooter only makes 35 or less of 60 shots? 1.1%. So while it’s totally possible that this could happen naturally (1.1% events do happen . . . 1.1% of the time) but it certainly fits alternate narratives (choking, frustrations, lack of condition, what have you). And while Giannis’ struggles were very real, the rest of the Bucks weren’t able to take advantage of the extra attention Giannis got.
The 2019 Raptors were quite good both with and without Kawhi. Yes, Kawhi missed 22 games. But if we look at both teams' margins of victory per gamewith each player in the regular season:
2019 Raptors with Kawhi: +3.98 MoV
2019 Bucks with Giannis: +10.0 MoV (151% better!)
That's a +6 difference in favor of the Bucks over healthy Raptors, and the Bucks lost. It would take a *lot* of coasting from Kawhi to explain away the Raptors victory. Losing to a team who was this much worse than you in the regular season basically never happens. I just have a hard time chalking this entire up to just "Kawhi's amazing playoff resilience". To me, it would only make sense if there was some playoff decline from the Bucks as well.

Let's check a larger sample. There is evidence for this decline in the Bucks against better teams in the regular season too. There was a stat available in 2019–2020 (having trouble re-finding it now... would appreciate help if anyone else knows where) that showed team performance against the better teams in the NBA and worse teams in the NBA (e.g. SRS in games against top half of teams vs SRS against bottom half of teams). In the regular season, the 2019 – 2020 regular season Bucks had a bigger improvement against worse teams and a bigger drop against better teams of almost any other great team in the time sample (which was this century, if I remember right...?). So in the 2019–2020 timespan, the Bucks also declined against better teams in the regular season. Why was this decline happening?

Defense: Was it defense? Probably not. I absolutely agree with your / Sansterre's analysis here, the Bucks team defense was great. They were near their defensive peak in 2019, and that peak was one of the best defensive teams of the century. Some of that credit goes to Giannis. Giannis was their best defensive player near his defensive peak. But if it was all Giannis, why were they a below average defense in the 2018 playoffs? Yes, Giannis absolutely took the jump from 2018 to 2019. But it's worth mentioning there were other factors that led to their defensive improvement in 2019. They switched to a better-fitting, defensive minded coach going from Kidd to Bud. And importantly, they signed Brook Lopez, one of the best rim protectors in the NBA, and a guy who could feasibly play twin towers alongside Giannis without giving anything away on offense (he was also one of the best stretch bigs in the NBA!).

Offense: If the decline wasn't defense, then presumably it was offense. You suggest some of the decline came from Giannis' poor efficiency -- his relative true shooting dropped -6.8% in the playoffs, and dropped -10.7% in the series vs the Raptors. That's a big drop. At the time, there were lots of reports of the "build a wall" defense doing serious damage to Giannis' offense, and I have to agree that's what I was seeing at the time.

But you suggest much of the decline might actually be a drop in free throw percentage (citing Sansterre), with the implication that some of this might be noise/luck. I'm not sure that's true. The issue is Giannis declines in his playoff FT% in every prime playoffs:
2018: 76% RS FT%, 69% playoff FT%. Change: -7%
2019: 73% RS FT%, 64% playoff FT%. Change: -9%
2020: 63% RS FT%, 58% playoff FT%. Change: -5%
2021: 69% RS FT%, 59% playoff FT%. Change: -10%
2022: 72% RS FT%, 68% playoff FT%. Change: -4%
2023: 65% RS FT%, 45% playoff FT%. Change: -19%
Career: 71% RS FT%, 62% playoff FT%. Change: -9%
To my eye, 2019 doesn't stand out as an outlier. Giannis declines (sometimes significantly) in his FT% in every single prime playoffs. How much is it caused by "choking, frustrations, lack of condition[ing], what have you" to quote Sansterre? No clue. But it does seem like a real change.

To my eye, when you see a consistent significant decline in playoff FT%, a consistent significant decline in playoff rTS% (particularly against better defenses), combined with a team that measurably declines against better teams in the regular season (at least in 2019–2020, Idk after), and has a high percentage (50% of the time!) of being upset by significantly worse teams... all these things don't scream resilient offense or resilience overall.

As I said in my first post, could you make the argument that the 2019 struggles are just Giannis (and the Bucks) getting used to deep playoff runs for the first time, then 2020 and 2023 are just declines from injury, while 2021–2022 are the true performance? Certainly. But I have a hard time coming away with the opinion that star's offense is particularly resilient enough (whether it's inexperienced 2019, poor health, or actual poor resilient play style) to take him over other players who have clearly more career value, prime length, and longevity (at least as of 2023).

rk2023 wrote:2021 --> "One Kevin Durant foot away from an SRS upset" reads as a moot point for me (I'm surprised this is being mentioned as a lot of the posts I've seen from you tangibly drill down on individual performance and impact to gauge whom did what and to what particular extent it was done). I'm in the camp that Giannis was the best player in that series - clearly:
Spoiler:
rk2023 wrote:
A few notes I have regarding that series (will try not to be redundant compared to what Ohayo presented):

https://youtu.be/krxgE5Eis7I

I think this video hits the nail on the head regarding Giannis coverage and why taking somewhat a closer eye is how to look into Giannis’ defense in the context of Bucks’ scheme. This is a very scholarly and analytical circle of basketball talk compared to any other Medium I engage with, so I think the concept of Giannis weak-side help would make sense with most of the PC Board.

Some Nets team data cited from that series (compared to season long values):

26.9 Attempts —> 17.7
65.9% Rim FG —> 61.3%
1.31 PPP —> 1.22
50.2% Drive(s) FG —> 41.9 (Passing Rate on drives increased from 36 to 48, with rim deterrence factored in).

For Kevin Durant specifically:
19% Rim frequency / 78% FG —> 15 & 57

While I think the box may be overselling Giannis’ offense and his true valuation on that end, a lot of his defense from that series doesn’t seem to be quantified / capture-able in box metrics when taking more a “bottom-up” means of analysis. Durant outclasses Giannis in some box metrics (eg. game score, individual ORTG) while the two shared similar efficiency - albeit Durant is the comfortably better offensive player here. My opinion is Giannis makes up for that gap and more in the defensive end.

Impact Assessment from that series (of course prone to a small sample bias):

Durant: 4.2 AuPM, 3.8 AuPM/G

Giannis: 5.5 AuPM, 4.6 AuPM/G

Furthermore, the Bucks were +3.37 / 100 poss. in minutes Giannis was on floor (-32 Net off, but it’s a virtually inconclusive sample) and +5.1 in minutes Giannis shared with Durant - churning out a 104.3 DRTG in this scenario.

I think you could make a reasonable Giannis case for being the best player this series - let alone the entirety of the 2020/21 season.
Re: why “one Kevin Durant foot away from an SRS upset” was mentioned (I appreciate the compliment that I tend to tangibly drill down deeper on individual performance!), this section that we’ve been focusing on was more meant to be a ‘high level team results overview’ before getting more in the weeds in the following sentences (which I did by looking at Giannis’ AuPM) and hoped to do in discussion with others.

I.e. “For Giannis to make up a massive deficit in career value, he needs to be *significantly, massively* better in the playoffs -> his high-level team results (wins) actually declined from expectations -> his more detailed team results (e.g. relative Net Rating) declined in all-time rank -> Giannis’ individual playoff impact (AuPM) declined in the playoffs (perhaps because of injury, perhaps not) -> Giannis may decline in the playoffs (with health concerns), but regardless at least does not get *significantly, massively* better in the playoffs to make up for the career value deficit”

Re: Giannis vs Durant, you could absolutely make a case that Giannis was better than Durant. There are certainly counter arguments though. In Backpicks BPM (the best box stat on the market, significantly more stable than impact stuff, actually outperforms Adjusted Plus Minus in predictive accuracy), Durant outperformed Giannis.

Giannis BPM: 4.3
Durant BPM: 6.7

Like you say, the on-rating favors Giannis as does on/off. Durant’s team was significantly more injured — Kyrie and Harden both missed 3 games — which does decrease Durant’s on rating, and adds some instability to the lineup which may have made it harder for Durant. The counter would be that Harden and Irving were all injured in the regular season, so perhaps it’s par for the course for those Nets.

It seems like I’m was a bit lower on Giannis’ decision making in this series than you were. Giannis took 4 3PAs per 36, 4.4 3PAs per game, and hit them at a frigid 26%. Over the entire playoffs, he hit them at an even colder 19%! I don’t exactly punish him for his lack of a 3 point shot alone. You can have impact without shooting range. However, when he has fewer other counters relative to all-time players too (no midrange counters, no foul drawing and making ability, in addition to no 3 point game)... it does limit your offensive resilience. Worse yet, he seemed to keep taking those 3 point attempts at higher volume than ideal, and often at poor times in the possession. He would take them unforced, early on in the possession, when there was plenty of time to get a better shot. As a guy who was actually rooting for Giannis this series, it almost made me pull my hair out! :banghead:

Here’s some film analysis I did a while back, but updated now:
2021 Nets vs Bucks, Game 5, final 6 minutes.
Spoiler:
0:00
Durant O: Durant pushes the smaller defender in transition… which should be a foul, but gets the mismatch, then gets the foul call on the pass. Lol.

0:50
Durant O: Durant slows the game down a lot at the top. A little too slow for my taste. Calls for PNR with Lopez, great job drawing double and good pass
Giannis D: Sags in lane to provide rim protection. Great rim protection against the rolling Nets player to force the miss

1:00
Durant D: On Middleton. Not very active, but good position
Giannis O: Harden disrupts his dribble. He switches to a PNR handoff, sets enough of a screen to help get his man the advantage. Although honestly this looks like Harden got in the way the most with the steal attempt. Regardless, Bucks get the shot and Giannis is in good rebounding position.

2:40
Durant O: Iso (alas no hesi) pull-up midrange jimbo. Money.
Giannis D: Inactive on weak side, though he’s in good position to help protect rim or recover to corner.

2:55
Durant D: physical defense on middleton, switches to Holiday, great defense there, forces bad shot and the miss.
Giannis O: Screen for Middleton that doesn’t generate much, Screen for Jrue but again doesn’t generate much. Fights for rebound but the Nets box him out.

3:30
Durant O: first offensive possession he isn’t involved in. He spaces in the corner. Inactive.
Giannis D: Inactive on weak side, Uncontested rebound

3:35
Giannis O: What is the decision-making here? In transition, with the defense just getting set, plenty of other options, 19 seconds on the shot clock when they’re behind in the last 5 minutes, and Giannis goes for the 3 from 2 feet behind the arc… which clanks off. He’s just gifting the Nets a free possession… but by dumb luck, Harden moves out of position and the unusual rebound bounce goes to Lopez in the corner

5:40
Durant D: Defends corner against Middleton. Sags into lane a bit too late to help with drive.
Giannis O: Giannis does the inbound pass, which allows him to get off ball for the handoff then drive. Hard shot, and he makes it.

5:56
Durant O: Durant takes it up. Gets doubled and immediate pass, which gets defender #24 going the wrong way, forces defense to collapse, and they make good corner 3.
Giannis D: Fairly inactive zoning up rim and corner, but his presence may have encouraged the pass rather than the layup. Regardless, Nets get an open 3.

6:18
Durant D: Good defense forces tough shot and bad miss by Middleton.
Giannis O: Inactive

7:37
Durant D: Inactive.
Giannis O: Uses an off ball screen, post up near the elbow. Gets position, good hook shot, sinks it. This is the kind of stuff I love to see from him in the half court.

8:05
Durant O: Again slow to start. Iso, gets past Middleton barely, but loses his footing when defense collapses. Kicks it out to open man (but it’s a slow pass since Durant was off balance). Regardless, extra pass gets the open corner 3. Nets miss.
Giannis D: Sitting in his classic spot, zoning up paint and corner 3. Helps on Durant, good job forcing pass.

8:17
Durant D: Does a Giannis here. Same positioning. Inactive as it’s on weak side.
Giannis O: Dribble handoff screen. Screen again to force the switch, rolls, but they don’t get anything. Jrue holiday iso, Giannis lack of spacing partially clogs the lane (which means the best shot is slightly further out) but his gravity keeps his defender from helping off him (so maybe not). Holiday scores .

8:40
Durant O: Durant iso drive to midrange, bounces off rim.
Giannis D: Again Inactive on weak side, but in good position, good communication with Lopez.

9:05
Durant D: Gets the rebound
Giannis O: Again, what is the thought process here? Matched up against Harden in isolation, and he settles for a contested turnaround iso jumper that misses.
Part 2:
Spoiler:
1:35
Durant D: Inactive.
Giannis O: Tries to get the switch but doesn’t. Gets the pass in on side midrange. Iso drives and gets the foul. Hits 1/2… limited free throw shooting is limiting of course, but this aggression to the rim against weaker defenders is the kind of stuff that makes him so impactful in the regular season.

3:15
Durant O: This time it’s Harden who’s super slow to start any action. Durant gets control of the ball with 2.8 seconds left on the shot clock and hits the looong 3 over Middleton. Wow, what a bailout shot!
Giannis D: Inactive on weak side, though he’s in good position to help protect rim or recover to corner. Have he heard this before?

5:30
Durant O: Durant Iso, three, misses.
Giannis D: Again Inactive on weak side, but in good position.

5:44
Durant D: Get beat by Middleton, gets lazy and goes for the steal from behind, but lucks out and the loose ball ends up in his hands.
Giannis O: In transition, passes and drives off ball. Good activity — they try to pass back to him and he’s in good position, but he bobbles the catch and it’s a turnover down 2 with 17 seconds left.

6:30
Durant O: they foul him, and he makes both shots.

6:55
Giannis O: Harden fouls Giannis in transition, down 4, 12 seconds left. Goes 1/2.
Durant D: gets rebound.

Durant O: They foul. Goes 1/2.

Nets win.

…Note that I skipped some possessions when both players were inactive.
So this is obviously a small sample. But some of the trends here are consistent with the other more detailed film analysis I’ve done for this series (end of Game 3, End of Game 7) and with my impressions from the rest of the series as I was watching it live. And before you discount this as the biased musings of a pro-Durant Giannis hater… note that I was actually rooting for Giannis this series!
Some Film observations:

-Durant: larger overall volume (Durant > Giannis). Giannis had more cases where he was inactive in the possession (Giannis had 7 inactive possessions to Durant’s 4 in the list above, although this skipped the possessions where both were inactive). Durant was the involved in almost every single offensive possession, as well as a number of defensive possessions. This is consistent with what I saw throughout the rest of the series, and Durant played more minutes

-Durant offense: better shotmaking (Durant > Giannis). Great shot making, better efficiency at the foul line to win the game. Didn’t pass much, but did draw defensive attention and playmaker out of it. Giannis has occasional moments where he was more aggressive, but also seemed less aggressive driving to the rim in transition or in the half court than he was in the regular season. Hard to tell exactly how much this is from increased fatigue in the playoffs, a more packed paint based on playoff adjustment, or hesitancy to get sent to the line.
Durant Example Clips: Part 1 2:40 , Part 2 3:15.
Giannis Example Clips: Good aggression and poor free throw shooting Part 1 1:35.

-Durant + Giannis offense: limited playmaking (con for both). The Nets offense was quite slow to get into its actions, often starting the play with ~12 seconds on the shot clock. The actions they ran were very frequently just Durant iso or Durant PNR. While Durant has the potential to be scalable, this kind of offense doesn’t get the best out of the other teammates. Still, when Durant was doubled, he was a very willing passer. Giannis meanwhile didn’t showcase much of his playmaking. Since he was less aggressive driving to the basket, he didn’t have as much rim gravity as the regular season. Instead he seemed to focus more on being off ball as a screener, but he slipped many of his screens, so they didn’t always actually generate much of an opening.
Durant Example Clips: Part 1 0:50, Part 1 5:56.
Giannis Example Clips: weaker screening 2:55

-Con for Giannis: occasional poor decision making settling for inefficient attempts on offense. The 3 point shot below was head scratching, as was the decision to commit to turnaround midrange shot with time on the clock against Harden of all defenders.
Example Clips: Terrible 3 point shot Part 1 3:35, poor decision against Harden Part 1 9:05.

-Pro for Giannis: Moments of better rim protection (Giannis > Durant). He had a great block at the rim, and had cases where he collapsed to the paint and forced the pass rather than the rim attempt. Although he had a surprising frequency inactive possessions, just zoning up the weak side. This was consistent in the other film sessions I did for the other games. How much latent value do these weak side inactive possessions have? Perhaps some. Perhaps the Nets always go to the far side away from Giannis (which might add some value if it’s headed towards more defenders or to someone’s off hand), or perhaps the possibility of him sliding over to protect the rim encouraged more midrange shots rather than drives (which would limit efficiency, even if it’s still in Durant’s comfort zone).
So Giannis has some great moments, some moments where he may have latent value (?) or just be inactive while his teammates are the primary defenders. This is consistent with the idea that the best defenders in the game generally have much lower defensive volume than the best offensive players have offensive volume.
Durant, for his part, had few moments of good perimeter defense vs Middleton and Jrue. Durant was playing more of a floor-raising role on defense, as one of their primary switchable bigs, rather than a ceiling raising role alongside other better defenders. Still, Durant has fewer cases of rim protection, and less latent value when inactive than Giannis, so advantage Giannis on defense.
Giannis Example Clips: Good defensive block Part 1 0:50, good job forcing pass Part 1 8:05. Inactive example Part 1 2:40
Durant Example Clips: Part 1 2:55, Part 1 6:18.



All that to say, you can absolutely make the case for Giannis > Durant in that series, but I wouldn’t say it’s a significant advantage. There’s a case for Durant as well. And if peak Giannis on the peak Bucks team isn’t looking significantly better than Durant at age 32, post-Achilles injury, then I’m not sure how he’s supposed to make up for the lack of career value. If you take a broader view, including the regular season, then I absolutely favor Giannis in 2021. But the point still stands.

rk2023 wrote:2022 --> Glad you mentioned the ramp up in defense / elevation against a very formidable opponent (one that was favored by 4 SRS - without factoring in MIL being w/o Middleton - and was taken 7 games). However, just going off of the "X.YZ % true shooting drop" is lazy analysis. Linking a graphic here for the full breakdown of impact and production (not originally mine, and I unfortunately forgot the source) which was left out for just the raw scoring efficacy- and I am aware that the +/- and on-off here is a small sample once again (https://imgur.com/a/kZBhHAc). In a more rhetorical sense, what more could you have asked for Giannis as he raised his offensive load / responsibility to a 100th %ile value (only surpassed by Young, Doncic, LBJ, Westbrook) in Taylor's series database?
How much more could I have asked for Giannis? A lot more, if I’m expected to take 5 years of prime Giannis over Durant’s entire career or his 10 year prime, or Barkley’s 16 year career (8+ prime years) for that matter, or Nash’s 18 year career (6–10 year prime). How much more for Giannis to be *on pace* to pass those players by the time we get more of a complete prime from him? Not much more at all.

The point of the true shooting drop was to show another example that Giannis doesn’t have the sufficient offensive resiliency to take his career over those other guys just yet. But perhaps it was too shallow analysis. You’re right that Middleton was out, and that taking the Celtics to 7 games is a great showing without Middleton. I wonder if the lack of Middleton made it easier for the Celtic to focus in on stopping Giannis’ offense. If so, what would his efficiency look like with a healthy Middleton? Perhaps better. The defense was certainly there.

AuPM suggests 2022 was Giannis’ best playoff run, although BPM suggests 2018–2021 was better. If we believe there’s a signal there and not noise, AuPM is likely picking up on Giannis’ defense (without as strong of a team performance when Giannis was off sans Middleton) in 2022, while BPM is picking up the significant drop in efficiency.

All that to say, 2022 playoffs is not a terrible showing by any means. It’s absolutely in line with a player who’s on pace to be Top 20 ever. But it doesn’t exactly assuage the offensive resiliency concerns (even if they’re assuaged by context), nor does it suggest Giannis is a sufficient playoff beast to take his career over Durant or Barkley or Moses or Nash until he has a few more year under his belt.

rk2023 wrote:- In general, you mention that a fair share of Giannis' problems are due to health (or at-least pose the question, perhaps this is more accurate). All three of his PS injuries have been more or less flukes rather than a case of his body being fragile / concerns about holding up - I wouldn't even attribute this towards his play-style. They happened yes, but I don't like the way it is being framed. It's just very odd that Giannis gets roasted for immediately returning from a back injury requiring him to take IV fluids and not be close to his full health for a team collapse with almost all parties involved / facing supernova Butler. It's crazy that had he sat out and nursed the injury some more, he probably wouldn't have this crazy a revisionist history for his PS translation (saying in general, here).

-
I made it pretty clear in my post back then that I saw Robinson's postseason decline as *partially* explainable by poor fit during his prime, and that (at a minimum) he could actually be a playoff improver in an ideal situation.

In general, I commend the approach to push back against fundamental attribution error, but I don't see the same rationale laid out for Giannis. With how he is discussed (compared to others like Garnett and Robinson) it is almost like Giannis is being penalized for shouldering more than both on the offensive end, and better equipped to raise a team's floor. Not to mention ball-stopping and puzzling shot-selection from other Milwaukee teammates (eg. terrible 3P% compared to RS results against BOS, BKN, MIA, & TOR across 2019-22 - the latter two years where Giannis was more efficient [substantially so in 2021] than the team averages in-spite of shouldering the brunt of MIL's offense.


^ Mentioned this all in the last thread, pushing back against the "Giannis poor resiliency / durability" narrative I'm seeing pushed.[/quote][/quote]

Re: Injury, Giannis plays a *very* physical style of basketball. I guess you could argue each injury was a fluke, in the sense that the exact injury that occurred was different each year. It’s not like Pual’s recurring hamstring injury. But I also don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that, when you play as physical as Giannis, the increased wear and tear of the playoffs may increase injury odds.

Re: situation, I would have to think we’d agree that prime Robinson and Garnett had a significantly worse situation than Giannis, no?
Giannis has two costars in Middleton and Holiday — absolutely more support than either peak Robinson or Garnett had. Both help share the offensive burden. Both are positive defenders, particularly Jrue who’s one of the best guard defenders of the century, which is particularly scalable when you have rim protection behind you. Speaking of rim protection, Giannis is paired with a weak DPOY to DPOY level defender in Brook Lopez, who also happens to be one of the best floor spacers in the game… which is particularly valuable alongside a guy whose offense depends on deriving to the rim. I also wouldn’t say their depth beyond the starters was terrible. Seems significantly better than mid-90s Robinson and mid-00s Garnett.

Re: poor teammate shooting, like I said in my film analysis, Giannis seems to drive to the rim less (or at least had less efficacy) against the Nets. It may be a limited film sample, but it was also consistent with my impression from the rest of the series. If Giannis is stifled more by a build a wall defense in the playoffs, or is more fatigued and so doesn’t drive as aggressively, that might collapse the defense less effectively, which would lead to worse quality 3 point looks for his teammates. He certainly faced this kind of defense that stifled his rim effectiveness against Boston, and Miami, and Toronto too. Could the decline of Giannis’ driving game lead to worse shots for teammates? It could be noise or bad luck too. Middleton’s injury in 22 could have played a role against Boston. etc. I’d want to look closer at statistics on the teammate shot quality or more film of the 3 point attempts they were missing.
SpreeS
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,745
And1: 4,117
Joined: Jul 26, 2012
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#102 » by SpreeS » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:26 am

OldSchoolNoBull wrote:If anyone's curious, here are the placements on the 2020 Top 100 for the players being discussed currently:

Moses - 20
Barkley - 21
Durant - 22
Pettit - 25
Stockton - 26
Nash - 27
Wade - 28
Harden - 31
Giannis - 74
Jokic - 95


2020

Durant 22th
Paul 23th

2023

Paul 20th
Durant 22th???

Paul added 194 RS games and 40 PS games (PHO had 2nd best record in 2021 and the best record in 2022, also reched NBA Finals, won 5 PO series + 2 Allstars + 2 AllNba teams)
Duarnt added 135 RS games and 27 PS games (BKN had only 4th best record in 2021 and won only 2 PO series + 3 Allstars +1 AllNba team)

Great insight from the members of this project
DraymondGold
Senior
Posts: 606
And1: 787
Joined: May 19, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#103 » by DraymondGold » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:34 am

Voting Post! :D

Vote: Durant
Nomination: Stockton
Alternate Nomination: Wade

Went into depth on Durant vs Giannis in the preceding post. Just to round out this one, I'll paste in my vote from last round. It has a bit of Durant vs Erving stuff, but it's still relevant to why I'm voting for Durant and nominating Stockton:

DraymondGold wrote:Voting Post! :D

Vote: Durant
Alternate: Erving
Nomination: Stockton
Alternate Nomination: Nash

To me, this is between Durant and Erving. Highest peak of this group (along with Giannis). Significantly higher longevity than the other top peak player. To me, this gives them the best cumulative career value / goodness of this group. Erving has more longevity, Durant has a more consistent prime. Erving has a higher peak if you value ABA, Durant has a higher NBA peak. Erving's probably the better floor raiser (he's at least a more resilient floor raiser), Durant might be the more scalable ceiling raiser.

Ultimately, I think Durant may have done just enough to pass Erving in his career. I haven't heard enough counter arguments to explain Erving's low impact (e.g. on/off and Augmented Plus Minus) in the early NBA. For example, was Erving's rotations aligned with the bench more than expected? Are there more historical/contextual factors for why we should value the ABA and not be discouraged by the early NBA performance? More arguments here could absolutely sway me.

For reference, here's a snapshot of the earlier post I made on their cumulative impact:
DraymondGold wrote: Let’s check PIPM as a ballpark estimate for total career value. It’s just one stat, it’s not perfect, but it does a fairly good job at capturing value (it’s like luck-adjusted RAPM), it includes playoffs, and it has one of the better box estimates on the market going back to the NBA Merger.

PIPM Career Value (1977–2020):
Giannis (through 2020): 74.1 wins
Giannis (estimate through 2023): 118.8 (assuming 2021–23 have the same value per game as 2019–2020)
Erving (post 1977): 126.2
Erving (estimate for ABA years): 187.3 (assuming 1972–76 have the same value per game as 1977–78)
Moses (post 1977): 147.1
Moses (estimate for ABA years): 159.7 (assuming 1975–76 have the same value per game as 1977)
Durant (through 2020): 149.8
Durant (estimating through 2023): 182.1 (assuming 2021–23 have the same value per game as 2019–2020)
Barkley: 187.8

Some recent nominations and other (post-1977) Top 30 candidates are also ahead of Giannis:
Nash: 130.1
Wade: 142.3
Pippen: 179.5
Stockton: +258.0[
These estimates are obviously very approximate, but it does illustrate the point. Moses is 34% ahead, Durant’s 53% ahead, Erving and Barkley are 57% ahead in total career PIPM.

...

What about Moonbeam’s RWOWY? WOWY metrics have super wide uncertainty ranges, but they’re based on actual impact, and we have all the years for everyone.
Durant: 1-2 samples touching 100th percentile, 4 over 97th, 8 over 90th, 11 over 75th, 12 over 50th
Dr J: 0 touching 100th percentile, 1 over 97th percentile, 6–7 over 90th percentile, 13 over 75th percentile, 16 over 50th percentile
Barkley: 1 touching 100th percentile line, 1 over 97th percentile, 8 over 90th percentile, 18 over 75th percentile, 18 over 50th percentile
Moses: 0 touching 100th percentile line, 0 over 97th percentile, 3 over 90th percentile, 8 over 75th percentile, over 50th percentile
Giannis: 0 touching 100th percentile line, 1-2 over 97th percentile, 4 over 90th percentile, 5 over 75th percentile, 5 over 50th percentile


As for nominations, I think f4p made some compelling arguments against Nash. He is absolutely lower in the box metrics (although not as low in the best box metric, Backpicks BPM). He looks great in some RAPM types (e.g. Goldstein RAPM), not quite as great in others or in certain derivatives (e.g. PIPM). He also looks worse in some of our best hybrid metrics like EPM (he was 11th and 13th during his MVP years in 05–06). I do think box performance has a hard time capturing his level of game-changing passing. Box stats tend to miss the subtler forms of creation, where is Nash absolutely a star. I also agree with f4p's point about people being too reliant on relative offensive rating (a team stat, and on only one side of the floor at that) to evaluate a single player's total impact (i.e. on both sides of the floor). It's a good ballpark measure, but not one we should rely on as much as people do. I prefer to use it in concert with other more granular measures.

With that, I think I've convinced myself that Stockton has surpassed Nash in career impact, although this group gets very close together. I would consider arguments for Wade (though generally I'm lower on his peak than others around here). Jokic is like Giannis -- better than any of the other nominations in terms of peak, but we just haven't had enough years yet for me to vote him now.

I'd also encourage people to start considering Pippen or Ewing for nomination soon! I don't have them over my current nominations, but I do think it might be time for them to enter into the general tier of players we're considering nominating soon.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,761
And1: 25,082
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#104 » by 70sFan » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:34 am

One_and_Done wrote:
ZeppelinPage wrote:Vote: Moses Malone
Nomination: Bob Pettit

The more I research, the more I come to appreciate the ability to rebound the ball, and Moses is among the greatest ever at that. Possessions are so valuable in basketball and you cannot have the opportunities to score without rebounding. Coaches like Red Auerbach and Pat Riley had a strong belief in rebounding and conditioning during their careers and made it a staple of their culture.

I think the success Moses consistently had throughout his career in the playoffs showcases this. When teams can gameplan around how their opponent plays, it can be more difficult to be consistent on offense, and this is where the extra possessions that rebounding provides really pays off. We see this in the impact Moses has on the Rockets and later the 76ers. I also look at guys like Dennis Rodman and Ben Wallace and notice something similar in what they were able to accomplish. I think rebounding specifically can be overlooked at times, as a team cannot win without possessions, and shooting more than the other team is a sound strategy that constantly paid off for teams like Auerbach's Celtics.

Pettit was just a fantastic all around player. Elite scorer, playoff performer, rebounder, and was a solid defender as well. His 1958 Finals performance is legendarily clutch. I do have guys like Pippen, Havlicek, and Baylor on my radar but Pettit slightly gets the nod here for me.

In today's game guys would be abusing Moses in the high pick and roll, and knocking down shot after shot if he tried to live in the paint and grab rebounds. It would be the easiest thing ever for offences to exploit, like Christmas came early. On the other end teams would be delighted at Moses team abandoning a 3pt shot to let Moses try and tip it to.himself repeatedly inside. They'd just send help and lick their lips gleefully at their opponents inefficient offense.

I think it would be better to present a serious argumentations instead of trying to be fun with highly exaggerated hyperboles that don't bring anything valuable to the project.
DraymondGold
Senior
Posts: 606
And1: 787
Joined: May 19, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#105 » by DraymondGold » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:37 am

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
ZeppelinPage wrote:Vote: Moses Malone
Nomination: Bob Pettit

The more I research, the more I come to appreciate the ability to rebound the ball, and Moses is among the greatest ever at that. Possessions are so valuable in basketball and you cannot have the opportunities to score without rebounding. Coaches like Red Auerbach and Pat Riley had a strong belief in rebounding and conditioning during their careers and made it a staple of their culture.

I think the success Moses consistently had throughout his career in the playoffs showcases this. When teams can gameplan around how their opponent plays, it can be more difficult to be consistent on offense, and this is where the extra possessions that rebounding provides really pays off. We see this in the impact Moses has on the Rockets and later the 76ers. I also look at guys like Dennis Rodman and Ben Wallace and notice something similar in what they were able to accomplish. I think rebounding specifically can be overlooked at times, as a team cannot win without possessions, and shooting more than the other team is a sound strategy that constantly paid off for teams like Auerbach's Celtics.

Pettit was just a fantastic all around player. Elite scorer, playoff performer, rebounder, and was a solid defender as well. His 1958 Finals performance is legendarily clutch. I do have guys like Pippen, Havlicek, and Baylor on my radar but Pettit slightly gets the nod here for me.

In today's game guys would be abusing Moses in the high pick and roll, and knocking down shot after shot if he tried to live in the paint and grab rebounds. It would be the easiest thing ever for offences to exploit, like Christmas came early. On the other end teams would be delighted at Moses team abandoning a 3pt shot to let Moses try and tip it to.himself repeatedly inside. They'd just send help and lick their lips gleefully at their opponents inefficient offense.

I think it would be better to present a serious argumentations instead of trying to be fun with highly exaggerated hyperboles that don't bring anything valuable to the project.
But 70sFan, consider the lip licking! Don't you feel the holiday spirit? :D
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 5,511
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#106 » by One_and_Done » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:44 am

Moses is basically the optimal version of the Greg Monroe player type. That player type isn't really a thing in today's NBA. When it was opposing teams would gleefully put those guys in as many pick and rolls as possible. J.Okafor and Monroe basically illustrate the problem nicely.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,577
And1: 8,208
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#107 » by trex_8063 » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:48 am

One_and_Done wrote:1) You have the leaving the bench rule stuff a bit mixed up. Those rules were introduced as a result of Kent Benson almost killing Rudy. They had nothing to do with Malice in the Palace. The rules had been around for literal decades, and had to that point ALWAYS been enforced in a draconian manner. David Robinson was among the many players who missed a playoff game as a result. I think it's impossible to argue the rule was unfair to the Suns or they didn't have time to adjust to it.


Ah, it seems I had things a little mixed up.

It appears you do as well.

Kent Benson did not nearly kill Rudy T. That was Kermit Washington (Kent Benson, if I'm not mistaken, is the guy who elbowed Kareem in the gut, and then subsequently broke Kareem's hand [with his face]).

The rule (for an automatic 1-game suspension for leaving the bench) has technically "been around for decades", but not the length of time you're implying (you also are off by more than a decade). The rule was initiated before the 1994-95 season, in attempt to curb fights and rough-housing, which were becoming commonplace.

Ostensibly, the rule was to prevent people from leaving the bench to enter a fracas. Neither Diaw or Stoudemire was entering the fracas (there actually was no fracas to speak of). They stepped mere feet outside the bench zone, mostly looking as though they were checking on Nash, to see if he's OK. That was it.
I still contend it was a poor ("hiding behind regs") decision to suspend them both (the 3rd and 4th best-players on the team) for a game, and arbitrarily giving a mere 2-game suspension to the roughly the 6th-man for the opposing team, who was the ONE [and only] person who truly did something [very] wrong.

Is it possible that the not-too-distant memory of the Malice could have played into the league's "we will not budge a micrometer from how this rule is written, just to set an example" response? Probably, but I don't know.

But it was not fair, it was not justice. That Amar'e and Boris made mistakes is not in question; that the punishment(s) fit the crime is.

That the Suns lost game 6 somewhat misses the point. The point is: after winning game 4, they were the favourites........until the league took away two starters for a crucial game 5. That threw everything into doubt.

Momentum is a thing; something they would have had A LOT of had they won game 5 at home with their full compliment [even without, they lost by just 3 pts, btw]; which would also make a game 6 loss irrelevant, as they would then still have a game 7 at home.


Apparently when Horry becomes "Cheap-shot Rob", he still ends up being "Big Shot Rob"......
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 5,511
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#108 » by One_and_Done » Thu Sep 7, 2023 6:51 am

Excuse me. I said Benson, but obviously meant Kermit.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,761
And1: 25,082
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#109 » by 70sFan » Thu Sep 7, 2023 7:01 am

One_and_Done wrote:Moses is basically the optimal version of the Greg Monroe player type. That player type isn't really a thing in today's NBA. When it was opposing teams would gleefully put those guys in as many pick and rolls as possible. J.Okafor and Monroe basically illustrate the problem nicely.

Yeah, except not really. Moses was much more athletic than these two and possessed significantly more advanced offensive game, while also being far far better defensive player.

By this logic, you can say that Shaq would be useless because Hibbert got played out of the league.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 5,511
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#110 » by One_and_Done » Thu Sep 7, 2023 7:02 am

trex_8063 wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:1) You have the leaving the bench rule stuff a bit mixed up. Those rules were introduced as a result of Kent Benson almost killing Rudy. They had nothing to do with Malice in the Palace. The rules had been around for literal decades, and had to that point ALWAYS been enforced in a draconian manner. David Robinson was among the many players who missed a playoff game as a result. I think it's impossible to argue the rule was unfair to the Suns or they didn't have time to adjust to it.


Ah, it seems I had things a little mixed up.

It appears you do as well.

Kent Benson did not nearly kill Rudy T. That was Kermit Washington (Kent Benson, if I'm not mistaken, is the guy who elbowed Kareem in the gut, and then subsequently broke Kareem's hand [with his face]).

The rule (for an automatic 1-game suspension for leaving the bench) has technically "been around for decades", but not the length of time you're implying (you also are off by more than a decade). The rule was initiated before the 1994-95 season, in attempt to curb fights and rough-housing, which were becoming commonplace.

Ostensibly, the rule was to prevent people from leaving the bench to enter a fracas. Neither Diaw or Stoudemire was entering the fracas (there actually was no fracas to speak of). They stepped mere feet outside the bench zone, mostly looking as though they were checking on Nash, to see if he's OK. That was it.
I still contend it was a poor ("hiding behind regs") decision to suspend them both (the 3rd and 4th best-players on the team) for a game, and arbitrarily giving a mere 2-game suspension to the roughly the 6th-man for the opposing team, who was the ONE [and only] person who truly did something [very] wrong.

Is it possible that the not-too-distant memory of the Malice could have played into the league's "we will not budge a micrometer from how this rule is written, just to set an example" response? Probably, but I don't know.

But it was not fair, it was not justice. That Amar'e and Boris made mistakes is not in question; that the punishment(s) fit the crime is.

That the Suns lost game 6 somewhat misses the point. The point is: after winning game 4, they were the favourites........until the league took away two starters for a crucial game 5. That threw everything into doubt.

Momentum is a thing; something they would have had A LOT of had they won game 5 at home with their full compliment [even without, they lost by just 3 pts, btw]; which would also make a game 6 loss irrelevant, as they would then still have a game 7 at home.


Apparently when Horry becomes "Cheap-shot Rob", he still ends up being "Big Shot Rob"......

Know what stops a fracas turning into a larger brawl? Letting the bench join in and escalate it.

I think you need to be objective about this. How can it be an unfair/poor decision to interpret the rule in the exact draconian way it had always been interpreted? A different interpretation, to stop a suspension, would have been biased. Teams who had lost stars in key games before, like David Robinson years earlier when he put 1 toe over the line, would have rightly complained of favouritism towards Phoenix. The Malice in the Palace is notable because many players got 'leaving the bench' suspensions, even if they had good intentions or only left by a foot. You can see assistant coaches grabbing guys to stop them getting suspended. The rule was well known. As soon as it happened people online started pointing out that it would 100% lead to suspensions.

It is impossible to believe the cluster of opposing players did not meet the rule, in practise and letter. The story that 'we were checking on Nash' was a thinly veiled excuse to try and avoid a suspension, which had never worked before and rightly was not considered here. Stars were suspended for similar violations in the 90s. It was always, always enforced in a draconian way. Today Adam Silver has softened it's application, which is fine if teams are all told that in advance. In Stern's day teams knew how it was going to be.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
trelos6
Senior
Posts: 558
And1: 231
Joined: Jun 17, 2022
Location: Sydney

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#111 » by trelos6 » Thu Sep 7, 2023 7:26 am

Some PIPM of the candidates.

Barkley
Image

Moses
Image

Nash
Image

Wade
Image

Pippen
Image
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 5,511
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#112 » by One_and_Done » Thu Sep 7, 2023 7:34 am

Pippen is a worthy candidate to discuss here too. Though if we're going to nominate Pippen we probably have to nominate Kawhi first.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#113 » by f4p » Thu Sep 7, 2023 7:56 am

Vote
1. Kevin Durant

Nomination:
1. James Harden



same ol' same ol' for KD. great peak, 1 MVP and 3 runner-ups to absolute peak lebron seasons. he's had great chances ruined by teammate injuries in 2013 and 2021. looking at durant's stats from age 21 to now is just crazy. still churning out 25 PER, 0.200 WS48, 7 BPM seasons after an achilles tear and had a crazy 67.7 TS% last year. has his faults but probably should have already been voted in.


james harden is either way more like steph curry than people think or steph curry is way more like harden than people think. it's amazing how often they end up right next to each other in certain measurements. whether its regular season box, postseason box, postseason resiliency, postseason plus/minus, Cheema postseason RAPM or how close their teams were even when one had way more talented teammates than the other.
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#114 » by f4p » Thu Sep 7, 2023 8:00 am

One_and_Done wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:1) You have the leaving the bench rule stuff a bit mixed up. Those rules were introduced as a result of Kent Benson almost killing Rudy. They had nothing to do with Malice in the Palace. The rules had been around for literal decades, and had to that point ALWAYS been enforced in a draconian manner. David Robinson was among the many players who missed a playoff game as a result. I think it's impossible to argue the rule was unfair to the Suns or they didn't have time to adjust to it.


Ah, it seems I had things a little mixed up.

It appears you do as well.

Kent Benson did not nearly kill Rudy T. That was Kermit Washington (Kent Benson, if I'm not mistaken, is the guy who elbowed Kareem in the gut, and then subsequently broke Kareem's hand [with his face]).

The rule (for an automatic 1-game suspension for leaving the bench) has technically "been around for decades", but not the length of time you're implying (you also are off by more than a decade). The rule was initiated before the 1994-95 season, in attempt to curb fights and rough-housing, which were becoming commonplace.

Ostensibly, the rule was to prevent people from leaving the bench to enter a fracas. Neither Diaw or Stoudemire was entering the fracas (there actually was no fracas to speak of). They stepped mere feet outside the bench zone, mostly looking as though they were checking on Nash, to see if he's OK. That was it.
I still contend it was a poor ("hiding behind regs") decision to suspend them both (the 3rd and 4th best-players on the team) for a game, and arbitrarily giving a mere 2-game suspension to the roughly the 6th-man for the opposing team, who was the ONE [and only] person who truly did something [very] wrong.

Is it possible that the not-too-distant memory of the Malice could have played into the league's "we will not budge a micrometer from how this rule is written, just to set an example" response? Probably, but I don't know.

But it was not fair, it was not justice. That Amar'e and Boris made mistakes is not in question; that the punishment(s) fit the crime is.

That the Suns lost game 6 somewhat misses the point. The point is: after winning game 4, they were the favourites........until the league took away two starters for a crucial game 5. That threw everything into doubt.

Momentum is a thing; something they would have had A LOT of had they won game 5 at home with their full compliment [even without, they lost by just 3 pts, btw]; which would also make a game 6 loss irrelevant, as they would then still have a game 7 at home.


Apparently when Horry becomes "Cheap-shot Rob", he still ends up being "Big Shot Rob"......

Know what stops a fracas turning into a larger brawl? Letting the bench join in and escalate it.

I think you need to be objective about this. How can it be an unfair/poor decision to interpret the rule in the exact draconian way it had always been interpreted? A different interpretation, to stop a suspension, would have been biased. Teams who had lost stars in key games before, like David Robinson years earlier when he put 1 toe over the line, would have rightly complained of favouritism towards Phoenix.



nothing changes the fact that it clearly wasn't spirit of the rule to have guys suspended for having a toe over the line, which is exactly why they pretty much immediately softened it and we haven't seen such a pointless suspension since.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,899
And1: 5,511
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#115 » by One_and_Done » Thu Sep 7, 2023 8:17 am

I don't see how you can say that was never the intent of the rule, when it was always enforced that way and had been around well over a decade.

https://www.espn.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/3386/guess-they-really-mean-stay-on-the-bench

Nor was it changed after the Suns series as you claim. Stern refused outright to alter it in any way.
https://www.nydailynews.com/2007/11/07/david-stern-wont-change-nbas-rule-about-leaving-bench/
It was softened in application under Adam Silver, who took over 7 years later. In fairness to Silver, he changed it immediately (while pretending nothing had changed). This was the point where the league basically said enforcement under this new commish would be different.
https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2049888-rod-thorn-explains-why-paul-george-didnt-violate-nba-rules-during-altercation.amp.html
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,168
And1: 22,173
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#116 » by Doctor MJ » Thu Sep 7, 2023 3:03 pm

Induction - Vote 1:

Nash - 1 (HBK)
Durant - 11 (AEnigma, rk, OaD, beast, hcl, trelos, trex, OSNB, Doc, DGold, f4p)
Moses - 3 (ltj, Clyde, ZPage)
Giannis - 2 (Samurai, iggy)

Durant has majority.

Kevin Durant is Inducted at #22.

Nomination - Vote 1:

Jokic - 4 (HBK, beast, ltj, iggy)
Wade - 3 (AEnigma, rk, Doc)
Harden - 4 (OaD, hcl, trelos, f4p)
Pettit - 4 (Samurai, Clyde, ZPage, OSNB)
Stockton - 2 (trex, DGold)

No majority. Beginning with eliminating all who don't have 4 votes:

Image

Jokic - 0 (none)
Harden - 2 (AEnigma, trex
Pettit - 1 (Doc)
none - (rk, DGold)

Eliminating Jokic:

Harden - 0 (none)
Pettit - 0 (none)
none - 4 (HBK, beast, ltj, iggy)

Harden 6, Pettit 5.

James Harden is added to Nominee list.

Image
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,930
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#117 » by OhayoKD » Fri Sep 8, 2023 1:51 am

Doctor MJ wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
Well, he wasn't the same after his injury, but that's not really why he was traded.

He was traded because Harden was sick of Paul nagging him, and using a power play to force the Rockets to get rid of the nagger even if it meant destroying any chance of the Rockets ever being a contender again - which is what Westbrook's arrival clinched.

If CP3 had been just as good, Harden would have put up with it, is the feeling I had.


Well this gets into the whole thing:

Thinking that getting Westbrook instead of Paul was an upgrade was a really, really bad thought. So either:

a) Harden wanted Paul gone for personal reasons.
or
b) Harden is a horrendous judge of team talent who damages his franchise when he's allowed to have power.

One can choose not to count either thing in one's Top 100 criteria, but nevertheless, at least one of those two things is true.

It doesn't have to be a "likely" upgrade. It can be as simple as "this team is unlikely to contend with chris paul just getting worse and worse with age, maybe worth rolling the dice as you can't go lower than 0 championships".

The latter does not require being a "horrendous judge of team talent who damages his franchise when he's allowed to have power". Kind of like "lebron doesn't cede control to coaches", this feels half-baked. Durant's decision to leave gsw for Kyrie is much more clear cut.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,168
And1: 22,173
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #22 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 9/7/23) 

Post#118 » by Doctor MJ » Fri Sep 8, 2023 4:03 am

OhayoKD wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:If CP3 had been just as good, Harden would have put up with it, is the feeling I had.


Well this gets into the whole thing:

Thinking that getting Westbrook instead of Paul was an upgrade was a really, really bad thought. So either:

a) Harden wanted Paul gone for personal reasons.
or
b) Harden is a horrendous judge of team talent who damages his franchise when he's allowed to have power.

One can choose not to count either thing in one's Top 100 criteria, but nevertheless, at least one of those two things is true.

It doesn't have to be a "likely" upgrade. It can be as simple as "this team is unlikely to contend with chris paul just getting worse and worse with age, maybe worth rolling the dice as you can't go lower than 0 championships".

The latter does not require being a "horrendous judge of team talent who damages his franchise when he's allowed to have power". Kind of like "lebron doesn't cede control to coaches", this feels half-baked. Durant's decision to leave gsw for Kyrie is much more clear cut.


It would have been one thing if Harden simply operated behind the scenes saying, "Look we're not good enough and Paul's getting older. I think you have to do something.", but that's not what happened. Harden made his beef public immediately after the playoffs.

At the time I was honestly more focused on Paul's role in all of this, but it was always clear that what Harden had done broke some ethical boundaries and potentially undermined the Rockets' ability to get as much as possible for the guy Harden wanted gone. And of course we're now several years on and we just know that Harden does this as a matter of course.

Re: Durant more clear cut. I'm very critical of Durant and don't have a problem with anyone who objects more to Durant's judgment than Harden...but both cases are crystal from what I see.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!

Return to Player Comparisons