Peaks: Brand vs Draymond vs Gasol vs Webber

[trex_8063]

How do career totals [particularly team-related totals] bear much relevance in a discussion of single-season peaks? (when "one good playoff run" is all that's required)

Well, you got me there. Caught me typing away without considering the context of the thread title.

But in an attempt to save my butt, I'd say that Brand's only notable PS run including only 12 games and one series win doesn't stack up well to the other guys, especially Pau and Draymond.

Since I've stepped in it now, I'll ask a question -- is peak always considered a single season?

Brand's 2005-06 season was indeed very good.

it depends on if people say "peak season(singular)" or "peak"

most people tend to see peak as being 2-3 seasons with most players except for those who seem to have one outlier year way ahead of all others (which fits brand)

In a broad sense [in general, or across ALL discussions], I've seen "peak" referred to both ways: single-season, or best 2-3 year period.

On THIS forum, it's customarily a term used to refer to a player's single-best season. Refer to all past Peaks Projects for reference.

EDIT: That's not to say that one can't [or shouldn't] use other nearby seasons to help inform opinion regarding player tendencies, strengths, etc. But yeah, typically the term is referring to the performance in one select season.

[trex_8063]

Without giving it a ton of thought or research, I'd be leaning toward Brand and Pau as the top 2, and Green and Webber as the bottom 2.
Webber might actually be last for me, crazy as that seems. It's a shame, because I think he had the BEST combination of size, athleticism and skill-set......he just didn't have a good basketball head on his shoulders [at least relative to the others]. Terrible shot-selection, and hit or miss on defense. Was capable of playing some D when he felt like it.....but he frequently didn't. I remember rewatching some of the '02 series against Dallas, and they were actually "hiding" Webber on Adrian Griffin much of the time.


I haven't thought about peaks in awhile, but I've previously been very high on peak Brand. I've typically thought of his '06 campaign as being pretty close to peak McHale or Willis Reed. In terms of box-based metrics, his peak exceeds that of all the other three [in both rs and playoffs]. And his PI RAPM that year is 16th in the league [while playing >39 mpg and barely missing any games; Kobe Bryant and LeBron James were the only two ahead of him in RAPM who actually played more minutes].

He was top 15 in the league in ORAPM, while being a small positive defensively too. 24.7/10.0/2.6 on good shooting efficiency and only 2.2 topg, also a team-high 2.5 bpg. In the playoffs, he was even marginally better. I'd note too that the '06 Clippers were the 7th-rated defense [excelling in DREB% and opp eFG%] with the other big-man getting serious minutes being Chris Kaman.

I didn't see a lot of him that year, except during the series against Phoenix [which I saw basically all of]; I'd seen a ton of him when he was with Chicago though. His '06 season in LA was so much above anything else he'd done though. Super-impressive player.


Draymond is a difficult one to evaluate. Superb impact metrics, but the most pedestrian box-based of the four. As he seems like an ideal lynch-pin on an already very talented [particularly offensively talented] team, people have really gushed over his value.
Many [myself included] have commented, however, that his value may tank without that talent around him. For myself, I feel that suspicion was proven true in '20. No Stephen Curry, no Klay or Durant (and they'd already pawned away most of their best depth previously). So Draymond + terrible cast translated to what?.....

Dead-last [30th of 30] in ORtg.
26th of 30 in DRtg.
Dead-last in MOV.
Dead-last in SRS.
Dead-last in wins [4 games worse than anyone else].

Admittedly Draymond missed a lot of time [was only 6th in total minutes played for the team]. That said, his net on/off with such a terrible cast was still a relatively pedestrian +2.8 [not even best in this poor principle rotation].
They were 10-33 [.233] with him, 5-17 [.227] without him. That is: still on pace to be the worst team in the league even if he's healthy the whole year.

Which brings me to the crux of all this: Draymond is a great piece on an already very very talented team. If the fit is good, he can take a semi-contender and turn them into an all-timer.
But he's the worst floor-raiser of the four, probably handily.


I know someone is going to argue that in essence elevating bad teams is meaningless, competing for a title is all that matters. I disagree. I've never been on-board with devaluing the work of, well......literally 80% of the league in any given season (the 80% that has no shot of contending). Some players will NEVER have a cast around them to have a shot to contend (look no futher than Elton Brand, actually).
imo, there's honour and value in lifting the dregs out of the basement. There's value in lifting a mediocre or mildly poor cast to a low-level playoff team. The other guys can do that to some degree; Draymond can't (even if he is as good as anyone on a contender).

[MyUniBroDavis]

Without giving it a ton of thought or research, I'd be leaning toward Brand and Pau as the top 2, and Green and Webber as the bottom 2.
Webber might actually be last for me, crazy as that seems. It's a shame, because I think he had the BEST combination of size, athleticism and skill-set......he just didn't have a good basketball head on his shoulders [at least relative to the others]. Terrible shot-selection, and hit or miss on defense. Was capable of playing some D when he felt like it.....but he frequently didn't. I remember rewatching some of the '02 series against Dallas, and they were actually "hiding" Webber on Adrian Griffin much of the time.


I haven't thought about peaks in awhile, but I've previously been very high on peak Brand. I've typically thought of his '06 campaign as being pretty close to peak McHale or Willis Reed. In terms of box-based metrics, his peak exceeds that of all the other three [in both rs and playoffs]. And his PI RAPM that year is 16th in the league [while playing >39 mpg and barely missing any games; Kobe Bryant and LeBron James were the only two ahead of him in RAPM who actually played more minutes].

He was top 15 in the league in ORAPM, while being a small positive defensively too. 24.7/10.0/2.6 on good shooting efficiency and only 2.2 topg, also a team-high 2.5 bpg. In the playoffs, he was even marginally better. I'd note too that the '06 Clippers were the 7th-rated defense [excelling in DREB% and opp eFG%] with the other big-man getting serious minutes being Chris Kaman.

I didn't see a lot of him that year, except during the series against Phoenix [which I saw basically all of]; I'd seen a ton of him when he was with Chicago though. His '06 season in LA was so much above anything else he'd done though. Super-impressive player.


Draymond is a difficult one to evaluate. Superb impact metrics, but the most pedestrian box-based of the four. As he seems like an ideal lynch-pin on an already very talented [particularly offensively talented] team, people have really gushed over his value.
Many [myself included] have commented, however, that his value may tank without that talent around him. For myself, I feel that suspicion was proven true in '20. No Stephen Curry, no Klay or Durant (and they'd already pawned away most of their best depth previously). So Draymond + terrible cast translated to what?.....

Dead-last [30th of 30] in ORtg.
26th of 30 in DRtg.
Dead-last in MOV.
Dead-last in SRS.
Dead-last in wins [4 games worse than anyone else].

Admittedly Draymond missed a lot of time [was only 6th in total minutes played for the team]. That said, his net on/off with such a terrible cast was still a relatively pedestrian +2.8 [not even best in this poor principle rotation].
They were 10-33 [.233] with him, 5-17 [.227] without him. That is: still on pace to be the worst team in the league even if he's healthy the whole year.

Which brings me to the crux of all this: Draymond is a great piece on an already very very talented team. If the fit is good, he can take a semi-contender and turn them into an all-timer.
But he's the worst floor-raiser of the four, probably handily.


I know someone is going to argue that in essence elevating bad teams is meaningless, competing for a title is all that matters. I disagree. I've never been on-board with devaluing the work of, well......literally 80% of the league in any given season (the 80% that has no shot of contending). Some players will NEVER have a cast around them to have a shot to contend (look no futher than Elton Brand, actually).
imo, there's honour and value in lifting the dregs out of the basement. There's value in lifting a mediocre or mildly poor cast to a low-level playoff team. The other guys can do that to some degree; Draymond can't (even if he is as good as anyone on a contender).

I think it’s fair to say on defense hes great either way, and he wasn’t as good defensively that year because they weren’t a good team

Offensively I don’t necessarily think he NEEDS an uber talented team, I think he needs a p and r ball handler which allows him to consistently operate on the short roll, a role he excels at.

That’s obviously asking for much, I think curry and lillard are the two I think of off the top of my head, and I agree that if he doesn’t have someone like that his defeciencies become too big to contribute on offense

I think at his optimal he’s far more impactful than the other three, and at his worst he still provides enough defensively

[70sFan]

Warriors tanked in 2020, Greem basically sat half of the season with no big injury.

Brand played on some horrible teams in 2002-04 period. Webber played on 1995 Bullets. 2007 Grizzlies doesn't look any better (and Gasol had actually a negative on/off in 2007).

[GSP]

Draymond
Brand

gap

Cwebb
Pau