#2 Highest Peak of All Time (Shaq '00 wins)

[therealbig3]

But I suppose what I'm asking is, if LeBron goes to an above average offensive team, what does the makeup have to look like for him to maintain his huge impact? I don't think they can be a high-level PG driven team or else he's just improving on one of the guys making them above average.

eg a Kevin Johnson offense is +3. Replace with LeBron they might go to +4 or +5.

But have we seen LeBron on an above average offensive team yet? Even with Wade and Bosh, like you said, the Heat still aren't that great outside of LeBron offensively.

BTW, I do agree that Nash is better than LeBron offensively, just like Magic/Bird are. I'm just arguing that it's not by a lot, and that his defense can make up for it.

But even though on/off data shows us that Nash's Suns teams aren't great offensively without Nash on the court, he DOES have players around him that fit him perfectly. He has great shooters, he has a wing that doesn't need the ball at all pretty much, and he has a big man that can score in the post and is awesome in the PnR. It's predicated on Nash's brilliance, which is why it doesn't do well without him, but all he needs to do is step in and the pieces fall right into place.

I don't think LeBron's had that. He had shooters and defensive role players in Cleveland. He didn't have a consistent secondary scorer that could move without the ball and score. He didn't have a legitimate post scorer (53 games of 37 year old Shaq, who was a net negative at that point doesn't count). He does get a consistent secondary scorer in Wade when he goes to Miami, but it happens to be a guy that basically does the same things he does. While they're trying to figure out how to co-exist, you have an All-Star caliber PF in Bosh basically relegated to being a spot up shooter and PnR/PnP finisher. And you have a bunch of shooters. I think if you replaced Wade with Marion and Bosh with Stoudemire, even though you downgrade the players, I think you get a better offense, because they play right into LBJ's strengths (Marion needs to be spoonfed, and Amare loves the PnR). So you'll have two scorers that would thrive off LeBron's on-ball play, including a post scorer, and a bunch of shooters around him. I think that's the perfect fit, and if you think about what Magic and Nash have had, they've had exactly that. Put Nash and Magic on the same team, neither is going to have the same impact. Your point about KJ is something that could be said about Paul or Nash, no?

To a lesser extent than LeBron, I don't think MJ could go to high-level SG driven teams (Miami in 09 or LA in 06, for example) and maintain his huge impact, unless he basically replaces Kobe or Wade. So I think it's a similar case with LeBron if we assume he goes to a high-level PG driven team. It's a criticism you could make of any player that goes anywhere that has a similarly talented player with a similar skillset...someone (most likely both) is going to see a decline in their production/impact. KG is actually the only guy I can think of who this wouldn't affect, and other players like him (Russell, Walton), superstars who mainly contribute defensively.

I guess you disagree, but I haven't really seen anything that would tell me that LeBron can't go to an above average offense with pieces that would fit him well and turn them into a historic offense. So he wouldn't be able to go to a team with Deron Williams or Derrick Rose and make them dramatically better, but I think he would be able to go to a team with Paul Pierce or Ray Allen and make them dramatically better. I think he would be able to go to a team with a post presence like Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan and make them dramatically better. It depends on the personnel, and I do understand that guys like Magic and Bird didn't seem to depend on personnel, they would just improve whoever by a huge amount, but I didn't see that with Magic actually (he had GOAT impact when he got the ball in his hands and played with guys that fit him perfectly), and with Bird, could he go to a team with a lot of off-ball players, but no real on-ball threat, and improve them dramatically? Who would have improved the 2006 Sonics or the 1998 Pacers more, Bird or LeBron?

[therealbig3]

BTW, I think 2013 is going to be super interesting. Personally, I think we'll see that super-elite offense you're talking about if Wade stays healthy and becomes an even average outside shooter. Because one of the pairings I've always wanted to see (LeBron and Ray Allen) is going to be a reality, and I think LeBron/Wade/Bosh finally understand their respective roles in the offense. I think we'll see some great things offensively from Miami and LeBron specifically this year, as long as he stays focused coming off a championship.

[C-izMe]

I get what our saying but Jordan worked off ball. Having Wade/Kobe really wouldn't make him a worse player if your talking impact. I always thought that part of his game was overlooked but watch Jordan in the 91 Finals. Scottie brings the ball down, they run Jordan around screens to catch the ball in the mid post. The. He either scores with a jumper or drives and dishes to whoever is open. He really only scored in the paint on fastbreaks and cuts (he didn't usually do that though which is why I say watch that series - that might be the best ever).

Now Bird would've had more impact on almost any type of offensive team. His skillset allowed him to be a spectacular playmaker and he would easily be able to take on a scoring load with spot up shooters around him. Think Dirk last year where the only "creator" he had was Terry (who isn't really good at it). On the other hand I don't think Lebron fits that team very well due to their reliance on Dirk's ability to draw doubles and kick (and unless your as dumb as Scott Brooks you aren't doubling Lebron no matter how much he kills you).

Magic's playmaking ability (much like Nash's) could mesh them with anyone. As ball dominant as Wade is Magic could get him the ball enough to make up for the lack of touches and Magic didn't really like to score that much anyway. Worthy had no problem maintaining numbers with and without Magic.

I'm going to say this and possibly catch heat (it's really a compliment) but Lebron IMO has the least portable skillset of any top 10 peak offensive player ever. He loves to pound the ball a lot (like the great PGs) but he doesn't have the playmaking ability they do (he has the natural ability though). If he was groomed as a PG it would probably be different but as of now he turns over the ball a ton (relatively speaking) when passing, and gives it up at the end of the shot clock too much. If his playmaking ability was really at elite PG level he and Wade would mesh perfectly IMO.

[Gregoire]

Id rank best players with their peak (1 year) like this (only impact the game)
1a Jordan
1b Shaq
1c Wilt
2 Kareem
3 Lebron
4 Bird
5 Hakeem, Magic
So, number 2 - Shaq 2000

[therealbig3]

I get what our saying but Jordan worked off ball. Having Wade/Kobe really wouldn't make him a worse player if your talking impact. I always thought that part of his game was overlooked but watch Jordan in the 91 Finals. Scottie brings the ball down, they run Jordan around screens to catch the ball in the mid post. The. He either scores with a jumper or drives and dishes to whoever is open. He really only scored in the paint on fastbreaks and cuts (he didn't usually do that though which is why I say watch that series - that might be the best ever).

That's why I said to a lesser extent. But Jordan gets a great reputation for working off-ball, but what you described is actually isolation basketball, what Melo does a lot of. Jordan did a ton of his scoring off isos and on-ball creation. But Jordan did play off-ball at times, and he was very good at it, so I can see how him and Wade or him and Kobe would still work...but it wouldn't be ideal, and I wouldn't be that surprised if Wade/Kobe + Jordan + shooters weren't an all-time great offense. And Kobe plays almost exactly the same way as Jordan, in terms of mid-post isos and on-ball creation.

In fact, there were a lot of doubts whether CP3 and Kobe could co-exist all that well when it looked like CP3 was going to be a Laker (just like there are doubts that Nash and Kobe can co-exist all that well)...I think similar issues would come up with CP3/Nash and Jordan, just like there are issues with Wade/LeBron.

Now Bird would've had more impact on almost any type of offensive team. His skillset allowed him to be a spectacular playmaker and he would easily be able to take on a scoring load with spot up shooters around him. Think Dirk last year where the only "creator" he had was Terry (who isn't really good at it). On the other hand I don't think Lebron fits that team very well due to their reliance on Dirk's ability to draw doubles and kick (and unless your as dumb as Scott Brooks you aren't doubling Lebron no matter how much he kills you).

I disagree with this a lot. I think LeBron and Dirk is a match made in heaven offensively. Dirk getting his iso on, with LeBron cutting to the basket, or LeBron creating with Dirk spotting up.

Also, Bird wasn't nearly as good as LeBron as an on-ball creator. In the examples I gave, you have Miller and Allen running around. Bird would absolutely help, and he's a legit post threat. But they had very average PGs, and adding Bird, whose off-ball strengths are already kind of there with Miller and Allen wouldn't be as helpful as adding LeBron, who I think could take those offenses to historic levels.

Magic's playmaking ability (much like Nash's) could mesh them with anyone. As ball dominant as Wade is Magic could get him the ball enough to make up for the lack of touches and Magic didn't really like to score that much anyway. Worthy had no problem maintaining numbers with and without Magic.

And Wade's had one healthy year with LeBron and his personal production didn't struggle at all. He had one of his most efficient seasons with LeBron. The issue is that they're redundant, so the team offense didn't explode as much as people expected. I think a similar issue would have happened with Magic and Wade (or in the Jordan/Wade example I gave before), although I think Magic would have worked better than LeBron, because he doesn't play exactly like Wade like LeBron does. But you put Nash on Magic's team, and I'm not seeing an offense that you would expect with that kind of offensive talent.

Also, is portability restricted to offense? Because Magic can't just go to any lineup and just fit defensively. He needs to play next to a SG and SF that can guard PGs and SGs, because Magic has to guard SFs or maybe bigger SGs. LeBron on the other hand, is one of the most versatile defensive pieces there is, and he can fit into almost any lineup defensively and not be a liability, and would rather be a strength.

[colts18]

I just went and rewatched the 4th quarter of game 7 of 2000 lakers vs. Blazers to look at Shaq's impact. Here were the results:

18 Offensive possessions (before the Blazers started fouling at the end)
16 half court possessions
Shaq touched the ball in the post for 11 out of 16 possessions
Shaq passed it out 3 times (1 assist)
Of the 8 times (he had 1 O Reb) Shaq didn't pass out, he drew 5 fouls and went 3-3 FG

Shaq was double teamed every single time without he touched the ball except for the times where he shot it real quick before the double or got fouled. Just rewatch that 4th quarter if you doubt that Shaq doesn't have a huge impact. he was the offensive catalyst of that team.Kobe wasn't getting double teamed, it was Shaq and Shaq's doubles helped the Lakers offense.

Shaq also drew 5 fouls in that quarter and got the Lakers into the bonus early. Sabonis started that quarter with just 2 fouls. 9 minutes into that quarter, he already fouled out. All 4 fouls were before shots. The last foul was on a Shaq offensive rebound and FG attempt.

[C-izMe]

Oh yeah defensively it's a different story. Their really isn't a problem with portability defensively unless your a bad defender (in some way). Like how a Bynum/Shaq frontcourt wouldn't work (they'll still be very good)because they aren't mobile and they usually don't pick up at all on PnRs.

Your saying that Jordan plays Melo style ball but that's why I say Melo usually (at least in Denver) isn't a iso player primarily. He was assisted more than any other high scoring perimeter wing up until KD came. MJ was still different though because where Melo likes to catch and make a decision, Jordan just attacked. He caught the ball and either shot, drove, or passed. And he did it almost immediately. Now the Kobe with Nash thing is different because no matter how similar their games are Kobe never showed a off ball ability close to what Jordan has. Jordan could impact the game well in a Reggie roll though (take the 91 Finals for example).

And Wade was more efficent just because he wasn facing constant double teams and he was relatively healthy. Also the fastbreak offense (as a cause of the defense and Wade's ability to cherrypick) the Heat ran led to a ton of easy buckets. In the halfcourt they were redundant and really if you had to rate their offense before and after 2011 you would say they both got worse.

And Bird was great on ball too. His off ball ability wouldn't be used but he could pass like nobody except Magic IMO and his scoring game was amazing off the dribble.

[ElGee]

@C-izMe They are the on/off numbers. Read my other post -- when Nash is on the court, Phoenix's offenses are 119+. That will result in like a 114 team rating for the year.

But I suppose what I'm asking is, if LeBron goes to an above average offensive team, what does the makeup have to look like for him to maintain his huge impact? I don't think they can be a high-level PG driven team or else he's just improving on one of the guys making them above average.

eg a Kevin Johnson offense is +3. Replace with LeBron they might go to +4 or +5.

But have we seen LeBron on an above average offensive team yet? Even with Wade and Bosh, like you said, the Heat still aren't that great outside of LeBron offensively.

Correct. I'm extrapolating, because as I've said, I think it's part of the essence of player evaluation. It's easier to determine for some players than others based on scenarios.

But even though on/off data shows us that Nash's Suns teams aren't great offensively without Nash on the court, he DOES have players around him that fit him perfectly. He has great shooters, he has a wing that doesn't need the ball at all pretty much, and he has a big man that can score in the post and is awesome in the PnR. It's predicated on Nash's brilliance, which is why it doesn't do well without him, but all he needs to do is step in and the pieces fall right into place.

I don't think LeBron's had that.

Agreed. So if we give James comparable tools, what will the results look like this? Are we assuming he runs 50 PnRs in a game like Nash? And only shoots when necessary? I'm not sure he can actually do this to the same effect -- he does have SOME scoring wing in him, if you know what I mean -- and it's why I said I (currently) regard Paul as a better offensive player.

...He does get a consistent secondary scorer in Wade when he goes to Miami, but it happens to be a guy that basically does the same things he does. While they're trying to figure out how to co-exist, you have an All-Star caliber PF in Bosh basically relegated to being a spot up shooter and PnR/PnP finisher. And you have a bunch of shooters. I think if you replaced Wade with Marion and Bosh with Stoudemire, even though you downgrade the players, I think you get a better offense, because they play right into LBJ's strengths (Marion needs to be spoonfed, and Amare loves the PnR). So you'll have two scorers that would thrive off LeBron's on-ball play, including a post scorer, and a bunch of shooters around him. I think that's the perfect fit, and if you think about what Magic and Nash have had, they've had exactly that. Put Nash and Magic on the same team, neither is going to have the same impact. Your point about KJ is something that could be said about Paul or Nash, no?

All very good points.

To a lesser extent than LeBron, I don't think MJ could go to high-level SG driven teams (Miami in 09 or LA in 06, for example) and maintain his huge impact, unless he basically replaces Kobe or Wade.

This is a really interesting thought and one I've had about volume scorers in general. I tend to regard many volume scorers as low portability because of this. The good ones who can create and pass well (and and are good spot up shooters) I tend to regard as having solid portability because of this. And the rare ones like Miller and Allen who can absolutely shoot the devil out of the ball I consider having high portability -- I think that kind of shooting is exactly what always improves offenses, regardless of how good.

So I think it's a similar case with LeBron if we assume he goes to a high-level PG driven team. It's a criticism you could make of any player that goes anywhere that has a similarly talented player with a similar skillset...someone (most likely both) is going to see a decline in their production/impact. KG is actually the only guy I can think of who this wouldn't affect, and other players like him (Russell, Walton), superstars who mainly contribute defensively.

With you 100%. Great observations that more people should be thinking about IMO.

I guess you disagree, but I haven't really seen anything that would tell me that LeBron can't go to an above average offense with pieces that would fit him well and turn them into a historic offense.

Well I'm re-evaluating this. And we have to guess. We don't know. Right now, I see a guy who "carries" not-so-good offenses to the +4 range. Then he gets a better situation -- granted, not ideal, as we've fleshed out nicely in this post, and something Wade gets a bit of a pass for incidentally -- but again you have similar offensive results.

My biggest qualm is that while I think he can play in the true ball-dominant mold of Nash and Paul and Magic (as evidenced by the clutch numbers) this doesn't automatically happen all the time on a better team, and I think this comes from the "winginess" he has. I WOULD levy the same criticism to Jordan. I do hold "ease of coaching use" as a trait in portability -- if it's hard to recognize how to use a player, I think it matters to a degree because we can't expect every coach to get it right if there are huge differences in style of use. And more importantly, does LeBron really WANT to play like this (Nash, Magic, Paul, Oscar) every possession, or does he like scoring a tad too much to expect that? (eg look at 2008 Olympics)

Who would have improved the 2006 Sonics or the 1998 Pacers more, Bird or LeBron?

I like this question. Let's do Indiana first. Bird can play either forward spot, really, but let's assume they go more offensive to start (or that it would have been easier for Bird to defend 4's in 1998). For LBJ, I instantly struggle with who he would replace. I think, based on our discussions, he reduces Mark Jackson to the backup. (?) Frankly, they should trade him because if you want LBJ on-ball constantly he should be paired with a guard who can hit open 3's and defend the point.

M. Jackson
R. Miller
C. Mullin
L. Bird
R. Smits

vs.

L. James
R. Miller
C. Mullin
D. Davis
R. Smits

The first lineup looks like they would just be silly-good on offense. Miller AND Bird off ball? Bird posting as an option, Mullin's crazy shooting. Reggie with Jackson AND Bird's passing.

The second lineup is like a slightly better version of what LBJ had in Cleveland, with Miller upgrading over Mo Williams off ball and the bigs pairing less well because those bigs aren't great in PnR situations (Z was). The bench units are interesting because of the build of the team but I won't go there.

2006 Sonics
Ridnour
Allen
R. Lewis
L. Bird
Center

vs.

Ridnour
Allen
L. James
R. Lewis
Center

I think it's pretty clear the lineups would work this way. Ridnour plays the Mo Wiliams role next to James. I again see the Bird team being slightly better for similar reasons. Keep in mind in 2009 the Cavs shooters around James (Mo, Pavlovic, Wally, Boobie and West) shot 41%. Miller, Allen, Lewis and Mullin certainly might improve on that (!), but to what degree? 41% would be the 3rd-best shooting team ever (LeBron brought them back to 12th from the 23-9 line). At 43% -- crushing the 2010 Suns -- they would pick up about a point of offensive efficiency.

Very interesting thought experiment though.

[therealbig3]

Jordan could impact the game well in a Reggie roll though (take the 91 Finals for example).

I'll have to rewatch that series, because I don't remember him playing like Reggie, or off-ball like you claimed...I remember him playing on-ball a lot.

And Wade was more efficent just because he wasn facing constant double teams and he was relatively healthy. Also the fastbreak offense (as a cause of the defense and Wade's ability to cherrypick) the Heat ran led to a ton of easy buckets. In the halfcourt they were redundant and really if you had to rate their offense before and after 2011 you would say they both got worse.

Agreed. But I'm not sure if this is really a knock on LeBron moreso than just saying they're really redundant.

And I would say Wade not facing constant double teams helps LeBron's case, since he was drawing the double teams from Wade. And the fast break offense, with Wade cherry-picking is somewhat of a product of LeBron/Wade teaming up since they cause a lot of that.

And Bird was great on ball too. His off ball ability wouldn't be used but he could pass like nobody except Magic IMO and his scoring game was amazing off the dribble.

But was Bird as great on-ball as LeBron is? I think it's no, which is why I'd much rather have LeBron with guys like Allen/Miller than Bird. And I'd rather have LeBron with KG/Duncan than Bird.

I'd rather have Bird with Nash or Wade or Kobe or Jordan or Magic than LeBron.

[C-izMe]

But was Bird as great on-ball as LeBron is? I think it's no, which is why I'd much rather have LeBron with guys like Allen/Miller than Bird. And I'd rather have LeBron with KG/Duncan than Bird.

See this is where we disagree. Lebron had great spacing in Cleveland and we know more or less what he would do in that role. Meanwhile Bird could score in every way short of the dribble drive. Ray could handle the ball a bit and so could Luke. They would really just need to get down the court and get the ball to Larry.

[ElGee]

@realbig3 I think you're underrating Bird "on-ball." He doesn't need to start a PnR 30 feet away or slash with the dribble to have great "on-ball" impact. He does it from the post and off curls extremely well because the dude is such a freakish passer. I mean, look at the Payton Sonics teams -- those are ridiculous offenses. Look at the construction of them...I don't think Payton was being "on-ball" dominant the way you are thinking of with James. It's just when you have great passing and shooting (eg Payton + Schmrepf with weapons like Hawkins, Kemp and stretch 5) the ball moves and team's get layups/fouls. (eg Celtics FT rates without McHale in 86 and 88 were strong.)

EDIT: To expound on the 2006 Sea example as C just did, Ridnour, Allen and Bird would share "on-ball" duties just fine to me. I mean, who did all this dribbling in Boston when their offenses WERE at historic heights?

[ronnymac2]

Bird and Magic: I encountered a Larry Bird stat recently that floored me a bit. In 1988 (considered to be the end of Bird's prime, or slightly after his peak), the Celtics offensive rating with Kevin McHale in the lineup was...

117.1 (+9.4 to league).

Those would both be records for a full season (McHale played in 64 games). The highest team rating on record for a season is 115.6. (87 Lakers) The greatest distance from league average is +9.2 (04 Dal). The 87 Lakers were +7.3 FTR, and their team was a beacon of health all year.

OK, so this was going to be my question.

Where do you rank Bird's 1988 regular season relative to himself and relative to everybody else in history when considering offense only? Because I remember looking at that season and thinking to myself it might be the best individual offensive regular season ever.

The RS alone? Verrrrrry high. I have it right on par with the other peak Bird seasons. I don't even know if I'd object to ranking it first (which it make it my No. 2 all-time offensive season behind 87 Magic). Unfortunately for Bird, his body falls apart that post season.

No doubt.

[C-izMe]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZQEkElyqAY[/youtube]
This game is Bird playing like Carmelo. A lot of isos.

[ronnymac2]

LeBron's ability to adapt to good teams is getting underrated here.

His off-ball and midpost game was underrated back in CLE. He ran off screens and started his attack in the midpost with greater frequency than people will remember.

It wasn't just Bron pounding the ball from 30 feet waiting for Varejao to come up for a pick. That only happened at the end of games; mind you, LeBron put up league-leading numbers in "under 5 minutes" scenarios that led to excellent team results for CLE.

But his game in 2009 and 2010 wasn't ground-n-pound, even though it is pigeon-holed as such. It's like when people think of Allen Iverson as being nothing but an isolation player. They don't remember that in 2001, Iverson ran off screens throughout the game and had a wicked backdoor baseline cut. How the hell did two other players on his team average over five assists per game that season if it was all Iverson all the time pounding the ball?

Then James goes to Miami to play with Wade and Bosh. It's not the most natural fit (you basically have THREE of the same players since they all score the same way pretty much), but all three are unselfish players. Bosh morphs into more of a spot-up shooter and a decision-maker at the high post. It's easy for him since he gets to drag a big man outside and he had the best stand-still mid-range spot-up game to begin with.

But James and Wade need to adapt the most. Since neither are spot-up shooters, what else can they do to provide spacing or present themselves as scoring threats? Well, the 3-point shot is probably the most efficient way to create space off ball in the modern era, but the basics still work, right?

Offensive rebounds, cuts, transition buckets, and quick attacking pin-down post ups worked for teams for over 30 years before 3-point shooting became popular.

LeBron was always god-like in transition, but his sense of seeing plays develop where it'd be advantageous for him to swiftly cut- not to mention the more opportunities since Miami has more stable ball-handlers than CLE ever had- has improved greatly over the past two years. So has his back-to-the-basket post game and willingness to use his strength on pin-downs (it's not Jordan's pin-down on the block for the quick turnaround fadeaway J, but with LeBron's strength and power, who cares?). And so has his offensive rebounding (6.8 OREB % in the playoffs, higher than Jordan's ever went).

One more thing. I agree with Elgee that James has some of that wing scorer in him. But he's so much closer to Magic and Bird than Jordan and Bryant in that sense. This is the same guy that passed the ball to Donyell Marshall at the end of a game and even though he missed, stuck by his decision. He's been criticized (unfairly imo) for making the right play- passing to an open teammate.

LeBron isn't out to get his. Sometimes he heat checks, but for the most part, he makes the unselfish plays. He defers. Guy has had a winner's mentality since coming into the league, since he passed to Marshall. He'll make the swing passes. That's portable.

[ronnymac2]

As somebody who isn't voting but hopes Shaq gets in at number 2 and thinks many of the criticisms of him in this thread are crap, I want to say that LeBron James, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Hakeem Olajuwon, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar all have arguments for having the GOAT peak. They are above everybody else.

Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Bill Walton, and Julius Erving never were superior peak players then those nine GOAT players (the eight I mentioned above and Jordan).

Of the players coming up, the one I want to hear about most is Larry Bird. I'll wait until the conversation about him heats up though.

You do understand how close Bill Walton and Kareem's impact was during their era? It's odd that you have put Walton down in a lower tier.

Walton's impact on the Blazers was greater than Kareem's impact on the Lakers.

That doesn't mean that Walton was the superior basketball player.

[therealbig3]

Good posts. I'm re-evaluating my stance too.

But I'm not saying there would be serious issues in Seattle with Bird, I just think LeBron would help them more. It's more than just having great spacing, I think a secondary scorer like Miller or Allen who can drop 15-20 ppg on outstanding efficiency, all while playing off-ball, is something LeBron never had (that and a legit post presence). Give him either of those, and the already elite offenses he's led get that much better. Why can't we assume they become ridiculous offensively?

Cleveland in 09 was 4th offensively, at +4.1. I mean, how large of a difference would there be between a superior version of that team and the 86 Celtics, who were +4.6 offensively?

And good points about good passing and good shooting, but LeBron brings an added element to the game, which IS his ability to attack the basket from 30 feet out...that kind of pressure he puts on the defense with the ball in his hands forces them to collapse and opens up wide open shots for someone like Ray Allen or Reggie Miller or Rashard Lewis or Chris Mullin. What ends up helping an offense more, Bird's passing ability/post play/off-ball play or LeBron's ability to attack the defense and get to the rim with the ball? Who knows, and it could very well be Bird, but to me, LeBron is like the wing version of Shaq with the kind of attention defenses need to pay to him when he lowers his head and goes into attack mode, and that's something I don't think Bird or really anyone outside of MJ could do. And LeBron is typically such an excellent passer, that he'll find guys that are left open (we saw it constantly in the 2012 playoffs with Chalmers/Miller/Battier).

FTR, I'm still leaning LeBron here after Russell, Wilt, and Shaq go, but you guys have made great points.

[ronnymac2]

I just went and rewatched the 4th quarter of game 7 of 2000 lakers vs. Blazers to look at Shaq's impact. Here were the results:

18 Offensive possessions (before the Blazers started fouling at the end)
16 half court possessions
Shaq touched the ball in the post for 11 out of 16 possessions
Shaq passed it out 3 times (1 assist)
Of the 8 times (he had 1 O Reb) Shaq didn't pass out, he drew 5 fouls and went 3-3 FG

Shaq was double teamed every single time without he touched the ball except for the times where he shot it real quick before the double or got fouled. Just rewatch that 4th quarter if you doubt that Shaq doesn't have a huge impact. he was the offensive catalyst of that team.Kobe wasn't getting double teamed, it was Shaq and Shaq's doubles helped the Lakers offense.

Shaq also drew 5 fouls in that quarter and got the Lakers into the bonus early. Sabonis started that quarter with just 2 fouls. 9 minutes into that quarter, he already fouled out. All 4 fouls were before shots. The last foul was on a Shaq offensive rebound and FG attempt.

Nice.

It doesn't make sense to ding Shaq for one game in an entire playoff run. Series should have been over in five after Shaq dropped 30/20 in game 5. He struggles in game 6 while Kobe hits a bunch of 3's when the game is basically over already, and that's "Kobe brought it, where was Shaq in such a big game?!!?" Then in game 7, both are instrumental in a comeback for the ages. Shaq has a stellar fourth quarter, yet "he didn't do what it took to win."

Horse ****. Liars suck.

Thank you for the research, Colts.

[ardee]

I think Walton and Garnett in particular have gotten massively overrated (I agree Garnett is a top 15 player of all time but the level people take it to is strange), mainly because a lot of people love Russell here and these two are in his mold.

Of course, the logical counter is that in general Walton and Garnett tend to be massively underrated, because (like Russell) their strengths come in areas besides scoring and scoring is massively overrated. Shrugs. Seems like that's the purpose of a project like this, to put your arguments on the table in a medium where a lot of people will be reading for potentially years to come. Spending a lot of time on opinion statements like "overrated" or "don't have an argument" seems not to add much to it. Everyone here has opinions on who should be where...instead of making definitive statements based on your opinion, we'd all be better served if you put your reasoning behind your opinion on the board instead.

People underrate Walton and Garnett? I'd say Russell, Garnett and then Walton/David Lee ( ) are the PC board's favorite players in that order.

Well, my argument that these two should not be in the top 8-9 discussion is not to do with them, but rather to do with the others above them.

I don't know what you mean by 'scoring is massively overrated'. The best offensive players of all time (except for Nash probably) were all very efficient volume scorers during their best years. Someone like a Shaq or a Jordan, who helps his team's offense by drawing defenders and then getting his team-mates easier shots.

However, if he wasn't a good scorer, he wouldn't be drawing that defensive attention, simple as that.

Scoring is the whole point of playing basketball, and it tends to get taken for granted. It's not a coincidence that Magic reached his zenith and the Lakers offense exploded when he became a capable volume scorer.

As ElGee mentioned, Bird's 1988 regular season was arguably his best, and he scored 30 ppg on 50-40-90 splits. The Cs also had the best offense in history when McHale was healthy.

The best offensive players are of two components: their ability to score, and their ability to help their team-mates get better shots. The second is dependent on the first, and the first just gets taken for granted.

I'd go ahead and say scoring is underrated when people discuss things like this.

[ardee]

This LeBron/Bird discussion has been very interesting. Some great discussion, I'm extremely glad we got this project going

In offensive terms, I think LeBron's ability to attack the basket is roughly equal to Bird's off-ball movement and shooting. LeBron is arguably the GOAT slasher during his '09 peak, and Bird's general feel for the game and offensive know-how during the '85'-'88 prime was arguably just as good.

So it comes down to who you think was the better playmaker. I think I'd lean towards Bird here. It's close, but he was literally a point guard. He could run an offense in anyway. LeBron's aiding his team-mates in '09 came basically off his freight-train drives and kick outs to the plethora of shooters. I'm not saying it didn't work, but Bird was just more versatile.

Note this is just discussing '09 LeBron. He's changed a lot by now, and it's a completely different discussion if you're comparing '12 LeBron to Bird as an offensive player.

[therealbig3]

Interesting:

From my calculations, the Cavs in 09 had a 113.5 ORating in the playoffs vs an average DRating of 105.3 (+8.2).

Based on ElGee's write-up here (http://www.backpicks.com/2011/12/19/the ... ince-1980/), that puts them right up there with Bird's Celtics in 84, 86, and 87.

Is there something I'm missing with the Cavs in 09? Because I'm seeing Bird's Celtics being ranked as some historic offensive teams, but what LeBron did in 09 with the Cavs is being brushed aside. Offensively, this is how they stack up:

09 Cavs: +4.1 (+8.2 PS)



84 Celtics: +3.3 (+6.4 PS)

86 Celtics: +4.6 (+8.2 PS)

87 Celtics: +5.2 (+8.5 PS)


So what is it about the Celtics offense that was so dominant, while LeBron's offenses are considered "meh" on the GOAT scale? Looks like comparable offenses to me.