#19 Highest Peak of All Time (Ewing '90 wins)

[therealbig3]

If you're talking about a player truly having a better balance shooting vs passing in his brain despite trends of poor efficiency, shouldn't I see some ability at some point in his career to adjust his shooting vs passing based on how his own scoring ability fluctuates?

Sure, if the team he was on could afford him to do that. But even in Houston, with Yao...he was still the offensive anchor that was depended upon to create volume offense, mainly through his scoring ability. And Yao was also injury-prone and inconsistent.

Obviously, this is speculation, but imo, if he was able to play with guys like Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom and Andrew Bynum in his post-03 years, I believe he would have demonstrated that superior balance.

BTW, his first year in Houston, he did average a clearly lower amount of shots per 36 (18.8 FGA vs 20.7 in 01-04), when he was trying to adjust to Yao. And JVG wanted him to be even more aggressive and shoot more.

His FGA/36 were up in 06 and 07...mainly because he played a lot of games without Yao, and without Yao, the Houston roster looked like his Orlando roster, and so he needed to shoot more, despite physically declining. Without Yao, his FGA/36 was up to about 22.5 in 46 games. Which means in his other 72 games in 06 and 07, T-Mac averaged 19.9 FGA/36, which is reduced from his 20.7 from 01-04. And again, I also don't think the Houston roster was even that offensively talented around T-Mac even with Yao.

[Doctor MJ]

If you're talking about a player truly having a better balance shooting vs passing in his brain despite trends of poor efficiency, shouldn't I see some ability at some point in his career to adjust his shooting vs passing based on how his own scoring ability fluctuates?

Sure, if the team he was on could afford him to do that. But even in Houston, with Yao...he was still the offensive anchor that was depended upon to create volume offense, mainly through his scoring ability. And Yao was also injury-prone and inconsistent.

Obviously, this is speculation, but imo, if he was able to play with guys like Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom and Andrew Bynum in his post-03 years, I believe he would have demonstrated that superior balance.

BTW, his first year in Houston, he did average a clearly lower amount of shots per 36 (18.8 FGA vs 20.7 in 01-04), when he was trying to adjust to Yao. And JVG wanted him to be even more aggressive and shoot more.

His FGA/36 were up in 06 and 07...mainly because he played a lot of games without Yao, and without Yao, the Houston roster looked like his Orlando roster, and so he needed to shoot more, despite physically declining. Without Yao, his FGA/36 was up to about 22.5 in 46 games. Which means in his other 72 games in 06 and 07, T-Mac averaged 19.9 FGA/36, which is reduced from his 20.7 from 01-04. And again, I also don't think the Houston roster was even that offensively talented around T-Mac even with Yao.

Okay, so your take is basically: TMac in years other than '03 was simply so much worse at scoring than Kobe that even though he was better about passing instead of taking bad shots, Kobe was a significantly more efficient player?

This is where I talk about "question marks". I'm not saying that take is impossible to be true, but I'm a really convinced enough by that that I'm going to champion McGrady's balance over Kobe's? Probably not.

[therealbig3]

Okay, so your take is basically: TMac in years other than '03 was simply so much worse at scoring than Kobe that even though he was better about passing instead of taking bad shots, Kobe was a significantly more efficient player?

Not exactly. My take is, T-Mac was worse at scoring than Kobe in years other than 03, and he had better balance than Kobe, but he was still forced to take the difficult/bad shots because his teams were still heavily dependent on his scoring. However, he did kind of show his balance by cutting down on his shot attempts when he was paired with another capable offensive player. Unfortunately, that secondary player was more injury-prone than T-Mac was, and was inconsistent in terms of his own personal performance as well.

And I'm not sure why you keep saying Kobe was a significantly more efficient player, when TOs are a part of offensive efficiency as well. T-Mac was better at taking care of the basketball, which is why his ORatings in his non-03, prime years (01, 02, 04, 05) were comparable to Kobe's ORating in years other than 07-09. Better balanced players tend to keep their TO rates down, because they don't force things as much. I never understood why TOs are always tied to assists...volume scorers tend to turn it over as well.

[SDChargers#1]

I am going to vote for who I did last time for the same reasons.

Vote: 1983 Moses Malone

I don't care if Moses impact wasn't great in other seasons, because it was clearly great in '83, and this is a single year peak project.

His rebounding clearly affected the team, and his offensive rebounding was arguably the All Time Great season. Yes, he wasn't a great passer, and they didn't run the offense through him, but adding extra possessions through offensive rebounding has value in itself (and for Moses incredible value because he was so amazing at it).

And clearly it didn't hurt the team. The '83 Sixer are one of the greatest regular season and postseason teams ever.

Okay, but I want to make sure you understand the objections to this:

First off, just because a guy puts up the biggest numbers on a great team, doesn't mean he deserve crazy amounts of credit. The 76ers SRS improvement that year was less than 2. This is really quite small. It's pretty understandable to say "I don't care about fit issues, look at the night and day difference he made." but this actually wasn't THAT big of a difference.

Although as I say that, I'll acknowledge that there's a bit of a ceiling on SRS levels on a lot of teams. I personally would not let the small SRS improvement here stop me if I was otherwise sold on Moses, but if you're making the argument for Moses based on the team improvement, it simply has to be pointed out that the 76ers were already a VERY good team without him. He had impact certainly, but if he'd been in Philly first, and Erving instead had joined the team that year, it's very possible that it would be Erving's addition that would put them over the top.

Secondly, it's well and good to say that you don't care about Moses' impact in other seasons, but if a player is having massively more "impact" in one particular context than in other context, you need to be very careful about what you call "impact". Basketball is not additive like baseball. A baseball team that adds a new star can literally and accurately talk about the value that star will "add" to the team because they are just talking about him making more of opportunities than the guy he was replacing.

A new basketball player by contrast has a role that is interdependent with his fellow teammates. They all make adjustments based on what their other teammates can give them, and if Player A's thing only results in net good things because he has a hard to duplicate set of teammates that are making up for his deficiencies, then they need to be given some of the credit for some of the success that comes with Player A doing that thing.

I see what you are saying. But in the same sense, it is the same logical fallacy to say that other seasons affect the one in question. There are just too many variables involved.

And I do think it was quite a bit of a difference. Philly went from a very good team that had been going to the conference finals, to an All Time Great team that had the second greatest postseason run in history. That is a pretty substantial jump IMO.

Which bring me to another point, playoffs. Which has been hyped a lot on this project. Malone's numbers went up in the playoffs that year, while (Dr. J's plummeted (sub 50% TS)) yet the Sixers played even better in the playoffs than they did in the regular season. Including Moses absolutely dominating Kareem in the Finals.

I feel like some posters focus on just one aspect when looking at certain players, but then switch up the criteria when focusing on others.

One of the big arguments for Dirk was that he was so amazing in the playoffs. Yet, when it comes to Moses all of a sudden it is more about his lack of passing ability.

[Lightning25]

Sure, if the team he was on could afford him to do that. But even in Houston, with Yao...he was still the offensive anchor that was depended upon to create volume offense, mainly through his scoring ability. And Yao was also injury-prone and inconsistent.

It's funny that you say this when Yao was actually far more consistent than McGrady was as a Rocket.

You know if you have to put every teammate of a player down in order to prop up that one player, chances are that player really isn't that good.

This is pretty much what I'm talking about...

His FGA/36 were up in 06 and 07...mainly because he played a lot of games without Yao, and without Yao, the Houston roster looked like his Orlando roster, and so he needed to shoot more, despite physically declining

That would be a great joke, too bad you were probably being serious.

I would escalate further but I don't see much of a point considering how you have already made up your mind that Tmac was the 2nd greatest SG ever and that he never did anything wrong when that couldn't be further from the truth.

Anyways, I haven't been too involved in the past week or so because I've been relatively sick and I just recently got treated with antibiotics so I'll try to get involved more.

[MisterWestside]

Right so, I get when people say he's a more natural passer than Kobe, but then I also know that he was typically less efficient than Kobe.

Well for that year in 2003, T-Mac was on par with Kobe's best offensive season. Translated to the 2003 stat environment, T-Mac produced 2+ points per 100 possessions than '06 Kobe on slightly less usage:

T-Mac '03 116 ortg/33.6 %poss
Kobe '06 (translated to '03) 114 ortg/36.5 %poss

So at least for that season, his efficiency was right there. Now, if you want to compare the two players career-wise then you have a point.

Well, but what I mean when I say that is that I expect a volume scorer to do more with crappy teammates and I expect a floor general to do more with capable teammates. I just take that as a rule, and I reject from the start any attempt to reduce a comparison between different types of players in to a focus on one particular scenario unless the person making that attempt is very clear why that scenario is at the forefront of their mind.

I originally brought up this comparison because some held it against T-Mac that his team didn't produce a historic offense and pointed to his high usage as "holding his team back". I'm simply arguing that players often ramp up/down usage out of necessity, especially given one's teammates. T-Mac's team scenario was different from the sheer team goodness that Nash was surrounded with in Phoenix so it's not a fair comparison.

[Doctor MJ]

Right so, I get when people say he's a more natural passer than Kobe, but then I also know that he was typically less efficient than Kobe.

Well for that year in 2003, T-Mac was on par with Kobe's best offensive season. Translated to the 2003 stat environment, T-Mac produced 2+ points per 100 possessions than '06 Kobe on slightly less usage:

T-Mac '03 116 ortg/33.6 %poss
Kobe '06 (translated to '03) 114 ortg/36.5 %poss

So at least for that season, his efficiency was right there. Now, if you want to compare the two players career-wise then you have a point.

But understand the distinction:

It''s one thing to say that something Player X did in other year but he didn't do in his Peak shouldn't be held against his Peak.

It's another thing entirely to make a general assertion of Player X's mental basketball balance based on his Peak year, when his other years appear to tell a very different story.

Fine to say you're not concerned with the amount he shot in '03, but if you're going to add general playmaking tendencies to the list of arguments for him then his other years are still relevant to the discussion.

Well, but what I mean when I say that is that I expect a volume scorer to do more with crappy teammates and I expect a floor general to do more with capable teammates. I just take that as a rule, and I reject from the start any attempt to reduce a comparison between different types of players in to a focus on one particular scenario unless the person making that attempt is very clear why that scenario is at the forefront of their mind.

I originally brought up this comparison because some held it against T-Mac that his team didn't produce a historic offense and pointed to his high usage as "holding his team back". I'm simply arguing that players often ramp up/down usage out of necessity, especially given one's teammates. T-Mac's team scenario was different from the sheer team goodness that Nash was surrounded with in Phoenix so it's not a fair comparison.

Understood.

[Dr Positivity]

After thinking it over, I'm changing my vote to 1990 Ewing. Although not a true #1 option offensively, I like the idea of his elite defense + still excellent offense (even with his weaknesses, how little impact could 29ppg/.60 TS% with floor spacing and offensive rebounding, be having?) giving a team a HUGE building block to work around. Also I feel culturally a team is likely to come together more behind Ewing than Tmac because of his effort level

[Lightning25]

Can someone get a tally of the votes so far? I like the Ewing pick because he was also a great two-way player. I forgot about him though. I think chances are I'll stick with West but Ewing is definitely going to be next if that's the case.

[thizznation]

'66: ardee
'68 West: Doc MJ, Lightning25, ardee
'03 T-Mac: C-izMe, therealbig3
'83 M.Malone: PTB Fan, JordansBulls, SDChargers#1
'90 Ewing: drza?, Dr Positivity



edit: Fixed

[therealbig3]

From what I see:

83 Moses - 3 (PTB Fan, JordansBulls, SDChargers#1)

03 T-Mac - 2 (Ciz-Me, therealbig3)

68 West - 1 (Doctor MJ)

90 Ewing - 1 (Dr Positivity)

66 West - 1 (ardee)

07 Nash - 1 (bastillon)

[therealbig3]

'68 West: Doc MJ, Lightning25, ardee
03' T-Mac: C-izMe, therealbig3
'83 M.Malone: PTB Fan, JordansBulls, SDChargers#1
'90 Ewing: drza, Dr Positivity

Was that drza's official vote, or was that a general post about Ewing?

[Lightning25]

'68 West: Doc MJ, Lightning25, ardee
'03 T-Mac: C-izMe, therealbig3
'83 M.Malone: PTB Fan, JordansBulls, SDChargers#1
'90 Ewing: drza, Dr Positivity

This looks more accurate because I know I voted West in this poll.

So we are in a tie between West and Moses....

[thizznation]

Wait, therealbig is right, ardee was '66 not '68...my laptop screen is turned down really dim at the moment...

'66 West: Ardee
'68 West: Doc MJ, Lightning25
'03 T-Mac: C-izMe, therealbig3
'83 M.Malone: PTB Fan, JordansBulls, SDChargers#1
'90 Ewing: drza?, Dr Positivity

[Lightning25]

You know what, change my vote to 1990 Patrick Ewing.

He was a great two-way player like West and I give Ewing the advantage over West for being a big. Ewing was dominant as heck in 1990 and he gets overlooked. I think one could easily argue that 1990 Ewing was better than 1995 Robinson.

[An Unbiased Fan]

You know what, change my vote to 1990 Patrick Ewing.

He was a great two-way player like West and I give Ewing the advantage over West for being a big. Ewing was dominant as heck in 1990 and he gets overlooked. I think one could easily argue that 1990 Ewing was better than 1995 Robinson.

I really have to disagree with this. The Knicks were only the #13 defense in 1990, and Ewing wasn't playing stellar D that year. The Knicks didn't become an elite defense until Pat Riley showed up and demanded it.

As a rebounder, he's was good, not great. In fact, I really would have to ask how he beats out Karl Malone, who had a higher PPG & RPG in 1990.

[Lightning25]

I really have to disagree with this. The Knicks were only the #13 defense in 1990, and Ewing wasn't playing stellar D that year. The Knicks didn't become an elite defense until Pat Riley showed up and demanded it.

As a rebounder, he's was good, not great. In fact, I really would have to ask how he beats out Karl Malone, who had a higher PPG & RPG in 1990.

He was averaging about 4 bpg that season. I don't know why everyone feels like the entire offensive/defensive rating should fall on the shoulders of one player. This is basketball, a team sport, a 5 on 5 sport, everybody matters, not just one star.

Yes it is true that Knicks weren't great defensively until Riley showed up but defensive coaching has more impact on defenses than one individual player does anyways.

[C-izMe]

I like the Ewing vote be because he should definetly be close to DRob but I still have TMac over him. I'll definetly take him over Moses.

[C-izMe]

Serious question: Why hasn't Rick Barry/Bob McAdoo been mentioned. I mean if Bernard King is getting buzz these two should be.

[MisterWestside]

But understand the distinction:

It''s one thing to say that something Player X did in other year but he didn't do in his Peak shouldn't be held against his Peak.

It's another thing entirely to make a general assertion of Player X's mental basketball balance based on his Peak year, when his other years appear to tell a very different story.

Fine to say you're not concerned with the amount he shot in '03, but if you're going to add general playmaking tendencies to the list of arguments for him then his other years are still relevant to the discussion.

I see what you're saying now.

I suppose I was simply arguing that in the one season he put it all together ('03) he rivaled or surpassed Kobe's hit seasons. After that he got a bit too gunslinger happy for his own good.