RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #34 (Kawhi Leonard)

[penbeast0]

(a) I don't agree that "Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier," though you can certainly make that argument by discounting Frazier's much weaker era. But not without a really strong factor for era differential.
(b) Having watched both Knicks title runs, it was obvious to me that the FMVP vote for Frazier (certainly the second one and quite probably the first) was a sentimental vote for Reed rather than a basketball one. I believe it was former mod here TrueLAFan who suggested it was a racial/cultural statement honoring the "safe" black man rather than the edgy one but that could explain it as well.
(c) I have Frazier as a guy I'd want to lead my team. I certainly don't have Kawhi that way despite his obvious talent. He quit on San Antonio, helped Toronto win a title but certainly wasn't the team's leader since he made it clear he was one and done there, and has not been impressive in LA.
(d) I still might vote Kawhi if his defense remained as strong when his offensive role scaled up. Frazier's did, Kawhi chose to prioritize offense and put less effort on defense.

To me, actions have consequences and one of those is that Kawhi's actions have made him less valuable to me than pure numbers indicate. Same goes for Rick Barry of those we are talking about.

[tsherkin]

(a) I don't agree that "Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier," though you can certainly make that argument by discounting Frazier's much weaker era. But not without a really strong factor for era differential.

Well, you can look at scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. Let's say 17-21 is his period of examination, yes? That's 25.7 ppg on +4.45% rTS (excluding his 9-game 2018 season). Supporting higher volume on better efficiency separation is definitely better in that domain. That said, I think that you're correct about the phrasing: much better might be a little bit exaggerated.

(d) I still might vote Kawhi if his defense remained as strong when his offensive role scaled up. Frazier's did, Kawhi chose to prioritize offense and put less effort on defense.

Difference in volume to consider there. And he was excellent for us, at least, on defense. And then of course health plays some role in what he's able to do defensively as well.

Food for thought. An interesting race between the two of them, though, as Frazier was excellent.

[penbeast0]

...Well, you can look at scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. Let's say 17-21 is his period of examination, yes? That's 25.7 ppg on +4.45% rTS (excluding his 9-game 2018 season). Supporting higher volume on better efficiency separation is definitely better in that domain. That said, I think that you're correct about the phrasing: much better might be a little bit exaggerated....

We have a stat that measure exactly that called TS Add. So, let's look at the best seasons (and obviously this takes into account missed games, as it should.

The best regular seasons between the two of them:
(1) Frazier 1972 222
(2) Kawhi 2016 184.1
(3) Kawhi 2017 179.5
(4) Frazier 1970 179
(5/6) Frazier 1969/1971 173

Then it drops to Kawhi 122 or Frazier 110.

Either way I'm not seeing "scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. "

I don't have the TS Add numbers from the postseason; but if you are going to make a case for Kawhi, that has to be it as he had some great postseasons runs (so did Frazier but Kawhi was much more the focal point of those postseason offenses where Frazier ran a multi-polar offense). I would guess that's where Kawhi gets an advantage other than era differential.

Is it enough to exceed what I see as Frazier's leadership advantage? Not for me but certainly others can legitimately differ.

[HeartBreakKid]

Kawhi Leonard already played "team" basketball and pretty much thrived. The Kawhi Leonard era spurs are among the best examples of teams using teamwork over talent supremacy in the NBA.

I'm getting "Garnett in Minny" vibes in regards to how people are more or less subconsciously saying that stuff doesn't count because Kawhi was different or something.


Most of Kawhi's career consisted of playing in a stable, teamwork oriented environment and it brought massive amounts of success. So maybe we shouldn't stereotype based on guys wanting to go to LA or having a top tier iso game (which objectively helped the Spurs achieve success in 2017, they were derailed when Kawhi got injured).


If you're going to rebuttal that that Spurs environment only worked because

1) He had an all time great coach

2) He had a very talented team

3) He had a big, stoic, star player, who commanded respect to control the locker room (or whatever jargon we use to mystify players)

in a comparison with Walt Frazier then you are being bias and are probably stereotyping them

[tsherkin]

We have a stat that measure exactly that called TS Add. So, let's look at the best seasons (and obviously this takes into account missed games, as it should.

The best regular seasons between the two of them:
(1) Frazier 1972 222
(2) Kawhi 2016 184.1
(3) Kawhi 2017 179.5
(4) Frazier 1970 179
(5/6) Frazier 1969/1971 173

Then it drops to Kawhi 122 or Frazier 110.

Either way I'm not seeing "scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. "

Well, you're also addressing his health by doing that, not only examining quality when you use TSAdd.

Kawhi was definitely a better shooter, I don't believe that's much of a contestable point. And both his raw efficiency and separation from league average are higher.

I will add, though: if you look at 70-72, then there's something there for Frazier. His separation in that period was quite good, +5.5 to +7.2%. League average was like 50-51% TS at the time and he was doing the 55.6% to 57.6% dance, which would have remained relatively efficient for quite some time thereafter, though not as significant in deviation. Obviously, Kawhi was facing higher league averages and was even more efficient than Frazier due to his 3pt and FT shooting, and also his raw 2FG%.

For Kawhi in the playoffs...

In 2017, he averaged 27.7 ppg on 67.2% TS and him missing most of the WCFs changed that series outcome badly. League average that PS was 56.3%, so you're talking +10.9% rTS that postseason over 12 games.

In 2019 with Toronto, 30.5 ppg on 61.9% TS, +6.9% rTS.

In 2020 with LAC, 28.2 ppg on 59.3% TS, only +1.9% rTS.

In 2021, 30.4 ppg (but missed 8 games), 67.9% TS, +10.8% rTS

70-73 (to include the second title) Frazier in the PS for comparison

70: 16.0 ppg, 53.1% TS, +3.3% rTS
71: 22.6 ppg, 57.2% TS, +8.2% rTS
72: 24.3 ppg, 58.6% TS, +8.8% rTS
73: 21.9 ppg, 55.9% TS, +6.9% rTS

So, close, but didn't peak as high as Kawhi in 2017 or 2021. Still damned good though.

Again, not really sure where I land on this one because Frazier was quite good, but yeah, I can see where a pro-Kawhi argument comes from.

[Doctor MJ]

Kawhi Leonard already played "team" basketball and pretty much thrived. The Kawhi Leonard era spurs are among the best examples of teams using teamwork over talent supremacy in the NBA.

Eh, let's clarify here.

Playing "team basketball" in the conversation with Frazier means read & react offense blending with other talents despite being both the best scorer & passer on the team.

The "team basketball" you're talking about with Kawhi is him just being an offensive role player being neither the team's primary scorer nor any kind of serious playmaker. It worked out well in part because he was able to focus on defense, but it's not the same sort of thing as what Frazier demonstrated.

[Samurai]

Vote for #34: Walt Frazier. Was always a fan of his and felt he was largely underrated since his role on the Knicks wasn't to be a dominant shooter. The Knicks were the epitome of a team-first emphasis in which the ball kept moving and resulted in guys like Frazier, Reed, DeBusschere, Barnett (then Monroe), Bradley, Lucas, etc. all getting their shots. Frazier was so good and efficient that if I were Red Holzman I probably would have wanted Frazier shooting more and DeBusschere and Bradley shoot a little less, but no one was asking me to coach the team. But within the parameters that Holzman wanted, Frazier played his part superbly. He took care of the ball, shot a very high percentage, and was a dominant man defender. 7-time All Defensive First Team, 4-time All NBA First Team (and 2-time second team), he was a guy who did everything very well with no glaring weakness.

Alternate vote: John Havlicek. GOAT-level stamina and motor. Four time All NBA First Team and seven time All NBA Second team. Eight time champion and Finals MVP in 74. Great all-around swing man who was an all star as both a guard and a forward, he could score (finished in the top 20 in ppg 11 times; as high as 2nd in 71), pass (finished in the top 20 in assists/game 11 times; as high as 4th in 72), and defend (five time All NBA Defensive First Team and three time All NBA Defensive Second Team). Hondo was a terrific athlete - played baseball in college (hitting over .400 as a freshman), in 1962 he was drafted by both the Celtics and the NFL's Cleveland Browns. Former coach Rick Weitzman called Havlicek the best natural athlete he ever came into contact with. Teammate Dave Cowens was convinced that Hondo could have also excelled at track, particularly the 800 meters. Teammate Satch Sanders marvelled at how Hondo could just run forever without sweating or getting tired. Sanders told him "You're gifted as an athlete. But don't be looking at everyone else and expecting them to run with you. Because that's not going to happen!"

Nomination: Artis Gilmore. Gotta admit that when I watched him play, I was never a big Gilmore fan. And I admit that in his later years, he was largely immobile and deserved his moniker of Rigor Artis. But in his prime, he was a very good center. In his prime, he had a decent array of moves in the low post to get his (very) high percentage shots off, whereas in his later years he was largely limited to putbacks and dunks. He was a solid defender (four time All ABA Defensive First Team and once on the All NBA Defensive Second Team), a very strong rebounder and excellent screen setter. To my eyes, he was the strongest player in the game during the post-Wilt and pre-Shaq years. He won a ring in 75, was the Playoffs MVP that year, league MVP in 72, and made 11 All Star games in his 18-year career.

Alternate nomination: Anthony Davis. Not really comfortable with this and could definitely change my vote based on input from other posters. The shortcomings in longevity and durability is his kryptonite. But when he does play, he has a strong case. Excellent defense with 4 All NBA Defensive Team awards (two on the first team and two on the second). Led the league in blocks/game three times with three more in the top five. Offensively he has finished in the top ten in points/game five times, although his 30% career 3-point % is a weakness.

[70sFan]

Have to say, I have a hard time seeing much of a case for Frazier over Kawhi. Frazier basically had 7 seasons as an impact player. His rookie year he was league average-ish statistically on low minutes, comparable to Kawhi's rookie year. By 75/76, he had a 2.5 BPM and the team went 26-33 in games he played and 12-11 in games he missed. After that, he'd never have a BPM over 2 or make the playoffs again.

Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier, has the same number of championships, and more FMVPs, but the knock on him is his longevity. Well, in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2020, he was completely healthy through the postseason and played at a much higher level than Frazier did in his 5 best seasons. In 2017, he did take an injury on a dirty play, but he'd already led his team to the Western Conference Finals before that, and he was probably the frontrunner for POY prior to the injury. Even with the injury, he finished 4th in POY voting which is higher than Frazier did in all but 4 seasons. Then 2021 is another impactful season where Kawhi led the playoffs in PER, finished 6th in POY voting, and only made it to Round 2 to get hurt because he averaged 32.1/7.9/4.6/2.3/1.0 on .723 TS% to beat Luka's Mavs in 7.

So basically:
2019 Kawhi >>> 1973 Frazier
2016 Kawhi >>> 1972 Frazier
2020 Kawhi >>> 1971 Frazier
2014 Kawhi > 1970 Frazier
2015 Kawhi >>> 1969 Frazier
2017 Kawhi > 1974 Frazier
2021 Kawhi > 1975 Frazier
2013 Kawhi > 1976 Frazier
2023 Kawhi > 1977 Frazier
2012 Kawhi = 1968 Frazier

So after all that, the only real longevity "edge" is Frazier's 1978-1980 seasons where he was basically worthless. What criteria do people use to take Frazier? Are you just looking at raw POY shares and ignoring the fact that Kareem was basically the only other superstar level player in the league during Clyde's prime?

Not going to lie, 2014 Kawhi over 1970 Frazier made me laugh.

[ShaqAttac]

VOTE

1. KAWHI
won chip as best player, clutch, probs better than kd who already been voted. Went crazy on the best team ever and ended the heatles

2. Frazier
won 2 chips as best player, maybe i should put him 1

NOMINATE

1. Walton
won chip as best playerand swept kareem

2. AD
went crazy in 2020, ended the warriors, and one of the best on d ever

[iggymcfrack]

Have to say, I have a hard time seeing much of a case for Frazier over Kawhi. Frazier basically had 7 seasons as an impact player. His rookie year he was league average-ish statistically on low minutes, comparable to Kawhi's rookie year. By 75/76, he had a 2.5 BPM and the team went 26-33 in games he played and 12-11 in games he missed. After that, he'd never have a BPM over 2 or make the playoffs again.

Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier, has the same number of championships, and more FMVPs, but the knock on him is his longevity. Well, in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2020, he was completely healthy through the postseason and played at a much higher level than Frazier did in his 5 best seasons. In 2017, he did take an injury on a dirty play, but he'd already led his team to the Western Conference Finals before that, and he was probably the frontrunner for POY prior to the injury. Even with the injury, he finished 4th in POY voting which is higher than Frazier did in all but 4 seasons. Then 2021 is another impactful season where Kawhi led the playoffs in PER, finished 6th in POY voting, and only made it to Round 2 to get hurt because he averaged 32.1/7.9/4.6/2.3/1.0 on .723 TS% to beat Luka's Mavs in 7.

So basically:
2019 Kawhi >>> 1973 Frazier
2016 Kawhi >>> 1972 Frazier
2020 Kawhi >>> 1971 Frazier
2014 Kawhi > 1970 Frazier
2015 Kawhi >>> 1969 Frazier
2017 Kawhi > 1974 Frazier
2021 Kawhi > 1975 Frazier
2013 Kawhi > 1976 Frazier
2023 Kawhi > 1977 Frazier
2012 Kawhi = 1968 Frazier

So after all that, the only real longevity "edge" is Frazier's 1978-1980 seasons where he was basically worthless. What criteria do people use to take Frazier? Are you just looking at raw POY shares and ignoring the fact that Kareem was basically the only other superstar level player in the league during Clyde's prime?

Not going to lie, 2014 Kawhi over 1970 Frazier made me laugh.

Why? Here are their box composites:

Kawhi (RS): 19.4 PER, .193 WS/48
Clyde (RS): 21.1 PER, .236 WS/48

Kawhi (PS): 18.7 PER, .191 WS/48
Clyde (PS): 16.5 PER, .163 WS/48

So Frazier had better RS numbers and Kawhi had better postseason numbers by similar margins. Then, when you get into non-box impact, Kawhi shut down LeBron to win FMVP. He guarded him more than anyone else and held him to 34% from the field when he was the primary defender after he'd shot at least 55% from the field in each of the 3 opening rounds. I know Frazier was a good defender and a decent enough passer, but I don't see how he would have anywhere near that kind of non-box impact.

Plus Frazier's season took place in one of the weakest seasons in league history when professional basketball had recently exploded from a total of 10 teams in 1967 to a total of 25 teams in 1970 between the NBA and ABA. There's no way he'd be able to replicate that level of success against the difficulty of competition that Kawhi faced 20 years after the Dream Team pried international markets wide open. What makes you laugh about this exactly?

[iggymcfrack]

...Well, you can look at scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. Let's say 17-21 is his period of examination, yes? That's 25.7 ppg on +4.45% rTS (excluding his 9-game 2018 season). Supporting higher volume on better efficiency separation is definitely better in that domain. That said, I think that you're correct about the phrasing: much better might be a little bit exaggerated....

We have a stat that measure exactly that called TS Add. So, let's look at the best seasons (and obviously this takes into account missed games, as it should.

The best regular seasons between the two of them:
(1) Frazier 1972 222
(2) Kawhi 2016 184.1
(3) Kawhi 2017 179.5
(4) Frazier 1970 179
(5/6) Frazier 1969/1971 173

Then it drops to Kawhi 122 or Frazier 110.

Either way I'm not seeing "scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. "

I don't have the TS Add numbers from the postseason; but if you are going to make a case for Kawhi, that has to be it as he had some great postseasons runs (so did Frazier but Kawhi was much more the focal point of those postseason offenses where Frazier ran a multi-polar offense). I would guess that's where Kawhi gets an advantage other than era differential.

Is it enough to exceed what I see as Frazier's leadership advantage? Not for me but certainly others can legitimately differ.

Pace by year
2017: 96.8
2016: 98.5
1973: 114.5 (estimated)
1972: 116.1 (estimated)
1971: 120.2 (estimated)
1970: 117.5 (estimated)
1969: 117.5 (estimated)

Just adjusting for pace brings Kawhi's 2016 and 2016 seasons pretty close to 1972. Then you have to account for Kawhi's TS% going up in the playoffs while Frazier's went down and the fact that conventional wisdom was to play your starters a lot more minutes in the '70s. From 1969-1973, Frazier averaged 3150 minutes per year which is more than any NBA player has played in any of the last 10 seasons. His durability was impressive, but he also only ever finished top 10 in minutes once over that stretch. That was just the way the league worked for star players then.

[OhayoKD]

...Well, you can look at scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. Let's say 17-21 is his period of examination, yes? That's 25.7 ppg on +4.45% rTS (excluding his 9-game 2018 season). Supporting higher volume on better efficiency separation is definitely better in that domain. That said, I think that you're correct about the phrasing: much better might be a little bit exaggerated....

We have a stat that measure exactly that called TS Add. So, let's look at the best seasons (and obviously this takes into account missed games, as it should.

The best regular seasons between the two of them:
(1) Frazier 1972 222
(2) Kawhi 2016 184.1
(3) Kawhi 2017 179.5
(4) Frazier 1970 179
(5/6) Frazier 1969/1971 173

Then it drops to Kawhi 122 or Frazier 110.

Either way I'm not seeing "scoring volume and league-relative separation, right? Kawhi is a notably better shooter. "

I don't have the TS Add numbers from the postseason; but if you are going to make a case for Kawhi, that has to be it as he had some great postseasons runs (so did Frazier but Kawhi was much more the focal point of those postseason offenses where Frazier ran a multi-polar offense). I would guess that's where Kawhi gets an advantage other than era differential.

Is it enough to exceed what I see as Frazier's leadership advantage? Not for me but certainly others can legitimately differ.

Pace by year
2017: 96.8
2016: 98.5
1973: 114.5 (estimated)
1972: 116.1 (estimated)
1971: 120.2 (estimated)
1970: 117.5 (estimated)
1969: 117.5 (estimated)

Just adjusting for pace brings Kawhi's 2016 and 2016 seasons pretty close to 1972. Then you have to account for Kawhi's TS% going up in the playoffs while Frazier's went down and the fact that conventional wisdom was to play your starters a lot more minutes in the '70s. From 1969-1973, Frazier averaged 3150 minutes per year which is more than any NBA player has played in any of the last 10 seasons. His durability was impressive, but he also only ever finished top 10 in minutes once over that stretch. That was just the way the league worked for star players then.

In an era-relative framework, it's important to look at how a player ranks compared to other players in the league as far as minutes go.

[70sFan]

Have to say, I have a hard time seeing much of a case for Frazier over Kawhi. Frazier basically had 7 seasons as an impact player. His rookie year he was league average-ish statistically on low minutes, comparable to Kawhi's rookie year. By 75/76, he had a 2.5 BPM and the team went 26-33 in games he played and 12-11 in games he missed. After that, he'd never have a BPM over 2 or make the playoffs again.

Kawhi obviously peaked MUCH higher than Frazier, has the same number of championships, and more FMVPs, but the knock on him is his longevity. Well, in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2020, he was completely healthy through the postseason and played at a much higher level than Frazier did in his 5 best seasons. In 2017, he did take an injury on a dirty play, but he'd already led his team to the Western Conference Finals before that, and he was probably the frontrunner for POY prior to the injury. Even with the injury, he finished 4th in POY voting which is higher than Frazier did in all but 4 seasons. Then 2021 is another impactful season where Kawhi led the playoffs in PER, finished 6th in POY voting, and only made it to Round 2 to get hurt because he averaged 32.1/7.9/4.6/2.3/1.0 on .723 TS% to beat Luka's Mavs in 7.

So basically:
2019 Kawhi >>> 1973 Frazier
2016 Kawhi >>> 1972 Frazier
2020 Kawhi >>> 1971 Frazier
2014 Kawhi > 1970 Frazier
2015 Kawhi >>> 1969 Frazier
2017 Kawhi > 1974 Frazier
2021 Kawhi > 1975 Frazier
2013 Kawhi > 1976 Frazier
2023 Kawhi > 1977 Frazier
2012 Kawhi = 1968 Frazier

So after all that, the only real longevity "edge" is Frazier's 1978-1980 seasons where he was basically worthless. What criteria do people use to take Frazier? Are you just looking at raw POY shares and ignoring the fact that Kareem was basically the only other superstar level player in the league during Clyde's prime?

Not going to lie, 2014 Kawhi over 1970 Frazier made me laugh.

Why? Here are their box composites:

Kawhi (RS): 19.4 PER, .193 WS/48
Clyde (RS): 21.1 PER, .236 WS/48

Kawhi (PS): 18.7 PER, .191 WS/48
Clyde (PS): 16.5 PER, .163 WS/48

So Frazier had better RS numbers and Kawhi had better postseason numbers by similar margins. Then, when you get into non-box impact, Kawhi shut down LeBron to win FMVP. He guarded him more than anyone else and held him to 34% from the field when he was the primary defender after he'd shot at least 55% from the field in each of the 3 opening rounds. I know Frazier was a good defender and a decent enough passer, but I don't see how he would have anywhere near that kind of non-box impact.

Plus Frazier's season took place in one of the weakest seasons in league history when professional basketball had recently exploded from a total of 10 teams in 1967 to a total of 25 teams in 1970 between the NBA and ABA. There's no way he'd be able to replicate that level of success against the difficulty of competition that Kawhi faced 20 years after the Dream Team pried international markets wide open. What makes you laugh about this exactly?

"Kawhi shut down LeBron" in 2014 finals is one of the biggest myths in the league recent history, so I won't even comment that.

ABA wasn't that relevant in 1970 yet, so I don't think 1970 is anywhere near the weakest seasons in the league history.

Do you think 2014 Kawhi was comparable offensive player to 1970 Frazier? That's a serious question.

[homecourtloss]

Not going to lie, 2014 Kawhi over 1970 Frazier made me laugh.

Then, when you get into non-box impact, Kawhi shut down LeBron to win FMVP. He guarded him more than anyone else and held him to 34% from the field when he was the primary defender after he'd shot at least 55% from the field in each of the 3 opening rounds. I know Frazier was a good defender and a decent enough passer, but I don't see how he would have anywhere near that kind of non-box impact.

"Kawhi shut down LeBron" in 2014 finals is one of the biggest myths in the league recent history, so I won't even comment that.

ABA wasn't that relevant in 1970 yet, so I don't think 1970 is anywhere near the weakest seasons in the league history.

Do you think 2014 Kawhi was comparable offensive player to 1970 Frazier? That's a serious question.

The entire “Kawhi shut down LeBron” nonsense should have been shut down for anyone looking at even the cursory data, i.e., LeBron played only about 20 more minutes than Kawhi did and both players started meant that most of LeBron’s super efficient scoring happened while Kawhi was on court. The Spurs were matching him up as much as possible in the series but this isn’t 1980s/1990s one-on-one defense with teams now being allowed to play quasi zone—the number of possessions in which Kawhi was the primary defender and only detterant is a small number.

But here is what happened with Kawhi on court vs. off court.

LeBron’s 2014 Finals totals: 52-91 (14 3P made), 23-29 FTs, 20 assists, 67.9% TS in 189 minutes

With Kawhi on court: 41-69 (12 3P made), 19-25 FTs, 18 assists, 70.6% TS in 162.5 minutes
With Kawhi off court: 11-22 (2 3P made), 4-4 FTs, 2 assists, 58.9% TS in 26.5 minutes

As for Frazier, his impact signals look great:

- New York Knicks
Key players: Walt Frazier, Willis Reed, Dave DeBusschere, Dick Barnett, Earl Monroe, Bill Bradley


[/img]

Okay, so this is interesting.

We have Frazier start out with a lead over Reed that Reed then matches and briefly surpasses. With that early lead I think we should note that the turnaround of the Knicks came mid-season in '67-68 when with Frazier getting put in the game mid-season. By the following post season he was a clear cut star.

How did he get off the bench? New coach named Red Holzman came in and quickly decided that's how things should be, and the team got better.

All this raises a question of whether Frazier's getting the last-piece-of-the-puzzle benefit where whoever joins the core right when the biggest breakthrough happen looks great with regression. If some other guy, like Reed would have had the same last-piece-of-the-puzzle effect we should not give this credence but we'll never truly know.

I think at the least Frazier's better health, despite not having great longevity himself, continues to give him the nod in my book.

I have no problem with anyone thinking that Kawhi had a greater peak, but I think many people think that Leonard’s defensive and offensive peaks happen at the same time, which they really didn’t.

Kawhi’s impact signals aren’t otherworldly—if they were, we’d probably have to consider him up even higher, even with his lack of longevity.



He looks better in JE’s RS-PS set.

[Clyde Frazier]

I'm out of town so just chiming in with a quick comment on kawhi. Again everyone's criteria is different but I really feel like kawhi's lack of availability is being glossed over here. We're going on several years of what *should* be his prime where he hasn't shown up.

In 2014, while Duncan, Ginobili and Parker were nearing the end of their careers, that was an excellent all around roster. And they built on that chemistry even further after falling short in 2013. Let's not just count accolades like kawhi's finals MVP without context.

Kawhi was amazing in 2019 but this isn't a peaks project. I truly believe Frazier has the better body of work and being able to rely upon his health and leadership gives him the clear edge over kawhi.

[Doctor MJ]

My vote is the same as last time:

Induction Vote 1: Walt Frazier



I think my previous posts where I showed how massive the gap is between Frazier and his teammates really hammers in how I'm seeing things. I completely respect others who value longevity more, but I do see Frazier as a clear cut alpha superstar leading the top team of his era, and that's not something I can say about the other guys on the board.

Induction Vote 2: Reggie Miller

Arguing for Reggie a good bit over in the Reggie-Top-10-season thread.

Nomination Vote 1: Manu Ginobili



Bumping him up. I think what I said is still basically relevant, so I'll just un-spoiler for the event.

Yup, there I go. Manu's my next man.

Now as I've said, I'm less fixed on where exactly Ginobili is than I am feeling compelled to spread the gospel on the guy. I'm not purposefully doing that early - but it's possible I'll end up raising someone else above him before all is said and done here.

I quote my posts from the '04-05 thread before, and it's not just a coincidence they come from there. As I was going back through the years evaluating POY, I ended up siding with Ginobili at #1. This actually shocked me, and it's incredibly funny talking about it here, given that I was first compelled to post at RealGM during that same season to argue for Steve Nash's MVP worthiness and that Nash has since become my all-time favorite player. I like Ginobili, but Nash is the one who I truly fear having bias for. Perhaps I overcompensate, but in the past my '04-05 POY considerations were really about Nash vs Duncan.

To understand how I got there logically:

1. I think that Ginobili impacts with the best of 'em per minute and is typically held back in total impact by his limited minutes.

2. When a player's lack of minutes seems clearly to have held the team back meaningfully - like keeping team from chip - it's easy to justify knocking him harshly for the lack.

3. But when the team wins the title, and does so on the back of how he plays when he does play, I need to seriously ask myself where the minute threshold is that would have been "enough" to be the most valuable player.

4. And so, in my analysis, I would say that Ginobili would be my pick for both the WC MVP & Finals MVP.

5. This is happening in a season where there Ginobili leads the league in +/- by a significant margin:

Ginobili +844
Duncan +765
Nash +728

6. Speaking today, I now believe with confidence pace & space is a just plain superior way to play to win, and Ginobili was the guy driving the pace (+5.5 Pace On/Off in the playoffs) and the space (made more 3's than any other Spur), which I think was likely critical to their success against the Suns in particular.

Without elaborating on Ginobili vs Duncan & Ginobili vs Nash specifically at this time, I'll just say:

I see compelling arguments for Ginobili against each of them, and I struggle to use minutes to negate them.

Okay then zooming out, I see Ginobili as a guy who at his best was really capable of being the top basketball player in the league. He's held back some due to his limited minutes...but he also shows a remarkable tendency to level up his impact in the playoffs, and in particular deep in the playoffs.

And when the Spurs won titles in the 2000s, it always coincided with Ginobili seeming to go particularly nuts with his impact. All 4 of those chips, Ginobili had the best team +/- - and for perspective with the data we have, we don't have any other player more than twice. (Though we do have Michael Jordan twice, during his final two chips, which bodes exceptionally well for what we may find when we get access to earlier data.)

I'm honestly not sure if there's any other player remotely like Ginobili on this front - demonstrating this level of deep playoff impact dominance, while not being something like a GOAT candidate.

Okay, imma stop there. I hope my plea doesn't end up making folks recoil. I'm less concerned with convincing people right now that they should Nominate Ginobili, and more hopeful they'll just chew on their assessment of the guy. I think we have some significant things to learn about basketball, and basketball analysis, by understanding the the time of the Argentine.

Nomination Vote 2: Rick Barry

Next guy on my list. Definite legend. Have some criticisms of him that keep him from going higher, but I remain highly impressed by him.

[iggymcfrack]

Not going to lie, 2014 Kawhi over 1970 Frazier made me laugh.

Why? Here are their box composites:

Kawhi (RS): 19.4 PER, .193 WS/48
Clyde (RS): 21.1 PER, .236 WS/48

Kawhi (PS): 18.7 PER, .191 WS/48
Clyde (PS): 16.5 PER, .163 WS/48

So Frazier had better RS numbers and Kawhi had better postseason numbers by similar margins. Then, when you get into non-box impact, Kawhi shut down LeBron to win FMVP. He guarded him more than anyone else and held him to 34% from the field when he was the primary defender after he'd shot at least 55% from the field in each of the 3 opening rounds. I know Frazier was a good defender and a decent enough passer, but I don't see how he would have anywhere near that kind of non-box impact.

Plus Frazier's season took place in one of the weakest seasons in league history when professional basketball had recently exploded from a total of 10 teams in 1967 to a total of 25 teams in 1970 between the NBA and ABA. There's no way he'd be able to replicate that level of success against the difficulty of competition that Kawhi faced 20 years after the Dream Team pried international markets wide open. What makes you laugh about this exactly?

"Kawhi shut down LeBron" in 2014 finals is one of the biggest myths in the league recent history, so I won't even comment that.

ABA wasn't that relevant in 1970 yet, so I don't think 1970 is anywhere near the weakest seasons in the league history.

Do you think 2014 Kawhi was comparable offensive player to 1970 Frazier? That's a serious question.

"Comparable" is kind of a nebulous term to define. Like is Giannis comparable to Dame on offense? Dame's clearly better, but they're not that far apart. I guess if I had to answer, I'd say that 2014 Kawhi and 1970 Frazier weren't comparable offensive players in the regular season, but they were in the playoffs.

[iggymcfrack]

I'm out of town so just chiming in with a quick comment on kawhi. Again everyone's criteria is different but I really feel like kawhi's lack of availability is being glossed over here. We're going on several years of what *should* be his prime where he hasn't shown up.

In 2014, while Duncan, Ginobili and Parker were nearing the end of their careers, that was an excellent all around roster. And they built on that chemistry even further after falling short in 2013. Let's not just count accolades like kawhi's finals MVP without context.

Kawhi was amazing in 2019 but this isn't a peaks project. I truly believe Frazier has the better body of work and being able to rely upon his health and leadership gives him the clear edge over kawhi.

Kawhi was very clearly the best player on the 2014 Spurs, much moreso than Frazier was on the 1970 Knicks. It's not just the Finals MVP. Here are the top VORPs in the regular season and postseason:

RS: Kawhi 3.5, Duncan 2.9, Ginobili 2.4, Mills 2.3, Green 2.2
PS: Kawhi 1.3, Manu 1.1, Green 1.1, Duncan 1.0, Diaw 0.9

Here are the top Spurs by RAPTOR which combines RS and PS:
Kawhi +6.6, 12.8 WAR
Manu +5.9, 9.7 WAR
Green +5.1, 8.9 WAR
Mills +5.3, 7.7 WAR
Duncan +2.3, 7.5 WAR

Manu had the best on/off on the team in both the regular season and postseason, but Kawhi's was far and away the best among starters. Kawhi missed 16 games and the Spurs went 54-12 with him in the lineup and 8-8 in games he missed. For comparison's sake, they went 10-4 in games Manu missed.

Meanwhile, Frazier and Reed had pretty similar numbers and I doubt that even as an excellent PG defender Clyde could come close to matching Reed's defensive impact. He did come up big when Reed got hurt in the Finals, but I think that's still a 1a/1b situation where you could go either way rather than a clearcut best player like Kawhi was for the Spurs.

[Cavsfansince84]

Kawhi was very clearly the best player on the 2014 Spurs, much moreso than Frazier was on the 1970 Knicks. It's not just the Finals MVP. Here are the top VORPs in the regular season and postseason:

RS: Kawhi 3.5, Duncan 2.9, Ginobili 2.4, Mills 2.3, Green 2.2
PS: Kawhi 1.3, Manu 1.1, Green 1.1, Duncan 1.0, Diaw 0.9

Here are the top Spurs by RAPTOR which combines RS and PS:
Kawhi +6.6, 12.8 WAR
Manu +5.9, 9.7 WAR
Green +5.1, 8.9 WAR
Mills +5.3, 7.7 WAR
Duncan +2.3, 7.5 WAR

Manu had the best on/off on the team in both the regular season and postseason, but Kawhi's was far and away the best among starters. Kawhi missed 16 games and the Spurs went 54-12 with him in the lineup and 8-8 in games he missed. For comparison's sake, they went 10-4 in games Manu missed.

Meanwhile, Frazier and Reed had pretty similar numbers and I doubt that even as an excellent PG defender Clyde could come close to matching Reed's defensive impact. He did come up big when Reed got hurt in the Finals, but I think that's still a 1a/1b situation where you could go either way rather than a clearcut best player like Kawhi was for the Spurs.

Worth noting I would say that if we are using vorp as one rough estimate of player goodness and Kawhi had a 3.5 in 2014 that Walt in 74&75 in years that were probably slightly worse than 1970 had vorps of 4.4&4.7. So even though Kawhi's might have led the Spurs in 2014 more than Walt's did(if he would have over Reed that year which he probably wouldn't have), Walt likely still had significantly higher vorps in both the rs and ps, comparing these two seasons.

[HeartBreakKid]

Kawhi Leonard has other great seasons other than 2019.

Also, dinging his availability in a comparison with Frazier...? Even if Frazier played more it isn't by much. Frazier has played more RS games, Kawhi has played more PS games (by a lot)

I think brushing aside what Kawhi did in 2014 is really weak. He was flat out underrated by the media which by reach meant most of the basketball populous. He didn't score that many points but considering we've voted someone like Pippen in over an infinite amount of better volume scorers I would hope we've grown past that point of rating players.

I don't think Kawhi was much worse in 2014 than he was in 2015. He seemed more like a misunderstood player than anything. Most parts of his game have always been underrated or not acknowledged until years later. ("Woah he learned how to shoot!" - he always knew how to shoot. "WOAH look at his iso game!" - he had been doing that for years before he had the reputation of a scorer, even defensively he was overlooked hence why the Spurs got him relatively deep in the draft)