Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #23 - 2010-11 Dirk Nowitzki

[AEnigma]

The PS impact almost unanimously lean CP3 in terms of PS impact so the numbers would not be the way to go.

Well that is not really true lol, but that is also conflating “impact” with “performance”. Unless you are referring to team results and saying Paul’s teams performed better, but then you basically need to ignore Garnett’s deeper runs in favour of how Paul was doing over the course of his second round matchups (somewhat famously against teams which always went on to lose the following round ).

I meant to write the PS impact numbers are almost unanimously in Paul's favor in terms of Peak.

I knew what you meant. And again, I find that hard to believe, depending on what you are using as “impact numbers”. Garnett had a ton of impact on his postseason teams, just not so much via the box score.

But this guess I just feel like the idea that KG was that level of PS performer is just not true to me. His offense is a sore spot; simply less than ideal shot-selection because of inability to create his own shot. I credit KG being able to stay healthy longer during a PS run (although it's not like KG had Manu during prime if we are to nitpick).

1. But the majority of his argument is defensive.
2. His scoring declines, but everything else he does maintains.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Well that is not really true lol, but that is also conflating “impact” with “performance”. Unless you are referring to team results and saying Paul’s teams performed better, but then you basically need to ignore Garnett’s deeper runs in favour of how Paul was doing over the course of his second round matchups (somewhat famously against teams which always went on to lose the following round ).

I meant to write the PS impact numbers are almost unanimously in Paul's favor in terms of Peak.

I knew what you meant. And again, I find that hard to believe, depending on what you are using as “impact numbers”. Garnett had a ton of impact on his postseason teams, just not so much via the box score.

But this guess I just feel like the idea that KG was that level of PS performer is just not true to me. His offense is a sore spot; simply less than ideal shot-selection because of inability to create his own shot. I credit KG being able to stay healthy longer during a PS run (although it's not like KG had Manu during prime if we are to nitpick).

1. But the majority of his argument is defensive.
2. His scoring declines, but everything else he does maintains.

Kevin Garnett also witnesses more turnover issues during the PS than RS. I think there is an argument his playmaking takes a hit as well. And the scoring decline matters enough to me that at this level, the difference between Duncan being able to score on higher volume and almost 5 TS% higher (relative to opponent), matters. The drop is enough to make him drop down from the tier he is in during the RS. But to each their own.

[falcolombardi]

I meant to write the PS impact numbers are almost unanimously in Paul's favor in terms of Peak.

I knew what you meant. And again, I find that hard to believe, depending on what you are using as “impact numbers”. Garnett had a ton of impact on his postseason teams, just not so much via the box score.

But this guess I just feel like the idea that KG was that level of PS performer is just not true to me. His offense is a sore spot; simply less than ideal shot-selection because of inability to create his own shot. I credit KG being able to stay healthy longer during a PS run (although it's not like KG had Manu during prime if we are to nitpick).

1. But the majority of his argument is defensive.
2. His scoring declines, but everything else he does maintains.

Kevin Garnett also witnesses more turnover issues during the PS than RS. I think there is an argument his playmaking takes a hit as well. And the scoring decline matters enough to me that at this level, the difference between Duncan being able to score on higher volume and almost 5 TS% higher (relative to opponent), matters. But to each their own.

Wait is the discussion about duncan vs garnett?

I thought it was about garnett vs paul?

[LukaTheGOAT]

I knew what you meant. And again, I find that hard to believe, depending on what you are using as “impact numbers”. Garnett had a ton of impact on his postseason teams, just not so much via the box score.


1. But the majority of his argument is defensive.
2. His scoring declines, but everything else he does maintains.

Kevin Garnett also witnesses more turnover issues during the PS than RS. I think there is an argument his playmaking takes a hit as well. And the scoring decline matters enough to me that at this level, the difference between Duncan being able to score on higher volume and almost 5 TS% higher (relative to opponent), matters. But to each their own.

Wait is the discussion about duncan vs garnett?

I thought it was about garnett vs paul?

He wrote "and dozens of pages of analysis have been written comparing him favourably to our darling Tim Duncan. "

So I reintroduced Duncan into the argument.

[falcolombardi]

Kevin Garnett also witnesses more turnover issues during the PS than RS. I think there is an argument his playmaking takes a hit as well. And the scoring decline matters enough to me that at this level, the difference between Duncan being able to score on higher volume and almost 5 TS% higher (relative to opponent), matters. But to each their own.

Wait is the discussion about duncan vs garnett?

I thought it was about garnett vs paul?

He wrote "and dozens of pages of analysis have been written comparing him favourably to our darling Tim Duncan. "

So I reintroduced Duncan into the argument.

But duncan and garnett are already in, why are they being debated again vs each other?

[LukaTheGOAT]

Also, since I made a pretty big claim on how CP3 wipes Garnett in PS value metrics, I suppose I should post a few to back up my claim.

Chris Paul's Peaks

3-year Backpicks BPM-7.4

5-year Backpicks BPM All-time Rank- #3

5-year BPM-9.60

3-year PS AuPM-5.2

Single Year PS PIPM-5.67 (Has 2 years better than KG's 08 PS run)

In RAPTOR, CP3 has 8 PS runs, besting KG's single best PS run. 08, 11, 13-18

CP3 also has a higher 3-year peak in the PS xgboost model predicting LEBRON created by one of the developers of the LEBRON metric (box-score only tbough)

Read on Twitter

Kevin Garnett's Peaks

3-year Backpicks BPM-5.7

5-year Backpicks BPM All-time Rank-#21

5-year BPM-7.06

3-year PS AuPM-6.2

Single Year PS PIPM-4.63

Peak PS RAPTOR was 7.88 done in 01 (1 round)


Take note, that the one PS metric, KG looks better in, is AuPM/G, which is regressed against RS on/off to improve stability, but by doing this, also gives a bias to strong RS performers and underrates those who improve play in the PS. I never denied KG was a superior RS performer than CP3, so this isn't completely surprising to me that he comes out better in PS AuPM/G.

Now I am not saying that Paul has a better peak than KG, but it is interesting to note that statistically he compares favorably in PS play. And while KG maybe has less questions about his durability in deeper playoff runs (he didn't have many himself tbh), Paul actually faced tougher PS defenses from 12-16 than KG ever did, so we do know he is resilient offensively against tough defenses https://diamondhoop5.wordpress.com/2021/07/12/playoff-defenses-faced-update/ Not only did CP3 not necessarily get to boost his playoff numbers against bad defenses, but he looks this insane going up and gives the imprint of a guy who is an all-timer who ran up against some tough teams. Paul's team offenses haven been great, posting a playoff offensive relative efficiency of +5.7 from 2013-17 and a 3-year offensive peak of 7.7 (15-17).

Paul has done this repeatedly too. The longevity is impressive. For instance, Paul has the 2nd most postseason runs over +4 in AuPM per game since 1997 with 7, with Curry next up with 6. Keep in mind a +4 is around the area of what you would expect for a top 5 guy, so that is significant added value and has been able to do this type of thing repeatedly.

[iggymcfrack]

Cp3 vs Nash is interesting, I'd probably lean Nash. I've just never been a big fan of Cp3's game or leadership qualities. Cp3 can probably fit better in various roles, so maybe that's something that can give him an edge but if your team goal is to score 120 points every game I'd take Nash. Both can do amazing things for an offense, no doubt about it.

There's another thread in the PC forum right now that lists best rORtgs by player over the last 25 years. Here are the top 3 seasons for each:

Nash: +14.2 (1st overall), +12.1 (6th overall), +10.7 (14th overall)
Paul: +12.5 (4th overall), +11.2 (8th overall), +10.7 (15th overall)

Considering the differences in the offense they led is less than 1 PPG on average, shouldn't the defense be more than enough to make up the difference? Paul is arguably the best defender at his position all-time. I'd say at the absolute worst he should be top 5. Nash meanwhile is probably the single worst defender that will be a serious contender in this project by a large margin. The difference between them has to be larger on defense than on offense right? Never mind that Nash had a uniquely great fit in Phoenix and that Paul consistently outperforms him offensively in the box scores.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Wait is the discussion about duncan vs garnett?

I thought it was about garnett vs paul?

He wrote "and dozens of pages of analysis have been written comparing him favourably to our darling Tim Duncan. "

So I reintroduced Duncan into the argument.

But duncan and garnett are already in, why are they being debated again vs each other?

I think be was just trying to show that Garnett is not far off from Duncan, who was voted with a super elite peak.

[AEnigma]

Cp3 vs Nash is interesting, I'd probably lean Nash. I've just never been a big fan of Cp3's game or leadership qualities. Cp3 can probably fit better in various roles, so maybe that's something that can give him an edge but if your team goal is to score 120 points every game I'd take Nash. Both can do amazing things for an offense, no doubt about it.

There's another thread in the PC forum right now that lists best rORtgs by player over the last 25 years. Here are the top 3 seasons for each:

Nash: +14.2 (1st overall), +12.1 (6th overall), +10.7 (14th overall)
Paul: +12.5 (4th overall), +11.2 (8th overall), +10.7 (15th overall)

Considering the differences in the offense they led is less than 1 PPG on average, shouldn't the defense be more than enough to make up the difference?

And what about in the postseason.

Paul is arguably the best defender at his position all-time.

It would be an extremely bad argument.

I'd say at the absolute worst he should be top 5.

In terms of accumulated career value, maybe. For a peak/prime? Nah, he has never sniffed that best perimetre defender in the league title the top guards have on occasion pushed for.

Nash meanwhile is probably the single worst defender that will be a serious contender in this project by a large margin.

In absolute, perhaps. Relative to how much they actually limit the defence, well, Jokic made it in several spots ago, and I think you were one of his voters.

The difference between them has to be larger on defense than on offense right?

In the regular season? Possibly. At least a pretty fair argument to be made. But against adaptive playoff offences, Paul’s defence is not quite as disruptive as that regular season level, despite what a couple of random clips of “he guarded Kevin Durant!!!!” are often used to suggest. If I am in crunch time and need specifically Chris Paul to get (or significantly contribute to) stops in the postseason, that is probably not going to happen — which is what you would expect from a small guard whose best defensive attributes are good hands and a strong core.

Never mind that Nash had a uniquely great fit in Phoenix

Lmao oh woe is Chris Paul, if only he had better fit with the Clippers…

and that Paul consistently outperforms him offensively in the box scores.

Nash is still the better passer and scorer (in before “but Paul scores more!”).

[AEnigma]

He wrote "and dozens of pages of analysis have been written comparing him favourably to our darling Tim Duncan. "

So I reintroduced Duncan into the argument.

But duncan and garnett are already in, why are they being debated again vs each other?

I think be was just trying to show that Garnett is not far off from Duncan, who was voted with a super elite peak.

Essentially, but I was primarily trying to say if you were actually that curious about the case for Garnett’s postseason value despite his scoring dropoff and any other dropoffs you feel are present or are present in the boxscore, you could go back (here or in prior projects) to read them rather than drawing an odd analogy wherein you comparatively argue for Paul because of offensive box score advantages.

[f4p]

i haven't had a chance to read this thread, but i assume it's not dissimilar from the last: it's weird to see the people that get ranked over harden. people without rings, people with seemingly even more playoff drop-off. people who made it further than ever only after joining harden.

kevin durant showed even less playoff resiliency in OKC than harden over his career, but we're supposed to be impressed because he did well when life was easy? if steph and KD are so much better, why was 2018 looking really bad for them and why was 2019 super close even with chris paul looking like crap for most of the series? was it really pj tucker holding it together? the one time harden got a super team, he had a 75 TS% in his one healthy playoff round. this board loves creation abilities when tied to other offensive skills but harden's don't seem as important (see the Nets for what it meant). was KD really better in the regular season than 2017-2020 harden?

chris paul never saw the good side of the 2nd round until he joined harden. he has blown not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, but 5 2-0 series leads in his career (threw in a 3-1 for good measure). 9-9 as an SRS favorites in the playoffs, which is amongst the worst marks ever (10-3 for harden). even 5-5 as a +2 SRS favorite, which is the worst number i saw other than Oscar, and even then that's only if you factor out the Kareem years (and even then it was only 1-2 so a smaller sample). for pure favorites, only t-mac (0%) and pre-Kareem Oscar (33%) are lower with dominique (50%) tied.

westbrook? won't rehash the debate that he wasn't even better than harden in 2017, which would be maybe harden's 4th best regular season, but he doesn't even have the corroborating surrounding seasons that people have been looking for even in a peaks project. the claim was that he was a high volume, moderate efficiency guy who couldn't translate this style to having better teammates seemed to be perfectly backed up in subsequent seasons where his team basically did no better with paul george and didn't get out of the 1st round. even his insane 2017 playoff stats don't even grade out as amazing as you would think in a volume stat like PER (27.4). the fact he never got out of the 1st round without durant or harden (and he didn't really play the 1st round) makes it weird to pick him over a guy who has basically had the 2nd round as his floor for 8 years and who basically only loses to the champion or 60+/70+ win teams.

also, since i saw luka mentioned in the previous round, i'm starting to think i should have started thinking of him earlier. from the previous thread, it seemed like he was already getting the kawhi nit-pick everything and ignore what happened treatement. but he's literally the leading scorer in playoff history and that list is basically MJ with a huge lead over 2nd place. huge 1st rounds against the clippers, where he was putting up 40 point triple doubles with game winners. huge series against a 64 win #1 seed where he basically just clowned them in a game 7, seeming to thrive from the tip off like it was a fun challenge while they all shrunk in the moment (who was their leader again?), with him scoring 30 in the 1st half, more than the suns. then he played the #1 defense in the league and was putting up 30 and 40 point massive games and giving them everything they wanted. maybe a few dings for slow starts in the regular season, but how much did phoenix's fast start help them? luka is probably next on my list, and frankly, only because i hadn't started considering him due to recency bias (and because my picks never come off the board so i'd probably have luka higher in an absolute sense). he's going to be a top 15 minimum and probably top 10 guy in history and his peak being super low will look weird in the future.


1. 1983 Moses Malone (alternate 1982)
Fo Fo Fo, blah blah blah.

Dominated the regular season, dominated the playoffs for one of the best teams ever. Dr J didn't even play well in the playoffs, so if there was ever going to be a test of the "Moses is just joining a great team, he's not really that good", then this would be it. And well, the 12-1 record doesn't lie. But his PIPM is low?

2. 2011 Dirk Nowitzki

In some ways doesn't feel as good as 2006, with the epic Spurs series and being great against the Suns. But in one finals he crumbled, while in 2011 he was great. He might have had the GOAT clutch playoffs. I wanna say he had a 90+ TS% in the clutch through the WCF. Maybe it was a few games into the WCF, I don't know, but it felt like he never missed a shot in the clutch in those playoffs. Faced down the Heatles and came out on top. Though it wasn't actually a particularly great series compared to the rest of the playoffs, he still seemed amazing in the clutch. Weight of the world and his legacy on the line with this being the last realistic shot and he came through.

3. 2019 James Harden (alternate 2018, then 2020)

2018 summary: Led league in PER, WS, WS48, BPM, team easily won the most games, won MVP. When healthy, Rockets went an incredible 44-5 with a +11.0 SRS when Harden and Paul played (42-3 and +12.0 when Harden/CP3/Capela played). Dominated first 2 rounds and then got up 3-2 on a seemingly unbeatable team that went 28-3 in the playoffs in 2017 and 2018 when not facing the Rockets, including easy trouncings of prime Lebron. And arguably only lost because Chris Paul got hurt and the Rockets were down to a 5.5 man rotation for the last 2 games, where Harden still averaged 32/7.5/6.5 in games where his team averaged 88.5 ppg. Anybody else is beloved for this amazing season and heroic challenge of Goliath. then followed it up with...

Greatest scoring season in history per 100. Took an 11-14 team that cratered at the beginning of the season because the owner got cheap and thought Michael Carter Williams and Carmelo Anthony could replace Trevor Ariza and Luc Mbah-a-moute (narrator: they couldn't). I was at opening night when we lost by a million. I knew we would do nothing until we got rid of them. Well, it took a few extra games after we got rid of them, but then The Unguardable Tour started. 32 consecutive games of 30+ points, just mind-boggling. A total of a 46 game stretch averaging 39.7/7.0/7.3 where the rockets went 33-13 after looking out of it and with guys in and out of the lineup. Seriously, read that again. 39.7 ppg for 46 straight games, doing way more winning than 1987 Jordan or 2006 Kobe.

On January 14th and 16th, Harden I believe became the first person since Wilt to score 57+ in back to back games. On March 20th and 22nd, James Harden became the first person since James Harden to score 57+ in back to back games. Insane how easy he made scoring look. You'd just look up and he'd have 31 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd and you'd barely remember him being hot because it was just a normal night. Eventually made the playoffs and put up 35/7/5.5 against the Warriors in arguably his best series ever (why I choose it over 2018). Played toe to toe with KD, who was on fire, and easily outplayed Steph. Did everything he could with Chris Paul not looking great. An amazing season. Again, anyone but Harden has this season and people are drooling over it.

[AEnigma]

Too bad you did not read the thread, because then you would see how we all unanimously agreed that we just hate the Houston Rockets as a franchise and will never give any of their players the credit they so rightly and obviously deserve.

[LukaTheGOAT]

But duncan and garnett are already in, why are they being debated again vs each other?

I think be was just trying to show that Garnett is not far off from Duncan, who was voted with a super elite peak.

Essentially, but I was primarily trying to say if you were actually that curious about the case for Garnett’s postseason value despite his scoring dropoff and any other dropoffs you feel are present or are present in the boxscore, you could go back (here or in prior projects) to read them rather than drawing an odd analogy wherein you comparatively argue for Paul because of offensive box score advantages.

Correct, most of CP3's case comes from him being an all-time offensive player and thus I used the results to highlight his impressiveness. It is also why I made a post of some plus-minus metrics that almost universally have CP3 ahead of KG in the PS.

[AEnigma]

I think be was just trying to show that Garnett is not far off from Duncan, who was voted with a super elite peak.

Essentially, but I was primarily trying to say if you were actually that curious about the case for Garnett’s postseason value despite his scoring dropoff and any other dropoffs you feel are present or are present in the boxscore, you could go back (here or in prior projects) to read them rather than drawing an odd analogy wherein you comparatively argue for Paul because of offensive box score advantages.

Correct, most of CP3's case comes from him being an all-time offensive player and thus I used the results to highlight his impressiveness. It is also why I made a post of some plus-minus metrics that almost universally have CP3 ahead of KG in the PS.

But all those so-called “plus/minus metrics” still draw heavily from individual box score production, and the one that probably draws the least (comparatively) is the one you liked the least…

[LukaTheGOAT]

Essentially, but I was primarily trying to say if you were actually that curious about the case for Garnett’s postseason value despite his scoring dropoff and any other dropoffs you feel are present or are present in the boxscore, you could go back (here or in prior projects) to read them rather than drawing an odd analogy wherein you comparatively argue for Paul because of offensive box score advantages.

Correct, most of CP3's case comes from him being an all-time offensive player and thus I used the results to highlight his impressiveness. It is also why I made a post of some plus-minus metrics that almost universally have CP3 ahead of KG in the PS.

But all those so-called “plus/minus metrics” still draw heavily from individual box score production, and the one that probably draws the least (comparatively) is the one you liked the least…

Nahhh, all I did was explain the potential blindspot of the metric and how it makes sense that AuPM/G would be the one metric KG would rate higher in, if any.

[AEnigma]

Correct, most of CP3's case comes from him being an all-time offensive player and thus I used the results to highlight his impressiveness. It is also why I made a post of some plus-minus metrics that almost universally have CP3 ahead of KG in the PS.

But all those so-called “plus/minus metrics” still draw heavily from individual box score production, and the one that probably draws the least (comparatively) is the one you liked the least…

Nahhh, all I did was explain the potential blindspot of the metric and how it makes sense that AuPM/G would be the one metric KG would rate higher in, if any.

Or alternatively Garnett would rate higher in AuPM because it is more dependent on net ratings (where Garnett tops Paul even in the postseason) and to the extent it does use box scores it more deliberately skews to defensive box statistics to try to make up for how most all-in-ones undersell defence.

[f4p]

Eh. 2014 okc had nothing to do with hamstrings. He just plainly choked. It grandfathered the clippers choking in the future, as everyone got shook from that point on. You have guys like Jared Dudley tell it, the clippers were never the same after that. 2015 vs houston looks even worse for cp3 than it already did in that lense.

2017 game 7, played the first 6 games very well against a not that good jazz team. 13 points on 31% shooting in the biggest game tho. No hamstring issues there.

2018 there definitely was hamstring issues lol.

2019 what was the excuse when there was no kd, everyone expected the rockets to win, and he played so badly it made people think his all star days are far behind him now? Hamstrings? Or just being badly outplayed by steph once again?

2021 nba finals whyd he lose another 2-0 series lead and just lost 4 games in a row again?

2022 against dallas, coming off a closeout game against NOP where he shot perfectly, looked fine physically...then what happened? Between that game and game 3 of the dallas series? What exactly happened? We still don't know. But he played like crap and averaged 9 ppg and 5 assists on almost 4 turnovers and 4 fouls a game. Just awful.

You cant just throw all this to hamstring issues. Its dishonest.

The truth of the matter is as the best player healthy or not cp3 cant get you out of the second round. Other great point guards, like the one being compared to him in this thread in steve nash, could lose his best scorer and still carry you to within 2 games of the finals despite playing on a team with a 7 man rotation. That HAS to count for something. It just has to.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

i agree with pretty much all of this but 2019 in the game durant missed was actually his best game of the series, with 27 points, 11 rebounds, and 6 assists on 11-19 shooting. it was the rest of the series (with every game decided by 6 or less) where he sucked.

[LukaTheGOAT]

But all those so-called “plus/minus metrics” still draw heavily from individual box score production, and the one that probably draws the least (comparatively) is the one you liked the least…

Nahhh, all I did was explain the potential blindspot of the metric and how it makes sense that AuPM/G would be the one metric KG would rate higher in, if any.

Or alternatively Garnett would rate higher in AuPM because it is more dependent on net ratings (where Garnett tops Paul even in the postseason) and to the extent it does use box scores it more deliberately skews to defensive box statistics to try to make up for how most all-in-ones undersell defence.

I'd like to see the proof that it uses more/better defensive box-metrics in comparison to say a RAPTOR (something with player tracking data); we don't have the exactly methodology for AuPM inputs. Based on the older AuPM, that would be a firm no

Furthermore, my interpretation is more than fair. From Ben Taylor the creator of the metric.

"The all-in-one stat featured in this series, Augmented Plus Minus (AuPM ), estimates value based on likely indicators by relying on a bit of regular season information.1 If you believe postseason basketball is wildly different than the regular season, than this stat is arguably too reliant regular season data."

I do believe the PS is a whole new game compared to the RS, so...

[f4p]

Too bad you did not read the thread, because then you would see how we all unanimously agreed that we just hate the Houston Rockets as a franchise and will never give any of their players the credit they so rightly and obviously deserve.

i caught up. moses might be a rocket but is from before my time so i don't really hold any allegiance to him in that way. the harden stuff is funny, from a supposedly more objective board like this one. you would think it would not just be the usual harden hate/narrative, but it seems to seep through even here. i've still yet to see him ever win a poll. although to be fair, sometimes they are "bird vs harden as a shooter" polls. westbrook over harden, on a board like this? tmac, with his 0 playoff series wins and completely uncorroborated massive outlier season that still ended in a 3-1 blown 1st round lead (if regular season floor-raising is the case, then not sure how harden is losing that)? chris paul, with maybe the most SRS favorite losses ever (most in my spreadsheet at 9, only duncan with 8 and kareem with 7 are close, and they played almost 40 such series to paul's 18) and most 2-0 blown leads ever. a huge outlier season from ewing? it's like people are searching for non-harden seasons to pick, when basically any of his 18/19/20 stretch would probably measure up to any one of those, including the outliers, and usually comes with better team results to boot. at least chris paul has the huge statistics/lots of injuries/lots of losses case that makes him weird to rank.

as for moses. just seems weird. couldn't shoot, couldn't pass, couldn't play defense. seems easy to gameplan for. apparently he just drunkenly stumbled into philadelphia and walked out with a championship trophy somehow. must have been Dr. J's sub-50 TS% in the playoffs. or toney's 52.5 TS%. you would think with philly's top 3 scorers dropping about 5 TS% in the playoffs (cumulatively) that the 76ers would have at least struggled a little on the way to the title if moses wasn't really that impactful. but i guess it can't live up to chris paul's legendary fight to get to game 6 of the 2nd round.

[falcolombardi]

How do you guys see the barkley vs moses comparision?

They share some strenghts like their absurd offensive rebounding.

I dont like barkley defense, too many bad decisions and bad timing help defense/slow rotation plays in defense that i think arguably make him a negative defender in spite of his defensive rebounding and physical gifts

On the other hand i love his fastbreak game and passing on the full court and he is capable of very good passes in the post too