Peak Project #16

[bastillon]

Vote

1) Dirk Nowitzki 2011
2) Patrick Ewing 1990
3) Dwyane Wade 2010

[...]

Unsure what to do for the third slot. When I started this post I had '08 Kobe third. As I was writing about Dirk I decided to switch to '10 Wade. And if I keep talking I might get '03 TMac into the mix. Wade was the most explosive horizontally of the mix, and I think he had the highest measured impact of the crew in his peak year. TMac was the most explosive vertically of the mix, with the best 3-point shot, and his added size (realistically 6-9) made him more of a physical mismatch than the other two. Kobe in '08 was just so polished...he was a professional scorer that was able to take a few mph off his individual fastball and take advantage of a very good offensive cast and lift them into historic territory as a squad.

Of the 3, I feel like TMac was the most portable, Kobe was the most scaleable, and Wade had the highest single-season impact of the three. All are in the argument for the best non-Jordan SG seasons ever, IMO. I have all three of them just above Jerry West, but the argument could certainly be made that West's combo of elite shooting and playmaking could have gotten him into the argument if not pushing him to the front. Tough one.

At the end of this post, I've decided that I'm leaning Wade at the moment. But that's changing from second-to-second, so I'll submit this vote now but it may change again

This is how I see Bryant v. Wade v. TMac:

-Bryant's advantage over both of these guys is that he has proven that he can carry all-time level offense (Lakers 08) without stacked supporting cast. He had Gasol, yes. But it was hardly a stacked roster. Just a well-balanced team with clear division of roles and great coaching. Neither Wade nor TMac have proven that they can achieve that high ceiling on a team level. Granted, they didn't really have good supporting casts to work with, but this is definitely something to consider. It is a lot more difficult to make high impact on top team than on a bad team.

-Bryant's advantage over TMac and to a certain degree over Wade is that Kobe can sustain his high level of play vs. great defenders. This was a period Bryant was regularly torturing guys like Battier, Artest, Bowen etc. When Kobe was on, it didn't matter much whose hand was in his face. And he was on very often. This makes Kobe harder to gameplan for because you can't force him into a situation where he feels discomfort. So fluid.

TMac 03 feasted on Michael Curry in the playoffs (the knucklehead which later coached Suns and made Nash a sidekick, rofl), putting up multiple 40+ pt performances. But since G4 TMac was shutdown by rookie Tayshaun Prince. I have a feeling that TMac's style didn't do very well vs. high quality opponents. He was a huge talent but I really don't see him dominating top defense in a playoff series. His track record is quite poor in that regard. Kobe on the other hand had numerous playoff series where he destroys top defenses (Spurs every year, Rockets 09). Admittedly, Kobe also had quite a few poor performances but in general he delivers vs high quality defensive teams.

Wade is much better than TMac in that regard but I'd be curious to see how he does against a truly elite defense with gameplan to stop Wade. Usually in the playoffs coaches gameplanned to let Wade get his points (for example 06 finals, 2010 vs. Celtics). Wonder what would happen if he faced Spurs and they went under every single screen and roll, forcing him to take jumpshots a la LeBron in the finals. I'm not convinced by Wade's ability to sustain his high level under those circumstances. It was a huge issue for Wade in the Big 3 era, even when he was healthy. Particularly Chicago dumpstered Wade in 2011 ECF, and this is exactly what Thibodeau was trying to do - just let Wade shoot. Unfortunately we didn't really see Wade going up against great defenses very often. To be fair though, he did dumpster Pistons in 05 despite the injuries.

-Bryant and TMac have big advantage over Wade when it comes to portability. They play a lot more without the ball so you can pair them up with guys that need the ball in their hands to make impact. It gives you a lot more flexibility when it comes to team compositions you can run. With Wade you don't have the same flexibility, unless you are willing to sacrifice someone's impact.

so in short 3 points:
1. track record of very high team ceiling
2. ability to sustain production vs. high level opponents
3. portability

[SideshowBob]

Ballot

15. Wade 09 +6.25 (+5.00 O/+1.25 D)

16. Curry 15 +6.25 (+6.25 O/+0.00 D)

17. West 68 +6.75 (+5.75 O/+1.00 D)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Curry

Spoiler:

On Curry's improvements in 2015

Huh. He's showed a marked improvement in his already amazing ability to shoot threes off the dribble, which he also seems to be doing better (and more frequently), despite the fact that he's now got a reputation for it and defenses that face GS will often make it a top priority to adapt to this ability.

Most clearly though, he's gotten much better at utilizing his crafty dribble to get into the lane (2014: 2.5 FGA at the rim and 4.4 FTA, 2015: 3.2 FGA at the rim and 4.8 FTA, despite minute decline from 36.5 to 32.8), and when he's there he's finishing at an elite level now (68%, gotten really comfortable with that floater, and his touch around the rim even in traffic is outstanding), up from 63%, despite the fact that he's become clearly more of a threat to get there and defenses are now more concerned with trying to control his penetration. Ultimately, this means he's more frequently able to collapse/disrupt defenses in the way that typical drive and dish guys are (while notably being a far superior pullup threat than any of those guys), and this is in addition to his already strong playmaking.

Building on that end, while he's no Nash/Paul, he's a clearly superior to most of the drive/kick wings/lead guards; he's more able to probe and force rotations/disruptions with his on-ball movement and then exploit openings/matchup advantages. Overall, his playmaking is certainly a step higher from before, he's more sound at running the system, he's brought his turnovers under control, and from what I've seen, his presence of mind/creation vision when he's off the ball seems to be, at the least, commendable, at best pretty remarkable.

I mean I can keep going. It seems pretty off base to suggest that he hasn't really improved "that much" this year, when he's gotten better at everything.

Curry vs. Wade

Spoiler:

Kind of conflicted on Wade vs. Curry. I'm a lot more firm in my evaluation of Wade than Curry. Its easier to find parallels for 09 Wade, in the RS, his offense is similar to 09 Lebron's. Lebron IMO is a better playmaker, better 3pt shooter, and a deadlier finisher, but Wade's better at actually getting to the basket, has a far superior complimentary midrange game, and has better instincts attacking defenses. Wade also measures out similarly to a younger Jordan, with a slightly less refined post-game/jumpshot/etc. It's easy for me to gauge him on that end, and on defense as well (high activity level in the lanes, weak-side shot blocking, has the length and athleticism to cover the rim while also being a versatile/pesky man defender, strong rebounding out of the two spot, etc.). I penalize him a slight bit for being injured during the postseason but its minor.

Curry I have a tougher time with. I've championed him pretty high, and I can see my thoughts on him fluctuating in both directions. Am I too high on his defense? He looks good in the GS system but I don't know how well that might translate to less disciplined teams (I don't see the smarts outside of just sticking with the system). Am I too high (or low) on his offense? We've never seen someone have degree of gravity outside the arc before (on and off the ball), so its hard to find a comparison, even for the sake of a relativity comparison.

Also, I really like 2010 and 2011 from Wade; IMO he's not far off from 09 in those years.

Not going to get into West too much yet, because I'm on the fence with Dirk/Barkley/Kobe/Durant at that spot as well.

Apologies for lack of discussion in the last few threads, been caught up with CFA studying, but I'll try to break down my thoughts on the next few guys as the weekend approaches.

[SideshowBob]

Vote

1) Dirk Nowitzki 2011
2) Patrick Ewing 1990
3) Dwyane Wade 2010

[...]

Unsure what to do for the third slot. When I started this post I had '08 Kobe third. As I was writing about Dirk I decided to switch to '10 Wade. And if I keep talking I might get '03 TMac into the mix. Wade was the most explosive horizontally of the mix, and I think he had the highest measured impact of the crew in his peak year. TMac was the most explosive vertically of the mix, with the best 3-point shot, and his added size (realistically 6-9) made him more of a physical mismatch than the other two. Kobe in '08 was just so polished...he was a professional scorer that was able to take a few mph off his individual fastball and take advantage of a very good offensive cast and lift them into historic territory as a squad.

Of the 3, I feel like TMac was the most portable, Kobe was the most scaleable, and Wade had the highest single-season impact of the three. All are in the argument for the best non-Jordan SG seasons ever, IMO. I have all three of them just above Jerry West, but the argument could certainly be made that West's combo of elite shooting and playmaking could have gotten him into the argument if not pushing him to the front. Tough one.

At the end of this post, I've decided that I'm leaning Wade at the moment. But that's changing from second-to-second, so I'll submit this vote now but it may change again

This is how I see Bryant v. Wade v. TMac:

-Bryant's advantage over both of these guys is that he has proven that he can carry all-time level offense (Lakers 08) without stacked supporting cast. He had Gasol, yes. But it was hardly a stacked roster. Just a well-balanced team with clear division of roles and great coaching. Neither Wade nor TMac have proven that they can achieve that high ceiling on a team level. Granted, they didn't really have good supporting casts to work with, but this is definitely something to consider. It is a lot more difficult to make high impact on top team than on a bad team.

-Bryant's advantage over TMac and to a certain degree over Wade is that Kobe can sustain his high level of play vs. great defenders. This was a period Bryant was regularly torturing guys like Battier, Artest, Bowen etc. When Kobe was on, it didn't matter much whose hand was in his face. And he was on very often. This makes Kobe harder to gameplan for because you can't force him into a situation where he feels discomfort. So fluid.

TMac 03 feasted on Michael Curry in the playoffs (the knucklehead which later coached Suns and made Nash a sidekick, rofl), putting up multiple 40+ pt performances. But since G4 TMac was shutdown by rookie Tayshaun Prince. I have a feeling that TMac's style didn't do very well vs. high quality opponents. He was a huge talent but I really don't see him dominating top defense in a playoff series. His track record is quite poor in that regard. Kobe on the other hand had numerous playoff series where he destroys top defenses (Spurs every year, Rockets 09). Admittedly, Kobe also had quite a few poor performances but in general he delivers vs high quality defensive teams.

Wade is much better than TMac in that regard but I'd be curious to see how he does against a truly elite defense with gameplan to stop Wade. Usually in the playoffs coaches gameplanned to let Wade get his points (for example 06 finals, 2010 vs. Celtics). Wonder what would happen if he faced Spurs and they went under every single screen and roll, forcing him to take jumpshots a la LeBron in the finals. I'm not convinced by Wade's ability to sustain his high level under those circumstances. It was a huge issue for Wade in the Big 3 era, even when he was healthy. Particularly Chicago dumpstered Wade in 2011 ECF, and this is exactly what Thibodeau was trying to do - just let Wade shoot. Unfortunately we didn't really see Wade going up against great defenses very often. To be fair though, he did dumpster Pistons in 05 despite the injuries.

-Bryant and TMac have big advantage over Wade when it comes to portability. They play a lot more without the ball so you can pair them up with guys that need the ball in their hands to make impact. It gives you a lot more flexibility when it comes to team compositions you can run. With Wade you don't have the same flexibility, unless you are willing to sacrifice someone's impact.

so in short 3 points:
1. track record of very high team ceiling
2. ability to sustain production vs. high level opponents
3. portability

I don't really disagree with your thoughts on Wade bast. I'm interested in what you think of him defensively though - IMO the gap he has over Kobe on that end is the reason I prefer his peak (if it were 06-08 Kobe offense + early 00s Kobe defense then I'd flip).

[Clyde Frazier]

Ballot #1 - 66 West

[I know as we get into this range the difference between each spot is pretty small considering how many viable candidates there are. I still think west is right there with oscar, though, so i'm sticking with it.]

Spoiler:

Going with West here sort of in the same vein as magic / bird putting him after oscar. West was a master volume scorer on great efficiency (especially for his era), not to mention an excellent playmaker, falling somewhere between a PG and SG throughout his career.

RS: 31.3 PPG, 7.1 RPG, 6.1 APG, 47.3% FG, 86% FT (12.4 FTAs per game), 57.3% TS (+8.6% vs. league avg), .256 WS/48

PS: 34.2 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.6 APG, 51.8% TS, 87.2% FT, 58.1% TS, .237 WS/48

He had the poor luck of coming up during the russell celtics era, losing to them several times in the finals. He would lead the lakers to the finals in 66, again losing in game 7 by 2 to the celtics in heart breaking fashion. This would come after putting up 33.9 PPG, 6.4 RPG and 5.1 APG on 51.5% from the field and 87.1% from the line in the series.

Oscar and West may be the 2 most complete players left on the board. And purely as a fan, I think they'd really thrive in today's game, and it would be a pleasure to watch.

1966 Finals Highlights

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf0F9QupxFY[/youtube]

Ballot #2 - 09 Dirk

Spoiler:

May re-evaluate this selection in the next thread, but for now, I feel good about Dirk here. A quick summary of why I consider 09 his peak as opposed to 06, 07 or 2011:

While Dirk took way too much heat for the 07 first round exit against the warriors (the average fan refused to acknowledge that former mavs coach don nelson knew avery’s game plan to a T), he nonetheless struggled in the series. Smaller defenders like stephen jackson and al harrington were able to irritate him and force him into taking bad shots. This included taking 3s as an out as opposed to a strength.

Over the next few seasons, Dirk further improved his footwork and high post play, and got to a point as if the defender was invisible. He was much more patient, took his time and went into a series of moves that left smaller defenders helpless. Dirk was also still quick enough to blow by bigger defenders as he brought them out of the paint. This is on top of his already elite pick and roll / pop game.

You can see this in full force in game 4 against the nuggets in 09:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnAgZzaKE2o[/youtube]

He put up 44 pts on 25 shots (67.7% TS) in that game.

I like 09 dirk over 2011 because he was a better rebounder and defender, and just as good offensively. The main reason he didn’t advance further in the playoffs from 08-10 was a lack of teammate support. They had some abysmal shooting series, yet dirk was stellar. In the 09 playoffs, he put up 26.8 PPG, 10.1 RPG, 3.1 APG, .9 SPG, .8 BPG on 63.4% TS along with a 126 ORTG and .238 WS/48. Smaller sample, but even better production than 2011.

If it does come down to one of those other years, it’s easily 2011 to me. He was a more refined player, even being less athletic than earlier years. He was pretty much unstoppable offensively, and still adequate defensively.

Oh, and I know the below game winner is from 2012, but it kinda epitomizes the whole patience thing, combined with the fact that he might be the only player in the league able to get that shot off. Just unreal.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNMQ9-1ZBJ0[/youtube]

Ballot #3 - 93 Barkley

I’ve enjoyed the discussion in this thread on Barkley. Totally see a case for 90 being his peak, but I like Barkley’s more refined game in PHX where he was still an excellent athlete (and in amazing shape), but was a little less reckless. Of course he had more talent around him, but I think that slightly toned down version helped them get as far as they did in the postseason. I’m not quite sure 90 barkley gets them there.

[Have strong opinions (both positive and to a lesser degree negative) about wade and curry, so I’m just going to let it play out…]

[SideshowBob]

Also, on Dirk - I think I mentioned this before but I can't seem to find it right now - I think the consensus is that his offense is better in the 09-11 period than his earlier years. I agree with this as well, but does this make up the defensive advantage of 06 or 07?

I don't think there is much defensive slippage, if any, apart from the expected lower regular season effort levels. I rated his playoff defense equivalent to pretty much any season of his earlier prime (I have the 02-05 period closer to a +1.0, with 06-11 around a +0.5). I think 05 was his best defensive season, but we're talking razor thin margins. If there is any real defensive slippage in his late prime, it's not showing up in any metrics we track and it's not very noticeable. 2012 is where his defensive decline truly started, and by 2014 he was pretty much a liability, but in 11 he was still the same solid Dirk.

I think whatever he lost in athleticism was made up for by the skills he picked up- holding position, footwork, swiping at the ball.

Thanks for the response

With regards to not showing up in metrics - I know that his exceptionally low TO% rate helps keep his DRAPM high (less live ball TOs - less easy baskets for opposing team; less TOs overall - less extra offensive possessions for opposing team). In the context of his overall RAPM rating, this is irrelevant, but when splitting them up, this an offensive virtue that is being attributed to defense (maybe half a point or so).

Anyone else have thoughts on Dirk's defense across the crucial points of his career?

[E-Balla]

Short about my 3rd choice. I think about 3 offensive bigs (Moses Malone, Barkley and Dirk) and Ewing. Overall, Malone is the best defender not named Ewing (especially 1983 Moses). He is the best rebounder by far (even better than Barkley) while being just as good scorer as Dirk and Barkley. Yes, I know he's a poor passer and turnover machine, but it didn't hurt his team as much as many think. His amazing work on offensive glass creates mismatches and turnes opponents in foul trouble.
I just think Ewing is clearly the worst offensive player of this 4. His defense is the best, yes I know, but Ewing was never in the same class with Mutombo or Admiral as a defender. He had bad team in 1990, but their average defense is also Ewing fault. Also, playing against good opponents is a key factor for me. I don't have his numbers from 1990 against Hakeem etc. but I don't think he was close to the Moses's domination against Kareem, Lanier, Sikma, Gilmore and others. Ewing performed usually bad against best centers for the most of his career.
Besides, this season for Patrick is like 2003 TMac. He was never as good as that year (mainly because of injures). Don't get me wrong, I think he should be in conversation but not over Moses in my opinion.

Ewing is clearly the worst offensive player of the bunch but IMO Moses, Dirk, and Chuck are only under Shaq, Kareem, arguably Wilt, and maybe Hakeem as offensive bigs. I do want to address the bolded though with numbers:
Hakeem and Pat h2h in 1990:
2 games: 1-1 record
Hakeem: 24/13/2, 48.8 TS%, 97 ORTG
Ewing: 33/11/3, 53.5 TS%, 106 ORTG

I've read a lot of old articles from the 1990 season (mainly because IMO it's probably the best season ever for top level talent with Chuck, Pat, Magic, MJ, Ewing, Karl, etc. all in one of their top 5 seasons kind of like 2009) and before completely flipping the team Ewing was probably on his way to winning MVP and the Knicks on their way to 55-60 wins and a top 2 record in the conference. Articles were saying he finally hit his potential as the next generational big and a few articles I read were calling him as good as MJ. Then after the trades they go 11-20 despite Ewing averaging 30/12.1/2.1/1.2/3.7 on 61.9 TS% with a 116 ORTG and average 24.7 GmSc (only 4 games with under a 103 ORTG, no sub 10 game scores, and only 2 games under 50 TS% in that 31 game stretch).

I also disagree in saying Ewing wasn't on Robinson's level defensively (IMO Mutombo is the best defender since Russell so he's over DR). He led amazing defensive teams yearly and while we can say his defense got better later I don't really agree with that. Here's an old post I had from an old comparison to Anthony Davis about his defense in 90:

His defensive impact was very impressive (actually if he would've stayed healthy his rookie season would easily make my top 10) if his very early career is any indication of his play in 1988-1991. As a rookie he was an All-Star and one of the best defensive players in the NBA if not the best when healthy (and certainty better than Anthony Davis). In 86 the Knicks were 18-32 in the 50 games Patrick Ewing played with the number 3 defense in the league and without him they were 5-27. The team had a 0.5 SRS when he played (he didn't miss any of their games against the Celtics, Sixers, Lakers, and most of the other top teams in the NBA he missed the softest stretch of their schedule and the Knicks had the toughest SOS in the league) and a -7.6 SRS when he didn't when controlling for Pat Cummings. In 87 the Knicks were 20-43 with him and 4-15 without him. That's a combined 38-75 with him (34%, 28-54) and 9-42 without him (18%, 14-68). And remember in 87 Patrick played out of position at PF because Bill Cartwright came back from his injury and played 58 games (the team was a 24 win team both with and without him).

After those first two seasons Ewing remained healthy through his whole prime but unless we are to believe he fell off defensively from his rookie, 2nd, and 3rd (where he anchored the 7th best defense practially by himself) seasons only to regain his form later (which is possible but highly unlikely) I think we can say with confidence that even in 1990 he was a way better defender than Anthony Davis.

Basically evidence points to Ewing being the best defender in the league as a rookie. Controlling for his opponents Ewing led the number one defense in the 50 games he played and the next time he played C (his 3rd season) he led the 7th ranked defense. Another about how people unfairly forget how athletic he used to be and putting his numbers into context:

Patrick Ewing when he was young and spry got just as many steals as Davis and Robinson (outside of 92). The list of players to have a 2 stl% and 6 blk% while playing over 30 minutes a night is Camby (usually regarded as a freak athlete by most), Davis (a freak athlete according to you), Kirilenko (freak athlete according to many), Hakeem (a freak athlete according to you), Robinson (a freak athlete according to you), Josh Smith (a freak athlete according to most), Ben Wallace (a freak athlete according to most), and Ewing (not a freak athlete according to you). You're thinking of Ewing later in his career how you remember him but there was a time when Ewing was the next Bill Russell and it wasn't because he wasn't super mobile.

In this conversation I actually got trex to go back and watch tape from Ewing in the late 80s/early 90s and his response was mostly that he underrated Ewing's defense and mobility.

And actually, in watching the vids I did prior to responding here, I was pretty impressed by Ewing’s pnr defense. Not saying he was as good as AD, but much better than I was remembering (and actually likely better than Hakeem in this regard, imo, despite lacking Hakeem’s quickness).

Watching old tape on Ewing I see a super athlete not on the level of David Robinson and maybe lacking some of Hakeem's quickness (he's bigger than Hakeem though) but making up for that by flat out playing tougher and harder than they did on that end.

Still Dirk for me.

For guys picking Ewing:

1) How much of his value (relatively speaking) comes offensively vs defensively for you/

2) How many defensive peaks do you put above the year you selected for his peak?

I think defensively he wasn't at his peak yet but he was still at least peak Dwight level. Now I think Ewing has better defensive years (peaking in 93) so I haven't really thought of his defense in 90 alone relative to others before and I might need to. Actually going through my notes on this season he might supplant Dirk and Moses IMO.

Post I wanted to respond to last thread (I think we need to talk about lengthening threads as I'm busy and it takes a lot of time to touch on everything I'm thinking of in a post thoroughly):

Same top 3 as last thread

Ballot 1: Stephen Curry 2015

Ballot 2: Patrick Ewing 1990

Ballot 3: Oscar Robertson 1964

Would you mind expanding a bit on your Ewing pick? I want to compare him a bit to Moses, but wasn't planning on doing it for a round or two more of voting (throw in Howard/Gilmore or any other bigs as you see fit as well).

To me the argument for Ewing is similar to why Duncan/Hakeem/Robinson got in over offensive mega powers like Oscar and Curry just slightly worse. Fair to say Ewing is a true defensive anchor at 4 blocks per game and although the Knicks DRTG was ok (12th) Ewing was anchoring the Riley era defense 2 years later, and was known as a potentially generational defender going back to his college days, so I'm fairly confident that 1990 Ewing's difference from them in team results is probably the context around him. Ewing was in his 5th season after 4 college years which is deep enough to make the "2015 Anthony Davis effect" who is blocking lots of shots, but for experience reasons, appears to not have it as impactful yet, less likely. Ewing is at same stage of his career as Tim Duncan in 2002 who also played 4 years in college.

As for his offense first off it's hard to ignore the scoring numbers at 28.9pts (26.7 per 36) on .599 TS%. Although he's not at Hakeem and KG's level in terms of passing the skill eye test, he can do things in the post and he has a long midrange jumper. I feel Ewing from a "space creating" perspective is likely to have been spacing the floor well with his midrange jumper while also doing enough in the post to draw double teams. When added to the raw scoring numbers that's a pretty awesome offensive player. Here is a clip showing a fairly well rounded game

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpGhKRKlPHs[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwCjvAQyHjM[/youtube]

I am more impressed by Ewing's polish level in the post and shooting range than I am Robinson. He is not close to DRob's level of physical domination though.

A weakness of Ewing's stats is passing. He averages 2.1 assists per 36 minutes. However notably it's harder to get assists on a team with as little offensive talent as Ewing had in his tenure in NY. I am not saying he's Duncan or Shaq but if you surrounded him with outside shooters and ran an inside out game he may have upped those passing numbers. In both of the clips above there are some surprisingly adept passes.

Overall I just find Ewing to be underrated because of the value of a top 10 all time defensive anchor who had a very, very good offensive career. I've thought of for while Ewing should be above players like Moses and Barkley on the ATL because if you asked me who's career I'd rather draft to start a team around, I am taking the defensive center and good offensive player in Ewing, than the defensive concerns I've had with Moses and Barkley, to say nothing of Barkley's personality vs Ewing's. I'd rather have Ewing to start a team over Barkley all day. Ewing did not get handed the best card in the deck in terms of his supporting cast in NY (an imbalanced team) and still got them to within 1 game of a title that would've been just as impressive if not moreso as 1994 Rockets, 2003 Spurs or 2011 Mavericks in terms of the gap between a star and his supporting cast's talent. To me Ewing is possibly the player who's all time rank improves the most if you change the result of a single game

I actually think Sheed is the top guy here (change the result of 2 game 7s against LA and Sheed is universally a top 10 PF ever) but this is so right. Ewing's teams are usually thought of of not good enough but this is a guy who led some meh supporting casts to being some of the best teams of the decade. A guy who played his whole career with no second star (Oakley is the best defensive player he's played with and if we are only talking his prime John Starks is the best offensive player? Seriously?) and nearly won the Finals in 94. I get that he got outplayed badly but they still stayed in the series thanks to his amazing defense.

[Clyde Frazier]

If Patrick Ewing is on the board already, then I don't see a reason why 2015 Anthony Davis shouldn't be, the Pelicans had a similar record (and better SRS) than the 1990 Knicks, despite:
-The starting PG missing half the season
-6 other starters/rotation players (including Davis himself) missing at least 10 games each

It's fairly evident that Davis is a hell of a off-ball finisher, much better than Ewing has been, and is therefore able to be much more efficient with his possessions, leading to a better (rel to lg) offense for the Pels as well,

I think davis being a "much better" off the ball finisher than ewing is pushing it. He was at his peak athletically in 1990. He scored 4.3 more PPG than davis on better efficiency (59.9% TS vs. 59.1% TS). He was also clearly a more polished defender than davis.

And c'mon... the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers on the knicks were oakley and gerald wilkins. Oakley missed 21 games that season. Mark Jackson was a great distributor, but far from a scoring threat (9.9 PPG on 49.2% TS).

Actually I have no problem with saying Davis is a much better off-ball finisher. Ewing was superior in a couple ways, primarily post scoring and ORB (although I need to check the numbers for offensive board). But Davis right now might actually be the GOAT pick and roll big; his numbers are basically what we saw from Amar'e at the peak of his powers and Davis doesn't have Nash setting him up. It's also pretty visible that Davis has athletic gifts Ewing simply doesn't possess.

I'm not comfortable enough with Davis' defense to be bringing him up right now, and I think Ewing is the superior overall player for now, but Davis is probably the best finisher we've ever seen at this point and arguably the best mid-range shooter west of Wuerzburg. I take seriously the notion that Davis could one day be right up there with Kareem and Dirk as the best offensive bigs ever, and thus it's not crazy to me to say he has a huge advantage over Ewing in certain areas.

Remember, we’re specifically talking about 90 Ewing here. He was at the top of his game athletically, and was very much an above the rim player who was rather mobile for a guy his size and strength. This is pre knee problems, so he hadn’t yet started relying so much on his midrange game. That’s the main reason he was able to score as much as he did on such high efficiency. So calling davis a “much better” off the ball finisher vs. 90 ewing is pushing it to me. Calling him “better” seems more reasonable to me.

Also, regarding davis overall offensively, he’s extremely impressive, no argument from me there. I watched the first round against GSW pretty closely, and it really got to a point where they couldn’t stop him. He’d catch the ball around one of the elbows, take 1 dribble and get right to the rim. They essentially just started intentionally fouling him and sending him to the line. The strategy ended up working as he got pretty tired eventually, but a top defensive team in the league resorting to that was kinda crazy. He finished that series with 31.5 PPG on 61.3% TS. The guy is only 22

[trex_8063]

OK, calling it for Wade. Will get #17 up as quick as I can (but I'm at work currently).

Dwyane Wade - 27
Stephen Curry - 25
Dirk Nowitzki - 12
Jerry West - 11
Tracy McGrady - 7
Patrick Ewing - 7
Kevin Durant - 5.5
Chris Paul - 4
Kobe Bryant - 3.5
Moses Malone - 3
Charles Barkley - 2

[Samurai]

How do you view Kobe vs. West specifically? I feel like Kobe has everything that West has skillset-wise, except he does it better. Realy surprised that Kobe is getting so downvoted in this project. I remember that when I joined realGM back in 2008 or so, Kobe was unanimously regarded as top-2 SG all-time over West, and by a considerable margin. Even West-supporters like TrueLAFan rated Kobe higher IIRC. Kobe's advantages in terms of athleticism/slashing/post-up/footwork are insane.

Bast - Is this the post by TrueLAFan that you were referring to? It looks like more of a career comparison than peak but at least it does give the skillset comparisons you had asked about:

Re: Kobe Bryant vs Jerry West
0
Post#33 » by TrueLAfan » Fri May 13, 2011 1:06 pm

I think Doctor MJ put it about right. In terms of overall career, I have Kobe a bit below West—although it's a difficult question. The “longetivity” point that people keep bringing up is curious. Jerry West had a 12 year run were he played well over 800 games and averaged 27.6-6-6.5. I am not all sure that Kobe Bryant has an longetivity edge on West. I do think Kobe will, eventually, surpass West. I don't think he has yet though. West was awesome.

West is the (far) better perimeter shooter as well. West's range was tremendous. I'd actulaly give West and advantage on D as well; Kobe doesn't get as many blocks/steals as West did. Kobe is bigger, but he's more of a SG/SF swingman; West was a combo guard. I go with the logo on D. Kobe also is more durable and is a better rebounder (tho' not by much). West has better assist numbers, but a part of that is because he played a lot at the point. Still, I'd say that, at worst, West is equal as a ballhandler to Kobe. West also goes to the line more, and converts at a higher percentage. I am curious as to what Kobe supporters say in favor of Kobe other than “West is old! That was so long ago!” (I'm also getting a laugh about the “defensive quality faced” comment regarding West … a quarter of West's playoff games were against the Dynasty Celtics, generally regarded as the greatest defensive teams of all time. He also went against the Frazier/Reed Knicks multiple times. I think West's defenisve opponents have, in general, been much better.)

I've said this before, but Jerry West played in the worst possible era for a guy with his skill set. No three, harsher enforcement of carrying, more violent interior play (West was a slasher), lower percentage of assists given per basket made. For 95% of past players, you assume they will score less with the slower play of the modern game. I don't think that's true of West. The three, the easing of backcourt D...man, he'd be devastating today.

Where West pulls away—and I’m inclined to think it will be difficult for Kobe to match up in this area—is in intangibles. Kobe is totally feared and respected. West was totally feared and respected and genuinely liked. He was a better guy in the locker room, caused less problems for coaches and management, and was (in general) a better teammate. This is not a knock on Kobe; the list of players who had the combination of fear/respect/liking as incredibly small. The only people I can think of that are around West's level are Russell and Erving. And, yes, Jerry West was a markedly better playoff performer. Those are pretty important factors for a great player.

[Quotatious]

I don't get how you can compare a skillset of a 60s player like West, to a 2000s player like Bryant. That's just unfair. Of course Kobe is going to look much better, but let's put it this way - if there's no Jerry West, there would be no Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant, as we know them. It's amazing how many of West's tricks they incorporated to their own games. Jordan/Bryant were like a combination of Baylor's athleticism/aerial skills and and West's below the rim game.

[bastillon]

I don't really disagree with your thoughts on Wade bast. I'm interested in what you think of him defensively though - IMO the gap he has over Kobe on that end is the reason I prefer his peak (if it were 06-08 Kobe offense + early 00s Kobe defense then I'd flip).

I definitely think Wade is the better defender out of the two. But this is not enough to sway me. It's just that superstar wings tend to exert so much energy on offense that their defensive impact in a playoff series is rather marginal. There is no series that I know of where Wade has made a significant defensive impact, which swang the series in a different direction (be it man defense or help-D). Both Wade and Kobe COULD HAVE BEEN great perimeter defenders if they didn't have any offensive responsibilities. But that is simply not the case. Both of them are very inconsistent and were usually hidden on defense, guarding guys like Bowen etc.