RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,207
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#61 » by ElGee » Sun Jul 2, 2017 4:10 pm

There are nuances to the Garnett argument that are missing. But first a general comment:

When I got to realgm, there was a concept called The Immortal Six — it was six players who were unassailably the best in NBA history because they “dominated” each stage. (Claiming most MVPs and titles in that period.) Russell, Wilt, KAJ, Bird, Magic, MJ. No one could be put above them, or it was blasphemy.

People were attached to this idea. Instead of discussing the complexities of ranking players, the differences in longevity, the valuation of individual seasons (asking for a precise ranking of a specific season in the past is hard, as we’ve seen in peaks projects), people shortcut to a kind of macro-narrative among the top players; lots of MVP’s and titles and such. Nothing more to see here.

After 2010’s RPOY, I made a GOAT list based on evaluating each player’s individual season and calculating the value of longevity on title odds. It surprised me! My mental calculus for this was off. Later, I updated that list with concepts like portability. Again, the results surprised me. Even in the last few years, I've had guys move 5-10 spots from small compounding changes over similar seasons, or making an adjustment to how I view something like longevity.

It’s only when completely removing attachments from “this guy HAS TO BE TOP-X!! that I can have an honest list with myself. And an honest discussion. I feel this way about movies too — I rank all the movies I see. Movies I LOOOOOOVE are no longer in the top-10, because there are just more great movies that come along. It’s only if I were to be attached to 20 movies being in the top-10 I'd be really upsetting at myself for blasphemous short-changing all of my favorite movies! :crazy:

So for Garnett (or any player), the discussion isn’t valuable if you insist he should be X. I don’t even find direct comparisons to be as valuable. What’s valuable is understanding the nuances and subtleties of a player’s career — his peak value, his prime value, his skill set, strengths and weakness and of course, his longevity curve, and how these apply in the wonderful team dance (shooting, spacing, redundancy, defensive schemes, etc.)

Garnett has 3 important dynamics that I see people overlook:
(a) he gradually changed over 7 years
(b) his team changed over 7 years
(c) the league changed

With Garnett, he was always improving early in his career. All-Star level in 97, then all-NBA level, MVP level by 2000 and continued growth until 03 when he was at Sacred Peaks level, in constant discussion with peak Tim Duncan for the NBA’s best player. He indeed won more POM awards in that stretch from 2000-2005 (7) than Shaq (6), Kobe (4), McGrady (4), Webber (3), Pierce (2.5), Dirk (2.33), Duncan (2) and Kidd (2).

There was the issue of Shaq’s latent power, but by 03 he had gained so much weight that it was not a mere function of “Derrick Rosing” the MVP vote that TD took 0.81 shares of the vote and KG 0.73. (Shaq fifth at 0.11). In 2004 he was near unanimous in a Tour de Force season at 0.991. (Duncan 0.58) His MVP Shares from 00-04 (2.2) were 3rd to Duncan’s (2.9) and Shaq’s 2.3, light years beyond guys like McGrady and Bryant (0.7) who were hotly debated as the game’s two best wings. That was the pecking order, and KG-Duncan was the debate behind healthy Shaq — the issue was Duncan had Robinson a great defensive team and KG had…Marbury? Brandon? Wally? Smith?

(Even so, the revisionism argument is circular. If people are saying “you missed something about Iverson in 2001,” the counter of “he won MVP” is circular. That’s exactly the thing you missed that’s being argued.)

The Wolves teams in the early 2000’s weren’t terrible. But the team grew worse as KG grew better. This was precisely because of the Joe Smith penalty and the death of Sealy and the injuries to literally all his sidekicks (Googs, Brandon, Wally). In 2005, Sprewell fell off a cliff (already an aging one-dimensional player). In 2006-07, the team was comprised of guys who couldn’t play in the NBA. This is literally a 7 to 15-win team in all likelihood -- 35 to 45 wins IS the footprint of a GOAT-level player. The issue has always been people lumping a team like that in with a team that would win, say, 25-30 games without a star. The talent gaps are giant.

Then there’s the league. It was a slow, lumbering league by 03 and 04. Before then Flip had this idea of playing zone (after it was installed for anti-Shaq measures) and liked Garnett high in the zone because of his length and foot speed. (!) Flip could draw up great plays, but he tried some stuff that was a little backwards. Even stranger is that Garnett wasn’t the greatest rim protector (he was good) but his man defense was more of a strength when younger...so stick him a zone? Moving him to a more traditional role in his peak seasons saw a bigger impact.

Well, low and behold they changed the rules in 05, D’Antoni and Nash came in and the game started to open up. Pick n roll action exploded as did spacing/shooting. So suddenly Garnett’s defensive strengths and high IQ were uber-valuable. He was the GOAT big at defending PnR on AND off ball, the games most crucial play. It’s not that he wasn’t a good defender in Minnesota, it’s that the league dynamics made it possible for him to be GOAT-level in the second-half of his career.*

*GOAT level in the 3-pt era
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: RE: Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#62 » by ardee » Sun Jul 2, 2017 4:14 pm

Colbinii wrote: His regular season's were actually something that you should "write home about" if you watched him play from his first day at training camp to his last playing time in 2016. No player has given his all for 365 days of the year for 20 years like Kevin Garnett did. He had a multitude of MVP-level years, unfortunately, MVP is a "Who is a good player on one of the best team" awards, and not "Who is the best player in the league", otherwise he would have a handful of an award that would be much more meaningful when discussing all-time greats.


Kevin Garnett was not the best player in the league any year besides 2004, in which he did admittedly deserve the MVP. However, that was also one of the weakest years in league memory, it was an off-year for Duncan and for Kobe, and post-prime for Shaq.

Kevin Garnett was never a "dismal" or "abysmal" playoff performer. This is a false narrative that needs to be put in a safe and dropped into the depths of Lake Superior. If you would like to post evidence on why Kevin Garnett is an abysmal playoff performer, please do so.


He quite simply was. Garnett had a number of big flaws to his game that hurt his team big time in the Playoffs. Defensively we will talk about below, but offensively it was a massive overreliance on long-range jumpers instead of trying to get higher percentage shots at the rim.

tsherkin wrote:
OK, right off of the bat I want to address this.

Garnett's TS% drops from a career 54.9% in the RS to 52.3% in the PS. That's not "a bit," that's 2.6%. That's a pretty significant drop. Now, some of that includes his very early twenties, but given that he was typically playing 4 games and then being done, it doesn't harm his overall average that much and he's still only had two postseason runs with the Celtics where he was very close to league average TS%. In the title run, he was 0.2% above league average and this past season, he was actually +1.4% over league average. Garnett has been a very, very weak scorer in the playoffs through the majority of his career at all stages thereof... and he's posted an ORTG of 110+ only three times in the PS (97, 01, 08).

Next, I want to point out that on 4-game samples during which he's playing 41-44 mpg, the data is going to be incredibly noisy, so those APM studies are going to have some significant issues. You note this somewhere around the 02-04 range, though, so that's good.

You start to argue quality of teams faced, and that's fine: I think most sensible posters realize that with crap teams, KG was dragging them into the playoffs only to get spanked... usually by the Spurs. He had little hope to beat a lot of the teams he faced and no one should really penalize him for that too harshly. But when you're trying to fashion an argument about who is the best postseason performer of the generation and you take an already second-tier scoring threat and have him decline as much as he did, well, that's less effective. His 01 run was pretty amazing, I mean he rocked a 7.5% TOV (!!!) while doing the 21/12/4 thing on ~ 57% TS. You can make a single-series claim about his efficacy there against the Spurs (who were the best defense in the league that year), but I'm not really seeing how him doing that is a ton better than what Dirk did against them in 2006.

We are, however, getting back to the root of the debate I was trying to generate before, about KG's defensive efficacy versus Dirk's scoring.

The APM data is very interesting, and squares well with his impact (primarily as a defender)... but at the same time, there is a data point that you're excluding, right? From 99-03, KG won 5 games in the postseason, then won 10 in the deep run in 04 and didn't return to the playoffs with the Wolves. Now context. Injuries, abysmal management (Cassell for Marko Jaric? REALLY? JOE SMITH!! YOU BASTARDS! and so forth), but if you're looking at his contributions and you see how one-sided KG's were angling towards the defensive element, then it starts to become an issue. You can't just defend your opponent; in a game of basketball, you can't shut an opponent down, you need to score as well. From everything I've seen, there IS a slight, small bias towards offensive value (at least where star players are concerned) that's not generated via narrative alone. Especially at the paces at which the Wolves and the Spurs/Blazers/etc were playing in the early 00s, the notion that "each possession counts" isn't just a truism, it's a major point of contention.

So I offer a counter-point. Since the number of games isn't that bad, let's look at KG's Minny postseason career and see how it played out from 99-04.

99 versus the eventual-champion Spurs.

Hard to REALLY ream him for this one because they had Duncan and Robinson, but that kind of casually back-slides KG's rep away from where you're going. In any case, he opened up with 21 points on 54.3% TS (9/18 FG, 3/3 FT), 8 boards, 1 assist, 5 blocks, 4 fouls and 5 turnovers. They lost, of course, and for the moment, we'll pretend as if KG's performance comes in isolation so that I don't have to spend 8 years discussing what his teammates did or didn't do in this post. We'll acknowledge their role tacitly. Here we're seeing, though, that Garnett was coughing it up something fierce. 20.6% TOV against 31% USG, not his best game. Game 2, they win. 23 points on 22 shots (11/22 FG, 1/2 FT). 50.3% TS, but there, I think that's a bit misleading to call that a "bad" performance. Certainly not dominant, and this time he brought the rebounding, then added 6 assists to 4 turnovers. Again, not really pushing hard on offense, and given that he didn't have any other scorers, the Wolves would have likely been better off if he'd been a little less effective on D and a little more effective on offense, since everyone and their mom knew that he was basically the only major scorer on that squad, the only real threat. Games 3 and 4, they lost of course. 9/19, 5/6 for 23 points, 12 boards, 2 AST / 3 TOV. Then here's the killer. Game 4 was a 7-point loss and he shot 6/20 FG and 8/12 at the line. Realistically, he left 7-9 points on the board from what he'd have posted just making 45% FG and around 80% FT, very normal numbers for him. This is a single-game, single-series performance at the beginning of his All-NBA era (and he's far from alone in having poor performances), but as we start to watch him coming up short in key moments and close games like that, it begins to detract from the overall picture you're painting of the "most dominant postseason performer from 99-08" kind of thing, right? That right there is a game that kind of mirrors Dirk against the Warriors.

2000, against Portland:

Opens up with a 6/20 performance, no FTAs. 12/10/11 triple-double, but the triple-double belies his overall performance. With 26.2% usage and him shooting 30% FG without any FTAs, that's a rough, rough performance. And it was a 3-point loss. The not-Garnett Wolves shot 53% FG. Meantime, Sheed played well: didn't shoot much, but was 6/10 for 15 points (3/3 FT).

Game 2. 25/10/5, 4 TOV, 4 PF. 50% FG, 7/10 FT, 56.4% TS against 31.4% USG. Really, a good game. 4-point loss. Were he a more dominant scorer, that might have mattered, but Sealy, Wally Z and Sam Mitchell were rough enough that I'll actually post that they shot a combined 7/17. Sheed was crap. So, this one stands as a contrast to the first.

Game 3. A win. Middling TS (52.3%), but actually his best offensive game of the series. 11/22 FG and 1/1 from downtown (heh), he brought the rebounding and passing from the first game (13 boards, 10 assists, 2 turnovers). He played his mind out and his teammates actually supported him a lot (Brandon was 10/16 for 28 points that night).

Game 4. Elimination game #2 in this series and KG goes for a 5/20. 1/2 3P, 6/6 FT. 17 points on 37.5% TS. 10 boards, 9 assists, 3 turnovers. But WOW was he ever bad shooting that night, and that's his second major stinker in the series and his third over two consecutive postseason matchups (e.g. his 3rd in 8 games).

2001 vs SAS:

25/13/6Game 1. , 55.8% TS, really a good game overall. Only 1 turnover, 50% FG, 70% FT (10 FTA), just looking really good. It was a loss, but it can hardly be blamed on KG.

Game 2. Welcome to Crapsville, population, YOU. 5/13 FG, but 8/8 FT gives him a 54.5% TS. 12 boards, 2 assists, 2 turnovers, 112 ORTG. Another rough shooting night for him, though, and he played only 32 minutes because of some foul trouble, but mainly because it was garbage time after 3. The Wolves shot something stupid like a tenth of a percent off of their franchise-worst in the playoffs and they committed 20 turnovers. It was embarrassing. KG was part of a team-wide failure that game. This is, I believe, the year after Sealy was killed and right around Joe Smith time.

Game 3, token win time. 22/8/4, 1 TOV. 8/10 FT. 59.8% TS. KG did a great job of getting to the line in this series, it was very atypical for him. This was a great game from Garnett though, and they won.

Game 4, elimination game. 6/13 shooting, 19/15/5, 2 turnovers, 5 fouls, 7/8 FT for 57.5% TS but they were crushed, a 13-point loss. Duncan shot terribly (8/23) and D-Rob had 4 fouls by the 3rd. Wolves were down 8 after 3, but down only 1 at halftime.

2002, 3-game sweep by Dallas.

Game 1. 6/18 FG, 6/6 FT, 46% TS. 21 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 turnovers. Dirk put 30/15 on the Wolves, shooting 10/19 from the field and 9/10 at the line.

Game 2. PHENOMENAL game from Garnett. 9/19 FG, 13/17 at the line (12-point loss), 18 boards and 4 assists. 58.5% TS. Absolutely fantastic. Wasn't enough, but it's hard to blame him. 25 a piece from Billups and Wally Z (both shooting over 52%, nearly 53% FG). 31/15 from Dirk (42.9% FG, 9/10 FT, 4 steals).

Game 3, elimination time. 9/19 FG, 4/9 FT in a 13-point loss. 47.4% TS. 17 boards, 5 assists, 6 turnovers, 5 fouls. Another weak game at the point of elimination. Minny won the 2nd and 4th quarters, but they permitted Dallas to score 40 first-quarter points and started the game in a 12-point hole from which they never recovered. Down by 10 at the half, they lost the 3rd by 8 points and then won the 4th by 5. Dirk dropped 39/17 on 11/17 FG, 14/16 FT, crushing the Wolves like a bug.

For the record, KG was 3/10 from the field in the second half, hitting his first 2 shots and then going 1/8 after that. He had 4 offensive boards, split a pair of FTs, assisted Wally Z on a 3 and a 21-footer and had a turnover. That was his contribution during the second half of the elimination game. He had a bunch of defensive boards as well, but I wasn't logging those, I was looking at offensive performance, since we've already established that he's been a very high-impact defender. But in an elimination game, to disappear that way in the second half (which raises those old ghosts that people spoke of at the time of KG being a choker in the playoffs) is... not good. And what we're seeing here is the reason that narrative came about, because this isn't the first or second bad game we've seen from him in this stretch as far as poor performance in an elimination game, and over a comparatively small sample of games, we've seen him stinking it up on offense quite a lot... more than once in a game winnable had he performed at a less-than-terrible level. It does tell us that his defense and rebounding were THAT AWESOME, though, to continually show the kind of impact they did... and it also explains that his teammates were really not helping him out a ton on the defensive end at all, as it happens. At times, Brandon (prior to his injury) and Billups (prior to him being moved) were contributors, but it's still clear that they were outmatched. Dirk's Mavs were coming at the Wolves with him, Finley, Nash and Van Exel, right? Nash was 3/9 under the arc in Game 3... but 3/7 from downtown, 10/10 at the line and had 11 assists. Billups was 5/16 and 4/7 at the line. Brandon was gone. Wally Z was 5/12 (though 9/10 at the line). Anthony Peeler was 4/7 from 3 off of the bench (but 2/6 under the arc). Garnett's terrible TS% mostly extends from 4/9 FT shooting and the 3 or 4 points he left on the board are significant but yeah, the biggest issue is how poorly he played in the second half. In his defense, the common motif of saying he's nothing but a jump shooter is at least a little harsh on his rep, because of the 10 shots he took, only one was from farther than 8 feet. Some of those were his favored turn-over-right-shoulder fades from the left block, but he got a four-footer and two shots off of offensive rebounds, one of which drew those 2 FTAs. He just hit nothing when it mattered.

OK, ramble over.

2003 vs Lakers. This is a 6-game series, the longest KG has played in the PS to this point in his career. Two wins!

Game 1. 11/21 FG, 1/4 FT. 14 boards, 7 assists, 2 turnovers, great D. 46 minutes played, loss. 19-point blowout, as it happens. There really wasn't a lot of hope for them to win this series; while the Lakers didn't repeat as champions, it was still the Shaq/Kobe Lakers coming off of their third straight title. Shaq had 32/10 and Kobe carved them up for 39. The Wolves flatly didn't have anyone who could defend either of those guys and Flip Saunders has never been a particularly good defensive coach, so there was no strong scheme in place, either. It was "here's hoping KG is magic!" I mean, they were putting Szczerbiak on Kobe, that's just asking for trouble. They were buried after the first, down 16 points. They never finished a quarter closer than 12 points.

Game 2. Explosion. 15/21 shooting, 4/6 at the line, 20 boards, 7 assists, 2 turnovers, 35 points. I don't even need to post the TS, you know it's insane. Remarkable game, and a win. Just about what was needed from him in order to beat this team. 37 points and 10 assists from Troy Hudson (!!!!!!) certainly helped, though. They were up by 13 at the half and then by 22 after an opening tear in the 3rd.

Game 3. 33/14/4, 2 steals, 4 blocks, 4 turnovers and 6 fouls. 15/31 shooting, one of the most aggressive performances of Garnett's entire career in a 4-point OT win. 27 points from Hudson. One of those "questionable officiating" nights, heh. 3 fouls in 3 minutes in the 4th for Garnett, then fouled out in the opening part of OT. Kobe got a four-point play when Wally Z apparently fouled him without touching him. Then there was that thing with Rick Fox where Wally "stepped out of bounds" as Rick grabbed his jersey, which was unique. They won, though, so it was OK.

4th quarter KG? 4 boards (2 offensive), an assist at the rim and a turnover on an offensive foul. He was 3/8 FG and 2/2 FT for 8 points. He took one shot inside of 10 feet and 4 shots from 14+ feet. Lots and lots of jumpers. Got blocked by Shaq the one time he shot around the rim.

Game 4. 10/21 FG, 1/3 3PA, 7/9 FTA. 18 boards, 5 assists, 4 turnovers. 56.1% TS in a 5-point loss. Solid performance. 34/23 from Shaq didn't help. Kobe shot like crap (7/25) but got to the line at will (16/17 FT). With about 2 minutes left in the third, the Wolves were up by 11 but then the Lakers went on an 8-0 run to close the quarter and Kobe hit a 3 early in the 4th to tie it. About halfway through the fourth, the Wolves were up by 5, but L.A. reeled off another 8-0 run. Stayed close down the wire; Shaq got an OREB off of a Kobe miss to give L.A. a 3-point lead with 19 seconds remaining... and KG missed both free throws when he was fouled. Kobe hit 2 FTs, Garnett stuck a jumper. Shaq had more offensive boards than the Timberwolves. The Lakers had 18 offensive boards and scored 29 points off of them.

Second half play from Garnett.

He had 3 assists and a turnover (Kobe stripped him) in the 3rd. He TECHNICALLY shot 1/7, but that includes a 43-foot heave at the buzzer. He was really 1/6, which is still terrible, missing his last 5 (or 6, counting the 3) shots after hitting a shot around the rim. 2 of his shots were inside of 15 feet.

In the fourth, he was 4/6, including a three, but he was 2/4 at the line, missing two big ones with about 16 seconds left, as I mentioned. He also had an assist. When he stuck the three with about a half-minute left, they were down 1.

Little rough. If he hadn't sucked in the 3rd, they might have built a better cushion and taken that game. Instead, L.A. evened the series.

Game 5. 11/23, 1/2 3P, 2/4 FT, 50.5% TS. 25/16/3, 3 TOV. 30-point blowout. KG played 43 minutes, conjuring that old thought about he gets a bunch of numbers in garbage time. Minny was down 7 at the half, down 21 after 3 and down 30 at the end of the game. We'll look at KG's second half performance, offense-only in the third and then what he did once the game was long-decided in the fourth.

In the third, he got a pass picked off by Kobe, he had an assist and he shot 4/8 for 9 points (1/2 from 3). Pretty solid performance all told, with two shots at the rim and two others within 7 feet. OK, so now we're going to look at the 4th Q, which starts with the Wolves down 21 points, and we're going to see what KG racked up in garbage time.

He played about 9.5 minutes in the fourth, leaving down 28 with about 2:38 to go. 1 offensive rebound (his own miss after getting blocked by Brian Shaw at the rim) and 4 defensive rebounds. It was the only offensive rebound he had all game and 4 of his 15 defensive boards. He split a pair of FTs and shot 1/3 from the field.

Doesn't much look like he racked up too many box score data points. He wasn't dominating and bringing them closer, they were getting pounded and Flip took him out eventually. Again though, it was the reigning champs, so the outcome wasn't really a huge surprise to anyone, especially as the team thinned from a few years prior, as scary as that is to say. They had to play some out-of-their-minds offense in order to get those two wins.

Game 6, elimination time, KG's favorite!

9/21 FG, 0/1 3P, 0/2 FT. 41.1% TS, 83 ORTG. He was terrible on O. 12 boards, 5 assists, 3 steals, 3 turnovers, 18 points. Not a good game. Good box score line, but not a good game. Played 44 minutes in a 16-point loss. Wolves were up by 5 after 1, down 4 after 2, down 6 after 3 and lost the 4th quarter by 10. Shaq had 8 offensive boards to Minny's 11. The 2nd and 4th quarters were the bad ones for Minny. The 4th was bad defensively, but the 2nd was bad offensively, with them scoring only 13 points.

Rough game. Minny went on a 9-0 run to close the third... and then Kobe opened up the fourth with 10 of the 14 points he'd score in the quarter, with L.A. opening the quarter on an 18-2 run. Shaq had 9 assists, Kobe 8 (total, not in the quarter). L.A.'s passing was just ridiculous that game. It took 6.5 minutes for the Wolves to score their first basket in the 4th.

In the 2nd, KG played the last 9 minutes. He had a pair of assists, a picked off pass and shot 2/5, scoring 4 of their 13 points... but involved in 8. Were he a more dominant scorer, that could have helped, but it's hard to nit-pick that performance in this series over much.

4th Q. An assist, two turnovers, 2/5 shooting (including Devean George blocking him), leaves with 1:56 remaining, down by 18.


Garnett time and time again failed to perform when his team really needed him to. More importantly, failed to even try. When his team needed rim protection, he played some weird perimeter "middle linebacker" role that allowed opposing teams to destroy his guys at the rim. When they needed him to create high percentage shots, he took long jumpers and shot them out of the game. The 32/21 game against the Kings was the exception, not the rule.


I found the numbers (well, have them on my computer, but I found the files and the folder where they were located 8-) )

Regular Season, Playoff years are bolded.

colbinii wrote:1997: 51.3% on 26.1 attempts/game
1998: 58.2% on 24.4 attempts/game
1999: 58.8% on 20.6 attempts/game
2000: 58.0% on 21.5 attempts/game
2001: 58.0% on 22.5 attempts/game
2002: 58.2% on 20.0 attempts/game
2003: 58.1% on 20.9 attempts/game
2004: 53.7% on 20.7 attempts/game

2005: 56.7% on 22.0 attempts/game
2006: 55.1% on 23.4 attempts/game
2007: 60.1% on 22.2 attempts/game
2008: 55.5% on 16.6 attempts/game
2009: 54.4% on 17.4 attempts/game
2010: 56.5% on 17.1 attempts/game
2011: 56.9% on 20.1 attempts/game


Post-Season:

1998: 64.8% on 22.6 attempts/game
1999: 57.1% on 26.3 attempts/game
2000: 47.1% on 21.8 attempts/game
2001: 60.2% on 22 attempts/game
2002: 47.2% on 17.7 attempts/game
2003: 64% on 22.7 attempts/game
2004: 55.4% on 22.9 attempts/game
2008: 54% on 16.3 attempts/game
2010: 58.8% on 18.7 attempts/game
2011: 56.9% on 20.1 attempts/game

The first thing I notice when looking at these numbers is the amount of variance relative to his regular season. This is due to the small sample size, and as we know with statistics, the smaller the sample size, the less accurate the results.

The second thing I notice about them is how they correlate to his opponents. Take 1999, 2001, and 2003 for example: His opponents were Spurs, Spurs, and Lakers. So he faced Tim Duncan twice (with David Robinson) and then Shaquille O'Neal. Do we expect any player, even Bill Russell, to have the same defensive field goal % at the rim against these top 10 all-time greats as we would when looking at his regular season averages? Of course not.


I mean, you can compare to RS to make it look better, but in an absolute sense those Playoffs numbers, particularly in the years you mentioned, are terrible. 64% in 2003? You think Hakeem is letting that happen? Or Robinson? Point blank, if your opponent is shooting 64% at the rim, you aren't winning the series. 64% is almost like your whole team becoming '06 Wade at the rim. And that's on your anchor. You can make excuses, but if you want results that isn't acceptable.


If we are looking at Kevin Garnett in the post-season, it is very important to look at who he played. Here are the net-differences in SRS in the regular season of Garnett's teams and his opponents that he lost to.

1998: 6.16
1999: 7.29
2000: 3.69
2001: 6.11
2002: .83
2003: .25 (Shaq missing 15 games)
2004: -1.51 (Shaq and Kobe missing over 15 Regular season games a piece, Cassell getting injured in the middle of a crucial series)

As we can see, the Timberwolves didn't stand a punchers chance from 1998-2001. The best chances for them to win were 2002, 2003, and 2004.



You ever thought Garnett is to blame as well for the low SRSes of his teams in the RS?


The ironic part about all of this is that Kevin Garnett actually raised his production against the Lakers. Here are his numbers in those series in 2003 and 2004.

2003: 27/15.7/5.2/1.7/1.7 on 51.4 FG%
2004: 23.7/13.5/4.5/1.2/1.2 on 46.3 FG%

So, here we are, making claims about Kevin Garnett's "disappointing playoff performances" when he puts up video game numbers with impact data to back up those numbers. It isn't difficult to see why those Timberwolves teams didn't stand a chance against those Lakers teams...Prime Kobe Bryant gets to be defended by Latrell Sprewell, Wally Szczerbiak, and Anthony Peeler.

Here are Garnett's numbers in 2004 against the Nuggets and Kings.

Nuggets: 25.8/14.8/7.0/1.0/2.0 on 45.4 FG%
Kings: 23.9/15.4/4.3/1.7/3.4

Here are Garnett's numbers in elimination games during his tenure in the greatest of the 50, Minnesota.

22.7/13.8/5.4/1.6/1.7 with 3.3 turnovers, 43% FG%, 72.8% FT%


I mean those numbers are nice but not ATG. The 2003 Lakers series was the only truly excellent one, and the 2004 Kings series was also pretty good.

The 2004 Lakers series, the raw numbers are actually slightly worse than his RS averages and he had a 100 ORtg. That is pathetic.

The 2004 Nuggets series was unbelievably inefficient. He had a 102 ORtg and was 13-30 and 9-27 in the first two games. The tsherkin post I quoted above breaks down all these games and shows how flawed KG was in the Playoffs, even at his peak.

Like I said, '03 Lakers and '04 Kings were great, but that's 2 series' out of a whole career. He never consistently reached the heights Kobe did in '01 Kings, '01 Spurs, '08 Nuggets, '08 Jazz, '08 Spurs, '09 Nuggets or '10 Suns. Or Bird, or Magic, or Dirk, or even Wade.

It is simply insane for Garnett to be voted in at this spot when he was such a painfully limited player, especially in the Playoffs.
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,736
And1: 5,708
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RE: Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#63 » by An Unbiased Fan » Sun Jul 2, 2017 4:33 pm

Colbinii wrote: His regular season's were actually something that you should "write home about" if you watched him play from his first day at training camp to his last playing time in 2016. No player has given his all for 365 days of the year for 20 years like Kevin Garnett did. He had a multitude of MVP-level years, unfortunately, MVP is a "Who is a good player on one of the best team" awards, and not "Who is the best player in the league", otherwise he would have a handful of an award that would be much more meaningful when discussing all-time greats.

Kevin Garnett was never a "dismal" or "abysmal" playoff performer. This is a false narrative that needs to be put in a safe and dropped into the depths of Lake Superior. If you would like to post evidence on why Kevin Garnett is an abysmal playoff performer, please do so.

The major problem I'm seeing with KG is that his argument is heavily narrative driven. In fact, based on the narrative I'm seeing....why wasn't KG argued for #1?

There have been good posts in favor of KG's positives, so I don't want to be dismissive of those who are picking him here, but.....comparatively KG falls short of around 6-7 players left and that's been sidestepped mostly. Any fault of KG's career is dismissed as either him not having enough support, or not even existing. KG apparently had no faults, no weaknesses, no responsibility for any of his team's shortcomings, no responsibility for missing the playoffs 3 straight seasons in his prime, or not excelling in the playoffs in general. The only player in NBA history without a flaw it would seem.

Case in point, you point out KG had multiple MVP caliber seasons which is true. But....Kobe, Magic, Bird, Shaq, all had around twice as many. In fact despite Magic/Bird's shorter overall careers, their primes are longer than KG's, as is Kobe and Shaq's. Even DRob has around the same number of prime seasons as KG does.

How many seasons would KG have been POY? Not from 96-03, or 05-14. Had the NBA awarded "player of the year"....I could see Kobe/Shaq/Magic/Bird/Hakeem/DRob with multiple awards, but 2004 is really the only seasons KG would have won it. Which again, shows that once we drift away from narratives to comparisons, KG falls quite a bit short of current competition.

Playoff performer? For those too young to remember, KG was the 1st guy with the can't get out of the first round label before Tmac. He didn't lead Minny to upsets, and failed to make the Finals as the #1 seed during that 04 peak season. In 08 Boston's big 3 had their lone title, but the run was far from legendary despite the talent on that roster. It's not that KG was an awful playoff performer, its that he was mediocre. Which is fine if we're comparing him lower near guys like DRob or K. Malone, but when compared to guys at this spot his playoff performances are severely lacking.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
User avatar
Outside
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,112
And1: 16,827
Joined: May 01, 2017
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#64 » by Outside » Sun Jul 2, 2017 4:58 pm

Vote: Magic
Alternate: Bird


Joined at the hip in their careers, joined at the hip on my list.

When I look at longevity and defense for these two, I question why I have them this high. Others have better cases statistically. But these two are prime examples of why I'll always rely on subjectivity in my ranking, because leadership and will to win are what set these guys apart.

Magic was a revelation, showing what a guy that size could do from the traditional point guard position. His quickness and ballhandling ability were outstanding (though he did lose that late in his career), and he used his size, vision, and audacity to carve up the opponent with passes. LeBron does that well now, but Magic was on a whole 'nother level. Taking it to the hole on the break, he was practically unstoppable, and with the wings he had running the break, they turned the break into a weapon that separated themselves from their opponents, much like the Russell Celtics did and the Warriors do today. Magic could do what Draymond Green does now -- combine rebounding with ballhandling and playmaking -- but his ballhandling and playmaking was an order of magnitude better.

But what puts Magic here is that he added those physical tools to an all-time great will to win. Kareem was the guy for the first half of the decade, the Lakers had an all-time great collection of players, but there's a reason that they didn't win titles until Magic arrived.

Bird had that same will to win and is the most cold-blooded killer I've ever seen on the court. I look at his percentages and question how they can be that low because it seemed like the guy made every big shot. It was like there was nothing you could do to stop him or rattle him. The stories from opponents about how he'd tell you where he was going to shoot the ball and then do exactly that. He'd rip out your heart and dance on your grave. From his perspective, he was there to win, and that's what he was going to do.

Bird was a great shooter, great passer, and very good rebounder. His defense is much discussed, with some pointing to him being on all-defense teams three times and others pointing to his lack of quickness making him ineffective as an individual defender in space. I think the truth is somewhere in between, leaning toward him being an overall good defender. As others pointed out, he wasn't the quickest guy or a great leaper, but he had quick hands and very good size. He was also incredibly smart and used that to great effect defensively. You weren't going to anchor your defense around him, but he was an excellent complement to Parish and McHale.

Both Magic and Bird have MVPs and finals MVPs. Where I separate them is in titles (five for Magic, three for Bird) and in head-to-head finals (two for Magic, one for Bird).

Hopefully, everyone has seen the recent ESPN 30 for 30 on the Lakers and Celtics. There's obviously history going back to the 60s, but it centered on the rivalry in the 80s. Great stuff on Magic and Bird.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
User avatar
THKNKG
Pro Prospect
Posts: 994
And1: 368
Joined: Sep 11, 2016
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#65 » by THKNKG » Sun Jul 2, 2017 5:07 pm

Fundamentals21 wrote:Said I wouldn't vote, stalking these discussions, but I have no idea why KG is shooting up like this. Nothing against him - This is about 5 spots too high. Actually the ranking was around okay in the 2014 voting. What changed between now and then? Isn't this bias against Shaq, Magic, Bird?

- Defensive longevity is great until you realize it's the offense that is irreplacable for any team's title hopes. Any team you're taking certain players to contribute extremely well offensively, pray they play above average defense and have the roleplayers with their added energy to contribute defensively. This is why Kobe's prime and KG"s prime is close - his offensive contribution makes it so. This is why Dirk's also on KG's level - his scoring prowess makes it so. Ben Wallace was not a Top 5 player in 2004. Oh and no, clearly KG is worth your #2 scoring option and way better. That being said, this is the kind of stuff D-Rob did on a consistent basis as well. It's not unheard of to the point that you place KG on #7. What does my franchise gain due to KG's supposed defensive greatness throughout his career? Minnesota did a bad job with KG, no doubt, but he has never proven he's with power-shifters of the league in Magic/Bird and their colossal offensive impacts.
- Kevin Garnett was thought to have a great well rounded game 20+ point game offensively in the early 00's. This is not the same as having a great scoring game offensively, such as Dirk's. You can make a case that KG pre-Boston had an inferior career to Dirk's in the postseason. Speaking of - I think it's perfectly okay to put Kobe and Dirk into the conversation if KG is here. I mean, like, really really pushing it.
- If his impact is truly as astronomical as adding up his offensive +/- and defensive +/- implies, his teams would be winning more. OH BUT YOU CARE FOR RINGZ! No not really. Look, there isn't anything magical a player is doing if his team is winning 33-44 games with mediocre supporting casts between 05-07. There is nothing you're taking here between Dirk, Kobe, etc. and not expecting similar team results.
- This feels like a case of +/- blindness. It's where you take the +/- results first, throw out everything you know about how the game operates, and dissect a player to magnify his strengths. Yes, KG had a great defensive career but it's not worth as much as we believe it to be. We are still perfectly capable of dissecting a player's offense with eye test and traditional box score metrics. The reason we need additional help defensively is because we didn't have access to SportsVU's depth of defensive statistics and they were limited to blocks and steals on the box score.
- By the way, to be consistent, Duncan should be a few spots lower as well.
- You can throw away most kinds of non +/- thinking and claim you're a radical, but if you do so then Dirk Nowitzki should be a debate for as high as #3 as lorak posted him if he's debatable with Kareem. You would be changing this entire list from the get go.


But, I don't understand. Drza, colbinii, myself, and others have addressed most of these points. In fact the "offense is more important than defense" for a title team is something I disputed in thread one. I don't understand. Not to mention the 07 Wolves stuff... I just feel like there's a lot of talking past each other, but I'd rather be addressed head on by what I actually said.
All-Time Fantasy Draft Team (90 FGA)

PG: Maurice Cheeks / Giannis
SG: Reggie Miller / Jordan
SF: Michael Jordan / Bruce Bowen
PF: Giannis / Marvin Williams
C: Artis Gilmore / Chris Anderson
User avatar
Jaivl
Head Coach
Posts: 7,104
And1: 6,757
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
Location: A Coruña, Spain
Contact:
   

Re: RE: Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#66 » by Jaivl » Sun Jul 2, 2017 5:38 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:How many seasons would KG have been POY? Not from 96-03, or 05-14. Had the NBA awarded "player of the year"....I could see Kobe/Shaq/Magic/Bird/Hakeem/DRob with multiple awards, but 2004 is really the only seasons KG would have won it. Which again, shows that once we drift away from narratives to comparisons, KG falls quite a bit short of current competition.

In your opinion.

An Unbiased Fan wrote:Playoff performer? For those too young to remember, KG was the 1st guy with the can't get out of the first round label before Tmac. He didn't lead Minny to upsets, and failed to make the Finals as the #1 seed during that 04 peak season. In 08 Boston's big 3 had their lone title, but the run was far from legendary despite the talent on that roster. It's not that KG was an awful playoff performer, its that he was mediocre. Which is fine if we're comparing him lower near guys like DRob or K. Malone, but when compared to guys at this spot his playoff performances are severely lacking.

Wow. Really. Still this argument?

How couldn't this (Cassell got injured)

Image

beat this?

Image

A disgraceful choker, I tell you!
_________

EDIT: Funny that the KG guys are by faaaaar the ones that are argumenting the most, and at the same time are the ones that vote on narrative.
This place is a cesspool of mindless ineptitude, mental decrepitude, and intellectual lassitude. I refuse to be sucked any deeper into this whirlpool of groupthink sewage. My opinions have been expressed. I'm going to go take a shower.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,409
And1: 9,936
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#67 » by penbeast0 » Sun Jul 2, 2017 5:51 pm

Outside wrote:

Hi Trex. Thanks for everything you're doing to steer this project. I'm all for doubling your salary based on your fine work here.

As an FYI, the link for the number 6 thread above goes to the number 5 thread. I use these links regularly to go back to previous discussions, and I can still find the number 6 thread in the thread list without much trouble, but that may be an issue as we get further down the list.


That was my mistake, not Trex . . . fixing it now.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
wojoaderge
Analyst
Posts: 3,100
And1: 1,682
Joined: Jul 27, 2015

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#68 » by wojoaderge » Sun Jul 2, 2017 5:52 pm

By my thinking, what i've learned here is that KG was possibly the GOAT 2nd banana (either him or The Admiral) who had to play the role of 1st banana for most of his career.
"Coach, why don't you just relax? We're not good enough to beat the Lakers. We've had a great year, why don't you just relax and cool down?"
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,442
And1: 6,216
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#69 » by Joao Saraiva » Sun Jul 2, 2017 5:57 pm

Thinking about Shaq and Hakeem. I'll come here later and make my vote. Was out for the weekend so I don't know how much time there is left, but I'll vote today!

Surprised Wilt got in, I'm glad he did!
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
User avatar
Outside
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,112
And1: 16,827
Joined: May 01, 2017
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#70 » by Outside » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:25 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
Outside wrote:

Hi Trex. Thanks for everything you're doing to steer this project. I'm all for doubling your salary based on your fine work here.

As an FYI, the link for the number 6 thread above goes to the number 5 thread. I use these links regularly to go back to previous discussions, and I can still find the number 6 thread in the thread list without much trouble, but that may be an issue as we get further down the list.


That was my mistake, not Trex . . . fixing it now.

Oops, it was you. You can double your salary, too :)

Thanks for fixing it.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,736
And1: 5,708
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#71 » by An Unbiased Fan » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:36 pm

Where do people put Bob Petit?

-10 time All-NBA 1st team
- 2 MVPs
- 8 Top 5 MVP seasons
- Career 26/16 PF
- Career 25.3 PER
- 1 ring

Did it in Russell's era too.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
User avatar
eminence
RealGM
Posts: 17,049
And1: 11,862
Joined: Mar 07, 2015

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#72 » by eminence » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:42 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:Where do people put Bob Petit?

-10 time All-NBA 1st team
- 2 MVPs
- 8 Top 5 MVP seasons
- Career 26/16 PF
- Career 25.3 PER
- 1 ring

Did it in Russell's era too.


Haven't really weighed him much yet, first gut instinct says somewhere around #20. Feels like he has to be below Mikan though
I bought a boat.
Hornet Mania
General Manager
Posts: 9,006
And1: 8,492
Joined: Jul 05, 2014
Location: Dornbirn, Austria
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#73 » by Hornet Mania » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:46 pm

wojoaderge wrote:By my thinking, what i've learned here is that KG was possibly the GOAT 2nd banana (either him or The Admiral) who had to play the role of 1st banana for most of his career.


This is pretty close to my general feeling on KG as well. Excellent player who can fill a lot of needs, but he doesn't impose himself on the game as effectively as guys like Shaq, or even Kobe/Dirk (which I feel is more his tier).
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,736
And1: 5,708
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#74 » by An Unbiased Fan » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:47 pm

eminence wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:Where do people put Bob Petit?

-10 time All-NBA 1st team
- 2 MVPs
- 8 Top 5 MVP seasons
- Career 26/16 PF
- Career 25.3 PER
- 1 ring

Did it in Russell's era too.


Haven't really weighed him much yet, first gut instinct says somewhere around #20. Feels like he has to be below Mikan though

I think that's where he landed last time around, so a pretty good guess. But based on his play and resume, should he be higher? Mikan's era was decidedly the weakest ever, but Petit entered the NBA just 2 years before Russell, and played in the same era. As much as I love Jerry West, I'm not even sure why he's above Petit. The PF position has always been the hardest to sort out.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
Gibson22
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,921
And1: 912
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#75 » by Gibson22 » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:52 pm

Cmon guys Bird was better than Magic like I mean cmon guys you know I mean cmon hear my point you know he better
User avatar
THKNKG
Pro Prospect
Posts: 994
And1: 368
Joined: Sep 11, 2016
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#76 » by THKNKG » Sun Jul 2, 2017 6:54 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:
eminence wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:Where do people put Bob Petit?

-10 time All-NBA 1st team
- 2 MVPs
- 8 Top 5 MVP seasons
- Career 26/16 PF
- Career 25.3 PER
- 1 ring

Did it in Russell's era too.


Haven't really weighed him much yet, first gut instinct says somewhere around #20. Feels like he has to be below Mikan though

I think that's where he landed last time around, so a pretty good guess. But based on his play and resume, should he be higher? Mikan's era was decidedly the weakest ever, but Petit entered the NBA just 2 years before Russell, and played in the same era. As much as I love Jerry West, I'm not even sure why he's above Petit. The PF position has always been the hardest to sort out.


I have him somewhere around 20 as well. Around the Barkley/Moses level.
All-Time Fantasy Draft Team (90 FGA)

PG: Maurice Cheeks / Giannis
SG: Reggie Miller / Jordan
SF: Michael Jordan / Bruce Bowen
PF: Giannis / Marvin Williams
C: Artis Gilmore / Chris Anderson
scrabbarista
RealGM
Posts: 20,257
And1: 17,961
Joined: May 31, 2015

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#77 » by scrabbarista » Sun Jul 2, 2017 7:01 pm

Outside wrote:
scrabbarista wrote:[b]In the "Winning" portion of my formula, Magic is second all-time to Lebron James (he edges MJ by a fraction). He has a comfortable lead over Shaq and a huge lead over Wilt.

Just curious, but why isn't Russell a runaway leader in the winning portion of your formula?


I weight it according to the number of teams in the league. So, a championship in an 8 team league is worth 1/3 as much as one in a 24 team league. However, there's the raw score for winning, which is what I was referencing, and a "truer" score which would factor in the bonus for being the best player on a title team.

If I factor in the bonus (which doesn't show up on my spreadsheet, which is the reason I only referenced the raw total in my OP), a randomly selected list of great winners would look like this:

Jordan - 203.7
Lebron - 172.8
Duncan - 169.8
Magic - 168.7
Russell - 163.8
Shaq - 113.8
Bird - 88.3
Kareem - 87.1
Kobe - 83.9
Mikan - 63
Olajuwon - 53.2
Pippen - 51.5
Erving - 51
Isiah Thomas - 49.4
Curry - 46.8
Wade - 43.2
Wilt - 41.9
West - 36.9
Nowitzki - 33.6
Drexler - 30.6
Havlicek - 29.9
Hayes - 28.4
Kidd - 26.2
M. Malone - 25.8
Tony Parker - 24.9
Walton - 24
Billups - 23.7
K. Malone - 23.2
Durant - 23

While I consider some form of this metric indispensable, it isn't overwhelmingly important. E.g., Karl Malone is 12th on my official list, and Pippen is currently 34th.
All human life on the earth is like grass, and all human glory is like a flower in a field. The grass dries up and its flower falls off, but the Lord’s word endures forever.
User avatar
Jaivl
Head Coach
Posts: 7,104
And1: 6,757
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
Location: A Coruña, Spain
Contact:
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#78 » by Jaivl » Sun Jul 2, 2017 7:18 pm

Hornet Mania wrote:This is pretty close to my general feeling on KG as well. Excellent player who can fill a lot of needs, but he doesn't impose himself on the game as effectively as guys like Shaq, or even Kobe/Dirk (which I feel is more his tier).

(translation: he doesn't score as much)

Luckily there are more ways to impact the game other than scoring. Imagine this post...

This is pretty close to my general feeling on Jordan as well. Excellent player who can fill a lot of needs, but he doesn't impose himself on defense as effectively as guys like Russell, or even KG/Duncan (which I feel is more his tier).

Sounds kind of dumb, doesn't it? I mean, why would we penalize Jordan for not being as good a defender as the all-time defenders?
...why do you penalize KG for not being as good a scorer as the all-time scorers?

Spoiler:
Yeah, offensive impact peaks higher than defensive impact. But KG had loads of offensive impact as well, so...
This place is a cesspool of mindless ineptitude, mental decrepitude, and intellectual lassitude. I refuse to be sucked any deeper into this whirlpool of groupthink sewage. My opinions have been expressed. I'm going to go take a shower.
User avatar
2klegend
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,333
And1: 409
Joined: Mar 31, 2016
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#79 » by 2klegend » Sun Jul 2, 2017 7:23 pm

The list currently is exactly what I would have in my GOAT list so nothing surprised there. Hopefully #7 will be the same.

The argument for #7 center around these 3 players, Magic, Shaq, Bird due to their combination of strong statistical impact, peak, prime, and winning pedigree. I'm not going into deep how I calculated their performance impact so I'm going with just pure basis ranking in order.

Peak:
1. Shaq '00 (3rd all-time)
2. Bird '86 (7th all-time)
3. Magic '87 (8th all-time)

Prime:
1. Bird 82-88 (9th all-time)
2. Shaq 95-03 (10th all-time)
3. Magic 83-91 (11th all-time)

Longevity:
1. Shaq
2. Magic
3. Bird

Accolades:
1. Magic (5 titles, 3 MVPs)
2. Bird (3 titles, 3 MVPs)
3. Shaq (4 titles, 1 MVP)

With these simple ranking, Shaq 9, Bird 8, Magic 7. However since it's so close, I believe Magic displays certain quality and intangible that put him ahead of the other two such as leadership and being a generally more successful on the court for the amount of times he was in the NBA relative to the other two.

1st Pick: Magic Johnson
2nd Pick: Shaquille O'neal
My Top 100+ GOAT (Peak, Prime, Longevity, Award):
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1464952
Ambrose
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,339
And1: 5,145
Joined: Jul 05, 2014

Re: RE: Re: RealGM Top 100 List 2017 -- #7 

Post#80 » by Ambrose » Sun Jul 2, 2017 7:46 pm

Jaivl wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:How many seasons would KG have been POY? Not from 96-03, or 05-14. Had the NBA awarded "player of the year"....I could see Kobe/Shaq/Magic/Bird/Hakeem/DRob with multiple awards, but 2004 is really the only seasons KG would have won it. Which again, shows that once we drift away from narratives to comparisons, KG falls quite a bit short of current competition.

In your opinion.

An Unbiased Fan wrote:Playoff performer? For those too young to remember, KG was the 1st guy with the can't get out of the first round label before Tmac. He didn't lead Minny to upsets, and failed to make the Finals as the #1 seed during that 04 peak season. In 08 Boston's big 3 had their lone title, but the run was far from legendary despite the talent on that roster. It's not that KG was an awful playoff performer, its that he was mediocre. Which is fine if we're comparing him lower near guys like DRob or K. Malone, but when compared to guys at this spot his playoff performances are severely lacking.

Wow. Really. Still this argument?

How couldn't this (Cassell got injured)

Image

beat this?

Image

A disgraceful choker, I tell you!
_________

EDIT: Funny that the KG guys are by faaaaar the ones that are argumenting the most, and at the same time are the ones that vote on narrative.


It makes sense though. Even on Realgm where every mistake Kevin Garnett made is forgiven, this is where he placed on the retro player of the projects:

98-99: #9
99-00: #5 (0 1st place votes 2, 2nd place)
00-01: #5 (0 1st place, 1 2nd place)
01-02: #4 (0 1st place, 0 2nd place)
02-03: #2 (2 1st place, 13 2nd place)
03-04: Conceded by An Unbaised Fan
04-05: #3 (2 1st place, 6 second)
05-06: #7 (0 1st place, 0 2nd place)
06-07: # 6 (0 1st place, 0 2nd place)
07-08: #1 with the lowest overall consensus in the entire project by a huge amount
08-09: NR
09-10: NR
10-11: Couldn't find, guessing it's not high
11-12: #4 (0 1st place, 0 2nd place)
12-13: NR
13-14: NR

So other than Kobe and D-Rob, he just flat-out has less years where he was MVP or had a POY-type season than those other guys (who have also yet to be voted in).
hardenASG13 wrote:They are better than the teammates of SGA, Giannis, Luka, Brunson, Curry etc. so far.
~Regarding Denver Nuggets, May 2025

Return to Player Comparisons