#25 - GOAT peaks project (2019)

[LA Bird]

1) Michael Jordan 1990-91
2) LeBron James 2012-13
3) Wilt Chamberlain 1966-67
4) Shaquille O'Neal 1999-00
5) Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1976-77
6) Tim Duncan 2002-03
7) Larry Bird 1985-86
8) Bill Russell 1963-64
9) Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94
10) Magic Johnson 1986-87
11) Kevin Garnett 2003-04
12) Julius Erving 1975-76
13) Bill Walton 1976-77
14) Oscar Robertson 1963-64
15) Stephen Curry 2015-16
16) Dwyane Wade 2008-09
17) Jerry West 1965-66
18) David Robinson 1994-95
19) Dirk Nowitzki 2010-11
20) Kobe Bryant 2007-08
21) Tracy McGrady 2002-03
22) Moses Malone 1982-83
23) Patrick Ewing 1989-90
24) Kevin Durant 2013-14

Please include at least 1 sentence of reasoning for each of your 3 picks. A simple list of names will not be counted.
If you're repeating votes from previous rounds, copy and paste the reasoning because "see previous thread for explanation" will not be counted as a valid vote.

Current deadline: 9am September 22 Eastern Time.
The deadline will be extended by 24 hours up to twice if there is less than 12 votes or there is a tie for first.

The Voting System:

Everyone gives their 1st choice (4.5 points), 2nd choice (3 points), and 3rd choice (2 points). Highest point-total wins the round.
You can use your 3 choices to vote for more than 1 season of the same player (if you think that the best 3 seasons among the players left belong all to the same player, nothing is stopping you from using all you 3 choices on that player), but you can't continue voting for other seasons of that player once he wins and gets his spot. The final list will be 1 season per player.

Thank you for your participation!

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[liamliam1234]

1. 2019 Kawhi Leonard

Elevated perpetual second-round exit/chokers into a title team on back of one of the best scoring runs in NBA history (arguably the best in a title-winning season). Strong leadership, major offensive load, excellent clutch performances. One of the weakest modern title leaders, sure... but still a title-leader. And now that Moses is in, the list of peak players to achieve that is exceedingly small. Winning a title is hard, and elevating in the playoffs is hard, and elevating in an elimination (or near elimination) scenario is hard, and every time Kawhi rose to the occasion, did as asked, and succeeded. That has consistently been worth a lot to me, and it is not different here. Also, it is weird to see Dirk supported and accepted without complaint for scoring and rebounding well... which Kawhi did at an even better degree. And of course Dirk had certain box score intangibles, which is why he fared well in impact metrics and is ultimately several spots higher, but it is not that different of a portfolio when it comes down to it. And for all Kawhi's defensive degradation, Dirk was certainly never acting as the first point of defence against a player like Giannis.

2. 2007 Steve Nash
3. 2005 Steve Nash
Reasoning linked below, so I do not blow up the page every time someone wants to look at it:

Spoiler:

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=78458769&sid=ce4140e8382c9d2e962dd65db4fc358c#p78458769

Choosing 2007 over 2005 because I (and his team) value the passing peak of the 2007 postseason more than the scoring peak of the 2005 postseason. Choosing both over 2006 because that postseason felt comparatively less impressive, with its argument mostly stemming from individual shooting efficiency and on/off impact.

[Odinn21]

I’m kind of glad that KD got it of the way because I was having a very hard time picking his best season.
But I’m also sad that he got in before the players with more solid playoffs performances. 2014 was one of his weakest playoffs. Arguably 2nd from the bottom for him since 2011.

[liamliam1234]

It seems to be pretty consistent with prior results. If the rules specified regular season only, would any season definitively change? Maybe Kobe, maaaaybe Dirk... but even then I doubt it. Fortunately the two measures generally line up reasonably well, but in the case of Lebron, Wade, Curry, Durant, Robertson (admittedly I contributed to this one), and maybe Robinson (also Russell... ?), the regular season definitely took priority.

[trex_8063]

1st ballot - '15 Chris Paul - Wicked efficiency (both in terms of shooting and turnover economy) while leading a top-tier offense, and also being one of the best defensive PG's in the game. Played brilliantly in the playoffs, too, the only blemished being that he missed two playoff games [and did that cost them something?]; which was ironic, given he didn't miss a single game in the long rs.
I could see going for '08, but I just feel his defense was better in the later portions of his career, and his on-court impact has perhaps never looked better than in '15.


2nd ballot - '90 Charles Barkley - I actually like this version of Barkley better than '93. He didn't fall back on the mid-range jumper as much, instead relentlessly attacked the rim. Consequently, his scoring efficiency is fairly unparalleled in his era: averaged 25.2 ppg @ +12.45% rTS.......that combination of volume and accuracy was basically never done again until '16 Steph Curry.
Excellent rebounder [especially on the offensive glass], could pass out of the double-team (and in transition)......he was just a devastating offensive force. With a supporting cast [in order of descending minutes] of Johnny Dawkins, 2nd-year Hersey Hawkins, Mike Gminski, Rick Mahorn, Ron Anderson, Derek Smith, and 2nd-year Scott Brooks, he led the 2nd-rated offense in the league (+5.4 rORTG).
And if memory serves, based on on/off data collected by that one Philly exec way back into the 80's, and organized by Dipper, he wasn't yet a negative defensively (started going negative in '91, and was sort of big defensive negative in '92, iirc).


3rd ballot - '08 Chris Paul - More explosive, better athlete than his '15 version, which left him with better endurance and ability to penetrate the paint. But he wasn't yet the mid-range shooter that he was in '15, nor did he yet have the defensive IQ that he would in '15. Those are the primary reasons I put this season a pinch behind '15.


I'd be pretty happy with '19 Giannis getting in at this stage, too.

[No-more-rings]

3rd ballot - '08 Chris Paul - More explosive, better athlete than his '15 version, which left him with better endurance and ability to penetrate the paint. But he wasn't yet the mid-range shooter that he was in '15, nor did he yet have the defensive IQ that he would in '15. Those are the primary reasons I put this season a pinch behind '15.

What's the case for 08 Paul over Harden's 2018+2019 seasons or 17 Westbrook? He didn't fair anything special by impact metrics, his box scores aren't any better, and metrics show Paul as a negative defensively. Paul's team was +6.2 DRTG worse with Paul on the court than off, that's awful. And when you consider those things, Paul's total lack of playoff experience has to factor in and that he was only 22 years old.

[trex_8063]

3rd ballot - '08 Chris Paul - More explosive, better athlete than his '15 version, which left him with better endurance and ability to penetrate the paint. But he wasn't yet the mid-range shooter that he was in '15, nor did he yet have the defensive IQ that he would in '15. Those are the primary reasons I put this season a pinch behind '15.

What's the case for 08 Paul over Harden's 2018+2019 seasons or 17 Westbrook? He didn't fair anything special by impact metrics, his box scores aren't any better, and metrics show Paul as a negative defensively. Paul's team was +6.2 DRTG worse with Paul on the court than off, that's awful. And when you consider those things, Paul's total lack of playoff experience has to factor in and that he was only 22 years old.

I'll just put the full rate-metric picture on the board first (including playing time, because they're rate metrics).....

'08 Paul (rs): 28.3 PER, .284 WS/48, +9.2 BPM, +22 net rating in 37.6 mpg (2 missed games)
'17 Westbrook (rs): 30.6 PER, .224 WS/48, +15.6 BPM, +8 net rating in 34.6 mpg (1 missed game)
'18 Harden (rs): 29.8 PER, .289 WS/48, +10.9 BPM, +15 net rating in 35.4 mpg (10 missed games)
'19 Harden (rs): 30.6 PER, .254 WS/48, +11.7 BPM, +10 net rating in 36.8 mpg (4 missed games)

'08 Paul (ps): 30.7 PER, .289 WS/48, +12.3 BPM, +19 net rating in 40.5 mpg
'17 Westbrook (ps): 27.7 PER, .103 WS/48, +13.1 BPM, -4 net rating in 38.8 mpg
'18 Harden (ps): 24.9 PER, .163 WS/48, +7.8 BPM, +3 net rating in 36.5 mpg
'19 Harden (ps): 25.2 PER, .189 WS/48, +8.4 BPM, +6 net rating in 38.5 mpg

'08 Paul: +3.0 PI RAPM (26th in league)
'17 Westbrook: +3.05 PI RAPM (tied for 18th in league)
'18 Harden: +3.50 NPI rs-only RAPM (tied for 17th in league)
'19 Harden: +2.74 NPI rs-only RAPM (32nd in league)


So once you look at both rs AND playoffs [and take note of mpg with these], certainly none of '17 Westy or '18/'19 Harden is exactly distinguishing itself, statistically, from '08 Paul. Not saying '08 Paul is clearly superior (certainly not by any significant margin), but it's clearly "holding its own" statistically. If placing a heavy emphasis on the playoffs, I would think one would be compelled to go with Paul among these four seasons.

Additionally, while I usually prefer PI to NPI, there are some instances when it could [potentially, anyway] be the inferior product.
One instance is with a player who has JUST entered his prime: his PI RAPM in '08 is likely being dragged down by the priors of '06 and '07; thus should probably be taken with a little grain of salt.
And while I see his defensive on/off is pretty poor, there are a lot of factors that could contribute to that (as well as simply noting the extreme sample needed for those numbers to really gel). I know he gambled, but when I consider his athleticism and competitive intensity, the defensive acumen he would eventually attain, his 2.7 spg, and the fact that [while leading team in minutes] with a supporting cast of [in descending order of minutes] David West, Tyson Chandler, Peja Stojakovic, Morris Peterson, Jannero Pargo, Bobby Jackson, Rasual Butler, Hilton Armstrong, and Ryan Bowen they achieved a 7th-rated -1.8 rDRTG.......I'm skeptical he was actually a relevant negative defensively.

And at any rate, we're comparing him to Harden and Westbrook......not exactly defensive titans.

Note also, looking at that supporting cast, that he led them to 56 wins, a 5th-rated +5.46 SRS, and 7 games into the WCSF, in which they tied the Spurs exactly in series pts scored.

[E-Balla]

1. 2017 Westbrook - this is a placeholder until I get the full reasoning in here since I'm at a bar waiting on someone right now. Basically he was dominant and carried a team of scrubs farther than they had any business being behind historically clutch play.

2. 75 McAdoo - Scoring was off the charts and he was a dominant scorer against even the best defenses.

3. 75 Barry - The last player here who won a ring with a bad squad (outside of him of course). His passing and scoring made him a great floor raiser.

[E-Balla]

3rd ballot - '08 Chris Paul - More explosive, better athlete than his '15 version, which left him with better endurance and ability to penetrate the paint. But he wasn't yet the mid-range shooter that he was in '15, nor did he yet have the defensive IQ that he would in '15. Those are the primary reasons I put this season a pinch behind '15.

What's the case for 08 Paul over Harden's 2018+2019 seasons or 17 Westbrook? He didn't fair anything special by impact metrics, his box scores aren't any better, and metrics show Paul as a negative defensively. Paul's team was +6.2 DRTG worse with Paul on the court than off, that's awful. And when you consider those things, Paul's total lack of playoff experience has to factor in and that he was only 22 years old.

I'll just put the full rate-metric picture on the board first (including playing time, because they're rate metrics).....

'08 Paul (rs): 28.3 PER, .284 WS/48, +9.2 BPM, +22 net rating in 37.6 mpg (2 missed games)
'17 Westbrook (rs): 30.6 PER, .224 WS/48, +15.6 BPM, +8 net rating in 34.6 mpg (1 missed game)
'18 Harden (rs): 29.8 PER, .289 WS/48, +10.9 BPM, +15 net rating in 35.4 mpg (10 missed games)
'19 Harden (rs): 30.6 PER, .254 WS/48, +11.7 BPM, +10 net rating in 36.8 mpg (4 missed games)

'08 Paul (ps): 30.7 PER, .289 WS/48, +12.3 BPM, +19 net rating in 40.5 mpg
'17 Westbrook (ps): 27.7 PER, .103 WS/48, +13.1 BPM, -4 net rating in 38.8 mpg
'18 Harden (ps): 24.9 PER, .163 WS/48, +7.8 BPM, +3 net rating in 36.5 mpg
'19 Harden (ps): 25.2 PER, .189 WS/48, +8.4 BPM, +6 net rating in 38.5 mpg

'08 Paul: +3.0 PI RAPM (26th in league)
'17 Westbrook: +3.05 PI RAPM (tied for 18th in league)
'18 Harden: +3.50 NPI rs-only RAPM (tied for 17th in league)
'19 Harden: +2.74 NPI rs-only RAPM (32nd in league)


So once you look at both rs AND playoffs [and take note of mpg with these], certainly none of '17 Westy or '18/'19 Harden is exactly distinguishing itself, statistically, from '08 Paul. Not saying '08 Paul is clearly superior (certainly not by any significant margin), but it's clearly "holding its own" statistically. If placing a heavy emphasis on the playoffs, I would think one would be compelled to go with Paul among these four seasons.

Additionally, while I usually prefer PI to NPI, there are some instances when it could [potentially, anyway] be the inferior product.
One instance is with a player who has JUST entered his prime: his PI RAPM in '08 is likely being dragged down by the priors of '06 and '07; thus should probably be taken with a little grain of salt.
And while I see his defensive on/off is pretty poor, there are a lot of factors that could contribute to that (as well as simply noting the extreme sample needed for those numbers to really gel). I know he gambled, but when I consider his athleticism and competitive intensity, the defensive acumen he would eventually attain, his 2.7 spg, and the fact that [while leading team in minutes] with a supporting cast of [in descending order of minutes] David West, Tyson Chandler, Peja Stojakovic, Morris Peterson, Jannero Pargo, Bobby Jackson, Rasual Butler, Hilton Armstrong, and Ryan Bowen they achieved a 7th-rated -1.8 rDRTG.......I'm skeptical he was actually a relevant negative defensively.

And at any rate, we're comparing him to Harden and Westbrook......not exactly defensive titans.

Note also, looking at that supporting cast, that he led them to 56 wins, a 5th-rated +5.46 SRS, and 7 games into the WCSF, in which they tied the Spurs exactly in series pts scored.

Net rating isn't a rate metric, or really much of a metric at all. Doesn't really fit in with the rest.

To the main point I wanted to make though, in those numbers you posted alone CP3 is clearly over both of those Harden seasons.

He has a higher postseason EVERYTHING than Harden. Then a higher RAPM. I mean you made a great case against Harden in that post if you ask me and then on top of that once you get into the weeds and add context Harden looks even less impressive. His +3-4 on/offs and actual net rating (which is lower than Paul's even with better teammates) aren't really a good look compared to either Westbrook or Paul...

[No-more-rings]

Paul's playoffs were 12 games, i don't know how much to weigh that and Paul's advanced stats have always overrated him. Paul had a 30.7 PER and 12.3 BPM, i get it but if you're really taking that at face value that would mean he was playing at Jordan/Lebron level in those 12 games. Maybe he was, but i really doubt it.

Aside from that, if you guys are really willing to take an inexperienced 22 year old to lead your team over peak Harden and Westbrook(or in Eballa's case just over Harden) then go ahead i guess.

If it wasn't for the injury in 09 that would be Paul's clear peak i think, and I'd likely take it over those guys. 16 Curry was voted in almost strictly on regular season play, i don't see why 09 Paul shouldn't be the choice for his peak if there's any consistency going on.

[freethedevil]

Think it's time for

2019 giannis
-> anchored a historically great team on both ends, both as the primary facilitator, defensive anchor, and scoring weapon. It took an atg championship winning defense giving him the pistons treatment to stop him and even then it was by the slimmest of margins. His decimation of a strong celtics defense was quite impressive as well. His passing limitations cost him vs the raptors but no one yet to be listed is strong enough of an offensive threat to warrant anything close to the defensive attention giannis warranted and when you add that to being one of the game's best scorers and a top 5 defender, you get a worthy pick for this spot. He has the highest corp +/- evaluation and the second highest corp. I'm hesitant to put him below the #1 in corp here, largely because I disagree with ben's analysis of kd's portability, but more on that later.

2017 Durant
-> Was one of two seasons in his career his defense was noteworthy and actually significant. I don't view his offense as significantly lower than his 2014 self who was able to lead a great rs team with or without westbrook(the playoffs are another story). Pretty one dimensional but at this rate so is the rest of the competition. He comes pretty close to giannis's +/- evaluation. That said, I'm not convinced he's portable at all. Much is made of his ability to "raise the cieling" of the warriors but given his skillset which is basically scoring, i'm rather hesitant to give him credit for this cieling raising when he's playing with better shooters and passers.

Players I'm considering a vote for at #3
-> 2017 Westbrook
-> 2016 draymond green
-> 1962/63 Moses Malone
-> Some version of Patrick Ewing
-> 2019 Kawhi

For vote three I'll go 2017 westbrook. Coming off playoffs where he outplayed, arguably, peak durant, his three point shot dramtically improved in 2017. From a small po sample he has a gigantic imapct and while the sample size is an issue, I think we can infer what 2017 westbrook was capable of from his large 2016 sample without a great shot.

Replace Durant with 07 Nash. Move Westbrook to #2. led the GOAT offense, atg impact #'s, fits well with other stars, best playmaker not named magic.

[cecilthesheep]

1. 1949 George Mikan - Mikan's peak was so far above his contemporaries that I don't think I can leave him out any longer. He was the most unstoppable scorer of basketball's first decade or two, he raised his game in the playoffs to lead his team to 5 titles in 6 years and create the league's first dynasty, and this was his most dominant year.

2. 1950 George Mikan - same player, second-best year, basically the same level of performance

3. 2007 Steve Nash. I'd just rather have this guy to win a title with than anyone left. Very very close with some version of Ewing and with '97 Karl Malone, but the way Nash totally transforms an offense is not something that anyone remaining in this tier can do on either end, in that I think if you have this version of Nash your offense is guaranteed to be one of the best in the league.

Next tier I'm thinking about: Ewing, CP3, Durant, Barry, and Karl Malone

If my participation from this point forward is spotty, I apologize. I'm getting married today and will be on my honeymoon for the next week or so

[freethedevil]

If my participation from this point forward is spotty, I apologize. I'm getting married today and will be on my honeymoon for the next week or so

[liamliam1234]

Congratulations, Cecil!

Replace Durant with Nash. Move Westbrook to #2. led the GOAT offense, atg impact #'s, fits well with other stars, best playmaker not named magic.

Mentioning this out of self-interest, but LA Bird will not count the vote if a year is not specified. I am guessing your vote is for 2007, but right now it reads as:

1. 2019 Giannis
2. 2017 Westbrook
3. ???? Nash

A basic edit would clarify.

[Sublime187]

1. 1949 George Mikan - Mikan's peak was so far above his contemporaries that I don't think I can leave him out any longer. He was the most unstoppable scorer of basketball's first decade or two, he raised his game in the playoffs to lead his team to 5 titles in 6 years and create the league's first dynasty, and this was his most dominant year.

2. 1950 George Mikan - same player, second-best year, basically the same level of performance

3. 2007 Steve Nash. I'd just rather have this guy to win a title with than anyone left. Very very close with some version of Ewing and with '97 Karl Malone, but the way Nash totally transforms an offense is not something that anyone remaining in this tier can do on either end, in that I think if you have this version of Nash your offense is guaranteed to be one of the best in the league.

Next tier I'm thinking about: Ewing, CP3, Durant, Barry, and Karl Malone

If my participation from this point forward is spotty, I apologize. I'm getting married today and will be on my honeymoon for the next week or so

How dare you ditch this project for such a selfish thing as marriage!

[trex_8063]

Net rating isn't a rate metric, or really much of a metric at all. Doesn't really fit in with the rest.

Technically no, I suppose not. I sort of tacked it in there as an after-thought with the rest.
Although I guess it's loosely a "rate metric" in that the players are providing that degree of offensive/defensive efficiency for X-number of mpg.

[Odinn21]

The reason why I haven't casted my vote yet, I found out the difference between rating system of Basketball-Reference.com and NBA.com.
Bkref calculates that how box score numbers would translate into a 100 possessions game.
NBA.com calculates that how plus/minus numbers would translate into a 100 possessions game.

I think considering NBA.com numbers could cause some changes. Among candidates we're discussing now;
Steve Nash in 2004-05; 123-111 according to Bkref and 118.6-105.7 according to NBA.com
Steve Nash in 2006-07; 124-110 according to Bkref and 116.7-105.4 according to NBA.com
Chris Paul in 2007-08; 125-103 according to Bkref and 113.3-105.3 according to NBA.com
Chris Paul in 2014-15; 126-105 according to Bkref and 116.7-104.0 according to NBA.com

According to Bkref, CP3 is considerably better. But that's because he has far better steals numbers which are translating into a drtg and net rtg advantage over Nash. But NBA.com numbers look a bit more reasonable to me.

I guess using Bkref numbers is still a bit safer because I don't know if NBA.com calculation makes adjustment abouts effect other players. At least Bkref keeps it more consistent with their focus on only one player.
I think NBA.com doesn't care much about the negating effect of other players. Looking at my favourite players numbers and this is his numbers, Duncan's net rating his career; 9.2 in 2002 and 2003. 16.3 in 2005 and 14.6 in 2007. His net rating got skyrocketed because his team got better. Not because Duncan himself got better.

But I still think there should be a use of NBA.com numbers because it's more than box score numbers. I need help guys. LOL.

[liamliam1234]

Yeah, I do not love either, but NBA.com’s is the one I prefer by a fair margin. Basketball-reference’s is more convenient, but I generally ignore it for everything other than broad trends (i.e. if one year has an outlier jump or decrease, it is probably worth noting). I think it is better to look at team results and impact numbers and try to sort things out from there. Stockton is a god according to box score offensive rating, but his team’s offences were rarely, if ever, anything special; I think the latter says much more than the former.

[trex_8063]

Yeah, I do not love either, but NBA.com’s is the one I prefer by a fair margin. Basketball-reference’s is more convenient, but I generally ignore it for everything other than broad trends (i.e. if one year has an outlier jump or decrease, it is probably worth noting). I think it is better to look at team results and impact numbers and try to sort things out from there. Stockton is a god according to box score offensive rating, but his team’s offences were rarely, if ever, anything special; I think the latter says much more than the former.

Can't tell if this was serious, or just trying to see who's awake; unless I'm completely mis-understanding you here (I haven't followed the full context of this exchange), but......

Once they got Jeff Hornacek on board, they had a four-year run where their AVERAGE offense was +6.6 rORTG (over FOUR years). They peaked at a +7.7 rORTG, which is tied [with the '02 Mavs, the '10 Suns, and the '97 Bulls] for the 4th-best offense EVER, behind only:

'04 Mavs (+9.2)
'05 Suns (+8.4)
'16 Warriors (+8.1)

Most franchises don't have a single season which matches the Jazz 4-year AVERAGE from '95-'98.

[liamliam1234]

Two things:

1. Sorry, should have specified playoffs.
2. Checking the numbers, that is probably less charitable than deserved on my part. They did have a strong offensive run from 1995-97 in the playoffs. Considering sample size, the third place finishes in 1996-97 are pretty admirable; there is of course a conference divide, but in 1997 specifically it is conceivable that they might have finished at the top if not for the Bulls series (or maybe second to the Bulls if we did a total opponent adjustment). Still would not say it is anything truly incredible, but it was better than I gave it credit (even though I could probably hide behind the “rarely” qualification, haha).

Also, in terms of the regular season, they finished fourth, second, second, and first (again, that one did not carry over to the playoffs), so I think your portrayal is a little excessive. That said, generally your point is fair: that was a great run, and for its regular season value finishing top two for three straight years was also better than I remembered.

EDIT: Perhaps rather than dismiss Stockton’s box offensive rating because of team performance, it would be better to dismiss his box offensive rating because of how his teammates fared relatively. Box offensive rating makes it look like Stockton was being massively held back by Karl Malone (which might be the primary reason that narrative is pushed, come to think about it) .