#26 - GOAT peaks project (2019)

[E-Balla]

^ To a point that does speak to their respective series minutes gap, though, where Kawhi was adding value past Giannis’s (even with some nagging injuries).



http://bkref.com/tiny/udB23

Sure has me laughing.

True. It can totally be true that Giannis outplayed Kawhi but Kawhi had the better series.

The raps out scored the bucks by 6 points over 6 games. Even if we just take the extra minuites to be somethign giannis couldn't do, the series was close to a draw.

You've made some good arguments here for Giannis over 2019 Kawhi. Not taking him over 2016 Kawhi still though lol.

[freethedevil]

I said title run because that specifically was what you specified. I've been arguing against 2019 kawhi and you specfically mentioned "title run" in your qualifier

5. I never said having the most efficient high volume title run inherently meant it was the “greatest scoring run”.

So I guess we're saying the following weren't "high volume runs"?

-> 2017 Curry
-> 2017 Kevin Durant

Those were vastly more effeicent postseasons and we're just talking the last 3 seasons without me even adjusting for 2018-2019's being a historicla outlier in terms of league effiency.

Kawhi had an atg psotseason in terms of scoring. He did not have the most efficient high volume postseason, even if we completely disregard relative effiency essentially locking this discussion down to anyone whose played in the 2010's, and if we disregard any scoring postseason from anyone who wasn't on the 6 teams we've seen lift a title, it was, as a matter of fact, not even close.

[freethedevil]

True. It can totally be true that Giannis outplayed Kawhi but Kawhi had the better series.

The raps out scored the bucks by 6 points over 6 games. Even if we just take the extra minuites to be somethign giannis couldn't do, the series was close to a draw.

You've made some good arguments here for Giannis over 2019 Kawhi. Not taking him over 2016 Kawhi still though lol.

Lol, make a case. You might just westbrook me again.

[liamliam1234]

I said title run because that specifically was what you specified. I've been arguing against 2019 kawhi and you specfically mentioned "title run" in your qualifier

So I guess we're saying the following weren't "high volume runs"?

-> 2017 Curry
-> 2017 Kevin Durant

Those were vastly more effeicent postseasons and we're just talking the last 3 seasons without me even adjusting for 2018-2019's being a historicla outlier in terms of league effiency.

Kawhi had an atg psotseason in terms of scoring. He did not have the most efficient high volume postseason, even if we completely disregard relative effiency essentially locking this discussion down to anyone whose played in the 2010's, and if we disregard any scoring postseason from anyone who wasn't on the 6 teams we've seen lift a title, it was, as a matter of fact, not even close.

As I said, you a.) could have stipulated if that was what you wanted, b.) did not really respond in a way suggesting that was your foremost intent, and c.) did not set a frame different from what I have already offered.

And no, evidently they did not meet my high volume cut-off. But it is an absolute joke to act as if coincidentally the two “greatest” scoring title runs occurred on the same team at the same time played on the greatest offensive roster ever assembled. Which I already said like five threads ago.

Again, do better.

[freethedevil]

I said title run because that specifically was what you specified. I've been arguing against 2019 kawhi and you specfically mentioned "title run" in your qualifier

So I guess we're saying the following weren't "high volume runs"?

-> 2017 Curry
-> 2017 Kevin Durant

Those were vastly more effeicent postseasons and we're just talking the last 3 seasons without me even adjusting for 2018-2019's being a historicla outlier in terms of league effiency.

Kawhi had an atg psotseason in terms of scoring. He did not have the most efficient high volume postseason, even if we completely disregard relative effiency essentially locking this discussion down to anyone whose played in the 2010's, and if we disregard any scoring postseason from anyone who wasn't on the 6 teams we've seen lift a title, it was, as a matter of fact, not even close.

But it is an absolute joke to act as if coincidentally the two “greatest” scoring title runs occurred on the same team at the same time played on the greatest offensive roster ever assembled. Which I already said like five threads ago.

Huh? I said the two most efficient, the specifc filter you used. "greatest"?, Refer to my original post

[liamliam1234]

And if we are going specific filters, then they do not meet my high volume cut-off. Or, if you prefer, they do not meet the standard of not playing on the most offensively favourable roster in NBA history.

Seems like you would get just as much value from reading the past threads as doing... whatever this is.

[E-Balla]

The raps out scored the bucks by 6 points over 6 games. Even if we just take the extra minuites to be somethign giannis couldn't do, the series was close to a draw.

You've made some good arguments here for Giannis over 2019 Kawhi. Not taking him over 2016 Kawhi still though lol.

Lol, make a case. You might just westbrook me again.

I have a post about 2016 Kawhi on the last page. Unless you're saying you wanna hear 2016 Kawhi vs 2019 Giannis because that'll be fun to type up and it might clarify where I need to put Giannis at for me as I'm working through the logic in my head.

And damn I keep writing off this tier 3 PG post...

[70sFan]

"Non-existent defense, lackadasial playmaking, liability whenever he was asked to bring the ball up, and both his scoring volume and effiency dropped."

Oh wow you quoted me, i guess you telling me ur wrong proved you watched the games better.


his volume and efficiency empirically, unquestionably dropped vs the warriors. His turnover % increased despite the raptors relying more on van vleet/lowry/gasol/ibaka to carry the ball more than they had in earlier rounds and defensively he was put on the weakest offensive threats despite his value defensively nearly exclusively being based on man on man d.

Again, you saying "i wonder if people watched the game" shows nothing. I watched the games and it was obvious kawhi was significantly worse in the finals than he had been in the series before.

If you're going to try and play police

If some of you think they know everything, why posting here at all?

Why post here?

First of all, calling someone "liability whenever he was asked to bring the ball up" is very strong opinion and you have to have strong evidences to defend that. I saw nothing that would indicate it's true, so maybe you can explain me that.

Now let's look at efficiency and turnovers:

In ECSF Kawhi averaged 3.3 tov and 10.7 TOV% (along with 4.0 apg).
In ECF Kawhi averaged 3.1 tov and 10.9 TOV% (along with 4.3 apg).
In the finals Kawhi averaged 3.0 tov and 11.3 TOV% (along with 4.2 apg).

He averaged the least turnovers per game in the finals and his TOV% increased by insane 0.3% points compared to ECF. Is this such a difference? Really? The difference like that would be decreased by one turnover less in 6 games series. This only shows that Kawhi had his limits as a playmaker but he was always strong at turniver economy, no matter how good defensive team he faced. 3 turnovers per game for volume scorer is not a lot, especially that efficient scorer.

Now, scoring efficiency:

In ECSF Kawhi averaged 34.7 ppg on 57.6% eFG, 85.7% FT and 63.4% TS (94.0 pace)
In ECF Kawhi averaged 29.8 ppg on 48.4% eFG, 88.5% FT and 57.4% TS (96.4 pace)
In the Finals Kawhi averaged 28.5 ppg on 50.0% eFG, 90.6% FT and 60.6% TS (96.1 pace)

His volume dropped but as you said, it's more due to different game plan and more involment of Gasol, Lowry and Van Vleet. That's still one point per game (and he played one more minute per game in ECF). His efficiency was far better than against Bucks and it's easy why - Bucks were the best defensive team he faced. Warriors actually didn't limit Kawhi at all, he just didn't have to do as much as he did before (especially against the Sixers).

If you expected him to play like in ECSF, then you put him on extremely high standard. He wasn't GOAT-level like some people argue recently, not even close. He wasn't bad in the finals either, he was still what he is - unstoppable volume scorer who lacks playmaking abilities. He didn't struggle against Warriors and he was more efficient than against Bucks.

As to defense - he didn't guard anybody notable due to gameplan, but he actually showed nice help defense plays in the finals. Of course, he's not the greatest off-ball defender and can be a bit lazy at times, but I'd still call him positive on defense in the finals. He played well defensively throughout the playoffs while having large offensive load, I don't understand why he is held to standarda of GOATs. He'll never be in that tier, but compared to guys left he's definitely a worthy candidate to consider.

[Dr Positivity]

I can't complain about the voting since I haven't been participating. But the Westbrook ranking is painful. Even putting aside players like Kawhi, Barkley, Malone, so people think 2017 Westbrook is the best of the last three MVPs???

[freethedevil]

You've made some good arguments here for Giannis over 2019 Kawhi. Not taking him over 2016 Kawhi still though lol.

Lol, make a case. You might just westbrook me again.

I have a post about 2016 Kawhi on the last page. Unless you're saying you wanna hear 2016 Kawhi vs 2019 Giannis because that'll be fun to type up and it might clarify where I need to put Giannis at for me as I'm working through the logic in my head.

And damn I keep writing off this tier 3 PG post...

2016 kawhi vs 2019 giannis would be cool. That said, 'd like to see elaboration regarding kawhi's defense. You say he anchored a -7 defense, but was he more important than say duncan? And his man defense was nice, but how about his rim protection, help defense, ect?

Also, you say he was a decent playmaker based on like a few great passes? How frequently did he create, how many tunrovers, turnover percentage, assist percentage ect.

[freethedevil]

"Non-existent defense, lackadasial playmaking, liability whenever he was asked to bring the ball up, and both his scoring volume and effiency dropped."

Oh wow you quoted me, i guess you telling me ur wrong proved you watched the games better.


his volume and efficiency empirically, unquestionably dropped vs the warriors. His turnover % increased despite the raptors relying more on van vleet/lowry/gasol/ibaka to carry the ball more than they had in earlier rounds and defensively he was put on the weakest offensive threats despite his value defensively nearly exclusively being based on man on man d.

Again, you saying "i wonder if people watched the game" shows nothing. I watched the games and it was obvious kawhi was significantly worse in the finals than he had been in the series before.

If you're going to try and play police

If some of you think they know everything, why posting here at all?

Why post here?

First of all, calling someone "liability whenever he was asked to bring the ball up" is very strong opinion and you have to have strong evidences to defend that. I saw nothing that would indicate it's true, so maybe you can explain me that.

Now let's look at efficiency and turnovers:

In ECSF Kawhi averaged 3.3 tov and 10.7 TOV% (along with 4.0 apg).
In ECF Kawhi averaged 3.1 tov and 10.9 TOV% (along with 4.3 apg).
In the finals Kawhi averaged 3.0 tov and 11.3 TOV% (along with 4.2 apg).

Now, lets take into account what you said:

His volume dropped but as you said, it's more due to different game plan and more involment of Gasol, Lowry and Van Vleet:

His turnover % went up despite being asked to handle the ball less.

Now, scoring efficiency:

In ECSF Kawhi averaged 34.7 ppg on 57.6% eFG, 85.7% FT and 63.4% TS (94.0 pace)
In ECF Kawhi averaged 29.8 ppg on 48.4% eFG, 88.5% FT and 57.4% TS (96.4 pace)
In the Finals Kawhi averaged 28.5 ppg on 50.0% eFG, 90.6% FT and 60.6% TS (96.1 pace)

That's still one point per game (and he played one more minute per game in ECF). His efficiency was far better than against Bucks and it's easy why - Bucks were the best defensive team he faced. Warriors actually didn't limit Kawhi at all, he just didn't have to do as much as he did before (especially against the Sixers).

If you expected him to play like in ECSF, then you put him on extremely high standard. He wasn't GOAT-level like some people argue recently, not even close. He wasn't bad in the finals either, he was still what he is - unstoppable volume scorer who lacks playmaking abilities. He didn't struggle against Warriors and he was more efficient than against Bucks.

Hmmm, this is fair. For some reason, I just assumed he played the bucks like he played philly. Prorbably more accurate to say he slowed down once philly started using high drop coverage vs mid range in the last few games. Seems I overrated his scoring vs the bucks and underrated his scoring vs philly.

As to defense - he didn't guard anybody notable due to gameplan, but he actually showed nice help defense plays in the finals. Of course, he's not the greatest off-ball defender and can be a bit lazy at times, but I'd still call him positive on defense in the finals. .

I disagree. I think he was a positive defensively vs philly and the bucks. I think he was negative against orlando and the warriors. The warriors series he was an outright negative for me on the defensive end. Overall he was a psotive defensively but vs the warriors his man defense was enar non-existent and his off-ball defense is frnakly a clear negative. To his credit he did offer occasional rim protection...

[No-more-rings]

I want to say it looks like there's a big disconnect in the project right now, we have votes all over the place. Which is fine, but i think it may make for some weird results. This spot is more than likely going to CP3 or Barkley, I'm not buying anymore that they give you a better shot at a title than Nash. Paul and Barkley, they got huge numbers and sure they're very impactful, but i have some doubt about winning with them as your best player, not because they weren't talented enough but for other reasons. With Paul, i think he doesn't always properly balance his scoring/passing, or doesn't do it at the right times. What i mean by that is, there seems to be playoff games, where they need him to be more of a scorer and he instead will be more worried about setting people up. And vice versa. Nash in 05 averaged 30 ppg on 64 ts% against the 9th ranked DRTG Mavs, Paul never showed that level of scoring instinct/ability. With Barkley, i don't know i just find him a strange case, a 6'5ish PF that doesn't play defense. I think he would be such a misfit in today's game, he would still be a high level all star/borderline top 10 type guy but with the way the game is played i think his defense would look even worse.

The anti Kawhi stuff is baffling to me, using some regular season rest as a reason to discredit an entire championship run is asinine to me. There is also no proof that his level of play could be replicated by just any old star from resting. Maybe if Lillard misses 20 games, then comes back to lead Portland to a title i might believe it. Like, if we're being real here, the lower regular season effort is the only reason he's not in the mix with Wade, Curry and the rest. Like me and Liamliam are the only ones voting for him at this point, he went from overrated during the eastern playoffs to now severely underrated. If he falls out of the top 30 that will be embarrassing. With Harden's lack of discussion, he'll be lucky to make top 40.

1. 19’ Kawhi- For me it’s as simple as his playoff run being imo better than anyone else who’s left. Yeah he missed 20ish games, but he accomplished what everyone strives to do and only some can dream of. And 2017 proved he can play a full season and still be rested enough to dominate, sure you can bring his durability into question, I remember him being a little banged up against the Warriors and maybe some of the Bucks series but he’s shown to have held up better than someone like Cp3 has proven.


2. 19’ Harden- 3rd best offensive player of his generation, behind only Curry and Lebron. Proved he can be teh best player on a legit title caliber team, etc, etc, slightly ahead of Nash, because i think his size allows him to do a bit more than Nash can on both ends.

3. 2005 Nash- Monster offensive force, perpetual leader of insanely good offenses and if his defense were even neutral he'd be fighting with the likes of West, Oscar, Wade etc. He's probably the 2nd best passer ever honestly.

[liamliam1234]

Why 2005 Nash over 2007 Nash? I know his scoring was better in the postseason, but by voting for Nash we are already admitting we are looking at passing much more than scoring volume. And 2007 was definitely his peak as a passer, in the regular season and in the postseason. Obviously he lost a round earlier, but either way he lost to the Spurs, so I am not sure how that is a major difference.

And I am only really pushing this because vote-splitting is part of the reason for these results, and if anyone is going to be convinced to vote / should be voting for 2007 Nash, it is the people voting for 2005 Nash.

[E-Balla]

I can't complain about the voting since I haven't been participating. But the Westbrook ranking is painful. Even putting aside players like Kawhi, Barkley, Malone, so people think 2017 Westbrook is the best of the last three MVPs???

I hate the various posts like this from people who I'm guessing didn't read the cases for players, have no interest in actually supporting their opinion, and just hate Westbrook generally.

Westbrook is the only of the last 3 MVPs to not get outplayed by another star head to head in the playoffs. He's the only one of the last 3 MVPs that wasn't on a deep ass roster. He's the most succesful of the last 3 MVPs in the playoffs for his career. He's the most proven (if we're looking at his career) of the last 3 MVPs. If that's painful, what is it when someone gives unsubstantiated opinions unprovoked?

[liamliam1234]

I do not care much about the Westbrook/Harden/Giannis debate, but talking about Westbrook's "success" next to a better player is hardly a case for him when he has had three straight quick first-round exits without Durant. Talking about not being "outplayed" because he never went up against Curry/Durant/Kawhi is a similarly poor case.

[E-Balla]

I want to say it looks like there's a big disconnect in the project right now, we have votes all over the place. Which is fine, but i think it may make for some weird results. This spot is more than likely going to CP3 or Barkley, I'm not buying anymore that they give you a better shot at a title than Nash. Paul and Barkley, they got huge numbers and sure they're very impactful, but i have some doubt about winning with them as your best player, not because they weren't talented enough but for other reasons. With Paul, i think he doesn't always properly balance his scoring/passing, or doesn't do it at the right times. What i mean by that is, there seems to be playoff games, where they need him to be more of a scorer and he instead will be more worried about setting people up. And vice versa. Nash in 05 averaged 30 ppg on 64 ts% against the 9th ranked DRTG Mavs, Paul never showed that level of scoring instinct/ability. With Barkley, i don't know i just find him a strange case, a 6'5ish PF that doesn't play defense. I think he would be such a misfit in today's game, he would still be a high level all star/borderline top 10 type guy but with the way the game is played i think his defense would look even worse.

What? If anything THIS is the era for Chuck. No one plays defense anymore. Look at the superstars right now. Outside of Giannis and Embiid who plays defense? LeBron? Harden? Dame? Jokic? Steph? Kawhi?

Chuck was 6-7 and not 6-5 and he had long ass arms. You don't play with the top of your head, Chuck wasn't undersized at all and that's why he's the best interior finisher in league history. According to Dipper13 in 27 games he tracked from 93 Chuck was 81% in the restricted area and 66% in the paint.

The anti Kawhi stuff is baffling to me, using some regular season rest as a reason to discredit an entire championship run is asinine to me. There is also no proof that his level of play could be replicated by just any old star from resting. Maybe if Lillard misses 20 games, then comes back to lead Portland to a title i might believe it. Like, if we're being real here, the lower regular season effort is the only reason he's not in the mix with Wade, Curry and the rest. Like me and Liamliam are the only ones voting for him at this point, he went from overrated during the eastern playoffs to now severely underrated. If he falls out of the top 30 that will be embarrassing. With Harden's lack of discussion, he'll be lucky to make top 40.

1. 19’ Kawhi- For me it’s as simple as his playoff run being imo better than anyone else who’s left. Yeah he missed 20ish games, but he accomplished what everyone strives to do and only some can dream of. And 2017 proved he can play a full season and still be rested enough to dominate, sure you can bring his durability into question, I remember him being a little banged up against the Warriors and maybe some of the Bucks series but he’s shown to have held up better than someone like Cp3 has proven.


2. 19’ Harden- 3rd best offensive player of his generation, behind only Curry and Lebron. Proved he can be teh best player on a legit title caliber team, etc, etc, slightly ahead of Nash, because i think his size allows him to do a bit more than Nash can on both ends.

3. 2005 Nash- Monster offensive force, perpetual leader of insanely good offenses and if his defense were even neutral he'd be fighting with the likes of West, Oscar, Wade etc. He's probably the 2nd best passer ever honestly.

Kawhi ain't falling out the top 30 I don't know why you'd think he is. He's already getting votes and discussion and we have 4 more spots. He's undeniably in everyone's HM in some for. 2016 Kawhi is next up for my top 3 if someone I'm voting for gets in.

As far as Harden goes make an argument for him if you think he deserves to be top 40 and needs discussion. His supporters haven't mentioned his negatives at all, you're not drumming up support for him that way. Personally I'd put him closer to D. Rose/Iverson than any other MVP since 2000. And that's peak Harden, not 2017-19 Harden who homerized his game.

It's hard to put him over plenty of SGs knowing I'd take them over Harden in a heartbeat if I wanted a ring (like Reggie Miller).

[E-Balla]

I do not care much about the Westbrook/Harden/Giannis debate, but talking about Westbrook's "success" next to a better player is hardly a case for him when he has had three straight quick first-round exits without Durant.

This is the part where we act like:

1. One of those examples of a star outplaying Harden IS Westbrook outplaying Harden in a year many said was Harden's peak?

2. I'm guessing this is also the part where we act like Westbrook the current 65% freethrow shooter isn't over the hill and has clearly not been the same player he was from 2013-17?

3. This is also the part where we forget Westbrook was better than KD in 2016 when that team played better than the 2019 Bucks or 2018 Rockets in the playoffs?

Talking about not being "outplayed" because he never went up against Curry/Durant/Kawhi is a similarly poor case.

Umm... Hate to break it to ya but Westbrook has been featured in tons of series featuring all 3 of those players. Hell most of his series had at least one of those players present. Westbrook has been outplaying superstars when the lights are on since he outplayed prime Kobe and KD in his first playoff series. Harden? Outplayed by KD in 2013 (and Russ while they had him for 2 games), outplayed by Dwight, LMA, AND Dame (who wasn't even a star yet) in 2014, outplayed by Blake, CP3 (when healthy), and Curry in 2015. Outplayed by Klay and Dray in 2016. Outplayed by Westbrook and Kawhi in 2017. Outplayed by CP3 vs Utah, Steph, and KD in 2018. For the first time in 2018 he did "outplay" a star when he outplayed CP3 in 2 series and Jimmy. Outplayed by KD in 2019. He outplayed ANOTHER star finally when he outplayed Steph.

And the biggest issue with each time he has outplayed a star (2018 Jimmy, 2018 CP3 vs Minny and GS, 2019 Steph) is the other player sucked, it's not like he outplayed them while they were playing well. I just don't see a reason to put someone who can't perform at that level, even if it's only occasionally, up with people who can. And on top of that his game, and his impact numbers, ain't that good.

[liamliam1234]

Interesting, but highly contentious, counterpoint. I think it is pretty difficult to definitively claim Westbrook would have performed as well as he did had Durant not drawn primary defensive attention (when it came to scoring, at least). But I am nowhere near enough of a Curry or Durant supporter to care much about pushing against it.

Also, I think the general consensus on Harden's peak favours these past two years. Someone who is more invested in whether 2018/19 Harden was the better player can handle that one, though.

[ardee]

1. 2015 Chris Paul

He has a really solid case as the best player in the league that year. Blake missed a bunch of games but he still led the Clippers to a 6.8 SRS and the best offense in the league. At least regular season wise it's a feat comparable to 2008 Kobe. 19-5-10 on 49-40-90, 60% TS, 26 PER, numbers are definitely there. The Spurs series was masterful and it truly marked his ascenion to Point God. I can't really put the Rockets loss on him at all, now when we averaged 26-10 efficiently for the last 3 games. The one missed game, well, if 2016 Curry is already in with 7 missed Playoff games, then that is a moot point here.

The way he controlled games this year was unreal, his BBIQ was ludricious.

2. 2008 Chris Paul

Basically just as good in every way as 2015 but less experienced and a slightly worse shooter. Raw numbers are utterly absurd (even better in 2009, which is IMO the 2nd best regular season for a PG after 2016 Curry, but of course he was terrible in the Playoffs). Absurd Playoffs too, 30.7 PER for a PG is just wtf.

3. 1990 Charles Barkley

It's clearly his peak IMO. All the numbers favor it over 1993. The main reason 1993 gets votes is those two ridiculous games 5 and 7 performances against Seattle, but I'm not putting 2016 LeBron over 2013 LeBron based on 2 games either. Dragged a very uninspiring Sixers team to the 2nd ranked offense in the league with God-like scoring and honestly pretty underrated playmaking.

[ardee]

I can't complain about the voting since I haven't been participating. But the Westbrook ranking is painful. Even putting aside players like Kawhi, Barkley, Malone, so people think 2017 Westbrook is the best of the last three MVPs???

Truly, why is it such a travesty in your eyes... it is an '06 Kobe-esque season almost. Putrid roster with no spacing, bad coach, out of 47 wins I'd say at least 20 were just through his single-minded force of will. Insane raw numbers, insane advanced numbers. His Playoff efficiency wasn't great but he was on an insanely outmatched team. From '14 and '16 we know he's a beastly Playoff performer if he just isn't put in the worst possible situation.

I think the issue with Westbrook being this high is just reputation.