RealGM

Joey Wheeler wrote:I'm probably too late to join the voter pool as I've been away from this forum for a while, but just in case I'll leave a ballot

1-Kevin Durant

Should already be in, don't see any case for some of the guys already in over him. GOAT level scorer, imo the best ever in that regard along with Jordan, his insane volume and efficiency holds up even in the biggest stage in the Finals. Very good longevity already too.

2-Charles Barkley

One of the best offensive players ever, super efficient scorer, great offensive rebounder, he was outright dominant during his prime.

3-Moses Malone

I don't like his skillset for the modern NBA, but his in-era dominance can't be denied, he dominated the league and was an enormous difference maker. You could argue for a higher spot, but again I don't think his game has really aged well.

eminence wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:

eminence wrote:
By the distinct measure of 'playoff offense' Nash is the untouchable offensive GOAT, everyone else is left in the dust. They were running something like +11.5/+3 (negative good for defense) over his second Phoenix stint in the playoffs (bit of a tragedy they never made it out of the West).

Your last paragraph could just as easily apply to Nash vs Magic/MJ/Oscar/West/Kobe/Bird/etc if you don't believe Phoenix was intentionally tanking the defense to power the offense. If so, why weren't you (and others, as I get you're mostly following along) arguing for Nash far far earlier than this?

I do think there's an element of Phoenix emphasizing offensive personnel over defensive personnel. That matters in the sense that other offensive greats didn't have the luxuries that Nash played with in Phoenix.

In the comparison to Curry though, Curry doesn't get to play that card, he happened to have a ton of talent on both sides of the ball around him. And we've seen Nash in more balanced lineups still maintain ridiculous offensive impact, even when playing with a defensive big like Kurt Thomas and without Amare Stoudemire. GS's success is basically objective proof to me that you could surround Nash with two-way players instead of one-way offensive-minded players and I do think he would have replicated the offensive success we saw in Phoenix while playing on a good defensive team. It's possible to be an uptempo high scoring team that still manages to play great defense, if you have the personnel.

I do think Nash is on the short list of offensive GOATs though, while I do not think Curry is on that list. I think longevity and lack of defense hurts Nash in an overall GOAT list, which is why other high-level perimeter players can be ranked ahead of him all-time.

Also, we don't have as much specific detail about the playoff offenses that Magic/Bird/Jordan/Oscar/West were running, in terms of on/off numbers, so it's hard to say they're definitely left in the dust.

So Nash had 5 playoff runs in his second Phoenix stint.

2005: +17.3/+6.8/+10.5 (Amar'e main big)
2006: +9.4/+4.6/+4.8 (Tim Thomas)
2007: +7.3/-3.2/+10.5 (Amar'e/Kurt Thomas)
2008: +2.7/-0.6/+3.3 (Amar'e/Shaq)
2010: +13.1/+2.6/+10.5 (Amar'e/Frye)

He did not maintain that otherworldly offense without Amar'e at C as the defense improved.

05/06/10 as 'small-ball' seasons
+13.3/+4.7/+8.6

07/08 as traditional C ball seasons
+5.8/-2.3/+8.1

The tradeoff aspect is just glaringly obvious.

1st offense = 5th defense
3rd offense = 4th defense
4th offense = 1st defense
5th offense = 2nd defense
2nd offense = 3rd defense

70sFan wrote:

2klegend wrote:

70sFan wrote:Because of number of things:

- all of them had clearly better longevity - even someone like West and Robinson,
- most of them peaked clearly higher,
- most posters here don't count rings as valuable criteria, had KD never joined to the Warriors he'd probably still be ringless but that wouldn't make him worse player at all,
- some of them have more accolades than him,
- most of them rank higher in historical impact analysis.

I mean, what's the case for Durant over West for example? 2 FMVPs is very weak one...

Not counting the superiority of Durant's stat over West.

West:
NBA champion (1972)
NBA Finals MVP (1969)
14× NBA All-Star (1961–1974)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (1972)
10× All-NBA First Team (1962–1967, 1970–1973)
2× All-NBA Second Team (1968, 1969)
4× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1970–1973)
NBA All-Defensive Second Team (1969)
NBA scoring champion (1970)
NBA assists leader (1972)

Durant:
2× NBA champion (2017, 2018)
2× NBA Finals MVP (2017, 2018)
NBA Most Valuable Player (2014)
10× NBA All-Star (2010–2019)
2× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2012, 2019)
6× All-NBA First Team (2010–2014, 2018)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2016, 2017, 2019)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2008)
NBA All-Rookie First Team (2008)
4× NBA scoring champion (2010–2012, 2014)

Worth mentioning his accomplishment consists of competing against Lebron in the same forward position in his span career.

I mean, Durant has more rings and FMVPs (which are team accomplishments). He also has one more MVP (so does Iverson, Rose, Unseld, Cowens...). Then West has 4 more all-nba first team selections, 4 more all-star selections and 5 more all-defensive selections. You didn't prove anything, accolades don't make Durant look clearly better.

What stats makes Durant better than West by the way? I'm really curious about that one.

2klegend wrote:It is hard to compare modern-day player stat to 60s era player stat due to the lack of available data. But with that said, Durant is clearly a more efficient scorer, so stat like PER and ts% . Durant is a 25PER, 61TS% vs West a 23PER, 55 TS%.

Defensively, Durant is a better team defender due to his length while West is slightly better man-to-man from the video available.

Like I said, Durant position as a forward competing directly with many all-time level fowards is the reason he couldn't get in as many All-NBA 1st Team. The selection and talent pool is a lot different now.

therealbig3 wrote:

eminence wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:As someone not taking part and observing in the background, I personally don't understand a Curry>Nash case, if we're looking beyond a ring count.

Nash has clearly demonstrated imo he's more "unguardable" against a wide variety of defenses in a playoff situation. He didn't need Kevin Durant, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green around him to lead playoff offenses that were comparable to the 2017 Warriors playoff offense, and he's led multiple playoff offenses that are crystal clearly better than any other year of the Warriors dynasty under Curry.

I'm just not seeing the case for Curry over Nash offensively, at all...not in terms of team offense, not in terms of enabling teammates, not in terms of individual ability against elite defenses. And unless Curry is secretly a DPOY caliber player, any difference between them defensively is marginal at best and this pretty much gives Nash the victory in this comparison, no?

By the distinct measure of 'playoff offense' Nash is the untouchable offensive GOAT, everyone else is left in the dust. They were running something like +11.5/+3 (negative good for defense) over his second Phoenix stint in the playoffs (bit of a tragedy they never made it out of the West).

Your last paragraph could just as easily apply to Nash vs Magic/MJ/Oscar/West/Kobe/Bird/etc if you don't believe Phoenix was intentionally tanking the defense to power the offense. If so, why weren't you (and others, as I get you're mostly following along) arguing for Nash far far earlier than this?

I do think there's an element of Phoenix emphasizing offensive personnel over defensive personnel. That matters in the sense that other offensive greats didn't have the luxuries that Nash played with in Phoenix.

In the comparison to Curry though, Curry doesn't get to play that card, he happened to have a ton of talent on both sides of the ball around him. And we've seen Nash in more balanced lineups still maintain ridiculous offensive impact, even when playing with a defensive big like Kurt Thomas and without Amare Stoudemire. GS's success is basically objective proof to me that you could surround Nash with two-way players instead of one-way offensive-minded players and I do think he would have replicated the offensive success we saw in Phoenix while playing on a good defensive team. It's possible to be an uptempo high scoring team that still manages to play great defense, if you have the personnel.

I do think Nash is on the short list of offensive GOATs though, while I do not think Curry is on that list. I think longevity and lack of defense hurts Nash in an overall GOAT list, which is why other high-level perimeter players can be ranked ahead of him all-time.

Also, we don't have as much specific detail about the playoff offenses that Magic/Bird/Jordan/Oscar/West were running, in terms of on/off numbers, so it's hard to say they're definitely left in the dust.