Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor)

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

VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 11,156
And1: 11,444
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#481 » by VanWest82 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:28 pm

Heej, I thought your post was very eloquent.

Where I think you run into problems is when you start saying because ____ was player archetype ____ then we know he can only be ____. That kind of stuff serves purpose as a general guide but ultimately it has to be about what actually happened on the court. We don't get to wash away the performances because we're "historians of the game" who have modelled what we think certain guys looked like in terms of impact in relation to other guys who sort of fit the same profile that we maybe know a little more about.

Also, if we're saying Steph's "gambler-style" offensive game is a valid comparison to MJ's "gambler-style" defense then we're effectively saying MJ is in the conversation for greatest defenders ever, which I don't agree with btw, but all that example proves is you can play the game in a fashion that isn't deemed technically sound and still have an impact greater than virtually everyone else.

I'll take lead from sansterre and try a cross sport comparison. Bobby Orr was the greatest defenseman in NHL history. Few would dispute that. He was the first defenseman who'd routinely lead the rush past the opposing blue line and into enemy territory. Guys generally didn't do that back then (and still don't) because it can get everyone out of position and open you up to rush advantages in the other direction. He was the biggest gambler in the game; except, he was so brilliant as an offensive defenseman that he not only overcame those risks but became the most impactful player in the league precisely because he was taking and hitting on them. Sadly, Orr blew out his knee and sports medicine just wasn't the same back then. But no one is saying "well actually Orr really wasn't that effective and all those MVPs and wins weren't really a good representation because he was a gambler and we've simulated vs. other defenseman gamblers and so we know no one is as good as they seem playing that style." You'd get laughed out of the room. Sometimes we just have to accept that some guys are different and don't work in conventional models.
LukaTheGOAT
Junior
Posts: 365
And1: 240
Joined: Dec 25, 2019
 

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#482 » by LukaTheGOAT » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:13 pm

Odinn21 wrote:I watched Jordan and Robinson episodes earlier but something made me watch them before going into Olajuwon episode.

I think Olajuwon episode was definitely the best of the 3.

I'd like to start with reminding my position about criticism of Taylor and also he already does a great job and my criticism is about minor things, you can think that I'm too nitpicky but I have these thoughts nonetheless.

In Jordan episode, I feel like he didn't dive deep enough to highlight the fundamental issue in Jordan's overaggressive defensive approach. Maybe he just wants to keep it light but I feel like he isn't shy about mentioning certain physical habits and Jordan's movement in his left knee was an issue for him. Instead of showing so many footages of Jordan's gambling habits, he could have mentioned that.

In Robinson episode, I think he could draw bigger comparisons between him, Olajuwon and Ewing (even maybe young O'Neal). Also, I always get bothered by 3 certain narratives;
Abdul-Jabbar had all-time great guards around him. The only overlapped prime guard with Abdul-Jabbar's prime is 1971 Robertson. The C legend didn't have have that luxury.
The notion of goat offense coming only from goat offensive guards/wings. By his standards, Abdul-Jabbar is the only goat offensive force up until Magic Johnson's prime. There's no need to get sidetracked with positional assumptions.
If we look at historical timeline for goat offensive forces, up until the mid '00s majority goat offensive players were bigs/low post players. Not even Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan tipped those scales. That notion is just too pro-modern and ignores the actual timeline.
In terms of his Robinson evaluation, it's a top notch job without a doubt. I just got turned off by his comment about Abdul-Jabbar.

Olajuwon episode was perfection. There are some nuances I'd disagree about but none them are fundamental issues to be addressed. His presentation, what and how he discussed, they were all perfect.



Lol, now I'm interested in learning more about Jordan's movement with his left knee. I suppose that was the injury that bothered him a bit in the 1991 PS and had him limping a bit throughout.
VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 11,156
And1: 11,444
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#483 » by VanWest82 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:17 pm

Jordan Syndrome wrote:
VanWest82 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:The bucks without brook still were the best rim protecting team in the league holding teams --7 points-- below their average effiency at the rim.


Yeah because they had his twin brother in there.

Giannis does provide some level of rim protection from the wing. He just isn’t their main rim protector, and this idea that you have to be the main rim protector or have to play the 5 in order to be a DPOY candidate is misguided imo. We’d have to throw out the two best defenders in the league last year on that basis.


Giannis spent all of his minutes last year at the 4 and 5. Gobert spent all his minutes at the 5. Davis spent 40% of his minutes at the 5 in the regular season and even more in the post-season.

What are you on about?


The 4 is not the 5. This isn't pre-2010s. 4s play mostly on the perimeter now and aren't the ones dealing with the bulk of PnR. Both AD and Giannis spent the majority of their time out on the perimeter, and then would finish games as the 5. Giannis spent over 3/4 of his time playing as a 4. AD played alongside Lebron, JaVale, and Dwight who collectively spent a lot more time protecting the rim in the regular season.

If you need to be the best rim protector to win DPOY then surely those two are out of the conversation on the basis that they weren't in position to do that by design.
Odinn21
Starter
Posts: 2,384
And1: 1,757
Joined: May 19, 2019
   

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#484 » by Odinn21 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:30 pm

LukaTheGOAT wrote:Lol, now I'm interested in learning more about Jordan's movement with his left knee. I suppose that was the injury that bothered him a bit in the 1991 PS and had him limping a bit throughout.

His left knee was slightly more hesitant and crumbling than his right one, he just had less confidence in his left knee. If you watch several consecutive full games of him before his first retirement, you'd see that when he had to use his left knee / leg to gamble on a steal, he usually went all the long distance around his opponent's body because he had to fully commit to that. When he went on his right knee, he had firmer position / stance and risked less open distance.
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 11,156
And1: 11,444
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#485 » by VanWest82 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:31 am

sansterre wrote:Because the tone of his video has come into question, I sat down and broke down the defensive section of the video into sections, to try and objectively assess his tone. Obviously this is approximate but it should work for our purposes:
Spoiler:
15:45 - 16:00: Jordan's defense was fairly boom or bust (Neutral - given that Jordan gambled a lot this is a factual statement)
16:00 - 16:25: Jordan generated a ton of steals (Clearly Good)
16:25 - 16:40: Jordan whiffed a lot (not proportionally, but overall) because he gambled a lot (Bad)
16:40 - 16:50: He succeeded more often than not, but his misses still hurt (Neutral - objectively true)
16:50 - 17:45: Jordan was incredibly quick and used it to good effect (Good - went for 55 seconds)
17:45 - 18:20: Jordan often swiped as he stayed in front of dribblers, which sometimes worked and sometimes created openings for shots, he lunged for steals often (Neutral)
18:25 - 18:40: Examples of Jordan creating shots for opposition by missing steals and missing swipes in the Finals against Magic (Bad)
18:40 - 18:55: Jordan liked swiping in the post too, but Ben thinks he should have played more straight up on account of his strength and athleticism (Neutral? This isn't really a bad thing and involves praise, so I wasn't sure how to grade it. But it's clearly opinion, not objective truth. But not negative either.)
18:55 - 19:15: Magic torching Jordan in the Finals (clearly bad)
19:20 - 19:30: Jordan loved surprising double-teaming (Neutral - this isn't a good or bad thing, and is objectively fairly accurate)
19:30 - 19:40: Jordan did a ton of damage with these when it worked (Good)
19:40 - 20:10: But it did leave his man open, which did lead to undefended shots, and at times Jordan strayed into the paint and abandoned his man (Bad)
20:10 - 21:15: Jordan was an extremely good blocking guard, did a strong job protecting the paint, and his straying into the lane was often valuable because of this (Good, and it went for 65 seconds)
21:15 - 21:20: Ben feels like Jordan's defense is hard to evaluate accurately (Neutral - he's basically admitting that he thinks his margin of error with evaluating Jordan is higher than it is with most players)
22:20 - 22:25: Jordan often rotated very quickly (Good)
22:25 - 22:40: Jordan wasn't always a good help defender and at times misread plays (Bad)
22:40 - 22:50: Jordan was a really good defensive rebounder (Good)
22:50 - 23:00: Ben views Jordan as an all-league defender, if not an all-time great wing defender (Not sure how to rate this)

The total (by my count):

Good: 170 seconds
Neutral: 90 seconds
Bad: 95 seconds

I don't want to get into a back and forth about each ten second snippet of the video but suffice to say I thought of a lot of the stuff you listed in here as neutral was actually criticism. Taylor tried hard to curb that criticism with faint praise so as not to seem overly biased, but the tone of a lot of those points was more negative than positive imo, like the swiping stuff for example which was really part of the overall gambling point he was making. In the end, it was pretty close to 50/50 in terms of tone of the arguments, at least in terms of his defense, which is exactly how he set the table with his opening "boom or bust" comment.

it seems to offend you for Ben to say that Jordan had tendencies that, at times, hurt his team. And I can't really say anything to help with that. If your standard for a good Jordan video is that it glosses over Jordan's flaws . . . more power to you I guess.

Haha don't worry I'm not offended by a video done by someone I don't know about someone I don't know. I think 70sfan and some others here might've been a little offended with my critique based on the reactions and personal relationships posters here are claiming to have with the author. Hopefully people aren't taking my comments too personally. It's just one man's opinion.

The issue I have is with posters using this video as some kind of definitive proof that MJ was a serial gambler who hurt his team. I just don't believe that to be true, or at least not to the degree everyone here is making it out to be, nor do I think this video proves that out. There's a pretty obvious anti-MJ bias on this forum that can sometimes taint what's otherwise one of the better forums on RealGM. If I can help balance that out some and get some of you guys to consider an alternate viewpoint then it's worth it to me.
kayess
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,502
And1: 808
Joined: Sep 29, 2013

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#486 » by kayess » Wed Jan 13, 2021 3:35 am

VanWest82 wrote:Taylor tried hard to curb that criticism with faint praise so as not to seem overly biased, but the tone of a lot of those points was more negative than positive imo, like the swiping stuff for example.


Just like you're trying to curb your defense with faint objectivity so as not to seem overly affected/biased/etc.? You're really grasping at straws here. Perhaps people are legitimately offended at Ben's behalf or something, but really, you're seeing ghosts that aren't there and these guys are spending a disproportionate amount of time trying to talk you out of it, but you still keep seeing these ghosts.


VanWest82 wrote:The issue I have is with posters using this video as some kind of definitive proof that MJ was a serial gambler who hurt his team. I just don't believe that to be true, or at least not to the degree everyone here is making it out to be, nor do I think this video proves that out. There's a pretty obvious anti-MJ bias on this forum that can sometimes taint what's otherwise one of the better forums on RealGM. If I can help balance that out some and get some of you guys to consider an alternate viewpoint then it's worth it to me.


VanWest, when you say asinine, stramanny **** like the bolded above, you make an absolute fool out of yourself. It has been repeated multiple times: fundamentally, his style is high risk high reward, so of course sometimes he hurt his team. But DESPITE this, he was still a hugely positive impact defender. What in the **** is so hard about that to understand?

Also, don't get on your non-existent high horse and act like your hugely positive Jordan viewpoint is an "alternative viewpoint", LMAO, as if it's not actually the default viewpoint and most of these guys are in the minority (after having considered a ton of data, obviously). It's frankly very insulting. Here you are presented with mountains of arguments and data to the contrary, and your best rebuttal is "I don't believe that to be true", get the **** out of here LMAO.

What a complete waste of time, **** christ.
VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 11,156
And1: 11,444
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#487 » by VanWest82 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 5:32 am

Doctor MJ wrote:Why stop there? Dude, I'm not "going" anywhere, I'm just analyzing a bizarre event in NBA history. If seeing that the '80s DPOYs was dominated by guards doesn't strike you as strange, you're not thinking hard enough.

Also, Bill Russell played more like Giannis than a Lopez Bro, and I'm not just talking about proficiency. I mean that he played "horizontal game" big man defense emphasizing court coverage rather than camping out by the hoop.


Yeah, I'm not actually suggesting Giannis didn't deserve DPOY. It's this idea that just because a player isn't a big or a full time rim protector he should effectively be excluded from DPOY discussion that I don't agree with.

RE your guys' conspiracy theory about voter bias toward small players during that period, let's take a closer look. Let's start by acknowledging that awards like DPOY and MVP have almost always been a "best player on the best team" discussion. Let's also try and put ourselves in their shoes and work with the info that they were working with at the time (e.g. best defensive teams were the ones that allowed the least points, pace be damned).

82/83 - Moncrief
Spoiler:
Top 5 defenses (PPG allowed): 1. Knicks, 2. Bullets, 3. Suns, 4. Bucks, 5. Hawks.
Top 5 Voting: 1. Moncrief, 2. Rollins, 3. (tie) Cheeks, Cooper, Bird, Jones.

When you go through Knicks, Bullets, and Suns rosters from that year it's hard to say any of them had obvious candidates. Maybe Bill Cartwright? Rick Mahorn? Was DJ or Nance the MVP of the 83 Suns D? Next up is Moncrief who was the heart and soul of the Bucks defense. Rollins definitely had a good claim as the anchor of the 5th stingiest Hawks defense. He led the league in blocks that year. He also only played 30 mpg. It was a really close vote. Who were the dominant big defenders that were left off? Eaton's Jazz were 5th from the bottom on points allowed. Bobby Jones's inclusion even though his stats didn't jump off the page would seem to indicate voters had a pretty good idea of who the good defenders were; Bird's inclusion perhaps less so.

83/84 - Moncrief again
Spoiler:
Top 5 defenses (PPG allowed): 1. Bucks, 2. Hawks, 3. Knicks, 4. Celtics, 5. Sixers
Top 5 Voting: 1. Moncrief, 2. Eaton, 3. DJ, 4. (tie) Jones, Cheeks, Cooper

Defensive team leader from the number one defense wins the award. Shocker. Eaton's close runner up finish despite the Jazz once again finishing near the bottom of the league in points allowed would seem to suggest voters were capable of looking past little man biases and just voting for who the impactful defenders were. Two of the other three played on top five defenses.

84/85 - Mark Eaton
Spoiler:
Top 5 defenses (PPG allowed): 1. Bucks, 2. Bullets, 3. Sonics, 4. Hawks, 5. Celtics
Top 5 Voting: 1. Eaton, 2. Moncrief, 3. Pressey, 4. Cooper, 5. Cheeks

Eaton wins due to huge block numbers on Jazz defense that leapt into the top 8. Moncrief reps the top defense along with Pressey, arguably their second best defender. Should Mahorn have been included? Gus Williams lol? Sonics were awful. Are we still arguing on behalf of Tree Rollins despite an obvious decline? Who was the obvious game changing big that was left out here? Herb Williams??

85/86 - Alvin Robertson
Spoiler:
Top 5 defenses (PPG allowed): 1. Knicks, 2. Sonics, 3. Celtics, 4. Bullets, 5. Bucks,
Top 3 Voting: 1. Robertson, 2. Bol, 3. Moncrief

This one is harder to defend. Bol and Moncrief make sense given their team success, and in the case of Bol his crazy block numbers. But again, Knicks and Soncis were trainwrecks. Chief was a good defensive big but are Celtics fans even arguing he should've received DPOY consideration? Eaton probably deserved votes. Ultimately, Robertson - a terrific defender btw - won because he improved a lot, was a menace, and won the steals title.

86/87 - Michael Cooper
Spoiler:
Top 5 defenses (PPG allowed): 1. Hawks, 2. Bulls, 3. Rockets, 4. Celtics, 5. Bucks
Top 5 Voting: 1. Cooper, 2. Robertson, 3. Eaton, 4. Bol

Another tough one. Cooper was a great defender and the Lakers were the best team that year. That's why he won. None of the Bullets, Spurs, or Jazz had top defenses in terms of PPG (though Jazz were obv vg), but they all had outstanding defenders that voters chose to acknowledge anyway. I actually thought Jordan deserved more consideration this year. His "gambling" helped turn around the Bulls atrocious defense from the year prior when he missed all those games. Should Hakeem have won? Probably Yes. He didn't even receive a vote. It's a glaring omission for which there is no good explanation. Sometimes these things happen to young players before they've earned their stripes so to speak. I wouldn't exactly call Cooper winning the award an embarrassment but it's probably the hardest one to defend out of all the DPOY winners.

87/88 - MJ (Best defensive play maker on the stingiest defense in the league. I feel like we've covered this one to death)

Conclusion: it's mostly explainable without resorting to conspiracy thinking. Also, here's an alternative theory for consideration. NBA pace jumped back up in 83 after years of a downward trend. The new stars of the league (Magic, Bird, Thomas, Jordan) were guards and wings who excelled in the open court, and so teams placed more of an emphasis on finding good defensive guards and wings to stop them, kind of like today. Those players were then rewarded with more DPOY votes.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 15,485
And1: 11,009
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#488 » by 70sFan » Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:19 am

VanWest82 wrote:Haha don't worry I'm not offended by a video done by someone I don't know about someone I don't know. I think 70sfan and some others here might've been a little offended with my critique based on the reactions and personal relationships posters here are claiming to have with the author. Hopefully people aren't taking my comments too personally. It's just one man's opinion.


It would be better if you won't act like you know how I feel. I already said you that I'm not offended with your critique, I just think that your critique is based on wrong approach. I'm not criticizing you because of my emotions, I'm doing that because I disagree with your take.

The issue I have is with posters using this video as some kind of definitive proof that MJ was a serial gambler who hurt his team. I just don't believe that to be true, or at least not to the degree everyone here is making it out to be, nor do I think this video proves that out.

Nobody does that here...

There's a pretty obvious anti-MJ bias on this forum

You can't be serious...
sansterre
Junior
Posts: 362
And1: 578
Joined: Oct 22, 2020

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#489 » by sansterre » Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:12 pm

VanWest82 wrote:The issue I have is with posters using this video as some kind of definitive proof that MJ was a serial gambler who hurt his team.

When Ben said that Jordan's risk taking hurt his team he meant one of two things:

1) Jordan's risk-taking hurt his team when it failed;
2) Jordan's risk-taking overall hurt his team.

If he said #2 then I think your confusion is merited. After all, if Jordan gambled a lot (which he did) and the overall effect of the gambling was negative, that would make him a pretty compromised defender. That said, Ben goes on to list Jordan as an all-league defender, indicating that he thinks very highly of Jordan's defense. Also, #2 would imply that he's done a bunch of quantitative evaluation on the success rate of these steals and determined that, overall, they were a loss not a win. Which he hasn't done (because he sure as heck would have said that if he had). Between all these factors, #1 seems to be what Ben meant.

And I do not understand how you, or anyone, can object to #1. Unless your position is that when Jordan sacrificed position to make a big play and gave up an easy shot, having given up an easy shot did not hurt his team.

You cannot argue that the results of such a play are a neutral thing. They are obviously negative.

I feel like Ben is saying "When Jordan risked and won, it was great, but when he risked and lost, it was bad. He won more than he lost so this was a net positive, but it was still a big characteristic of his defense." And you are saying "When Jordan gave up wide open looks it wasn't bad".

At the point where your position seems to be "showing Jordan lunging for steals and missing is bad analysis because everyone knows that Jordan was one of the best defenders ever" seems like you're saying "To say that great defenders have flaws is bad analysis because they are great defenders."
"If you wish to see the truth, hold no opinions."
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 15,485
And1: 11,009
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#490 » by 70sFan » Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:18 pm

sansterre wrote:
VanWest82 wrote:The issue I have is with posters using this video as some kind of definitive proof that MJ was a serial gambler who hurt his team.

When Ben said that Jordan's risk taking hurt his team he meant one of two things:

1) Jordan's risk-taking hurt his team when it failed;
2) Jordan's risk-taking overall hurt his team.

If he said #2 then I think your confusion is merited. After all, if Jordan gambled a lot (which he did) and the overall effect of the gambling was negative, that would make him a pretty compromised defender. That said, Ben goes on to list Jordan as an all-league defender, indicating that he thinks very highly of Jordan's defense. Also, #2 would imply that he's done a bunch of quantitative evaluation on the success rate of these steals and determined that, overall, they were a loss not a win. Which he hasn't done (because he sure as heck would have said that if he had). Between all these factors, #1 seems to be what Ben meant.

And I do not understand how you, or anyone, can object to #1. Unless your position is that when Jordan sacrificed position to make a big play and gave up an easy shot, having given up an easy shot did not hurt his team.

You cannot argue that the results of such a play are a neutral thing. They are obviously negative.

I feel like Ben is saying "When Jordan risked and won, it was great, but when he risked and lost, it was bad. He won more than he lost so this was a net positive, but it was still a big characteristic of his defense." And you are saying "When Jordan gave up wide open looks it wasn't bad".

At the point where your position seems to be "showing Jordan lunging for steals and missing is bad analysis because everyone knows that Jordan was one of the best defenders ever" seems like you're saying "To say that great defenders have flaws is bad analysis because they are great defenders."

Excellent post and I think it's a great summary for this topic. We should move on and give Hakeem's video more love because it's amazing :)
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,898
And1: 3,098
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#491 » by freethedevil » Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:42 pm

DQuinn1575 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:
LukaTheGOAT wrote:Since we are arguing about the value of perimter defense now, I think this is the ideal time to pose a question. Assume we consider Tim Duncan, Dikembe Mutombo, and other historic bigs to be worth 3.25 on D. What would a perimeter player without great rim protection, have to do to be worth a similar amount on D?

Like if a perimeter player had GOAT level man defense, and could hold a peak MJ to around 25 pts per gam on a rTS% 4-5 pts below league average, would that be worth similarly to a historic big? I am trying to think of shortcuts/possibilities that a wing might have to close the gap in comparison to all-time league average. I feel like making MJ's scoring a negative value might be an example (an even then there would only be certain scenarios when a perimeter offensive player is good enough for such man-level defense to matter so much).

Well, if we go off playoff drapm, for their careers, Lebron, Pippen and Kahwi were >2.5 irrc. I'm guessing their peak would be higher so that scale might be a little too compressed.

Duncan would probably be a +4-+5. For what its worth, dpipm puts duncan's best at +4.8 and dwight howards best at +4.1 and im pretty sure per rapm the best defensive seasons grade out at +5. The highest post russell mark I can find is Hakeem's +5.4 in 90.


so i googled DRAPM and found this https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/9944qv/the_problem_with_defensive_statistics_i_dpoys_by/

Season DRAPM DPOY Actual DPOY
1997 Kevin Garnett Dikembe Mutombo
1998 Dikembe Mutombo Dikembe Mutombo
1999 Grant Long Alonzo Mourning
2000 Eddie Jones Alonzo Mourning
2001 Tim Duncan Dikembe Mutombo
2002 Eddie Jones Ben Wallace
2003 Kevin Garnett Ben Wallace
2004 Tim Duncan Ron Artest
2005 Jason Collins Ben Wallace
2006 Shane Battier Ben Wallace
2007 Bruce Bowen Marcus Camby
2008 Kevin Garnett Kevin Garnett
2009 LeBron James Dwight Howard
2010 Kevin Durant Dwight Howard
2011 Paul Pierce Dwight Howard
2012 Dwight Howard Tyson Chandler
2013 Mike Conley Marc Gasol
2014 Kemba Walker Joakim Noah
2015 Khris Middleton Kawhi Leonard
2016 Draymond Green Kawhi Leonard
2017 Rudy Gobert Draymond Green
2018 Robert Covington Rudy Gobert

So this gets Grant Long, Eddie Jones twice, Battier, Bowen Pierce Conly Walker Middleton -about 1/2 the time it's giving the DPOY to a non big man. Pretty sure it's giving me a worse list than Defensive Win Shares.

well the first rule of rapm is that its extremeley noisy if you just take one year. Not really the same as looking at 1 --14-- year, --or 6 year-- playoff sample.


If we use rapm priperly, with 3 or 5 year stretches, all the "dpoys" are big men.
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,898
And1: 3,098
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#492 » by freethedevil » Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:55 pm

VanWest82 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:
VanWest82 wrote:
Why stop there? Let's take away Giannis's DPOY too. He was basically a wing last year. Lopez bros were the bigs who guarded all those PnRs (heh) and defended all those shots. Brook was easily in more actions than Giannis.

19/20 Player tracking:

Brook - 16.5 DFGAs in 26mpg (5th in NBA)
Giannis - 10.5 DFGAs in 30mpg

The bucks without brook still were the best rim protecting team in the league holding teams --7 points-- below their average effiency at the rim.


Yeah because they had his twin brother in there.

Giannis does provide some level of rim protection from the wing. He just isn’t their main rim protector, and this idea that you have to be the main rim protector or have to play the 5 in order to be a DPOY candidate is misguided imo. We’d have to throw out the two best defenders in the league last year on that basis.

Where did anyone say "5"? And Giannis is definitely the primary paint protector on his team. The fact you can switch brook out for an average defender(robin) and still be the best intrior defense in the league is a testament to Gianni's defensive gravity.. Jordan feeds off others, Brook and Lopez feed off Giannis And guess what, Giannis's effect on the bucks defense is far more impressive than jordan's effect on the bulls. Giannis is a worthy dpoy, Jordan is not. One can justify Giannis's dpoy based on his inuddual impact, no such justification can be made for jordan and you demanding we take the opinions of people because you say so reflects how nonsensical the claim that Jordan was ever a worthy dpoy is.
DQuinn1575
Rookie
Posts: 1,247
And1: 441
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#493 » by DQuinn1575 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:01 pm

freethedevil wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:Well, if we go off playoff drapm, for their careers, Lebron, Pippen and Kahwi were >2.5 irrc. I'm guessing their peak would be higher so that scale might be a little too compressed.

Duncan would probably be a +4-+5. For what its worth, dpipm puts duncan's best at +4.8 and dwight howards best at +4.1 and im pretty sure per rapm the best defensive seasons grade out at +5. The highest post russell mark I can find is Hakeem's +5.4 in 90.


so i googled DRAPM and found this https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/9944qv/the_problem_with_defensive_statistics_i_dpoys_by/

Season DRAPM DPOY Actual DPOY
1997 Kevin Garnett Dikembe Mutombo
1998 Dikembe Mutombo Dikembe Mutombo
1999 Grant Long Alonzo Mourning
2000 Eddie Jones Alonzo Mourning
2001 Tim Duncan Dikembe Mutombo
2002 Eddie Jones Ben Wallace
2003 Kevin Garnett Ben Wallace
2004 Tim Duncan Ron Artest
2005 Jason Collins Ben Wallace
2006 Shane Battier Ben Wallace
2007 Bruce Bowen Marcus Camby
2008 Kevin Garnett Kevin Garnett
2009 LeBron James Dwight Howard
2010 Kevin Durant Dwight Howard
2011 Paul Pierce Dwight Howard
2012 Dwight Howard Tyson Chandler
2013 Mike Conley Marc Gasol
2014 Kemba Walker Joakim Noah
2015 Khris Middleton Kawhi Leonard
2016 Draymond Green Kawhi Leonard
2017 Rudy Gobert Draymond Green
2018 Robert Covington Rudy Gobert

So this gets Grant Long, Eddie Jones twice, Battier, Bowen Pierce Conly Walker Middleton -about 1/2 the time it's giving the DPOY to a non big man. Pretty sure it's giving me a worse list than Defensive Win Shares.

well the first rule of rapm is that its extremeley noisy if you just take one year. Not really the same as looking at 1 --14-- year, --or 6 year-- playoff sample.


If we use rapm priperly, with 3 or 5 year stretches, all the "dpoys" are big men.


Even in 2002, where Eddie Jones has 2 of the 3 years's best results?
2015, where all 3 years someone other than a big had the best single year?
Real quick I get 10 bigs and 12 non-bigs as having best single year - it can be noisy, but you would expect it to be 70-80% bigs if this always showed bigs being better.
I'm not arguing bigs in general aren't more valuable, and have the highest numbers, but this doesnt look like it supports the conclusions being drawn,
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,898
And1: 3,098
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#494 » by freethedevil » Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:44 pm

DQuinn1575 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:
so i googled DRAPM and found this https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/9944qv/the_problem_with_defensive_statistics_i_dpoys_by/

Season DRAPM DPOY Actual DPOY
1997 Kevin Garnett Dikembe Mutombo
1998 Dikembe Mutombo Dikembe Mutombo
1999 Grant Long Alonzo Mourning
2000 Eddie Jones Alonzo Mourning
2001 Tim Duncan Dikembe Mutombo
2002 Eddie Jones Ben Wallace
2003 Kevin Garnett Ben Wallace
2004 Tim Duncan Ron Artest
2005 Jason Collins Ben Wallace
2006 Shane Battier Ben Wallace
2007 Bruce Bowen Marcus Camby
2008 Kevin Garnett Kevin Garnett
2009 LeBron James Dwight Howard
2010 Kevin Durant Dwight Howard
2011 Paul Pierce Dwight Howard
2012 Dwight Howard Tyson Chandler
2013 Mike Conley Marc Gasol
2014 Kemba Walker Joakim Noah
2015 Khris Middleton Kawhi Leonard
2016 Draymond Green Kawhi Leonard
2017 Rudy Gobert Draymond Green
2018 Robert Covington Rudy Gobert

So this gets Grant Long, Eddie Jones twice, Battier, Bowen Pierce Conly Walker Middleton -about 1/2 the time it's giving the DPOY to a non big man. Pretty sure it's giving me a worse list than Defensive Win Shares.

well the first rule of rapm is that its extremeley noisy if you just take one year. Not really the same as looking at 1 --14-- year, --or 6 year-- playoff sample.


If we use rapm priperly, with 3 or 5 year stretches, all the "dpoys" are big men.


Even in 2002, where Eddie Jones has 2 of the 3 years's best results?
2015, where all 3 years someone other than a big had the best single year?
Real quick I get 10 bigs and 12 non-bigs as having best single year - it can be noisy, but you would expect it to be 70-80% bigs if this always showed bigs being better.
I'm not arguing bigs in general aren't more valuable, and have the highest numbers, but this doesnt look like it supports the conclusions being drawn,

I just explained to you that single year is noisy and your response is to....keep brining up single year rapm?


Post the three year stuff. Off your list, its very very clear that the vast majoirty of the "rapm" dpoy's are going to big men given its the big men who have multiple years in a row at the top, while the non bigs fall off from one year to the next which supporting my conclsion that big men are more valuable.

Just going off whose at the top, a multui-year list(aka, stablized) would go something like
1. Mutembo
2. Mourning
3. Wallace
4. Eddie Jones
5. Dwight Howard
6. Unclear but lets just give it to a non big for kicks
7. Kawhi or Draymond
8. Gobert

Save for at best three stretches(one of those featuring a goat level all time wing in kawhi), the big man is clearly on top. If you want to use single year, then you're going to have to use somethign which is regressed like PIPM.

Going off that....

2020. Giannis
2019. Gobert
2018 Gobert
2017 Draymond
2016 Draymond
2015 Draymond
2014 KG
2013 Marc Gasol
2012 Dwight
2011 Dwight
2010 Dwight
2009 Lebron(was KG before he got injured)
2008 KG
2007 Tim Duncan
2006 Wallace
2005 Duncan
2004 Walllace




It would seem that, when you either a. use suitable sample sizes or B.use deritatives that are less noisy, bigs do indeed rule in defense.
VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 11,156
And1: 11,444
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#495 » by VanWest82 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 6:48 pm

sansterre wrote:When Ben said that Jordan's risk taking hurt his team he meant one of two things:

1) Jordan's risk-taking hurt his team when it failed;
2) Jordan's risk-taking overall hurt his team.
Spoiler:
If he said #2 then I think your confusion is merited. After all, if Jordan gambled a lot (which he did) and the overall effect of the gambling was negative, that would make him a pretty compromised defender. That said, Ben goes on to list Jordan as an all-league defender, indicating that he thinks very highly of Jordan's defense. Also, #2 would imply that he's done a bunch of quantitative evaluation on the success rate of these steals and determined that, overall, they were a loss not a win. Which he hasn't done (because he sure as heck would have said that if he had). Between all these factors, #1 seems to be what Ben meant.

And I do not understand how you, or anyone, can object to #1. Unless your position is that when Jordan sacrificed position to make a big play and gave up an easy shot, having given up an easy shot did not hurt his team.

You cannot argue that the results of such a play are a neutral thing. They are obviously negative.

I feel like Ben is saying "When Jordan risked and won, it was great, but when he risked and lost, it was bad. He won more than he lost so this was a net positive, but it was still a big characteristic of his defense." And you are saying "When Jordan gave up wide open looks it wasn't bad".

At the point where your position seems to be "showing Jordan lunging for steals and missing is bad analysis because everyone knows that Jordan was one of the best defenders ever" seems like you're saying "To say that great defenders have flaws is bad analysis because they are great defenders."


I'll try to explain one last time and then I'm packing it in on this discussion as it's clearly derailing the thread and posters seem to be only responding to my points about the video anyway. My position is pretty simple:

1. I thought the amount of time dedicated to criticism and overall tone of the defense section in the video left viewers with an inaccurate picture of MJ as a defender to the point where Taylor's line at the end about Jordan being an "all league defender, but..." was toothless and was undermined by the rest of the work he did;

2. and way more importantly, I just fundamentally disagree with the overall premise Taylor and the rest of you guys have on this topic. Of course it's not a good thing when MJ goes for a steal and misses - which did happen, obviously - but that "gambling" that I would term aggressiveness was the very thing that made him great imo, not what was holding him back from being one of the greats. Taylor even says at one point "I thought Jordan was more effective playing straight up" and my reaction to that was this guy doesn't get it. Maybe 99.9% would have been better playing straight up but not MJ. He was better taking risks because it allowed him to make plays that no one else in the game was making, and those plays outweighed the misses so disproportionately as to make them inconsequential once you tallied everything up. I'm not just talking about steals or deflections vs. whiffs either; well timed doubles to get the ball out of the hands of the opposing best player that sometimes did lead to open shots on the weakside for their worst player, or even just the phantom aggressions that guys like Doc Rivers and Marc Jackson have talked about where they couldn't play normally vs. Bulls, constantly looking over their shoulder because they were so freaked out about MJ rotating over. Simple entry passes into the post were a chore. The truth is that a few players like Magic could and did take advantage of that aggressiveness which caused Jordan to have to tone it down against those guys. The vast majority couldn't though. They were seeing ghosts, black cats everywhere. It's one of the main reasons why guys so frequently seemed to beat themselves against him.
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 17,796
And1: 13,692
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#496 » by HeartBreakKid » Wed Jan 13, 2021 6:53 pm

VanWest82 wrote:Heej, I thought your post was very eloquent.

Where I think you run into problems is when you start saying because ____ was player archetype ____ then we know he can only be ____. That kind of stuff serves purpose as a general guide but ultimately it has to be about what actually happened on the court. We don't get to wash away the performances because we're "historians of the game" who have modelled what we think certain guys looked like in terms of impact in relation to other guys who sort of fit the same profile that we maybe know a little more about.

Also, if we're saying Steph's "gambler-style" offensive game is a valid comparison to MJ's "gambler-style" defense then we're effectively saying MJ is in the conversation for greatest defenders ever, which I don't agree with btw, but all that example proves is you can play the game in a fashion that isn't deemed technically sound and still have an impact greater than virtually everyone else.

I'll take lead from sansterre and try a cross sport comparison. Bobby Orr was the greatest defenseman in NHL history. Few would dispute that. He was the first defenseman who'd routinely lead the rush past the opposing blue line and into enemy territory. Guys generally didn't do that back then (and still don't) because it can get everyone out of position and open you up to rush advantages in the other direction. He was the biggest gambler in the game; except, he was so brilliant as an offensive defenseman that he not only overcame those risks but became the most impactful player in the league precisely because he was taking and hitting on them. Sadly, Orr blew out his knee and sports medicine just wasn't the same back then. But no one is saying "well actually Orr really wasn't that effective and all those MVPs and wins weren't really a good representation because he was a gambler and we've simulated vs. other defenseman gamblers and so we know no one is as good as they seem playing that style." You'd get laughed out of the room. Sometimes we just have to accept that some guys are different and don't work in conventional models.


Yeah, but you're missing one really big thing - Bobby Orr was a much better defender relative to Michael Jordan...that's kind of an important caveat.

Also, there is not as much data and info about Bobby Orr, so naturally it would be much harder to contest. We do know that Bobby Orr's play style did have fundamental flaws, that absolutely is a valid criticism. We have enough footage of younger Jordan to know that he didn't always prioritize good positioning versus going for a steal. Bobby Orr might be able to get away with higher risk style because Bobby Orr is basically the Bill Russell of the NHL.

I think you are just projecting, really. You're passing this narrative that someone said Jordan is a bad defender because he gambles. That does not exist in that video. It's just someone pointing out that Jordan wasn't a perfect defender - literally every video has negative portions dedicated to it. The bigger the misconception that exist the more time will be spent on it, naturally.


Going for a steal and missing is a bad thing. Jordan did that. Did he do it most of the time? No. If he missed a steal could he get back a lot of the time? Yes. Did he often successfully cause a turnover at a rate much higher than an average defender? Yes. Literally Ben Taylor points out all these things, and comes with the conclusion that Michael Jordan was an all-defense level defender...so what exactly is the complaint here?


Maybe Jordan is a better defender than what Ben Taylor said. Maybe he is a worse defender than what you said. What exactly are you harping so much about? Not everything that was said in these videos are 100% accurate, it's the opinion of one guy, so why are you talking so much about this one relatively minor thing in this whole series - just because it's Michael Jordan?
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,898
And1: 3,098
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#497 » by freethedevil » Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:30 pm

---
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,898
And1: 3,098
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#498 » by freethedevil » Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:34 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:
VanWest82 wrote:Heej, I thought your post was very eloquent.

Where I think you run into problems is when you start saying because ____ was player archetype ____ then we know he can only be ____. That kind of stuff serves purpose as a general guide but ultimately it has to be about what actually happened on the court. We don't get to wash away the performances because we're "historians of the game" who have modelled what we think certain guys looked like in terms of impact in relation to other guys who sort of fit the same profile that we maybe know a little more about.

Also, if we're saying Steph's "gambler-style" offensive game is a valid comparison to MJ's "gambler-style" defense then we're effectively saying MJ is in the conversation for greatest defenders ever, which I don't agree with btw, but all that example proves is you can play the game in a fashion that isn't deemed technically sound and still have an impact greater than virtually everyone else.

I'll take lead from sansterre and try a cross sport comparison. Bobby Orr was the greatest defenseman in NHL history. Few would dispute that. He was the first defenseman who'd routinely lead the rush past the opposing blue line and into enemy territory. Guys generally didn't do that back then (and still don't) because it can get everyone out of position and open you up to rush advantages in the other direction. He was the biggest gambler in the game; except, he was so brilliant as an offensive defenseman that he not only overcame those risks but became the most impactful player in the league precisely because he was taking and hitting on them. Sadly, Orr blew out his knee and sports medicine just wasn't the same back then. But no one is saying "well actually Orr really wasn't that effective and all those MVPs and wins weren't really a good representation because he was a gambler and we've simulated vs. other defenseman gamblers and so we know no one is as good as they seem playing that style." You'd get laughed out of the room. Sometimes we just have to accept that some guys are different and don't work in conventional models.


Yeah, but you're missing one really big thing - Bobby Orr was a much better defender relative to Michael Jordan...that's kind of an important caveat.

Also, there is not as much data and info about Bobby Orr, so naturally it would be much harder to contest. We do know that Bobby Orr's play style did have fundamental flaws, that absolutely is a valid criticism. We have enough footage of younger Jordan to know that he didn't always prioritize good positioning versus going for a steal. Bobby Orr might be able to get away with higher risk style because Bobby Orr is basically the Bill Russell of the NHL.

I think you are just projecting, really. You're passing this narrative that someone said Jordan is a bad defender because he gambles. That does not exist in that video. It's just someone pointing out that Jordan wasn't a perfect defender - literally every video has negative portions dedicated to it. The bigger the misconception that exist the more time will be spent on it, naturally.


Going for a steal and missing is a bad thing. Jordan did that. Did he do it most of the time? No. If he missed a steal could he get back a lot of the time? Yes. Did he often successfully cause a turnover at a rate much higher than an average defender? Yes. Literally Ben Taylor points out all these things, and comes with the conclusion that Michael Jordan was an all-defense level defender...so what exactly is the complaint here?


Maybe Jordan is a better defender than what Ben Taylor said. Maybe he is a worse defender than what you said. What exactly are you harping so much about? Not everything that was said in these videos are 100% accurate, it's the opinion of one guy, so why are you talking so much about this one relatively minor thing in this whole series - just because it's Michael Jordan?

There's one piece of data we have about Orr. His lineups have, by far, the biggest plus minus in the history of hockey despite a realtively short career. Lineups which were built around ORR's defense.

Jordan being compared to him is baffling.
User avatar
Goudelock
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,741
And1: 19,077
Joined: Jan 27, 2015
Location: College of Charleston
 

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#499 » by Goudelock » Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:41 pm

70sFan wrote:Excellent post and I think it's a great summary for this topic. We should move on and give Hakeem's video more love because it's amazing :)


I thought the Hakeem having iffy shot-selection was a great point that most people kind of gloss over. For all of Hakeem's spins and beautiful footwork, he also took a lot of low-percentage turnarounds. I have to wonder if he could've been an even better player had he taken smarter shots.

Then again, Taylor showed that Hakeem's efficiency didn't really drop all that much in the playoffs. So at least in terms of scoring, Olajuwon's game was similar to Kobe's. They took way too many tough shots, but neither suffered much drop off when it came to efficiency come playoff time.
Devin Booker wrote:Bro.
DSMok1
Freshman
Posts: 65
And1: 10
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
Location: Maine
Contact:
 

Re: Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor) 

Post#500 » by DSMok1 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 8:21 pm

freethedevil wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:
freethedevil wrote:well the first rule of rapm is that its extremeley noisy if you just take one year. Not really the same as looking at 1 --14-- year, --or 6 year-- playoff sample.


If we use rapm priperly, with 3 or 5 year stretches, all the "dpoys" are big men.


Even in 2002, where Eddie Jones has 2 of the 3 years's best results?
2015, where all 3 years someone other than a big had the best single year?
Real quick I get 10 bigs and 12 non-bigs as having best single year - it can be noisy, but you would expect it to be 70-80% bigs if this always showed bigs being better.
I'm not arguing bigs in general aren't more valuable, and have the highest numbers, but this doesnt look like it supports the conclusions being drawn,

I just explained to you that single year is noisy and your response is to....keep brining up single year rapm?


Post the three year stuff. Off your list, its very very clear that the vast majoirty of the "rapm" dpoy's are going to big men given its the big men who have multiple years in a row at the top, while the non bigs fall off from one year to the next which supporting my conclsion that big men are more valuable.

Just going off whose at the top, a multui-year list(aka, stablized) would go something like
1. Mutembo
2. Mourning
3. Wallace
4. Eddie Jones
5. Dwight Howard
6. Unclear but lets just give it to a non big for kicks
7. Kawhi or Draymond
8. Gobert

Save for at best three stretches(one of those featuring a goat level all time wing in kawhi), the big man is clearly on top. If you want to use single year, then you're going to have to use somethign which is regressed like PIPM.

Going off that....

2020. Giannis
2019. Gobert
2018 Gobert
2017 Draymond
2016 Draymond
2015 Draymond
2014 KG
2013 Marc Gasol
2012 Dwight
2011 Dwight
2010 Dwight
2009 Lebron(was KG before he got injured)
2008 KG
2007 Tim Duncan
2006 Wallace
2005 Duncan
2004 Walllace




It would seem that, when you either a. use suitable sample sizes or B.use deritatives that are less noisy, bigs do indeed rule in defense.


I used 5 year average RAPM stints for developing BPM. Here's what it looks like at the top:

Code: Select all

╔══════╦═══════════════════════════╦═════╦═══════╗
║ Rank ║       Player - Era        ║ MPG ║ DRAPM ║
╠══════╬═══════════════════════════╬═════╬═══════╣
║    1 ║ Kevin Garnett 2007-11     ║  34 ║ 5.6   ║
║    2 ║ Kevin Garnett 2012-16     ║  24 ║ 5.4   ║
║    3 ║ Tim Duncan 2002-06        ║  37 ║ 4.8   ║
║    4 ║ LeBron James 2007-11      ║  39 ║ 4.7   ║
║    5 ║ Ben Wallace 2002-06       ║  37 ║ 4.6   ║
║    6 ║ Andre Iguodala 2012-16    ║  31 ║ 4.6   ║
║    7 ║ Draymond Green 2012-16    ║  25 ║ 4.4   ║
║    8 ║ David Robinson 1997-01    ║  32 ║ 4.3   ║
║    9 ║ Metta World Peace 2002-06 ║  35 ║ 4.1   ║
║   10 ║ Tim Duncan 1997-01        ║  39 ║ 4.1   ║
║   11 ║ Rasheed Wallace 1997-01   ║  35 ║ 4.1   ║
║   12 ║ Dikembe Mutombo 1997-01   ║  36 ║ 4.0   ║
║   13 ║ Paul George 2012-16       ║  34 ║ 4.0   ║
║   14 ║ Scott Burrell 1997-01     ║  17 ║ 4.0   ║
║   15 ║ Bruce Bowen 2007-11       ║  26 ║ 3.9   ║
║   16 ║ Larry Sanders 2012-16     ║  22 ║ 3.9   ║
║   17 ║ Eric Bledsoe 2012-16      ║  27 ║ 3.9   ║
║   18 ║ Shawn Marion 1997-01      ║  32 ║ 3.8   ║
║   19 ║ Luol Deng 2007-11         ║  37 ║ 3.8   ║
║   20 ║ Jason Collins 2002-06     ║  26 ║ 3.8   ║
║   21 ║ Chuck Hayes 2007-11       ║  21 ║ 3.8   ║
║   22 ║ Tony Allen 2012-16        ║  26 ║ 3.7   ║
║   23 ║ Thabo Sefolosha 2012-16   ║  24 ║ 3.7   ║
║   24 ║ Doug Christie 2002-06     ║  33 ║ 3.7   ║
║   25 ║ Kevin Garnett 2002-06     ║  39 ║ 3.6   ║
║   26 ║ Shawn Bradley 1997-01     ║  27 ║ 3.6   ║
║   27 ║ Omer Asik 2007-11         ║  12 ║ 3.6   ║
║   28 ║ Manu Ginobili 2002-06     ║  27 ║ 3.6   ║
║   29 ║ Tony Allen 2007-11        ║  19 ║ 3.5   ║
║   30 ║ Dwight Howard 2007-11     ║  37 ║ 3.5   ║
╚══════╩═══════════════════════════╩═════╩═══════╝


Most of those names make sense, though even at a 5 year interval there is some noise.
Developer of Box Plus/Minus
@DSMok1

Return to Player Comparisons