RealGM

MVP season stats
* Westbrook: 31.6 PPG 10.7 RPG 10.4 APG 1.6 SPG 0.4 BPG 5.4 TPG 42.5 FG% 34.3 3P% 84.5 FT% +251 +/-
* Rose: 25 PPG 4.1 RPG 7.7 APG 1 SPG 0.6 BPG 3.4 TPG 44.5 FG% 33.2 3P% 85.8 FT% +498 +/-

What's Roses argument?

Westbrook but Rose peaked early due to injury. If Rose was able to develop naturally into his late 20s his peak would've been higher

Westbrook’s PER was more than 7 points higher. Like really, i’m not sure why this is even a comparison.

I actually prefer '16 Russ to the '17 version. Overall I'd go with Russ from either season. Just think he's a step above as a creator for others. Box-score all in ones probably inflate the gap due to rebounding, where the raw # overrates his impact. I think I prefer Rose slightly on defense, how do people feel about their comparison on that end?

HeartBreakKid wrote:What's Roses argument?

When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

LewisnotMiller wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:What's Roses argument?

When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

I prefer even 12/14 Westbrook over 11 and 12 Rose, but it's close. 15/17 West was significantly better.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

LewisnotMiller wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:What's Roses argument?

When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Westbrook never lead his team to the #1 seed.
The Bulls with Rose were a legit contender.
OKC with Westbrook in the post KD era was never seen as a championship team.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

LewisnotMiller wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:What's Roses argument?

When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Rose carried the offence in a way Westbrook didn't have to because of Durant. That doesn't make Rose better, but it is an angle for those looking to argue that way. Some in this thread seem to be suggesting it's Westbrook and not close. I'd disagree.

FWIW...and honestly I'd say not too much...here's a contemporary article on the subject.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/838871-settling-the-derrick-rose-vs-russell-westbrook-debate-for-good

eminence wrote:I actually prefer '16 Russ to the '17 version. Overall I'd go with Russ from either season. Just think he's a step above as a creator for others. Box-score all in ones probably inflate the gap due to rebounding, where the raw # overrates his impact. I think I prefer Rose slightly on defense, how do people feel about their comparison on that end?

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on any tangible differences between 16 and 17 Russ, because to me they are almost carbon-copies. Defensively, while it doesn't show through the numbers necessarily, I think Rose was decisively better on defense. I think he was just simply more disciplined and got out of position less then Russ.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:

eminence wrote:I actually prefer '16 Russ to the '17 version. Overall I'd go with Russ from either season. Just think he's a step above as a creator for others. Box-score all in ones probably inflate the gap due to rebounding, where the raw # overrates his impact. I think I prefer Rose slightly on defense, how do people feel about their comparison on that end?

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on any tangible differences between 16 and 17 Russ, because to me they are almost carbon-copies. Defensively, while it doesn't show through the numbers necessarily, I think Rose was decisively better on defense. I think he was just simply more disciplined and got out of position less then Russ.

16 West:
7,4 DFGA on %46,2 DFG, 2,0 SPG, 3,6 ForcedOppTO(est), 1,0 Contested DRB,

17 West:
7,4 DFGA on %48,6 DFG, 1,6 SPG, 2,8 ForcedOppTO(est), 1,3 Contested DRB
. Russell literally declined on both ball defence and shot defence while improved on defensive rebounding just with 0,3 per game.

It's huge defensive difference between the two year. 16 West arguably even above average, on the other hand 17 West was net negative.

KGtabake wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

LewisnotMiller wrote:
When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Westbrook never lead his team to the #1 seed.
The Bulls with Rose were a legit contender.
OKC with Westbrook in the post KD era was never seen as a championship team.

I mean the Bulls had good players outside of Rose...and they weren't really a real contender.

These seem like pretty shallow arguments.

The Bulls are also in an easier conference than the Thunder.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

KGtabake wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:
The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Westbrook never lead his team to the #1 seed.
The Bulls with Rose were a legit contender.
OKC with Westbrook in the post KD era was never seen as a championship team.

I mean the Bulls had good players outside of Rose...and they weren't really a real contender.

These seem like pretty shallow arguments.

The Bulls are also in an easier conference than the Thunder.

Good players, sure. Durant level? No.
I linked to an article with some basic statistical analysis from the time...and it was a little before the more recent analytics boom, so not sure there is too much more around.

I'm not sure peak Rose was better, incidentally. It's hard to remember whether I thought he was better in the moment, or was projecting a golden future on him due to his age and rise. I just think it's close. Personal preference I'd go Rose, but that's different again.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

KGtabake wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:
The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Westbrook never lead his team to the #1 seed.
The Bulls with Rose were a legit contender.
OKC with Westbrook in the post KD era was never seen as a championship team.

I mean the Bulls had good players outside of Rose...and they weren't really a real contender.

These seem like pretty shallow arguments.

The Bulls are also in an easier conference than the Thunder.

They never had a Paul George type of player.
If anything the Thunder tried to give Westbrook help, post KD.
Yes, the East back then was easier but still it had teams like the Heat big 3, the Celtics big 3, Dwight's Magic. It wasn't easy to get the #1 seed.

LewisnotMiller wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

LewisnotMiller wrote:
When he was on court, his team played extremely well, and he was THE star.
Short peak, I know.

The same could be said for Westbrook and basically any star.

Rose carried the offence in a way Westbrook didn't have to because of Durant. That doesn't make Rose better, but it is an angle for those looking to argue that way. Some in this thread seem to be suggesting it's Westbrook and not close. I'd disagree.

What a nonsense take.

Westbrook while averaging more points, and more assists on similar efficiency, also had a slightly better offensive on/off 10.5 to 10.1, while carrying a significantly higher usage 41.7 to 32.2, but sure Westbrook never carried the load that Rose did .

KGtabake wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

KGtabake wrote:
Westbrook never lead his team to the #1 seed.
The Bulls with Rose were a legit contender.
OKC with Westbrook in the post KD era was never seen as a championship team.

I mean the Bulls had good players outside of Rose...and they weren't really a real contender.

These seem like pretty shallow arguments.

The Bulls are also in an easier conference than the Thunder.

They never had a Paul George type of player.
If anything the Thunder tried to give Westbrook help, post KD.
Yes, the East back then was easier but still it had teams like the Heat big 3, the Celtics big 3, Dwight's Magic. It wasn't easy to get the #1 seed.

Paul George didn't play with peak Westbrook.

feyki wrote:

LukaTheGOAT wrote:

eminence wrote:I actually prefer '16 Russ to the '17 version. Overall I'd go with Russ from either season. Just think he's a step above as a creator for others. Box-score all in ones probably inflate the gap due to rebounding, where the raw # overrates his impact. I think I prefer Rose slightly on defense, how do people feel about their comparison on that end?

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on any tangible differences between 16 and 17 Russ, because to me they are almost carbon-copies. Defensively, while it doesn't show through the numbers necessarily, I think Rose was decisively better on defense. I think he was just simply more disciplined and got out of position less then Russ.

16 West:
7,4 DFGA on %46,2 DFG, 2,0 SPG, 3,6 ForcedOppTO(est), 1,0 Contested DRB,

17 West:
7,4 DFGA on %48,6 DFG, 1,6 SPG, 2,8 ForcedOppTO(est), 1,3 Contested DRB
. Russell literally declined on both ball defence and shot defence while improved on defensive rebounding just with 0,3 per game.

It's huge defensive difference between the two year. 16 West arguably even above average, on the other hand 17 West was net negative.

Fair, but couldn't you chuck the difference defensively too having a larger load on offense (hence better box-score stats in 17). Like if you put 17 Russ in the same situation as 16 Russ, are we sure there is a tangible difference between them as players?

We never saw peak Rose. Comparing a 3rd year 22 year old Rose to a 29 year old prime Westbrook is not a fair comparison.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:

eminence wrote:I actually prefer '16 Russ to the '17 version. Overall I'd go with Russ from either season. Just think he's a step above as a creator for others. Box-score all in ones probably inflate the gap due to rebounding, where the raw # overrates his impact. I think I prefer Rose slightly on defense, how do people feel about their comparison on that end?

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on any tangible differences between 16 and 17 Russ, because to me they are almost carbon-copies. Defensively, while it doesn't show through the numbers necessarily, I think Rose was decisively better on defense. I think he was just simply more disciplined and got out of position less then Russ.

I don’t think there’s much of a gap either way, just that on better teams I think he’d have to play more like ‘16 with a bit more effort on D and letting others take the lead on offense every once in awhile. In particular I think he would’ve been a bit better served stepping back for Oladipo at times.