AEnigma wrote:1. Patrick Ewing (1990) Shouldered a heavy offensive load like 1982 Moses Malone while providing strong defence. Ewing sadly had no true chance at MVP that year with peak-ish Magic and Jordan in the league, nor was he fortunate enough to be traded to a 1982 76ers equivalent. However, he did go on his own monstrous scoring run and pull off an unexpected upset of Bird’s Celtics, where Ewing won three straight elimination games averaging an efficient 36/13/5, including a road win in the league’s toughest road environment. Shortly after, with Pat Riley as his coach and a better but still unspectacular supporting cast, he came the closest to beating each of the 1992 Bulls, 1993 Bulls, and 1994 Rockets in their respective title years. If he had been his 1990 self, instead of a few years on with degrading knees and overall athleticism, maybe he could have broken through (almost certainly in 1994). Timing is such an under-appreciated element of how legacies are built in this sport.
Here are some of the best posts and articles I was able to find about that season:
Hardwood Hype wrote:Already a bona fide star, the 1989-90 season is the one in which Ewing catapulted himself into SUPERstardom.
Ewing hit on 55.1% of his shots and a career-high 77.5% of his free throws en route to 28.6 points per game, third-best in the league and a career-high. For good measure, 10.9 rebounds per game, which was fifth in the league, was his best to date, as were his Assist (10.0%) and Turnover Rates (12.4%).
Twenty-one times he scored at 35 points in a game – in no other season did he do so more than eleven times. Eleven times he went for at least 40 – it’s the only time he reached 40 more than four times in a season. He set a single-season high with twelve games of 30+ and at least 15 rebounds. On ten of those occasions he scored at least 35 – he never did this more than five times in any other season. Eight times in his career Ewing scored at least 30 and grabbed at least 20 rebounds. He did it three times in ’89-‘90 – it’s the only season in which he did it more than once. Two of these were the only 40-20 games of his career. By Basketball Reference Game Score, this is the season in which he turned his top four (and five of the top-ten) individual performances, regular and postseason. Only once since 1983-84 (the date from which B-R has Game Scores) has a center topped four such games in a season.
This is a breakout season of volume greatness and performances, by a short-lived version of Patrick Ewing. Beyond the goofy great statistics and but special, historic performances (more on this in a sec), this is a different Ewing than the Dream Teamer, let alone, the one who anchored the contending Knicks teams to come.
Consider the first of those 40-20s. A month into the season, during the Knicks’ annual visit to Oakland, Ewing positively battered the Warriors, making 17 of 27 shots on his way to 44 points, while grabbing 24 rebounds – ten of them offensive –blocking three shots and handing out four assists in an easy win.
And the hits just kept coming. Three nights later in Phoenix, he had 41, 8 and 4, with five blocks. Two weeks after that, on December 16, it was 30, 14 and six blocks in a home win over the Sonics. Three nights after that, 41, 15 and four blocks in another win, this time over the Jazz.
By the numbers, that night in northern California remained the best regular performance of his career… for about five weeks. On January 7 he basically replicated the feat at home against the Clippers, again scoring 44, this time with 22 rebounds, seven blocked shots, four assists and a pair of steals. Two nights later he hung 35 on the Bullets, before putting a 33 and 12, with five assists and eight blocks on the Bulls at MSG.
And so it went… 38, 15 and four blocks in Dallas… 24, 11 and nine against Miami… 35, 13 and seven the next night in Orlando… 33, 13 and six in Houston… a pair of 41s in wins on either side of the All-Star break, with a combined 25 rebounds and eleven blocks… 37, 13, six assists and three blocks against the defending champion Pistons… 30, 18 and six blocks against Philly… and on… and on…
The game at the Garden on March 24 was always going to be an event, as any visit from the Celtics was in those days. Though the Knicks ultimately fell by five, it was another milestone for Ewing, who grabbed a whopping 18 rebounds to go with a career-high 51, and looked completely unstoppable doing it.
The next time out it was 41 and 12 with four blocks against the Bullets. Four days later it was 37, 21 and six against Denver. This is one of ten 35/20/6 performances recorded since 1973-74 – it was Ewing’s second of the season, and remains the most recent. He went for 37 twice more in the week that followed, first with 17 rebounds in Washington, and two nights later, with 19 rebounds and nine blocks in a home win against Philly. Six times since 1973-74 has a player has scored 35, grabbed 15 rebounds and blocked nine shots in a game. Only four times has it been done in regulation. This is one of them. No one has done it since.
fatal9 wrote:Some context around the 1990 Knicks: The Knicks started out 34-17 before making the Strickland/Cheeks trade. Then finished the season 11-20 for a combination of reasons. I wish I had game 3 of the Celtics series on my computer because Peter Vecsey does a decent job in a halftime segment of showing all the chemistry issues the Knicks had in the last couple of months of the season (these issues were why Knicks were given no chance to beat the Celtics). From making the Strickland trade, to Mark Jackson getting booed on the court and benched for 33 year old Cheeks, to Oakley fracturing his left hand and missing games, to Kiki V coming back and joining the team. These are a LOT of lineup changes for a team to endure mid-season, Knicks had a different starting PG, a different starting PF (Oakley out), a different starting SF (all of whom were defensive downgrades) in the last month of the season than they did when they were winning and putting up one of the best records in the league. I don't think it's a coincidence how the team performance changed so much just as the Knicks began encountering instability in their lineup. Unfortunately this stretch thwarted Ewing's MVP campaign as well (he was in the convo with Magic, Barkley, MJ for it). That was a 50+ win team disguised by the issues at the end of the season, so I would say Ewing was doing a great job of getting the best out of what he was given.
Some posts here seem to be have no sense of context surrounding his season, no analysis of his game (probably haven't bothered to watch any games), just going off a very very superficial analysis of "let me check PER and team defensive rating" and draw conclusions. This type of analysis is only going to produce outrageous statements such as "90 Malone was better than Ewing" or that Ewing "wasn't even on par with Dwight".
This is a peak project, I have a feeling people are letting their bias from mid/late 90s Ewing (who I have issues with offensively too) cloud their judgement on how good he was this year. I had a similar bias, but then I began watching his games from that season (about 15 or so) and what I'm seeing a dominant defender (his defensive versatility is better here than later in the 90s, my one gripe defensively would be that he was more prone to foul trouble this season than he would be later) with an offensive package like we've never seen Ewing put together at any other point of his career.
Why was he so much better offensively? As I've been mentioning, he had more variety in his offensive game, this was something everyone in the league was talking about. He went from being a predictable offensive player who was easy to game plan for, to being a lot more well rounded who mixed up and expanded his scoring repertoire. He was better at creating space on his shots, got that extra bit of separation he wasn't quite getting later as the years went on and a result he was having a lot of success as a one on one scorer in the post. He was at his physical peak in the NBA, insane stamina, a lot more athletic, moved better, had a bit more spring in his legs, which naturally allowed him to have a better conversion rate around the basket. His aggressiveness is completely different, he wasn't content to bail you out with fadeaways all game, he attacked the defense more often ever and consequently posted the best FTA numbers of his career (combined with a career best FT% which further raised his efficiency). His passing also took a big leap that year. While he wasn't Shaq or prime Hakeem, he was competent at reading doubles, this is another observation that is obvious to me from watching games and also reading/listening to what people around the league were saying.
This isn't a guy who saw an increase in his averages because he just upped his numbers and feasted on bad defenses either (like say D-Rob in '94), he was lighting up everyone. Here he is putting up 41/15 on Eaton:
His offensive numbers against good defensive teams/centers were very good over the course of the entire season.
Here's a Sports Illustrated article midway through the season (when Knicks were 25-10) talking about Ewing's amazing improvement on offense and how surprised everyone was by how much he improved:
But what the NBA is seeing these days, and is likely to be seeing through a good bit of the next decade, is much, much more. Some of the old images of Ewing are dated. He has buried them under an avalanche of soft, turnaround jump shots. "The book on him always was, Make him shoot over you, make him earn it," says Boston's backup center, Joe Kleine. "Well, now he's earning it." The power, the intimidation, the fearlessness are still there, but so are grace and finesse and economy of movement, terms previously associated with Houston's Akeem Olajuwon, Ewing's yardstick through most of the '80s, and San Antonio rookie David Robinson, the only other NBA center currently mentioned in the same breath with Ewing and Olajuwon.
Ewing's play has been an even more important component of New York's success. "He might be the best in the game right now," Los Angeles's Mychal Thompson told the New York Daily News after Ewing scored 29 points in a 115-104 loss on Dec. 3. "He and Magic [Johnson] are shoulder to shoulder."
"I know what people are saying now," says Jazz coach Jerry Sloan, "but when he came out of college, I don't recall anybody thinking he would score like this."
"I worked on some things this summer, just like I always do. I wanted to get better on coming into the lane with my left hand, and I've done that. I'm getting to the foul line more [his eight attempts per game are about two more than last season], and that's helped my scoring. But I haven't changed my jump shot. It just got better.
Ewing gradually improved under Pitino, but only recently has the whole package been unwrapped. It reveals an agile seven-footer whose turnaround jumper is accurate up to 20 feet; a heady player who discourages double-teaming with canny passes; an outstanding athlete who has somehow figured out the exotic fast-break passing strategies of point guards Mark Jackson and Rod Strickland, both of whom never make a simple move when 13 complicated ones will do; and a defensive intimidator whose 3.7 blocks per game at week's end were second only to Olajuwon's league-leading 4.2.
''He has taken his game to another level,'' Johnson continued, ''a level I've never seen him play at before. He's dominating offensively and defensively, but he's also making the right plays at the right time. He's leading his team, as opposed to before, when it seemed he'd just as soon let somebody else lead. That's the real mark of an MVP.'
And people are questioning this guy's defense? Come on...this is '92-'94 Ewing but with way better knees. I mean every game I've seen of his from this season, it's the type of combo of scoring variety, defense and athleticism, Knicks fans always wished he had. He was seen as a better center than Hakeem that year, made the all-NBA first over him and had coaches around the league saying he was the best center in the league.
Parish said that Ewing "is a better player today because he has variety of shots, just doesn't throw the fadeaway jumpshot, he gives you the jump hook and his spin move on the baseline is the toughest thing for me to guard" (so this isn't exactly the fadeaway jumpers all game long offensive version of Ewing we remember most). From what I've read guys say about him, he took a big leap in his post game that season but declined as the 90s went on because his knees got worse and worse (and of course he aged, he was in his 30s during '92-'94...and consequently shot jumpers wayyyyyy more often), and as a result so did his efficiency. Even in something like FT shooting, it's way above his career average and his best year ever. He is doing a lot of heavy lifting offensively...must be turning the ball over a lot like he always did, but nope, while putting up the scoring numbers he did, he also posted the third best TOV% of his career. It's not like Ewing is inexperienced here either, he is 27-28 which is usually when players peak so career trajectory wise, it makes sense.
Knicks were still above average defensively considering the following things: a rookie head coach (Stu Jackson, fired 15 games into next season...and only coached one other team after that, the 6-33 Grizzlies), the second best defender on the team missing 21 games, a bad defensive backcourt particularly when Kiki joins the team. I would say he's making pretty good impact here (and we know he can probably make a lot more if he is on a championship caliber team where he doesn't have to score as much). This is one of the great interior defenders of all time, he didn't learn defense when he was 30 years old just like KG didn't magically learn to play defense when he joined the Celtics. His comparison was Bill Russell coming out of college, he was seen as one of the finest defensive talents ever. The questions weren't "can he defend?" but "can he add enough to his post game?" (and he did in 1990). In terms of interior defense, he's ones of the best ever, anything you threw around the basket was going to get challenged, no easy baskets even it meant you put him on a poster. He's second in the league in blocks behind Hakeem, I know averages aren't everything but this isn't Javale McGee we are talking about, but a fundamentally sound defensive player, who plays great post defense and whose block averages reflect his ability to absolutely lock down the paint. I'm going to guess a better moving version of the guy who was anchoring historic defenses a year and a half later was still pretty damn effective on defense. Seems like a reasonable conclusion.
Regarding the Ewing Theory. It refers to the mid/late 90s version of Ewing (in his mid 30s) who is 5+ years away from the year in question here and a CLEAR step down offensively. Even if it were true, it's not very relevant. It's like using Kobe's impact last couple of years to define his impact in '08.
One thing I kind of wish there was more of an argument for was D-Rob (who I think went a few spots too high) vs. Ewing. Would people really take '95 D-Rob in a playoff series over '90 Ewing? Has D-Rob ever taken over offensively for his teams in the playoffs like that? Could D-Rob give the bad boy Pistons defense 45 point game and then come back and drop 30 points in the second half of the next game? And don't forget the intangibles, Ewing was intimidating on the court, a better leader, a guy who has an impact over the entire mentality of the team. I think a great argument I read for D-Rob was that he'd be a great second banana offensively on a championship team but would still be the best overall player on the team...could the same thing not be said about '90 Ewing?
lorak wrote:Another great post by fatal and I agree with you 100% (even youtube video you posted was uploaded by me, because I was so impressed by Ewing's play).
And Ewing theory is completly BS... at least until he was 36 years old. In 1986 he missed 32 games and NYK without him were worse by 6.2 efficiency pts (Ewing improved offense by 1 and defense by 5,2).
1987: 19 games missed, -7 without Ewing (0.4 offense, 6,6 defense)
1996: 6 games missed, -10.6 without Ewing (he improved defense by 12.2 drtg! but offense was worse with him by 1.6)
1998: 56 games missed, -5.4 without Ewing (he improved defense by 7.3 but offense was worse with him by 1.9)
1999: 12 games missed, NYK were better without him by 2.7 eff pts (but still defense was better with Ewing by 1.5)
2000: 20 games missed, team worse by 1.1 with Ewing (but with him offense was better by 3.5 and defense worse by 4.6)
So we see that through almost whole career he was great defensive player and during his early years, before knees were destroyed by injuries, he was also slightly positive player on offense. I really see no reason to put him so much behind DRob whose profile and impact on the game are very close to Ewing's.
E-Balla wrote:1990 Patrick Ewing - This season is spectacular. Ewing was legitimately up for MVP along with Barkley and Magic for most of the season prior to his team making some moves that hurt them. In the first 52 games of the season the Knicks went 34-17 (55 win pace) with Ewing averaging 27.8/10.2/2.3 (4.9 combined blocks and steals) on 58.7 TS% with a 114 ORTG. After the trade the Knicks went 11-20 which would make one assume Ewing didn't play well but he actually played better with the team around him falling apart. He averaged 30.0/12.1/2.1 (4.9 combined blocks and steals) on 61.9 TS% with a 116 ORTG in the last 31 games.
At one point they had a 1-9 stretch where Ewing averaged 32.1/12.5/1.3 (5.0 blocks and steals combined) on 64.5 TS%. His career high was in that stretch, a 51 point performance in a loss to the Celtics.
Then the playoffs came and Ewing went off. In game 1 vs Boston they lost pretty handedly and in game 2 they allowed Boston to break the playoff record for points with 157 (a record that still stands). Following that embarrassment at Boston they were facing elimination in game 3. Ewing and Oakley really turned on the defense and dominated the glass with Ewing grabbing 19 boards in the 3 point win. They followed that with a game 4 blowout win where Ewing played what's probably his best game ever with 44 points, 7 steals, 5 assists, and shooting 75% from the field. Now they were tied up in the series attempting to become the 2nd [sic] team to comeback from being down 0-2 and at the same time hoping to break a 28 game losing streak in Boston (the last time they won in Boston was in 84). The Knicks won that closely contested game with the momentum shifting towards the end of the game with Larry Bird missing an easy dunk and Ewing shortly after making his iconic turnaround 3 pointer.
On Larry Bird missing that dunk this is from SI's article on that series:
When Larry Bird missed the dunk—a point-blank dunk at crunch time in a do-or-die playoff game in Boston Garden—he did so not as a result of any strange astrological occurrence or the Massachusetts budget crisis or even tough defense.
He did so, by his own account, because he was worried. "I wasn't going to dunk it," he explained after the game. "But I thought Patrick was coming, so I tried to. And then I jumped too high, if you can believe it."
Believe it, as hard as it may seem. It is not the business of Boston Celtics to feel shadowy presences, least of all for Larry Legend to feel one from a New York Knick in the building in which New York had lost 26 straight times and hadn't won in the playoffs since the Nixon administration. This was the Garden, and the ghosts are supposed to be friendly. But: "I thought Patrick was coming."
If the truth be told, at the time of Bird's misguided dunk attempt, any Celtic was entitled to be wary of these Knicks. A little more than four minutes remained in Sunday's fifth and final game of these teams' first-round Eastern Conference playoff series, and the Patrick in question, a certain Mr. Ewing, had just feathered in a jump-hook to give New York a 103-99 lead. Ewing did just about everything asked of him in this game. He finished with 31 points and 10 assists, and those figures are stark testimony to how shrewdly he picked apart Boston's double teams with opportune passes and drives.
Following that series they were completely outmatched by the Pistons but Ewing wasn't. He had some stinkers but overall averaged 27.2 ppg on 56 TS% which is more PPG than anyone outside of MJ (who was only as efficient as Ewing one of those 3 years) averaged against the Pistons in a series between 88 and 90.
EDIT: I punched the numbers. MJ averaged 30.0 ppg on 56.0 TS% against the Pistons from 88 to 90. He averaged 25.4 points per 36. Ewing averaged 26.2 points per 36 against them on 56.0 TS%. So his scoring performance against them was right there with MJ's average scoring performance against them.
Overall that's a pretty great season, but it's not the most impressive left on the board so why 90 Ewing? Well here's how I see his game:
Scoring - 28.6 ppg on +6.2 rTS% speaks for itself. Post merger only Moses (in 81), Robinson (in 94), and Shaq (in 94, 95, 00, and 01) have scored more ppg as a center. Only Shaq in 94, 00, and 01 did it on higher efficiency. In the playoffs he showed he could consistently score on that level scoring 29.4 ppg on 57.9 TS% in the playoffs. Post merger only Shaq (in 98, 00, and 01), Hakeem (in 88 and 95), and Kareem (in 77 and 80) scored more ppg than Ewing in the 90 playoffs. Only Kareem in both years, and Shaq in 98 did it on higher efficiency.
Then you look at his skillset. He had a robotic but effective post game with a predictable but at times unstoppable running hook shot, great speed and strength, the best jumper for any true C I've seen outside of KAT, and his one weakness was probably his small hands which at times limited him on lobs and lead to easy misses of his signature finger roll. There's a solid argument to be made that outside of the true greats (Kareem, Hakeem, Wilt, Moses, Shaq) he's the best scoring C ever. I think his scoring game would suit the modern game amazingly too. Ewing got most of his buckets back then off quick actions and turnaround jumpers, things that would be more valued in today's league at his size.
His passing and rebounding on the other hand were never strong. His passing was below average and his rebounding was mediocre at best for his size.
There's been a lot of discussion about his defense this year. Discussion I don't really understand. Ewing was still an elite defender in 1990 and I don't really have any reason to think he improved after 1990. Played better? In 1992, definitely, but outside of that the biggest change in the quality of the Knicks defense those years was due to his support and most of all the coach. The coach's effect on defensive ratings is always overlooked but there's no great defenses that don't have great defensive coaches and his supporting cast was Oak, Wilkins, and a bunch of scrubs in 1990.
On that end he was a beast out on the perimeter capable of sticking with smaller guys, super athletic and capable of blocking shots at their apex, the best PNR defender of all the Cs of that era (DRob, Hakeem, Deke, and a little later Zo) and he had fast hands capable of stopping drives. Can anyone actually say what he improved at under Pat Riley? I mean performances aren't consistent which is why I think he was better defensively in 89, 92, etc. but why believe Ewing was a meaningfully better defender in the mid 90s just because he finally got a supporting cast that was dominant on that end and a great defensive coach?
I think tons of people just aren't used to seeing young Ewing so they see the numbers and can't connect it to him being legitimately better, and assume he had to have improved later when in reality he lost a ton of his athleticism and really didn't add much to his game. 93/94 Ewing isn't locking down Edwards on the perimeter, forcing Isiah to pick up his dribble and rush a pass (causing a turnover) after a switch in the PNR, drawing a charge on Isiah all the way at the dotted line with his quick reaction and movement (it was called blocking but he's clearly there in time), stopping 3 on 1 fast breaks because no one wanted to go up with it with him around, and at the end of the game blocking Isiah's layup from the other side of the basket.
2. Dwight Howard (2011) Put simply, I think he is the best remaining defender in contention (perhaps depending on whether Thurmond qualifies as a contender, which he might), and while I have some issues with his offensive profile in the postseason and with that profile’s ability to translate dynamically across different teams, his intense rim gravity gives him a pretty fair floor. He was a top player on par with several already admitted — 2009-11 Wade, 2009-11 Dirk, 2005-11 Nash — and has a theoretical framework of “Rudy Gobert with legitimate scoring pressure”. As with Ewing, also worth considering just how much timing affects our assessments: could the 2011 iteration of Dwight and a healthy Jameer Nelson have won the title in 2009?
3. Tracy McGrady (2003) McGrady is the player with whom I have struggled the most in this project. Never made it out of the first round despite playing generally uninspiring all-time teams. Impeccable résumé as a floor-raiser, but underwhelming results in any other context. Houston is funny; I ran the numbers for 2005-09, and the team was essentially +4 with McGrady alone, +4 with Yao alone, annnnnd… +4 with both. And then of course without McGrady they finally win a series and then an out-of-prime Artest, Battier, and Lowry go on to push the soon-to-be-champion Lakers to a tough seven-game series. Almost feels like a cosmic joke.
The other aspect giving me trouble was Penny Hardaway. I just… was not sure if I really should be that much more impressed with McGrady than with Penny. Raw impact seemed to be either equal or to favour peak Penny. Penny went toe-to-toe with Jordan and Pippen (Luka-esque?), and then his 1997 series against the -6 rDRTG Heat, without Shaq and also without Horace Grant, is to me probably more impressive than any McGrady series. It was a five-game first round, and you could argue McGrady would have pulled of an 1-8 upset in that circumstance; however, as acknowledged with the 1981 Rockets/Lakers series, teams should adapt earlier in those circumstances, and Detroit’s approach to Game 4 would be different if it were an elimination scenario. Penny also seems more portable, although playing next to Yao is tougher than playing next to Shaq.
Most people take McGrady nevertheless, and I have no strong counter against that. His season looks extremely similar to 1987 Jordan, with honestly a better postseason. His on-court offences in 2002 and 2003 were a lot better than post-1996 Penny’s were without Shaq. He has a small but appreciable advantage in minutes. Idk. I guess I feel more comfortable punishing Embiid for never playing 60% of available team minutes than punishing McGrady for never closing out an advantaged team. And against Malone, well, I guess I would rather have the cross between 1987 Jordan and 2006 Kobe who could pretty much drive +5 on-court offences by himself.
4. Karl Malonea.) 1998 b.) 1995 I said when I entered the project that I had a general preference for two-way bigs. Among that archetype, Karl Malone looks like the best option (if only because I am applying something of a health penalty to Embiid). Outstanding offensive impact through scoring and passing, and respectable defensive impact via tenacious post defence, crafty hands, and positionally strong defensive rebounding. Robust albeit not overwhelming performer in most impact indicators, although as I have repeatedly expressed, I avoid getting too myopic with both in-era contextual and cross-era comparative impact, and I do believe there are some major collinearity issues with being perpetually tied to Stockton. I do not see Stockton as any sort of superstar, think he was only ever a fringe top ten player at his peak (and this is not his peak), and am secure with the evidence (contrary to common assumption) that Malone did not exactly need Stockton to score as he did.
The postseason dips give me some pause, but the results were still stronger than most players, and the scoring decline is defensible enough when factoring load, scheme, opposition, style, and teammates. An often unrecognised attribute I like in Malone: he has a mild positive tendency to improve after struggling against a prior opponent. Note the change from the 1994 Rockets to the 1995 Rockets, from the 1997 Rockets/Bulls to the 1998 Rockets/Bulls, and from the 1999 Blazers to the 2000 Blazers. I think 1995 has merit, but 1998 would be my pick, for its postseason and for how Malone supported the team without Stockton… but that sample without Stockton is also what makes me hold off on a higher spot.
The Jazz went 51-13 with Stockton (65-win pace) and 11-7 (50-win pace) without him. In prior projects I saw cases made that the without record is a bit unfair because the team needed time to adjust without their ever-present offensive captain, and that is probably true… but then again, most of those teams in the without sample were pretty bad (for an example of what that can look like at as a “with you” sample, see Jordan and the 1995 Bulls). I do not have any SRS numbers on hand for that stretch, or even net rating. I do not exactly have Malone on/off splits independent of Stockton, although I do know his average plus/minus (not regularised — I am referring to the one for which Draymond set the all-time record in 2016) was +4.2. He went +8.1 the rest of the season with Stockton in the lineup. I encourage anyone to share further data or prior comments on this dynamic.
Now, this is not a damning result. Elsewhere on this board I have gone over other random WOWY absences which hurt their teams, by players with a much lower place on their team’s hierarchy than Stockton’s place on the Jazz. However, Stockton was an undeniably high impact player in the regular season, and while we could debate the merits of replacing him with a less “good” but more reliable postseason performer, seems fair to say the Jazz would not be much of a contender without him. I do have Karl Malone ahead of Barkley for his substantial advantage on defence and for postseason offensive results comparable to or better than Barkley with a generously “similar” supporting cast (Playoff KJ >>> Playoff Stockton). My preference is for players who manage to generate championship level offence or defence without a significant secondary support piece substantially aiding them… like we see with peak Dwight Howard and Tracy McGrady.
Elgee wrote:the RS numbers need to be remembered in interpreting what happened to Utah in the PS. This is a 27 ppg/58% guy changing to 27 ppg/53%...but there are also circumstantial changes to consider.
I've written about the change in role in the PS, largely IMO bc Stockton was incapable of certain things for the heart of Malone's career. The rest of the team's turnovers plummet (an indication they are "doing" less), for example, as Malone does more. (I'd call it unipolar, but I have a lot of respect for the Jazz offensive sets.) As a result, we see Malone in more iso situations, absolutely.
With jordan, Shaq and Hakeem as the only other better statistical PS scorers of the period (or perhaps Reggie Miller?)...
You know who else has an enormous drop? His teammate, Stockton (-3.4%). Chicken, meet egg. But if you believe that Stockton was helping Malone get better shots, only Stockton's own game limits the pressure he can put on a PS defense, then that shifts some of the role to Malone (which bastillon was saying). That we still see 27 ppg scoring and excellent offensive results (remember Malone was a fantastic passer) means it doesn't make much sense to say his scoring was "REALLLYYYY overstated."
The 94 Jazz had "second options" of Horny and Stock...but really Stock was a PG who wasn't going to take over the game scoring and he didn't have the same scoring threat we see today from guys like Paul or Nash (heck it wasn't close to the same as Penny.) Horny was a spacer/shooter, and a good one, and his arrival boosted the Jazz offense. So what you get is:
Malone's A 27 ppg, 53% TSer who was carrying an enormous load. The Jazz postseason offenses in those years were:
Utah PS offenses 94 +4.5 95 +8.5 96 +6.7 97 +6.5 98 +0.1 (and that was +4.3 in the WC PS before the debacle in Chi)
So you're left with a scorer, who is the primary scorer, who is scoring at a rate that only the all-time best eclipse, and his team's ORtg changes correlate strongly (0.77 from 92-98) with his individual ORtg changes. Here are the players I consider to be better offensive post players and their PS numbers*:
And here's the crux of the point: If Malone could maintain his volume/efficiency (27/58%) despite the changes in what his teammates were doing in playoff series...he'd actually be raising his game significantly. Significantly! Heck, 27/56% would be raising his game a lot because that would simply be the "expected" TS% against those defenses. This is, in a statistical sense, what Hakeem did (and why he was voted in at No. 5). If Malone was doing this, he'd quite likely have multiple championship rings and we'd have voted him in a long time ago.
So I guess if you think of Malone as a 30/60% guy, then that does really overstate him as an iso scorer. If you think of him as a 27/53% guy on a good team (or for some, a really good team), that understates him as a scorer. Who cares about the semantics here though, when the important point is that Malone is an excellent scorer who is just a cut below the all-timers.
*Malone 92-98 is 27/53% (103.9 opp DRtg). He's +1.6% aTS% gainst his opponent's, and when we incorporate how good of a passer he was, there just simply aren't any bigs left who are better offensively. Other bigs in their prime as PS scorers:
Duncan 23/55% v 103.7 DRtg teams Moses 23/55% v 103.2 DRtg teams Ewing 23/55% v 105.1 DRtg teams Robinson 23/55% v 106.5 DRtg teams
fatal9 wrote:If we take out isolation offense, Malone is maybe the best scorer ever. He is incredible at scoring in context of the team, kind of like “take nothing off the table” type of guy in the offense. He spaces out the floor. He gets your offense easy baskets. He RUNS offense for you out of the high post. He threads passes from the post to hit cutters. He is a legit offensive hub. He makes opponents think twice about fighting through his screens. He reads defenses well. He's elite in the pick and roll. He is a capable iso scorer (mediocre when compared to the best). He does an amazing job at putting himself in position to score without the ball (has a knack for where to be, and also has brute strength to get position where ever he wants). He can score an efficient 25 without ever stopping the ball or putting it on the floor. If he grabs a defensive rebound, he’s throwing an outlet pass in the receiver's lap. He is an incredibly effective team offensive player. You lose a lot with him off the floor.
I think it's absurd that people are questioning Malone's team impact when his strength as a scorer and offensive player is how well he does it WITH the team (and how well the team does with a player like him on the floor). No, I don't think old Stockton and old Hornacek playing 30 mpg are the co-anchors of an offense that was better than MJ's Bulls. I can’t throw out all I see based on a single piece of data that isn't even from the time period in question and is filled with confounding variables galore.
Malone’s regular season impact is and never was a question to me. I have problems with his isolation scoring in the playoffs and to me that was a big flaw when we were discussing him with players in the 15-20 range (who were 5+ type offensive players). Now we are at 25, the flaw isn’t quite as glaring because everyone now has one thing or another, we’ve moved into lower end of the tier.
Embiid next in line, then less clear. Guards: Frazier, Penny, Luka are the guys I trust most in a postseason setting. If someone really cares to push for Westbrook, they would need to sell me on him as a player (yes, I know the postseason AuPM numbers) over at least Luka. Wings/Forwards: Barry and Pippen, and then Barkley will almost certainly be admitted before I would be comfortable voting for him. Possibly Paul George or Draymond if we extend to fifty. Bigs: A lot of names although feeling increasingly mixed. Feel best about Lanier. Oscillate on Mourning and Thurmond because of their unreliable postseason scoring profiles.
Mikan: He's clearly the most dominant of anyone here by any (few) stats we have, and by any (limited) film we have [see my previous conversation on the topic]. The big question is how much to discount him for his competition or from a "goodness" perspective. I'm honestly not sure what the answer is. I put him here, which used to be the approximate boundary between two Tiers of peaks. I think there'll definitely be some arbitrariness in when he gets voted in though. I just wish we had more info on him!
Other than Mikan, we're now getting into the group of peaks that are quite hard to distinguish. No candidate is flawless, and the data we have doesn't portray them too far apart, though there are clear groups). Additionally, no candidate has outlier positive contextual factors (e.g. resilience, scalability, time machine argument, etc.) to put them above the rest.
Malone, Barkley, and Harden tend to have the best statistical profiles (likely in that order, though Barkley and Harden are hard to separate). Malone is ahead in Augmented Plus Minus (both regular season and postseason), RAPM, and PIPM (regular season and postseason). He doesn't lose that much ground in BPM, and the accuracy of his WOWY numbers are limited by his minuscule off sample (which actually supports his durability advantage over everyone here). Harden and Barkley trade off in these stats, but tend to have a slight advantage over McGrady/Ewing.
Contextually, people tend to have resilience concerns with Malone. I've been a proponent that many supposed playoff "chokes" are overreactions that aren't that bad, often being cases of injuries or poor fit more than inherent limitations in the player. For Malone, I see his playoff struggles as clearly connecting to the fact that the load/volume of his teammates decreased in the playoffs... he was forced to shoulder a load that was slightly too large for him, and appeared to fail because of it. I see him as a fine playoff performer for this level, and I don't see him losing enough ground in resilience to Barkley and certainly not to Harden for them to catch up. Neither of these three are portability darlings (though all are better than Ewing here). Defensive concerns hold me back on Barkley compared to Malone, particularly since both are big men where defense is more valuable.
For McGrady, I'm a bit hesitant to take him over the other 3 given he doesn't have as compelling a statistical case, and given the shorter peak (how do we rate outlier years?) and the various other concerns (health / resilience) that come with him.
For Ewing, his WOWY numbers are encouraging, but defensive anchors have the potential to be overrated in WOWY, for reasons I've discussed previously. None of the other data we have on him is compelling relative to the first three, and I have major scalability concerns. Put another way, I have concerns about his iso-centric offensive approach to scoring, especially given he lacks a clear volume or efficiency advantage against these other players. And for all his defensive superiority, he's probably the worst facilitator of this group. Could I be underrating Ewing's defensive advantage? The 90s Knicks were a historically good defensive dynasty, after all -- up there with Robinson/Duncan Spurs, the KG Celtics. How much of this was driven solely by Ewing vs boosted by his teammates? Ewing's certainly an all time defender, probably top 10 all time, but I see him as clearly a step down from Robinson/Duncan/Wilt/Hakeem/Russell/Garnett. If you're using team relative defensive rating to argue for him, it's worth noting that unlike other defensive greats (like Russell), his team's defensive success does not correlate well with Ewing's individual defense. Most people rate Ewing's seasons as something like this: 1990 > 1989 ~ 1991 > 1992 > 1993. But his team's defensive rating goes the exact opposite! His teams were better defensively when he was worse defensively. Now this still suggests you can build All-time defenses around Ewing, but to me it also suggests that Ewing was not the sole driver of these defensive teams. Thus, I haven't yet been convinced that Ewing's defense is enough to overcome the advantages others have, but as I've said, these peaks are quite close together. There's certainly some uncertainty, and a more optimistic interpretation of Ewing's defense/offense could have him higher.
1. George Mikan 1950. (alternate 1951, 49) By far the most dominant 2-way player relative to his peers of anyone left. Led the league in scoring, Win Shares and Defensive WS. Likely would have led the league in rebounds and blocks if those stats were recorded then and would have been the clear favorite for Defensive Player of the Year is such an award existed. There is no question whatsoever that he was the best of his era, more so than anyone left. In terms of in-era dominance, he has a very good case for being the GOAT. As is, he may well be the most impactful player ever, given that the 24-second rule was established largely due to Mikan's dominance and the widening of the key was dubbed "the Mikan rule". A good argument can be made that the introduction of the shot clock is the single biggest and most influential rule change since the NBA started. The question is how much do we penalize him for playing in a weaker era. This is where I would draw the line at continuing to penalize him.
2. Bob Pettit 1959. (alternate 58, 62)I have Pettit as very close to Mikan so I suppose it makes sense for me to list him just after Mikan. In terms of how he did against his peers, I think a good argument could be made that 59 Pettit could have been a top ten season. Obviously we also have to look at the context of his season and the quality of his competition and figure out how much to penalize him for the era he played in. He was MVP in a league that had Bill Russell averaging 23 boards/game, a rookie Elgin Baylor averaging 25 pts and 15 rebounds/game, and Hall of Famers like Schayes, Arizin, Hagan, Cousy and Twyman in their primes. Pettit led the league with 29.4 pts/game, a 28.2 PER and 14.8 WS while finishing second in rebounds with 16.4/game.
3. Tracy McGrady 2003. Sure, its an outlier season for him but for this project that is irrelevant. For that one year, he put together his best shooting season with one of his better assist seasons. Also had his best season at drawing fouls and by far his best season ever in WS, WS/48, OBPM and PER.
30. Charles Barkley 1990. (1993 HM). There’s no perfect players left, and Charles certainly was not great on D. But what Barkley did on TNT, I mean offense, is pretty spectacular. 24.1 pp75 on +12.4 rTS%.
31. T-Mac 2003. 31.5 pp75 at +4.5 rTS%. I don’t care if it was a single season outlier. It happened and it was beautiful.
32. Draymond Green 2015-16. The one year he could shoot. Draymond on D was a force. His versatility on D, and spectacular PIPM numbers. Also considered here were Ewing, Howard, Miller, Pippen, Grant Hill.
Was originally going to go with barkley among the 90's players left. But thinkinh about it more i am unsure if i really would rather build my team around a weak defensive big and all the team building issues of that
Karl malone doesnt give the same offense punch (and has notable issues scoring as a first option in the playoffs) but i feel like in a majority of situations i would rather build around him than barkley thanks to his better defense. While being still able to be the main part of a really fantastic offense
Ewing is someone i am unsure how to weight agains howard. Incredible defenders. Good if limited scorers (ewing with better post moves, howard more raw athletism imo) and weaker passing...the more i think of them the more i have to agree with the sinimarities
Although i would give ewing the edge if only by "leadership" tiebreaker
Penny, pippen and reggie are all interesting picks too. As well as 2016 draymond or McGrady (which have a bit of an "outlier" asterisk to them. As in outlier seasons that cannot be clearly explained by injuries like happens to post 90 ewing)
This is inportant. If a player has an outlier year, gets hurt and slows down. It probably was not an outlier year as much as a breakout year followed tragically by injuries. 2016 draymond and 2003 mcgrady are weirder in that as far as i know there were not jig injuries to explain the "outlierness" of their peak seasons (shooting and efficienct wise respectively)
which may mean that if i plugged 2003 mcgrady in a different situation and 1990. The former may be more likely to underwhelm (relative to 2003 absurd season) than the latter.
Penny i have just not had the chance to watch much footage of these days, been kind of busy (sorry penny) so i womt be considering him for now until i can watch more games from him
Reggie and pippen is where i really struggle. Limited impact metrics and game watching tell me they really are at the same level as ewing/barkley/karl
But as lame as it sounds. I dont feel confident enough in the amount of analysis/game watching i have done on them to "jump thw shark" yet. I am thinking that pippem may actually be better than barkley....but not confident enough to go there yet
Another project, another vote for mikan (like 16 threads and going lol)
1-1950 george mikan (1951)
As i have said before i dont think there is a right answer to the mikan question of how to evaluate a player who dominated nba early stages when talent pool, game advancement, rules and segregation made it such a different league
But i feel like if we are gonna include him in the project he deserves a placing that more closely indicates how much he dominated the league when he played, otherwise i would prefer to keep pre shot clock seasons out of the project
2- 1990 patrick ewing
Compared to barkley defensive issues with team construction and karl malone struggles as a first option. I get the feel a team built around defensive star ewing is gonna be the easier one to build around (knicks long success with a diminished ewing version may hint there a bit) as most of his value comes without the ball
Also watching him i think he is the one who left more value on the table the way he was utilized...if that makes sense
Barkley played in a way that squeezed as nuch value of his offense as you could have in that era (maybe a more point forward role? But i dont think he had the dribble to do that full time)
Karl malone post passing was well used in the jazz system, using his athletism and passing well
Ewing was asked to isolate over and over when he could have been a monster in the pick and roll in 1990 with his athletism and shooting. I think asking him to be a full time isolationist limited his offensive impact a bit. Put him with kevin johnson or stockton and i think he could have done more damage in offense. Put 90' barkley along an all star offensive guard and he probably still sucks there (i dont think his issue in defense was his offensive load)
3- 1994 scottie pippen
I am surprised i actually went there....but why not? This is a pick that can still be chsnged later if i change my mind
I think pippen ability to be a legitimate offensive star was clearly shown in 1994.
He was not as good of a scorer as barkley. But i think he has a lot lf the same strenghts in rebounding and full court game. Whike being leagues ahead in defense.
In this year He is like karl in that he was a so-so efficiency volume scorer. A great creator (more off the dribble and full court while karl obviously is more in the post) a insanely underated offensive rebounder. And in general just a solid offense floor raiser who when moved to the "offense no 2 spot" can still hold a huge amount of impact without volume scorint
The most striking thingh about 94 pippen is that he may be the only elite perimeter defender who showed dpoy level defense while being a first option in offense. (The 94 playoffs are mindblowing in how much energy he puts in both ends of the court while shouldering a huge load)
Kawhi had a much higher offense ceiling but never got as close to playing 100% defense and 100% offense simultaneously as i feel pippen did here.
4- 1996 karl malone
The version i have been watching so i may be off the mark here. I am very impressed with his overall game. And in the playoffs his offensive value is still higher than pippen (although i think karl malone scoring drop off and pippen ability to handle the ball at hks height close the gap a bit) but i think pippen defense is in easily higher level.
Even as a first option in 1994 pippen defense is still Soooo good that i think is at least close between them (as first options) and i prefer scottie skillset if i am pairing them with a better offense first option (second option portability starts to be more important to me at this level than in the top 10~ or 20)
I may move karl or barkley or reggie above pippen in later rounds. My vote is still very temptative....but i go with these for now
1st ballot: Charles Barkley '90 (> '93) I know many go for '93, but I like '90 best because he was still closer to his athletic peak and utilizing his inside game optimally, just on constant attack. '93 is probably his best playmaking season, and arguably one of his better defensive ones [though not any better than '90, I don't think].......but his increasing penchant for shooting in the mid-range [or from trey]---where he was merely mediocre---is a big strike against '93 compared to '90: he was the worst 2pt% season since his rookie year in '93, while also taking more 3's than ever before [hitting just 30.5% (and worse in the playoffs)], AND '93 also sees his [by far] lowest FTAr of his career to that point.
2nd ballot: '22 Joel Embiid (> '21) Honestly, on a per-minute basis, I think Embiid is a bit better/more valuable than anyone left on the table. It's simply the missed games/durability concerns (in BOTH rs and playoffs) combined with relatively restricted minutes that slides him just behind a couple players for me.
3rd ballot: '03 Tracy McGrady Not sure how much of a ceiling raiser he can be, but this was perhaps an all-time tier floor-raising carry-job. I'm going to quote portions of posts of other posters [from the TMac vs Drexler thread] for argumentation...
tsherkin wrote:He was a +4.5% rTS guy (109 TS+) in that 02-03 season. Led the league in usage at 35.2%, led the league in OWS (13.2) on a 42-win team. 30.3 PER, led the league. .262 WS/48, league-high. +9.8 OBPM, league-high. Second in the league in oRAPM behind Dirk.
I'm about to focus on OBPM, but obviously it is just one stat, and one which has its own pros and cons. But I do want to examine the achievement, since we're speaking specifically of offense and specifically of peak.
Keep in mind, there are 3 seasons in league history of 2,000+ minutes and 9.5+ OBPM. McGrady's 9.8 is second-highest on that list, ahead of 09 Lebron's 9.5, and behind 2016 Steph's 10.3. There are 9 player-seasons of +9.0 or better with those 2,000 minutes, just to open it up to a slightly less arbitrary range. Lebron's on it 3 times, and Jokic is on it twice. No one else is on it more than once.
Drexler's career-high is +6.8 OBPM, from the 92 season when his Blazers lost to MJ in the Finals. It was part of a stretch of 5-straight seasons of +5.0 or better, and six seasons in eight. Never managed double-digit OWS. Never exceeded 24.1 PER. rTS a little lower in his peak seasons than McGrady. Never exceeded 27.2 ppg. Never exceeded 28.7 USG. Topped out at 29.9% AST and 12.4% TOV, against 03 McGrady's 30.0% USG and 8.4% TOV.
In an article I previously wrote, I described TMac's offensive game and value before.
Some stats:
33.4 Adjusted Points (leading the league) on +4.5 relative-to-league average true shooting 5.4 Assists, along with a 9.9 Offensive Box Creation and 7.6 Passer Rating 6.4 Rebounds (1.6 coming on the offensive end) 5.8 BackPicks Box Plus-Minus, 4.4 Augmented Plus-Minus / Game (4th and 5th in the league)
Posting one of the highest possessional scoring rates in NBA history, McGrady demonstrated a versatile scoring arsenal – leveraging his size and quickness for a long mid-range and 3-Point driven shot diet (57.7% of his total field-goal attempts, shooting 43.1 and 38.6 % on these level shots respectively) with stellar low post play and basket drives in addition. In a situation with relatively poor spacing and offensive support, McGrady was often responsible for creating possessions. His volume scoring gave him significant attention through doubles – where he showed a solid ability to pass out of them – dishing assists over the heads of defenders (the hyperlinked clip shows career highlights, including his 2002-03 season). How much McGrady was responsible directly impacted his team’s situation. With a 105.2 rated team offensive (good for 10th in the league), 74% of this production came with McGrady on – where the team posted a 109.3 offense (5.7 points above league average). In the other 26%, the Magic posted only a 91.8 offensive rating.
This goes to show how much of a load McGrady shouldered, where he ultimately brought the Magic to the first round of the playoffs in an 8 vs. 1 seed matchup against the 2002-03 Pistons (whom were anchored by a 99.9 rated team defense). While McGrady had some struggles down the stretch, he still performed well in totality. His averages in the series, listed below, show a somewhat decline in creation, but this can certainly be explored further when considering an inferior (for star standards) supporting cast and the opponent faced. In a better situation, there would certainly be a chance McGrady could engine a championship level offense.
32.5 Points on +5.5 relative-to-opponent average true shooting 4.4 Assists, with an 8.1 Offensive Box Creation and 5.8 Passer Rating 6.2 Rebounds (1.4 coming on the offensive end) 5.0 BackPicks Box Plus-Minus
Looking at all of that, it is clear McGrady has posted a season that is more impactful than any variant of Drexler. Even with such a high offensive load and responsibility, I believe McGrady didn't quite have scoring blindness --- nor was he a slouch off ball. As a matter of fact, he was a very good playmaker off of his scoring gravity and I believe him to be the best offensive player in the league in 2003 (with Shaq declining and Kobe not quite reaching his apex then).
.
4th: '90 Patrick Ewing (> '94 Ewing) 5th: '97 Karl Malone (> '92 > '98) --- I think his peak is slept on a bit, but certainly deserves to be in the conversation around here. Could even see moving it ahead of TMac and Ewing (though not into my top 3). 6th: '11 Dwight Howard (> '09 Howard) 7th: '61 Elgin Baylor (> '62) 8th: '75 Artis Gilmore
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
1. 2017 Westbrook- Was MVP over the seasons from the #11, #21, and #24 peaks in this project and then maintained his numbers in the playoffs with an on/off of +62. This season gets poisoned by the ones around it, but Westbrook literally had an all-time season in 2017.
2. 2022 Embiid- Had a better PER than all but 6 players all-time while also playing defense at an all-NBA level. That's a pretty undeniable combo.
3. 1949 Mikan (1950)- Was playing in a VERY primitive league at the time, but at least he dominated the competition as much as you could possibly imagine. His 20.9 WS almost doubled second place Ed Sadowski. In the playoffs, he was even more dominant going from 28 PPG on .498 TS% to 30 PPG on a league best .541 TS%. He had 4.2 WS in 10 games which would be 0.42 WS/48 if he played 48 minutes every single game. Otherwise, he's even better. I think he's worth a flyer behind all the truly dominant alpha dogs from the modern game.
trex_8063 wrote:1st ballot: Charles Barkley '90 (> '93) I know many go for '93, but I like '90 best because he was still closer to his athletic peak and utilizing his inside game optimally, just on constant attack. '93 is probably his best playmaking season, and arguably one of his better defensive ones [though not any better than '90, I don't think].......but his increasing penchant for shooting in the mid-range [or from trey]---where he was merely mediocre---is a big strike against '93 compared to '90: he was the worst 2pt% season since his rookie year in '93, while also taking more 3's than ever before [hitting just 30.5% (and worse in the playoffs)], AND '93 also sees his [by far] lowest FTAr of his career to that point.
2nd ballot: '22 Joel Embiid (> '21) Honestly, on a per-minute basis, I think Embiid is a bit better/more valuable than anyone left on the table. It's simply the missed games/durability concerns (in BOTH rs and playoffs) combined with relatively restricted minutes that slides him just behind a couple players for me.
3rd ballot: '03 Tracy McGrady Not sure how much of a ceiling raiser he can be, but this was perhaps an all-time tier floor-raising carry-job. I'm going to quote portions of posts of other posters [from the TMac vs Drexler thread] for argumentation...
tsherkin wrote:He was a +4.5% rTS guy (109 TS+) in that 02-03 season. Led the league in usage at 35.2%, led the league in OWS (13.2) on a 42-win team. 30.3 PER, led the league. .262 WS/48, league-high. +9.8 OBPM, league-high. Second in the league in oRAPM behind Dirk.
I'm about to focus on OBPM, but obviously it is just one stat, and one which has its own pros and cons. But I do want to examine the achievement, since we're speaking specifically of offense and specifically of peak.
Keep in mind, there are 3 seasons in league history of 2,000+ minutes and 9.5+ OBPM. McGrady's 9.8 is second-highest on that list, ahead of 09 Lebron's 9.5, and behind 2016 Steph's 10.3. There are 9 player-seasons of +9.0 or better with those 2,000 minutes, just to open it up to a slightly less arbitrary range. Lebron's on it 3 times, and Jokic is on it twice. No one else is on it more than once.
Drexler's career-high is +6.8 OBPM, from the 92 season when his Blazers lost to MJ in the Finals. It was part of a stretch of 5-straight seasons of +5.0 or better, and six seasons in eight. Never managed double-digit OWS. Never exceeded 24.1 PER. rTS a little lower in his peak seasons than McGrady. Never exceeded 27.2 ppg. Never exceeded 28.7 USG. Topped out at 29.9% AST and 12.4% TOV, against 03 McGrady's 30.0% USG and 8.4% TOV.
In an article I previously wrote, I described TMac's offensive game and value before.
Some stats:
33.4 Adjusted Points (leading the league) on +4.5 relative-to-league average true shooting 5.4 Assists, along with a 9.9 Offensive Box Creation and 7.6 Passer Rating 6.4 Rebounds (1.6 coming on the offensive end) 5.8 BackPicks Box Plus-Minus, 4.4 Augmented Plus-Minus / Game (4th and 5th in the league)
Posting one of the highest possessional scoring rates in NBA history, McGrady demonstrated a versatile scoring arsenal – leveraging his size and quickness for a long mid-range and 3-Point driven shot diet (57.7% of his total field-goal attempts, shooting 43.1 and 38.6 % on these level shots respectively) with stellar low post play and basket drives in addition. In a situation with relatively poor spacing and offensive support, McGrady was often responsible for creating possessions. His volume scoring gave him significant attention through doubles – where he showed a solid ability to pass out of them – dishing assists over the heads of defenders (the hyperlinked clip shows career highlights, including his 2002-03 season). How much McGrady was responsible directly impacted his team’s situation. With a 105.2 rated team offensive (good for 10th in the league), 74% of this production came with McGrady on – where the team posted a 109.3 offense (5.7 points above league average). In the other 26%, the Magic posted only a 91.8 offensive rating.
This goes to show how much of a load McGrady shouldered, where he ultimately brought the Magic to the first round of the playoffs in an 8 vs. 1 seed matchup against the 2002-03 Pistons (whom were anchored by a 99.9 rated team defense). While McGrady had some struggles down the stretch, he still performed well in totality. His averages in the series, listed below, show a somewhat decline in creation, but this can certainly be explored further when considering an inferior (for star standards) supporting cast and the opponent faced. In a better situation, there would certainly be a chance McGrady could engine a championship level offense.
32.5 Points on +5.5 relative-to-opponent average true shooting 4.4 Assists, with an 8.1 Offensive Box Creation and 5.8 Passer Rating 6.2 Rebounds (1.4 coming on the offensive end) 5.0 BackPicks Box Plus-Minus
Looking at all of that, it is clear McGrady has posted a season that is more impactful than any variant of Drexler. Even with such a high offensive load and responsibility, I believe McGrady didn't quite have scoring blindness --- nor was he a slouch off ball. As a matter of fact, he was a very good playmaker off of his scoring gravity and I believe him to be the best offensive player in the league in 2003 (with Shaq declining and Kobe not quite reaching his apex then).
.
4th: '90 Patrick Ewing (> '94 Ewing) 5th: '97 Karl Malone (> '92 > '98) --- I think his peak is slept on a bit, but certainly deserves to be in the conversation around here. Could even see moving it ahead of TMac and Ewing (though not into my top 3). 6th: '11 Dwight Howard (> '09 Howard) 7th: '61 Elgin Baylor (> '62) 8th: '75 Artis Gilmore
Did you already considered Doncic in your voting, or is it too early for you yet?
1. 17 Westbrook (2016) Having out-valued, out-box stat'd and out-played prime KD in the post-season while staying within range in the regular season, 2016 Westbrook(and to an extent 2014 westbrook) is a great peak aready. Adding in westbrook's tendency to get better vs stronger opponents and his significant playoff elevation on very strong playoff opponents(crushing the 70 win spurs, taking the warriors to 7, pushing the 14 spurs to overtime of game 6, beating the best clippersi iterations, ect, ect) and Westbrook accomplishing this without good spacing, 2016(and 2014 to a degree) sets a verty strong floor.
2017 Westbrook can claim a stronger regular season performance(second in impact stuff behind 2017 curry), a better skill-set(stronger catch and shoot) and nothing about the rockets first playoff exit really calls into questions Westbrook's track record as a playoff elevator.
2. 94 Scottie Pippen (91, 92) Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.
3. 2022 Embid Improved from leading a contender in 2019 across the board in the regular, strong playoff performances in adverse circumstances and mvp level impact with questionable fit
OhayoKD wrote: 2. 94 Scottie Pippen (91, 93) Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.
Idle thoughts with Pippen. They added Kerr, Kukoc and Bill Wennington, and then Luc Longley for the last quarter of the season. They dropped off by 6.8 points of team ORTG (-0.2 relative to league average after being +4.9 the year before), though they improved by 3.4 points of team DRTG.
Lots of people try to treat 94 as a static "hey, look, they only won 2 fewer games without Jordan, but with Scottie at the helm" kind of situation, and it's not quite accurate. Instead of leaning on the increasingly injury-addled Bill Cartwright (who retired after 94), they had a much better rotation at the 5. They took their lumps on offense, that drop-off was immense and expected, and that defensive improvement looks great until you realize they were 7th on D in 93 and 6th in 94. They got worse at defensive TOV%, but they also got a lot better on the defensive glass, going from 12th at 68.7% to 2nd at 70.8%. Half a season of Will Perdue helped, but so did Longley, Scott Williams, Bill Wennington and rookie Corie Blount (albeit in fairly limited minutes in his case). Chicago's frontcourt added some significant pieces and depth that is often underappreciated. Also, this was Horace Grant's All-Star season. 94-96 were his best defensive rebounding seasons, and while 92 was probably his actual best season, this was at least the second-best season of his entire career. That adjustment also helped.
And of course, this is the (in)famous season where Pippen sat out while Kukoc took the last shot with 1.8 left on the clock.
OhayoKD wrote:2. 94 Scottie Pippen (91, 93) Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.
Idle thoughts with Pippen. They added Kerr, Kukoc and Bill Wennington, and then Luc Longley for the last quarter of the season. They dropped off by 6.8 points of team ORTG (-0.2 relative to league average after being +4.9 the year before), though they improved by 3.4 points of team DRTG.
Lots of people try to treat 94 as a static "hey, look, they only won 2 fewer games without Jordan, but with Scottie at the helm" kind of situation, and it's not quite accurate. Instead of leaning on the increasingly injury-addled Bill Cartwright (who retired after 94), they had a much better rotation at the 5. They took their lumps on offense, that drop-off was immense and expected, and that defensive improvement looks great until you realize they were 7th on D in 93 and 6th in 94. They got worse at defensive TOV%, but they also got a lot better on the defensive glass, going from 12th at 68.7% to 2nd at 70.8%. Half a season of Will Perdue helped, but so did Longley, Scott Williams, Bill Wennington and rookie Corie Blount (albeit in fairly limited minutes in his case). Chicago's frontcourt added some significant pieces and depth that is often underappreciated. Also, this was Horace Grant's All-Star season. 94-96 were his best defensive rebounding seasons, and while 92 was probably his actual best season, this was at least the second-best season of his entire career. That adjustment also helped.
These are decent reasons to take a 1995 or 1996 over 1994 (as I would), but they are not effective arguments against Pippen’s peak itself.
1994: +5.5 on, +7 net 1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan.
And of course, this is the (in)famous season where Pippen sat out while Kukoc took the last shot with 1.8 left on the clock.
And they only got to that position — basically one shot away from upsetting a 6.5 SRS team — because of Pippen’s play.
OhayoKD wrote:2. 94 Scottie Pippen (91, 93) Led a contender without Jordan winnning 55 rs games, sweeping a 48 win team in the ffirst round and nearly taking the 61 srs knicks out with maybe the best performance of his career. Biggest factor in Jordan's 50 win bulls sides turning into atg teams, arguably the best non-big defender ever, and one of the best creators of the 90's starting in the 91 playoffs.
Idle thoughts with Pippen. They added Kerr, Kukoc and Bill Wennington, and then Luc Longley for the last quarter of the season. They dropped off by 6.8 points of team ORTG (-0.2 relative to league average after being +4.9 the year before), though they improved by 3.4 points of team DRTG.
Lots of people try to treat 94 as a static "hey, look, they only won 2 fewer games without Jordan, but with Scottie at the helm" kind of situation, and it's not quite accurate. Instead of leaning on the increasingly injury-addled Bill Cartwright (who retired after 94), they had a much better rotation at the 5. They took their lumps on offense, that drop-off was immense and expected, and that defensive improvement looks great until you realize they were 7th on D in 93 and 6th in 94. They got worse at defensive TOV%, but they also got a lot better on the defensive glass, going from 12th at 68.7% to 2nd at 70.8%. Half a season of Will Perdue helped, but so did Longley, Scott Williams, Bill Wennington and rookie Corie Blount (albeit in fairly limited minutes in his case). Chicago's frontcourt added some significant pieces and depth that is often underappreciated. Also, this was Horace Grant's All-Star season. 94-96 were his best defensive rebounding seasons, and while 92 was probably his actual best season, this was at least the second-best season of his entire career. That adjustment also helped.
These are decent reasons to take a 1995 or 1996 over 1994 (as I would), but they are not effective arguments against Pippen’s peak itself.
1994: +5.5 on, +7 net 1995: +8.2 on, +12.3 net (third in league), with no Grant and with only 17 games of a rusty Jordan.
And of course, this is the (in)famous season where Pippen sat out while Kukoc took the last shot with 1.8 left on the clock.
And they only got to that position — basically one shot away from upsetting a 6.5 SRS team — because of Pippen’s play.
And they looked on pace to win it before pippen was taken out and ewing suddenly got hot while he was on the bench
AEnigma wrote:These are decent reasons to take a 1995 or 1996 over 1994 (as I would), but they are not effective arguments against Pippen’s peak itself.
I'm not sure what this comment is intended to illustrate. I think Pippen played generally very well. He's an unremarkable offensive player at the level of player we're discussing in the sense that he's not moving the needle a lot with his offensive play. A sound playmaker, a good offensive rebounding wing. 92-97 ish, a pretty solid offensive player. Very good rebounder, obviously an outstanding defender. Very much a team player. Just not a particularly good offensive anchor.
And they only got to that position — basically one shot away from upsetting a 6.5 SRS team — because of Pippen’s play.
That isn't entirely accurate, of course. BJ Armstrong shooting the absolute lights out that series helped. Ho Grant's extremely efficient 16.7 ppg was also very relevant, as was his offensive rebounding. And of course, Scottie was 8/22 (36.4%) from the field in game 7. An absolute beast on the glass, but his shooting was horrific, and he of course split his FTs. He wasn't a particularly impressive scorer, and certainly not a hot first option scorer, though he balanced that by moving the ball more and playing a more pure lead role in the Triangle offense.
So it's a little up and down if we're trying to lean too heavily on Pippen's performance in that series. Granted, New York was an excellent defense (in fact, the best D in the league that year). But the Bulls were riding on team O and their own D, which wasn't just from Pippen. Obviously, Pippen did a good job, on both the season and through most of that series. Chicago was pretty successful with him at the forefront. They were less so in 95 than they had been in 94 pre-Jordan, though. They won 8 fewer games that year, and they were 13-4 with Jordan, which emans they were 33-31 without him, so they'd sunk back to just above average. Their D was still strong, their offense was actually a little better per-possession than it had been the year before, but league average moved from 106.3 to 108.3 with the first year of the pulled-in 3, and Chicago was taking something like 6.5 extra 3PA per game in 95 compared to 94, so... They also went from 24th to 19th in team FT%, an area where Pippen most certainly did not contribute positively.
For a project entitled "greatest peaks," I can't really see Pippen in the top 30 personally. There were huge roster changes from 93 to 94 and the absence of Jordan redistributed the offense so that a couple other guys could mitigate the loss. They were still dramatically inferior on O without MJ, which surprised no one and they did quite well. And then they immediately were worse the year after. I think it was a very good season, but hardly a top 30 single-season peak.
AEnigma wrote:These are decent reasons to take a 1995 or 1996 over 1994 (as I would), but they are not effective arguments against Pippen’s peak itself.
I'm not sure what this comment is intended to illustrate. I think Pippen played generally very well. He's an unremarkable offensive player at the level of player we're discussing in the sense that he's not moving the needle a lot with his offensive play. A sound playmaker, a good offensive rebounding wing. 92-97 ish, a pretty solid offensive player. Very good rebounder, obviously an outstanding defender. Very much a team player. Just not a particularly good offensive anchor.
Is this greatest peaks or greatest offensive anchors.
And they only got to that position — basically one shot away from upsetting a 6.5 SRS team — because of Pippen’s play.
That isn't entirely accurate, of course. BJ Armstrong shooting the absolute lights out that series helped. Ho Grant's extremely efficient 16.7 ppg was also very relevant
Playing offball of Pippen, scoring like a point or two per game more than you would expect in that context based on minutes and attempt rate. Does that matter? Sure — at the very least they needed that much to win Game 3 — but that is well within usual variance.
as was his offensive rebounding.
????? His offensive rebounding was worse than normal. Pippen had two fewer over the course of the series, are you just looking for random nitpicks?
And of course, Scottie was 8/22 (36.4%) from the field in game 7. An absolute beast on the glass, but his shooting was horrific, and he of course split his FTs.
Ah, yes, of course. The team’s lead scorer and lead playmaker had an 8/22 night on the road against one of the greatest defences in league history. Imagine that. Imagine if any of these other peaks ever had that type of shooting performance against an elite defence. Really, it boggles the mind…
He wasn't a particularly impressive scorer, and certainly not a hot first option scorer, though he balanced that by moving the ball more and playing a more pure lead role in the Triangle offense.
Is this greatest peaks or greatest scorers.
So it's a little up and down if we're trying to lean too heavily on Pippen's performance in that series.
Karl Malone, Tracy McGrady, and Joel Embiid are three of the main peaks in discussion right now. Scoring dips are not the big concern here, no.
Granted, New York was an excellent defense (in fact, the best D in the league that year). But the Bulls were riding on team O and their own D, which wasn't just from Pippen. Obviously, Pippen did a good job, on both the season and through most of that series. Chicago was pretty successful with him at the forefront. They were less so in 95 than they had been in 94 pre-Jordan, though. They won 8 fewer games that year, and they were 13-4 with Jordan, which emans they were 33-31 without him, so they'd sunk back to just above average. Their D was still strong, their offense was actually a little better per-possession than it had been the year before, but league average moved from 106.3 to 108.3 with the first year of the pulled-in 3, and Chicago was taking something like 6.5 extra 3PA per game in 95 compared to 94, so... They also went from 24th to 19th in team FT%, an area where Pippen most certainly did not contribute positively.
Yep, they went 13-4, no further context necessary. Who cares that they had a season wide on-court rating of +8 with Pippen and no Grant. That was all probably from those 17 games of Jordan scoring at -5 relative efficiency. No need to think about it any further than that. Certainly not relevant that in that 13-4 sample is a 7-1 stretch against the -4.3 SRS Bucks, -7.1 SRS Pistons, -1.9 SRS Heat, -3.3 SRS Nets, -1.9 SRS Celtics, and -5.1 SRS 76ers, while for the 6-3 remainder they split with the 0.6 SRS Cavaliers, split with the 3.4 SRS Pacers, beat the 1.1 SRS Hawks, beat the 2.9 SRS Hornets, twice beat the 2.8 SRS Knicks, and lost to the 6.4 SRS Magic.
But hey, still 13-4; totally a 63-win team once Jordan returned.
For a project entitled "greatest peaks," I can't really see Pippen in the top 30 personally. There were huge roster changes from 93 to 94 and the absence of Jordan redistributed the offense so that a couple other guys could mitigate the loss. They were still dramatically inferior on O without MJ, which surprised no one and they did quite well. And then they immediately were worse the year after. I think it was a very good season, but hardly a top 30 single-season peak.
Okay, find me… twenty superstar players with a better AuPM, on-court, and net rating than Pippen’s 1995 and/or 1996 seasons. Probably should be pretty easy, since his peak was not actually that impactful, right.
If you want to look at pre-databall options, I can even open it up to the box stats. From 1994-96 he averaged .197 WS/48, 7.2 BPM, +7.7 RAPTOR, and +5.1 PIPM. Underwhelming totals, of course, so should be similarly easy to find a bunch of extra guys topping those marks too… right?
I would be amazed if after twenty years on the forum you still have not been exposed to criticisms of saying “33-31 without Jordan, 13-4 with.” It is the laziest analysis of that season, not far off dismissing McGrady for only being 39-36 with the 2003 Magic, and when paired with complaints like “well Horace Grant had two extra rebounds against the Knicks,” yeah, I think it deserves a bit of mild derision.
70sFan wrote:Did you already considered Doncic in your voting, or is it too early for you yet?
Doncic is a tough one for me to figure. Among current players, I definitely do not put him ahead of Embiid.
He's most likely coming up in the next group, which includes more than one player who "fill up a box-score" as well as anyone, but whom I question exactly how dominant they are (e.g. Doncic, Westbrook).
My concerns with Doncic (as far as placement in a project like this) are his defensive consistency [which I think mostly relates to his conditioning], and his *turnover economy; also health, to a degree (healthy in '21, but missed 14-17 rs games in each of '20 and '22, plus a few playoff games in '22).
*I realize he produces A LOT on offense (like....A LOT). But even relative to that production his turnover rate is a little high; very similar to Westbrook's, and only marginally better than Harden's.
I could overlook the turnovers if he were more efficient in terms of shooting efficiency; but he's only a little above league average in that regard, too. I've commented elsewhere that if Doncic could improve his shooting form just a little---to where he's a legit good FT-shooter [nothing crazy; just 78-80%] and (edited) maybe 37% from beyond the arc----that would be a mighty impressive offensive player, even if everything else stayed the same; perhaps one worthy of top 20-25 peak consideration.
Also worth noting that they were basically just an average offense last year [at least in the rs]. Better in the playoffs [and certainly his playoff resilience is a point in his favour], though that was with Jalen Brunson playing like an All-Star (Dinwiddie had a couple really nice games too).
They had better offenses in previous years. Which I suppose raises the question: which year do you go with for Doncic's peak? His last three seasons are remarkably similar, statistically, and you could actually make a case for any one of them [particularly considering the best rs offense was in '20]. I keep waiting for him to make that jump (what kind of skill-based perimeter star peaks at age 20-22?); still waiting.
Anyway, hopefully this ramble-on at least partly explains why I'm not quite ready.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Proxy wrote:1. 2003 Tracy McGrady I guess the main comp for this season would be the floor raising efforts by players like Kobe(2006, Voted 19th), and Wade(2009, Voted 18th) - more similarily to Kobe(and somehow he ended up higher than him in one of the projects lol).
I don't think his situational value was really all that far off of those two, and I feel he was arguably in an even worse situation. I'd also say his game translated to the PS fairly well(seriously though, the expectations for some of those squads should be basically none), and there isn't really something I can point to from a skillset perspective that would cause me alot of concern in most runs, but the sample size for this Tmac is just sooo small - even right after in 2004 he was in an even worse situation and basically gave up on defense. Also by that point back problems started affecting his performance more and more.
RS to PS (2002 - 2005, unless i'm reading the multi year PS stuff wrong, but still just like 3 playoffs series) (via backpicks.com) 29.2 Inflation Adjusted Pts/75 -> 31.7 +1.6 rTS% -> +4.8% (also only a 6.9 Creation adjusted TOV% in the RS(!) 8.4 Box Creation -> +10.1 7.28 Passer Rating -> 6.3 +1.2 PlayVal -> +1.1 +1.1 ScoreVal -> +1.7
I will say that even though the numbers do paint the idea of him being a playoff riser, I think his performance in high leverage/clutch situations is kinda uninspiring relative to some of his peers(possibly due to fatigue), but reasons like that, the "flukiness" of the season, and the playoff sample size are all reasons that I think the gap between him and players like Kobe/Wade is fairly justified.
He is not the best offensive player remaining to me(Nash definitely and maybe Chuck, Penny, Harden, and Luka all better), but I view him as a positive impact player defensively in most cases so he slips past my next picks. (On a side note I think both and 2006 Kobe are somewhat underrated in that their defense on/off splits are hurt by teams slanting defensively when they leave the court).
2. 1997 Karl Malone (1998, 1992) Honestly I could see the argument for him even being a top 20 ish regular season peak ever, but I generally have my gripes with him in a playoffs setting. Even with those though I don't think it's all too damning for Karl to drop him below here and I believe his impact translated better than his box numbers(more specifically scoring efficiency) would have you believe.
?. 1990 Charles Barkley (1989, 1993) Probably the 2nd best offensive peak remaining to me(after Nash). To be brief: asurd combination of scoring efficiency(partially inflated by ball stopping issues) and ridiculous rim pressure, all-time offensive rebounding, and one of the better big playmakers of all-time(I do think he peaked in this regard in Phoenix). Chuck averaged 24/75 on +8.7 rTS% in the PS from 1989 - 1991 with almost 5 offensive rebounds per 75. The pollack Sixers on/off numbers said he had about a +10 swing on offense(around neutral on defense) these 2 years in the RS, and they were probably his finest defensive ones as well(though I can't see any real reason to believe he was a net positive there - I'd say he was clearly a negative if anything for a power forward).
Philly those years had some pretty strong offenses(+5 in both regular seasons) but their defenses were just not that good, and they also didn't hold up completely on offense in the playoffs either.
Otoh later in Phoenix(I think he was a similar level player offensively)
This team actually wasn't actually terrible defensively(above average actually, without a substantial change in his skillset or anything) and the floor raising effort here was extremely impressive(Phoenix's offenses actually held up in the PS, around +7.5 ish but their defenses where again abysmal, almost 3 points worse than average). I believe his defense is still not worse than the other "glass cannon players"(ex Harden, Luka, Penny), so with similar offensive quality he ends above them.
?. 2022 Joel Embiid(?) Will add later
Honestly he might even be better than those 3 above already, but the health thing is hard to balance. I may still slide him higher later but I might also decide to not put him on at all(not sure he's really been better in the PS than Luka for example), but he's GOOD.
Anyways, after these players i'm leaning some group of Frazier, Zo, Penny, Dwight, Harden, and Luka.
The dicussion on Barkley's defense is making me rethink my position on him slightly, so I won't actually add him on my ballot for this round but i'll still keep the info above there for anyone interested. I'm still not completely sold on choosing the other primary offensive players with quality around his level that also have generally neutral-bad defense either around here(Ex Harden, Doncić, and Hardaway, Miller) over him - so they probably won't end up higher on my voting than him but I am reconsidering how Barkley stacks up against some of the all-defense bigmen(like Dwight, Zo, Joel, honestly even considering Thurmond, Gilmore, Cowens, Lanier, Draymond, and Reed to some degree - Ik he has been mentioned but I don't really see the evidence in Pettit's defense for me to rank him higher than Chuck), as well as some wings/fowards like Pippen, Barry, Hill, 19 PG, Baylor, and Hondo. Frazier doesn't fit into those categories but he's also getting consideration, also Russ ig(doubt I vote for him unless this goes to 50).
AEnigma wrote:Arf arf.
trex_8063 wrote:Calling someone a stinky turd is not acceptable. PLEASE stop doing that.
One_and_Done wrote:I mean, how would you feel if the NBA traced it's origins to an 1821 league of 3 foot dwarves who performed in circuses?
And then of course without McGrady they finally win a series and then an out-of-prime Artest, Battier, and Lowry go on to push the soon-to-be-champion Lakers to a tough seven-game series. Almost feels like a cosmic joke.
