RealGM

Same prompt as the title post here, am curious which - if any - fit such a claim. I’ve seen people on here be low on KD and cite impact as such, so I’d love to see a contrary case being presented - as to what sort of data available can paint the Slim Reaper up there with any top tier data-ball performer (eg. Jokic, Steph, LeBron, Garnett, CP3).

2017 playoff rating - 2016 playoff rating, apply no context...still not a goat candidate

His best claim might be how he elevated the 17 Warriors when he first got there.

Ben Taylor puts it best: "Slotted next to two of the best shooters ever — Thompson and Curry — Durant helped Golden State improve from one of the best full-strength teams ever to the best ever, playing at a mind-bending 73-win pace when healthy (14.4 SRS). Durant missed 19 games, and the otherwise healthy Warriors “only” played at a 67-win clip (10.4 SRS). This might sound minimal, but adding 4 points to an all-time level team, as a scorer, is incredibly difficult due to the diminishing returns on scoring."

If you weigh ceiling raising enough and believe perhaps no one in history could slot in and do what KD did, then would be a notable point. Joining a team that was already getting GOAAT shouts, and then clearly catapulting them to another level is something. Especially, considering, I would say Klay had a notable decline in offensive output.

None...

If you are one of those posters who believe that anything before this century is an inferior brand of basketball and that only scoring really matters, KD has the highest TS Add of any player since 2000 I believe.

PPG - TS%

RCM88x wrote:PPG - TS%

minus?

Literally none. His height-to-handle ratio, idk.

Having great finals stats H2H with Lebron... otherwise it could not be more obvious he's not in top 10 all time conversation. Even before getting to questioning his leadership.

He's top 20 in BR type metrics. BPM, W/S, TS% etc. seem to support him. Harder to see him as a Top 10 or 5 type, more like a Tim Duncan or Kobe level player, he's a bit more on Dirk's range. Still, his efficiency metrics look elite from any standpoint. Scoring like that is hard to capture.

penbeast0 wrote:

RCM88x wrote:PPG - TS%

minus?

I think he is just listing them together, and tying them together with the '-' symbol.

Fundamentals21 wrote:He's top 20 in BR type metrics. BPM, W/S, TS% etc. seem to support him. Harder to see him as a Top 10 or 5 type, more like a Tim Duncan or Kobe level player, he's a bit more on Dirk's range. Still, his efficiency metrics look elite from any standpoint. Scoring like that is hard to capture.

Duncan's statistical rivals are the likes of Garnett, Jordan, and Magic, not Kobe or Durant

OhayoKD wrote:

Fundamentals21 wrote:He's top 20 in BR type metrics. BPM, W/S, TS% etc. seem to support him. Harder to see him as a Top 10 or 5 type, more like a Tim Duncan or Kobe level player, he's a bit more on Dirk's range. Still, his efficiency metrics look elite from any standpoint. Scoring like that is hard to capture.

Duncan's statistical rivals are the likes of Garnett, Jordan, and Magic, not Kobe or Durant

Duncan is a statistical rival to Durant in career PER and WS/48 FWIW

OhayoKD wrote:

Fundamentals21 wrote:He's top 20 in BR type metrics. BPM, W/S, TS% etc. seem to support him. Harder to see him as a Top 10 or 5 type, more like a Tim Duncan or Kobe level player, he's a bit more on Dirk's range. Still, his efficiency metrics look elite from any standpoint. Scoring like that is hard to capture.

Duncan's statistical rivals are the likes of Garnett, Jordan, and Magic, not Kobe or Durant

Box Score derived metrics does not have Duncan as a rival Garnett, Jordan, or Magic at all.

MiamiBulls wrote:

OhayoKD wrote:

Fundamentals21 wrote:He's top 20 in BR type metrics. BPM, W/S, TS% etc. seem to support him. Harder to see him as a Top 10 or 5 type, more like a Tim Duncan or Kobe level player, he's a bit more on Dirk's range. Still, his efficiency metrics look elite from any standpoint. Scoring like that is hard to capture.

Duncan's statistical rivals are the likes of Garnett, Jordan, and Magic, not Kobe or Durant

Box Score derived metrics does not have Duncan as a rival Garnett, Jordan, or Magic at all.

BBR Box-score derived metrics do not, but there are endless variations of box-scores which would put duncan and garnett on a completely different level than either.

There is however, no serious route to putting duncan below that tier if you make winning the objective. Duncan has better raw splits than magic or jordan over similar time frames, has a case for having the 2nd best data-ball(and at worst top 3) portfolio over the last 30 years and top-tier on/off over certain frames in-spite of his best years coming with a similar player who plays his natural positions and massive minute distribution seeing him play with his best teammate's backups.

Cherrypicking aside, Duncan is right there with those two(as is Garnett if you disregard the team success gap). Duncan does not share the emperical nigh inviolability russell and lebron do, but he can be argued against anyone else(though for various contextual considerations including srs tresholds i'd say kareem is a losing case)

His stats in the finals

Colbinii wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:

RCM88x wrote:PPG - TS%

minus?

I think he is just listing them together, and tying them together with the '-' symbol.

Yes that's correct sorry

None. But that's a product of the NBA's history is getting longer. Basketball is a very young sport. Putting together a possible GOAT resume was considerably easier in 1991 than 2006 and 2006 was considerably easier than 2024. It isn't just the number of years but the number of teams increasing.

It won't be strange for the NBA to go a decade without a GOAT candidate. And that isn't a product of top players declining but just the sport maturing.

Not necessarily. Kobe gave Duncan a lot of trouble, and I can see Durant doing the same. Durant can be argued as high as #8 or so, with his super-efficient scoring. Having such a high TS add is nothing to scoff at. There are also some arguments that he was better than Curry in the GSW era. I personally have him lower, but I wouldn't mind seeing some pro Durant arguments.

sp6r=underrated wrote:None. But that's a product of the NBA's history is getting longer. Basketball is a very young sport. Putting together a possible GOAT resume was considerably easier in 1991 than 2006 and 2006 was considerably easier than 2024. It isn't just the number of years but the number of teams increasing.

It won't be strange for the NBA to go a decade without a GOAT candidate. And that isn't a product of top players declining but just the sport maturing.

You said this to me on Twitter, but making the top 20 players of all time today is about as hard as making the top 10 players of all time in 1990.