Peak Giannis vs Peak Dr. J

[D.Brasco]

Who do you have ahead? I used peak, as some have argued peak Dr. J was in the ABA and that's fine for this comparison if that's your view.

[penbeast0]

Relative to his league, Erving in his later ABA years. With discounting that significantly weaker league, I have Giannis as more valuable.

[kcktiny]

A few points:

- Erving did not play in the NBA until the age of 26. By the age of 26 Antetokounmpo had already played 8 NBA seasons.

- Antetokounmpo is listed at 6-11 and 245 lb, Erving was listed at 6-6/6-7 and 210/215 lb.

- Antetokounmpo has yet to play more than 2845 minutes in a single season yet this is his 12th year in the NBA (and he won't play that many this season either). Erving by the age Antetokounmpo is now (29) played just 8 seasons in the ABA/NBA but in 7 of those played more minutes in a single year than Antetokounmpo ever has, including 4 seasons of 3000+ minutes (actually 3200+ minutes).

- from the ages of 23-29 (ages when both played and blocked shots were counted) despite the huge height difference Erving was the better shot blocker.

- from the ages of 21-29 (ages when both played) Antetokpounmpo averaged 68 g and 2295 min per season. Erving averaged 80 g and 3059 min per season.

In Erving's last 3 years of the ABA when he played for the New York Nets and won 2 titles over both the regular season and playoffs he alone accounted for:

- 26% of the Nets total points scored
- 22% of the Nets total rebounds
- 23% of the Nets total assists
- 21% of the Nets total steals
- 32% of the Nets total blocked shots

Antetokounmpo doesn't come close to this over any 3 year stretch for the Bucks because he's missed so many games.

With discounting that significantly weaker league

Is that a fact.

The reality is that in the NBA from 1976-77 to 1978-79, the 3 years after the ABA/NBA merger, 25% of all minutes played in the regular season were played by players that had played in the ABA, despite the fact that the last 3 years of the ABA that league had - what - half the teams the NBA had.

Not only that but among the 22 players who played the most minutes in the NBA in the regular season the 3 years after the merger 10 played in the ABA - Artis Gilmore, Larry Kenon, David Thompson, Rick Barry, George Gervin, M.L.Carr, Julius Erving, Dan Issel, Don Buse, and Moses Malone.

Wow what a weak league that ABA was.

[One_and_Done]

Giannis and it's not close... and I like Erving quite a bit.

[OhayoKD]

- from the ages of 23-29 (ages when both played and blocked shots were counted) despite the huge height difference Erving was the better shot blocker.

[capfan33]

Relative to era might be Dr J although even there his 76 run might get overrated.

[Doctor MJ]

Relative to his league, Erving in his later ABA years. With discounting that significantly weaker league, I have Giannis as more valuable.

So I think it's a really apt comparison in general, and I'm inclined to start with beast's view as a good prior.

I think it's absolutely within the realm of debate just how much of a "discount" factor there should be for the ABA, but I'd agree that a) some discount makes sense and that could easily swing the comparison to Giannis but b) if no discount, than Dr. J.

I think I want to point out is that Erving peaking in '75-76 in the ABA and never matching it in the NBA is such a tricky thing to take literally about his ability to play basketball. Some have always argued that the drop off should be taken as the NBA just being that much better than the ABA, but while acknowledging the basic truth of the mean NBA quality being above the mean ABA quality, I think the biggest factor was always team fit. The Nets were extremely well built around Erving, the 76ers were the absolute opposite of that (at first) because of George McGinnis.

Now, the rebuttal to the McGinnis explanation that should be brought up is that the 76ers eventually re-built reasonably around Erving beginning with swapping McGinnis for Boddy Jones, and he did put up better numbers again, but a) they still weren't up there with the ABA years, and b) the revelation of +/- data for the 76ers in this era did not look great for Erving. It's quite reasonable I'm afraid to conclude that in Erving's NBA years, as good as he still was, he wasn't as valuable as his box score indicated.

On the other hand, while we don't have +/- data for Erving on the Nets, all the indicators seem to say he really did have mega impact on them, so I don't have reason to argue that Erving was fundamentally overrated all through his superstardom.

So then, here's where the comparison gets so app, if we frame Erving's career as:

"He peaked in his age 25 season ('75-76) with a game based on a type of physical dominance that regressed with age combined with a lack of outlier BBIQ, rather than the older ages (27+) we tend to see for players who are able to develop great mental mastery of the game."

We may end up being able to say about Giannis' career:

"He peaked in his age 25 season ('19-20) with a game based on a type of physical dominance that regressed with age combined with a lack of outlier BBIQ, rather than the older ages (27+) we tend to see for players who are able to develop great mental mastery of the game."

I've noted the only difference between those sentences in read, which of course just the fact that they played at different times. Otherwise, from this simple lens, might end up with a remarkably similar story.

And yes, to make no bones about it, I think generally Giannis' impact has clearly fallen off after the age 25 season. He won the chip the next season which was great, but I'm not sure there's any reason to think that Giannis from the prior year wouldn't have been at least as likely to win that year.

Of course this won't sit right with a lot of folks who would point out that by some of Giannis' numbers, he's better than ever! I mean, it's only from an age 28 season after he's been scoring 30 PPG and his TS% hasn't shown a clear downward trend, so he must be a more capable scorer than ever before, right? Some may debate that, but honestly I'm not even trying to. I don't think his scoring is the problem. I do think his scoring ability has held up better than Dr. J's did at this age and so that's a clear advantage for him.

We should note that it could just be that Dr. J's athletic advantage began breaking down more clearly earlier due to injury, and also note that if Giannis had to play in Converse and get '70s-era trainer care, he might have ended up in a similar boat, but regardless, in terms of demonstrated scoring in this age range, advantage to Giannis.

Okay, just making note of what I see as the clear physical difference between the two:

Dr. J swoops where Giannis stabs. Giannis is effectively the apex power player of his era whereas Dr. J's swooping was in no small part him looking to avoid physical contact. And while I don't believe Dr. J could come today's game and do what Giannis does, I think Giannis would be forced to play enough differently with officiating that he's want to use Dr. J as his model.

Mind you, I think Giannis would have the defensive advantage in either era, and it's understandable if that's thing that ends the debate in the eyes of many.

But I'll end by saying: What's most interesting to me about how similar the two players are in some important but non-stylistic ways, is that stylistically the difference is so stark to me.

I'd say Dr. J is the prettiest driving aerialist in the history of the game, and Giannis is in the category for ugliest.

Doesn't matter in the slightest about the competitive question which is the real meat of the thing we're surely looking to prioritize here and I'm not looking to vilify Giannis here for doing what works for him. But let's just say:

Dr. J's swoops are to basketball for me, are a lot like Roger Federer's one-handed backhand.
Apex athletic grace, but a bit less than apex competitive efficiency.

[70sFan]

I don't really know who is better, I guess I'd give Giannis the edge for undeniable defensive advantage. One thing I'd say is that Erving would be magnificent to watch today, he was on the very short list of basketball players that you could call true artists on the court.

[kcktiny]

think I want to point out is that Erving peaking in '75-76 in the ABA and never matching it in the NBA is such a tricky thing to take literally about his ability to play basketball.

Erving was named MVP in the ABA in 1975-76 when there were 112 different players in the ABA.

He was named MVP in the NBA in 1980-81 when there were 304 different players in the league. Not only that he was 2nd in MVP voting in 1979-80 and 3rd in MVP voting in 1981-82.

What does that tell you about how MVP voters thought about his ability to play basketball?

It's quite reasonable I'm afraid to conclude that in Erving's NBA years, as good as he still was, he wasn't as valuable as his box score indicated.

I'm afraid those that voted for the MVP thought otherwise, not to mention that in his first 7 seasons in the NBA he was named to the all-NBA 1st team 5 times (2nd team once). They all thought he was extremely valuable.

You by chance watch him play in the late 70s/early 80s?

[70sFan]

think I want to point out is that Erving peaking in '75-76 in the ABA and never matching it in the NBA is such a tricky thing to take literally about his ability to play basketball.

Erving was named MVP in the ABA in 1975-76 when there were 112 different players in the ABA.

He was named MVP in the NBA in 1980-81 when there were 304 different players in the league. Not only that he was 2nd in MVP voting in 1979-80 and 3rd in MVP voting in 1981-82.

What does that tell you about how MVP voters thought about his ability to play basketball?

It's quite reasonable I'm afraid to conclude that in Erving's NBA years, as good as he still was, he wasn't as valuable as his box score indicated.

I'm afraid those that voted for the MVP thought otherwise, not to mention that in his first 7 seasons in the NBA he was named to the all-NBA 1st team 5 times (2nd team once). They all thought he was extremely valuable.

You by chance watch him play in the late 70s/early 80s?

You know there are stronger and weaker MVP wins, right?

[kcktiny]

You know there are stronger and weaker MVP wins, right?

Over 3 consecutive seasons when there were 441 different players in the NBA Erving was voted top 3 in MVP each season.

What does that tell you about what the voters thought of his ability to play basketball in the NBA, regardless of his statistics?

[OhayoKD]

You by chance watch him play in the late 70s/early 80s?

You just called him a better shot-blocker than Giannis because of weakside help.

Pipe down.

[penbeast0]

You by chance watch him play in the late 70s/early 80s?

You just called him a better shot-blocker than Giannis because of weakside help.

Pipe down.

Try not to be rude; it reflects more on you than on anyone else.

[70sFan]

You know there are stronger and weaker MVP wins, right?

Over 3 consecutive seasons when there were 441 different players in the NBA Erving was voted top 3 in MVP each season.

What does that tell you about what the voters thought of his ability to play basketball in the NBA, regardless of his statistics?

That he was one of the best players in the league, which nobody denied here. The question isn't whether Julius was good in the NBA, but how close he was to his ABA level.

[Special_Puppy]

Is there a flattering explanation for why Dr J’s BPM dropped 5 points when he joined the NBA?

[Special_Puppy]

Doctor Js average BPM from 1974 to 1976 was +9.2. His average BPM from 1977 to 1979 was +4.3. From 1980 to 1982 it then jumped back up to +7.6. Is there an explanation for this unusual career arc?

[70sFan]

Doctor Js average BPM from 1974 to 1976 was +9.2. His average BPM from 1977 to 1979 was +4.3. From 1980 to 1982 it then jumped back up to +7.6. Is there an explanation for this unusual career arc?

Yeah, significantly reduced role on a team with poorly constructed roster full of volume scorers.

[tsherkin]

I think I want to point out is that Erving peaking in '75-76 in the ABA and never matching it in the NBA is such a tricky thing to take literally about his ability to play basketball.

To this, I hasten to add that people look at Per Game stats a lot and forget rate stats.

Erving was a 25.5 PTS36 guy for the Nets and a 25.2 PTS36 guy for the Squires. He had three straight seasons of 25+ PTS36 in the NBA, including his 1980 season at 26.9, which was the second-highest PTS36 average of his career.

He could score just fine in the NBA... he just didn't play the 42 mpg he averaged with Virginia or the 39.9 mpg he averaged with the Nets. Instead, he averaged like 34 mpg with the Sixers and never topped 36.1 mpg.

That's the largest difference.

[One_and_Done]

Is there a flattering explanation for why Dr J’s BPM dropped 5 points when he joined the NBA?

Aside from what others just said, it's worth noting Erving was put into a terrible position on the Sixers. They told him 'we've got four 25ppg scorers, and that's not going to work', and asked him to sacrifice touches and role for the good of the team.

The team construction was just bad, as World B.Free/McInnis/Erving all wanted to score alot, as did Collins. Yet Erving was still so good that they made the finals his first year in the NBA. Once the Sixers started to put a balanced team around Erving, e.g. getting guys like B.Jones, things improved.

The last factor of course is that Erving suffered serious injuries in the late 70s that slowly sapped his athleticism, including a first degree ligament strain in 77. He wasn't the same guy by the time the Sixers had a functional team around him. His knees were steadily getting worse.

All that said, this is still easily Giannis.

[kcktiny]

One thing I'd say is that Erving would be magnificent to watch today

He was magnificent to watch when he did actually play. Everybody wanted to watch him play. When he first came to the NBA all the 76ers road games were sellouts.

You just called him a better shot-blocker than Giannis because of weakside help.

I called him a better shot blocker because on a per minute basis he was. What are you missing?

Giannis and it's not close... and I like Erving quite a bit.

Pipe down.

Must really hurt that you did not get to see Dr. J. play in real time. Sorry for you.

The question isn't whether Julius was good in the NBA, but how close he was to his ABA level.

His last 3 seasons in the ABA (1973-74 to 1975-76, ages 23-26) Erving scored at a rate of 28.3 pts/40min. From 1979-80 to 1981-82 in the NBA (ages 29-31) he scored 28.7 pts/40min.

These same two 3 year stretches his per minute rates for both steals and blocks were virtually identical, his eFG% a bit better in the NBA, his rate for getting to the FT line a bit better in the NBA (7.4 vs. 7.6 FTA/40min).

His overall statistics were better in the ABA because he played more minutes (40 vs. 35 min/g in the NBA) those 3 year stretches.

So how close do his stats have to be for you to consider NBA Erving as being close to his ABA level?

Is there a flattering explanation for why Dr J’s BPM dropped 5 points when he joined the NBA?

Doctor Js average BPM from 1974 to 1976 was +9.2... From 1980 to 1982 it then jumped back up to +7.6. Is there an explanation for this unusual career arc?

Is there a flattering explanation why Erving was an MVP and 5 time all-NBA 1st team player his first 7 seasons in the NBA? Those that actually saw him play and that voted for those awards were certainly impressed by his ability to play.

I find it funny/ironic that those saying peak Erving wasn't as good as peak Antetokounmpo clearly are those that did not see him play when he did in fact play in his peak seasons.

Yeah, significantly reduced role on a team with poorly constructed roster full of volume scorers.

That's just part of the reason.

If you watch interviews of Erving talking about when he first got to the NBA you'll hear him talk about how 76ers GM Pat Williams asked him to tone down his contribution as the team had other really good players and that they didn't need him to score 30 pts/g like he did in the ABA.

That only lasted a couple of years and then once Philly traded away George McGinnis and then Lloyd Free Erving was pretty much back to his free-wheeling ABA level.

The last factor of course is that Erving suffered serious injuries in the late 70s that slowly sapped his athleticism, including a first degree ligament strain in 77. He wasn't the same guy by the time the Sixers had a functional team around him.

He wasn't?

If that was true then explain how his per minute statistics like scoring, FTAs, steals, and blocks were all pretty much identical 1979-80 to 1981-82 compared to 1973-74 to 1975-76.

All that said, this is still easily Giannis.

On the contrary - this is easily Erving.

Erving has 3 titles, Antetokounmpo just 1. Had Giannis played anywhere near the minutes Erving did ages 21-29 maybe he'd have another title or two.