RealGM

How many years of Ewing would you take over Peak Draymond?

Every season in a Knicks uniform.

Patrick Ewing from 1988 -> 1997. So in total of 10 season above Peak Draymond.

Patrick Ewing was a force. I think it is uneven comparison. Ewing was more than a great defender. He was feared. MSG roared when he went up. You also had to watch him offensively. He had skill many now do not appreciate. He was not just dunks. He had touch. He would get his baskets and it was difficult to stop. Draymond is good but this is not reasonable.

I have to look up his high school years but all 4 years at Georgetown as well.

Pat is arguably the greatest Knick of all time. Draymond has no argument over him as a player ever.

Sorry guys but I think there is some exaggeration going on, there is no chance that '96 Ewing was better than peak Draymond.

Only 51.6% TS, VORP of 2.5, zero votes for all-Defense, only had enough votes to make sixth team all-NBA

Draymond '16 had 58.7% TS, VORP of 5.3. Second in DPOY, first team all-Def, and 2nd team all-NBA

Probably not the only Knicks season that was below peak Draymond.

Patrick Ewing and Draymond Green were similar because their playing styles. Both very physical and intimidating but each player had a different impact on their team and opponents. Ewing was asked to score and shut down the middle. Ewing was option 1 on offense and defense. Draymond's assignment was different. It was to disrupt the opponent's offensive continuity and deny any scoring opportunities. Offensively Draymond was not the first, second option to score. His option was to pass to Steph or Klay or Kevin Durant. If an opportunity was available, he would score on a high percentage shot. Draymond did what Charles Oakley did but was more disruptive and found his teammates to do the heavy lifting on offense. Draymond was over his head when he did not make the correct read on offense, he did not give the ball to Kevin Durant and lost to the Cavaliers. Draymond was the difference in the Celtics were winning the series with the Warriors, but the third game became the turning point when Draymond disrupted the Celtics offense with a hard foul the tone of the series completely changed. Patrick Ewing's load management was too much because he did not a have impact offensive player who could carry the offense. This resulted in Ewing being burnt out. Allan Houston scored points but was not an impact player under extreme pressure. John Starks was an exceptional talent but had issues with his temper being cool under pressure. Reggie Miller would be a good impact player to have on the Knicks

'89-'95

Patrick Ewing and Draymond Green were similar because their playing styles. Both very physical and intimidating but each player had a different impact on their team and opponents. Ewing was asked to score and shut down the middle. Ewing was option 1 on offense and defense. Draymond's assignment was different. It was to disrupt the opponent's offensive continuity and deny any scoring opportunities. Offensively Draymond was not the first, second option to score. His option was to pass to Steph or Klay or Kevin Durant. If an opportunity was available, he would score on a high percentage shot. Draymond did what Charles Oakley did but was more disruptive and found his teammates to do the heavy lifting on offense. Draymond was over his head when he did not make the correct read on offense, he did not give the ball to Kevin Durant and lost to the Cavaliers. Draymond was the difference in the Celtics were winning the series with the Warriors, but the third game became the turning point when Draymond disrupted the Celtics offense with a hard foul the tone of the series completely changed. Patrick Ewing's load management was too much because he did not a have impact offensive player who could carry the offense. This resulted in Ewing being burnt out. Allan Houston scored points but was not an impact player under extreme pressure. John Starks was an exceptional talent but had issues with his temper being cool under pressure. Reggie Miller would be a good impact player to have on the Knicks.

Smoothbutta wrote:Sorry guys but I think there is some exaggeration going on, there is no chance that '96 Ewing was better than peak Draymond.

Only 51.6% TS, VORP of 2.5, zero votes for all-Defense, only had enough votes to make sixth team all-NBA

Draymond '16 had 58.7% TS, VORP of 5.3. Second in DPOY, first team all-Def, and 2nd team all-NBA

Probably not the only Knicks season that was below peak Draymond.

Draymond was a 4th option Ewing was the #1,2,3 option on his teams. What evidence do you have to suggest that Draymond as a #1 option on those Knick teams would still have a 58.7%TS or VORP of 5.3? There is a huge difference between being the guy who is left open and unguarded all game and the guy who is double/triple teamed every time he touched the ball. Unless of course you think Mason/Starks=Curry/Thompson. (side note that 96 team had 2COY Monty Williams and Hubert Davis)

Warspite wrote: Draymond was a 4th option Ewing was the #1,2,3 option on his teams. What evidence do you have to suggest that Draymond as a #1 option on those Knick teams would still have a 58.7%TS or VORP of 5.3? There is a huge difference between being the guy who is left open and unguarded all game and the guy who is double/triple teamed every time he touched the ball. Unless of course you think Mason/Starks=Curry/Thompson. (side note that 96 team had 2COY Monty Williams and Hubert Davis)

Draymond was 3rd option and you're focusing on one thing (TS%) when yes it is commendable to be a first option and that can affect your TS% but you're missing the point. Draymond did very well that season, and almost everyone agrees with that notion seeing as he got the 6th most votes for all-NBA and was 2nd for DPOY.

In a vacuum, I would take '90 and '94 Ewing over peak ['16, imo, for the record] Draymond for sure.

Beyond that, I'd have to take a closer look. Not saying there aren't other Ewing years, but those are the only two I'm willing to state more or less off the cuff. (though a number of the in-betweens ['91-'93] as well as '95 look possible, if occasionally more 'dark horse' contenders)

Smoothbutta wrote:

Warspite wrote: Draymond was a 4th option Ewing was the #1,2,3 option on his teams. What evidence do you have to suggest that Draymond as a #1 option on those Knick teams would still have a 58.7%TS or VORP of 5.3? There is a huge difference between being the guy who is left open and unguarded all game and the guy who is double/triple teamed every time he touched the ball. Unless of course you think Mason/Starks=Curry/Thompson. (side note that 96 team had 2COY Monty Williams and Hubert Davis)

Draymond was 3rd option and you're focusing on one thing (TS%) when yes it is commendable to be a first option and that can affect your TS% but you're missing the point. Draymond did very well that season, and almost everyone agrees with that notion seeing as he got the 6th most votes for all-NBA and was 2nd for DPOY.

If Peak Draymond Green is your best player you cant win 20 games today or During Ewings career. I put Ewing any season between the age of 19 and 35 on the 2024 Pistons that had the worst record in the NBA they reach the ECF. Very few teams are a 3rd option defensive role player away from a title. Most Every team is a top 10 all time C away from a title.

I think 1989-94 is reasonable, but I also see some people may say only one or two. Green is still underrated here because he didn't score a lot on stacked teams.

Anyone who believes post-95 Ewing is even close to 2016 Green would need to justify the idea that inefficient volume scorer who was a poor passer and clearly worse defender at this point can be somehow a better player than someone who is much better passer and clearly better defender.

I think the whole 'aren't going to win much with Dray as your team's #1 player' isn't a terrible argument though having said that, we've never really seen a team that was built around the concept of it and Dray is really more of a complimentary piece on offense. 88-95 seems like the best answer to me.

Draymond haters are so wild. LOL @ Georgetown or every year in a Knicks uniform. Here's how the 2 players performed in the Finals:

1994 Ewing: 18.9/12.4/1.7 on .390 TS%
2016 Green: 16.5/10.3/6.3 on .618 TS%

Passing and playmaking are just as important as scoring. This idea that Draymond must not be very valuable because he doesn't score a lot is absurd on its face since it's just one aspect of his game, but in the 2016 season in particular, he was actually scoring decently well. He had a higher playoff BPM in both 2016 and 2017 than Ewing ever had for any playoffs his entire career. His regular season BPM was 5.5, matching Ewing's peak BPM in 1990. That's all box score and while BPM does a pretty damn good job of approximating impact stats, Draymond's impact still outperforms even BPM by about as much as any player in the history of the league.

I wouldn't take any Ewing season over 2016 Draymond. I was considering 1990, but if Ewing was really having a Draymond level impact on defense, would the Knicks have really had the 13th best defense in the league? Draymond had better numbers, better impact, and was a better player. There's also the fact that you're not going to win with either player as your #1, but Draymond's one of the best supporting players ever for a championship team while Ewing never showed the ability to succeed in that role.

Warspite wrote:

Smoothbutta wrote:

Warspite wrote: Draymond was a 4th option Ewing was the #1,2,3 option on his teams. What evidence do you have to suggest that Draymond as a #1 option on those Knick teams would still have a 58.7%TS or VORP of 5.3? There is a huge difference between being the guy who is left open and unguarded all game and the guy who is double/triple teamed every time he touched the ball. Unless of course you think Mason/Starks=Curry/Thompson. (side note that 96 team had 2COY Monty Williams and Hubert Davis)

Draymond was 3rd option and you're focusing on one thing (TS%) when yes it is commendable to be a first option and that can affect your TS% but you're missing the point. Draymond did very well that season, and almost everyone agrees with that notion seeing as he got the 6th most votes for all-NBA and was 2nd for DPOY.

If Peak Draymond Green is your best player you cant win 20 games today or During Ewings career. I put Ewing any season between the age of 19 and 35 on the 2024 Pistons that had the worst record in the NBA they reach the ECF. Very few teams are a 3rd option defensive role player away from a title. Most Every team is a top 10 all time C away from a title.

LOL, this is so dumb. 2016 Draymond was the best player on the Warriors whenever Steph was on the bench. Draymond/no Steph lineups had a point differential of +10.6 in the playoffs over 689 possessions and +12.4 over 714 possessions in the playoffs. When Curry missed games altogether, they went 2-1 in the regular season and 4-2 in the playoffs. Replace Steph Curry with John Starks on the 2016 Warriors and they beat the '94 Knicks.

would definitely take any year from 90-95 over 16 draymond and would probably take 88-97 as well but its definitely closer.

Love Draymond because he completely detonates the idea of 1-to-1 player comparison hypotheticals

There are so so many guys (not even talking about Ewing) who are both 1) worse players than Draymond and 2) better primary scorers

What is one to do?