Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier
capfan33 wrote:f4p wrote:Moreover, if you just look at the offensive value Jokic is providing, I think he's comparable but not clearly better than Bird, Magic, Nash, West, Oscar, Paul, and probably some other guys.
ty 4191 wrote:capfan33 wrote:f4p wrote:Moreover, if you just look at the offensive value Jokic is providing, I think he's comparable but not clearly better than Bird, Magic, Nash, West, Oscar, Paul, and probably some other guys.
Which offensive years of Bird, Magic, Nash, West, Oscar, and Paul are better than 27.1/13.8/7.8 on .625 eFG% and +9.7 tTS%?
All this with zero garbage minutes (and in only 33.5 MPG)?
capfan33 wrote:Offensive numbers right now are inflated, especially on a per-minute basis.
capfan33 wrote:Just using raw stats with minutes isn't really a fair comparison.
capfan33 wrote:And the fact that Jokic is even comparable with those guys as a big man is insane in it's own right. And I think all of them have multiple years arguable except for maybe Paul because he gets injured too much.
ty 4191 wrote:capfan33 wrote:Offensive numbers right now are inflated, especially on a per-minute basis.
Please explain exactly how offensive numbers are inflated on a per game basis.capfan33 wrote:Just using raw stats with minutes isn't really a fair comparison.
Why not? Please be specific. Thanks.capfan33 wrote:And the fact that Jokic is even comparable with those guys as a big man is insane in it's own right. And I think all of them have multiple years arguable except for maybe Paul because he gets injured too much.
Who absolutely, in your opinion, had a better offensive season than Jokic last year? Let's start with that.
Dr Positivity wrote:I would rate the most dominant for their leagues (in NBA and post shotclock) as Russell, Bird, and then some combination of Curry, Hakeem, Magic, Walton, Dirk, etc. However Russell is also oldest season followed by Bird. I do not like Giannis as much as players like Bird, Hakeem, Magic but he has the advantage of being one of the most modern.
1. Stephen Curry 2015 (b. 2017 b. 2019) - The best skillset for a PG ever in my opinion over Magic. Not the most perfect playoff performance in 2015, but still very good and deserved Finals MVP in higher level difficulty than having Durant.
2. Bill Russell 1965 (b. 1962 c. 1963) - Russell for some unique reasons seems to have had as big an impact in the 60s as any shotclock player in history, plus he performed well in the playoffs. I believe the competition in 1960s does not compare that badly to twenty years later candidates like Bird when the league is still in a low spacing time period.
3. Giannis Antetokounmpo 2022 (b. 2021 c. 2020) - I don't feel great about it and might change my vote next time, but ultimately I value the recency in the 35 years since Bird, Dirk is worth considering as a hedge as only 11 years ago but some things have still changed and Giannis has more defensive impact to make up for the offense deficit. I'm actually voting for 2022 since I like his regular season more and while his advanced stats are a bit lower, he was in a tough situation efficiency wise going against elite Celtics D without Middleton and still dropped 34/15/7 on them.
70sFan wrote:If we take game 4 for example, we can see a lot of instanced when Hakeem and Smith didn't communicate well on P&R coverages:
11:41 - horrible effort from both Rockets players
18:50 - Smith went under the screen for no reason, but Hakeem didn't come out and he realized he made a mistake, trying to recover and leaving Miller open for a brief moment (KJ missed open jumper)
36:28 - very low drop coverage, there was no reason to go for rebound here instead of going a bit higher
40:48 - poor footwork on closeout in P&P situation, blown by Suns center
53:54 - bad positioning, instead of shutting down the drive he wanted to come back to his man and it forced help defense and KJ created an open shot
57:05 - this one isn't terrible, but it shows lack of effort from Hakeem. I mean, we're talking about someone who could legitimatelly guard KJ in isolation, that's just a weak job from him
That's just a few examples from one game, but I think you get it.
ty 4191 wrote:70sFan wrote:Kareem got voted 4th without a ring in chosen season. I will vote for 1993 Hakeem who didn't win a ring either. I fail to see your point...
That was quite refreshing. Thank you!!
The overarching point is that it is very unlikely anyone who didn't get a ring who make the finals (aside from Kareem) will be in the top 10 or top 15.
That's Winning Bias at work.
Championships and Finals are predicated on ownership, management, coaches, and great teammates. Jokic, arguably, had one of the top 5 or top 10 seasons in NBA history this year, in (by far) the deepest and strongest NBA in history.
But, his season will probably not make the top 25 here. He hasn't even been mentioned yet by anyone but me, and won't be, for weeks or months.
Really, nobody cares.
70sFan wrote:I get why people feel concerned about Russell's portability across eras, but:
a) I don't care about time machine argument
b) I think Russell would lose significantly less in 2017 than Curry in 1962
But still - I don't care about time machine argument. He did everything he could against the best competition he faced.
You've forced me to consider Mikan, for the first time ever. Thanks! LukaTheGOAT wrote:ty 4191 wrote:capfan33 wrote:Offensive numbers right now are inflated, especially on a per-minute basis.
Please explain exactly how offensive numbers are inflated on a per game basis.capfan33 wrote:Just using raw stats with minutes isn't really a fair comparison.
Why not? Please be specific. Thanks.capfan33 wrote:And the fact that Jokic is even comparable with those guys as a big man is insane in it's own right. And I think all of them have multiple years arguable except for maybe Paul because he gets injured too much.
Who absolutely, in your opinion, had a better offensive season than Jokic last year? Let's start with that.
For more on the first 2 questions, check out this video:
Offensive loads are also highest for stars today than ever before so their box-score stats are better although some might argue guys of today should get some extra benefit if they are tasked with more responsibility
https://youtu.be/r0934lGZ4dw
Also, it is not just about the raw stats, when it comes to attempting to evaluate offensive players. There is so much more than that, and things that the box-score does not pick up on. Out of the guys you mentioned, I feel comfortable taking Jokic over all of them offensively except for Magic (where I think they are in the same realm and are undecided) and MAYBE Nash.
For example, 1987 Magic averaged an
•23.8 IA pts/75,+6.4 rTS%
•11.9 ast/75
•6.2 reb/75
•1.7 stl/75
In the playoffs that same year
Playoffs:
•21.3 aPts/75,+6.9 rTS%
•11.8 ast/75
•7.5 reb/75
•1.7 stl/75
The Lakers improved to a +10.5 team rOrtg (119.9 offensive rating was the highest PS ORTG ever until Cleveland surpassed it in 17).
while leading a +7.3 team rOrtg. Magic gets a lot of notoriety for leading terrific RS and PS offenses; while I do think Jokic with better talent could do potentially do similar things, the fact that Magic consistently did this year after, takes some of the guessing work out of the idea of "Could Magic lead offenses that are GOAT level for the time." We know and saw Magic do it, and therefore I think people are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to people we saw actually do it versus guys who just have not necessarily had the horses around them to do it.
For example, Magic's PS stats look very similar over a 5 year PS span, so there is a certain amount of confidence that Magic could consistently do his thing against a variety of defenses. Where as Jokic is just kind of starting out his journey
I think what you want to take note of with Magic is that he has a very strong claim to be the GOAT playmaker, and that matters to a lot of people.
ardee wrote:Dr Positivity wrote:I would rate the most dominant for their leagues (in NBA and post shotclock) as Russell, Bird, and then some combination of Curry, Hakeem, Magic, Walton, Dirk, etc. However Russell is also oldest season followed by Bird. I do not like Giannis as much as players like Bird, Hakeem, Magic but he has the advantage of being one of the most modern.
1. Stephen Curry 2015 (b. 2017 b. 2019) - The best skillset for a PG ever in my opinion over Magic. Not the most perfect playoff performance in 2015, but still very good and deserved Finals MVP in higher level difficulty than having Durant.
2. Bill Russell 1965 (b. 1962 c. 1963) - Russell for some unique reasons seems to have had as big an impact in the 60s as any shotclock player in history, plus he performed well in the playoffs. I believe the competition in 1960s does not compare that badly to twenty years later candidates like Bird when the league is still in a low spacing time period.
3. Giannis Antetokounmpo 2022 (b. 2021 c. 2020) - I don't feel great about it and might change my vote next time, but ultimately I value the recency in the 35 years since Bird, Dirk is worth considering as a hedge as only 11 years ago but some things have still changed and Giannis has more defensive impact to make up for the offense deficit. I'm actually voting for 2022 since I like his regular season more and while his advanced stats are a bit lower, he was in a tough situation efficiency wise going against elite Celtics D without Middleton and still dropped 34/15/7 on them.
If you go Russell > Giannis > Hakeem, I am guessing you have Russell's defense as WAAAAY higher than Hakeem's?
70sFan wrote:I haven't finished tracking Russell games yet, but I have finished the majority of them for now. Here are the numbers similar to the ones I posted for Hakeem, Kareem, Wilt and Shaq before:
Rim protection
1962-69 Russell (estimated): 9.4 high quality contests per game, 2.5 weak contests per game
1993-94 Hakeem: 7.7 high quality contests per game, 1.9 weak contests per game
1962-67 Wilt (estimated): 7.1 high quality contests per game, 2.7 weak contests per game
1971-79 Kareem: 6.4 high quality contests per game, 2.5 weak contests per game
2000 Shaq: 3.7 high quality contests per game, 2.8 weak contests per game
1982-83 Moses: 3.2 high quality contests per game, 3.0 weak contests per game
Help rotations inside
1962-69 Russell (estimated): 2.8 high quality rotations per game, 0.8 bad rotations per game
1993-94 Hakeem: 3.6 high quality rotations per game, 1.3 bad rotations per game
1962-67 Wilt (estimated): 1.0 high quality rotations per game, 1.2 bad rotations per game
1971-79 Kareem: 3.1 high quality rotations per game, 2.2 bad rotations per game
2000 Shaq: 1.4 high quality rotations per game, 1.8 bad rotations per game
1982-83 Moses: 1.3 high quality rotations per game, 1.4 bad rotations per game
I will post a few Russell clips to help you understand why I think his defense would translate to future eras better than anyone's.
Perimeter Defense
Rookie Russell pressures Pettit on perimeter and Bob tried to blow him by with a quick first step. Notice Russell's unreal recovery time and very light footwork. He blocked Pettit's layup attempt with his right hand - that's important since a lot of shotblockers are one hand dominant, but not Russell.
Russell in his last year, at 35 years old switching onto perimeter, pressuring opponent and closing out long jumpshots. Look how effortless he moved despite the age.
I will post more when I get a new footage from 1964 ECF (it should be ready next week).
Over 46% of P&Rs defended by Russell were switched by Bill. In comparison:
Hakeem: 22%
Wilt: 21%
Kareem: 20%
Shaq: 10%
Moses: 15%
Note that Shaq's and Wilt's numbers could be a bit overstated due to them playing in deep drop coverage, to the point that I didn't count all of their P&R defensive possessions.
Sample of size isn't massive, but it seems that Russell was more willing to pressure perimeter players than any other center that I tracked so far. The numbers can change after I finish my evaluation, but it is a clear pattern when I watch Russell.
LukaTheGOAT wrote:ty 4191 wrote:capfan33 wrote:Offensive numbers right now are inflated, especially on a per-minute basis.
Please explain exactly how offensive numbers are inflated on a per game basis.capfan33 wrote:Just using raw stats with minutes isn't really a fair comparison.
Why not? Please be specific. Thanks.capfan33 wrote:And the fact that Jokic is even comparable with those guys as a big man is insane in it's own right. And I think all of them have multiple years arguable except for maybe Paul because he gets injured too much.
Who absolutely, in your opinion, had a better offensive season than Jokic last year? Let's start with that.
For more on the first 2 questions, check out this video:
Offensive loads are also highest for stars today than ever before so their box-score stats are better although some might argue guys of today should get some extra benefit if they are tasked with more responsibility
https://youtu.be/r0934lGZ4dw
Also, it is not just about the raw stats, when it comes to attempting to evaluate offensive players. There is so much more than that, and things that the box-score does not pick up on. Out of the guys you mentioned, I feel comfortable taking Jokic over all of them offensively except for Magic (where I think they are in the same realm and are undecided) and MAYBE Nash.
For example, 1987 Magic averaged an
•23.8 IA pts/75,+6.4 rTS%
•11.9 ast/75
•6.2 reb/75
•1.7 stl/75
In the playoffs that same year
Playoffs:
•21.3 aPts/75,+6.9 rTS%
•11.8 ast/75
•7.5 reb/75
•1.7 stl/75
The Lakers improved to a +10.5 team rOrtg (119.9 offensive rating was the highest PS ORTG ever until Cleveland surpassed it in 17).
while leading a +7.3 team rOrtg. Magic gets a lot of notoriety for leading terrific RS and PS offenses; while I do think Jokic with better talent could do potentially do similar things, the fact that Magic consistently did this year after, takes some of the guessing work out of the idea of "Could Magic lead offenses that are GOAT level for the time." We know and saw Magic do it, and therefore I think people are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to people we saw actually do it versus guys who just have not necessarily had the horses around them to do it.
For example, Magic's PS stats look very similar over a 5 year PS span, so there is a certain amount of confidence that Magic could consistently do his thing against a variety of defenses. Where as Jokic is just kind of starting out his journey
I think what you want to take note of with Magic is that he has a very strong claim to be the GOAT playmaker, and that matters to a lot of people.
capfan33 wrote:Fantastic work as always, a few things of note. Firstly, I am biased but I'm impressed by Kareem, he looks better than I thought he would generally with these numbers. While clearly a step down from the very best ever he is a lot closer than a lot of people would probably assume.
Second, it's striking how much Russell contests even compared to Wilt/Hakeem. I do wonder how peak Walton would compare because I know that he was ridiculously active as a defender and in many ways was like a less athletic Russell.
capfan33 wrote:ardee wrote:Dr Positivity wrote:I would rate the most dominant for their leagues (in NBA and post shotclock) as Russell, Bird, and then some combination of Curry, Hakeem, Magic, Walton, Dirk, etc. However Russell is also oldest season followed by Bird. I do not like Giannis as much as players like Bird, Hakeem, Magic but he has the advantage of being one of the most modern.
1. Stephen Curry 2015 (b. 2017 b. 2019) - The best skillset for a PG ever in my opinion over Magic. Not the most perfect playoff performance in 2015, but still very good and deserved Finals MVP in higher level difficulty than having Durant.
2. Bill Russell 1965 (b. 1962 c. 1963) - Russell for some unique reasons seems to have had as big an impact in the 60s as any shotclock player in history, plus he performed well in the playoffs. I believe the competition in 1960s does not compare that badly to twenty years later candidates like Bird when the league is still in a low spacing time period.
3. Giannis Antetokounmpo 2022 (b. 2021 c. 2020) - I don't feel great about it and might change my vote next time, but ultimately I value the recency in the 35 years since Bird, Dirk is worth considering as a hedge as only 11 years ago but some things have still changed and Giannis has more defensive impact to make up for the offense deficit. I'm actually voting for 2022 since I like his regular season more and while his advanced stats are a bit lower, he was in a tough situation efficiency wise going against elite Celtics D without Middleton and still dropped 34/15/7 on them.
If you go Russell > Giannis > Hakeem, I am guessing you have Russell's defense as WAAAAY higher than Hakeem's?
Russell defensively probably did have way more impact than Hakeem, but that's more due to era than anything else.
Dr Positivity wrote:capfan33 wrote:ardee wrote:
If you go Russell > Giannis > Hakeem, I am guessing you have Russell's defense as WAAAAY higher than Hakeem's?
Russell defensively probably did have way more impact than Hakeem, but that's more due to era than anything else.
An analogy, not sure if it's accurate or not
Russell shotblocking: Curry 3pt
Hakeem shotblocking: Lillard 3pt
Lillard is arguably 2nd or 3rd best shooter of all time so you'd think it wouldn't be that big of a difference but it is in terms of Curry warping the court.
Likewise I don't believe anyone's shotblocking had the type of anti-gravity fear factor that Russell's did to the point where teams changed their entire offensive strategy to avoid him. I will say though that unlike Curry and Lillard, Russell and Hakeem didn't play at the same time. However he did play at the same time as Wilt who seems to also be one of the greatest shotblockers of all time and Russell's impact doing it seems to have been clearly higher or else it would have been a joke to compare them in impact, and probably impossible for Russell to beat him in playoffs as consistently as he did.
70sFan wrote:Russell is the next choice, clearly above any other one-way player left. I get why people feel concerned about Russell's portability across eras, but:
a) I don't care about time machine argument
b) I think Russell would lose significantly less in 2017 than Curry in 1962
iggymcfrack wrote:70sFan wrote:Russell is the next choice, clearly above any other one-way player left. I get why people feel concerned about Russell's portability across eras, but:
a) I don't care about time machine argument
b) I think Russell would lose significantly less in 2017 than Curry in 1962
I know it was just a throwaway comment in an unrelated argument, but I don't think Curry would lose anywhere near as much in 1962 as you'd think. Steph has a career EFG% of .581. The league average this year was .532. Meanwhile, Curry has a career FG% of .473. The league average for that stat in 1962 was .426. Even without a 3-point shot available, he'd be outperforming the league average by a similar amount. Now take into account that the league was used to not guarding people even close to Curry's range. Even when they adjusted, they still wouldn't have experience trying to follow a shooter that closely off of screens on the perimeter and Curry would undoubtedly shoot significantly better than he does today. Furthermore, if they suddenly have a guy they have to guard from 30 feet when they hardly have to guard anyone else in the league past 15 feet, his gravity would warp the court even more than it does today and would get amazing looks for his teammates. I think there's a strong argument that Curry would be just as dominant if not more in the '60s than he is in the modern game.