Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #9 - 1985-86 Larry Bird

LA Bird · Post #1 » by **LA Bird** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 1:01 pm

RealGM Greatest Peaks List (2022)
1. 1990-91 Michael Jordan
2. 2012-13 LeBron James
3. 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal
4. 1976-77 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
5. 1966-67 Wilt Chamberlain
6. 2002-03 Tim Duncan
7. 1993-94 Hakeem Olajuwon
8. 1963-64 Bill Russell
9. ?

Spoiler:

Please vote for your 3 highest player peaks and at least one line of reasoning for each of them.

Vote example 1
1. 1991 Jordan: Explanation
2. 2013 LeBron: Explanation
3. 2000 Shaq: Explanation

In addition, you can also list other peak season candidates from those three players. This extra step is entirely optional

Vote example 2
1. 1991 Jordan: Explanation
(1990 Jordan)
2. 2013 LeBron: Explanation
(2012 LeBron)
(2009 LeBron)
3. 2000 Shaq: Explanation

You can visit the project thread for further information on why this makes a difference and how the votes will be counted at the end of the round.

Voting for this round will close on Saturday July 16, 9am ET.

SickMother · Post #2 » by **SickMother** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 1:15 pm

01 Erving 75-76: 28.7 PER | .569 TS% | 110 TS+ | 17.7 WS | .262 WS/48
01 Erving 75-76 Playoffs?!?: 32.0 PER | .610 TS% | 3.7 WS | .321 WS/48
[a peak so high the NBA absorbed a whole other league to get this guy under their banner. Doctor turned in a top tier regular season, then followed it up with one of thee largest postseason efficiency increases of all time.]

02 Magic 86-87: 27.0 PER | .602 TS% | 112 TS+ | 15.9 WS | .263 WS/48
02 Magic 86-87 Playoffs?!?: 26.2 PER | .607 TS% | 3.7 WS | .265 WS/48
[topped the league in assists with career best scoring volume en route to 65-17 regular season, 8.32 SRS & a smooth 15-3 postseason cruise. Peak Magic Showtime.]

03 Larry 85-86: 25.6 PER | .580 TS% | 107 TS+ | 15.8 WS | .244 WS/48
03 Larry 85-86 Playoffs?!?: 23.9 PER | .615 TS% | 4.2 WS | .263 WS/48
[went back & forth on who to place higher between Magic & Larry, but ultimately gave the edge to Johnson on the strength of a stronger regular season.]

iggymcfrack · Post #3 » by **iggymcfrack** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 2:48 pm

1. 2003-04 Garnett: With KG on the bench, the Wolves were -10.9. That’s over 3.5 points worse than the worst team in the league. And yet KG was so dominant on both ends that he led Minnesota to the 1 seed over peak Tim Duncan playing with Parker and Ginobili and a super team of Shaq, Kobe, Malone, and Payton. He led the league in the box score composites while also putting up the best defensive impact season of the modern era. Sam Cassell was literally the only other above average player on the entire team and he got hurt early in the conference finals causing the Wolves to lose 4-2. If he’d just had one decent teammate to help him, KG could have led Minnesota to one of the most impressive individual rings of all-time.

2. 2020-21 Giannis Antetokounmpo: Some of the biggest performances ever when it mattered most. 40/13/5 on .663 TS% in a Game 7 to close out KD and the Nets, then 3 more 40/10 games in the Finals including a ridiculous 50/14 game with 5 blocks on .749 TS% to close out the Suns.

3. 2021-22 Nikola Jokic: Best regular season ever by PER, 5th best postseason ever by PER with advanced numbers that dominate the competition much more than the box score. Incredible playmaking as Jokic combines the best passing from a big man ever with a surprisingly low amount of time holding the ball for such an offensive hub.

Dutchball97 · Post #4 » by **Dutchball97** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:00 pm

iggymcfrack wrote:1. 2003-04 Garnett: With KG on the bench, the Wolves were -10.9. That’s over 3.5 points worse than the worst team in the league. And yet KG was so dominant on both ends that he led Minnesota to the 1 seed over peak Tim Duncan playing with Parker and Ginobili and a super team of Shaq, Kobe, Malone, and Payton. He led the league in the box score composites while also putting up the best defensive impact season of the modern era. Sam Cassell was literally the only other above average player on the entire team and he got hurt early in the conference finals causing the Wolves to lose 4-2. If he’d just had one decent teammate to help him, KG could have led Minnesota to one of the most impressive individual rings of all-time.

2. 2021-22 Giannis Antetokounmpo: Some of the biggest performances ever when it mattered most. 40/13/5 on .663 TS% in a Game 7 to close out KD and the Nets, then 3 more 40/10 games in the Finals including a ridiculous 50/14 game with 5 blocks on .749 TS% to close out the Suns.

3. 2022-23 Nikola Jokic: Best regular season ever by PER, 5th best postseason ever by PER with advanced numbers that dominate the competition much more than the box score. Incredible playmaking as Jokic combines the best passing from a big man ever with a surprisingly low amount of time holding the ball for such an offensive hub.

You're describing 20-21 Giannis and 21-22 Jokic. The 2022-23 season hasn't even happened yet.

DraymondGold · Post #5 » by **DraymondGold** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:28 pm

1. 2017 Steph Curry
1b. 2016 Curry
2. 1986 Bird
3. 2004 Garnett.

1. Reasoning for Curry (now updated with new WOWY stats):
In short, I think by the data, Curry clearly outperforms Hakeem.

1a. Curry >> Hakeem (even though he's been voted in):

Spoiler:

2017 Curry beats 1994 Hakeem 4/4 of our most trusted stats, 4/4 playoff-only stats, and by 10/10 stats total. If we add 2016 Curry and either 1993 or 1994 Hakeem (whichever helps Hakeem more), Curry beats Hakeem in 9/10 stats with 1 tie. The only stat Hakeem ties in is CORP (which is Ben Taylor's personal evaluation). In the four of the stats that aren’t old enough for Hakeem, Curry is at least 2nd all time in three of them. In short: I don't think there's any statistical argument for Hakeem > Curry.

1b. Curry > Bird

Spoiler:

1986 Bird and 2017 Curry are tied 2-2 in our more trusted stats and in playoff-only stats, so it's clearly close. If we include less-trusted stats, 1986 Bird ties 2017 Curry 5-5. But: If we look at a larger sample (2016 for Curry and either 1985 or 1987 for Bird, whichever helps Bird more), Curry dominates in 8/10 stats. 16/17 Curry is also top 2 all time in all 4 stats that don’t have data for Bird.

1c. Curry > Magic

Spoiler:

So Curry beats Magic in 6/10 of these total stats, and in 4/4 of the playoff-only stats. If we add 2016 Curry and either 87 Magic or 88 Magic (whichever helps Magic more), Curry wins even more in 7/10 Stats. 16/17 Curry is top 2 all time in all 4 stats that don’t have data for Magic. Magic also faced the weakest playoff competition of any player at this level: 87 Magic's average opponent overall SRS was +1.53 to 17 Curry's +4.59, so if you value playoff difficulty, this makes the playoff gap look even larger.

Does context help either Magic or Bird? 1) Scalability: Curry is clearly the most scalable of the three, and is probably the most scalable player of all time. 2) Resilience: None are bastions of resilience, but the playoff metrics do not have either Bird or Magic over Curry (Magic's clearly below), which is not nearly enough of a difference to make up for Curry's strong regular season advantage. 3) Health: none of these players had particularly healthy careers, but all 3 are healthy in their peak year. 4) Is defensive value missed by the metrics? Unlikely to change anything. Bird's the best defender, but he's far from his defensive peak in 86. Magic has just as many arguments to be a worse defender than Curry as he does to be a better defender, with Magic having worse lateral speed, worse footwork, worse hands, worse off-ball awareness, and no better rim protection despite his size (see here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100448248#p100448248). 5) Does team fit bias the metrics> Curry might have benefited from the best fit, but Magic and Bird also had Dynasty-level teams at their peak, and both Magic and Bird had easier playoff opponents even when counting injury. 6) What about the time machine argument? Bird and Magic are far from dominant enough here to make up for the gap by the data. Bird might improve offensively, but he'd clearly get worse defensively. Magic would also get worse defensively in this era.

1d. A Statistical Case for Curry > Jokic, Giannis, Chris Paul, Durant, Kawhi, and Harden can be found here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100432654#p100432654. Curry's favorable statistical comparison to Duncan, and Shaq are also in previous threads.

---

Counter to Curry 1: Did better fit allow Curry to put up better stats than other players? Not enough to matter.
The team around Steph did have an optimal fit, and the team was dominant. But the data seems to suggest the team's dominance was primarily driven by Curry. The other all stars obviously helped the team win, but superstars' individual stats usually decline when they have better teammates, because the better teammates take on-ball time away from the superstar. Instead, Curry's numbers seem as dominant as ever. This indicates Curry's GOAT-level ceiling raising ability.

From 2017–2019 (larger sample to give more stable values), here's the net rating with each of the stars on or off:
-All 4 stars on: +17. (that's 20% better than the 1996 Chicago Bulls across 3 seasons!)
-Only Klay off: +15.64.
-Only KD off: +13.54 (still better than the 96 Chicago Bulls even with KD off)
-Only Draymond off: +12.77
-Only Steph on, all 3 other stars off: +10.81
-Only Steph off: +1.94
With all 3 other all stars off, and just Steph on, the 17-19 Warriors have a better net rating than the 16 Warriors, 13 Heat, 2000 Lakers, 91 Bulls, 87 Lakers, or 86 Celtics. With all 3 all stars on, and just Steph off, the 17-19 Warriors are worse than this season's 2022 Cavs. This pattern remains in the playoffs (more info below).

Counter to Curry 2: Did other players have better resilience to justify them over Curry? No.
Bird, Magic, and KG are all not major playoff improvers over the course of their career. Curry's playoff decline almost entirely correlates with postseason health. Per Per BPM and AUPM, Curry actually improves in the playoffs when he's healthy. Even if the others improve more in the playoffs, the difference isn't significant enough for them to catch up to Curry (e.g. Shaq's career +0.67% improvement vs Curry's career +0.57% improvement), particularly when 2017 Curry outperforms his opponents per the above statistics.
More in depth discussion of Curry's Resilience here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100017661#p100017661

Counter to Curry 3: Did Curry face sufficiently weak playoff opponents to allow his postseason success?
Here are the average playoff opponents' Overall SRS (playoff + regular season SRS) or SRS for relevant teams:
2004 Mavs' opponents: +5.09 (hardest opponent: Lakers at +7.6)
2017 Warriors' opponents: +4.59 (hardest opponent: Cavs at +9.5)
2003 Spurs' opponents: +4.45 (hardest opponent: Mavs at +7.5)
1964 Celtics' opponents: +4.42 (hardest opponent: Royals at +4.43)
1991 Bulls' opponents: +4.10 (hardest opponent: Lakers at +8.1)
1986 Celtics' opponents: +2.77 (hardest opponent: Rockets at +7.4)
1962 Celtics' opponents: +2.22 (hardest opponent: Warriors at +2.22)
1963 Celtics' opponents: +1.90 (hardest opponent: Lakers at +2.67)
1965 Celtics' opponents: +1.76 (hardest opponent: Lakers at +4.41)
1987 Lakers' opponents: +1.53 (hardest opponent: Celtics at +5.3)

2017 Curry's average playoff opponents were better the opponents of 2003 Tim Duncan, 1991 Jordan, 1986 Larry Bird, 1987 Magic Johnson, and 1962-1965 Bill Russell. Accounting for opponent injury, Curry still faced harder competition than Magic, Bird, or Russell. 1962-1965 Russell's best opponent was statistically worse than Curry's average opponent. The 2017 Cavs were statistically a better opponent than any opponent faced by 1994-95 Hakeem, 2004 Garnett, 2003 Duncan, 1991 Jordan, 1986 Bird, 1987 Magic, or 1962-1965 Bill Russell. Source for opponent SRS: Basketball Reference, Sansterre's Top 100 Teams: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2012241.

This overall opponent difficulty does not account for the disproportionate defensive attention that Curry faced. For example, in the 2018 Finals, Curry faced double teams more than 20x more (that's 2000% more) than Durant (Source: Nbalogix and Clutch Points). Per my personal film analysis, this GOAT-level defensive attention persists in the 2017 Finals, even when playing next to KD. It's also worth noting that in my film analysis, Curry had a good rate of good defensive plays to defensive mistakes, and the Cavs did not produce good offense by putting LeBron against Curry in isolation.
Film study of a 2017 Curry here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100386706#p100386706.

Counter to Curry 4: Does health matter? Maybe.
Curry was healthy throughout the entire 2017 season, which is one of the reasons I take 2017 over 2016. However, if you want to dock Curry for being a health risk (even though he stayed healthy this season), that's understandable.

Counter to Curry 5: Should we have 2016 Curry > 2017 Curry?
I certainly see the arguments for 2016 Curry. If he had a healthy playoffs (or if you only care about players' chances of getting injured in a season, rather than whether they actually got injured or not), I could see 2016 Curry > 2017 Curry.
Still, Doctor Mj and I have argued before that Curry actually was a better player in 2017. Specifically, I see him improving in his health, resilience (e.g. better strength, decision making, and handle), and scalability. I'm not concerned by that his decline in metrics from 2016 to 2017 show a decline in skill -- Curry openly admitted in interviews that mentally, he took too much of a step back and and got into a small slump when trying to accommodate KD. This shows good leadership and chemistry. Once he figured out how to play alongside KD, metrics / the eye test / player interviews all say 2017 Curry returned to 2016 form by the end of the 2017 regular seasons.
More discussion that 2017 Curry > 2016 found here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100017661#p100017661.
Discussion that 2017 Regular season was just as good as 2016 Regular Season (just with his value brought down by a slump) here: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100321960#p100321960 and here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=100359184#p100359184

2. Reasoning for Bird:
What about Bird against the competition of KG or Hakeem?

Spoiler:

Hakeem vs Duncan vs KG vs Bird:
Plus-minus based stats:
Ai. AuPM: 2004 KG (3rd all time) > 2003 Duncan (7th all time) > 1994 Hakeem (9th all time)
Aii. Postseason AuPM: 2003 Duncan (3rd all time) > 2004 Garnett (12th all time) [No older players]
Bi. Goldstein RAPM / Historical Square2020 RAPM: 2004 Garnett (1st all time) > 2003 Duncan (3rd all time) > Bird (~20th all time, but small sample) > Hakeem (~20th all time, small sample)
Bii. Goldstein Playoff PIPM (3 years for sample size): 2003 Duncan (1st all time) > 1986 Bird (9th all time) > 1994 Hakeem (16th all time) > 2004 Garnett (20th all time)
Additional plus minus stats: C. on/off: 2003 Duncan > 2004 Garnett [no older players]
Additional plus minus stats: D. WOWY: Garnett > Duncan = Hakeem > Bird
Additional plus minus stats: E. ESPN’s RPM: (2005 Duncan) > 2004 Garnett (7th all time) > 2003 Duncan (8th all time)
Additional plus minus stats: F. Backpicks’ CORP evaluation: (1993 Hakeem) > 2004 Garnett (5th all time) > (2002 Duncan) > 2003 Duncan (9th all time) > 1986 Larry Bird > 1994 Hakeem (would be 14 all time)

Box score-based data
Gi. Backpicks BPM: 1986 Bird (10th all time) > 2004 Garnett (15th all time) > (1993 Hakeem 17th all time) > (2002 Duncan 20th all time) > 2003 Duncan > 1994 Hakeem
Gii. Postseason Backpicks BPM: 1986 Bird (4th all time) > 2003 Duncan (tie 6th all time) > 1967 Wilt (12th all time) > 1994 Hakeem (13th all time) > (1993 Hakeem) > 2003/04 Garnett
Additional box score stats: Hi. BR’s BPM: 2004 Garnett (13th all time) > 1986 Bird > (2004 Duncan) > 2003 Duncan > (1993 Hakeem) > 1994 Hakeem
Additional box score stats: Hii. BR’s Postseason BPM: (2002 Duncan would be 8th all time) > 2003 Duncan > 1986 Larry Bird > (1993 Hakeem) > 1994 Hakeem > 2004 Garnett [No Russell, Will]
Additional box score stats: Ii. WS/48: 2004 Garnett > (2002/04 Duncan) > 2003 Duncan > 1986 Larry Bird > (1993 Hakeem) > 1994 Hakeem
Total WS: 2004 Garnett > (2002 Duncan) > 2003 Duncan > (1993 Hakeem 93) > 1986 Larry Bird > 1994 Hakeem
Additional box score stats: Iii. Postseason WS/48: 2003 Duncan > 1986 Larry Bird > (1993 Hakeem) > 1994 Hakeem > 2004 Garnett

Bird > KG: 2004 KG and 1986 Bird are tied 4 stats to 4, but Bird’s up 3-1 in our most trusted stats, and Bird leads in 4/4 playoff-only stats.

Bird > Hakeem: 86 Bird beats 94 Hakeem in 4/4 of the most trusted stats, 4/4 of the playoff-only stats, and 9/10 of the total stats. If we add 93 Hakeem to the mix, 86 Bird still wins in 8/10 total stats (or 7/8 if you prefer total WS over WS/48).

Any contextual factors (1. Scalability, 2. Resilience, 3. Health, 4. Defense not captured in impact metrics, 5. Team Fit exaggerating/limiting impact, 6. Time machine.)? Bird is definitely more scalable and performs better in a time machine to today the Hakeem (though it's close for KG). KG doesn't have a resilience advantage, and Hakeem's Resilience advantage isn't enough to make up the difference according to playoff-only stats. Overall, the contextual factors aren't enough in KG or Hakeem's favor to make up for Bird's clear impact advantage.

3. Thoughts for Russell ~ KG

Spoiler:

KG and Russell are tied 1-1 in trusted stats and 3-3 in total stats. Russell wins in 2/2 postseason only stats. KG is top 3 all-time in 2 of the more trusted stats which we don’t have for Russell.
 Does context help? 1. Scalability: KG > Russell. KG is clearly more scalable. His offensive spacing, better passing, and off-ball ability all fit perfectly on a good offense.
2, Resilience: Russell > KG. Russell is clearly more resilient at his peak, winning both playoff-only stats. Russell's team had a 10-0 record in Game 7s and a 22-0 record in elimination games (https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/l81hr6/its_pretty_well_known_that_bill_russell_was_210/). That's just crazy!
3. Health: KG = Russell. Both are healthy.
4. Defense not captured in impact metrics: Both players are defense-oriented, and Russell is missing many of the impact metrics. It's possible WinShares is underrating Russell more, but WOWY is likely accurate to Russell's defensive value.
so I'm not too concerned that there's a bias against one over the other based on defense being missed in the stats.
5. Fit: KG > Russell. KG had a much worse fit at his peak, which may limit his impact metrics more than Russell's.
6. Time Machine: KG > Russell. KG would perform better if they both took a time machine to the modern era.

Overall, both are close statistically, with lots of stats missing for Russell. The argument for Russell relies on his playoff resilience. The argument for KG relies on portability and the time machine argument, while arguing that his poor postseason performance was caused by atrocious fitting team, rather than an inherent lack of skill on his part. There’s some evidence for this, since 2001 and 2008 both have better postseason metrics than 2004, but it’s hard to know just how much better the 2004 postseason would be with better fit. All in all, there’s high uncertainty for both players, and I’m not sure who to go with. But since Russell's been voted in now, I'm going with KG.

iggymcfrack · Post #6 » by **iggymcfrack** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:29 pm

Dutchball97 wrote:
iggymcfrack wrote:1. 2003-04 Garnett: With KG on the bench, the Wolves were -10.9. That’s over 3.5 points worse than the worst team in the league. And yet KG was so dominant on both ends that he led Minnesota to the 1 seed over peak Tim Duncan playing with Parker and Ginobili and a super team of Shaq, Kobe, Malone, and Payton. He led the league in the box score composites while also putting up the best defensive impact season of the modern era. Sam Cassell was literally the only other above average player on the entire team and he got hurt early in the conference finals causing the Wolves to lose 4-2. If he’d just had one decent teammate to help him, KG could have led Minnesota to one of the most impressive individual rings of all-time.

2. 2021-22 Giannis Antetokounmpo: Some of the biggest performances ever when it mattered most. 40/13/5 on .663 TS% in a Game 7 to close out KD and the Nets, then 3 more 40/10 games in the Finals including a ridiculous 50/14 game with 5 blocks on .749 TS% to close out the Suns.

3. 2022-23 Nikola Jokic: Best regular season ever by PER, 5th best postseason ever by PER with advanced numbers that dominate the competition much more than the box score. Incredible playmaking as Jokic combines the best passing from a big man ever with a surprisingly low amount of time holding the ball for such an offensive hub.

You're describing 20-21 Giannis and 21-22 Jokic. The 2022-23 season hasn't even happened yet.

Oops, thanks. Fixed it now. Originally I wrote out 2021 for Giannis and then when I saw I’d already written 2003/04 for KG, I tried to change it to make the format match and had a brain fart, then added a year for Jokic.

f4p · Post #7 » by **f4p** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:51 pm

1. 2017 kawhi

I actually talked myself into this. This is an excellent regular season with a monster playoffs where he showed that his playoff resilience didn't even care about facing the greatest roster ever, only to be taken out on one of the more famous cheap shots in recent memory. from my post in the #8 thread:

...kawhi's 31.5 PER is 13th all time based on 100 MP and 8th all time for multi-series playoffs. his WS/48 of .314 is 9th all time based on 100 MP and 6th all time for multi-series playoffs. and that's with 1954 mikan included above him. even with very generous 100 MP and 20 PPG limits, his TS% of 67.2% is 24th. for 200 MP and 24 PPG, it jumps to 6th, and one of the people ahead of him is himself.

if this was a one year phenomenom, i might understand the hesitancy. but "kawhi puts up huge playoff performance" is not a one year phenomenom...

If we are truly talking about peaks, there aren't many higher than 2017 playoffs Kawhi.

2. 1987 Magic

Bounced back from 1986 playoff failure and won 65 games. Huge scoring increase. 27.0 PER as a high assist point guard is pretty crazy. Kept up the stats in the playoffs and comfortably won the title while going 15-3. i can't wait any longer to have a magic season.

3. 1983 Moses Malone

Fo' Fo' Fo'. Led the league in regular season PER and WS48 while putting up 24.5 ppg and 15.3 rpg and winning MVP. Then led the playoffs in PER (25.7) and WS48 (0.260) while putting up 26 ppg and 15.8 rpg on 58.7 TS%. In the Finals, he demolished (35 year old) Kareem with 25.8 ppg and 18.0 rpg in a sweep. I was actually just looking at this season to see where I might put it and then convinced myself when I looked at the rest of the Sixers in the playoffs. After Moses at 25.7 PER and 0.260 WS48, the next highest was Maurice Cheeks at 17.3 PER and 0.155 WS48 (Dr J really fell off in the playoffs). That puts Moses as far and away the best player in arguably the most dominant playoff run ever. One that he called before it happened just to make it more impressive. Moses gets disrespected enough on all-time lists, he shouldn't get the same on peak lists.

capfan33 · Post #8 » by **capfan33** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:00 pm

1. 2017 Curry
This is where everything starts to get very hazy, as I think 4-5 guys are essentially a coinflip here. Ultimately, I went with Curry in 2017 albeit I'm not convinced at all by it. It came down to Curry, Bird and KG to me. KG is someone I really struggle to rank, some of the recent posts have made me reconsider his case. While I love his versatility and IQ, I just can't put him in yet due to his scoring limitations. I just feel that no matter how good KG is at other aspects of basketball, he needs a very good to elite perimeter scorer next to him to be able to win a title, and I think that's a relatively high bar to clear to the point where I can't justify putting him in quite yet. As for Bird, I think Curry is similar to Bird but better at what Bird does best in terms of off-ball portability and offensive scalability.

2. 1986 Bird
The smartest basketball player ever IMO and probably the best passer ever pass for pass (very close with Magic). Whenever I watch highlights of him I see him do something new or creative and it really is incredible to witness just how far ahead of his opponents he was on both ends of the floor. I love his skillset because of how well it plays next to anyone, and how he makes any offense gel incredibly well. His scoring ability is definitely somewhat questionable in the playoffs, but this wasn't as much an issue from 84-86 outside of the bar fight games in 85, and the impact metrics we have of his offense in the playoffs suggest that from 84-88 he had plenty of impact regardless of his scoring numbers. His defense keeps him from being higher, but one of the highest offensive peaks ever.

3. 2004 KG
Probably the greatest 2nd option ever (debatable between him and Robinson) I have to remind myself sometimes of how absurd KG was as a complete package. A 6-10+ physical freak that moved like a forward, could handle and pass the ball like the best point-forwards, but played horizontal defense better than anyone outside of Russell and maybe Walton/Olajuwon. Oh and he was an elite mid-range shooter with a beautiful array of post-moves. Just an absurd combination when you realize the full-breadth of his skills. It's hard to rank him because of how awful his teams were in his prime, and maybe with better talent around him he would be more viable as a #1 scoring option, but just based on what I've seen both watching him and statistically I have too many questions about his ability to be the #1 option on a title team to rank him any higher. However, his unrivaled versatility and portability make it hard to put him too much lower than here, even though it was close between him and Magic for me.

falcolombardi · Post #9 » by **falcolombardi** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:08 pm

capfan33 wrote:1. 2017 Curry
This is where everything starts to get very hazy, as I think 4-5 guys are essentially a coinflip here. Ultimately, I went with Curry in 2017 albeit I'm not convinced at all by it. It came down to Curry, Bird and KG to me. KG is someone I really struggle to rank, some of the recent posts have made me reconsider his case. While I love his versatility and IQ, I just can't put him in yet due to his scoring limitations. I just feel that no matter how good KG is at other aspects of basketball, he needs a very good to elite perimeter scorer next to him to be able to win a title, and I think that's a relatively high bar to clear to the point where I can't justify putting him in quite yet. As for Bird, I think Curry is similar to Bird but better at what Bird does best in terms of off-ball portability and offensive scalability.

2. 1986 Bird
The smartest basketball player ever IMO and probably the best passer ever pass for pass (very close with Magic). Whenever I watch highlights of him I see him do something new or creative and it really is incredible to witness just how far ahead of his opponents he was on both ends of the floor. I love his skillset because of how well it plays next to anyone, and how he makes any offense gel incredibly well. His scoring ability is definitely somewhat questionable in the playoffs, but this wasn't as much an issue from 84-86 outside of the bar fight games in 85, and the impact metrics we have of his offense in the playoffs suggest that from 84-88 he had plenty of impact regardless of his scoring numbers. His defense keeps him from being higher, but one of the highest offensive peaks ever.

3. 2004 KG
Probably the greatest 2nd option ever (debatable between him and Robinson) I have to remind myself sometimes of how absurd KG was as a complete package. A 6-10+ physical freak that moved like a forward, could handle and pass the ball like the best point-forwards, but played horizontal defense better than anyone outside of Russell and maybe Walton/Olajuwon. Oh and he was an elite mid-range shooter with a beautiful array of post-moves. Just an absurd combination when you realize the full-breadth of his skills. It's hard to rank him because of how awful his teams were in his prime, and maybe with better talent around him he would be more viable as a #1 scoring option, but just based on what I've seen both watching him and statistically I have too many questions about his ability to be the #1 option on a title team to rank him any higher. However, his unrivaled versatility and portability make it hard to put him too much lower than here, even though it was close between him and Magic for me.

Why curry > magic? Not saying it is not possible but the way i see it magic led better offenses relative to era with more impressive playoffs resiliency and is not like either player was a huge plus in defense in 87 or 17

Curry has the portability edge but magic led the greatest offensive dinasty ever (him or nash) so is not like he had a issue maximizing offensive talent

70sFan · Post #10 » by **70sFan** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:48 pm

falcolombardi wrote:Curry has the portability edge but magic led the greatest offensive dinasty ever (him or nash) so is not like he had a issue maximizing offensive talent

I'd like to hear the explaination for that as well. It's conventional knowledge that Curry is more portable than Magic, but do we have any evidences of that? We've seen Magic playing next to ball-dominant guard (Nixon), all-time great post player (Kareem) and non-shooter scoring forward (Worthy). I wouldn't say that any of them were a perfect fit to Magic, yet he worked next to them beautifully. You may argue that Worthy was a good fit due to his transition finishing, but the other two - not so much.

It's not like Magic had to play fast either - he made it work in the early 1990s with slow, methodical offenses as well.

Is there anything else, other than "Curry is a better shooter" that could tell us that Magic isn't as portable as Steph?

DraymondGold · Post #11 » by **DraymondGold** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:51 pm

We had some great discussions in the last thread! (Apologies to the questions I haven't gotten back to yet). In the mean time, I thought I might re-share some of the previous discussions about Magic in case anyone else wanted to join in.

Discussion Questions for those voting for Magic
1. Could Magic be the worst defender we're considering at this point?
I'd argue he's clearly worse than Bird or KG (or Erving or Giannis if you're considering them, though I'm not). So what about Magic vs Curry? (apologies for always talking Curry -- he's just been on my ballot for while haha)

Re: Defense, there’s a ~4 minute section video on Magic’s peak that summarizes his defensive limitations better than I could (see 11:25-15:44).

Spoiler:

The main points are:
-On defense, Magic lacked later quickness and had poor footwork. This made him easy to isolate against from the perimeter. Curry’s clearly better in man defense against guards, which is surprising given man defense is one of Curry’s worst traits. Players like this would be hunted more today (though you may not care for time machine arguments).
-He didn’t have the best hands, and was somewhat foul prone.
-Off ball, he didn’t have the best awareness. This is again one of Curry’s strengths in defense: he’s a great communicator and weak side helper, which requires good timing and an ability to balance awareness of the ball with awareness of your man.
-Magic did roam off his man on defense and could generate some steals, but actually Curry generated more steals going by Steals per 100 possessions or by STL%.
-Magic does have size, which helps him against larger opponents. But for his size, he offered almost no rim protection. And it’s worth mentioning that although Curry could be hunted by bigger players in isolation, this rarely lead to great team offense against him. In my film analysis against the Cavs on page 1, LeBron hunted Curry in isolation, but often the best shot they could get from this was a late clock contested 3 point shot.

It’s also worth mentioning that although Magic is a better rebounder, Curry's still in the All-time Top 20 in rebounding percentage among point guards. Magic of course has the size advantage, but Curry is better at boxing out despite his smaller stature. Though it's just one play, I've never seen Magic do anything like this :lol:

Spoiler:

Personally, I see Magic and Curry about the same on defense. Curry’s of course the better scorer and more versatile off-ball player, while Magic’s of course the better passer and better ball-dominant player. Anyway, let me know if you disagree at all!

2. Were Magic's playoff opponents the easiest of anyone we're considering?
I'd argue 87 Magic's playoffs were significantly easier than KG's and Curry's, and slightly easier than Bird's (or Giannis' or Erving if you're considering them).

2004 KG's average playoff opponent: +5.09
2017 Curry's average playoff opponent: +4.59
1976 Erving’s average playoff opponent: +4.57
2021 Giannis’ average playoff opponent: +3.32
1986 Bird's average playoff opponent: +2.77
1987 Magic's average playoff opponent: +1.53
Magic's playoff opponents were weaker than basically every other Peak listed in the previous thread (under KG, Curry, Russell, Bird, Erving, Giannis, and Kawhi). If we estimates the Curry's opponents accounting for injury, their average opponent was +3.53, which is still tougher than what Magic faced. This doesn't even account for the fact that Magic's opponents were also injured: Walton couldn't play at all, and McHale was nursing an ankle injury throughout the entire finals. Bird's opponents were also injured (Moncrief, Ricky Pierce, and Kenny Fields missed games in the ECF), as were Giannis' opponents (Harden and Irving missed 3 games each the 2nd round, Trae Young missed 2 games in the ECF, CP3 was hobbled in finals)

What about toughest opponent?
2017 Curry's' toughest opponent: Cavs at +9.5
2004 KG's toughest opponent: Lakers at +7.6
1986 Bird's toughest opponent: Rockets at +7.4
2021 Giannis’ toughest opponent: Suns at +5.67
1976 Erving’s toughest opponent: Nuggets at +5.45
1987 Magic's toughest opponents: Celtics at +5.3 (which doesn't account for injury)

You may argue that the Warriors were starting from a better place, but the Lakers were certainly a superteam too. The difference between the Warriors and their hardest opponent was actually smaller than the Lakers and their hardest opponent. Of course, the difference between KG's Mavs and their opponent Lakers is the biggest of anyone's here, so it makes sense that the Mavs lost.

And this doesn't account for the general skill-level of the league. DoctorMJ has offered arguments that the league has gotten smarter and overall more skilled over time, and Ty 4191 has offered compelling data about the increasing talent pool over time (the NBA was made of 2% International players in 1996, 16% in 2006, and 24% in 2016)

Is there anything that makes people less concerned about Magic's easier playoff opposition?

capfan33 · Post #12 » by **capfan33** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:52 pm

falcolombardi wrote:
capfan33 wrote:1. 2017 Curry
This is where everything starts to get very hazy, as I think 4-5 guys are essentially a coinflip here. Ultimately, I went with Curry in 2017 albeit I'm not convinced at all by it. It came down to Curry, Bird and KG to me. KG is someone I really struggle to rank, some of the recent posts have made me reconsider his case. While I love his versatility and IQ, I just can't put him in yet due to his scoring limitations. I just feel that no matter how good KG is at other aspects of basketball, he needs a very good to elite perimeter scorer next to him to be able to win a title, and I think that's a relatively high bar to clear to the point where I can't justify putting him in quite yet. As for Bird, I think Curry is similar to Bird but better at what Bird does best in terms of off-ball portability and offensive scalability.

2. 1986 Bird
The smartest basketball player ever IMO and probably the best passer ever pass for pass (very close with Magic). Whenever I watch highlights of him I see him do something new or creative and it really is incredible to witness just how far ahead of his opponents he was on both ends of the floor. I love his skillset because of how well it plays next to anyone, and how he makes any offense gel incredibly well. His scoring ability is definitely somewhat questionable in the playoffs, but this wasn't as much an issue from 84-86 outside of the bar fight games in 85, and the impact metrics we have of his offense in the playoffs suggest that from 84-88 he had plenty of impact regardless of his scoring numbers. His defense keeps him from being higher, but one of the highest offensive peaks ever.

3. 2004 KG
Probably the greatest 2nd option ever (debatable between him and Robinson) I have to remind myself sometimes of how absurd KG was as a complete package. A 6-10+ physical freak that moved like a forward, could handle and pass the ball like the best point-forwards, but played horizontal defense better than anyone outside of Russell and maybe Walton/Olajuwon. Oh and he was an elite mid-range shooter with a beautiful array of post-moves. Just an absurd combination when you realize the full-breadth of his skills. It's hard to rank him because of how awful his teams were in his prime, and maybe with better talent around him he would be more viable as a #1 scoring option, but just based on what I've seen both watching him and statistically I have too many questions about his ability to be the #1 option on a title team to rank him any higher. However, his unrivaled versatility and portability make it hard to put him too much lower than here, even though it was close between him and Magic for me.

Why curry > magic? Not saying it is not possible but the way i see it magic led better offenses relative to era with more impressive playoffs resiliency and is not like either player was a huge plus in defense in 87 or 17

Curry has the portability edge but magic led the greatest offensive dinasty ever (him or nash) so is not like he had a issue maximizing offensive talent

The portability edge is decent here and I really don't like Magic defensively in the modern era as I think even back then he was getting covered a lot by his team. I think there's a good chance on a different team, and definitely today, that he would be a defensive liability while Steph, contrary to the popular narrative, hasn't been. And he did have resiliency and led great offenses, but I'm not particularly impressed by the competition he faced, specifically in 87 his run to the finals was a complete joke. 2 negative SRS teams with the best defense being 15th out of 23 teams in DRTG. With all that being said, it's definitely close and I could probably go in any order with these 4 players.

falcolombardi · Post #13 » by **falcolombardi** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:53 pm

70sFan wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:Curry has the portability edge but magic led the greatest offensive dinasty ever (him or nash) so is not like he had a issue maximizing offensive talent

I'd like to hear the explaination for that as well. It's conventional knowledge that Curry is more portable than Magic, but do we have any evidences of that? We've seen Magic playing next to ball-dominant guard (Nixon), all-time great post player (Kareem) and non-shooter scoring forward (Worthy). I wouldn't say that any of them were a perfect fit to Magic, yet he worked next to them beautifully. You may argue that Worthy was a good fit due to his transition finishing, but the other two - not so much.

It's not like Magic had to play fast either - he made it work in the early 1990s with slow, methodical offenses as well.

Is there anything else, other than "Curry is a better shooter" that could tell us that Magic isn't as portable as Steph?

That is also a valid point tbh, curry perfect portability sometimes gets taken for granted when we have seen him in teams without enough passing to maximize his off ball game (2021) and the result got kind of handwaved away

Other forms of portability not as related to shooting or offball movements sometimes get ignored

Such as magic fastbreak game, his rebounding as a point guard, his ability to play full time point guars allowing teams to go big as hell, etc

Post #14 » by **Doctor MJ** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:01 pm

Repeating my vote from last time below, but thought I'd add this video that's been making the rounds recently:

Watch on YouTube

There's obviously some issues with listening to the assessment of someone who has just watched one game from every era, so make of that what you will, but I think it's pretty clear when you watch how the game has just gotten more and more skilled and sophisticated over time, with radical changes made since the turn of the millenium.

And this would be my reminder as we've now said that 6 of the 8 top players in history play a position that is now largely manned by role players, that in the cutting edge of the game, it's been guys who are a threat on the perimeter that have come to reign supreme.

It's tough to know what to do with era shifts, and as I've said, there's no athlete I respect more than Bill Russell, but I think this dichotomy is what that we all need to chew on going forward, and not just in this project.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Steph Curry '16-17 (or '15-16 or '20-21 or '21-22)

As I've said, I think it's a really big deal that Curry effectively represents the cutting edge of the game we currently see.

We're no longer in a league where things are mostly pretty static like were arguably for about 40 years from somewhere in the '60s to the mid-00s. We've reached a new hockey stick in the sigmoid function.

We don't know where it will end, or what will come next. All we really know is that the game is more strategically optimized today because of greater use of the 3-point shot with a massively improved skill at this shot and complementary/oppositional skills.

And so the best teams today would beat the best teams of the past so long as the 3-point line is on the court.

And Curry's teams keep coming out as the best teams of today.

I respect folks' philosophy who are trying to be more era-neutral than this, but regardless of how it factors into your rankings, I think it's something to really chew on, because it's certainly not how most of us expected the game to go.

2. Magic Johnson '86-87 (pretty accepted I think)
3. Larry Bird '85-86 (pretty accepted I think)

Previously I focused on Magic's "solving" of the game as the reason why I just have a smidge more confidence in Magic than Bird.

But honestly I'd rather just gush about the two of them together. I think these guys might be the two greatest offensive geniuses we've ever seen, and for them to come out of college at the same, first as NCAA Championship rivals, and then proceeding the best in the West and the East for the better part of the following NBA decade...I mean just, wow, the basketball gods smiled upon the NBA at that time.

There's a part of me that feels like these guys would prove to be the best offensive players in the world in any era, and so anyone who has Magic or Bird ahead of Curry, I certainly get it and question myself.

Honorable Mention:

Julius Erving remains the next guy on my mind, and frankly I can definitely see arguments for him over all of the guys on my list above.

Also, I wanted to specifically shout out Bill Russell here after seeing '70s posts. Certainly gives me more confidence in continuing to think of Russell not simply as the defensive GOAT, but as a defensive talent remains unique in what we've seen since.

Dutchball97 · Post #15 » by **Dutchball97** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:23 pm

1. 1986 Larry Bird - I was really tempted to go with Bird a bit earlier to be honest. Since the Celtics were both a top 3 offense and defense his impact isn't as immediately visible as with the defensive bigs ahead of him. By 1986 Bird was slowing down on defense and with guys like Parish, McHale, Dennis Johnson and Walton on the team it's hard to give Bird all the credit on that front. Offensively he also got help of course but he did carry a much bigger load, while being the clear leader on that end. Bird was the clear MVP in the regular season and kept up that level throughout the play-offs on the way to a dominant title. The Celtics didn't have to go up against any superteams but they did face strong competition in every round.

1b. 1984 Bird

2. 1987 Magic Johnson - He won MVP pretty convincingly, while being the clear leading man on an incredibly strong team. The post-season is a bit weird as the path through the west was almost impossibly easy. Even then he didn't really dominate any of those average at best teams. I was starting to think maybe someone like Dr J, Curry or Mikan would be a better pick here but when it mattered most Magic showed up. In the finals against the Celtics I don't think anybody would dispute Magic being by far the best performing player in the series.

3. 1976 Julius Erving - Dr J had one of the most dominant years ever in North American pro basketball in the final year of the ABA. Where you rank him mostly depends on how good you think the ABA was towards its end. I'd say I'm probably somewhere in the middle. With the likes of Artis Gilmore, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones and George Gervin the ABA had become a serious competitor to the NBA but it didn't become on the same level just yet and since even the mid-70s NBA is generally considered as a relatively weak era, the mid-70s ABA isn't one of the strongest eras either. At this point I'm also seriously considering Mikan but I'm not sure what year yet. Curry and Moses are probably next for me if they haven't been voted in by then.

70sFan · Post #16 » by **70sFan** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:46 pm

capfan33 wrote:The portability edge is decent here

Care to elaborate?

and I really don't like Magic defensively in the modern era as I think even back then he was getting covered a lot by his team. I think there's a good chance on a different team, and definitely today, that he would be a defensive liability while Steph, contrary to the popular narrative, hasn't been.

I have to say that it sounds quite strange to be honest. Magic never played with elite defensive team from top to bottom like Curry did for majority of his prime. It was Curry who was covered a lot, surrounded by all-defensive members all over the place.

Magic wouldn't defend guards in modern game, as he rarely did during his best seasons. I don't see Magic as bad defender and he could be a very positive piece if motivated. I don't have enough time recently to make a long video breakdowns, but I will post old Blackmill's post about Magic's defense in game 4 of 1987 finals (I changed video to available one, as well as time to suit the action):

Blackmill wrote:Rewatched 1987 finals G4. Most people remember Magic's game wining hook shot from this game, but what stood out to me was his defense.

Watch on YouTube

The 4th begins with the score 85-78 in favor of the Celtics. Magic had been resting for the last few minutes of the 3rd, but interestingly, Pat Riley put Magic back into the game for the last possession... to play defense? It seems so since the Lakers likely wouldn't get another shot. Anyways, let's look at the 4th quarter.

1:00:18 Magic does gamble here and leaves his man open. Possibly his only bad play of the quarter.

1:01:42 Magic switches onto Bird to deny him the ball, drains much of the shot clock doing this, then does a solid job at contesting after being bumped.

1:03:11 Magic helps on Birds cut and strips the ball, stopping a likely layup, but he bangs his knee and goes out of the game. He re-enters the game, limping noticeably at 1:05:33.

1:06:00 Magic races back in transition and stops what would have been a 2-on-1 fast break by deflecting the ball.

1:07:21 At first glance I thought Magic over helped on Dennis. But then I realized he was playing the pass to Parish, which I think was arguably the correct decision, especially since he's able to run Ainge off the 3-point line on the kick out. If Thompson is a little sharper with his rotation responsibility, this would have been a contested shot.

1:08:40 Magic is guarding two since the Lakers have doubled McHale. He does a good job closing out, forcing both Dennis and then Ainge to give up their shots, and the Celtics must take a less than ideal shot.

1:09:45 Magic covers McHale who was left open underneath the basket during Lakers rotations. He does an excellent job denying McHale the shot before rotating onto Parish and helping force a 24 second violation.

1:11:52 Magic helps on Bird and Cooper gets the block. If you watch the different angle replay at 1:12:40, you see Cooper got the block in part because Bird exposed the ball to Cooper in order to avoid Magic's block attempt.

1:12:10 Magic helps on Dennis's drive and forces a tough shot.

1:13:17 Magic does a good job fighting over Kite's screen to pressure Ainge's shot. Today the game plan would likely be to ice the screen, but I don't remember the Lakers doing that much if at all. Otherwise Magic made a high effort play fighting past Kite.

1:16:20 Magic shows good instincts by moving onto McHale, anticipating that Thompson will be the help, and he'll have help-the-helper responsibility. Bird actually misses the open pass to Dennis and instead goes for a pass to Ainge. If you watch closely, you'll see Magic's quick close out forces Bird to pull back his pass, and proceed with a handoff. Because of this, Ainge is forced into a long, not-perfectly-squared-up three rather than a cleaner spot up.

1:24:20 Magic does a good job denying the pass from Bird to Dennis, and then shading the play so that Bird can't pass to Parish who was otherwise available.

1:26:05 Magic is defending the Dennis-Parish PnR. Magic switches with Kareem and does a really good job at keeping Parish from getting deep position until Kareem can re-switch. Magic signals for Cooper to stick to Ainge, but Cooper doesn't notice initially, and both close out to Dennis. As a result the Lakers are scrambling and Bird gets an open corner three. Nonetheless good defense by Magic. If you watched just this quarter you'd think Magic was the better defender than Cooper.

1:27:37 The hook shot.

That's 12 meaningful (5-7 I'd consider very meaningful) defensive plays in the 4th quarter with some being the difference between a stop and a sure make. Magic was legitimately quick, had size and strength, plus a better motor than people give him credit for, and possessed generally great instincts. The Lakers defense this season was rotation heavy and very much a team effort, but Magic was probably the most important Laker defender in the final minutes of this game. The last game I watched of Magic was from the 1991 finals, when he looked a lot like a liability. This was a nice reminder that during his peak he could be a very positive defender.

And he did have resiliency and led great offenses, but I'm not particularly impressed by the competition he faced, specifically in 87 his run to the finals was a complete joke. 2 negative SRS teams with the best defense being 15th out of 23 teams in DRTG.

The thing is that competition didn't change anything in Magic-led teams offensive results:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

Curry didn't face siginifcantly better defensive competition in any of his title seasons:

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg

Magic faced significantly stronger defensive competition in 1988-91 period than Curry did and Lakers offense was still better than Warriors (outside of massive outlier in 2017).

70sFan · Post #17 » by **70sFan** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:48 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:And this would be my reminder as we've now said that 6 of the 8 top players in history play a position that is now largely manned by role players, that in the cutting edge of the game, it's been guys who are a threat on the perimeter that have come to reign supreme.

We are fresh off a season when top 3 MVP candidates played at center, just to remind you :wink:

70sFan · Post #18 » by **70sFan** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:50 pm

DraymondGold wrote:Is there anything that makes people less concerned about Magic's easier playoff opposition?

That's when we should take into account larger samples. It would be fair if Magic didn't face a strong competition at any point of his career, or if he struggled against elite teams in other years but that's not the case with him. Magic was remarkably consistent postseason performer in 1985-91 period, no matter who he played against. I think we shouldn't focus too much on one season, even if we acknowledge that we have to pick only one.

Post #19 » by **Doctor MJ** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:58 pm

70sFan wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:And this would be my reminder as we've now said that 6 of the 8 top players in history play a position that is now largely manned by role players, that in the cutting edge of the game, it's been guys who are a threat on the perimeter that have come to reign supreme.

We are fresh off a season when top 3 MVP candidates played at center, just to remind you

Giannis mostly doesn't play center.

Jokic plays virtually nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.

Embiid is the closest thing to these guys but with an ability to shoot from 3 and attack from the perimeter, and by the end of the playoffs the question was whether he was Top 5 or not.

70sFan · Post #20 » by **70sFan** » Wed Jul 13, 2022 6:01 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:
70sFan wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:And this would be my reminder as we've now said that 6 of the 8 top players in history play a position that is now largely manned by role players, that in the cutting edge of the game, it's been guys who are a threat on the perimeter that have come to reign supreme.

We are fresh off a season when top 3 MVP candidates played at center, just to remind you

Giannis mostly doesn't play center.

Jokic plays virtually nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.

Embiid is the closest thing to these guys but with an ability to shoot from 3 and attack from the perimeter, and by the end of the playoffs the question was whether he was Top 5 or not.

Giannis played almost full season at center. He wasn't any less center in 2022 than Duncan in 20003.

Russell virtually played nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.
Shaq and Wilt played nothing like any other players ever.

Embiid is nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in.