Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #10 - 1986-87 Magic Johnson

[iggymcfrack]

For people voting for Giannis, do you have any resilience concerns?

In literally every prime playoff, Giannis has had a scoring decline, and scoring is his best offensive trait:
in 2019 playoffs: Massive drop in scoring (-2.2 pts/75 drop, -6.8% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2020 playoffs: Drop in scoring (-2.2 pts/75 drop, -1.4% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2021 playoffs: Drop in scoring (-0.5 pts/75 drop, -3.3% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2022 playoffs: Massive drop in scoring (-1.3 pts/75 drop, -6.8% rTS efficiency drop)

Context: Giannis did have injuries at the end of a few playoff series for example. But it still concerns me that Giannis' postseason scoring consistently declines after his best regular seasons in 2019 and 2020, even if we just look at playoff games where he was healthy. In 2021 when he supposedly "figured it out," he still had an overall drop and performed worst in his hardest series against the (injured) Nets. Even after "figuring it out" in 2021, he went right back to dropping in 2022 (and this decline persists even if we account for the opponent's defensive rating or just look at the 1st round).

I worry we're overrating Giannis' offense solely because of a memorable Finals, while forgetting... most of his other playoff performances. He's often had extreme declines against "build a wall" defenses and league-leading defenses. The best counterargument might be something akin to Bird or Curry or LeBron's resilience argument, where we say his scoring declines but he makes up for it in creation / gravity / off-ball play. But I'm not sure the eye test supports that (at least mine doesn't -- though I might have a particular bias against some of the head-scratching decisions he made earlier on... those early shot-clock 3s make me want to pull my hair out ).

And I will say team performance does correlate with this poor (offensive) resilience. Take the 2019 and 2020 regular season: the Bucks had fantastic margin of victory numbers, but they over-performed against bad teams and underperformed against good teams more than other all-time teams did. They had these numbers while surrounding Giannis with other all-stars who are good on offense (he had 2 other all-stars with him in 21), and he also had just about the perfect fitting big next to him, stretching the floor on offense while providing a second rim protector on defense.

No, I really don’t. It’s natural to have a slight drop when facing elite defenses and taking on a heavier minute load, but time and again, Giannis has shown the ability to come through in the biggest of games. The last 4 games against the Nets last year, the entire NBA Finals, and the last 5 games against the Celtics this season were all incredible top-level performances. They were up there with one of the best years out of peak LeBron and well ahead of what you’d see out of any of the other candidates at this stage. Nitpicking that he’s scoring 30 points per 75 possessions in the playoffs instead of 31 in the regular season is really just punishing him for being so good in the regular season.

Furthermore, while his offensive production may dip ever so slightly in the postseason, I feel like his defense has taken a leap in the postseason each of the last 2 years. Whereas he’s coasted a bit on D in the regular season to being maybe a borderline top-10 defender, he’s been at legit DPOY contender level both of the last 2 playoffs.

Compared to the other top contenders people are voting at this point (Curry, KG, Robinson, Magic, Jokic, Kobe, D-Rob), I would say Giannis ranks a clear #1 in playoff resiliency. All the other guys either dipped consistently or in the case of Jokic had a very short playoff run in his peak season.

[letskissbro]

1. 2004 Kevin Garnett
(2003)

KG is arguably the most ahead of his time player ever and I think that peaking in the most defensive environment in NBA history on a team practically void of talent suppressed his raw box score numbers and his all-around game, and has led to him becoming underrated even on this board. Because he was the lone offensive threat on his team most of the time he was forced to take more low percentage shots than other stars when he could've been mixing his midrange game with playing closer to the basket and rolling to the rim. I don't want to unfairly assign guys new attributes based on speculation but it isn't hard to believe that with better coaching he'd be taking more 3s instead of foot on the line-2s which would've been a huge boost to his efficiency.

I'm a really big fan of his IQ and all-around skillset. Versatility is what I value the most in basketball and KG was probably the #2 most versatile player ever. He was an elite passer, midrange shooter, and one of the 5 or so best defenders ever. He's maybe the most switchable, low mistake defender ever and he quarterbacked his teams by calling out rotations, an extremely underrated value-add. He essentially combined the best attributes of a stretch big and a wing, two of the most valuable role player archetypes in the modern game, resulting in a matchup proof player who I think has the best intangibles ever. This bears out in his impact stats where 04 is pretty unanimously a top 3 season on record and he's 2nd only to LeBron in career RAPM in the 21st century.

In the postseason where he catches a lot of flack for dropping off, his numbers remained elite and again, 2nd to only LeBron, indicating the enormous value of these intangibles. In fact by RAPM he actually improved, and that's with him missing the playoffs during what should've been the best years of his career.

https://public.tableau.com/views/PostseasonRAPM1997-2021/PostseasonRAPM1997-2021?%3Aembed=y&%3AshowVizHome=no#2

Even if this drop off is as significant as his raw box score numbers suggest, I'm less inclined to penalize him for it as I am guys like Steph Curry or Karl Malone, as he brings much more to the table in other areas of the game. Really he shouldn't even be asked to be the offensive engine anyways and would be best suited playing an offensive #2, defensive #1 type role where his resiliency would improve.

In an optimized NBA I have 0 doubt about his impact translating whereas I don't know if guys like Duncan or Shaq would've been as effective, offensively and defensively. I actually think KG should've been on here a long time ago but as much as this board might like to think it's above winning bias, I think there's a clear case of it being shown in this project.


2. 1995 David Robinson
(1994, 1996)

Was undecided between a few guys here but decided to lock this one in. Follows a similar plane of logic as KG. Monster 2-way impact and some of the best APM numbers ever. The difference is that KG's skillset is better for playing 2nd option on offense. There are question marks surrounding his postseason resilience but post-prime, when he moved to playing 1B to Duncan, his monster impact translated into the playoffs. Had he played with Ginobili and Parker in his prime I doubt that the results would be that much worse if at all than what the Spurs achieved with Duncan.

3. 1987 Magic Johnson

I think we're all familiar with Magic's game so I won't repeat what's already been said. The deciding factor for Magic over Curry is postseason resiliency. Magic led better postseason offenses with less talent beside him. I think Steph gets too much benefit of the doubt at times because his 2016 regular season was so jaw dropping that it feels wrong to some not to put him extremely high. He's a unique and fun player but outside of short isolated stretches he isn't the outlier that people theorize him to be offensively. If he could reproduce his 2016 shotmaking in the playoffs over a multi-year sample I'd be on board with him pushing top 5. But he hasn't. And that's despite having ample opportunities to do so playing under very favorable circumstances on some of the most talented rosters ever. Magic's strengths are just more practical to me. I value his on-ball creation more than Steph's off-ball creation. On-ball playmakers create AND deliver open looks to teammates. They bypass the need for high IQ teammates to move the ball around and capitalize on their gravity. I believe that portability gets overvalued in these discussions because NBA teams typically build teams with the strengths and weaknesses of their stars in mind, and it's rare that you get the opportunity to pair multiple MVP level players together. If my goal was to build an olympic team, Steph would be my pick, but under the constraints of the salary cap I'm going with Magic.

[Djoker]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

[capfan33]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

[MyUniBroDavis]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

[Doctor MJ]

If we think that 2017 Curry's regular season value was lower than 2016 but his "goodness" was the same and the drop in value was because of him taking a step back ... to me, that's his fault. The same way it's a player's fault for coasting. It's fair to not put much weight on that because of "goodness" the same way you would for coasting, but I don't personally agree with going the other direction and framing it as a positive (the cultural leadership point) instead of just taking it as what it is.

You're certainly not the only one who takes this perspective, but I think you though reflect more on what you consider when you think about "what it is".

My processing of your logic would seem to be that you think that fundamentally it was Curry's job to maximize his own on-court impact, but it's not. It's his job to help his team win, and being okay with bringing Durant in, and letting Durant be the first scoring option, were things he did in service of his team, while probably knowing that it would mean that people would be less impressed with him individually.

And yes, this is an aspect of cultural leadership, which coaches, GMs & owners greatly value when they get it. If you don't value it, then I think you have to ask yourself what it says about your approach that you're ignoring things that professionals whose careers depend on factoring in everything they can, don't ignore.

[capfan33]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

I'm talking about some people who may not feel comfortable/dismiss Jerry West just because he played in the 60s compared to a more modern guard. Which in this case ofc shouldn't apply because Oscar's getting a mention. And it has nothing to do with 1v1, I think West would be a better, more impactful player in most situations.

[Doctor MJ]

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

For the record, I'd take Kobe 1-on-1. The main thing holding Kobe back was the whole 5-on-5 thing.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

I'm talking about some people who may not feel comfortable/dismiss Jerry West just because he played in the 60s compared to a more modern guard. Which in this case ofc shouldn't apply because Oscar's getting a mention. And it has nothing to do with 1v1, I think West would be a better, more impactful player in most situations.

I understand your point on Oscar

But are you saying jerry west time portalled to the 2000s with let’s say a few months of training to get up to speed would be nearly as good as Kobe was?

[MyUniBroDavis]

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

For the record, I'd take Kobe 1-on-1. The main thing holding Kobe back was the whole 5-on-5 thing.

Tbf purely 1v1 I would take Kobe over bron pretty easily lol

[DraymondGold]

For people voting for Giannis, do you have any resilience concerns?

In literally every prime playoff, Giannis has had a scoring decline, and scoring is his best offensive trait:
in 2019 playoffs: Massive drop in scoring (-2.2 pts/75 drop, -6.8% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2020 playoffs: Drop in scoring (-2.2 pts/75 drop, -1.4% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2021 playoffs: Drop in scoring (-0.5 pts/75 drop, -3.3% rTS efficiency drop)
in 2022 playoffs: Massive drop in scoring (-1.3 pts/75 drop, -6.8% rTS efficiency drop)

Context: Giannis did have injuries at the end of a few playoff series for example. But it still concerns me that Giannis' postseason scoring consistently declines after his best regular seasons in 2019 and 2020, even if we just look at playoff games where he was healthy. In 2021 when he supposedly "figured it out," he still had an overall drop and performed worst in his hardest series against the (injured) Nets. Even after "figuring it out" in 2021, he went right back to dropping in 2022 (and this decline persists even if we account for the opponent's defensive rating or just look at the 1st round).

I worry we're overrating Giannis' offense solely because of a memorable Finals, while forgetting... most of his other playoff performances. He's often had extreme declines against "build a wall" defenses and league-leading defenses. The best counterargument might be something akin to Bird or Curry or LeBron's resilience argument, where we say his scoring declines but he makes up for it in creation / gravity / off-ball play. But I'm not sure the eye test supports that (at least mine doesn't -- though I might have a particular bias against some of the head-scratching decisions he made earlier on... those early shot-clock 3s make me want to pull my hair out ).

And I will say team performance does correlate with this poor (offensive) resilience. Take the 2019 and 2020 regular season: the Bucks had fantastic margin of victory numbers, but they over-performed against bad teams and underperformed against good teams more than other all-time teams did. They had these numbers while surrounding Giannis with other all-stars who are good on offense (he had 2 other all-stars with him in 21), and he also had just about the perfect fitting big next to him, stretching the floor on offense while providing a second rim protector on defense.

I think we discussed this in an earlier post, but 2021 and 2022 the offense was different, 4 out 1 in vs 5 out bigger gaps dunker spot etc etc, the majority of his dropoff was because he was worse form three (on less shots so he wasn’t being forced to shoot from there more), and from the ft line, so I don’t think it’s a resellience thing for that year, and in 2022 the Celtics were uniquely equipped to guard him + his offensive load

This is my view as well, I think Giannis noticably improved this year in terms of resiliency. When you consider the context of his series against the Celtics (Elite, close to ATG defense that smothered an admittedly declined KD, without Middleton) I think this year specifically has a decent argument already. I'm probably going to be putting him somewhere around 12-18 but that's much higher than I would put his other years.

MyUniBroDavis, we did indeed discuss it in another thread (Duncan vs Giannis)! I thought I'd move the discussion here so we could discuss it in context with the other greatest peaks.

So it sounds like your counters that 2021/2022 Giannis is actually resilient relies on 3 arguments (let me know if I misrepresent them!):
1. A change in offensive scheme to help out Giannis more
2. A decline in 3 point shooting and free throw shooting
3. Celtics being a bad matchup

Re 1: that's great to hear there's a new scheme! I think this matches matches what I was seeing in the film.

There are also series like the 2021 sweep against the Heat where he had something like a 49% TS% but a 57% TS% excluding three-pointers IIRC which doesn't worry me regarding his resilience as much. I do think the decision-making is a valid concern though, he has plenty of moments like you mentioned.

Re 2: Two of y'all mention a decline from 3 point shooting or Free throw shooting as if that makes it okay. If he declines from these areas, why should we not count it as a decline in scoring? If Giannis is a poor decision maker who continues to take bad 3s, shouldn't that be a negative?

And to be clear: Giannis also declined from the long midrange, so it's not just 3 point shooting and Free throw decline.

Re 3: Sure, the Celtics were a bad matchup, they sure were. But do we not care how a player performs vs a great defense? His decline of -10.2 rTS% is massive. But let's grant you that the Celtics were a bad matchup. What about his other 5 series in 21 and 22?

Against bottom 10 defenses (21 Nets, 21 Hawks, 22 Bulls): -0.0 ScoreVal, -0.1 pts75, -1.5 rTS%
Against other top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, not including 22 Celtics): +0.1 Scoreval, -0.2 pts/75, -4.5 rTS%
Against all Top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, 22 Celtics): -1.1 ScoreVal, -0.5 pts/75, -6.9 rTS%

So Giannis has shows small decline in volume and efficiency against bad defenses, a large decline in efficiency against top defenses even if we don't include the Celtics, and an all-time decline in efficiency if we don't filter out the Celtics. This is just looking at the change in offensive scheme that supposedly helped him. If we include his earlier years like 19 and 20, the declines get even worse. Are we sure this guy's the poster child for resilience?

I'm not terribly high on Giannis' offense, but I do think that he has high postseason gravity against teams that stifle his scoring efficiency. Generates a high number of open three-pointers (and his playmaking ability has improved a ton IMO, especially his passing accuracy) but it feels that the Bucks' three-point shooting suffers in the playoffs (example: Jrue) which lets teams get away with playing a defense focused on Giannis.

This is the argument I'm most convinced by. His rim gravity definitely has value!

But just to play devil's advocate: while he has strong gravity, much more of it is from on-ball during his drives, so we'd expect this increased playoff gravity (which you're saying makes up for the scoring decline) to show up in his various playmaking stats. Does Giannis show evidence of increasing his passing in the playoffs? Not really... his assists/100 go down by -1.6 in the 2021 playoffs, his average assists/100 still go down if we add the 2022 playoffs, and his PlayVal goes down in both 2021 and 2022. (though they go down less in 22, so he still might show evidence for improving... just not enough).

His off ball gravity should definitely have some value, but it does concern me that his team's 3 point shooting goes down in both the 21 and 22 playoffs. We could blame teammates, but it could also be Giannis' slower decision making (relative to other all time greats) making it easier for defenses to recover after the kickout, while the ball swings around the perimeter to find the open man. If I were being favorable to Giannis, I'd say some of it definitely comes from his teammates' decline, but Giannis doesn't show enough gravity improvements / playmaking improvements (I'd argue he doesn't show any in 21) to make up for his immense scoring decline.

...

No, I really don’t. It’s natural to have a slight drop when facing elite defenses and taking on a heavier minute load, but time and again, Giannis has shown the ability to come through in the biggest of games. The last 4 games against the Nets last year, the entire NBA Finals, and the last 5 games against the Celtics this season were all incredible top-level performances. They were up there with one of the best years out of peak LeBron and well ahead of what you’d see out of any of the other candidates at this stage. Nitpicking that he’s scoring 30 points per 75 possessions in the playoffs instead of 31 in the regular season is really just punishing him for being so good in the regular season.

Furthermore, while his offensive production may dip ever so slightly in the postseason, I feel like his defense has taken a leap in the postseason each of the last 2 years. Whereas he’s coasted a bit on D in the regular season to being maybe a borderline top-10 defender, he’s been at legit DPOY contender level both of the last 2 playoffs.

Compared to the other top contenders people are voting at this point (Curry, KG, Robinson, Magic, Jokic, Kobe, D-Rob), I would say Giannis ranks a clear #1 in playoff resiliency. All the other guys either dipped consistently or in the case of Jokic had a very short playoff run in his peak season.

Re: "it's natural to have a slight drop when facing elite defenses" Sure, but the efficiency numbers are adjusted relative to opponent defense. So If he has a greater drop-off in relative True Shooting % against greater defenses (which he does!), that means his scoring efficiency has poor resilience, right?

Re: "Giannis has shown the ability to come through in the biggest of games"... does he? You mention the 21 finals, which is a great point! He absolutely showed an improvement in volume and efficiency in that series. But the thing is... that's literally the only series in 21 or 22 where his volume or relative shooting efficiency didn't get worse.

You mention the Nets and the Celtics as if they were good resilience series. The thing is... they just weren't. Against the Nets and the Celtics, his scoring declined on average by -1.5 ScoreVal, -0.1 pts.75, and by -6.5 relative True Shooting %.

And remember: in 19 and 20, his playoff declines are even larger!

Re: "Nitpicking", a relative True Shooting % decline of -6.9 rTS% against top 10 defenses is absolutely massive, and is absolutely not nitpicking. That decline is adjusted for opponent defense, so to decline that much against good defense is a serious resilience concern, especially considering scoring is Giannis' best offensive trait.

Re: "Compared to the other top contenders people are voting at this point (Curry, KG, Robinson, Magic, Jokic, Kobe, D-Rob), I would say Giannis ranks a clear #1 in playoff resiliency. All the other guys either dipped consistently or in the case of Jokic had a very short playoff run in his peak season.", this is verifiably not true. 17 Curry improves in all scoring areas in the playoffs (improved by +0.1 in ScoreVal, +1.4 pts/75, and +4.7 rTS%) while having the massive playmaking advantage which also improves in the playoffs, so there's a playoff scoring run with a massively greater scoring improvement over Giannis. 87 Magic's scoring doesn't decline as much as Giannis' (though it does decline), but his playmaking improves more than Giannis'.

You make a great point about Jokic's sample size -- hopefully next playoffs we can get a better sample for him! I tend to agree that KG and Robinson have a greater playoff decline than Giannis (though to me they start from a higher spot in the regular season). The question for them is whether they drop enough for Giannis to pass them, and whether the decline was due to poor fit that could have been avoided on a better team.
___

Re: Defense, I have much less resilience concerns about his playoff defense for obvious reasons. But it's worth mentioning I have him clearly below every other defensive star that's been mentioned, at least relative to era (I have Giannis' defense under Russell, Duncan, Hakeem, KG, Robinson). For example, Giannis has a +2.5 Defense according to CORP, compared to Robinson/Duncan's +3.25, Hakeem/KG's +3.5, or Russell's +6 (relative to their own era, and while it's not a perfect stat, CORP at least shows I'm not alone in this opinion).

Now, the era argument is interesting. I do see Giannis' defense clearly becoming more valuable in the past. But given how much stricter dribbling rules were (no Eurostep, for example) and how much a clogged paint resembles the "Build a wall" defenses that Giannis has really struggled against, I can't see Giannis' offense not declining in an earlier era.

[capfan33]

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

I'm talking about some people who may not feel comfortable/dismiss Jerry West just because he played in the 60s compared to a more modern guard. Which in this case ofc shouldn't apply because Oscar's getting a mention. And it has nothing to do with 1v1, I think West would be a better, more impactful player in most situations.

I understand your point on Oscar

But are you saying jerry west time portalled to the 2000s with let’s say a few months of training to get up to speed would be nearly as good as Kobe was?

Might need more than a few months, I guess in the purest sense of era comparison, if Jerry West were born in 1980 he would be better than Kobe IMO. And in his own era, he was clearly more impactful at his peak than Kobe was and I feel more comfortable with West in a simulation/different teams than with Kobe.

[LukaTheGOAT]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

I think believing Kobe has a huge playmaking edge would be the big draw. Guards from like the 90s onward seem to have significant more playmaking value based on Ben Taylor's estimates of playmaking value and box-creation.

Also maybe more confidence on his durability during a hypothetical PS run simulation?

[capfan33]

And to be clear: Giannis also declined from the long midrange, so it's not just 3 point shooting and Free throw decline.

Re 3: Sure, the Celtics were a bad matchup, they sure were. But do we not care how a player performs vs a great defense? His decline of -10.2 rTS% is massive. But let's grant you that the Celtics were a bad matchup. What about his other 5 series in 21 and 22?

Against bottom 10 defenses (21 Nets, 21 Hawks, 22 Bulls): -0.0 ScoreVal, -0.1 pts75, -1.5 rTS%
Against other top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, not including 22 Celtics): +0.1 Scoreval, -0.2 pts/75, -4.5 rTS%
Against all Top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, 22 Celtics): -1.1 ScoreVal, -0.5 pts/75, -6.9 rTS%

So Giannis has shows small decline in volume and efficiency against bad defenses, a large decline in efficiency against top defenses even if we don't include the Celtics, and an all-time decline in efficiency if we don't filter out the Celtics. This is just looking at the change in offensive scheme that supposedly helped him. If we include his earlier years like 19 and 20, the declines get even worse. Are we sure this guy's the poster child for resilience?

Speaking for myself I never claimed Giannis is at all the poster child for resilience, in fact I've had major questions about his resiliance in most past years. But I think he improved enough in that regard over the past 2 years that he has a case at top-15, which he didn't before for me.

[DraymondGold]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

I think believing Kobe has a huge playmaking edge would be the big draw. Guards from like the 90s onward seem to have significant more playmaking value based on Ben Taylor's estimates of playmaking value and box-creation.

Also maybe more confidence on his durability during a hypothetical PS run simulation?

Hiya Luka! The durability facet is definitely valid -- Kobe has fantastic durability (at least in his prime), and West... does not.

Re: Playmaking being worse back in the day, I think that comes from 2 reasons. First, offenses in general were run more from the post (and less with perimeter playmaking) back in the day. Second, with much less spacing, passing lanes were far smaller; similarly, kickout passes were much less valuable, since they were being converted to inefficient long 2s rather than better 3s.

So if you purely ask how much "playmaking value" does a player have, the modern one might come out on top. But if you ask how m much does a past player distinguish himself from his peers with passing, or how well would a past player do in the modern era, West might catch up or even beat Kobe with passing. All of these questions are equally valid, but just wanted to say that depending on what question you're asking, the answer to who's the better playmaker might change

[capfan33]

1. 1987 Magic Johnson (1988 Magic, 1989 Magic, 1990 Magic)
2. 2017 Stephen Curry (2015 Curry, 2016 Curry, 2018 Curry, 2019 Curry, 2022 Curry)

Magic then Curry. The thing that most gives me pause about Curry is that when a player fits so seamlessly into a system, one wonders how he would do without it. That and the fact that he doesn't bring a whole lot to the game when his shot isn't falling (his gravity isn't insignificant but still..) compared to someone like Magic who can still dish out for 15 assists and get his team a blowout win while having a terrible shooting night. And people sometimes forget that 1987 Magic was giving you mid-20's in PPG on blistering efficiency too so Curry's scoring edge isn't that large. I honestly think the two of them are both on the same tier (GOAT-tier offensive players behind only MJ IMO and neutral defenders) but I think Magic's offensive impact is a tad less dependent on defensive quality/own shooting performance.

3. 2009 Kobe Bryant (2006 Kobe, 2007 Kobe, 2008 Kobe)

Not an easy choice because at this point there are so many players to choose from and I may change this choice but Kobe in 2009 had a seriously underrated playoff run with very good plus minus impact metrics as well. And his ability to lead the Lakers to such a strong record and championship gets underrated. Kobe really isn't the king of advanced metrics but definitely one of those players where the eye test and intangibles support him. Even though KG in a vacuum had a better peak than Kobe, there are serious doubts about his ability to be a first option on a championship team.

The guys I am considering over Kobe are 1963/1964 Oscar and 2021 Giannis although I kind of feel queasy voting for players who are in their primes currently like Giannis/Joker. It's easier when the dust settles and there is more context after a few years pass. Today's offensively inflated era gives me pause too to be quite honest and I have major reservations about a lot of current stars and how they would have fared even 10 years ago let alone 20 or 30 years ago.

By the way I am surprised that Oscar is getting no mentions. Led the top offense for 5 consecutive years with just ok supporting casts and has one a very impressive statistical profile even when corrected for pace. His efficiency compared to league average is out of this world!

Independent of era what's Kobe's argument over West? West is better at pretty much every aspect of basketball except ball-handling and inside finishing, if you're considering Oscar already I'm not sure why West wouldn't get serious consideration as well.

I think believing Kobe has a huge playmaking edge would be the big draw. Guards from like the 90s onward seem to have significant more playmaking value based on Ben Taylor's estimates of playmaking value and box-creation.

Also maybe more confidence on his durability during a hypothetical PS run simulation?

Actually that's another area where era would be a relevant factor, kind of similar to Shaq vs Kareem where Kareem is pretty clearly a better passer but had less playmaking impact/value because he didn't have a 3 point line. I think West was clearly a better passer than Kobe but ofc in that era having impact as a passer was harder than it was in Kobe's era. That's also why I specifically talked about skillset in my original post, which is one of my top criteria. In terms of skillset, I think West is clearly better than Kobe in most areas.

Durability is a valid concern for West even though it was a rougher game back then.

[MyUniBroDavis]

I think we discussed this in an earlier post, but 2021 and 2022 the offense was different, 4 out 1 in vs 5 out bigger gaps dunker spot etc etc, the majority of his dropoff was because he was worse form three (on less shots so he wasn’t being forced to shoot from there more), and from the ft line, so I don’t think it’s a resellience thing for that year, and in 2022 the Celtics were uniquely equipped to guard him + his offensive load

This is my view as well, I think Giannis noticably improved this year in terms of resiliency. When you consider the context of his series against the Celtics (Elite, close to ATG defense that smothered an admittedly declined KD, without Middleton) I think this year specifically has a decent argument already. I'm probably going to be putting him somewhere around 12-18 but that's much higher than I would put his other years.

MyUniBroDavis, we did indeed discuss it in another thread (Duncan vs Giannis)! I thought I'd move the discussion here so we could discuss it in context with the other greatest peaks.

So it sounds like your counters that 2021/2022 is actually resilient relies on 3 arguments (let me know if I misrepresent them!)
1. A change in offensive scheme to help out Giannis more
2. A decline in 3 point shooting and free throw shooting
3. Celtics being a bad matchup

Re 1: that's great to hear there's a new scheme! I think this matches matches what I was seeing in the film.

There are also series like the 2021 sweep against the Heat where he had something like a 49% TS% but a 57% TS% excluding three-pointers IIRC which doesn't worry me regarding his resilience as much. I do think the decision-making is a valid concern though, he has plenty of moments like you mentioned.

Re 2: Two of y'all mention a decline from 3 point shooting or Free throw shooting as if that makes it okay. If he declines from these areas, why should we not count it as a decline in scoring? If Giannis is a poor decision maker who continues to take bad 3s, shouldn't that be a negative?

And to be clear: Giannis also declined from the long midrange, so it's not just 3 point shooting and Free throw decline.

Re 3: Sure, the Celtics were a bad matchup, they sure were. But do we not care how a player performs vs a great defense? His decline of -10.2 rTS% is massive. But let's grant you that the Celtics were a bad matchup. What about his other 5 series in 21 and 22?

Against bottom 10 defenses (21 Nets, 21 Hawks, 22 Bulls): -0.0 ScoreVal, -0.1 pts75, -1.5 rTS%
Against other top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, not including 22 Celtics): +0.1 Scoreval, -0.2 pts/75, -4.5 rTS%
Against all Top 10 defenses (21 Miami, 21 Suns, 22 Celtics): -1.1 ScoreVal, -0.5 pts/75, -6.9 rTS%

So Giannis has shows small decline in volume and efficiency against bad defenses, a large decline in efficiency against top defenses even if we don't include the Celtics, and an all-time decline in efficiency if we don't filter out the Celtics. This is just looking at the change in offensive scheme that supposedly helped him. If we include his earlier years like 19 and 20, the declines get even worse. Are we sure this guy's the poster child for resilience?

I'm not terribly high on Giannis' offense, but I do think that he has high postseason gravity against teams that stifle his scoring efficiency. Generates a high number of open three-pointers (and his playmaking ability has improved a ton IMO, especially his passing accuracy) but it feels that the Bucks' three-point shooting suffers in the playoffs (example: Jrue) which lets teams get away with playing a defense focused on Giannis.

This is the argument I'm most convinced by. His rim gravity definitely has value!

But just to play devil's advocate: while he has strong gravity, much more of it is from on-ball during his drives, so we'd expect to show up in his various playmaking stats if he increases his passing in the playoffs. But his assists/100 go down in the 2021 playoffs, and his PlayVal goes down in both 2021 and 2022.

His off ball gravity should definitely have some value, but it does concern me that his team's 3 point shooting goes down in both the 21 and 22 playoffs. We could blame teammates, but it could also be Giannis' slower decision making (relative to other all time greats) making it easier for defenses to recover after the kickout, while the ball swings around the perimeter to find the open man.

...

No, I really don’t. It’s natural to have a slight drop when facing elite defenses and taking on a heavier minute load, but time and again, Giannis has shown the ability to come through in the biggest of games. The last 4 games against the Nets last year, the entire NBA Finals, and the last 5 games against the Celtics this season were all incredible top-level performances. They were up there with one of the best years out of peak LeBron and well ahead of what you’d see out of any of the other candidates at this stage. Nitpicking that he’s scoring 30 points per 75 possessions in the playoffs instead of 31 in the regular season is really just punishing him for being so good in the regular season.

Furthermore, while his offensive production may dip ever so slightly in the postseason, I feel like his defense has taken a leap in the postseason each of the last 2 years. Whereas he’s coasted a bit on D in the regular season to being maybe a borderline top-10 defender, he’s been at legit DPOY contender level both of the last 2 playoffs.

Compared to the other top contenders people are voting at this point (Curry, KG, Robinson, Magic, Jokic, Kobe, D-Rob), I would say Giannis ranks a clear #1 in playoff resiliency. All the other guys either dipped consistently or in the case of Jokic had a very short playoff run in his peak season.

Re: "it's natural to have a slight drop when facing elite defenses" Sure, but the efficiency numbers are adjusted relative to opponent defense. So If he has a greater drop-off in relative True Shooting % against greater defenses (which he does!), that means his scoring efficiency has poor resilience, right?

Re: "Giannis has shown the ability to come through in the biggest of games"... does he? You mention the 21 finals, and he absolutely showed an improvement in volume and efficiency in that series. But the thing is... that's literally the only series in 21 or 22 where his volume or relative shooting efficiency didn't get worse.

You mention the Nets and the Celtics as if they were good scoring series. The thing is... they just weren't. Against the Nets and the Celtics, his scoring declined on average by -1.5 ScoreVal, -0.1 pts.75, and by -6.5 relative True Shooting %.

And remember: in 19 and 20, his playoff declines are even larger!

Re: "Nitpicking", a relative True Shooting % decline of -6.9 rTS% against top 10 defenses is absolutely massive, and is absolutely not nitpicking. That decline is adjusted for opponent defense, so to decline that much against good defense is a serious resilience concern, especially considering scoring is Giannis' best offensive trait.

Re: "Compared to the other top contenders people are voting at this point (Curry, KG, Robinson, Magic, Jokic, Kobe, D-Rob), I would say Giannis ranks a clear #1 in playoff resiliency. All the other guys either dipped consistently or in the case of Jokic had a very short playoff run in his peak season.", this is verifiably not true. 17 Curry improves in all scoring areas in the playoffs (improved by +0.1 in ScoreVal, +1.4 pts/75, and +4.7 rTS%) while having the massive playmaking advantage which also improves in the playoffs.

___

Re: Defense, I have much less resilience concerns about his playoff defense for obvious reasons. But it's worth mentioning I have him clearly below every other defensive star that's been mentioned, at least relative to era (I have Giannis' defense under Russell, Duncan, Hakeem, KG, Robinson). For example, Giannis has a +2.5 Defense according to CORP, compared to Robinson/Duncan's +3.25, Hakeem/KG's +3.5, or Russell's +6 (relative to their own era, and while it's not a perfect stat, CORP at least shows I'm not alone in this opinion).

Now, the era argument is interesting. I do see Giannis' defense clearly becoming more valuable in the past. But given how much stricter dribbling rules were (no Eurostep, for example) and how much a clogged paint resembles the "Build a wall" defenses that Giannis has really struggled against, I can't see Giannis' offense not declining in an earlier era.

Don’t have much time to respond to this, but I think important thing when it comes to playoff scoring is, is there a noticeable decline in areas that is explainable outside of variance, in the sense of ft shooting and three point shooting, I don’t see a reason to think it’s not just variance rather than a concerted effort for them to stop his three point shot, he’s dared to shoot threes (and shot less than the RS), and ft shooting is a variance thing as well

I feel from a process based standpoint 2021 and 2022 were clearly better than 2019 and 2020, I think that him shooting poorly from three on the attempts he usually takes anyways is less indicative than him struggling to score inside the arc because of the defense he faced

When it comes to Giannis’s 2021 run specifically, there wasn’t a single series where I felt the vibe was giannis is systematically (is that the right word) unable to score, the heat series is the closest but it’s hard to take seriously his volume being down in a blowout sweep, especially when his scoring inside the arc was quite good outside of g1, and in g4 where he “only” went 8/14 he also had 15 assists

[Doctor MJ]

If you’re saying independent of era, are you saying you think Jerry west time portalled to like 2008 beats kobe 1v1?

For the record, I'd take Kobe 1-on-1. The main thing holding Kobe back was the whole 5-on-5 thing.

Tbf purely 1v1 I would take Kobe over bron pretty easily lol

My first thought is to agree, but I'd be remiss if I didn't say: I'm really not sure what the optimal 1v1 player is in today's game when we consider something that was traditionally huge in true 1v1: power.

If there's no 3-point line, very hard to beat bigs with a strong post game and scoring touch, because their possession success rate is pretty much optimized.

All that changes with the 3-point line. If a 3-point shooter can consistently get himself a good look from 3, then in a losers-out match, that might prove to be the best strategy now.

That might mean someone like Kobe is pretty much optimal, whereas I think LeBron would have the edge in earlier eras with his power advantage.

Regardless, when I took Kobe over West here, I wasn't thinking about any of this. Only that I think Kobe probably honed his on-ball shot-getting skillset like no one else with a combination of extreme fine-motor physical talent and obsessive dedication to it.

[MyUniBroDavis]

I'm talking about some people who may not feel comfortable/dismiss Jerry West just because he played in the 60s compared to a more modern guard. Which in this case ofc shouldn't apply because Oscar's getting a mention. And it has nothing to do with 1v1, I think West would be a better, more impactful player in most situations.

I understand your point on Oscar

But are you saying jerry west time portalled to the 2000s with let’s say a few months of training to get up to speed would be nearly as good as Kobe was?

Might need more than a few months, I guess in the purest sense of era comparison, if Jerry West were born in 1980 he would be better than Kobe IMO. And in his own era, he was clearly more impactful at his peak than Kobe was and I feel more comfortable with West in a simulation/different teams than with Kobe.

In terms of an absolute sense, not in era I don’t see them as comparable players whatsoever to be honest, but that’s a discussion for another day probably

I feel Kobe was as impactful as a 2000s era non slashing scorer could be to be honest, I think D-Nice or someone showed there’s some weird collinearnity things with his impact data in that 08-10 period, my recollection from synergy was either his halfcourt scoring or overall 1v1 scoring was beyond ATG compared to his peers, especially when taken together

From what I remember 1v1 scoring was more valuable in previous eras, I feel Kobe was probably in one of the worst eras for iso scorers probably in terms of their relative impact

[capfan33]

I understand your point on Oscar

But are you saying jerry west time portalled to the 2000s with let’s say a few months of training to get up to speed would be nearly as good as Kobe was?

Might need more than a few months, I guess in the purest sense of era comparison, if Jerry West were born in 1980 he would be better than Kobe IMO. And in his own era, he was clearly more impactful at his peak than Kobe was and I feel more comfortable with West in a simulation/different teams than with Kobe.

In terms of an absolute sense, not in era I don’t see them as comparable players whatsoever to be honest, but that’s a discussion for another day probably

I feel Kobe was as impactful as a 2000s era non slashing scorer could be to be honest, I think D-Nice or someone showed there’s some weird collinearnity things with his impact data in that 08-10 period, my recollection from synergy was either his halfcourt scoring or overall 1v1 scoring was beyond ATG compared to his peers, especially when taken together

From what I remember 1v1 scoring was more valuable in previous eras, I feel Kobe was probably in one of the worst eras for iso scorers probably in terms of their relative impact

That's fair, but I think West relative to era was probably a better scorer and has a good argument as a top-5 scorer ever along with excellent playmaking, while being notably better than Kobe defensively from all the evidence we have.

Moreover, even if Kobe's scoring impact is mitigated by era, I think the same goes for West and playmaking. Also West's defense would probably be even better in later more perimeter oriented eras. The lack of footage and data makes it difficult, but from most of the evidence we do have I don't see much argument for Kobe, unless you have era reservations.