Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #11 - 2016-17 Stephen Curry

[MyUniBroDavis]

So obviously lack of highly rated modern players in lists such as this or the Top 100 Players Project is beginning to stand out. For example in this list, there are multiple seasons from the 60s, 80s, 90s, and early 2000s in the top 10 including a 17 year stretch from 86 to 2003 that apparently has 6 of the top 10 seasons of all time. Yet there's only one season from the last 19 years in the top 10 and that was LeBron's 2013 season which happened almost a decade ago. I simply find it hard to believe that players are now peaking lower given the greatly increased 3 point shooting skills and the larger talent pool of international prospects.

One area of bias that I've noticed is that a lot of thought is given to how older players would be able to adapt to and dominate the modern game. But very little thought is given to how modern players would essentially break older eras. For example, watching the late 90s Bulls, one thing that immediately stands out is that opposing teams were forced to guard Rodman standing on the 3 point line due to the illegal defense rules. If Steph Curry were playing in the 90s, he would never see the type of defense that the Cavs used to contain him in the 2016 finals by helping off of Harrison Barnes every single play. Who knows what kind of mind-boggling numbers Curry would be able to put up if he were operating with as much space as Jordan or Pippen were on those Bulls teams.

I have giannis and curry botg around top 10th and jokic only a bit below. When giannis ans jokic finish their careers their peaks may be even higher to me

To be fair I think Jokic and Giannis kind of count as the next generation for me

I feel the 2010-2020 era wasn’t weaker than previous ones, lebron and the Warriors just dominated it

Because people save themselves for playoffs more among other things ranking some modern guys is hard, but while I get wanting to reward guys for having strong regular seasons and strong playoffs it feels weird to hurt modern players for not going all out in the regular season when on contests when it’s usually a smart decision overall

At their peaks, kawhi/Kobe/Durant all strike me as guys that would be incredible in other eras where their skill sets were more valuable. Not to say they weren’t incredible in their own eras of course.

My assumptions are that in eras more dominated by wing iso/post scoring, they would probably be far more impactful

It’s hard because we don’t have much data from older eras, but just looking at some guys

On one end you have guys like dantley who don’t seem to be high offensive impact guys

In the other end you have guys like gervin and Wilkins who absolutely seem like an exceptionally elite offensive impact guy,

Kobe/Kawhi/Durant all are genuinely the best 1v1 scorers of their generation while all being anywhere from willing passers to very good playmakers.

I feel the idea that 1v1 scoring is overrated historically is a bit overplayed to me, I agree it’s overrated from 2000-2016, in the sense that rule changes made iso scoring a bit less effective

I do feel like while there are definately historically volume wing scorers that weren’t as impactful as their data suggests, there are also guys that seem pretty crazy impactful offensicely like gervin pretty much exclusively leading top 5 offenses throughout his prime or wilkins going out and the teams off rtg going from 109.9 to 105.5

I feel Durant and Kawhi REALLY separate themselves from the pack in terms of high impact high volume 1v1 scorers, Kobe does impact wise despite his percentages because of where he got his offense from as well throughout his 06-09 prime

I’d probably rank them Kobe/Kawhi/Durant personally, but I honestly do think it’s a bit tricky, but I think if you put them in previous eras or even if they had as much seperation in these skill sets relative to their peers as they do now, we’d be looking at very high tier peaks as well

[jalengreen]

Jokic feels like a player who could be ranked higher further down the road if people's concerns are alleviated (i.e. defense) by future success.

[70sFan]

On one end you have guys like dantley who don’t seem to be high offensive impact guys

In the other end you have guys like gervin and Wilkins who absolutely seem like an exceptionally elite offensive impact guy,

What make you believe that Wilkins was "exceptionally elite offensive impact guy"?

Gervin was elite for sure, but a lot of that was caused by his off-ball game, shooting and overall efficiency (he was more efficient scorer than Kobe or even Kawhi).

[falcolombardi]

Jokic feels like a player who could be ranked higher further down the road if people's concerns are alleviated (i.e. defense) by future success.

Kinda like curry this year

[MyUniBroDavis]

On one end you have guys like dantley who don’t seem to be high offensive impact guys

In the other end you have guys like gervin and Wilkins who absolutely seem like an exceptionally elite offensive impact guy,

What make you believe that Wilkins was "exceptionally elite offensive impact guy"?

Gervin was elite for sure, but a lot of that was caused by his off-ball game, shooting and overall efficiency (he was more efficient scorer than Kobe or even Kawhi).

I mean again though, it’s about where they score from/how they’re scoring right? More than just raw effeciency, I’d assume iso scoring and historic outlier effeciency post scoring translates better backwards relatively for them (Kd and Kobe)

Just looking at the years he got hurt and or traded, when he played vs game he missed or wasn’t there for

Hawks (92)
109.9 with
105.5 without

Hawks (94)
109.6 with
104.8 without

Clippers (94)
102.2 without
105.7 with

[70sFan]

On one end you have guys like dantley who don’t seem to be high offensive impact guys

In the other end you have guys like gervin and Wilkins who absolutely seem like an exceptionally elite offensive impact guy,

What make you believe that Wilkins was "exceptionally elite offensive impact guy"?

Gervin was elite for sure, but a lot of that was caused by his off-ball game, shooting and overall efficiency (he was more efficient scorer than Kobe or even Kawhi).

I mean again though, it’s about where they score from/how they’re scoring right? More than just raw effeciency, I’d assume iso scoring and historic outlier effeciency post scoring translates better backwards relatively for them (Kd and Kobe)

Just looking at the years he got hurt and or traded, when he played vs game he missed or wasn’t there for

Hawks (92)
109.9 with
105.5 without

Hawks (94)
109.6 with
104.8 without

Clippers (94)
102.2 without
105.7 with

What makes you believe that Kobe was more efficient iso scorer than someone like Gervin though?

Wilkins WOWY are extremely underwhelming. Maybe they are caused by non-prime seasons, I would have to look at this closer.

[Doctor MJ]

Better in a vacuum or in practice? I mean being a bigger scoring threats is a big deal to playmaking

If you had the smartest and better vision player in the history of basketball but he was a 6'0 guard with mediocre handles, shooting and athletism would he really be a better playmaker than someone like giannis or even westbrook? Less smart pkayers who nonetheless create more and better opportunities than him through their athletism and scoring threat?

That is an extreme example exxageration of course to get the point across. But i believe that even if garnett is the better passer in a vacuum. His better scoring/handle skillset may lead him to create more shots thsn garnett regardless of eras

And simarly just as garnett would benefit offensively from playing in a 4-out era like giannis's. Giannis would benefit defensively from playing in the opposite one.

For how much we talk about garnett defense thriving in the modern game (he probably would) is actually giannis who has played in this era of 5/4-out offenses and thrived defensively even in the playoffs. With garnett it is very likely theory that he woukd dominate defensively today
With giannis is a proven fact, no theory needed

I actually find it fascinating that if giannis played in the 90's in, lets say, david robinson place.his development likely would have gone into developing an admiral-like game. A great athletic center with monster rim protection who does some face up drives and has a solid if unresilient post up power game and then we would wonder if he coukd translate that defensive impact to the 2020's since he is not as light footed as a hakeem or garnett

Right now my top 3 after mikan (who i think makes sense to put around as the last player to absolutely dominate and stand out above everyone else in a full era/decade alongside lebron, jordan, kareem and russel. His absolute ceiling may be as high as 5th based on that even when handicapping for era)

Is curry, giannis and garnett but i am also considering kobe, wade, west, robinson, walton and others like nash, paul or julius

I expect to have curry, jokic and giannis all in my top 20 with curry and giannis in my top 15

Ah, I was thinking the set of skills specifically associated with playmaking, which are typically associated with point guards, rather than ability to perform that role decently without shining on those skills based on scoring threat.

But, to be honest, I'm not sure if it makes a difference here. We saw Garnett generate comparable assists to Giannis back in the day despite inferior spacing. No given that superior spacing would lead to more assists necessarily - might show up more with improved scoring volume and efficiency - but I think we've already seen Garnett be able to playmake in a capacity similar to Giannis.

Re: Garnett's defense not seen in this era so only "very likely" rather than "sure thing". I think if you're going to use that line of argument you have to give a reason why you doubt. When I talk about recognizing the progress of the game, I'm not talking about blindly giving the benefit of the doubt to current players over old ones. I'm talking about the fact that with the way the 3-point shot is used today, it would have specific pros and cons to players in the past. And while we can't know precisely how each player would adapt, we can talk about things that would seem likely to help or hurt those players.

I look at Russell & Garnett and see guys with just about ideal defensive bodies for the "space" age with BBIQ well beyond Giannis, so I don't have any tangible reason to doubt them.

[Doctor MJ]

Jokic feels like a player who could be ranked higher further down the road if people's concerns are alleviated (i.e. defense) by future success.

Kinda like curry this year

Yes but key difference:

Jokic has to lead his team through the gauntlet of the playoffs showing defensive resilience against all comers.

Curry literally just has to keep doing what he's been doing and over time the skeptics will get quiet. Of course, the question remains how much longer he needs to keep it up. From my perspective, the parallels with Jordan are pretty clear except where Jordan really only needed to win 1 championship, Curry seems to need more than 4.

[falcolombardi]

Better in a vacuum or in practice? I mean being a bigger scoring threats is a big deal to playmaking

If you had the smartest and better vision player in the history of basketball but he was a 6'0 guard with mediocre handles, shooting and athletism would he really be a better playmaker than someone like giannis or even westbrook? Less smart pkayers who nonetheless create more and better opportunities than him through their athletism and scoring threat?

That is an extreme example exxageration of course to get the point across. But i believe that even if garnett is the better passer in a vacuum. His better scoring/handle skillset may lead him to create more shots thsn garnett regardless of eras

And simarly just as garnett would benefit offensively from playing in a 4-out era like giannis's. Giannis would benefit defensively from playing in the opposite one.

For how much we talk about garnett defense thriving in the modern game (he probably would) is actually giannis who has played in this era of 5/4-out offenses and thrived defensively even in the playoffs. With garnett it is very likely theory that he woukd dominate defensively today
With giannis is a proven fact, no theory needed

I actually find it fascinating that if giannis played in the 90's in, lets say, david robinson place.his development likely would have gone into developing an admiral-like game. A great athletic center with monster rim protection who does some face up drives and has a solid if unresilient post up power game and then we would wonder if he coukd translate that defensive impact to the 2020's since he is not as light footed as a hakeem or garnett

Right now my top 3 after mikan (who i think makes sense to put around as the last player to absolutely dominate and stand out above everyone else in a full era/decade alongside lebron, jordan, kareem and russel. His absolute ceiling may be as high as 5th based on that even when handicapping for era)

Is curry, giannis and garnett but i am also considering kobe, wade, west, robinson, walton and others like nash, paul or julius

I expect to have curry, jokic and giannis all in my top 20 with curry and giannis in my top 15

Ah, I was thinking the set of skills specifically associated with playmaking, which are typically associated with point guards, rather than ability to perform that role decently without shining on those skills based on scoring threat.

But, to be honest, I'm not sure if it makes a difference here. We saw Garnett generate comparable assists to Giannis back in the day despite inferior spacing. No given that superior spacing would lead to more assists necessarily - might show up more with improved scoring volume and efficiency - but I think we've already seen Garnett be able to playmake in a capacity similar to Giannis.

Re: Garnett's defense not seen in this era so only "very likely" rather than "sure thing". I think if you're going to use that line of argument you have to give a reason why you doubt. When I talk about recognizing the progress of the game, I'm not talking about blindly giving the benefit of the doubt to current players over old ones. I'm talking about the fact that with the way the 3-point shot is used today, it would have specific pros and cons to players in the past. And while we can't know precisely how each player would adapt, we can talk about things that would seem likely to help or hurt those players.

I look at Russell & Garnett and see guys with just about ideal defensive bodies for the "space" age with BBIQ well beyond Giannis, so I don't have any tangible reason to doubt them.

That giannis haa defensive impact metrics not too far off garnett in a era you consider much more unforgiving to defensive bigs doesnt give you some doubt about whether garnett really would have more defensive impact than giannis today?

I mean for all garnett is ideally built for today game he -still- would be playing a era less ideal for him (defensively). No matter how we slice it even for the likes of russel, garnett and hakeem it would harser to defend in the modern spacing era

Is almost impossible that garnett absolute defensive impavt today wouldnt drop, and giannis already looks close to him in defensive impact per stuff like regular season defense (the 19 and 20 bucks being close to garnett 08 celtics) and has monster impact in defense

This is with the agreement is tougher to anchor a defense now than before for a big man (data taken from unibrodavis posts)


2020 bucks
G 99.6 in 2020 (-7.9 net) (110.6 league avg)

1999 Spurs
David Robinson 92.0 (-2.4) (102.2 league avg)

2004 pistons
Wallace 94.8 (-2.0 net) (102.9 league avg)

2004 Spurs
Duncan 92.1 (-5.4 net) (102.9 league abg)

2005 Spurs
Duncan 94.5 (-8.9 net) (106.1 league avg)

2008 Celtics
Garnett 97.3 (-4.1 net) (107.5 league avg)

2014 pacers
Hibbert 98.9 (-2.9 net) (106.7 league avg)

Or

Regular defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 2nd behind PG
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Regular luck adjusted defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 1st by a lot
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Or

2019 -7.1 playoff league avg def rtg
2020 -2.8 playoff league avg def rtg
2021 -6.7 playoff league avg def rtg
2022 -7.4 playoff league avg def rtg

[falcolombardi]

In fact i gotta ask this question

Why do modern players not get extra cresit for their defensive impact the way older players often get for their offensive impact?

That always feels like it is a two way street but it never is seen like it

People will simultaneously prop up older players defense for playing in a era that was easier for defense then prop them up in offense, also, for playing in era easier for defense

[falcolombardi]

Jokic feels like a player who could be ranked higher further down the road if people's concerns are alleviated (i.e. defense) by future success.

Kinda like curry this year

Yes but key difference:

Jokic has to lead his team through the gauntlet of the playoffs showing defensive resilience against all comers.

Curry literally just has to keep doing what he's been doing and over time the skeptics will get quiet. Of course, the question remains how much longer he needs to keep it up. From my perspective, the parallels with Jordan are pretty clear except where Jordan really only needed to win 1 championship, Curry seems to need more than 4.

If jordan stopped winning after the first ring he would be seen very differently, he didnt get crownes goat or completely change the negative paradigm about building around volume scorers after 1 championship

And his second/third ring didnt come in such unusual circustance as curry ones

For better or worse if after 91 jordan lost to the knicks or whatever then hakeem or barkley joined the bulls and won a bunch of rings we would have seen similar doubts aboyt jordan as curry got

If he then won a ring after hakeem/barkley left those doubts would have also lessened like they did for curry

[Doctor MJ]

Better in a vacuum or in practice? I mean being a bigger scoring threats is a big deal to playmaking

If you had the smartest and better vision player in the history of basketball but he was a 6'0 guard with mediocre handles, shooting and athletism would he really be a better playmaker than someone like giannis or even westbrook? Less smart pkayers who nonetheless create more and better opportunities than him through their athletism and scoring threat?

That is an extreme example exxageration of course to get the point across. But i believe that even if garnett is the better passer in a vacuum. His better scoring/handle skillset may lead him to create more shots thsn garnett regardless of eras

And simarly just as garnett would benefit offensively from playing in a 4-out era like giannis's. Giannis would benefit defensively from playing in the opposite one.

For how much we talk about garnett defense thriving in the modern game (he probably would) is actually giannis who has played in this era of 5/4-out offenses and thrived defensively even in the playoffs. With garnett it is very likely theory that he woukd dominate defensively today
With giannis is a proven fact, no theory needed

I actually find it fascinating that if giannis played in the 90's in, lets say, david robinson place.his development likely would have gone into developing an admiral-like game. A great athletic center with monster rim protection who does some face up drives and has a solid if unresilient post up power game and then we would wonder if he coukd translate that defensive impact to the 2020's since he is not as light footed as a hakeem or garnett

Right now my top 3 after mikan (who i think makes sense to put around as the last player to absolutely dominate and stand out above everyone else in a full era/decade alongside lebron, jordan, kareem and russel. His absolute ceiling may be as high as 5th based on that even when handicapping for era)

Is curry, giannis and garnett but i am also considering kobe, wade, west, robinson, walton and others like nash, paul or julius

I expect to have curry, jokic and giannis all in my top 20 with curry and giannis in my top 15

Ah, I was thinking the set of skills specifically associated with playmaking, which are typically associated with point guards, rather than ability to perform that role decently without shining on those skills based on scoring threat.

But, to be honest, I'm not sure if it makes a difference here. We saw Garnett generate comparable assists to Giannis back in the day despite inferior spacing. No given that superior spacing would lead to more assists necessarily - might show up more with improved scoring volume and efficiency - but I think we've already seen Garnett be able to playmake in a capacity similar to Giannis.

Re: Garnett's defense not seen in this era so only "very likely" rather than "sure thing". I think if you're going to use that line of argument you have to give a reason why you doubt. When I talk about recognizing the progress of the game, I'm not talking about blindly giving the benefit of the doubt to current players over old ones. I'm talking about the fact that with the way the 3-point shot is used today, it would have specific pros and cons to players in the past. And while we can't know precisely how each player would adapt, we can talk about things that would seem likely to help or hurt those players.

I look at Russell & Garnett and see guys with just about ideal defensive bodies for the "space" age with BBIQ well beyond Giannis, so I don't have any tangible reason to doubt them.

That giannis haa defensive impact metrics not too far off garnett in a era you consider much more unforgiving to defensive bigs doesnt give you some doubt about whether garnett really would have more defensive impact than giannis today?

I mean for all garnett is ideally built for today game he -still- would be playing a era less ideal for him (defensively). No matter how we slice it even for the likes of russel, garnett and hakeem it would harser to defend in the modern spacing era

Is almost impossible that garnett absolute defensive impavt today wouldnt drop, and giannis already looks close to him in defensive impact per stuff like regular season defense (the 19 and 20 bucks being close to garnett 08 celtics) and has monster impact in defense

Hmm. You're talking about Giannis like we've consistently seen him put up the best defensive impact numbers in the game for years, but that's really not true. The Bucks' big defensive year was '19-20, and then their defense got ripped to shreds in the playoffs against the Heat. The last two years the Bucks looked much better in the playoffs, but their regular season meh.

And of course, this has everything to do with why he still hasn't won one of our RealGM PC Board DPOYs (though I've personally voted for him twice).

It feels like you're asking "Can we really expect the best defenders from the previous eras to do better than the best defender of today?" while brushing aside the fact that Giannis has been nothing close to the consensus best defensive player of the era.

But look, Giannis has certainly hit some high notes on defense, and if you'd like me to speak to a specific data point, go for it.

I'll end with this, which is no proof, but shows you how I think about it:

I think Draymond Green is the best defender of this era.
I think this despite the fact that he doesn't a more ideal defensive body like Giannis does.
He gets the edge by being one of the smartest big man defenders in history, right up there with Bill Russell & Kevin Garnett.
Bill Russell & Kevin Garnett have more ideal defensive bodies than Green, and quite possibly more than Giannis.

So the debate between Giannis & KG here feels like of like asking:

Who would be better, Giannis or someone with a stronger basketball brain in a body like Giannis'?

[Doctor MJ]

Kinda like curry this year

Yes but key difference:

Jokic has to lead his team through the gauntlet of the playoffs showing defensive resilience against all comers.

Curry literally just has to keep doing what he's been doing and over time the skeptics will get quiet. Of course, the question remains how much longer he needs to keep it up. From my perspective, the parallels with Jordan are pretty clear except where Jordan really only needed to win 1 championship, Curry seems to need more than 4.

If jordan stopped winning after the first ring he would be seen very differently, he didnt get crownes goat or completely change the negative paradigm about building around volume scorers after 1 championship

And his second/third ring didnt come in such unusual circustance as curry ones

For better or worse if after 91 jordan lost to the knicks or whatever then hakeem or barkley joined the bulls and won a bunch of rings we would have seen similar doubts aboyt jordan as curry got

If he then won a ring after hakeem/barkley left those doubts would have also lessened like they did for curry

If you can find someone in 1991 claiming the Bulls' championship was a fluke, I'd be very curious to see that. My recollection at the time is that volume scoring skeptics either got quiet, or they said "Yeah, but that's Michael Jordan!" and use him as "the exception that proves the rule".

One thing I find fascinating is how little I hear most folks knock 3-point shooting as a volume scoring focus on the grounds of "Yeah, but that's Steph Curry!" I hear coaches say stuff like when talking about running their own teams, but for the mainstream, to me skepticism of a 3-point shooting star and skepticism of Steph Curry still seem to be under the same umbrella in a way that is very different from Jordan's relationship with his own archetype.

[falcolombardi]

Ah, I was thinking the set of skills specifically associated with playmaking, which are typically associated with point guards, rather than ability to perform that role decently without shining on those skills based on scoring threat.

But, to be honest, I'm not sure if it makes a difference here. We saw Garnett generate comparable assists to Giannis back in the day despite inferior spacing. No given that superior spacing would lead to more assists necessarily - might show up more with improved scoring volume and efficiency - but I think we've already seen Garnett be able to playmake in a capacity similar to Giannis.

Re: Garnett's defense not seen in this era so only "very likely" rather than "sure thing". I think if you're going to use that line of argument you have to give a reason why you doubt. When I talk about recognizing the progress of the game, I'm not talking about blindly giving the benefit of the doubt to current players over old ones. I'm talking about the fact that with the way the 3-point shot is used today, it would have specific pros and cons to players in the past. And while we can't know precisely how each player would adapt, we can talk about things that would seem likely to help or hurt those players.

I look at Russell & Garnett and see guys with just about ideal defensive bodies for the "space" age with BBIQ well beyond Giannis, so I don't have any tangible reason to doubt them.

That giannis haa defensive impact metrics not too far off garnett in a era you consider much more unforgiving to defensive bigs doesnt give you some doubt about whether garnett really would have more defensive impact than giannis today?

I mean for all garnett is ideally built for today game he -still- would be playing a era less ideal for him (defensively). No matter how we slice it even for the likes of russel, garnett and hakeem it would harser to defend in the modern spacing era

Is almost impossible that garnett absolute defensive impavt today wouldnt drop, and giannis already looks close to him in defensive impact per stuff like regular season defense (the 19 and 20 bucks being close to garnett 08 celtics) and has monster impact in defense

Hmm. You're talking about Giannis like we've consistently seen him put up the best defensive impact numbers in the game for years, but that's really not true. The Bucks' big defensive year was '19-20, and then their defense got ripped to shreds in the playoffs against the Heat. The last two years the Bucks looked much better in the playoffs, but their regular season meh.

And of course, this has everything to do with why he still hasn't won one of our RealGM PC Board DPOYs (though I've personally voted for him twice).

It feels like you're asking "Can we really expect the best defenders from the previous eras to do better than the best defender of today?" while brushing aside the fact that Giannis has been nothing close to the consensus best defensive player of the era.

But look, Giannis has certainly hit some high notes on defense, and if you'd like me to speak to a specific data point, go for it.

I'll end with this, which is no proof, but shows you how I think about it:

I think Draymond Green is the best defender of this era.
I think this despite the fact that he doesn't a more ideal defensive body like Giannis does.
He gets the edge by being one of the smartest big man defenders in history, right up there with Bill Russell & Kevin Garnett.
Bill Russell & Kevin Garnett have more ideal defensive bodies than Green, and quite possibly more than Giannis.

So the debate between Giannis & KG here feels like of like asking:

Who would be better, Giannis or someone with a stronger basketball brain in a body like Giannis'?

The Bucks' big defensive year was '19-20, and then their defense got ripped to shreds in the playoffs against the Heat

Dont you always say we shouldbt let a single playoffs (such as curry 16') define a player too much?

Giannis playoffs defenses are elite in the 3 surrounding years (19,21,22)

Who would be better, Giannis or someone with a stronger basketball brain in a body like Giannis'?

I am not saying giannis is a better defender than garnett, but asking if the relative closeness of his results to garnett ones in a era less suited for defensive big men shouldnt give us pause that there is a clear and big gap between both defensively

My overall assesment is that i prefer garnett on defense too but that i like giannis offense more

"Can we really expect the best defenders from the previous eras to do better than the best defender of today?"

Is more than i am asking if it doesnt make sense to find a 5 points defensive impact big man in the modern game more impressive than a 5 points defensive impact bigman in the early aughts

Of course i see garnett as even more impactful than giannis, lets say garnett is a 5 points impact guy in an average situation back in the 00's and giannis is a 4 points impact guy in the mpdern game (numbers made up for this example). Are we sure the former is a lot more impressive than the latter?

If we give garnett time machine credit that his offense likely would be better today with mpte spacing and taking 3 pointers

Shouldnt we give giannis time machine credit his defense would be more impactful not having to defend those 3 pointers and deal with that spacing if he played in garnett era?

Hmm. You're talking about Giannis like we've consistently seen him put up the best defensive impact numbers in the game for years

He has a good of an argument as draymond and gobert imo, gobert (throufh imo by no fault of his own) doesnt have the playoffs results or the ultra high end reg season defenses

Draymond has mixed results too lately in an all time sense. The warriors defense in the 22 playoffs was good but unremarkable in an all time sense, he more or less gave up on 2020 season and shoulsnt get it handwaved away, we didnt see his playoffs defense in 21' but it may not have been dominant either if 22 playoffs are any indication

Giannis weaker playoffs defense in 2020 was still ok (-2.8 defense over 2 rounds) and his other 3 years were elite around -7 in average, bucks have a 4 year -6 def3nsive rating average in the playoffs

which is in a very rarefied air historically for consecutive defensive runs, if they have another -5 defense in the playoffs next year it will be almost up there with the best 5-year runs of playoffs defense ever

The garnett celtics and duncan spurs best 5 year stretches are the best marks post russel with a -6~ relative defensive rating in the playoffs (98-02 and 08-12) witg ewing knicks around -5, giannis bucks could join that group with a strong run in 2023

[Doctor MJ]

That giannis haa defensive impact metrics not too far off garnett in a era you consider much more unforgiving to defensive bigs doesnt give you some doubt about whether garnett really would have more defensive impact than giannis today?

I mean for all garnett is ideally built for today game he -still- would be playing a era less ideal for him (defensively). No matter how we slice it even for the likes of russel, garnett and hakeem it would harser to defend in the modern spacing era

Is almost impossible that garnett absolute defensive impavt today wouldnt drop, and giannis already looks close to him in defensive impact per stuff like regular season defense (the 19 and 20 bucks being close to garnett 08 celtics) and has monster impact in defense

This is with the agreement is tougher to anchor a defense now than before for a big man (data taken from unibrodavis posts)


2020 bucks
G 99.6 in 2020 (-7.9 net) (110.6 league avg)

1999 Spurs
David Robinson 92.0 (-2.4) (102.2 league avg)

2004 pistons
Wallace 94.8 (-2.0 net) (102.9 league avg)

2004 Spurs
Duncan 92.1 (-5.4 net) (102.9 league abg)

2005 Spurs
Duncan 94.5 (-8.9 net) (106.1 league avg)

2008 Celtics
Garnett 97.3 (-4.1 net) (107.5 league avg)

2014 pacers
Hibbert 98.9 (-2.9 net) (106.7 league avg)

Or

Regular defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 2nd behind PG
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Regular luck adjusted defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 1st by a lot
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Or

2019 -7.1 playoff league avg def rtg
2020 -2.8 playoff league avg def rtg
2021 -6.7 playoff league avg def rtg
2022 -7.4 playoff league avg def rtg

Not really sure what to say with the first set of data, glad you followed it up with the other samples.

With the RAPM & DRtg data, I see that you're focusing on the defensive RAPM of Giannis in 2019 & 2020, but leaning on 2021 & 2022 to make it look like there's a consistent trend of the Bucks having a comparably effective defense in the playoffs.

You're doing this because Giannis and the Bucks' best defensive regular season was also the year they got torched in the playoffs by the Miami Heat.

This is something in some ways really parallels the peak season debate with Curry, and so I kinda empathize here, but that also means I feel like you need to answer the questions analogous to those I've given my assessment on pertaining to Curry.

So:

What do you think happened to the Bucks against the Heat?
What do you think they changed in their approach after that (if anything)?
Do you think they've gotten better after that?
Why haven't they been able to be more than a middling (RS) defense after that?

[falcolombardi]

That giannis haa defensive impact metrics not too far off garnett in a era you consider much more unforgiving to defensive bigs doesnt give you some doubt about whether garnett really would have more defensive impact than giannis today?

I mean for all garnett is ideally built for today game he -still- would be playing a era less ideal for him (defensively). No matter how we slice it even for the likes of russel, garnett and hakeem it would harser to defend in the modern spacing era

Is almost impossible that garnett absolute defensive impavt today wouldnt drop, and giannis already looks close to him in defensive impact per stuff like regular season defense (the 19 and 20 bucks being close to garnett 08 celtics) and has monster impact in defense

This is with the agreement is tougher to anchor a defense now than before for a big man (data taken from unibrodavis posts)


2020 bucks
G 99.6 in 2020 (-7.9 net) (110.6 league avg)

1999 Spurs
David Robinson 92.0 (-2.4) (102.2 league avg)

2004 pistons
Wallace 94.8 (-2.0 net) (102.9 league avg)

2004 Spurs
Duncan 92.1 (-5.4 net) (102.9 league abg)

2005 Spurs
Duncan 94.5 (-8.9 net) (106.1 league avg)

2008 Celtics
Garnett 97.3 (-4.1 net) (107.5 league avg)

2014 pacers
Hibbert 98.9 (-2.9 net) (106.7 league avg)

Or

Regular defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 2nd behind PG
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Regular luck adjusted defensive RAPM
2019 Giannis ranked 1st by a lot
2020 Giannis ranks 1st by a lot

Or

2019 -7.1 playoff league avg def rtg
2020 -2.8 playoff league avg def rtg
2021 -6.7 playoff league avg def rtg
2022 -7.4 playoff league avg def rtg

Not really sure what to say with the first set of data, glad you followed it up with the other samples.

With the RAPM & DRtg data, I see that you're focusing on the defensive RAPM of Giannis in 2019 & 2020, but leaning on 2021 & 2022 to make it look like there's a consistent trend of the Bucks having a comparably effective defense in the playoffs.

You're doing this because Giannis and the Bucks' best defensive regular season was also the year they got torched in the playoffs by the Miami Heat.

This is something in some ways really parallels the peak season debate with Curry, and so I kinda empathize here, but that also means I feel like you need to answer the questions analogous to those I've given my assessment on pertaining to Curry.

So:

What do you think happened to the Bucks against the Heat?
What do you think they changed in their approach after that (if anything)?
Do you think they've gotten better after that?
Why haven't they been able to be more than a middling (RS) defense after that?

I actually see some similarities with curry and giannis which is why i asked you in a different post if over focusing on 2020 bucks defense struggles is not akin to overfocusing on curry 2016 struggles, both players even share a similar trajectory

Incredible mvp season (15 and 19) then even better next year (16 and 20) but dissapointing playoffs with some extenuating circunstances

Curry was joined by durant which made the incredible success of him and the warriors in 17 not as valued as perhaps it should be(as you often mention) so he didnt get the "player got over the hump" narrative in 17 the way giannis did in 21

I want to note that even as giannis is much more of a 2-way player than curry i actually have them next to each other in my peak ranking (curry ahead at that by the slimmest margin) so is not like i am disagreeing with curry offense being more impactful than giannis defense, cause i actually agree there

But since you mention the loss of regular season dominance. Wouldnt that also apply to curry and the warriors too?

Think about the similitudes here

The 2015 warriors were a good but historically unremarkable offense. Warriors actuallt have 2 ultra elite regular seasons offensively, 2016 and 2017. Their 2018 year was not on the same level and 15,19,21 and 22 even less so (2021 even had a below average offense)

So the warriors actually have the same amount of #1 regular season offenses (16 and 17) as the bucks have of #1 regular season defenses (19 and 20)

If we dont hold it against warriors offense they stopped turning up 100% in the regular season after a historical 2-year stretch why we should hold it against bucks defense that they didnt go 100% again in regulat season after a historical 2-tear stretch?

Bucks overall defensive numbers over these four yeats are arguably better than warriors offense numbers over 15-18 and we dont question the latter greatness offensively

Did bucks get better after 20 or was 20 an anomaly? I think it was a combination of both tbh. The 2020 bubble circunstances were unusual and giannis had some health issues by the ens of the miami series (not that it would have changed the end result)

16 warriors had to deal with curry injury and reincorporating him but there were also weaknesses in the warriors offense that changed after 16 (and replacing the light shooting barnes with kevin durant also helped, like replacing bledsoe with jrue probably helped too to a lesser degree)

You have mentioned before that curry and warriors may have found ways to be mpre bulletproof after 16 but didnt have the chance to prove it until 2022. Is it too unlikely the same thingh happened to bucks after 2020?

What happened against heat? i honestly couldbt tell you. But i also would be speculating about what happened to warriors offense against cleveland

My speculation is that giannis may not have been fully healthy and heat just caught fire taking advantage of bucks drop scheme, kinda like lebron and cavs took a step forward defensively and ruthlessly exploited the weak points of warriors offense by leaving barnes alone to go hard after curry.

That cavs had two mobile wing sized rim protectors in thompson amd lebron who are big enough to defend the rim agains the smaller warriors players but mobile enough to not be destroyed by warriors 3 point shooting is a underlooked matchup strenght of that finals cavs team

Just like heat monster 3 point shooting in the bubble environment against a team which at the time was even more tactically rigid than now may have just catched enough heat (ba dum tss) shooting wise to punish bucks drop scheme badly.... and giannis losing the last game and a bit may have also made bucks defense end looki g worse than it was

I would need to rewatch both series to be sure tho

[Doctor MJ]

He has a good of an argument as draymond and gobert imo, gobert (throufh imo by no fault of his own) doesnt have the playoffs results or the ultra high end reg season defenses

Draymond has mixed results too lately in an all time sense. The warriors defense in the 22 playoffs was good but unremarkable in an all time sense, he more or less gave up on 2020 season and shoulsnt get it handwaved away, we didnt see his playoffs defense in 21' but it may not have been dominant either if 22 playoffs are any indication

So, I'm seeing us responding to each other in multiple sets of posts which causes a lot of redundancy. I'm going to hold off on the stuff I didn't include in the quote here because I'd really like you to read my previous post and respond to what I asked you there.

On these point though, felt like chiming in:

RE: gobert (through imo no fault of his own) doesn't have... Interesting juxtaposition there. You're arguing for Giannis over Gobert because of a reason that you say is unfair to use against Gobert. That's quite abstract, not really about basketball, and not really in line with the data you were posting involving other DPOYs with their on/off.

Perhaps the more productive point to focus on though is the "no fault" part.

Do you believe that Gobert is as agile as the most agile bigs?
Do you believe that Gobert is as savvy as the most savvy bigs?

If you answered "no" to these questions, then the issues the Jazz have in the playoffs when opposing offenses design an attack forcing Gobert to make tough decisions and covers lots of ground are in part because Gobert is not as good in these extremely important areas as other bigs are.

None of that means "Gobert deserves all the blame!", but if we're trying to understand which characteristics of Gobert are being targeted and effectively exploited, it's not helpful to deflect the concerns.

Re: Warriors' '22 playoff D good but unremarkable in an all time sense. Well, it was more effective against Boston than the Bucks' defense led by prime Giannis was, so I'd be careful about having too high bar in terms of what impresses you. There is also the matter that Green is a good deal older than Giannis so it would have been pretty understandable if Giannis had clearly passed Green up at this point, but Green can still make it a debate.

Re: gave up on the 2020 season, shouldn't be handwaved away. I'd agree it shouldn't be handwaved way, but I would suggest only bringing it up when it's relevant to the discussion at hand. Hard for me to see the relevance here.

[falcolombardi]

He has a good of an argument as draymond and gobert imo, gobert (throufh imo by no fault of his own) doesnt have the playoffs results or the ultra high end reg season defenses

Draymond has mixed results too lately in an all time sense. The warriors defense in the 22 playoffs was good but unremarkable in an all time sense, he more or less gave up on 2020 season and shoulsnt get it handwaved away, we didnt see his playoffs defense in 21' but it may not have been dominant either if 22 playoffs are any indication

So, I'm seeing us responding to each other in multiple sets of posts which causes a lot of redundancy. I'm going to hold off on the stuff I didn't include in the quote here because I'd really like you to read my previous post and respond to what I asked you there.

On these point though, felt like chiming in:

RE: gobert (through imo no fault of his own) doesn't have... Interesting juxtaposition there. You're arguing for Giannis over Gobert because of a reason that you say is unfair to use against Gobert. That's quite abstract, not really about basketball, and not really in line with the data you were posting involving other DPOYs with their on/off.

Perhaps the more productive point to focus on though is the "no fault" part.

Do you believe that Gobert is as agile as the most agile bigs?
Do you believe that Gobert is as savvy as the most savvy bigs?

If you answered "no" to these questions, then the issues the Jazz have in the playoffs when opposing offenses design an attack forcing Gobert to make tough decisions and covers lots of ground are in part because Gobert is not as good in these extremely important areas as other bigs are.

None of that means "Gobert deserves all the blame!", but if we're trying to understand which characteristics of Gobert are being targeted and effectively exploited, it's not helpful to deflect the concerns.

Re: Warriors' '22 playoff D good but unremarkable in an all time sense. Well, it was more effective against Boston than the Bucks' defense led by prime Giannis was, so I'd be careful about having too high bar in terms of what impresses you. There is also the matter that Green is a good deal older than Giannis so it would have been pretty understandable if Giannis had clearly passed Green up at this point, but Green can still make it a debate.

Re: gave up on the 2020 season, shouldn't be handwaved away. I'd agree it shouldn't be handwaved way, but I would suggest only bringing it up when it's relevant to the discussion at hand. Hard for me to see the relevance here.

gave up on the 2020 season, shouldn't be handwaved away. I'd agree it shouldn't be handwaved way, but I would suggest only bringing it up when it's relevant to the discussion at hand. Hard for me to see the relevance here

Since you mentioned that giannis doesnt necesarrily have the most impressive defense results of his era (which i took to mean 19-22) i thought it relevant to look at who are his main competitors (gobert and draymond) and notice they dont necesarrily have better results than giannis, let alone by a clear margin

Giannis has one meh playoffs defensively and two mediocre regular seasons defense results wise? Yes

Green has no playoffa two of these four years which is relevant cause we shoulsnt just assume warriors playoffs defense would have beem fantastic with green if they made the post season. Just like if giannis missed the 2020 playoffs eith injury we would never have expected the bucks defense to struggle with him against miami

Also even if we use 2015-2018 for green vs 2019-2022 for giannis. green still doesnt pull ahead of him either (and green had strong defensve teammates too)

Gobert does have weak tean results in the last two playoffs

Giannis defensive "record" over this strwtch is not pefect but nobody else at the same era is

Re: Warriors' '22 playoff D good but unremarkable in an all time sense. Well, it was more effective against Boston than the Bucks' defense led by prime Giannis was, so I'd be careful about having too high bar in terms of what impresses you.

Is not that it doesnt impress me, is that it doesnt impress me more than bucks.

And i dont even necesarrily mean 2022 vs 2022. Take a bigger sample. The 15-18 warriors with green at his best and warriprs full of quality defenders everywhere and they still are not better than 19-22 bucks. Green doesnt have defensive team results better than those of giannis

I will mention it again, if bucks have a -6 defense next playoffs, somethingh they have accomplished 3 of the last 4 years, they will tie or beat the garnett celtics amd duncan/robinson spurs for best 5 year stretch of playoffs defense ever....outside russel of course (and this is including the weak 2020 outlier defense)

That would be quite am accomplishment, one that, if i am correct, even peak draymond green and the very defensively talented 15-19 warriors didnt accomplish as far as i remember the data (would need to confirm it, i am going off ben taylor peaks project here which was done after 2018)

None of that means "Gobert deserves all the blame!", but if we're trying to understand which characteristics of Gobert are being targeted and effectively exploited, it's not helpful to deflect the concerns.

I mentioned gobert as he is one of the best defenders of this era to compare his results with giannis. But since you mention him

Doesnt the facr that giannis led defenses have
-thrived- when gobert ones have struggled in the post season actually tell us that giannis shouldnt merit the doubts you havr on gobert?

We dont need theory to speculate about giannis defense team results, we have seen him in the mpdern game and his defende and teams are still absolutely smothering so i am confused why you bring up this bit of theory (giannis not having a ideal body for modern defense) when we have actual results on giannis side

Are you not leanint too hard on theory over results here?

Giannis teams have defensive dominance results in this era roughly on par with garnett or duncan best teams.

What do gobert real or perceived defensive struggles have to do with giannis who doesnt have them?

Do you think giannis would "struggle" as much as gobert if he was on utah (in which case the issue would be utah defenders, not gobert or giannis)

Or do you think that gobert weaker team defense results mean giannis led defenses may not be as effective defensively because you thinkg giannis body type and defensuve skillset is closer to gobert than hakeem or garnett?

In which case it still doesnt make sense when we have seen giannis team in a historical tier defensive run in this era

I need to mantion it again here: literally the only player among giannis, hakeem and garnett who has led a dominant defensive dinasty in the 3-point pace and space era is giannis. he is the one with evidence of his defensive dominance for this era

Why doubt him when all the evidence of his defensive impact is there for us?

It feels like the equivalent of doubting curry style of offense despite all the evidence in his favor, somethingh you always mention doesnt it?

Interesting juxtaposition there. You're arguing for Giannis over Gobert because of a reason that you say is unfair to use against Gobert. That's quite abstract, not really about basketball, and not really in line with the data you were posting involving other DPOYs with their on/off.

I didnt even argue for giannis over gobert. I domt want to take gobert playoffs defenses at face value when he was in an awful defensive roster

Again, i was just giving examples of how the usually agreed upon two best defensive pmayers of this generation (green amd gobert) dont have clearly better (or better at all) defensive results or defensive impact data than giannis

You have used utah struggles in the playoffs as evidence of gobert defensive limitations for this era, but that data point doesnt apply to giannis, quite the oppositr if anythingh

[falcolombardi]

To complement my previous post here is a defensive rating comparision for warriors with green and bucks with giannis

Warriors: reg sea/play-offs

2015: -4.2/-7.5
2016: -2.6/-4.5
2017 -4.8/ -6.9
2018 -1.0/-7.9
2019 -0.9/-2.0
Avg: -2.7/ -5.8

Now lets compare curry led offenses and green led defenses to giannis led defenses

2019 -5.2/-8.9* (corrected)
2020 -7.7/-2.8
2021 -0.9/-6.7
2022 -0.2/ -7.4
Avg: -3.5/ -6.3

They stop being a good defense in regular season but so do green warriors, they have a higher regular season peak too and overall the have a -3.5 defense in reg season over a 4 year stretch

Warriors average defense in reg season over this stretch is -2.8 over a 5 year stretch

Giannis bucks 19-22 are better than green warriors 15-19 in reg season as well as in the playoffs

Is not fully apples to apples as is 4 vs 5 seasons. But there is no indication per team resulrs that warriors led defense by peak green are better than bucks giannos led defense

This in apite of giannis much, much greater offensive load and imo with comparable defensive talent around them

If bucks have a strong run defensively next season they will joinf duncan spurs, ewing knicks and garnett celtics for more dominant prolonged (5-year stretch) defensive runs ever outside russel

Essentially there is not any team level result that suggests green is in a level above giannis as defenders and that is with giannis taking a huge offensive load (relevant if what we are discussin is theorical highest level of defense they can play)

And giannis defensive rapm metrics are at the top tier of the league too

[MyUniBroDavis]

What make you believe that Wilkins was "exceptionally elite offensive impact guy"?

Gervin was elite for sure, but a lot of that was caused by his off-ball game, shooting and overall efficiency (he was more efficient scorer than Kobe or even Kawhi).

I mean again though, it’s about where they score from/how they’re scoring right? More than just raw effeciency, I’d assume iso scoring and historic outlier effeciency post scoring translates better backwards relatively for them (Kd and Kobe)

Just looking at the years he got hurt and or traded, when he played vs game he missed or wasn’t there for

Hawks (92)
109.9 with
105.5 without

Hawks (94)
109.6 with
104.8 without

Clippers (94)
102.2 without
105.7 with

What makes you believe that Kobe was more efficient iso scorer than someone like Gervin though?

Wilkins WOWY are extremely underwhelming. Maybe they are caused by non-prime seasons, I would have to look at this closer.

I don’t know how to find wowy, did it say his offense was underwhelming or overall? The defense got better when he left so maybe it’s that

Not neccessarily in comparison to gervin, with Kobe it’s more so that there’s probably an assumption that his 1v1 was probably more about decent effeciency on extremely high volume, which isn’t really the case

Defining a 1v1 possession as either an isolation or post up, (which I feel is fair), Kobe does compare well to Kawhi and hold up against durant in pure effeciency alone

Isolation

2022
Isolation
Durant 89.7 percentile 5.2 poss
Post up
Durant 86.4 percentile 2.5 poss

2021
Isolation
Durant 94 percentile 3.3 poss
Kawhi 64.9 percentile 3.7 poss
Post up
Durant 90th percentile 1.9 poss
Kawhi 86.9 percentile 3.0 poss

2020
Isolation
Kawhi 84.6 percentile 3.7 poss
Post up
Kawhi 78.1 percentile 2.7 poss

2019
Isolation
Durant 85.5 percentile 3.7 poss
Kawhi 83.7 percentile 3.9 poss
Post up
Durant 77.5 percentile 2.5 poss
Kawhi 60.8 percentile 2.2 poss

2018
Isolation
Durant 86.9 percentile 3.6 poss
Post up
Durant 77 percentile 2.0 poss

2017
Isolation
Durant 89.2 percentile 2.5
Kawhi 72.2 percentile 2.9
Post up
Durant 55 percentile 1.5 poss
Kawhi 79.5 percentile 1.9 poss

2016
Isolation
Durant 85.2 percentile 3.8 poss
Kawhi 84.9 percentile 2.2 poss
Post up
Durant 99.6 percentile 2.1 poss
Kawhi 89.2 percentile 2.4 poss


Kobe
06
Kobe 91 percentile 12.1 poss
Kobe 71 percentile 2.6 poss

07
Kobe 95 percentile 11.1 poss
Kobe 91 percentile 2.1 poss

08
Kobe 89 percentile 8.3 a game
Kobe 91 percentile 2.6 a game

09
Kobe 85th percentile 9.1 a game
Kobe 90th percentile 3.5 a game

10
Kobe 82nd percentile 8.4 a game
Kobe 78th percentile 5.5 a game


Percentiles are a bit weird, but 90th percentile is very much in the hyper elite superstar category, most of the guys above it are guys who had a few possessions as outliers. I think Duncan generally was in the 75th-80th percentile as post scoring effeciency (05 was 78th), kobes effeciency is pretty much the same as dirks, albeit on less possessions. The offense wasn’t designed around generating isolation possessions like hardens Houston teams were either.

On one hand, it’s hard to compare Kobes synergy stats to players before 2004 since they don’t have synergy data.

Otoh, durants rightfully considered one of the most unstoppable 1v1 wing scorers ever, and peak kobe had similar efficiency to him on isolation possessions on much more volume