1. 1968/69 Willis Reed HM: 1969/70
Reed lost the battle barely against Lanier. I get that his boxscore production isn't the greatest, but we should consider that he did that under Holzman system that is well known for lowering the individual production, he wasn't a high volume iso scorer who ate shotclock in the post. He was extremely versatile scorer, capable of playing off-ball both as a rim runner and shooter (even used off the screens). He could bang up down low, but could also play more perimeter oriented basketball.
I also like how he scaled up his production against the toughest assignments. His overall postseason numbers are quite spectacular considering the competition faced. In 1967-70 period, Reed faced teams all-defensive level centers in all of his postseason series:
1967 ECSF vs Celtics - Russell
1968 ECSF vs 76ers - Wilt
1969 ECSF vs Bullets - Unseld
1969 ECF vs Celtics - Russell
1970 ECSF vs Bullets - Unseld
1970 ECF vs Bucks - Kareem
1970 Finals vs Lakers - Wilt
Results: 24.2 ppg on +4.0 rTS% (actually 25.3 ppg if we exclude games 5-7 of the 1970 finals). If we go with more contextualized numbers, here is his three year run:
1967-69 Reed: 22.7 pp75 on +8.6 rTS%
1968-70 Reed: 22.0 pp75 on +4.9 rTS%
Considering his style of play, the competition faced and his defensive impact, I think these numbers put him among the best candidates here. Like Lanier, he consistently outperformed his RS self and unlike Lanier, he proved his quality in significantly bigger sample.
On defense, Reed was very active, if slightly undersized center, who was a key for Knicks trap defense. He was quite willing to go outside and help his perimeter teammates outside. His athleticism is often underappreciated as well, he could move quite quick laterally despite his built and he wasn't a poor leaper either. The main weakness is his size - he just didn't have enough length to protect the paint on elite level. That's the only thing that separates him from Mourning defensively to me.
His post defense is also quite Mourning esque - he was very physical and strong, but his lack of size didn't allow him to really shut down his bigger opponents. He had considerable success against injured Wilt in 1970 finals, but as I got more footage from that series (and right now I have a lot of footage from games 3-7), I see that outside of a few successful possessions, Wilt usually did well on him in post up situations. That also limited his effectiveness against much taller Kareem.
2. 1971/72 Nate Thurmond HM: 1966/67, 1968/69
Nate Thurmond isn't typically the type of guy that gets a lot of love for his peak and I'm so glad to see him finally getting votes
Now, let's move into the reason why I put him on my voting list.
Thurmond's WOWY numbers are well known here. As AEnigma described well in his post, the Warriors were extremely depended on Thurmond's availability. They actually didn't need Rick Barry as much as they needed Nate. Why is this the case? Because Thurmond singlehandly anchored their defense. Defense is the reason why he's so high.
You may look in the first place at Warriors relative defensive ratings and come out unimpressed, but the biggest reason why his numbers don't look amazing is because Thurmond usually missed a lot of time and Warriors collapsed without him.
When you actually decide to watch his games, it's not a surprise why he had such an immense impact. He was a solid 6'11 man without the shoes with absurdly long arms. Seriously, if you haven't seen him in action before, you'd be shocked how long his arms were. What's also very important is that Thurmond was very athletic. He had a perfect body for a defensive center and his deceptive quickness often surprised perimeter players who tried to blow him by. Here is a short highlight reel I made presenting some of the better Thurmond plays on defensive end:
If you want to feel his pressence in the paint, you can check basically any full game we have of him:
If you want to see how his offensive game looked like during his prime, there is no better way than to watch this short Thurmond's highlight video made by the NBA last season for the Archive 75 project:
You can understand why he had so much problem with his scoring efficiency. He took a lot of inefficient shots and like most players in the league, he wasn't that good at making them. A small bouns is that he was very active without the ball and tried to help his teammates with screening and spreading out the floor, so he wasn't a complete liability. Despite his scoring inefficiency, he was fairly athletic player, who could finish inside on a move even over shotblockers:
Why did I decided to go with 1972 over 1967? Two main reasons - health and offensive improvement. I don't have enough footage to draw a clear conclusion of his defensive impact for 1967 vs 1972, but I know enough about his offense. It seems that he did become a bit better outside shooter as he got older (which is also visible in his FT% improvement) and I like his passing a bit more in these early 1970s years. He never became Tom Boerwinkle or anything close to it, but he was a very willing passer and could make some more advanced reads (he threw some beautiful outlet passes as well). Him arguably outplaying individually 1972 Kareem is just the icing on the cake, even though Warriors weren't really competitive in the series.
I can be persuated to pick 1967 or 1969 over 1972, but for now that's my choice. For anyone interested, I also have some high quality clips of Nate from the 1965 season without Wilt on the team.
3. 1993/94 Dikembe Mutombo HM: 1996/97
I will copy my arguments for Thurmond over Dikembe:
I think Mutombo has the advantage in rim protection. Deke is literally the GOAT-level rim protector and as great as Thurmond was at that, I think he was a level below that. Not only Mutombo was simply taller, I like his shot contesting technique a bit more as well, as he knew how to position himself better inside and used his arms a little better.
There are two reasons why I pick Thurmond over Deke:
1. Thurmond was better in basically every other aspect of defense. I'm not sure how to compare their P&R defense, but Nate certainly had a lot more value in switching schemes which made him more versatile. His quickness was just incredible for his size. That made Thurmond significantly better man defender overall (not only in the post). Of course he was far better post defender as well. I also like the effort Nate put consistently on the glass, he rarely left his man without boxing out (and he dealt with Wilt on the glass better than anyone, at least based on eye test).
2. I like Thurmond's offensive game a little bit more. He was inefficient, that's a fact - but he was also very active and he never stopped moving, trying to set screens, fight on the glass or spreading the floor. Mutombo was probably a bit better post scorer, but I wouldn't give him the edge in post offense overall, because Nate was a far better passer (that's a big Deke's weakness). To his credit though - Mutombo was a far better finisher and offensive rebounder, so it probably depends more on the system they'd play in.
I decided to pick younger, more mobile version of Mutombo who absolutely dominated the opposing offenses in the playoffs. He was as close to a one-man defensive army as it is possible in that run. He averaged staggering 9.3 BLK% in the playoffs in almost 43 mpg, which is nothing short of incredible. All of that came without excessive gambling, he was a very fundamentally sound rim protector.
I don't love his offensive game, but he was a solid finisher and excellent offensive rebounder. He could also draw many fouls and although his FT% is quite poor, it's not to the level of hurting his team.
I have a tough time picking Dikembe/Thurmond over the next offensive superstars (Doncic, Baylor, Barry), but I think more with time that top tier defensive anchors are significantly underappreciated. I mean, Nuggets were one game away from playing the WCF, even though Mutombo had no star around him and they had to face two contender-level teams in both rounds. Dikembe had no strong defenders around him and even though Nuggets were offensive oriented, they weren't that good on that end either. I doubt Doncic would get further with equally talented team.
