Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #49 - 2021-22 Luka Doncic

[70sFan]

Seems like a fairly weak case.

Well, I wouldn't say it's weaker than your strong reliance on scoring volume numbers.

That was simply a counter to a claim about scoring.

I mean, I didn't vote for Penny and I have these two relatively close, but the only thing that makes Doncic looks better is his raw boxscore numbers. I don't see why you feel offended by Penny finishing higher.

[Ambrose]

If you have no interest in the regular season or otherwise think that Luka’s team circumstance uniquely disadvantages him, maybe. Otherwise, what really separates him in the regular season from players like Trae or Lillard, both of whom also score at massive volume and have led conference finals teams and indeed have higher ORAPM values than Luka over the past three years.

I would be careful not to let recency bias make Luka look more dominant relative to the current league than he actually is, and to remember that his entire postseason career currently consists of 5 series.

When you reduce it down to that, sure, I guess.

Except Luka's massive volume is greater than theirs. He has 3 seasons of higher scoring volume than Lillard has ever had, and 2 (plus a tie) over Trae. That is with comparable efficiency.

Balancing efficiency with volume, I would say he and Trae have been similarly effective scorers, but here you are definitely underselling Lillard’s efficiency.

I notice you used ORAPM, and not something like ORAPTOR or OLEBRON where the results vary quite a bit.

Because those balance raw impact with box score components and my argument was not particularly tied to which of them have better box scores.

while downplaying the fact that Luka scales up in the postseason. If you want to compare their postseason runs, be my guest.

Conference Finals Run
Dame 33.1 pts/100 56.6% TS 4.9 OBPM
Trae 37.9 pts/100 55.1% TS 6.8 OBPM
Luka 44.6 pts/100 57.7% TS 6.8 OBPM

Even if you want to say they have comparable regular seasons it's pretty clear who the superior postseason scorer is, and Dame/Trae certainly aren't closing that gap with defense. It seems pretty easy to argue he did it with the inferior cast as well. Don't see an argument for either of them to be honest.

His postseason elevation is the entire reason he was voted in and the entire reason he has been receiving votes since the mid-30s. To my recollection, neither Lillard nor Trae have received a single ballot (maaaaaybe Lillard received one random one from an uncommitted voter).

Regardless, it seems you have not really considered the key reason I used those two as comparison: while they are all offensive giants, their overall ranks in most of these metrics (even the ones mixing in box scores) take a huge hit because of how much of a drain they are defensively. Luka is not providing clear top five value on offence in the regular season, and to cover for his defence that is what he should be doing.

If the argument for Penny is a remarkably impressive 28 game sample based mostly on team results, (bref doesn't even have +/- for that year, no concrete RAPM either) while his individual numbers never came close to reaching that level again, I'm going to lean with the guy that has proven he can hold his level of play for the last three seasons.

I encourage you to read back through the Penny thread (and maybe a couple of its predecessors). 28 games was far from the sole reason given, and he very much had a strong three-year run of his own.

Again, I do not think it is anything wild to prefer Luka, especially if we use a hyper-modern lens, but here you pretty much are asking for us to use a 25-31 game sample for Luka, because his regular season sample really does not stand out relative to many others in terms of raw value provided to a team.

Not really sure what you're arguing here. You're making arguments for players you yourself admit have no support for the conversation, with metrics you can't use to support the actual comparison being made. Generalizing "offensive giants and a defensive drain" tells us nothing useful if it ignores the levels of each.

You say Penny had a strong 3-year run, and he did, yet one of these appears to be a little bit of an outlier at least in terms of advanced numbers. T-Mac dropped from 21 in 2019 to 34 this year for having a year deemed an outlier (admittedly a much bigger one). Penny jumped from unranked in 2019 to 39 now despite more seasons being included. Who said anything about a 25-31 game sample? I'd argue Luka had the more impressive 3-year run.

[AEnigma]

When you reduce it down to that, sure, I guess.

Except Luka's massive volume is greater than theirs. He has 3 seasons of higher scoring volume than Lillard has ever had, and 2 (plus a tie) over Trae. That is with comparable efficiency.

Balancing efficiency with volume, I would say he and Trae have been similarly effective scorers, but here you are definitely underselling Lillard’s efficiency.

I notice you used ORAPM, and not something like ORAPTOR or OLEBRON where the results vary quite a bit.

Because those balance raw impact with box score components and my argument was not particularly tied to which of them have better box scores.

while downplaying the fact that Luka scales up in the postseason. If you want to compare their postseason runs, be my guest.

Conference Finals Run
Dame 33.1 pts/100 56.6% TS 4.9 OBPM
Trae 37.9 pts/100 55.1% TS 6.8 OBPM
Luka 44.6 pts/100 57.7% TS 6.8 OBPM

Even if you want to say they have comparable regular seasons it's pretty clear who the superior postseason scorer is, and Dame/Trae certainly aren't closing that gap with defense. It seems pretty easy to argue he did it with the inferior cast as well. Don't see an argument for either of them to be honest.

His postseason elevation is the entire reason he was voted in and the entire reason he has been receiving votes since the mid-30s. To my recollection, neither Lillard nor Trae have received a single ballot (maaaaaybe Lillard received one random one from an uncommitted voter).

Regardless, it seems you have not really considered the key reason I used those two as comparison: while they are all offensive giants, their overall ranks in most of these metrics (even the ones mixing in box scores) take a huge hit because of how much of a drain they are defensively. Luka is not providing clear top five value on offence in the regular season, and to cover for his defence that is what he should be doing.

If the argument for Penny is a remarkably impressive 28 game sample based mostly on team results, (bref doesn't even have +/- for that year, no concrete RAPM either) while his individual numbers never came close to reaching that level again, I'm going to lean with the guy that has proven he can hold his level of play for the last three seasons.

I encourage you to read back through the Penny thread (and maybe a couple of its predecessors). 28 games was far from the sole reason given, and he very much had a strong three-year run of his own.

Again, I do not think it is anything wild to prefer Luka, especially if we use a hyper-modern lens, but here you pretty much are asking for us to use a 25-31 game sample for Luka, because his regular season sample really does not stand out relative to many others in terms of raw value provided to a team.

Not really sure what you're arguing here. You're making arguments for players you yourself admit have no support for the conversation,

No, I am comparing Luka with players who seemingly have no especially strong case yet have arguably outperformed Luka during the regular season.

with metrics you can't use to support the actual comparison being made.

Luka’s total RAPM is so bad that even diminished Penny tops him, and the on/off data we have for Penny’s true peak tilts far further to his advantage.

Generalizing "offensive giants and a defensive drain" tells us nothing useful if it ignores the levels of each.

Well you seemed to have no interest in the holistic assessment. If we look at Luka as a whole, he is probably not one of the twenty most valuable players to his team during the regular season — and that is being nice and giving him extra credit for his box score production.

You say Penny had a strong 3-year run, and he did, yet one of these appears to be a little bit of an outlier at least in terms of advanced numbers. T-Mac dropped from 21 in 2019 to 34 this year for having a year deemed an outlier (admittedly a much bigger one). Penny jumped from unranked in 2019 to 39 now despite more seasons being included.

And multiple players ahead of Penny in 2019 dropped, because the pool of voters is different and some standards have changed over the past three years. By your own framing, do you feel there should have been a 20 spot gap between McGrady and Penny in 2019? To me this five spot gap is far more reasonable.

Who said anything about a 25-31 game sample? I'd argue Luka had the more impressive 3-year run.

Again, not if we want to look at relative regular season impact.

Now, I would agree Luka maintains better in the postseason, so the question is then whether at that point even with his defensive weaknesses he becomes more valuable than Penny, and/or whether the current era is so much better than Penny’s that even if Luka is not more valuable relative to his own era, he would be more valuable transplanting Penny into the modern era. Both arguments have their merits, and I have often used the latter when I felt profiles were otherwise close, but I certainly do not think those are incontestable for Luka.

[Ambrose]

No, I am comparing Luka with players who seemingly have no especially strong case yet have arguably outperformed Luka during the regular season.

Based on ORAPM.

Luka’s total RAPM is so bad that even diminished Penny tops him, and the on/off data we have for Penny’s true peak tilts far further to his advantage.

Based on RAPM and unofficial data. This would be a prime example of why this is a valuable metric, and not a definitive ranking of anything.

Well you seemed to have no interest in the holistic assessment. If we look at Luka as a whole, he is probably not one of the twenty most valuable players to his team during the regular season — and that is being nice and giving him extra credit for his box score production.

Well, when by holistically you really mean RAPM, then yeah, I'm not interested in taking that as gospel. It's a useful piece of an entire puzzle of trying to rank players but it is not an end-all, be-all.

And multiple players ahead of Penny in 2019 dropped, because the pool of voters is different and some standards have changed over the past three years. By your own framing, do you feel there should have been a 20 spot gap between McGrady and Penny in 2019? To me this five spot gap is far more reasonable.

Off the top of my head, I'd probably take the middle ground in between the two.

Now, I would agree Luka maintains better in the postseason, so the question is then whether at that point even with his defensive weaknesses he becomes more valuable than Penny, and/or whether the current era is so much better than Penny’s that even if Luka is not more valuable relative to his own era, he would be more valuable transplanting Penny into the modern era. Both arguments have their merits, and I have often used the latter when I felt profiles were otherwise close, but I certainly do not think those are incontestable for Luka.

I'd argue the offensive gap is large enough in the postseason that the defensive gap is more than overcome. I also think Luka would fair just as well in an era where he'd be able to utilize his post-game and midrange game more, while taking less 3's against a more diluted league. I also don't think Penny could achieve what Luka did last postseason with that amount of load and the level of surrounding talent. However, those are simply my opinions. Again, if you disagree, that's cool. My point is moreso that one guy is #39 and another is #49, where the former heavily benefits from a small sample size that wasn't replicated again.

[falcolombardi]

No, I am comparing Luka with players who seemingly have no especially strong case yet have arguably outperformed Luka during the regular season.

Based on ORAPM.

Luka’s total RAPM is so bad that even diminished Penny tops him, and the on/off data we have for Penny’s true peak tilts far further to his advantage.

Based on RAPM and unofficial data. This would be a prime example of why this is a valuable metric, and not a definitive ranking of anything.

Well you seemed to have no interest in the holistic assessment. If we look at Luka as a whole, he is probably not one of the twenty most valuable players to his team during the regular season — and that is being nice and giving him extra credit for his box score production.

Well, when by holistically you really mean RAPM, then yeah, I'm not interested in taking that as gospel. It's a useful piece of an entire puzzle of trying to rank players but it is not an end-all, be-all.

And multiple players ahead of Penny in 2019 dropped, because the pool of voters is different and some standards have changed over the past three years. By your own framing, do you feel there should have been a 20 spot gap between McGrady and Penny in 2019? To me this five spot gap is far more reasonable.

Off the top of my head, I'd probably take the middle ground in between the two.

Now, I would agree Luka maintains better in the postseason, so the question is then whether at that point even with his defensive weaknesses he becomes more valuable than Penny, and/or whether the current era is so much better than Penny’s that even if Luka is not more valuable relative to his own era, he would be more valuable transplanting Penny into the modern era. Both arguments have their merits, and I have often used the latter when I felt profiles were otherwise close, but I certainly do not think those are incontestable for Luka.

I'd argue the offensive gap is large enough in the postseason that the defensive gap is more than overcome. I also think Luka would fair just as well in an era where he'd be able to utilize his post-game and midrange game more, while taking less 3's against a more diluted league. I also don't think Penny could achieve what Luka did last postseason with that amount of load and the level of surrounding talent. However, those are simply my opinions. Again, if you disagree, that's cool. My point is moreso that one guy is #39 and another is #49, where the former heavily benefits from a small sample size that wasn't replicated again.

You may be giving too much importance to the distance between placings

The further you get from #1 in any ranking the harder the players become to distinguish and the bigger the tiers get

Ranking curry (#11 here) as #1 is a much tougher case than ranking luka over penny (also 10 spots) for that reason, .

players become more and more crowded the further you go, if this project went to top 100 you woulf see player 60 and player 100 being fairly comparable in a way not even player 1 and player 10 are

[LukaTheGOAT]

I didn't vote (and these are small voting samples) but I find it hard to believe any version of Penny was better than Luka last year. Let alone 10 spots better.

Depends on how strict you want to be with era relativity. Time machined Penny directly to the league today, yeah, maybe not, but I do think he was a more capable defender and in his own league was clearly an elite scorer and playmaker until his body broke down, plus showed up several orders of magnitude higher in relative regular season impact. Which I think is really what holds Luka back. Everyone is impressed with how he performs in the postseason, but it is strange how little that seems to reflect to the regular season. Even noted postseason risers like Hakeem and Reggie and Gus Williams all had a pretty high baseline regular season impact eclipsing what we have seen from Luka. And seeing as that leap in value is clearly not coming on the defensive end, you end up with the profile of a bad defender who has an incredibly resilient offensive style but not one which really generates desirable seeding because of the quicker diminishing returns of his underwhelming scoring efficiency and extreme ball control.

Like I said earlier, I think he could have gone earlier and maybe should have gone earlier, and I never felt those voting for him in the top forty were wrong or anything, but this early in his career there are still a lot of questions about how much his playstyle suits the formation of a reasonable championship team. If in three years he ends up in the top thirty because he cleaned up a few weaknesses and had an MVP season or a Finals run, would not be remotely surprised.

Do you think Penny loses some luster in today's era because or the lack of range of his shot?

[AEnigma]

Do you think Penny loses some luster in today's era because or the lack of range of his shot?

Yeah. His defence also could suffer. And in contrast, I agree with Ambrose that Luka profiles as a pretty good 1990s player. His defence would be less of an outright issue and his questionable perimetre range would not limit his era relative efficiency as much. But what I know is that for a three-year stretch in the 1990s, Penny was a secure top five player by pretty much every metric you care to use. The same is not as clearly true for Luka in the 2020s, and the only real extent to which it is a little more valid relies on a four to five series postseason sample.

As I said, I do not think it is wrong to just take that at face value and go with the better profile playing in the better league, but I also continue to think there is something in Luka’s style limiting what his impact can be on a team in a way I do not really see with Penny. Maybe not worth a ten spot gap, no, but the voting base was more divided on Luka, and it was divided in large part because Luka has some valid questions about his real impact outside the showy box scores.