Your unpopular takes? (PC Board Edition)

[breezypeezy]

1. Billups is a top 50 player ever. He should be ranked above Allen Iverson and Isiah Thomas to start. I think he's very underrated, even if people recognize his value.

2. Hakeem Olajuwon has the best playoff run ever in 94, and depending on how much you value playoffs he has a great case for the best peak ever.

3. Kobe Bryant was a better player than Larry Bird.

4. Per position, Andrei Kirilenko should be ranked among the best defenders ever.

5. LBJ's contributions on defense in his earlier years (07-13) got underappreciated with time and he should be regarded as en elite defender in that period.

(1) and (3) are odd views, at least someone agrees, your thesis did get a "and 1" I sée.

My question is did you see Isiah or Larry play or is your contention from a statistical measurement. These 2 were magical elements (along with Magic himself) to any court they stepped on.
Not certain theres a statistical capture over how much they elevated everyone around them. They were Mel Gibsons "Braveheart" level leaders, the guys to win lead and win battles. Those games were football level bruising contests back then and to a teammate everyone they played with knew who was in charge the minute they hit the court.
The intangible value of such players doesnt bleed through a stat sheet, they were weighed in fearlessness, drive, and mercy-less will to win and intimate, they engendered fear and surrender from opponents who knew they could not overcome this opponent.
In their primes they were every bit the legend they have.

Kobe, Chauncey great leaders and players, yet nothing on Isiah or Larry's level. Jordan and Magic also had this factor as well, im just not certain how measureable it was but their peers and opponents knew what they were in store for whenever they faced off.

[eminence]

i mean, no. lebron had a significant edge on steph at their peaks, which arguably happened at the same time if you think 2016/17 lebron was his peak. and while lebron has gotten older, so has steph. so it's hard to see how steph has not only closed the large gap, and then not only evened it up, but then surpassed lebron by some significant margin. especially since you are just making this a "quality of play" argument and not knocking lebron for missing games in 2019 and 2021.

2022 lebron had a much better regular season than 2022 curry. this doesn't seem debatable. and 2014 is a huge advantage to lebron. we're still talking about almost 30 PER lebron one year removed from arguably his peak regular season. even if it was a snub, steph isn't getting overlooked for the ASG if he was on lebron's level. and 2017 is also tough to see for steph given how much of a step back he took in the regular season. way worse stats and his team won 6 less games even after adding KD.

2018 and 2019 steph was on teams that won 58 and 57 games, despite massive amounts of talent. he was on just as much cruise control as lebron has ever been.

as far as the playoffs, unless this is just some 1 to 1 comparison where 82 games of regular season is compared to ~20 games of playoffs, with no regard for the fact that for both of these guys their whole season revolves around the playoffs, then the ground lebron makes up is just too much to ignore.

in this entire period, does steph have a playoff run that would be as good as 2013/14/15/16/17/18/20 for lebron? the only one that might would be 2017, and that's only if i ignore that it is by far steph's best playoffs in by far the least pressure-packed scenario, calling into question how real it was and how much it really affected championship odds (he could have played way worse and the warriors still would have cruised). and after 2017 nothing else would crack lebron's top 10 playoff runs. that's simply too much value at the most important time of the year to compared to some slight extra regular season value with lebron on cruise control.

I've got '09/'12/'13 as LeBrons top 3 seasons. '16/'17 contending with '10 to round out the top 5.

'22 LeBron being 'much better' than '22 Steph for the RS is so far out there I don't think I can have a serious discussion with you my man.

LeBron plays 56 games on a 33 win team, they are -2.1 with him on court, a +2.1 on/off. Posting a +0.31 RAPM, good for 182nd in the league.

Steph plays 64 games on a 53 win team, they are +10.1 with him on court, a +10.0 on/off. +3.67 RAPM, good for 2nd in the league.

Okay but that is an argument disconnected from what they are actually doing. 2022 was the worst scoring season of Steph’s prime. He did not shoulder a higher passing load. He did not take better care of the ball. His defence was potentially a step up that year, fine, but that is not the source of the value spike you see from 2022 compared to what we see in 2021 and 2023 — incidentally, two years where Lebron has a better on-court rating and on-off rating on teams with similar results. Now, contrast that with Lebron, who had his best scoring season as a Laker, and played his highest minutes per game since 2017, but all the same had an extreme value nadir compared to every other Lakers season. Again, seasonal shifts in defence are only worth so much. Those three season stretches should be a textbook example of how your surrounding roster affects your real impact, but instead you want to go with this rudimentary “Lebron was -2 and +2 and therefore had an awful season and Curry was +10 and +10 and therefore had his best post-Durant season.”

Or like, that's a quick summary. I think you're well aware you can stretch the sample however you like over LeBrons Lakers career and it don't measure up.

[AEnigma]

I've got '09/'12/'13 as LeBrons top 3 seasons. '16/'17 contending with '10 to round out the top 5.

'22 LeBron being 'much better' than '22 Steph for the RS is so far out there I don't think I can have a serious discussion with you my man.

LeBron plays 56 games on a 33 win team, they are -2.1 with him on court, a +2.1 on/off. Posting a +0.31 RAPM, good for 182nd in the league.

Steph plays 64 games on a 53 win team, they are +10.1 with him on court, a +10.0 on/off. +3.67 RAPM, good for 2nd in the league.

Okay but that is an argument disconnected from what they are actually doing. 2022 was the worst scoring season of Steph’s prime. He did not shoulder a higher passing load. He did not take better care of the ball. His defence was potentially a step up that year, fine, but that is not the source of the value spike you see in 2022 compared to what we see in 2021 and 2023 — incidentally, two years where Lebron has a better on-court rating and on-off rating on teams with similar results. Now, contrast that with Lebron, who had his best scoring season as a Laker, and played his highest minutes per game since 2017, but all the same had an extreme value nadir compared to every other Lakers season. Again, seasonal shifts in defence are only worth so much. Those three season stretches should be a textbook example of how your surrounding roster affects your real impact, but instead you want to go with this rudimentary “Lebron was -2 and +2 and therefore had an awful season and Curry was +10 and +10 and therefore had his best post-Durant season.”

Or like, that's a quick summary. I think you're well aware you can stretch the sample however you like over LeBrons Lakers career and it don't measure up.

It does not measure up because it was an awful environment. I do not actually think if you swapped 2022 Lebron with 2021 or 2023 Lebron that 2022 Lebron would be comfortably the worst, no.

Over that three-year stretch, Curry’s LA-RAPM is 4.12 in 34.5 minutes a game, and Lebron’s is 4.1 in 35.6 minutes a game. Lebron’s LEBRON over the past three seasons is marginally higher than Curry’s, but Curry has played more so he has the higher total wins above replacement (which is of course a valid enough reason to prefer him, but the margins are slim). These two have been extremely comparable overall, but that 2022 gap is almost entirely a consequence of their situational fluctuations rather than of Curry having a uniquely spectacular year and Lebron having some unique individual collapse.

[Cavsfansince84]

(1) and (3) are odd views, at least someone agrees, your thesis did get a "and 1" I sée.

My question is did you see Isiah or Larry play or is your contention from a statistical measurement. These 2 were magical elements (along with Magic himself) to any court they stepped on.
Not certain theres a statistical capture over how much they elevated everyone around them. They were Mel Gibsons "Braveheart" level leaders, the guys to win lead and win battles. Those games were football level bruising contests back then and to a teammate everyone they played with knew who was in charge the minute they hit the court.
The intangible value of such players doesnt bleed through a stat sheet, they were weighed in fearlessness, drive, and mercy-less will to win and intimate, they engendered fear and surrender from opponents who knew they could not overcome this opponent.
In their primes they were every bit the legend they have.

Kobe, Chauncey great leaders and players, yet nothing on Isiah or Larry's level. Jordan and Magic also had this factor as well, im just not certain how measureable it was but their peers and opponents knew what they were in store for whenever they faced off.

I don't see his 1/3 takes as that odd. Obviously he was stating them as unpopular but Billups for instance came in at 46 in this board's last top 100 and I'd say among general fans he is definitely under rated by a lot. Regarding Hakeem, I think his peak is top 5 and that there isn't much difference between 1 and 5 so an argument for him having the best peak of all time isn't that strange either. He has one of the few peaks where a guy seems clearly the best offensive and defensive player in the league at the same time.

[eminence]

Okay but that is an argument disconnected from what they are actually doing. 2022 was the worst scoring season of Steph’s prime. He did not shoulder a higher passing load. He did not take better care of the ball. His defence was potentially a step up that year, fine, but that is not the source of the value spike you see in 2022 compared to what we see in 2021 and 2023 — incidentally, two years where Lebron has a better on-court rating and on-off rating on teams with similar results. Now, contrast that with Lebron, who had his best scoring season as a Laker, and played his highest minutes per game since 2017, but all the same had an extreme value nadir compared to every other Lakers season. Again, seasonal shifts in defence are only worth so much. Those three season stretches should be a textbook example of how your surrounding roster affects your real impact, but instead you want to go with this rudimentary “Lebron was -2 and +2 and therefore had an awful season and Curry was +10 and +10 and therefore had his best post-Durant season.”

Or like, that's a quick summary. I think you're well aware you can stretch the sample however you like over LeBrons Lakers career and it don't measure up.

It does not measure up because it was an awful environment. I do not actually think if you swapped 2022 Lebron with 2021 or 2023 Lebron that 2022 Lebron would be comfortably the worst, no.

Over that three-year stretch, Curry’s LA-RAPM is 4.12 in 34.5 minutes a game, and Lebron’s is 4.1 in 35.6 minutes a game. Lebron’s LEBRON over the past three seasons is marginally higher than Curry’s, but Curry has played more so he has the higher total wins above replacement (which is of course a valid enough reason to prefer him, but the margins are slim). These two have been extremely comparable overall, but that 2022 gap is almost entirely a consequence of their situational fluctuations rather than of Curry having a uniquely spectacular year and Lebron having some unique individual collapse.

Best I can tell '22 LeBron played on the '22 Lakers, not the '21 or '23 Lakers. The road you're taking us down lets one make up whatever they want. Hell, let's give Curry ''12-'14, having to deal with Mark Jackson in your locker room, I shudder to imagine.

And even if I gave you the whole argument, it's a bad one at best for the original statement of LeBron being 'much better' than Curry in the '22 RS.

A side note - LA isn't LA over large samples. LeBron just doesn't contest the 3 all that well any more (somewhat similar situation to Jokic).

[AEnigma]

The road I am taking us down asks us to look at what the players are doing and can do. Lebron can contest threes less without being worth six points less via on/off. And I have argued before that 2014 Curry is not really that distinct from 2015 Curry as a player, yes, because basketball is about more than the value you show in a single season under a single system with a single roster and series of lineups.

[zimpy27]

I don't find winning multiple championships for the same team, with same coach, main teammates and same system that mich more impressive of an achievement for individuals.

For the team/franchise I think it's amazing but it's not something I'd give much value to for a star player on that team.

I think it says that the team found a great groove, a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health while they won 2 or more championships.

Shaq's 3-peat is less valuable to me than Duncan winning a championship in 99 and then in 14 with a.different team construction and role.

[eminence]

The road I am taking us down asks us to look at what the players are doing and can do. Lebron can contest threes less without being worth six points less via on/off. And I have argued before that 2014 Curry is not really that distinct from 2015 Curry as a player, yes, because basketball is about more than the value you show in a single season under a single system with a single roster and series of lineups.

I know you’re aware that presenting that data (connecting two fairly unrelated sections to do so) doesn’t mean I think LeBron was worth 6 pts less that season. Intentionally playing dumb is just annoying.

[parsnips33]

I don't find winning multiple championships for the same team, with same coach, main teammates and same system that mich more impressive of an achievement for individuals.

For the team/franchise I think it's amazing but it's not something I'd give much value to for a star player on that team.

I think it says that the team found a great groove, a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health while they won 2 or more championships.

Shaq's 3-peat is less valuable to me than Duncan winning a championship in 99 and then in 14 with a.different team construction and role.

Why wouldn't this same logic apply to winning 1 championship? I.E. is winning a championship an individual achievement at all?

[AEnigma]

The road I am taking us down asks us to look at what the players are doing and can do. Lebron can contest threes less without being worth six points less via on/off. And I have argued before that 2014 Curry is not really that distinct from 2015 Curry as a player, yes, because basketball is about more than the value you show in a single season under a single system with a single roster and series of lineups.

I know you’re aware that presenting that data (connecting two fairly unrelated sections to do so) doesn’t mean I think LeBron was worth 6 pts less that season. Intentionally playing dumb is just annoying.

It reads as intentionally playing dumb to me when you make that the basis of your argument. No, I do not think that is how you assess every player; if I did, I would probably roll my eyes and move on rather than try to have an actual conversation about the quality of these players independent of whatever their “impact” for the year might otherwise suggest.

[zimpy27]

I don't find winning multiple championships for the same team, with same coach, main teammates and same system that mich more impressive of an achievement for individuals.

For the team/franchise I think it's amazing but it's not something I'd give much value to for a star player on that team.

I think it says that the team found a great groove, a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health while they won 2 or more championships.
day mm
Shaq's 3-peat is less valuable to me than Duncan winning a championship in 99 and then in 14 with a.different team construction and role.

Why wouldn't this same logic apply to winning 1 championship? I.E. is winning a championship an individual achievement at all?

Because it's the main goal of what these guys play for. Being able to lead a team to a championship.

Of course it's not everything, I don't think you can be top 10 without a championship but you can be top 25.

[parsnips33]

I don't find winning multiple championships for the same team, with same coach, main teammates and same system that mich more impressive of an achievement for individuals.

For the team/franchise I think it's amazing but it's not something I'd give much value to for a star player on that team.

I think it says that the team found a great groove, a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health while they won 2 or more championships.
day mm
Shaq's 3-peat is less valuable to me than Duncan winning a championship in 99 and then in 14 with a.different team construction and role.

Why wouldn't this same logic apply to winning 1 championship? I.E. is winning a championship an individual achievement at all?

Because it's the main goal of what these guys play for. Being able to lead a team to a championship.

Of course it's not everything, I don't think you can be top 10 without a championship but you can be top 25.

I guess my questions is why would winning one championship be an individual achievement, but winning two or three in a row be "a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health"?

[rk2023]

1. Billups is a top 50 player ever. He should be ranked above Allen Iverson and Isiah Thomas to start. I think he's very underrated, even if people recognize his value.

2. Hakeem Olajuwon has the best playoff run ever in 94, and depending on how much you value playoffs he has a great case for the best peak ever.

3. Kobe Bryant was a better player than Larry Bird.

4. Per position, Andrei Kirilenko should be ranked among the best defenders ever.

5. LBJ's contributions on defense in his earlier years (07-13) got underappreciated with time and he should be regarded as en elite defender in that period.

(1) and (3) are odd views, at least someone agrees, your thesis did get a "and 1" I sée.

My question is did you see Isiah or Larry play or is your contention from a statistical measurement. These 2 were magical elements (along with Magic himself) to any court they stepped on.
Not certain theres a statistical capture over how much they elevated everyone around them. They were Mel Gibsons "Braveheart" level leaders, the guys to win lead and win battles. Those games were football level bruising contests back then and to a teammate everyone they played with knew who was in charge the minute they hit the court.
The intangible value of such players doesnt bleed through a stat sheet, they were weighed in fearlessness, drive, and mercy-less will to win and intimate, they engendered fear and surrender from opponents who knew they could not overcome this opponent.
In their primes they were every bit the legend they have.

Kobe, Chauncey great leaders and players, yet nothing on Isiah or Larry's level. Jordan and Magic also had this factor as well, im just not certain how measureable it was but their peers and opponents knew what they were in store for whenever they faced off.

How is Kobe > Bird as a "better player" an odd take? A lot of the rhetoric mentioned here I feel to be more generalizable as well. I don't value superlatives into my evaluation of players myself (and am not a general fan how these talking points somewhat amount to hagiography) , but wouldn't all of these superlatives be applicable to Kobe furthermore?

Overall, I prefer Bird's peak but lean Kobe's prime, so I pick the latter in a career sense with the added longevity.

[Cavsfansince84]

I guess my questions is why would winning one championship be an individual achievement, but winning two or three in a row be "a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health"?

Note: I am not Zimpy replying to the above. I don't think its a zero sum between the two to begin with as in one title is individual while multiple is team/environment based. I think what he's saying is the value of multiple titles compared to one on an individual basis. Which is another way of saying that in order to win more than one title in a given time frame it requires a number of factors working together. ie front office management, health, stable coaching etc. So its harder to look at multiple titles as an individual achievement compared to one title where a guy has a great playoff run.

[OhayoKD]

2022 lebron had a much better regular season than 2022 curry. this doesn't seem debatable. and 2014 is a huge advantage to lebron. we're still talking about almost 30 PER lebron one

Huh? Even after distorting things(tossing out losses where the Warriors missed players while not tossing out wins where the opposing team missed players), 2021/2022 Steph grades out as a historically strong floor-raiser(supported with much metrics dramatically more accurate than PER)

You claiming things aren't debatable while making assertions you can't defend is getting old.

[OhayoKD]

No, LeBrons level of play in those 3 seasons was not particularly close to Steph.

i mean, no. lebron had a significant edge on steph at their peaks, which arguably happened at the same time if you think 2016/17 lebron was his peak. and while lebron has gotten older, so has steph. so it's hard to see how steph has not only closed the large gap, and then not only evened it up, but then surpassed lebron by some significant margin. especially since you are just making this a "quality of play" argument and not knocking lebron for missing games in 2019 and 2021.

2022 lebron had a much better regular season than 2022 curry. this doesn't seem debatable. and 2014 is a huge advantage to lebron. we're still talking about almost 30 PER lebron one year removed from arguably his peak regular season. even if it was a snub, steph isn't getting overlooked for the ASG if he was on lebron's level. and 2017 is also tough to see for steph given how much of a step back he took in the regular season. way worse stats and his team won 6 less games even after adding KD.

2018 and 2019 steph was on teams that won 58 and 57 games, despite massive amounts of talent. he was on just as much cruise control as lebron has ever been.

as far as the playoffs, unless this is just some 1 to 1 comparison where 82 games of regular season is compared to ~20 games of playoffs, with no regard for the fact that for both of these guys their whole season revolves around the playoffs, then the ground lebron makes up is just too much to ignore.

in this entire period, does steph have a playoff run that would be as good as 2013/14/15/16/17/18/20 for lebron? the only one that might would be 2017, and that's only if i ignore that it is by far steph's best playoffs in by far the least pressure-packed scenario, calling into question how real it was and how much it really affected championship odds (he could have played way worse and the warriors still would have cruised). and after 2017 nothing else would crack lebron's top 10 playoff runs. that's simply too much value at the most important time of the year to compared to some slight extra regular season value with lebron on cruise control.

I've got '09/'12/'13 as LeBrons top 3 seasons. '16/'17 contending with '10 to round out the top 5.

'22 LeBron being 'much better' than '22 Steph for the RS is so far out there I don't think I can have a serious discussion with you my man.

LeBron plays 56 games on a 33 win team, they are -2.1 with him on court, a +2.1 on/off. Posting a +0.31 RAPM, good for 182nd in the league.

Steph plays 64 games on a 53 win team, they are +10.1 with him on court, a +10.0 on/off. +3.67 RAPM, good for 2nd in the league.

As far as impact-data goes, 13 and 15-17 Lebron all have an emperical case against 16 Steph(never mind colinearity/dray consideration), and 13, 15-17, and 20 all have a case against the rest, even from a strict regular season lens.

You basically have to ignore the playoff elevation of Lebron and his teams(or i guess ignore minutes played in 2015) for a post 14 case, let alone post 13.

[OhayoKD]

The road I am taking us down asks us to look at what the players are doing and can do. Lebron can contest threes less without being worth six points less via on/off. And I have argued before that 2014 Curry is not really that distinct from 2015 Curry as a player, yes, because basketball is about more than the value you show in a single season under a single system with a single roster and series of lineups.

Well, 14 being the same as 15 can work both ways. One could argue Mark "jesus water" Jackson was situationally suppressing Curry's true value in 13/14 as opposed to 15/16 being inflated. Curry wasn't being used as an off-ball creator those years, so I think 13/14 data underselling Steph's true "goodness" works at least as well as dray/collinearity/kerr inflating Curry post 14 data

[OhayoKD]

Or like, that's a quick summary. I think you're well aware you can stretch the sample however you like over LeBrons Lakers career and it don't measure up.

It does not measure up because it was an awful environment. I do not actually think if you swapped 2022 Lebron with 2021 or 2023 Lebron that 2022 Lebron would be comfortably the worst, no.

Over that three-year stretch, Curry’s LA-RAPM is 4.12 in 34.5 minutes a game, and Lebron’s is 4.1 in 35.6 minutes a game. Lebron’s LEBRON over the past three seasons is marginally higher than Curry’s, but Curry has played more so he has the higher total wins above replacement (which is of course a valid enough reason to prefer him, but the margins are slim). These two have been extremely comparable overall, but that 2022 gap is almost entirely a consequence of their situational fluctuations rather than of Curry having a uniquely spectacular year and Lebron having some unique individual collapse.

Best I can tell '22 LeBron played on the '22 Lakers, not the '21 or '23 Lakers. The road you're taking us down lets one make up whatever they want. Hell, let's give Curry ''12-'14, having to deal with Mark Jackson in your locker room, I shudder to imagine.

And even if I gave you the whole argument, it's a bad one at best for the original statement of LeBron being 'much better' than Curry in the '22 RS.

A side note - LA isn't LA over large samples. LeBron just doesn't contest the 3 all that well any more (somewhat similar situation to Jokic).

Enigma literally just pointed out their three-year data is similar without any sort of accounting for health, the postseason, or situation.

You just claimed it "doesn't measure up" regardless of the sample. What road exactly were you taking us down.

[parsnips33]

I guess my questions is why would winning one championship be an individual achievement, but winning two or three in a row be "a great combination of factors that put together a team and system that was able to maintain health"?

Note: I am not Zimpy replying to the above. I don't think its a zero sum between the two to begin with as in one title is individual while multiple is team/environment based. I think what he's saying is the value of multiple titles compared to one on an individual basis. Which is another way of saying that in order to win one title in a given time frame it requires a number of factors working together. ie front office management, health, stable coaching etc. So its harder to look at multiple titles as an individual achievement compared to one title where a guy has a great playoff run.

Fair enough. I do think we tend to put way too much emphasis on individual achievements on this board rather than team achievements anyways (maybe it's as simple as this being called the player comparison board and not the team comparison board)

[homecourtloss]

Or like, that's a quick summary. I think you're well aware you can stretch the sample however you like over LeBrons Lakers career and it don't measure up.

It does not measure up because it was an awful environment. I do not actually think if you swapped 2022 Lebron with 2021 or 2023 Lebron that 2022 Lebron would be comfortably the worst, no.

Over that three-year stretch, Curry’s LA-RAPM is 4.12 in 34.5 minutes a game, and Lebron’s is 4.1 in 35.6 minutes a game. Lebron’s LEBRON over the past three seasons is marginally higher than Curry’s, but Curry has played more so he has the higher total wins above replacement (which is of course a valid enough reason to prefer him, but the margins are slim). These two have been extremely comparable overall, but that 2022 gap is almost entirely a consequence of their situational fluctuations rather than of Curry having a uniquely spectacular year and Lebron having some unique individual collapse.

Best I can tell '22 LeBron played on the '22 Lakers, not the '21 or '23 Lakers. The road you're taking us down lets one make up whatever they want. Hell, let's give Curry ''12-'14, having to deal with Mark Jackson in your locker room, I shudder to imagine.

And even if I gave you the whole argument, it's a bad one at best for the original statement of LeBron being 'much better' than Curry in the '22 RS.

A side note - LA isn't LA over large samples. LeBron just doesn't contest the 3 all that well any more (somewhat similar situation to Jokic).

By “anymore” you mean just this year, right? Even now, in the 8 games post the All star break he’s played, opponents are shooting 7.1% worse on threes James contests than on threes everyone else contests.

2023: Opponents are shooting 1.8% better on threes James contests than on shots everyone else contests
2022: Opponents shot 2.1% worse on threes James contested
2021: Opponents shot 6.7% worse on threes James contested
2020: Opponents shot 5.2% worse on threes James contested