Offensive Legends Series from Ben | The "Official" Thread

[Djoker]

"By far the best 5-year run of playoff offense in NBA history"

That quote by Ben Taylor sums up the video. Brilliant piece of work as always.

Other than Magic there's no other offensive quarterback you can justify taking over Nash. At least in the last 40 years...

The only close run is lebron post season wise

Lebron
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

nash

2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: + 8.5

Ben Taylor's postseason numbers are quite different than yours. These are his numbers.

Lebron

2013: +6.5 (RS) +8.2 (PS)
2014: +4.3 (RS) +9.7 (PS)
2015: +5.5 (RS) +4.2 (PS)
2016: +4.5 (RS) +11.4 (PS)
2017: +4.8 (RS) +13.2 (PS)
Average: +5.1 (RS), +9.3 (PS)

Nash

2005: +8.4 (RS) +16.2 (PS)
2006: +5.3 (RS) +8.9 (PS)
2007: +7.5 (RS) +6.7 (PS)
2008: +5.8 (RS) +2.3 (PS)
2010: +7.7 (RS) +12.6 (PS)
Average: +6.9 (RS), +10.6 (PS)

[falcolombardi]

"By far the best 5-year run of playoff offense in NBA history"

That quote by Ben Taylor sums up the video. Brilliant piece of work as always.

Other than Magic there's no other offensive quarterback you can justify taking over Nash. At least in the last 40 years...

The only close run is lebron post season wise

Lebron
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

nash

2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: + 8.5

I find what Nash did against those WCF teams more impressive than what Bron did against those ECF teams.

I dont disagree that nash offensive run is a notch above, just commenting lebron/magic have got the closest runs of team offense per my view

Also a tad related but lebron rivals defenses from 13-17 is up there with almost anyone. People sometimes forget how many elite defensive teams he was facing (and it extends all the way to 2007)

[Djoker]

The only close run is lebron post season wise

Lebron
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

nash

2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: + 8.5

I find what Nash did against those WCF teams more impressive than what Bron did against those ECF teams.

I dont disagree that nash offensive run is a notch above, just commenting lebron/magic have got the closest runs of team offense per my view

Also a tad related but lebron rivals defenses from 13-17 is up there with almost anyone. People sometimes forget how many elite defensive teams he was facing (and it extends all the way to 2007)

As far as defenses we're looking at relative ORtg so that accounts for opponent DRtg.

If anything Lebron's numbers are inflated playing in the weak Eastern Conference.

[SilentA]

Feelsbad that this dropped to the 4th page but I guess the gaps between videos are pretty long.

New Dirk Nowitzki video:

Watch on YouTube

For me, pretty interesting how his off ball play is highlighted. I skipped a lot of this era.

[rk2023]

Got back from work, and can’t wait to watch this. Kind of cool how all this time Dirk hasn’t seemed like an “analytics darling” ITO playstyle (eg. Not moving much a needle defensively or as a creator), but had an outlierish impact with spacing and a very unique flexibility for roster construction - in spite of being a lifelong Maverick.

Am very stoked to have seen him get a video, as one whom regards Dirk very highly

[rk2023]

I liked this video a lot, fair share of it (particularly the scoring efficacy and uniquely good mid-range #s) is to be expected from those who have gone through Dirk's career - but I found this video a nice reinforcement of such.
https://imgur.com/a/yJcILck

Thankfully, Dirk gets his fair share of props around here for how well his game aged. He was already very skilled as a younger player and underratedly spry. It's cool to see snippets of how he treated ISO / Post-up possessions like a chess match with defenders by using footwork and timing to get better quality shots off. And of course, can't talk about Dirk's prime without mentioning how he added counters to his counters after the 2007 playoffs - being able to make more tough mid-ranges and add a better sense of strength creation on those shots (a longevity hack for his career into the late 2000s / early 10s)

Some more cool data on the subject (courtesy of the one and only 0_6:

#1: Dirk moved MUCH better than Jokic
I think maybe all those old Dirk years at the end made people forget the kind of athlete he was in his prime. Dirk was a legit 7ft, with a strong frame, and could really run the floor when he was younger. He was one of the better transition bigs in the league when he hit his prime. Take a look at where Dirk ranked in terms of FastBreak Points from 2000-2016.

Fast Break Scoring rank
2000: 22nd
2001: 3rd
2002: 7th
2003: 14th
2004: 19th
2005: 21st
2006: 28th
2007: 74th
2008: 46th
2009: 45th
2010: 48th
2011: 80th
2012: 87th
2013: 159th
2014: 109th
2015: 111th
2016: 140th

This where Jokic ranks in Fast Break scoring since 2017...

Fast Break Scoring rank
2017: 162nd
2018: 179th
2019: 244th
2020: 245th
2021: 186th
2022: 62nd
2023: 125th

So I think we can clearly see at least one area where Dirk had an edge, transition scoring. Jokic seems to have improved in that area over the last couple of years (losing some weight helped?), getting up to 62nd in 2022 and at 125th this year. But prior to that, he didn't finish better than 162nd in the league.

Dirk had a 7 year stretch from 2000-06 where he ranked 28th or better every single season. 4 seasons where he finished Top 20 in Fastbreak points. 3rd in '01, 7th in '02, clearly peaking as one of the very best transition players in the league those years. And still staying respectable in transition points until his body started breaking down.

#2: Dirk emphasized the mid-range much more than Jokic

Both Jokic and Dirk have excellent levels of efficiency when it comes to the mid-range, however Dirk's volume is on a completely different level making it hard to compare. Dirk ranked 34th in Mid-Range Field Goals Made in 2001, and he ranked 9th in Mid-Range FG% among the top 100 players who took the most mid-range FGAs. This is where he ranks through his prime...

2001: 34th in FGM -- 9th in FG% (among Top 100 in FGA)
2002: 18th in FGM -- 4th in FG%
2003: 11th in FGM -- 25th in FG%
2004: 3rd in FGM -- 7th in FG%
2005: 1st in FGM -- 37th in FG%
2006: 2nd in FGM -- 5th in FG%
2007: 1st in FGM -- 4th in FG%
2008: 1st in FGM -- 4th in FG%
2009: 1st in FGM -- 3rd in FG%
2010: 1st in FGM -- 9th in FG%
2011: 1st in FGM -- 1st in FG%
2012: 1st in FGM -- 8th in FG%
2013: 9th in FGM -- 7th in FG%
2014: 2nd in FGM -- 2nd in FG%
2015: 2nd in FGM -- 6th in FG%
2016: 2nd in FGM -- 16th in FG%

You can see how it differs from the transition points chart for Dirk. As he got older, he simply mastered the mid-range shot and became the best in the league at it during his prime. Check out that stretch from '07 to '12, 6 straight years with the most Mid-Range FG's made while being Top 10 in FG% every year among those who qualified. Leading the year in both mid-range FGM and FG% in his 2011 championship season.

During the 13 year span from '04-'16; Dirk finished 1st in FGM 7x, 2nd in FGM 4x, 3rd in FGM 1x, and 9th another time. He finished Top 10 in FG% among those who qualified 11/13 of those years. Just an insane combination of volume and efficiency lasting over a decade. This is how Jokic compares to Dirk since 2017...

2017: 68th in FGM -- 2nd in FG%
2018: 47th in FGM -- 13th in FG%
2019: 72nd in FGM -- 61st in FG%
2020: 17th in FGM -- 25th in FG%
2021: 13th in FGM -- 5th in FG%
2022: 44th in FGM -- 4th in FG%
2023: 61st in FGM -- 3rd in FG%

TLDR: Dirk had a small but clear edge in shooting but a big edge in utilizing the mid-range area. He was the easy #1 mid-range scorer in the league during his prime, whereas Jokic is in the Top 5 mix but clearly behind Durant.

As is the common trend, It is sometimes harder to detect off-ball utility watching a live game or even upon first glances of a film study - so I'm glad the video provided great breakdown of Dirk's spacing, off-ball gravity, and ability to yield the most Pick and Pop value (sans Jokic.. maybe) in NBA History - which, of course, is where he's adding more value as one whom scored very effectively / diversely but didn't create much through passing. The teammate efficiency without vs. with Dirk mentioned at the ~end of the video was refreshing to see as well - pretty consistent with JE's study at a birds' eye view:

Effect on eFG% (Note, this is only spanning 2001-14):
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329072330/http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/adj_PPS_shooter_all.html

Code: Select all

Dirk - 3.6 points
Nash - 5.6 points
LBJ - 2.9 points
Kobe - 3.5 points
Curry - 1.9 points
Russ - 2.6 points
Harden - 2.4 points
CP3 - 2.5 points
D. Williams - 3.4 points
Wade - 4.2 points

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Ben has always been quite lukewarm about Dirk, I was quite surprised by the tone of the video.

[Doctor MJ]

Watch on YouTube

Thoughts?

[Peregrine01]

Watch on YouTube

Thoughts?

Was a bit shocked about the on/off data with Ginobili on/Duncan off and vice versa. Was not expecting the delta to be that wide.

I really think Ginobili could’ve been a top 10 guard of all-time had he started earlier and played on a team that showcased him more.

[MiamiBulls]

Ginobili impact signals are amazing & are clear signs of a superstar, but the only pushback would be his durability. Despite only playing 28 MPG from 2005-2010, Ginobili still missed an average 17 gms a season. His durability isn't something anyone can handwave away or attempt to minimize unless they're interested in treating basketball like it's fantasy basketball.

The idea that an injury prone player who only plays 28-29 MPG can somehow play 35-36 MPG and not have a higher probability of physically breaking down faster doesn't seem to be grounded in common sense.

[Doctor MJ]

Ginobili impact signals are amazing & are clear signs of a superstar, but the only pushback would be his durability. Despite only playing 28 MPG from 2005-2010, Ginobili still missed an average 17 gms a season. His durability isn't something anyone can handwave away or attempt to minimize unless they're interested in treating basketball like it's fantasy basketball.

The idea that an injury prone player who only plays 28-29 MPG can somehow play 35-36 MPG and not have a higher probability of physically breaking down faster doesn't seem to be grounded in common sense.

All reasonable points. To your last thought here let me put this forward:

I completely understand the question of whether a guy can sustain what he's doing for more minutes, but I think we need to be careful about pointing to something we haven't done deep analytical study of as the end of discussion. It's an open question not just how Ginobili could scale to greater minutes and what the tradeoffs would be, but how players in general would scale. If we did such analysis we might see something objective that indicates he was in the sweet spot of what you could get out of him.

But:

1. We don't actually know. He might have been able to, he might not have. Hence each of us needs to consider how to press ahead in the absence of certainty.

2. I think there's a mirror question that we should be asking right along side how Ginobili would have faired playing less minutes:

How would the other player fare in Ginobili's minutes?

I think people tend to think that people can just up their motor proportionally and create considerably more per minute impact, but the reality is that motion without purpose isn't generally valuable, and motion with problematic purpose can quickly go negative.

Ginobili playing the way he did only had value because of his ability to in-the-moment improvise with outlier optimality all 24 seconds of the shot clock.

As always: His lesser minutes should get held against him in any holistic assessment of value, and so wherever he would be if he did what he did for more minutes, that ceiling was not hit.

But just appreciating what the dude brought when he was playing on hardwood, I find him to just be a fascinating player to try to get my head around.

[homecourtloss]

Watch on YouTube

Thoughts?

Was a bit shocked about the on/off data with Ginobili on/Duncan off and vice versa. Was not expecting the delta to be that wide.

I really think Ginobili could’ve been a top 10 guard of all-time had he started earlier and played on a team that showcased him more.

For others’ reference:

[parsnips33]

Man, Steve Kerr would have loved to coach Manu I'm sure

[Texas Chuck]

Anyone remember the Spurs rotation from that time period?

I know for instance with the Mike/Scottie Bulls that Scottie always took the 2nd team minutes whereas Mike played primarily with the starters. If the same is true with Timmy/Manu it means we shouldn't overreact to that data.

Note: I really don't remember as I never watched the Spurs every night the way I did those Bulls teams (90s Mavs basketball was so bad I had to also watch actual good basketball and WGN made Bulls games available). So I'm not saying that is the case, but just that it could be.

[Doctor MJ]

Anyone remember the Spurs rotation from that time period?

I know for instance with the Mike/Scottie Bulls that Scottie always took the 2nd team minutes whereas Mike played primarily with the starters. If the same is true with Timmy/Manu it means we shouldn't overreact to that data.

Note: I really don't remember as I never watched the Spurs every night the way I did those Bulls teams (90s Mavs basketball was so bad I had to also watch actual good basketball and WGN made Bulls games available). So I'm not saying that is the case, but just that it could be.

Key things:

1. We have RAPM data which normalizes for such concerns.

2. The assumption that Ginobili was beating up on 2nd units implies that he should be less effective in the playoffs, because the teams are better and the rotations are shortened.

3. Instead what we see is that Ginobili's playoff RAPM gets stronger (surpasses Duncan), and that if we had a RAPM just for the deepest rounds, he'd likely look even stronger.

[Texas Chuck]

I'm not assuming Manu is beating up on bad players. I was asking because Mike benefited from always playing with better players with Scottie being tasked to carry the bench. If Timmy had the same responsibility, we should see the on/off numbers reflect that to some degree.

It was just a theory to explore. Manu is a beast, without question. As a Mavs fan I had 15 years of seeing it first hand. A real mix of hoping he and Timmy would eventually age out(as a Mavs fan) and hoping they'd play forever(as a hoops fan).

[Doctor MJ]

I'm not assuming Manu is beating up on bad players. I was asking because Mike benefited from always playing with better players with Scottie being tasked to carry the bench. If Timmy had the same responsibility, we should see the on/off numbers reflect that to some degree.

It was just a theory to explore. Manu is a beast, without question. As a Mavs fan I had 15 years of seeing it first hand. A real mix of hoping he and Timmy would eventually age out(as a Mavs fan) and hoping they'd play forever(as a hoops fan).

Okay, and I appreciate you looking to be civilized here Chuck.

I emphasize the RAPM because that normalizes both for opponent and teammate quality. Now, some information gets erased when you use an all-in-one, but if a player were generally playing with weaker teammates, while that would hurt his on/off, it shouldn't inherently hurt his RAPM. Make sense?

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Anyone remember the Spurs rotation from that time period?

I know for instance with the Mike/Scottie Bulls that Scottie always took the 2nd team minutes whereas Mike played primarily with the starters. If the same is true with Timmy/Manu it means we shouldn't overreact to that data.

Note: I really don't remember as I never watched the Spurs every night the way I did those Bulls teams (90s Mavs basketball was so bad I had to also watch actual good basketball and WGN made Bulls games available). So I'm not saying that is the case, but just that it could be.

The thing is that when you play with pbpstats you can see how Manu's signal is consistent in all kind of lineups.
Maybe we can't say he was better than Timmeh, but definitely that he had superstar impact.
Once again, I don't think anybody in history had that kind of numbers without being a superstar.