Who peaked the highest: Kawhi, Harden, Jokic?

[falcolombardi]

I kinda wonder if this whole preference for kawhi over harden would be reversed had they switched their respective versions of the warriors they played between 2018 and 2019

I prefer kawhi but i admit if the 18 rockets were the ones beating warriors in the way to a ring while raptors fell short if i would be picking harden since ring bias affects us all whether we admit it or not

[jalengreen]

I kinda wonder if this whole preference for kawhi over harden would be reversed had they switched their respective versions of the warriors they played between 2018 and 2019

I prefer kawhi but i admit if the 18 rockets were the ones beating warriors in the way to a ring while raptors fell short if i would be picking harden since ring bias affects us all whether we admit it or not

I think Harden had a more impressive series against the 2019 Warriors anyway. Most impressive part of Kawhi's run was the absurd carry job against Philly

[Doctor MJ]

Well, I'd say Jokic and I'd say all the data favors Jokic.

With Kawhi I get the theory of him due to his excellence on both sides of the ball, but despite this, Jokic's offensive genius was just too much to overcome.

I will say one suggestion to folks: Be careful indexing too much on the seeming perfection of a single season. The reality is typically - and I think in all relevant cases here - that that championship wasn't inevitable based on the player's play, and that surrounding years of a player's career probably saw him as basically the same guy.

Not saying it's unreasonable to define "peak" as "best season", but just keep in mind that if you look at peak in terms of just the most capable levels a player reached in his career, you can should typically look across a longer span than a single season - and that in the rare circumstance where you can't, this should lead to more uncertainty in your assessment rather than less.

Jokic has 1 title, and right now that's not looking like it'll change any time soon. I note that not as someone who counts rings, but as someone who has long said Jokic has some weaknesses to his game that put a ceiling on your team defence. If Jokic's impact was as big as the advanced stats suggest, we'd see it translate more in the results.

Over the last 3 seasons the Nuggets have won 53, 57 & 50 games, and are likely a 2nd round or worse exit 2/3 years. The year they won they had a favourable playoff slate and didn't beat anyone who mattered. Jokic has had ample help if he's really bringing GOAT level impact. That's not an impact I associate with a GOAT peak candidate

To be clear, the fact that both Kawhi & Jokic have title runs was something I expected the reader to assume I was alluding to.

Re "not...GOAT peak". I mean, that's not the subject of this thread, nor something I said in this thread. Seems like you're bringing baggage in where it'd be better off left out.

[Doctor MJ]

I kinda wonder if this whole preference for kawhi over harden would be reversed had they switched their respective versions of the warriors they played between 2018 and 2019

I prefer kawhi but i admit if the 18 rockets were the ones beating warriors in the way to a ring while raptors fell short if i would be picking harden since ring bias affects us all whether we admit it or not

I think this is largely the truth - that Harden would just be ranked higher than Kawhi if Houston had won in 2018 and Toronto not in 2019 - though of course how Harden actually played in that run would matter a great deal in debates with other players.

All that said, I think it would be reasonable to still favor Kawhi's peak over Harden's even that alternative timeline.

[Salieri]

2017, sure, but was 2019 Kawhi "elite" on defense?

Most definitely not.
He also missed 24 [iirc] rs games, during which the Raps didn't miss a beat without him.

A far less playoff resilient team without him, but this was a team that was winning >50 games, winning in the first round and perhaps still going 7 against Philly in the 2nd even if Kawhi didn't exist. He was the lynchpin that pushed them over the top (though GS falling apart with injuries at exactly the wrong time helped, too); but this was a really good team even without him.

So title/no title (as usual) is a bit of a whatev argument. Teams win titles, not individuals.

While I think peak Kawhi is 2017, and I kind of agree, he certainly looked pretty elite guarding Giannis those playoffs.

6 years and counting of Kawhi getting the praise that Marc Gasol should receive. Marvelous.

[Asianiac_24]

Jokic is clear 1 imo. His peak is up there with the best of them.

Between Kawhi/Harden I’d probably take Kawhi. Harden is clearly better offensively, but Kawhi impacts the game in more ways and is more resilient

[BIGJ1ER]

I have motor concerns with Kawhi personally, after 17 he didn't balance his O/D load all that effectively imo, and would've been better suited bringing more defensive impact in my eyes. It's not a shocker impact metrics loved him most during his higher defensive impact years, since I think his playmaking limitations don't make him the most effective offensive lead. He's also not always an overly in the flow of the offence guy, think he eats alot of shotclock up to get into his midrange game.

This is a general problem with wings leading offences barring Lebron, that I don't think its a role they're best utilised at. I know The Kawhi's, KD and Tatums of the world have produced elite offences over the last decade, but I think they're better suited playing more off the catch and being the secondary engine rather than the helio style wings have seemed to want to explore post lebron. Their size and skillsets usually lend themselves to being the best at off catch attacking, as its harder to bother their shots with closeouts and have more size to explode and finish at the basket. It's why Tatum has been so good in recent years imo even with the scoring warts, since he provides that Pippen/Igoudala/Butler style versatile plug the gaps wing impact, just at even higher levels. No surprise we saw KD's impact peak playing somewhat reduced role in GS.

I was a huge Kawhi fan in the mid 10's, I think his peak has become mythologised a little too much.

Harden is a tough one, I was never much of a fun, but gimmicky offence or not, he's likely the greatest isolation player ever and an all time offensive engine. Didn't love his approach, but it was damn effective. I've come to appreciate his playmaking a lot more over the years.

However, I'm very confident its Jokic at 1. We haven't even seen him utilised in in idealised role for my eye. He has to carry such a huge burden on O, if he was paired with a better guard who could put him in better positions with downhill pressure and get him in more spots per game where he's goat level (SMR/Floater range) and flow into more actions, I think he may even be unlocked more. His defensive concerns hold him back from the true GOAT level peaks (and yes I know his defensive catch all's are good, I don't buy it), but his competition here isn't at that level either, so I'm confident Jokic gives you the best championship equity, hence is the best player both prime and peak wise.

[trex_8063]

Most definitely not.
He also missed 24 [iirc] rs games, during which the Raps didn't miss a beat without him.

A far less playoff resilient team without him, but this was a team that was winning >50 games, winning in the first round and perhaps still going 7 against Philly in the 2nd even if Kawhi didn't exist. He was the lynchpin that pushed them over the top (though GS falling apart with injuries at exactly the wrong time helped, too); but this was a really good team even without him.

So title/no title (as usual) is a bit of a whatev argument. Teams win titles, not individuals.

While I think peak Kawhi is 2017, and I kind of agree, he certainly looked pretty elite guarding Giannis those playoffs.

In the playoffs he switched it on [mostly]; but that's a mere fraction of a season. I [along with most people here] take peak to refer to one season......not one fraction of a season, or one series, or 1-2 key games. One could [and perhaps should] place higher emphasis upon the playoff games, but not to the degree that the rs is ignored (which, for instance, brings up the question of how would you then even evaluate the peak of a player on a team that missed the playoffs?).

Couple-three additional questions one has to ask (when "Playoff Player X" is different from "RS Player X").....
1) How might his rs metrics (i.e. [more or less] his offensive effectiveness) look different if he hadn't been coasting on defense?
There's a reason most high usage offensive stars coast on defense; it takes a lot of energy to be locked in for each and every defensive possession, to give it your all. It's extremely physically [and perhaps mentally?] fatiguing to be consistently elite on both ends of the court; that's why most players don't accomplish it (read: '19 Kawhi is one of those players who did NOT accomplish it).
If he HAD expended all that energy defensively---all year long---one wonders if his TS% takes a dip by 1-2% (because he's tired), or if maybe his usage slips just a little as he defers to teammates more (because he's tired).


2a) Missed games matter (in MOST circumstances). For example, put him on a team like.......let's say the '87 Bulls [in place of Jordan]. Or maybe the '03 Magic in place of peak TMac. These are teams that won just 40-42 games and were 8-seeds even with their stars not missing much time (ZERO missed games for '87 Jordan, actually).

If their star instead missed 22 games (as Kawhi did that year), they are in serious jeopardy of missing the playoffs entirely.
Then we wouldn't be talking about what Kawhi did in the playoffs that year, because the playoffs wouldn't have happened.

Kawhi was fortunate to be on a team where he could take time off (and coast on defense when he did play), because his supporting cast was very likely going to nab the #2-seed even without him. They were that good (and had been proving it for years).


2b) What if he wasn't "load-managed"?
Most of his missed games were for the sake of load management (to have him healthy for the playoffs). But what if he's in one of those LESS fortunate circumstances where load-managing him in the rs is the difference between maybe getting the 7th or 8th seed and missing the playoffs entirely? Or the difference between being a 4-seed and a 7-seed?

Suppose those teams decide to NOT engage in any significant load management, instead aiming to simply make the playoffs, and/or get the highest seeding they're capable of.....
Is '19 Kawhi then still healthy enough to perform as he did in those '19 playoffs? Or is his body now shot for the year and breaking down? Does he fall apart at the worst possible time?


These are considerations that I certainly keep in mind when evaluating player peaks. Because it's not about a single playoff series (or even a full playoff run).....it's about a full season.
And for most players [for most players' teams], what they do from November-March is going to matter. Kawhi was lucky that he got to take it easy for five months.

[ShotCreator]

Jokic had the best regular seasons but I don’t think almost has played better than 17!Kawhi in the playoffs.

Not even just the output, but how he did it. Demanding traps and doubles from 30 feet out because he was unconscious from 3. Impossible to contain with a live dribble because of the strength skill, and athleticism so he could get into the lane at will.

Elite ast/to ratio, especially considering his aggression and volume. And considering the team around him. End of career Pau Gasol, David Lee and Tony Parker, beginning of carer Dejounte Murray, who all brought negative spacing, and had the offense humming at a Warriors level because his gravity all over the court created so many at rim opportunities and wide open 3s for the few shooters they had.

Defensively was on, contained a piping hot Mike Conley, and then really gave GS fits with his KD defense while it lasted.

25 year old Kawhi was a machine. Just too good in too many areas, I’m only sure 24 year old LeBron was better.

[Jaivl]

(...)
Elite ast/to ratio, especially considering his aggression and volume. And considering the team around him. End of career Pau Gasol, David Lee and Tony Parker, beginning of carer Dejounte Murray, who all brought negative spacing
(...)

Hey, that's "Señor league leader in 3PT% Pau Gasol" to you.

Spoiler:

Kidding, of course. Kawhi was nuts in 2017. But, ultimately... you know. He got fluke-injured. And, in hindsight, was it really a fluke?

[trex_8063]

(...)
Elite ast/to ratio, especially considering his aggression and volume. And considering the team around him. End of career Pau Gasol, David Lee and Tony Parker, beginning of carer Dejounte Murray, who all brought negative spacing
(...)

Hey, that's "Señor league leader in 3PT% Pau Gasol" to you.

Spoiler:

Kidding, of course. Kawhi was nuts in 2017. But, ultimately... you know. He got fluke-injured. And, in hindsight, was it really a fluke?

That one was mostly a fluke (triggered officiating changes to protect shooters).
That said, he had already missed one playoff game [that year] BEFORE that injury.

I do think his peak was ‘17, though. And I’d put ‘16 second. ‘19 is only third for me (gets inflated, imo, basically because he had a terrific cast).

[Special_Puppy]

Well, I'd say Jokic and I'd say all the data favors Jokic.

With Kawhi I get the theory of him due to his excellence on both sides of the ball, but despite this, Jokic's offensive genius was just too much to overcome.

I will say one suggestion to folks: Be careful indexing too much on the seeming perfection of a single season. The reality is typically - and I think in all relevant cases here - that that championship wasn't inevitable based on the player's play, and that surrounding years of a player's career probably saw him as basically the same guy.

Not saying it's unreasonable to define "peak" as "best season", but just keep in mind that if you look at peak in terms of just the most capable levels a player reached in his career, you can should typically look across a longer span than a single season - and that in the rare circumstance where you can't, this should lead to more uncertainty in your assessment rather than less.

Jokic has 1 title, and right now that's not looking like it'll change any time soon. I note that not as someone who counts rings, but as someone who has long said Jokic has some weaknesses to his game that put a ceiling on your team defence.

Nuggets had the 6th best defense in the league last year with a mediocre defensive supporting cast

[parsnips33]

I kinda wonder if this whole preference for kawhi over harden would be reversed had they switched their respective versions of the warriors they played between 2018 and 2019

I prefer kawhi but i admit if the 18 rockets were the ones beating warriors in the way to a ring while raptors fell short if i would be picking harden since ring bias affects us all whether we admit it or not

Harden did play the 2019 Warriors tho? Or do you just mean with both Klay and KD injured?

[One_and_Done]

Well, I'd say Jokic and I'd say all the data favors Jokic.

With Kawhi I get the theory of him due to his excellence on both sides of the ball, but despite this, Jokic's offensive genius was just too much to overcome.

I will say one suggestion to folks: Be careful indexing too much on the seeming perfection of a single season. The reality is typically - and I think in all relevant cases here - that that championship wasn't inevitable based on the player's play, and that surrounding years of a player's career probably saw him as basically the same guy.

Not saying it's unreasonable to define "peak" as "best season", but just keep in mind that if you look at peak in terms of just the most capable levels a player reached in his career, you can should typically look across a longer span than a single season - and that in the rare circumstance where you can't, this should lead to more uncertainty in your assessment rather than less.

Jokic has 1 title, and right now that's not looking like it'll change any time soon. I note that not as someone who counts rings, but as someone who has long said Jokic has some weaknesses to his game that put a ceiling on your team defence.

Nuggets had the 6th best defense in the league last year with a mediocre defensive supporting cast

The playoffs are where Jokic's defensive limitations kill you.

[Special_Puppy]

Jokic has 1 title, and right now that's not looking like it'll change any time soon. I note that not as someone who counts rings, but as someone who has long said Jokic has some weaknesses to his game that put a ceiling on your team defence.

Nuggets had the 6th best defense in the league last year with a mediocre defensive supporting cast

The playoffs are where Jokic's defensive limitations kill you.

Nuggets playoff defense was good last year. It was their offense that killed them (fueled by Murray being absolutely hobbled by injuries)

[picko]

Jokic has had a historic peak, and he isn't done yet. It's him without a doubt.

Who did he play against though? League caught up and he hasn't looked the same since. Did all that in a down year for the NBA. 2019 Raps would run laps around those Nuggets.

There is no doubt that the Nuggets had an historically easy run to a championship. However, the league didn't catch-up to Jokic - he's hasn't become any less impactful - they caught up to the Nuggets. Largely because the Nuggets were, at best, only mildly better than the competition when they won the title.

There isn't a coach in the league or a defensive player who has managed to work Jokic out.

[CKRT]

I kinda wonder if this whole preference for kawhi over harden would be reversed had they switched their respective versions of the warriors they played between 2018 and 2019

I prefer kawhi but i admit if the 18 rockets were the ones beating warriors in the way to a ring while raptors fell short if i would be picking harden since ring bias affects us all whether we admit it or not

Harden did play the 2019 Warriors tho? Or do you just mean with both Klay and KD injured?

I think Falco was saying that if the 2018 Rockets played the 2019 Warriors instead. 2019 Rockets were plagued by injuries all year and never really got near the levels they reached in 2018.

[One_and_Done]

I have come to appreciate Jokic more in recent years, and I have him in my top 15 all-time now. By the time he retires he may be higher. However, he has also become hugely overrated by many. This is for a number of reasons. Part of it is advanced stats that love him, part of it is counting stats, and part of it is him getting a bunch of MVPs. I’m not saying he didn’t have a good argument for his MVPs, but if Lebron and Kareem got all the MVPs they deserved they’d have 8-10 each. In that respect, Jokic has been luckier than many all-timers.

Jokic’s hardcore fans point to his stats and argue he has a GOAT type of peak. His actual impact in reality does not seem to support such a claim. Over the past 5 years, which I think people would say are all prime-Jokic years, his team won 53*, 48, 53, 57 and 50 games. His support cast wasn’t good in the year they won 48 games, but otherwise I think his supporting cast was somewhere between fine and pretty darn good. It is odd that a ‘GOAT type player’ is only winning an average of 52 games in the middle of his prime, while fully healthy, with pretty good supporting talent. It’s also odd that his team made it out of the 2nd round only once, and that was the year they faced a very weak slate of playoff opponents. If Jokic loses to the Clippers this year he’ll have 2 first round exits in that 5 year stretch. What is the historical parallel for that?

I look at guys like Duncan and Lebron and see them carrying absolutely trash teams at their peak, like the 02 or 03 Spurs, or the 09 and 10 Cavs. I see Kareem turning the 27 win Bucks into a 56 win contender as a rookie, I see Bird turning the 29 win Celtics into a 61 win contender. I see peak Hakeem leading a relatively weak Rockets team to 2 titles. What I’m seeing from Jokic is not that level of impact, even though he clearly has a huge impact. People are too obsessed with stats, either advanced or counting ones, but if those stats don’t translate into results then they are meaningless. Westbrook has four seasons averaging a triple double, and it’s meaningless. Not that Jokic is Westbrook, but he’s not having the impact of the sorts of guys I mentioned above at their peak.

If Jokic had a terrible team, or was losing to elite teams, I’d be more sympathetic; but that isn’t what’s happening. Take this years Nuggets team. I don’t care what the advanced stats say; Gordon/Murray/Porter/Braun is a good starting line-up. Murray has played well again, and even their worst starter Braun is solid. Guys like Duncan and Lebron had to play on teams with guys who were not real starters in the years I cited above, and they did better than these Nuggets teams. Jokic lost last year to the Wolves. They’re a nice team, but they were nothing special. Jokic loses to a lot of non-special teams. Remember when they got swept by the Chris Paul/Booker Suns? Let’s just cool the jets on Jokic a little.