Top 25 peaks of the 2001-25: #1-#2 Spots

[falcolombardi]

I made a list before the project started to get a rough idea of who is in and where everyone fits but now when it comes to actually submitting the vote, I find myself increasingly questioning the placing of almost everyone. LeBron is my GOAT peak so he is locked in at 1 and I have an order of Duncan>Shaq>Garnett for the early guys and Jokic>Curry for the later guys. Currently leaning towards LeBron>Jokic>Duncan>Curry when merging the two lists. I did have it LeBron>Duncan>Shaq>Garnett at one point but then I noticed three of them coming within a 4 year span out of 25 and while that kind of talent concentration is not impossible (see tennis big 3), it is something I am wary of in the back of my mind to check if I am over or under valuing any particular era.

Any other names folks would want to bring up for top 4 vote consideration?

None for a full year but I would like to mention the half season we got from 2024 Embiid. 35/11/6 on 53/39/88 shooting while leading the league in opponent shots missed at the rim with a 35 win WOWY change is absolutely insane yet almost forgotten by everyone.

Not to ignore the rest or your comment but i want to focus on this part i bolded

I understand that concern when you realize a lot of your highest ranked players happen to have been drafted at the same time being too much of a concidence statistically (albeit peaks and clusters of highest end talent are to be expected too with somethingh so rare and variable as all time great talent which requires both exceptional prospects as well as health and circunstances that propel them to their ceilings)

I myself have doubted myself or others when i notice someone's list has, lets say, all of jordan, magic, bird and hakeem in a top 5 or 6 all time (what are the odds of that?)

But two thinghs to note in your example is the age range of those players is not quite as close as it sounds

1- Shaq to duncan/garnett is a half decade~ gap in actual age(not the same as draft class), then lebron another half decade (more in practice as he would have come into the league in 2006 or 2007 if he went to college for as long as shaq. Meaning id closer to a 12 year window between all 4

2-is not the only cluster of talent we consider all time tier as the 79-84 cluster or the 56-60 or the 2003-2009 clusters show (and potentially the 2013- 2018 cluster may look like one day)

[Jaivl]

2023 over 2024 for Jokic? I'm very confused.

[lessthanjake]

2023 over 2024 for Jokic? I'm very confused.

2023 is the year he led the Nuggets to the title. What’s the argument for 2024? Jokic has been an all-time player each of the last 5 years, but 2023 seems pretty straightforward to me as his best year.

[Jaivl]

2023 over 2024 for Jokic? I'm very confused.

2023 is the year he led the Nuggets to the title. What’s the argument for 2024? Jokic has been an all-time player each of the last 5 years, but 2023 seems pretty straightforward to me as his best year.

It depends, are we rating the player or the performance? Because if it is the latter, I probably agree, and I have to enter 2020 Davis into the discussion.

2024 Jokic was, admittedly by eyetest, a bit better player than the previous year (and similar to 2025), which in turn was a bit better player than his 2022 version. More aggresive getting to the rim, forced on carry a bigger offensive load / create more on isolation and being a bit better at it. Slight but noticeable in real time.

All-in-one stats, RAPM et al are basically identical despite 2023 being a huge outlier year in terms of shooting variance. For what that's worth, the only big difference is playoff on/off massively favouring 2024. I wouldn't put that much stock on it, but yeah.

And the title run... well, yeah, that's mainly hinging on outside variables, such as Murray's own favourable variance and the existence of much better teams (the +6 Wolves instead of the +0 Wolves... with others like +11 Boston waiting).

[Joao Saraiva]

Forget it I was in middle of work completely forgot it started in 2001

[lessthanjake]

2023 over 2024 for Jokic? I'm very confused.

2023 is the year he led the Nuggets to the title. What’s the argument for 2024? Jokic has been an all-time player each of the last 5 years, but 2023 seems pretty straightforward to me as his best year.

It depends, are we rating the player or the performance? Because if it is the latter, I probably agree, and I have to enter 2020 Davis into the discussion.

2024 Jokic was, admittedly by eyetest, a bit better player than the previous year (and similar to 2025), which in turn was a bit better player than his 2022 version. More aggresive getting to the rim, forced on carry a bigger offensive load / create more on isolation and being a bit better at it. Slight but noticeable in real time.

All-in-one stats, RAPM et al are basically identical despite 2023 being a huge outlier year in terms of shooting variance. For what that's worth, the only big difference is playoff on/off massively favouring 2024. I wouldn't put that much stock on it, but yeah.

And the title run... well, yeah, that's mainly hinging on outside variables, such as Murray's own favourable variance and the existence of much better teams (the +6 Wolves instead of the +0 Wolves... with others like +11 Boston waiting).

I think the mere fact of having a dominant playoff run in which he led his team to a title is itself a really big deal that puts a huge finger on the scale for 2023. It’s similar to how I’d easily take 2003 Duncan over 2002 Duncan. I think a player’s year definitely becomes “greater” when they win a title, and particularly with a dominant playoff run.

That said, if we’re talking about his individual skill set in these years, I think a big area that Jokic was at his best at in 2023 was the floater. He’s the GOAT at that floater, but it was noticeably at its most automatic in 2023. That is, to me, the biggest reason that my eye test has him at his best in 2023, even leaving aside the fact that he won a title with a dominant individual playoffs. I think that floater is such a huge part of what makes him unstoppable offensively, and 2023 was the year he was noticeably at his best with it.

He also shot better from range that entire year than he did in 2024 (though in 2025 he took another step up in long-range shooting). Which feels like a somewhat important thing to me, particularly given that his 2024 playoffs ended with him going 2 for 10 on threes in Game 7. The shooting may involve a bit of variance. Certainly I think the 46.1% from three in the playoffs was, in significant part, a variance thing. But his regular season three-point shooting and shooting on long-twos were good enough that I’m pretty comfortable saying we’ve got enough of a sample to say he was a better shooter in 2023 than in 2024. He wasn’t just on a playoff heater. He actually shot better the whole year (though I wouldn’t say the same about 2023 vs. 2025—I get the sense that he really made an effort to work on that before 2025, probably in part as a reaction to what had happened in Game 7 against the Timberwolves in 2024).

[ReggiesKnicks]

My votes:
1. Hakeem Olajuwon 1994
The greatest defender of the modern era. Covered a lot of ground, was able to switch to smaller players, great defender in the post who could cause trouble to very strong players like Shaq or Karl Malone... and the ultimate rim protector. He was a difference maker and that was, the way I see it, his most legendary playoff run and the most iconic playoff run I've ever seen.

On offense he had all the moves to score in the post, he had a really good midrange shot providing space, and he was definitely a better passer than earlier in his career, meaning he punished the double teams.

2. LeBron James 2009
I had some doubts about including 2018 here or 2016, but I just feel the motor difference is hard to ignore. That was James going all out for the entire regular season, perfoming at superb level every night and dragging a poor roster to 66 wins. Best driver the game has ever seen. Superb finisher at the rim. Best athlete of all time in my view. It was impossible to stop his 1st step, he could go where he wanted on the court unless you defended him with A TON of help defense. He was just an unstopable machine.

On defense he was very fast rotating, a great help defender and a very good man to man defender, able to stick with stronger guys but also move his feet quick enough to stay in front of the fastest guards.

He went down in the ECF with a legendary performance (specially games 1 and 5) but it had nothing to do with him. Cleveland was just outmatched all over the place.

3. Michael Jordan 1991
It's MJ, what else? Greatest scorer the game has ever seen. Showed his playmaking abilities at very high level, including putting more assists than Magic Johnson in the finals until the last game. Superb ability to get his own shot, both at the rim or with footwork.

On defense he was as impacftful as you can get being an SG. Quick feet, help defense, smart reading passing lanes, and a big part of Chicago's pressing system when needed. Sure, other great defenders were arround him, but basketball is not a 1 on 1 game.

4. Shaq 2000
Super dominant force on offense, teams filling rosters with 3 extra big guys just to foul him... it's absolutely crazy. You couldn't let him get the ball down low. You couldn't front him cause he'd lock you and get the ball, finishing very well even on alley oops.

The worst defender of the bunch cause he didn't want to come out often, but in his era that was not much of a problem. Man to man he was good and as a rim protector too.

Anyway these are my top 4. Sorry for the short explanations on the last two but I have work to do.

The era is 2001 - 2025.

[Joao Saraiva]

My votes:
1. Hakeem Olajuwon 1994
The greatest defender of the modern era. Covered a lot of ground, was able to switch to smaller players, great defender in the post who could cause trouble to very strong players like Shaq or Karl Malone... and the ultimate rim protector. He was a difference maker and that was, the way I see it, his most legendary playoff run and the most iconic playoff run I've ever seen.

On offense he had all the moves to score in the post, he had a really good midrange shot providing space, and he was definitely a better passer than earlier in his career, meaning he punished the double teams.

2. LeBron James 2009
I had some doubts about including 2018 here or 2016, but I just feel the motor difference is hard to ignore. That was James going all out for the entire regular season, perfoming at superb level every night and dragging a poor roster to 66 wins. Best driver the game has ever seen. Superb finisher at the rim. Best athlete of all time in my view. It was impossible to stop his 1st step, he could go where he wanted on the court unless you defended him with A TON of help defense. He was just an unstopable machine.

On defense he was very fast rotating, a great help defender and a very good man to man defender, able to stick with stronger guys but also move his feet quick enough to stay in front of the fastest guards.

He went down in the ECF with a legendary performance (specially games 1 and 5) but it had nothing to do with him. Cleveland was just outmatched all over the place.

3. Michael Jordan 1991
It's MJ, what else? Greatest scorer the game has ever seen. Showed his playmaking abilities at very high level, including putting more assists than Magic Johnson in the finals until the last game. Superb ability to get his own shot, both at the rim or with footwork.

On defense he was as impacftful as you can get being an SG. Quick feet, help defense, smart reading passing lanes, and a big part of Chicago's pressing system when needed. Sure, other great defenders were arround him, but basketball is not a 1 on 1 game.

4. Shaq 2000
Super dominant force on offense, teams filling rosters with 3 extra big guys just to foul him... it's absolutely crazy. You couldn't let him get the ball down low. You couldn't front him cause he'd lock you and get the ball, finishing very well even on alley oops.

The worst defender of the bunch cause he didn't want to come out often, but in his era that was not much of a problem. Man to man he was good and as a rim protector too.

Anyway these are my top 4. Sorry for the short explanations on the last two but I have work to do.

The era is 2001 - 2025.

Oh sorry my bad. I'll delete and redo tomorrow then. Thanks!

[-Luke-]

@70sFan:

Could I still join this project, at least for the 2001-25 era and possibly for 197x-2000 (I don't think I can add any value for the early years)?
I didn't want to before because I thought I wouldn't have the time to participate, but if we have a week for every two spots that should be plenty of time for me.

Since I have never participated in any of these projects it would be fine with me if I only share my notes in the first few threads and the experienced posters decide whether I can participate or not afterwards.

[ReggiesKnicks]

1. LeBron James 2016 (2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2017)
2. Tim Duncan 2003 (2002)
3. Kevin Garnett 2004 (2003)
4. Steph Curry 2017 (2016, 2015)
5. Nikola Jokic 2023 (2024, 2025)

Wow, what an absolutely loaded class of Top 5 for the 25-year period. 5 players with clear arguments for Top 10-ish peaks of all-time.

RE: LeBron: LeBron James is an easy and obvious #1 for me. Best player I have ever seen in 40-some years. A completely dominant statistical profile. A playoff riser to the highest level and a player with little, if any, weaknesses whose strengths span through multiple player archetypes and roles on a team, which goes full circle in explaining why he is the ultimate playoff riser.

As Anthony Federico would say, "There is no chink in the armor which LeBron James wears".

RE: Duncan & Garnett: Two dominant two-way players complete the Top 3 for the period. Both peaked in an era of small courts, limited spacing and inept offensive mindsets spanning the Association. Both proved to be highly impactful as they aged, which is a key data-point when I assess how good a player was as it is a data point providing context to a moment in time. Below LeBron because he splits the offense/defense wear and tear better but above Curry and Jokic as these two giants split that difference better.

RE: Curry and Jokic: Curry, like KG and Duncan, led teams to the NBA Championship in 2015 and 2022, that by itself is an incredible achievement. Jokic and Curry are offensive maestro's in different lights and occupy separate avenues to achieve their basketball prowess. This is doubly true when trying to view them from a box-score lense, where Jokic is quite possibly the most dominant box-score player we have ever seen while Curry routinely falls short from a baseline statistical lense to Joker, LeBron and even the next tier of players. Neither player is a game changer on both ends of the court and thus it is their offensive brilliance which propels them to such heights.

[migya]

Isn't it reasonable that Duncan's peak was in a much tougher era/time period? The 00s, particularly early to mid of that decade was a grind and not easy to score, particularly near the basket and Duncan did so in 02 and 03. His defense is so much better than the others in consideration that he looks the top player.

[70sFan]

@70sFan:

Could I still join this project, at least for the 2001-25 era and possibly for 197x-2000 (I don't think I can add any value for the early years)?
I didn't want to before because I thought I wouldn't have the time to participate, but if we have a week for every two spots that should be plenty of time for me.

Since I have never participated in any of these projects it would be fine with me if I only share my notes in the first few threads and the experienced posters decide whether I can participate or not afterwards.

Of course, welcome on the board! I don't mind you starting just from the beginning.

[Doctor MJ]

Isn't it reasonable that Duncan's peak was in a much tougher era/time period? The 00s, particularly early to mid of that decade was a grind and not easy to score, particularly near the basket and Duncan did so in 02 and 03. His defense is so much better than the others in consideration that he looks the top player.

So I'll just say:

I totally reject the idea that the early-to-mid 00s should be seen as a stronger era than what came after, because quite literally the era that came after represented a paradigm shift of inherently more effective basketball based on skillsets that the top players from the early 00s either a) didn't have, or b) were discouraged from using.

Doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a glut of extreme outlier talents of a sort in the early '00s based on what NBA coaches thought they knew about what worked, but those coaches were wrong. And so I'd suggest, frankly, that if you're seeing the early '00s as the most talented era of the century, when the early '00s couldn't compete against the rest of the century in reality, you're anchoring yourself to a pre-paradigm way of thinking and finding fault with guys for not being optimized for what NBA coaches thought was optimal 25 years ago, rather than asking yourself what issues guys back then would have if they were forced to play in a league that was more advanced.

Of course, I'm a minority view, and I expect my ballot when I put it down is going to deviate pretty wildly from the mean.

[TrueLAfan]

LeBron 2012. League MVP, 4th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. Well, LeBron’s got more than a few years where he would place in the top 25 peaks. I think this is his best year, and I think it’s the highest peak of the last quarter century. Like the other players that are (slightly) below him on my list, it helped that he was a little older and was complete in terms of on and off-court impact. There’s nothing he couldn’t and didn’t do at the very highest level this year.

Duncan 2003. League MVP, 4th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. Tim Duncan is the Stan Musial of basketball. He was totally decent guy that led with actions rather than words. He was really good for an incredibly long time. He was an iron man; until Pops started load managing him after 2010, he was playing about 2800 minutes a season … and that was for a dozen plus years. And he’s got one of those careers where his “off” years are still good, so that the impact of his good years—combined with his demeanor—makes him a little less remembered by the general public. (Note: Not here!). Anyway, 2003 Duncan was about as good as you could get. He won the MVP. You could make the argument for him as DPOY. He actually ratcheted it up a notch to win a title and a Finals MVP on a 60 win team. Because he was good for so long, it’s easier to miss how high the peak is. 2003 is really high.

Shaq 2001. 3rd in MVP voting, 8th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. I have been accused of being hard on Shaq. I don’t think I am or have been. Actually, the reason I’ve criticized him in the past is because he was so good. When he was at his peak, Shaq was a very to great defender, and a virtually unstoppable offensive force. He was very good but incomplete in his first few years, then missed time because of … well, whatever he missed time with. He struggled with weight on conditioning, especially later in his run with the Lakers. But when he put it all together for a season or two—like in 2000 and 2001—my God, he was great.

Jokic 2023. 2nd in MVP voting, Finals MVP. This is Jokic’s 1995 Hakeem season. Was second in MVP voting that he probably should have won, and tore through the playoffs like a man possessed and took his team to the title. It’s not his best RS, but it’s his best—and most successful—post season run. It’s also the only season where he missed anything like significant time, but his team was still #1 in the conference and 16-4 in the playoffs. I’m also of the opinion that Jokic’s defense is a little underrated. Could he be better? Yes. Is he a good positional guy with quick hands that makes other players work for their points? Yes to that too. He’s disruptive out there.

[TrueLAfan]

I made a list before the project started to get a rough idea of who is in and where everyone fits but now when it comes to actually submitting the vote, I find myself increasingly questioning the placing of almost everyone. LeBron is my GOAT peak so he is locked in at 1 and I have an order of Duncan>Shaq>Garnett for the early guys and Jokic>Curry for the later guys. Currently leaning towards LeBron>Jokic>Duncan>Curry when merging the two lists. I did have it LeBron>Duncan>Shaq>Garnett at one point but then I noticed three of them coming within a 4 year span out of 25 and while that kind of talent concentration is not impossible (see tennis big 3), it is something I am wary of in the back of my mind to check if I am over or under valuing any particular era.

I was thinking the same thing--spoiler alert for KG, I guess—but I don’t think it’s an issue. (I don’t think talent was more concentrated either—I’ll second DoctorMJ’s excellent response on this.) There’s going to be plenty of randomization in responses—but it’s not totally unlikely that there will be a grouping in a short time span.

[falcolombardi]

Isn't it reasonable that Duncan's peak was in a much tougher era/time period? The 00s, particularly early to mid of that decade was a grind and not easy to score, particularly near the basket and Duncan did so in 02 and 03. His defense is so much better than the others in consideration that he looks the top player.

So I'll just say:

I totally reject the idea that the early-to-mid 00s should be seen as a stronger era than what came after, because quite literally the era that came after represented a paradigm shift of inherently more effective basketball based on skillsets that the top players from the early 00s either a) didn't have, or b) were discouraged from using.

Doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a glut of extreme outlier talents of a sort in the early '00s based on what NBA coaches thought they knew about what worked, but those coaches were wrong. And so I'd suggest, frankly, that if you're seeing the early '00s as the most talented era of the century, when the early '00s couldn't compete against the rest of the century in reality, you're anchoring yourself to a pre-paradigm way of thinking and finding fault with guys for not being optimized for what NBA coaches thought was optimal 25 years ago, rather than asking yourself what issues guys back then would have if they were forced to play in a league that was more advanced.

Of course, I'm a minority view, and I expect my ballot when I put it down is going to deviate pretty wildly from the mean.

I dont disagree with that statwment actually, but i wish it was applied more evenly by the wider community and not just to the 00's stars like duncan
(Like pre 00's but post 70's stars which are isolated from these criticisms)

[Doctor MJ]

Isn't it reasonable that Duncan's peak was in a much tougher era/time period? The 00s, particularly early to mid of that decade was a grind and not easy to score, particularly near the basket and Duncan did so in 02 and 03. His defense is so much better than the others in consideration that he looks the top player.

So I'll just say:

I totally reject the idea that the early-to-mid 00s should be seen as a stronger era than what came after, because quite literally the era that came after represented a paradigm shift of inherently more effective basketball based on skillsets that the top players from the early 00s either a) didn't have, or b) were discouraged from using.

Doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a glut of extreme outlier talents of a sort in the early '00s based on what NBA coaches thought they knew about what worked, but those coaches were wrong. And so I'd suggest, frankly, that if you're seeing the early '00s as the most talented era of the century, when the early '00s couldn't compete against the rest of the century in reality, you're anchoring yourself to a pre-paradigm way of thinking and finding fault with guys for not being optimized for what NBA coaches thought was optimal 25 years ago, rather than asking yourself what issues guys back then would have if they were forced to play in a league that was more advanced.

Of course, I'm a minority view, and I expect my ballot when I put it down is going to deviate pretty wildly from the mean.

I dont disagree with that statwment actually, but i wish it was applied more evenly by the wider community and not just to the 00's stars like duncan
(Like pre 00's but post 70's stars which are isolated from these criticisms)

Well, I certainly don't want to apply reasoning inconsistently, and where I am, I'd like to do better.

Something I will say is that for Peaks, my approach with both the abandoned project and this one is to try to think about it terms of separation from actual competitors rather than those who came later. I still factor in some sense of level of competition, but I'm not looking to just do a "who would be best in 2025" thing.

I chimed in as I did here not to damn all the early '00s guys way down on my list, but because people were talking as competition back then was harder than it's been in eras since, and that's where the whole paradigm shift to me just can't be ignored. One thing not to penalize older era players because they played in a less strategically mature era, quite another to penalize current players as if they are playing in a weaker era when this era would eat every earlier eras lunch.

[eminence]

On picking seasons like '03 Duncan over '02 or '23 Jokic over '24

I don't feel players often meaningfully change in prime (obviously it can happen - injury, team change, sometimes it just does), there are small differences season to season but I find it tough/impossible to detect some 5%* change in play and would rather reference the season where the player was more historically significant (this can be due to team success or personal awards). In most cases I expect players themselves to pick their peak seasons as ones where team/individual success coincided as well.

*made up number

[eminence]

On era bias within these 25 year spans

If I go through 25 and find 15-20 of my picks falling in a ~10 year window, I'll be worried I'm not looking at players relative to their competition. But on a 4 man ballot I'm just not worried about it - the sample size is so tiny.

Here, first 4 random numbers 1-25 (I used random.org)
20
2
25
2

Oh man, two 2s and none in a 17 number span from 3-19.

This is just to demonstrate the smallness of the 4 spot sample, our brains will find 'patterns' of 'bias' when there's nothing there at all. On the actual lists I'll prefer a light bias towards the later years in this set of 25 and the '77-'00 era, with a moderately aggressive bias towards the later years in the '50-'76 period.

[Doctor MJ]

On picking seasons like '03 Duncan over '02 or '23 Jokic over '24

I don't feel players often meaningfully change in prime (obviously it can happen - injury, team change, sometimes it just does), there are small differences season to season but I find it tough/impossible to detect some 5%* change in play and would rather reference the season where the player was more historically significant (this can be due to team success or personal awards). In most cases I expect players themselves to pick their peak seasons as ones where team/individual success coincided as well.

*made up number

I think I'm the same. I'm not much interesting in stressing about which I should pick between the same player in back-to-back years and will tend to give the nod to the one with the most mainstream love.