Top 25 peaks of the 2001-25: #5-#6 Spots

[lessthanjake]

On SGA, with the group of 2006 Wade, 2021 Giannis, 2011 Dirk, 2019 Kawhi, 2009 Kobe, and 2025 SGA, I think SGA pretty clearly had the most impressive regular season. He led his team to a season that’s on the short list of best regular seasons in NBA history, despite them having a significant amount of injuries. Granted, I think the existence of those injuries is a bit overblown because the Thunder are so unbelievably deep with positive-impact players that there’s not much of any dip in quality if someone in the supporting cast is out. And, even with all those injuries, the Thunder were still a really good team even without SGA on the floor (+5.8 in his off minutes). But it’s still the case that you *really* wouldn’t expect to see a 68-win, 12.70 SRS season from a team that had the other guys in the core playoff rotation miss an average of almost 20 regular season games each. And the flip side of the Thunder doing well without SGA on the court is that they also did historically well with him on the court (+16.06 net rating with him on the court). Out of the guys who have already been inducted here, I think only Steph 2015-2017 and Duncan 2005 have had better on-court net ratings in a season, and I don’t think anyone vying for a ballot this time has done it. And the box numbers for SGA are also incredibly good. For instance, his 11.46 BPM is the highest of any year in contention here. Indeed, it was 15th all time, mostly just behind a bunch of seasons from Jordan, LeBron, and Jokic (note: Giannis is the only other player from this 2001-2025 timeframe to ever post a higher BPM, and it was barely higher and in 2020 rather than the 2021 year that most everyone will vote for for Giannis).

That said, I think SGA also had the least impressive playoffs. He wasn’t bad in the playoffs. In fact, he actually played well. But the other guys all played better in the playoffs.

So I think this presents a case where it really depends on how much one weighs playoff performance vs. regular season performance. It’s the conundrum of “The regular season is a way bigger sample size but the playoffs matter way more.” I’m pretty undecided here. If the Thunder had lost Game 7 of the Finals, then SGA would definitely not be in contention for the ballot right now, despite the amazing regular season. But I’m not sure how much to ding someone for lesser playoff performance when his team nevertheless won the title with him easily being his team’s best player in the playoffs. I’ll ding it some compared to these other guys, but maybe the regular season superiority overcomes it as compared to at least some of those above-listed guys?

[ReggiesKnicks]

I’m pretty set on three of my four votes this time being 2001 Shaq, 2006 Wade, and 2004 Garnett (in that order). The last spot is pretty up in the air. I’m inclined to give it to one of 2009 Kobe, 2011 Dirk, 2019 Kawhi, 2021 Giannis, or 2025 SGA. I would be really interested to see what other people have to say on those years, since I really don’t have a strong lean in any particular direction there.

To follow up on my above post briefly, I’d say that 2009 Kobe, 2011 Dirk, 2019 Kawhi, 2021 Giannis, and 2025 SGA are all pretty similar, in the sense of being a year where the guy was a top-tier player but probably not the best player in the world, and led his team to a title while playing well in the playoffs (the latter qualification being why 2024 Tatum is not listed).

I have some concerns with all of them though, and I’ll list some of those concerns below. These aren’t super well-thought-out concerns, so I’m hoping others can tell me how much they think I should or shouldn’t be concerned by these things:

- 2009 Kobe: My biggest concern here is just that impact data in general just isn’t that high on Kobe. It was higher on him in this late 2000s era than in other timeframes, but it was still low for someone who might be on the ballot at this point.

Yeah, that's always been the problem with Kobe in Peaks vs All-Time rankings. He has a 10-year period where he is flirting with Top 3 player in the NBA but doesn't seem to ever breakthrough to "Clear best in the league", which is damning for a player to be considered Top 10 peak of a 25-year period. The other side of the coin is that 10-year period had Shaq, Duncan, Garnett and LeBron who will all be getting in likely in the next vote and guys like Wade who had shorter primes but spiked peaks.

4-Year RAPM paints him as a Top 2-3 offensive player for 2007-2009 and a Top 5 offensive player from 2006-2010.

The problem I have with Kobe, and where I have pause, is his defense. None of the metrics love him, or even like him. I'm not blown away by his defensive consistency either, though he does get better in the post-season.

Ultimately, his 2009 season is his most dominant season by combination of box-score and +/-.

- 2011 Dirk: I’m not super inspired by Dirk’s performance in the Finals, and I feel like the story of those Finals was more LeBron’s complete collapse, rather than Dirk actually having a great series. He’d been extremely good in the prior two rounds though, against teams that were genuinely dangerous, so this is arguably a nitpick. Finals performance does matter a lot (biggest stage, often most difficult opponent, etc.), though, and I don’t think the Mavs win that series with Dirk’s performance if LeBron even plays somewhere in the ballpark of his normal level.

Dirk is a easier for me to get behind than Kobe. Dirk was a Top 2-3 offensive player for an entire decade and evolved into an unstoppable offensive piece. It was another season where a player eclipsed +10 Net Rating in both the regular season and post-season.

Here are the players you are considering On-Court in RS/PS and (On/Off)

2009 Kobe: +11.0 (+11.1) / +9.7 (+12.4)
2011 Dirk: +10.6 (+16.0) / +10.2 (+16.8)
2019 Kawhi: +8.5 (+5.3) / +8.9 (+16.7)
2021 Giannis: +8.4 (+6.7) / +7.5 (+8.0)
2025 SGA: +16.9 (+11.0) / +9.6 (+1.8)

- 2019 Kawhi: This was his least good regular season in that era and he did miss a lot of games in the regular season, which has to matter at least somewhat.

2019 also isn't Kawhi's best post-season performance on a game-by-game basis.

- 2021 Giannis: This was perhaps his least good regular season in his prime (though less of a fall off from the best than 2019 is for Kawhi). Perhaps more importantly, Giannis being injured in the conference finals is a serious issue for me. He came back and was incredible in the Finals, so I see this as being very different from the playoff-ending injuries that disqualify a year like 2017 Kawhi. But I think he was extremely fortunate that his team was facing a really weak conference finals opponent such that his team could win the last two games of the series without him. I will note that I think the leverage of each playoff series goes up dramatically, since, for a high-seeded team, the difficulty of the series goes up a huge amount as you get further into the playoffs, so I see this as a bigger issue than something like Steph missing games in the 2016 and 2018 playoffs (though neither of those years were the ones that made my ballot for him in the last couple threads). Those situations are still negatives, but it’s much more plausible for a guy’s genuinely good team to do fine without him in in the first round or even maybe the second round, but you’d generally expect a collapse in the conference finals or finals without a team’s best player. Luckily for Giannis, that didn’t happen, but it just feels really lucky to me that it didn’t.

I agree 2019 and 2020 Giannis were better than 2021 Giannis. It seems like a lot of your list is ranking the #1 options on title winners, rather than best players in a vacuum.

- 2025 SGA: The biggest concern I have here is the playoff performance. He was still good in the playoffs, but I think these other guys were all better in the playoffs than he was.

SGA was better than all of these guys in the regular season, which is a larger sample.

[70sFan]

That said, I think SGA also had the least impressive playoffs. He wasn’t bad in the playoffs. In fact, he actually played well. But the other guys all played better in the playoffs.

Are we sure that is the case? I think at least him vs Kobe and Gianni's is a legitimate discussion.

[70sFan]

I have a lock top 2 (Shaq and Garnett) and I also lean heavily into Giannis at #3.

I have a very rough time deciding the last spot. I consider almost 10 players on that place, but mostly I think about the guards group - Kobe, Wade, Shai and Paul - and I also think about Kawhi (especially his 2017 version). I hope someone will convince me one way or another in the next few days.

[lessthanjake]

That said, I think SGA also had the least impressive playoffs. He wasn’t bad in the playoffs. In fact, he actually played well. But the other guys all played better in the playoffs.

Are we sure that is the case? I think at least him vs Kobe and Gianni's is a legitimate discussion.

Well, here’s some playoff data:

Playoff EPM

1. 2006 Wade: 7.3
2. 2019 Kawhi: 6.9
3. 2009 Kobe: 6.3
4. 2011 Dirk: 5.6
5. 2021 Giannis: 5.0
6. 2025 SGA: 4.7

I think one could make an argument about Giannis, particularly since he missed two games in the conference finals (which is a genuine concern for me about that year). But he really was fantastic in the Finals—far better than SGA in my view, and the Finals is the highest leverage series (though both faced a difficult second round as well).

[lessthanjake]

I agree 2019 and 2020 Giannis were better than 2021 Giannis. It seems like a lot of your list is ranking the #1 options on title winners, rather than best players in a vacuum.

Yeah, I think team success is a significant aspect of the “greatness” of a player’s year, and this is a greatest peaks project. If someone leads his team to a title, then I think he achieved a whole lot and was tremendously significant that year, and that weighs a lot regarding the player’s greatness that year. Not everyone takes that approach, but I do. I don’t see this as purely an exercise in determining who was the best player in a vacuum, but rather who actually had the greatest year. It’s a very related inquiry, but not the same.

That said, if you take a look at the 2022 Peaks Project, you’ll find that the peak year voted in for Wade, Giannis, and Dirk are the same ones I listed. The only differences between the years I am going for and what the consensus was in the last peaks project is that 2017 was voted in for Kawhi and 2008 was voted in for Kobe. And my differences in those years actually aren’t really about winning or not winning the title. Regarding Kawhi, his 2017 year doesn’t fall out for me because he didn’t win a title, but rather because he had a playoff-ending injury, which I just see as disqualifying for purposes of this project. As for Kobe, I actually think he performed better individually in 2009 than in 2008 (though it is definitely quite close). So that’s not really an example of me taking a lesser year because the guy won the title that year, but rather me thinking a guy was both better that year and won the title.

So yeah, I do value winning a title in an assessment of greatness. But I think that sort of thing is in line with how votes have previously been in peaks projects here, so I don’t think I’m out in left field. Maybe my “I categorically won’t vote for 2017 Kawhi” view is not a totally mainstream view here, but that’s not about winning a title or not. I’d also just point out that I intend to vote for 2004 Garnett over a whole bunch of guys who won a title (2006 Wade is the only one of the Wade/Kawhi/Giannis/Kobe/Dirk/SGA group that I’m going to have above 2004 Garnett), and am also going to choose 2004 for him over the year Garnett won a title.

[f4p]

I honestly feel it's far too early to actually have 2025 Shai on the ballot. He had a nice RS but in the PS, it left much to be desired. Volume went down, efficiency nosedived, creation went down, turnovers went up. He went from prime MJ level in the RS to well below prime Kobe in the PS. Don't get me wrong. It's still a good peak. It will start to get consideration around the #10 spot due to how great the RS is but now is far too early when you've got way better playoff performers left to choose.

Honestly, I think Shai's 2025 playoff run is getting way too much criticism. Let's just compare gamescore's for each series for Shai in 2025 vs Kobe in 08(often considered his peak season).

20.0
25.6
24.6
21.8

25.2
25.4
20.7
16.4

Which pretty much takes into account pace and whatnot.

game score doesn't actually factor in pace as far as i know. that's why it tends to be difficult for late 90's, early 00's guys to get on the list.

[DraymondGold]

That said, I think SGA also had the least impressive playoffs. He wasn’t bad in the playoffs. In fact, he actually played well. But the other guys all played better in the playoffs.

Are we sure that is the case? I think at least him vs Kobe and Gianni's is a legitimate discussion.

Well, here’s some playoff data:

Playoff EPM

1. 2006 Wade: 7.3
2. 2019 Kawhi: 6.9
3. 2009 Kobe: 6.3
4. 2011 Dirk: 5.6
5. 2021 Giannis: 5.0
6. 2025 SGA: 4.7

I think one could make an argument about Giannis, particularly since he missed two games in the conference finals (which is a genuine concern for me about that year). But he really was fantastic in the Finals—far better than SGA in my view, and the Finals is the highest leverage series (though both faced a difficult second round as well).

Just saw your comment in the other thread -- congratulations 70s!

Jake, do you have the playoff EPM for these players in the surrounding years or other candidate years, and perhaps also for Chris Paul, Durant, or Nash?

E.g.
-Wade 06, 07, 09 (maybe 05 or 10 if anyone thinks it would be helpful)
-Kawhi 17, 19 (maybe 16, 20, 21)
-Kobe 08, 09, 10
-Dirk 09, 10, 11 (maybe 08)
-Giannis 20, 21, 22 (maybe 19)
-Chris Paul 14, 15, 16 (maybe 17)
-Durant 14, 16, 17
-Nash 05, 06, 07

Single playoff samples can be noisy, so presumably a several-year run would be stabler. These are roughly 3-year EPM runs, so if EPM allows you to do multi-year PS averages like 3-years, that could also be interesting to see (and perhaps easier for you than manually checking all these years). No worries if not!

[70sFan]

That said, I think SGA also had the least impressive playoffs. He wasn’t bad in the playoffs. In fact, he actually played well. But the other guys all played better in the playoffs.

Are we sure that is the case? I think at least him vs Kobe and Gianni's is a legitimate discussion.

Well, here’s some playoff data:

Playoff EPM

1. 2006 Wade: 7.3
2. 2019 Kawhi: 6.9
3. 2009 Kobe: 6.3
4. 2011 Dirk: 5.6
5. 2021 Giannis: 5.0
6. 2025 SGA: 4.7

I think one could make an argument about Giannis, particularly since he missed two games in the conference finals (which is a genuine concern for me about that year). But he really was fantastic in the Finals—far better than SGA in my view, and the Finals is the highest leverage series (though both faced a difficult second round as well).

I wouldn't call the corpse of Nets a particularly strong opponent, though I guess they managed to be difficult for the Bucks. The missed games in ECF are heavily undervalued here, had the Bucks face a typical third round level opponent, they would have been in huge trouble.

It's true that Giannis finals are legendary, but I would say that Shai faced a considerably more impressive team taking postseason into account.

Regarding EPM, I don't put too much value into such metrics, but considering small samples and the noise I wouldn't say that Kobe at 6.3 is on another tier to Shai.

[70sFan]

Is there any skill-related reason to pick 2006 Wade over 2009?

[lessthanjake]

Are we sure that is the case? I think at least him vs Kobe and Gianni's is a legitimate discussion.

Well, here’s some playoff data:

Playoff EPM

1. 2006 Wade: 7.3
2. 2019 Kawhi: 6.9
3. 2009 Kobe: 6.3
4. 2011 Dirk: 5.6
5. 2021 Giannis: 5.0
6. 2025 SGA: 4.7

I think one could make an argument about Giannis, particularly since he missed two games in the conference finals (which is a genuine concern for me about that year). But he really was fantastic in the Finals—far better than SGA in my view, and the Finals is the highest leverage series (though both faced a difficult second round as well).

Just saw your comment in the other thread -- congratulations 70s!

Jake, do you have the playoff EPM for these players in the surrounding years or other candidate years, and perhaps also for Chris Paul, Durant, or Nash?

E.g.
-Wade 06, 07, 09 (maybe 05 or 10 if anyone thinks it would be helpful)
-Kawhi 17, 19 (maybe 16, 20, 21)
-Kobe 08, 09, 10
-Dirk 09, 10, 11 (maybe 08)
-Giannis 20, 21, 22 (maybe 19)
-Chris Paul 14, 15, 16 (maybe 17)
-Durant 14, 16, 17
-Nash 05, 06, 07

Single playoff samples can be noisy, so presumably a several-year run would be stabler. These are roughly 3-year EPM runs, so if EPM allows you to do multi-year PS averages like 3-years, that could also be interesting to see (and perhaps easier for you than manually checking all these years). No worries if not!

Sure, here’s those years (as well as a few extra years that I ended up writing down while I was going through these):

Playoff EPM

Wade

2005: +3.3
2006: +7.3
2007: -3.5
2009: +2.9
2010: +4.6

Kawhi

2016: +5.8
2017: +9.4
2019: +6.9
2020: +4.2
2021: +5.1

Kobe

2008: +3.6
2009: +6.3
2010: +4.3

Dirk

2008:+3.2
2009: +5.1
2010: +3.6
2011: +5.6
2012: +0.9

Giannis

2019: +5.7
2020: +3.4
2021: +5.0
2022: +3.9

Chris Paul

2014: +6.4
2015: +5.1
2016: +6.3
2017: +5.1

Durant

2014: +3.1
2016: +2.3
2017: +6.7
2018: +5.7

Nash

2005: +2.5
2006: +2.9
2007 +3.0
2008: +0.7
2010: +3.3

_________________

A couple quick notes of caution on this:

1. Not all these years are equal in terms of sample size. For instance, some of them are first round losses, so those numbers are bound to be really noisy (even with EPM stabilizing small samples more than RAPM would).

2. I think expanding a sample is useful to help us determine how good a player was in general. However, playoff data is useful not just as a way to determine how good someone was in a vacuum. Rather, it’s also simply important in its own right. If someone performed extremely well in one playoff run but performed less well in other playoff runs, then I think that might tend to suggest a lower evaluation of how good the player was in a vacuum than just looking at the higher year would, but it doesn’t actually tell us that the guy didn’t perform extremely well in that one playoff run. And I do think that performance in a specific playoff run has quite a lot of independent importance to an assessment of how great their year was, beyond merely what it suggests about how good they were as a player in general.

[Djoker]

I honestly feel it's far too early to actually have 2025 Shai on the ballot. He had a nice RS but in the PS, it left much to be desired. Volume went down, efficiency nosedived, creation went down, turnovers went up. He went from prime MJ level in the RS to well below prime Kobe in the PS. Don't get me wrong. It's still a good peak. It will start to get consideration around the #10 spot due to how great the RS is but now is far too early when you've got way better playoff performers left to choose.

This feels harsh. You believe he had a prime MJ level RS for a 68 win, +12.7 SRS team - along with that, he produced a championship run where he was the best player in every meaningful series he played. But a top 8 peak of 2001-25 is "far too early" for him?

Surprising, is the regular season just not given much weight in your criteria? Or do you not actually view a "prime MJ level RS" that highly compared to the competition here?

Well the real level of a player to me is how they play in the playoffs; when stakes are high and a championship is on the line. If two players are equally great in the playoffs, then I'll take a guy who is a more consistent regular season performer. But when one guy is worse in the playoffs, it's hard to make up for that with regular season play. If that makes sense...

What do you mean by "far too early"? At what point would you consider him?

Maybe around the #10 spot. Right now there's a bunch of guys left who are clearly better in the playoffs.

By the way didn't SGA make like #15 or something on Ben's list? That's probably around where he ends up for me, maybe a little higher. If he proves more in the coming years, I'd be open to put him up higher. Like if he has one or two strong playoff runs.

[lessthanjake]

Is there any skill-related reason to pick 2006 Wade over 2009?

I think he was even quicker and therefore better able to get to get to the rim in 2006 than he was in 2009. That’s certainly borne out in the percent of his shots that were within 3 feet (notably higher in 2006, in both regular season and playoffs), as well as in having a decent bit more FTA per game despite having a notably lower offensive load. Which seems rather important to me, given that a huge part of his dominance in the 2006 playoffs was a result of his incredible rim pressure.

[TrueLAfan]

Shaq 2001. 3rd in MVP voting, 8th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. Posted this earlier. Good but incomplete in his first few years, missed time with conditioning issues and (sorry) a little apathy. But he put it all together a few times and he really put it all together here.

Garnett 2004. League MVP, 6th in DPOY Voting. Posted this earlier; will add a bit more. Part of my answers here are based on memories in conjunction with analytic tools. This relates to both the previous choice and this one; I really remember the T-Wolves/Lakers series in 2004. Both Kobe and Shaq were near their peak(s)—and KG was simply the best player out there. It sure seemed clear to me at the time, and I’ll go with that now.

Giannis 2021. 4th in MVP voting, 5th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. Maybe a better RS in 2020, although I personally don’t think so. The Bucks added pieces that may have led to Giannis looking a shade less important in the season. I think that’s mistaken. And his finals were epic enough to push him up. He was almost as dominant in postseason as J in 1975, and that is saying a real whole lot.

SGA 2025. League MVP, 10th in DPOY Voting, Finals MVP. I’m not 100% clear on the reasons why Shai shouldn’t be here, or even higher. I get that he “slumped” in the PS, but it didn’t hurt his team. I mean, look at how the rest of OKC played in the Finals. And they got the job done, and that it done because of SGA. It’s a bit like Jokic; there’s too much there there. I give Giannis the nod for my #7—but SGA had a better RS and was still mighty good on the PS.

[ReggiesKnicks]

I’m not sure that that conclusion is all that obvious. At least not to me. In general, I think that a team relying on someone more is a context in which we’d expect their impact to be higher, not lower.

To a point, but there is a tipping point, a maximum threshhold.

This also doesn't explain why the top of RAPM leaderboards are littered with lower-usage guys who excel in a limited role.

Of course, that can come into tension with the limits of human energy, where a guy who is relied on for everything probably can’t be as good at any single thing as they would be if they were more specialized in what the team was asking them to do. But it’s also not at all obvious to me that having multiple responsibilities that you do well will result in less impact than having one responsibility you do even better. Intuitively, one would think that the player who is focusing on one responsibility will have more impact on that area but less impact on other areas, and it would likely even out (or probably we worse than evening out, since there may be diminishing returns on energy in one particular area).

It depends on the degree but assuming things simply even out isn't how impact works.

Nikola Jokic's greatness comes from his offensive creation and shot-making. The more the Nuggets can put Jokic in a position to focus on that, the higher his impact will be. Now, if he is all of a sudden burdened with having to switch every pick-and-roll defensively or even blitz ball-handlers like Steph Curry 30 feet from the basket, not only will it physically tax Jokic, it will also lead to a worse defense compared to if he could play drop and utilize his size around the rim to help deter shots and dominate the defensive glass.

This context surrounding a players role within a team, and how the team utilized a player, is incredibly contextual and important. For the most part, Jokic has been used in the way we would want him to be, limited defensive diversity where he can stay near the rim and in the paint, utilize his hands, size and BBIQ to help deter defenders and dominate the defensive glass.

What would happen to Jokic's overall impact on winning if he were tasked with more defensive responsibilities? I would venture to say, as an educated guess, his overall impact would worsen. His offensive impact may stay the same, maybe it dips a bit, but defensively the Nuggets would be even worse.

Now, enter Shane Battier. Did you know his usage as a rookie was over 18%? He never eclipsed 16% again and during his peak stretch was around 11-13% usage. He was still a positive impact player as a rookie, but his maximized value as a player was to be a teams primary defender on-ball, an elite secondary wing defender off-ball and thus a spot-up 3P shooter offensively with minimal slack to attack off-the-dribble only in the most opportune times. Shane Battier could do some things on-ball offensively, but it simply isn't worthwhile in an offense when the players with more primacy should be taking on more responsibilities.

Kevin Garnett's offensive game is good enough to be the #1 option on a title contender (see 2004), but the reality is he's best when paired with a secondary creator at the level of Sam Cassell or Paul Pierce, which isn't unrealistic when building a title contending team. When parts of the scoring pressure is alleviated from the 7-course buffet Garnett is consuming on the court, he is capable of impacting the game in so many other facets that his impact rises.

Garnett's optimization to a team is more in line with the 2008 Celtics. Garnett is capable of fulfilling a role as an offensive anchor like he did in 2004 and lead a team to a title, which falls in line with his impact for the period.

RAPM (4 Year Increment)
Garnett 9.0 (2006)
Curry 9.0 (2020)
LeBron 8.9 (2013)
Kawhi 8.9 (2023)
Garnett 8.9 (2005)

Garnett's level here is incredibly impressive, so much so that I wouldn't hold anything Garnett did pre-2005 or pre-2006 to anything less than he was capable of, if not more, in the 2008-2010 period.

And, under the circumstances in which the responsibility-for-one-thing timeframe is when the guy is older, we would probably expect less impact overall, because players don’t have as much energy in later years, so basically defense is getting a bigger portion of the pie but the pie is also a bit smaller.

I would say we have such a clear change in roster construction around Garnett that it behooves one to say this.

I would agree if a player stayed in the same circumstance and simply aged. Curry is a great example of this. Same coach, system and 2nd wing (Green) for much of the prime. Curry had his best and more impactful season by RAPM in 2017-2019, his age 27-29 seasons, then started to see a decline.

Garnett saw his heights around ages 31-33.
Duncan saw his heights around ages 26-28.

The thing about all 3 of these players in this range is telling.

For Curry, he had an uber-elite second option in Durant and Draymond at the peak of his powers while in a system for 3-5 years. The role Curry played was clearly defined and laid out, with Durant there Curry's impact only increased even though he had less usage and less roles.

Do you see that? Curry had less offensive primacy and less of a usage and burden compared to his 2015 and 2016 seasons, and his impact per RAPM actually went up.

Now shift a dozen years earlier to Duncan. Duncan's overall impact is increasing he recalls parts of his offensive primacy, allowing the Spurs to foster the growth and blooming of Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. The offensive burden for the Spurs is no longer solely on the shoulders of Duncan, yet his impact metrics continue to grow.

Why can't this same logic, a pattern we have seen in the best players ever, not apply to Garnett?

[ReggiesKnicks]

Is there any skill-related reason to pick 2006 Wade over 2009?

Wade was a better basketball player in 2009 but he won a title in 2006.

At a Glance

2006 RAPM: 4th
2009 RAPM: 18th

2006 RAPTOR: 9.2
2009 RAPTOR: 9.4

Notably, Wade's 2006 is an outlier from 2005 and 2007, when 2009 if followed up 8.9, 6.8 and 6.7 seasons to finish up his prime in 2012, which shows a steady decline in ability.

Now, as lessthanjake said, his FTR in 2006 was a boon to his skill-set on 2006, with a 57% FTR in the 2005-2007 years compared to a still-impressive 46% FTR in the 2009-2011 years (with a low of 44% in 2009).

Of course, does this drop in rim pressure off-set playmaking and scoring gaps?

2006: 33% AST% to 13.2% TOV%
2009: 40% AST% to 11.6% TOV%

2006: 9.1 Assists/100, 1.8 AST/TO
2009: 10.3 Assists/100, 2.1 AST/TO

2006: 32.5 USG% on 148 TS+
2009: 36.2 USG% on 123 TS+

Now, the question I ask myself: Could 2009 Wade have scaled down his usage to maximize his impact to a larger degree and lead a team to the title?

I come away with a resounding yes to this answer. I have Wade who was simply better in 2009 than 2006, and no reason to think he couldn't have won with his 2009 self given 2006 or differening but better circumstances.

[70sFan]

By the way didn't SGA make like #15 or something on Ben's list? That's probably around where he ends up for me, maybe a little higher. If he proves more in the coming years, I'd be open to put him up higher. Like if he has one or two strong playoff runs.

If you can see Shai around 10th spot, then having him at 8th spot isn't that much different, right?

Yeah Ben has Shai quite low for my liking. I don't think there is a clear reason to have Shai much lower than Kobe or Wade. It's one of the first big disagreements with Ben from the series (the bigger one is Harden being so low).

[ReggiesKnicks]

By the way didn't SGA make like #15 or something on Ben's list? That's probably around where he ends up for me, maybe a little higher. If he proves more in the coming years, I'd be open to put him up higher. Like if he has one or two strong playoff runs.

If you can see Shai around 10th spot, then having him at 8th spot isn't that much different, right?

Yeah Ben has Shai quite low for my liking. I don't think there is a clear reason to have Shai much lower than Kobe or Wade. It's one of the first big disagreements with Ben from the series (the bigger one is Harden being so low).

Do you consider SGA/Harden/Kobe/Wade to be in the same tier or there being varying approaches which rates them in different orders?

[70sFan]

By the way didn't SGA make like #15 or something on Ben's list? That's probably around where he ends up for me, maybe a little higher. If he proves more in the coming years, I'd be open to put him up higher. Like if he has one or two strong playoff runs.

If you can see Shai around 10th spot, then having him at 8th spot isn't that much different, right?

Yeah Ben has Shai quite low for my liking. I don't think there is a clear reason to have Shai much lower than Kobe or Wade. It's one of the first big disagreements with Ben from the series (the bigger one is Harden being so low).

Do you consider SGA/Harden/Kobe/Wade to be in the same tier or there being varying approaches which rates them in different orders?

Kind of, although I do think Harden is the clear last one among the 4. I think all lie in the 8-15 range in this project.

Harden is probably the least well-rounded player here but his strengths are more impressive to me. He's probably the best scorer out of them and clearly the best on-ball creator. The problem is with his defense and non-existing off-ball game.

[ReggiesKnicks]

If you can see Shai around 10th spot, then having him at 8th spot isn't that much different, right?

Yeah Ben has Shai quite low for my liking. I don't think there is a clear reason to have Shai much lower than Kobe or Wade. It's one of the first big disagreements with Ben from the series (the bigger one is Harden being so low).

Do you consider SGA/Harden/Kobe/Wade to be in the same tier or there being varying approaches which rates them in different orders?

Kind of, although I do think Harden is the clear last one among the 4. I think all lie in the 8-15 range in this project.

Harden is probably the least well-rounded player here but his strengths are more impressive to me. He's probably the best scorer out of them and clearly the best on-ball creator. The problem is with his defense and non-existing off-ball game.

You have Giannis in the KG/Shaq tier?

Do you think Giannis' defense propels him enough ahead of the offensive guys?