Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285
Ryoga Hibiki wrote:Rubios wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:Anyway, calling the top6:
Duncan 6
Garnett 5
Curry 4-3
Jokic 4-3-2
Shaq 3-2
LeBron 1
99% it's like that, Jokic's final placement is the only open point. I somehow feel it could be 2.
Duncan below KG? Do you think so?
for sure, knowing him
DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
MiamiBulls wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
This pod doesn't think Wade peaked higher Offensively than Kobe, it's the notable defensive value of why Wade peaked higher. Kobe defensively was a slight positive while Wade was a strong positive.
A team from 2006-2009 with Wade quarterbacking an Offense isn't likely to have an elite Offensive output (+9 rOrtg or +10 rOrtg) with the philosophical Offensive roster constructions of the times. Wade's Offensive game doesn't really function that well with other high-end Offensive talent since he's 6'4" and can't really shoot. Your-Turn/My-Turn Offense doesn't scale up that impressively.
dhsilv2 wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:Rubios wrote:
Duncan below KG? Do you think so?
for sure, knowing him
in his top 40 he wrote up basically the argument for KG over Duncan and then gave it to Duncan because...we have results and it was close enough. Wouldn't shock me if he ends up doing that again.
Ryoga Hibiki wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:
for sure, knowing him
in his top 40 he wrote up basically the argument for KG over Duncan and then gave it to Duncan because...we have results and it was close enough. Wouldn't shock me if he ends up doing that again.
in the greatest peaks he had Garnett over Duncan.
moreover, in the meantime he got even higher on Manu.
99% Garnett will be ahead
rate_ wrote:MiamiBulls wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
This pod doesn't think Wade peaked higher Offensively than Kobe, it's the notable defensive value of why Wade peaked higher. Kobe defensively was a slight positive while Wade was a strong positive.
A team from 2006-2009 with Wade quarterbacking an Offense isn't likely to have an elite Offensive output (+9 rOrtg or +10 rOrtg) with the philosophical Offensive roster constructions of the times. Wade's Offensive game doesn't really function that well with other high-end Offensive talent since he's 6'4" and can't really shoot. Your-Turn/My-Turn Offense doesn't scale up that impressively.
I disagree with Wade’s game not coexisting well with other elite talent. His off-ball cutting is very underrated.
cupcakesnake wrote:rate_ wrote:MiamiBulls wrote:
This pod doesn't think Wade peaked higher Offensively than Kobe, it's the notable defensive value of why Wade peaked higher. Kobe defensively was a slight positive while Wade was a strong positive.
A team from 2006-2009 with Wade quarterbacking an Offense isn't likely to have an elite Offensive output (+9 rOrtg or +10 rOrtg) with the philosophical Offensive roster constructions of the times. Wade's Offensive game doesn't really function that well with other high-end Offensive talent since he's 6'4" and can't really shoot. Your-Turn/My-Turn Offense doesn't scale up that impressively.
I disagree with Wade’s game not coexisting well with other elite talent. His off-ball cutting is very underrated.
Wade is a good off-ball player with his clever cutting and overwhelming athleticism. Kobe is a GREAT off-ball player with his aggressive movement and ability to stick shots all over the floor. The podcast episodes give credit to both of them for their off-ball work.
Wade has some on-ball advantages in that he's a much more willing playmaker than Kobe, and his athleticism is on another level. Prime Wade could instantly crack a defense at will, suck in help, and make really solid passing reads. Kobe never threatened the rim quite like that, so he didn't have access to quite the same level of on-ball playmaking. Kobe played much of his career in a system that helped maximize his off-ball value while still letting him cook whenever he felt like it. Prime Wade was often on meh teams, being tasked with making things happen.
DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
cupcakesnake wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:
in his top 40 he wrote up basically the argument for KG over Duncan and then gave it to Duncan because...we have results and it was close enough. Wouldn't shock me if he ends up doing that again.
in the greatest peaks he had Garnett over Duncan.
moreover, in the meantime he got even higher on Manu.
99% Garnett will be ahead
No one would take KG>TD for career success or total career impact. Duncan simply has too many deep playoff runs compared to KG.
However, 2004 KG>2003 TD isn't a controversial take. Both those peaks are amongst the best seasons we've ever seen from an NBA player, and I've seen plenty of good arguments for both.
And yeah, haha, in this podcast series, Manu keeps coming up whenever they're comparing playoff stats of everyone on the list, and it has Ben being like... are we sure Manu shouldn't be even HIGHER? He's such a tough player to compare to the all-time greats.
Doctor MJ wrote:cupcakesnake wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:
in the greatest peaks he had Garnett over Duncan.
moreover, in the meantime he got even higher on Manu.
99% Garnett will be ahead
No one would take KG>TD for career success or total career impact. Duncan simply has too many deep playoff runs compared to KG.
However, 2004 KG>2003 TD isn't a controversial take. Both those peaks are amongst the best seasons we've ever seen from an NBA player, and I've seen plenty of good arguments for both.
And yeah, haha, in this podcast series, Manu keeps coming up whenever they're comparing playoff stats of everyone on the list, and it has Ben being like... are we sure Manu shouldn't be even HIGHER? He's such a tough player to compare to the all-time greats.
So I'll push back and say that I don't think it's a given that Duncan should be rated as having the better career over Garnett.
If someone thinks Garnett was literally better than Duncan at peak, there's no overwhelmingly obvious reason to side with Duncan based on longevity.
Certainly though, if we're focused on classical mega-team success accumulated over a career, Duncan tops anyone other than Russell and maybe Kareem (or Jordan if you just count chips).
I'd say it's perfectly fine to prefer Duncan, or to have a career assessment process that favors Duncan, but Garnett was elite in the minutes he played basically forever, and he played more career regular season minutes than Duncan did.
Doctor MJ wrote:cupcakesnake wrote:Ryoga Hibiki wrote:
in the greatest peaks he had Garnett over Duncan.
moreover, in the meantime he got even higher on Manu.
99% Garnett will be ahead
No one would take KG>TD for career success or total career impact. Duncan simply has too many deep playoff runs compared to KG.
However, 2004 KG>2003 TD isn't a controversial take. Both those peaks are amongst the best seasons we've ever seen from an NBA player, and I've seen plenty of good arguments for both.
And yeah, haha, in this podcast series, Manu keeps coming up whenever they're comparing playoff stats of everyone on the list, and it has Ben being like... are we sure Manu shouldn't be even HIGHER? He's such a tough player to compare to the all-time greats.
So I'll push back and say that I don't think it's a given that Duncan should be rated as having the better career over Garnett.
If someone thinks Garnett was literally better than Duncan at peak, there's no overwhelmingly obvious reason to side with Duncan based on longevity.
Certainly though, if we're focused on classical mega-team success accumulated over a career, Duncan tops anyone other than Russell and maybe Kareem (or Jordan if you just count chips).
I'd say it's perfectly fine to prefer Duncan, or to have a career assessment process that favors Duncan, but Garnett was elite in the minutes he played basically forever, and he played more career regular season minutes than Duncan did.
NZB2323 wrote:Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
If we’re using on/off we can compare Kobe and Wade in 2006.
Kobe: +12.5
Wade: +15.2
Playoff Kobe: -17.0
Playoff Wade: +22.2
DBurks2818 wrote:Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
I’m glad you’re at least finally acknowledging the gap in their defensive peaks.
Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Primedeion wrote:
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
I’m glad you’re at least finally acknowledging the gap in their defensive peaks.
I'm glad you recognize that Wade has zero argument for offensive peak.
Ryoga Hibiki wrote:Primedeion wrote:DBurks2818 wrote:Yeah, I thought it was fairly well-argued that Wade peaked higher than Kobe. Longevity/injuries are what put Kobe above Wade in the all-time rankings, but Wade at his best was a better player on both ends of the floor.
He has zero case for offensive peak. 06 Kobe had the highest offensive on off ever recorded and was #1 in every offensive impact metric. Also, the podcast has them as a toss up.
Jokic in 25 has a higher one.
