Doctor MJ wrote:So I guess I'll give my current thoughts on this years, which is one of the toughest ones in history for me to evaluate:
Wade's my #1. Totally understand if you feel otherwise based on either 1) considering his FTs illegitimate or 2) you really think Kobe's superhuman this year. For myself, I had Wade right in the think of my MVP rankings during this regular season, and thought he took it to the next level in the playoffs. For perspective, Wade's playoff stats were about as good as Kobe's ever done in the playoffs (better PER than Kobe's playoff peak) - and he became better with each subsequent series. This is a guy who just has the capability to push through when the going gets tough.
Re: What about Shaq? Hey Shaq helped. They don't win the title without Shaq, but it's not just about winning the title or not. And however the Heat got to the finals, once they were there, Wade was an absolute force of nature on the biggest stage.
My 2-5 are LeBron, Kobe, Dirk, and Nash in some order. I have a really tough time picking between them. I've gone back & forth for years, and I doubt I'll be satisfied with whatever order I choose this time around.
Duncan doesn't make the cut. It's tough because the way he was playing in the playoffs, seemed like his old self, and I consider his peak to be greater than any of the players this season. This is where how much you weight playoff play is huge. Had the Spurs won the title with Duncan playing the way he had, he'd be my #1. As it stands though, Duncan's improved play over a baker's dozen of games is only part of the Spurs disappointing in the playoffs, and it does not come anywhere close to erasing the 82 game season the preceded it - during which, Duncan really was not playing like his normal self. And know this wasn't just an offensive issue. The plantar fasciitis definitely affected his defense too.
Garnett doesn't make the cut. I'll give him a shout out in my honorable mentions but that's all. It's all well and good to say "but his terrible supporting cast", but this is a guy who was carrying a lightly regarded supporting cast to 50 wins for years before Spree and Cassell came to town. Garnett was still a great player, but his impact did go down when the team fell toward 30 wins.
(1) People seem to be treating Duncan with an all-or-nothing approach. As in, he was still great in the playoffs, so I'd want Duncan over just about everyone. Or, he had a subpar regular season, so nothing can make up for those 82 games.
I'm wondering about balancing those concepts though. His regular season wasn't really "bad," just subpar. He anchored a top defense and was still a good offensive option. Furthermore, Duncan has a history of taking fewer shots in the regular season and spiking some of his scoring numbers in the playoffs because of it.
To me, the conundrum is how to watch Game 7 of the Mavs series (de facto WCF) and
not consider Duncan one of the best player's in the world.
He had 26 points in 15 rebounds in that game 7...
In the second half. (2) KG in 06 probably wasn't the KG in 03 and 04. That said, I think you're being unfair with regards to the supporting cast. To me, even with posters who are not slaves to team success, this is where team and individual performance become convoluted.
All weak casts aren't equally bad.
KG's team in 03: (>1000 MP)
Hudson
Rasho
Peeler
Gill (34 years old)
Wally
Trent
Joe Smith
Marc Jackson (C)
51 wins. Pre-injury Wally was a good offensive option. 42% from downtown. Joe Smith provided solid minutes - he worked that jumper well if I recall. Hudson was sort of an explosive combo guard. The rest are big bodies. KG played at a ridiculous level then - defensively, 13.5 rebounds, 40 minutes a night, 6 assists, etc. 51 wins is impressive. But even great ones need serviceable parts.
KG's team in 06: (>1000 MP)
Trenton Hassell
Marko Jaric
Wally (40 games)
Ricky Davis (36 games)
McCants
Eddie Griffin
Marcus Banks
Mark Blount
Already there's a coaching downgrade to Dwane Casey. The ORtg plummets to 28th. Injuries are a serious issue. And the peripheral and role players are atrocious. No winning team has ever played Ricky Davis more than 600 minutes. He's a cancer. He has a very poor concept of basketball on both ends of the court. After that, how do the parts fit? Who's providing balance with shooting, penetration, offensive orchestration? Certainly not Marcus Banks -- he's barely an NBA player. McCants was a rookie who is also barely an NBA players. These issues are huge.
Basically, the 2003 team had parts, players and a coach. The 2006 team is a mess on all three fronts. This leads me to...
(3) Kobe Bryant. I've said before I see little difference in his ability between 06 and 07. Perhaps he provided a little more value in 06 (as most advanced metrics would indicate), but I'm not sure it's enough to jump levels. Some people seem to carry this mystical conception about 06 because of the 81 points or raw ppg. I don't see much evidence his scoring ability changed at all. He
did take more shots in 2006...
But I wanted to address parts, players and the coach on the Lakers.
Coach: Phil Jackson and the triangle are about as proven as relativity, so I don't need to say much about that.
Parts: Let's focus on offense because that was the strength of the Lakers team.
Smush Parker, who also had a poor understanding of basketball, at the least was a decent shooter. Vujacic could always shoot and surrounding Bryant with shooters works well. My recollection is Sasha provided a big boost at times off the bench, and in wins he shot nearly 40% from downtown in 2006, just 28% in losses. Cook could shoot - it was just about the only thing he could do - and he loved that 18 foot pop shot and had range out to 3. Within the triangle, Walton has
always facilitated offense well, and in that sense he's a decent part. He's
still providing value on the championship Pau teams, defending bigger forwards (pre-Artest) and improving offensive flow on the court. FInally, Odom could create offense for others and at times was a matchup nightmare. The two playoffs games I've rewatched he created about as much offense as Bryant and drew significantly more fouls attacking.
Now, as players I don't think I need to elaborate further. Vujacic is a defensive sieve. Kwame Brown, well, he could rebound and block an occasional shot but he's still Kwame Brown (ie terrible). But Odom constantly gets overlooked as a No. 2 option (probably because you can't win a title with him as a No. 2). He's a very good help defender on defense and a fantastic rebounder. Through the first 6 games of the Phoenix series, with a favorable matchup, LO averaged 20.3 points, 12.0 rebounds and 5.3 assists. He took nearly 3 shots more per game, as Kobe limited shots, and the results were impressive.
--
If we're calling all supporting casts the same because they simply don't have any other All-Stars, I think we're missing a huge portion of the game.
