#4 Highest Peak of All Time (Wilt '67 wins)

[C-izMe]

I'm not really getting the concept of defensive portability. Sounds like a fancy way to say "better defender".

Let's say you have a team where Bird doesn't have a PF that can guard SFs (I personally think Bird was better suited as a PF defensively). He's a liability. But who doesn't already take points off for that? Who compares Lebron to Bird defensively and doesn't think about versatility. Actually who compares ANYBODY defensively without thinking of versatility. Offense seems to be the area where it's neglected which is why thinking of portability makes sense.

Also offensively you pick your roles. Defensively your forced into roles. In NO SCHEME can you hide that Bird can't keep up with smaller, quicker forwards; the offense can always go small.

[colts18]

I'm not really getting the concept of defensive portability. Sounds like a fancy way to say "better defender".

Let's say you have a team where Bird doesn't have a PF that can guard SFs (I personally think Bird was better suited as a PF defensively). He's a liability. But who doesn't already take points off for that? Who compares Lebron to Bird defensively and doesn't think about versatility. Actually who compares ANYBODY defensively without thinking of versatility. Offense seems to be the area where it's neglected which is why thinking of portability makes sense.

Also offensively you pick your roles. Defensively your forced into roles. In NO SCHEME can you hide that Bird can't keep up with smaller, quicker forwards; the offense can always go small.

Its the same with Magic. He played a lot of SG and SF on defense. If he had a slow SG/SF next to him, that would present problems for his team because no one can guard the PG. With LeBron you can put him on PG (Rose/Rondo), PF (West), SF (Durant/Pierce), or even occasionally Center for bits (KG/Perkins). That helps your team a lot because the combo of lineups you can put on the floor makes you versatile. An example is Mike Miller who is a major liability on defense. The Heat had him guarding Harden instead of Durant who plays his natural position. Lets say Miller was the 3 on a traditional team, that means he has to guard Durant and get abused, but the Heat with LeBron/Wade/Battier being able to guard multiple positions were able to pick and choose the matchups.

[ElGee]

Defensive portability...it's a much smaller issue. I'd argue that non-big defensive outliers are more portable, but in general people's defensive strengths translate well to all environments. A second big only helps the defensive anchor, he isn't redundant with him...

Bird's defense shouldn't be thought of "high up." It's just that he's actually a *good* defender when he's younger (something most new fans don't know). By 86, he's still above average in my estimation *at the power forward.* This is because his team defense ITO of positioning and rebounding are quite good (the most important part of defense). He won't rotate to contest at the rim incredibly well, but he'll take charges, help off a man for steals, and he rebounds really really well.

At the SF in man situations he's below average. In a key series, it makes total sense to have a better defender (McHale) switch on to these players to bother them, well preventing Bird from unnecessary foul trouble. (So Bird is a defensive 4 in those cases.) This is part of why we shouldn't think of his defense in 86 as really good...but I think it's still a clear positive in most situations.

[therealbig3]

But Bowen was there up until 2009, along with Kurt Thomas/Oberto, and the defense still slipped, while the offense actually got worse since 07. In 2010, they no longer had Bowen, but they had Hill/McDyess. The defense still got worse, and the offense was still only around 9th.

It wasn't until 2011 and 2012 that SA was trotting out elite offenses, and I do understand the stylistic change, but the defensive personnel were still very similar, and guys like Splitter and Leonard have been added, and yet, the defense still isn't anywhere close to what it was in earlier years when Duncan was in his prime, even though the supporting cast of defensive players are still pretty strong.

And looking at with/without numbers, it seems that despite Popovich and supporting cast of defensive role players, the Spurs in Duncan's prime depended on Duncan. The defense is nowhere close to elite without Duncan in 05, for example.

[C-izMe]

I'm not really getting the concept of defensive portability. Sounds like a fancy way to say "better defender".

Let's say you have a team where Bird doesn't have a PF that can guard SFs (I personally think Bird was better suited as a PF defensively). He's a liability. But who doesn't already take points off for that? Who compares Lebron to Bird defensively and doesn't think about versatility. Actually who compares ANYBODY defensively without thinking of versatility. Offense seems to be the area where it's neglected which is why thinking of portability makes sense.

Also offensively you pick your roles. Defensively your forced into roles. In NO SCHEME can you hide that Bird can't keep up with smaller, quicker forwards; the offense can always go small.

Its the same with Magic. He played a lot of SG and SF on defense. If he had a slow SG/SF next to him, that would present problems for his team because no one can guard the PG. With LeBron you can put him on PG (Rose/Rondo), PF (West), SF (Durant/Pierce), or even occasionally Center for bits (KG/Perkins). That helps your team a lot because the combo of lineups you can put on the floor makes you versatile. An example is Mike Miller who is a major liability on defense. The Heat had him guarding Harden instead of Durant who plays his natural position. Lets say Miller was the 3 on a traditional team, that means he has to guard Durant and get abused, but the Heat with LeBron/Wade/Battier being able to guard multiple positions were able to pick and choose the matchups.

First off he guarded Perkins. Second he can guard any typed even offensive bigman; do you remember how much West was tiring him out? Third he can't guard ANY quick offball player (the Jason Terry and Ray Allens of the world). Fourth he can't (and has never) guarded a PG for a full game.

And lastly, THAT'S WHY WE SEE LEBRON AS A BETTER DEFENDER ANYWAY. It doesn't make sense to note Bird's defensive impact because no matter where he is on the floor it will never be bad enough to impact the game greatly. On the other hand we are talking about GOAT offense so any small change is really a big one.

[ElGee]

Following up what C-ize wrote, because I agree with most of that post...

It's easy to put a small G next to Magic who can shoot and guard opposing PG's. Those aren't hard to find.

With Bird, you aren't sliding him to the SF position for funsies. When you draft an all-time good post player (McHale), you want him in the post. That Bird could work with him so while says wonders about Bird offense to me. But defensively, the beauty was McHale could guard 3's if needed. This MIGHT not be possible in the game today with so many 3-pointers used and better spacing, but it was OK in 86...so you still have a "good" defender at the 4 (Bird).

You wouldn't just randomly throw Bird on a superstar 3 on defense because you have some antiquated notion of classical positions...

Think of this way -- people who show concern for Bird's defense think of the older Bird guarding athletic 3's. What they don't seem to notice is that Bird played 40 mpg for the heart of his career at the 4 on incredibly good defensive teams.

[ThaRegul8r]

Robertson 64 - Seems to have a terrific combination of scoring, passing, rebounding. Not sure whether to pick this season or another but I'll throw it to his MVP year for now despite getting clowned by the Celtics, he seemed to have performed well

With all due respect, is this spoken from knowledge of the situation, or is this based on a presumption that "since he's Oscar Robertson, one of the greatest players in the history of the game and won his only MVP that season, he had to have performed well?" I actually have the details if anyone's interested.

I went by the boxscore stats which seemed on the level of his regular season. I would appreciate the extra information if you have it if there's any Oscar playoff run that stands out over another to you that deserves the vote over 64 (ie '63)

'63 was absolutely a better playoff run than '64. He averaged 31.8 points on 57.4 percent true shooting, 13.0 rebounds and 9.0 assists. In the Eastern Division Finals against Boston, he averaged 33.4 points on 48.5 percent shooting and 58.8 percent true shooting, 12.4 rebounds and 8.6 assists, putting up a record three triple doubles in a playoff series, grabbing no fewer than 12 rebounds in each of the first six games, opening with 43 points on 71.0 percent true shooting (17-25 FG, 9-12 FT), 14 rebounds and 10 assists--which is still an NBA playoff record for most points in a game for a triple double, and ending with 43 points on 63.8 percent true shooting in the deciding Game 7.

In '64, he got shut down by Boston in the EDF: 28.2 points on 39.8 percent shooting and 49.6 percent true shooting, 9.6 rebounds and 5.6 assists after averaging 30.4 points on 53.6 percent shooting and 65.7 percent true shooting, 11.2 assists and 8.2 rebounds in the previous round against Philadelphia. Not only was he rendered inefficient, but his assists were also cut in half, so if he isn't scoring efficiently or creating offense for his teammates, then what impact is he having?

Now, of course, the '64 Celtics were perhaps the GOAT defensive team (I'm curious as to what other all-time great defensive team can be said to have utterly shut down an offensive great who was the MVP of the league to such an extent), reducing the Royals' to 93.2 points per game in the EDF from 114.7 in the regular season (-18.7%) and 118.4 in the previous round (-21.3%), and held them to 35.2 percent shooting, down from 48.4 percent in the previous round (-13.2%). But the fact remains that, no, he didn't perform well against Boston in '64, while he was brilliant in '63, extending them to seven games and scoring 43 in the decider.

[rrravenred]

Once again, because '71 Kareem wasn't even Kareem's own best season. If someone has a full career, it's simply impossible for them to peak in their sophomore season.

Let me put it to you this way. You're the biggest Jordan fan on the board. Could you in ANYWAY justify someone picking '87 Jordan (his second full season) as his best year?

Doesnt apply because MJ 1991 had better stats and more success than 1987 MJ. In this case Kareem in 1971 and 1972 had better numbers than Kareem 1976 and 1977 and less playoff failures on top of that. At least in 1971 he won it all and in 1972 he lost to clearly superior teams. In 1976 that doesn't help his case and in 1977 he lost with HCA in a sweep.

Well those things can be attributed to external factors (in both players cases) as much as they can to intrinsic value. A player's not just a player, he's a member of a team, a part of an organisation and a human being to boot. There are a lot of potentially confounding factors...

[ElGee]

Been thinking quite a bit about LeBron's offensive impact on 09. Given what I've said about that team, and their 3-point shooting, how do the people voting for him see the HEAT offense? Is this a case of Miami having really crappy offensive teams in 11 and 12? Or do people think James was really that much better as a distributor/on offense in 2009?

Very interested to hear these thoughts from his advocates here...

PS After Wilt/Bird go, I'm looking at KG/Duncan/Hakeem/Walton as this incredible group of big men that need to sorted out. I'm definitely leaning toward a specific order, but those are the guys in my next group and I'm looking forward to more arguments about them. A few cliff notes:

-Think about Walton's defense. Is it the closest to Russell's?

-Think about Hakeem and Duncan's offense in the sense that they put up nice numbers, but are they well suited to a high-level offense? Excluding Hakeem 95, isn't Kevin McHale a better post player than both of these guys? (Not a knock, but I think most people are coming in thinking of these guys as offensive superstars and I reject that in the sense of Global impact.)

-Garnett is a super-portable guy to me. Defensively, was he a GOAT-level help and PnR defender in Minny? Or did that only come about in Boston years? Offensively, think about the mid-post hub passing and spacing with jump shooting and passing. He's typically knocked for not having the back-to-the-basket game, but is his approach actually better?

[colts18]

Been thinking quite a bit about LeBron's offensive impact on 09. Given what I've said about that team, and their 3-point shooting, how do the people voting for him see the HEAT offense? Is this a case of Miami having really crappy offensive teams in 11 and 12? Or do people think James was really that much better as a distributor/on offense in 2009?

Very interested to hear these thoughts from his advocates here...

But Miami wasn't a crappy offense when James/Wade played. Considering the league average over the past 2 seasons is about 106, that 115 O rating is about +9.

Offense:
Miami Overall: 110.2 pts/100
Wade/LeBron: 114.8 pts/100
Wade/LeBron/Bosh: 114.7 pts/100
LeBron no Wade: 107.1 pts/100
Wade no LeBron: 107.3 pts/100
No Wade or leBron: 99.7 pts/100

Defense:
Miami Overall: 102.4 (+7.8 pts/100)
Wade/LeBron: 101.7 (+13.1)
Wade/LeBron/Bosh: 100.3 (+14.4)
LeBron, no Wade: 101.8 (+5.3)
Wade, no LeBron: 106.1 (+1.2)
No LeBron or Wade: 102.9 (-3.2)

In fact, Miami's offense overall was better than clevelands:

09: +4.1
10: +3.6
11: +4.4
12: +2.0 (lots of injuries)

In the 2012 playoffs, the Heat were 109.6 O rating vs. opponents of 101.2 (+9.4). That's pretty elite offensively when they weren't injured.

Not to mention that I believe LeBron 09 is a better offensive player so it makes sense for that offense to be better.

[C-izMe]

Don't put a lot of injuries for 2012. Everyone fell off because of the lockout.

[colts18]

Don't put a lot of injuries for 2012. Everyone fell off because of the lockout.

LeBron missed 4 games last year and they were 86.8 O rating in those games. In the games he played, they were 107.94 which is +3.34, not far off from his 2010 Cleveland pace. When you add Bosh and Wade being injured more in 2012 than 2011, it explains a lot of the difference.

[Dr Positivity]

I felt like the 2012 Heat weren't in top gear in the regular season, on that note

[ThaRegul8r]

-Think about Walton's defense. Is it the closest to Russell's?

"He can beat a rival team with passing, his speed, his shot-blocking, his rebounding, or simply his overall defense. Only ex-Celtics Bill Russell in recent years has intimidated rival shooters more often than Walton. Also, like Russell, Bill often makes better players of his teammates."
- Christian Science Monitor, Jun. 7, 1977

[C-izMe]

Don't put a lot of injuries for 2012. Everyone fell off because of the lockout.

LeBron missed 4 games last year and they were 86.8 O rating in those games. In the games he played, they were 107.94 which is +3.34, not far off from his 2010 Cleveland pace. When you add Bosh and Wade being injured more in 2012 than 2011, it explains a lot of the difference.

But everyone had those issues. Average ORTG plummeted.

[colts18]

I felt like the 2012 Heat weren't in top gear in the regular season, on that note

I do agree with this. The 2011 Heat struggled early on, but then hit their stride late in the year. They had a 5 game losing streak in March where everyone panicked, but then finished the season 15-3. Then in the playoffs, they started 12-3. So entering the finals, the Heat were 27-6 with a 9.55 SRS in those games and a healthy Miller/Haslem. So that was a huge upset by the Mavs which is a positive for Dirk.

In 2012, they started real hot, then the injury bug hit and they never gelled. They were actually 19-13 (49 win pace in 82 game season) after the all-star break. But come playoff time, they stepped it up another gear.

[C-izMe]

Do you mean come playoff time they played nobody? They didn't play any "all time teams".

[therealbig3]

Do you mean come playoff time they played nobody? They didn't play any "all time teams".

OKC was considered a juggernaut, and they were expected by most to win, and a lot of people expected them to steamroll the Heat. Their offense was being praised nonstop (for good reason). They not only had the best offense in the league, they had a top 10 defense that seemed to play better in the playoffs.

They were completely healthy and were playing better than they had in the regular season, when they were a 6.44 SRS team (3rd in the league).

And every team the Heat played was a top 10 defense.

[colts18]

Do you mean come playoff time they played nobody? They didn't play any "all time teams".

I'm not exactly sure what this post is supposed to mean? Anyways in 2011 they had a weighted average of 4.12 SOS in the playoffs and in 2012 it was weaker at 3.28. That 4.12 SOS would have been 12th best among all NBA champions. The 2011 Mavs were at an impressive 4.51 which is 8th best ever among NBA champions. The 2012 Miami Heat were middle of the pack and almost exactly the same as the 2006 Heat who were at 3.29 compared to 2012's 3.28.

[colts18]

Do you mean come playoff time they played nobody? They didn't play any "all time teams".

OKC was considered a juggernaut, and they were expected by most to win, and a lot of people expected them to steamroll the Heat. Their offense was being praised nonstop (for good reason). They not only had the best offense in the league, they had a top 10 defense that seemed to play better in the playoffs.

They were completely healthy and were playing better than they had in the regular season, when they were a 6.44 SRS team (3rd in the league).

And every team the Heat played was a top 10 defense.

If I recall there were posters on this board who were saying that the 2012 Thunder were better than the 96 Bulls after the Thunder destroyed a team that won 20 straight.