#6 Highest Peak of All Time (Kareem '77 wins)

[ardee]

Vote: 1987 Magic Johnson

For the reasons I illustrated in the last thread. I haven't heard anyone respond to the point that if Russell gets voted in as the GOAT defensive peak, Magic should be voted in soon since he had the GOAT offensive peak.

This is a reasonable point to bring up for consideration, but reasonable rebuttals come just as quickly:

1) Russell got a plurality, not a majority. Most of us don't agree with where Russell was placed. Doesn't make the vote invalid, but for most of us, the argument here should be irrelevant.

2) It is not reasonable to say that GOAT Offense = GOAT Defense as a rule. Russell has the defensive title by a very wide margin imho, Magic's lead is quite small. More to it than that, and stuff to be brought in to defend Magic's case, but that's the point: More nuance is needed.

Who is your defensive second GOAT? How would you rank him relative to Russ, and your second offensive GOAT relative to Magic? Using the SRS system that ElGee adopted, and going peak-wise relative to era :

Offensive GOATs:

Magic: 9
Bird: 7.5
MJ/Nash/Wilt: 7
Barkley/Shaq/Dirk: 6

Defensive GOATs

Russell: 9
Olajuwon/Walton/Garnett/Duncan: 7 (I know there are differences here but defense is too hard for me to judge so objectively. It depends on what you're looking for )

[PTB Fan]

Re-posting my post about '77 Walton in case someone wants to take him in consideration in this voting

"The Portland Trail Blazers, formally announced the firing of Lenny Wilkens yesterday naming Jack Ramsey to succeed him as a coach of the National Basketball Association team. Ramsey, fired by Buffalo after guiding the Braves into the Eastern semi-conference finals, is the fourth coach of the Blazers, who joined in the 1970. Ramsey said, "I think this the best coaching opportunity in professional basketball, and I took the position here for that reason."

"I have great regard for the talent of this team" Ramsey said. "It is like an iceberg. What you see isn't the mass that is really there. Sure Bill Walton has to be healthy and play almost a full season if we are to achieve great success.

"I want a team that can run, a team that can make the transition from offense to defense and be aggressive when it gets to defense. Bill Walton is a great big man and he will give us up front quality. I am looking forward to his playing a major part of the schedule."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mf ... lton&hl=en

"Depend on the health of center Bill Walton, this could be the turnaround season for the Portland Trail Blazers in the National Basketball Association. So far, Walton is healthy -- the healthiest he's ever been since he's turned pro -- and Portland is in a high state of optimism.

"Our future has to be now" says Ramsey, a successful veteran of the NBA wars who left Buffalo after three straight playoff seasons after falling out with the Braves front office. Ramsey admits Walton is the key to a turnaround. "I want at least 60 games out of Bill this season" he said. "If we get that, we will be in good shape."

Walton, the former UCLA All-American, can be awesome when healthy. But he was an injury prone in his first two pro seasons, getting in the equivalent of only one season's play over two years. For the first time, he came to training camp with no injuries:

"Walton is such a fine talent, so coachable, and unselfish." said Ramsey. "He does everything well. I like the spirit on this club. These players want to win. You can see it in practice and we saw it in exhibition games."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1E ... lton&hl=en

"His third season's been a charm, so far, for big Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers. The sometimes controversial redheaded is off to his best National Basketball Association start ever, and the reason is simple.

For the first time in his pro career, Walton's completely healthy. "I don't think about the injuries. I try to keep up in the best physical condition that I can prevent injuries, but I don't think about them" Walton says.[/b]

But he's had a bad reason to think a lot. He had nine broken bones of one kind or another in his first two NBA seasons. Coach Jack Ramsey wanted the 6-11 center, who was drafted No.1 from the UCLA in 1974, to come to camp a bit lighter this season. And he did -- about 10 pounds.

Ramsey thinks with less weight, there's less chances of an injury from pressure on the legs and knees. The Blazers have something of a new attitude under Ramsey, more of a team concept. But Walton says his attitude are about the same ever.

"I don't think I've changed. I have the same values and the same interests." says Walton, who turned 24 last week. Still bearded, he says he's got long hair cut for comfort, nothing else. The coach has nothing but praise for Walton.

"He is a blend of all the skills of the game" Ramsey says. "He'll do whatever is necessary to win, and that's all he's concerned about.

"I think he could be the most valuable player in pro basketball." But Walton, who has been a leading scorer for Portland and tops the league in rebounds so far in this season, says what counts in the end is the final tally on the scoreboard.

"I go by wins and loses and not by the boxscore. Boxscores are extremely misleading." Walton says. And he's glad to be mended. "It is pleasant to go to practices this season and be able to practice." [/i]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7P ... lton&hl=en

"The red ponytail is gone and so is the bandanna. So, too, are the aches and pains, the injuries that dogged Bill Walton through his first two years as a pro. "I'm healthy, that's the biggest difference" said Walton, who is playing the way Portland folks had hoped when they drafted him at No.1 in 1974 out of UCLA.

The 6-foot-11, 225 pounded is in great shape and is playing nearly 40 minutes a game. He still wears bandages on his knees, and after games he soaks his chronically sore feet in a tray of ice. But to have gone through seven weeks of the season with no injuries is a new experience, one he is enjoying.

"This is the most I've played in the NBA in one strach" Walton said following a 114-96 victory over the New York Knicks Tuesday night in which he contributed with 16 points, 15 rebounds and 8 blocked shots.

"Consistency, that's the most important thing," he said. "I've been able to develop all the areas of my game. When you play two weeks and then get hurt and sit out two weeks, you can't do that."

Ramsey who has nothing but praise for Walton, who leads the league in rebounds and blocked shots and is Portland's leading scorer at 21.1 points a game. "Bill's been just super" Ramsey said. "He's a very team first oriented guy. He's been working his tail off to help this team. He has great rapport with his teammates."

Walton, 24, is the captain of the Blazers. a position which he was voted to by other players. "It was nice of the guys to select me captain" he said with a smile. "but this team doesn't really need a captain to get them going. They know what to do, how to win games. But it was nice."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Ia ... lton&hl=en

"Center Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers will not play Sunday in the National Basketball Association All-Star Game in Milwaukee because of an inflamed Achilles tendon. He will be replaced by Don Buse of the Indiana Pacers.

Walton, who leads the NBA in rebounds and blocked shots, hasn't played in two weeks because of the injury. He said there has been noticeable improvement in the injury in the past three days."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=NB ... lton&hl=en

"A jubilant coach Jack Ramsey called it the return "of the old Portland Trail Blazers" and the New Orleans Jazz felt the sting, losing 131-104 in a National Basketball Association game here Tuesday night.

The win broke a three-game Portland losing streak and put the Blazers back within 2 and half games within the leading Los Angeles in the Pacific Division. Center Bill Walton made his return to the Portland lineup after missing five games because of an ankle sprain. He played only 17 minutes, but tallied 12 points, eight rebounds, four assists and four blocked shots.

"We ran well" said Portland forward Maurice Lucas who scored 18 of his 20 points as the Blazers built 66-44 lead. "It makes so much difference with Bill (Walton) back. Also I can do many more things with him there."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=12 ... lton&hl=en


For the season, Bill Walton averaged 18.6 points, 14.4 boards, 3.8 assists and 3.2 blocks on 52.8% field goal percentage, 69.7% free throw percentage and 56.3% true shooting percentage in 34.8 minutes per game. He led the league in rebounds, blocked shots and defensive rebound percentage while ranking top 5 in other advanced and basic stats (#2 in block %, #3 in total rebound %, #3 in win share per 48, #8 in effective field goal %, #2 in defensive rating).

Portland posted a 49-33 record in which he was arguably the main contributor. He finished second in the MVP voting, and for his excellence in the RS, he was awarded with a All-NBA Second selection ( only to the eventual MVP, Kareem) and All-NBA First Defense Team selection as well.


In the postseason, Walton averaged 18.2 points, 15.2 rebounds, 5.5 assists and 3.4 blocks on 50.7% field goal percent, 68.4% free throw percent and 52.7% true shooting percent in 39.7 minutes per game. He ranked fourth in rebounding, eight in assists and second in blocks in the playoffs. Walton managed to top all in four advanced stats (defensive reb %, DWS, Drtg and block %) and to lead all in total boards, blocks and assists in the same run.


In the first round against the Chicago Bulls, he posted averages of 17.3 points and 12.3 rebounds, as he had game logs of 11/9, 24/17 and 17/11 in those three games. Then came the series against the Los Angeles Lakers, who had the league MVP Kareem that was coming off a dominant series versus the Warriors.

"They were both All-Americans at UCLA and now the match up will be Kareem Abdul-Jabbar against Bill Walton as the Los Angeles Lakers battle the Portland Trail Blazers in the National Basketball Association semifinals.

The best of seven series starts Friday night at the Forum, home of the Lakers and where they've 41-4 record this season. The latest was a 97-84 triumph Wednesday night over the Golden State Warriors, who had beaten the three times in Oakland but lost all four playoff games at the Forum.

Abdul-Jabbar, who was Lew Alcindor when he played at UCLA, stands 7-foot-2 which gives him a three inch height advantage over Walton, who followed him at UCLA. "He's a good center and they're a good team" said Abdul-Jabbar, who spearheaded the Laker attack in the triumphant quarter-finals. He scored 40 or more points and 36 in the last one.

"It's going to be a tough series. There's no doubt that the home court is an advantage, at least it has been for us this year. But I've seen things turn around quickly."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_U ... kers&hl=en


Against LA, he averaged 19.3 points, 14.8 rebounds, 5.8 assists and 2.3 blocks on 50.7% field goal percentage and 51.7% true shooting percentage in a series where he was a major factor to Portland's surprising series sweep. He did a solid job defensively on Kareem (holding him to 10 points below the average from the previous series with a decent help from his teammates), matched him in other areas and made his impact in Portland's wins.


In the Finals against the 76ers, Walton led his team from 0-2 to win the next straight 4 games with him dominating. For the series, Walton averaged 18.7 points, 19 rebounds, 5.2 assists and 3.7 blocks on 54.5% field goal percent and 57.9% true shooting percent en route to a title and Finals MVP. Had there been a Defensive Player Of The Year award, he'd have most likely won that award as well.

"Portland became National Basketball Association champions Sunday, mostly because Coach Gene of Philadelphia 76ers could not find any way to stop Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers. Shue tried four different men on Walton in Sunday's sixth game of the championship final but none could handle him.

Caldwell Jones, Darryl Dawkins, Harvey Catchings and George McGinis all tried, but failed as Portland posted a 109-107 victory to overcome the multi-talented 76ers 4-2 in the best of seven series.

"Bill Walton has been our lead all the way" said Portland coach Jack Ramsey. "He is our team captain in every sense of the word. There is no better player, no more co-operative player, no better person than Bill."

Shue said: "Bill Walton is the best player for a big man who has ever played the game of basketball. We couldn't contain him. He dominated the middle and that threw us out of our game." Walton, who scored and rebounded in double figures in every game of the series, had 20 points, 23 rebounds, seven assists and eight blocked shots in the series finale.

He was named Most Valuable Player in the series for the way he anchored Portland's offense and defense."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fU ... lton&hl=en

[ardee]

Re-posting my post about '77 Walton in case someone wants to take him in consideration in this voting

"The Portland Trail Blazers, formally announced the firing of Lenny Wilkens yesterday naming Jack Ramsey to succeed him as a coach of the National Basketball Association team. Ramsey, fired by Buffalo after guiding the Braves into the Eastern semi-conference finals, is the fourth coach of the Blazers, who joined in the 1970. Ramsey said, "I think this the best coaching opportunity in professional basketball, and I took the position here for that reason."

"I have great regard for the talent of this team" Ramsey said. "It is like an iceberg. What you see isn't the mass that is really there. Sure Bill Walton has to be healthy and play almost a full season if we are to achieve great success.

"I want a team that can run, a team that can make the transition from offense to defense and be aggressive when it gets to defense. Bill Walton is a great big man and he will give us up front quality. I am looking forward to his playing a major part of the schedule."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mf ... lton&hl=en

"Depend on the health of center Bill Walton, this could be the turnaround season for the Portland Trail Blazers in the National Basketball Association. So far, Walton is healthy -- the healthiest he's ever been since he's turned pro -- and Portland is in a high state of optimism.

"Our future has to be now" says Ramsey, a successful veteran of the NBA wars who left Buffalo after three straight playoff seasons after falling out with the Braves front office. Ramsey admits Walton is the key to a turnaround. "I want at least 60 games out of Bill this season" he said. "If we get that, we will be in good shape."

Walton, the former UCLA All-American, can be awesome when healthy. But he was an injury prone in his first two pro seasons, getting in the equivalent of only one season's play over two years. For the first time, he came to training camp with no injuries:

"Walton is such a fine talent, so coachable, and unselfish." said Ramsey. "He does everything well. I like the spirit on this club. These players want to win. You can see it in practice and we saw it in exhibition games."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1E ... lton&hl=en

"His third season's been a charm, so far, for big Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers. The sometimes controversial redheaded is off to his best National Basketball Association start ever, and the reason is simple.

For the first time in his pro career, Walton's completely healthy. "I don't think about the injuries. I try to keep up in the best physical condition that I can prevent injuries, but I don't think about them" Walton says.[/b]

But he's had a bad reason to think a lot. He had nine broken bones of one kind or another in his first two NBA seasons. Coach Jack Ramsey wanted the 6-11 center, who was drafted No.1 from the UCLA in 1974, to come to camp a bit lighter this season. And he did -- about 10 pounds.

Ramsey thinks with less weight, there's less chances of an injury from pressure on the legs and knees. The Blazers have something of a new attitude under Ramsey, more of a team concept. But Walton says his attitude are about the same ever.

"I don't think I've changed. I have the same values and the same interests." says Walton, who turned 24 last week. Still bearded, he says he's got long hair cut for comfort, nothing else. The coach has nothing but praise for Walton.

"He is a blend of all the skills of the game" Ramsey says. "He'll do whatever is necessary to win, and that's all he's concerned about.

"I think he could be the most valuable player in pro basketball." But Walton, who has been a leading scorer for Portland and tops the league in rebounds so far in this season, says what counts in the end is the final tally on the scoreboard.

"I go by wins and loses and not by the boxscore. Boxscores are extremely misleading." Walton says. And he's glad to be mended. "It is pleasant to go to practices this season and be able to practice." [/i]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7P ... lton&hl=en

"The red ponytail is gone and so is the bandanna. So, too, are the aches and pains, the injuries that dogged Bill Walton through his first two years as a pro. "I'm healthy, that's the biggest difference" said Walton, who is playing the way Portland folks had hoped when they drafted him at No.1 in 1974 out of UCLA.

The 6-foot-11, 225 pounded is in great shape and is playing nearly 40 minutes a game. He still wears bandages on his knees, and after games he soaks his chronically sore feet in a tray of ice. But to have gone through seven weeks of the season with no injuries is a new experience, one he is enjoying.

"This is the most I've played in the NBA in one strach" Walton said following a 114-96 victory over the New York Knicks Tuesday night in which he contributed with 16 points, 15 rebounds and 8 blocked shots.

"Consistency, that's the most important thing," he said. "I've been able to develop all the areas of my game. When you play two weeks and then get hurt and sit out two weeks, you can't do that."

Ramsey who has nothing but praise for Walton, who leads the league in rebounds and blocked shots and is Portland's leading scorer at 21.1 points a game. "Bill's been just super" Ramsey said. "He's a very team first oriented guy. He's been working his tail off to help this team. He has great rapport with his teammates."

Walton, 24, is the captain of the Blazers. a position which he was voted to by other players. "It was nice of the guys to select me captain" he said with a smile. "but this team doesn't really need a captain to get them going. They know what to do, how to win games. But it was nice."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Ia ... lton&hl=en

"Center Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers will not play Sunday in the National Basketball Association All-Star Game in Milwaukee because of an inflamed Achilles tendon. He will be replaced by Don Buse of the Indiana Pacers.

Walton, who leads the NBA in rebounds and blocked shots, hasn't played in two weeks because of the injury. He said there has been noticeable improvement in the injury in the past three days."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=NB ... lton&hl=en

"A jubilant coach Jack Ramsey called it the return "of the old Portland Trail Blazers" and the New Orleans Jazz felt the sting, losing 131-104 in a National Basketball Association game here Tuesday night.

The win broke a three-game Portland losing streak and put the Blazers back within 2 and half games within the leading Los Angeles in the Pacific Division. Center Bill Walton made his return to the Portland lineup after missing five games because of an ankle sprain. He played only 17 minutes, but tallied 12 points, eight rebounds, four assists and four blocked shots.

"We ran well" said Portland forward Maurice Lucas who scored 18 of his 20 points as the Blazers built 66-44 lead. "It makes so much difference with Bill (Walton) back. Also I can do many more things with him there."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=12 ... lton&hl=en


For the season, Bill Walton averaged 18.6 points, 14.4 boards, 3.8 assists and 3.2 blocks on 52.8% field goal percentage, 69.7% free throw percentage and 56.3% true shooting percentage in 34.8 minutes per game. He led the league in rebounds, blocked shots and defensive rebound percentage while ranking top 5 in other advanced and basic stats (#2 in block %, #3 in total rebound %, #3 in win share per 48, #8 in effective field goal %, #2 in defensive rating).

Portland posted a 49-33 record in which he was arguably the main contributor. He finished second in the MVP voting, and for his excellence in the RS, he was awarded with a All-NBA Second selection ( only to the eventual MVP, Kareem) and All-NBA First Defense Team selection as well.


In the postseason, Walton averaged 18.2 points, 15.2 rebounds, 5.5 assists and 3.4 blocks on 50.7% field goal percent, 68.4% free throw percent and 52.7% true shooting percent in 39.7 minutes per game. He ranked fourth in rebounding, eight in assists and second in blocks in the playoffs. Walton managed to top all in four advanced stats (defensive reb %, DWS, Drtg and block %) and to lead all in total boards, blocks and assists in the same run.


In the first round against the Chicago Bulls, he posted averages of 17.3 points and 12.3 rebounds, as he had game logs of 11/9, 24/17 and 17/11 in those three games. Then came the series against the Los Angeles Lakers, who had the league MVP Kareem that was coming off a dominant series versus the Warriors.

"They were both All-Americans at UCLA and now the match up will be Kareem Abdul-Jabbar against Bill Walton as the Los Angeles Lakers battle the Portland Trail Blazers in the National Basketball Association semifinals.

The best of seven series starts Friday night at the Forum, home of the Lakers and where they've 41-4 record this season. The latest was a 97-84 triumph Wednesday night over the Golden State Warriors, who had beaten the three times in Oakland but lost all four playoff games at the Forum.

Abdul-Jabbar, who was Lew Alcindor when he played at UCLA, stands 7-foot-2 which gives him a three inch height advantage over Walton, who followed him at UCLA. "He's a good center and they're a good team" said Abdul-Jabbar, who spearheaded the Laker attack in the triumphant quarter-finals. He scored 40 or more points and 36 in the last one.

"It's going to be a tough series. There's no doubt that the home court is an advantage, at least it has been for us this year. But I've seen things turn around quickly."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_U ... kers&hl=en


Against LA, he averaged 19.3 points, 14.8 rebounds, 5.8 assists and 2.3 blocks on 50.7% field goal percentage and 51.7% true shooting percentage in a series where he was a major factor to Portland's surprising series sweep. He did a solid job defensively on Kareem (holding him to 10 points below the average from the previous series with a decent help from his teammates), matched him in other areas and made his impact in Portland's wins.


In the Finals against the 76ers, Walton led his team from 0-2 to win the next straight 4 games with him dominating. For the series, Walton averaged 18.7 points, 19 rebounds, 5.2 assists and 3.7 blocks on 54.5% field goal percent and 57.9% true shooting percent en route to a title and Finals MVP. Had there been a Defensive Player Of The Year award, he'd have most likely won that award as well.

"Portland became National Basketball Association champions Sunday, mostly because Coach Gene of Philadelphia 76ers could not find any way to stop Bill Walton of the Portland Trail Blazers. Shue tried four different men on Walton in Sunday's sixth game of the championship final but none could handle him.

Caldwell Jones, Darryl Dawkins, Harvey Catchings and George McGinis all tried, but failed as Portland posted a 109-107 victory to overcome the multi-talented 76ers 4-2 in the best of seven series.

"Bill Walton has been our lead all the way" said Portland coach Jack Ramsey. "He is our team captain in every sense of the word. There is no better player, no more co-operative player, no better person than Bill."

Shue said: "Bill Walton is the best player for a big man who has ever played the game of basketball. We couldn't contain him. He dominated the middle and that threw us out of our game." Walton, who scored and rebounded in double figures in every game of the series, had 20 points, 23 rebounds, seven assists and eight blocked shots in the series finale.

He was named Most Valuable Player in the series for the way he anchored Portland's offense and defense."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fU ... lton&hl=en

Are you voting for him?

[bastillon]

I'll post more about what I meant by pathetic opposition. I was talking about Duncan's individual rivals who he put up those numbers against. he didn't guard anyone of note in the post. D-Rob always took the tougher assignment. partly because D-Rob was probably a better man defender than Duncan. but offensively, Duncan was playing against some really bad low post defenders. IIRC he was guarded by Amare, Najera, Robert Horry and Kenyon Martin. Martin is a great man defender, but lacks size down low and he really struggles against that type of defenders. funny thing is Scott actually had both Collins and Mutombo to put them against Duncan... but he didn't do that. particularly astonishing with Mutombo, I remember games from like 06-07 when Duncan was still struggling against Mutombo. Scott could've used him to guard Duncan and Mutombo was still a very valuable defensive player. just a huge coaching error. @colts, don't know why you're focusing on those Nets so much, when it's blatantly obvious I was talking about the entire postseason. Martin was not a tough opponent to play against, but he was respectable. the other guys weren't.

also what really gets dismissed and overlooked time and time again with those Spurs is that Duncan's supporting cast sucked balls OFFENSIVELY. this needs to get emphasized. defensively those Spurs were a dream team: D-Rob, Bruce Bowen, Manu, Stephen Jackson, Tony Parker, Speedy Claxton, Malik Rose... coached by one of the greatest defensive coaches in league's history. this is also reflected in Spurs ratings in the playoffs. they were dominant defense, possibly putting the best defensive playoff of all-time, but at the same time they were horrible offensively, playing as one of the worst offensive teams of that postseason.

people usually look at that roster and say "wow those are horrible players, barely couple guys are in double digits and they're shooting low %, how did Duncan drag those corpses to the title". that was not the case because their defense gets overlooked. they WERE terrible offensively, and they performed accordingly, as one of the worst offensive teams of the playoffs. but the reason why they succeeded was the defense, and Duncan had TONS of help on that end.

[Doctor MJ]

Who is your defensive second GOAT? How would you rank him relative to Russ, and your second offensive GOAT relative to Magic? Using the SRS system that ElGee adopted, and going peak-wise relative to era :

Offensive GOATs:

Magic: 9
Bird: 7.5
MJ/Nash/Wilt: 7
Barkley/Shaq/Dirk: 6

Defensive GOATs

Russell: 9
Olajuwon/Walton/Garnett/Duncan: 7 (I know there are differences here but defense is too hard for me to judge so objectively. It depends on what you're looking for )

Well, I think I listed my offense something like this before:

Magic 10
Bird/Nash 9.5
Oscar 9
Jordan 8.5

On defense, were I ranking the 5 guys above, it might go something like this:

Russell 10
Hakeem/Walton 8
Garnett 7.5
Duncan 5.5

This drop off is just very steep on defense. I'll go over to +/- studies for a minute because it's certainly an influence on my thought. I've got 3 4-6 year studies that used APM (Ilardi) & RAPM (Engelmann) to measure offense & defense. In all 3 studies, the gap between #1 (Garnett in all cases) and #2, is larger than the gap between #2 & #10.

Now, at the same time, the raw results between the #1 defender (Garnett) and #1 offensive player (Nash in all cases), always ranks the offensive player ahead. So it's certainly not the case that it's clear that you want an outlier defensive guy more than an outlier offensive guy.

[ElGee]

Using the SRS system that ElGee adopted, and going peak-wise relative to era :

Offensive GOATs:

Magic: 9
Bird: 7.5
MJ/Nash/Wilt: 7
Barkley/Shaq/Dirk: 6

Defensive GOATs

Russell: 9
Olajuwon/Walton/Garnett/Duncan: 7 (I know there are differences here but defense is too hard for me to judge so objectively. It depends on what you're looking for )

I like this idea of putting stuff on a numerical scale because it challenges you once it's laid out. For instance, you have Magic on island. I reject that (for reasons hopefully clear). You think Wilt gives teams the same lift as MJ. That's WAY beyond what I see (wouldn't that imply, that in basically his best-case scenario w best-case coach an best-case mentality, the 67 76ers would be -2 ORtg team w/out Wilt basically?). But the most interesting to one is how much credit you give the second level of defenders. I have those guys in the ~4 range for impact. A 7 pt DRtg shift is +19 wins over .500 on defense. Isn't this way too much?

[ardee]

Using the SRS system that ElGee adopted, and going peak-wise relative to era :

Offensive GOATs:

Magic: 9
Bird: 7.5
MJ/Nash/Wilt: 7
Barkley/Shaq/Dirk: 6

Defensive GOATs

Russell: 9
Olajuwon/Walton/Garnett/Duncan: 7 (I know there are differences here but defense is too hard for me to judge so objectively. It depends on what you're looking for )

I like this idea of putting stuff on a numerical scale because it challenges you once it's laid out. For instance, you have Magic on island. I reject that (for reasons hopefully clear). You think Wilt gives teams the same lift as MJ. That's WAY beyond what I see (wouldn't that imply, that in basically his best-case scenario w best-case coach an best-case mentality, the 67 76ers would be -2 ORtg team w/out Wilt basically?). But the most interesting to one is how much credit you give the second level of defenders. I have those guys in the ~4 range for impact. A 7 pt DRtg shift is +19 wins over .500 on defense. Isn't this way too much?

The Wilt thing is obviously not something everyone can agree on, but think about it... There were no discernible flaws in his offensive game in '67 except for free-throw shooting. 68% from the field, and one of the best playmakers (not playmaking bigs, PLAYMAKERS, period) in the league?

I mean, there are other things to look at besides ORtg... Sometimes the kind of things he was doing should speak for themselves.

It can go both ways, I agree with you. Chamberlain is a matter of opinion, definitely one of the most difficult to decide on players in history.

For the defenders, honestly, it's hard to evaluate their value, so I just put them together for the time-being.

I would probably put Hakeem second, mainly because never really played in an implemented defensive system like Russell or Garnett did, but still impacted the game massively with his abilities.

Walton in '77 was arguably having Russell-like defensive impact at times. So, a re-evaluation (I made that list and posted it from my phone, thought it through this time):

Offense

Magic: 9
Bird: 7.5
MJ/Nash: 7
Wilt/Shaq/Barkley/Dirk/LeBron: 6

Defense

Russell: 9.5-10
Olajuwon: 8 (I have him this high because, again, he never had the benefit of a defensive genius of a coach who was able to revolve the defense around him, but still had a massive defensive impact while still surrounded by more mediocre players)
Garnett/Walton: 6.5-7
Duncan: 6-6.5

Those last three are very VERY hard to rank for me. I'm open to any kind of argument about Duncan and Garnett defensively.

[SDChargers#1]

I have PMed the Dr. about being on the panel. Though I have not heard back yet, I will cast my vote. If I don't make it then just ignore.

I vote for Kareem 1971.

32/16 in the regular season
27/17 in the post season

Won the Finals and MVP. Towards his peak as a defensive player.

[fatal9]

Duncan's competition wasn't strong in '03 though. I don't know how anyone gets away with saying that.

The Suns were an average team that the Spurs beat in a very close 6 game series in the first round. The '03 Lakers were the most dysfunctional Laker team to date, struggled to win 50 games, had chemistry and shot distribution issues and even then the only reason they lost is because role players like Robert Horry went ice cold (Horry shot 0/18 from three for the series, including missing an open game winner...very unlike him) while the Spurs role players got hot (Bowen going off for a 27 point game on 7 threes, Parker averaging 24 ppg in last two games to help close with Duncan, and GInobili stepped up in first two games as well). Duncan had his chance to beat the Lakers in '01, '02, '04 and he failed every time, often times because he failed to step up in those series especially at the end of games. He finally did step up in '03 and had a massive series, but in general he lacked success against the better Laker teams both individually and team wise (in years where he was a no worse player).

Then it was the Mavs with Dirk being injured and not playing after third game (series at 2-1 with fourth game in Dallas). Then it was the Nets, a 49 win team from the craptastic East. On top of this, they avoided a matchup with the Kings as Webber tore his knee in the playoffs. The run pretty much looks like three 45ish win teams (Suns, Nets, Mavs without Dirk) and a dysfunctional cold shooting Laker team to me, and despite this the Spurs had to sputter through 24 games to deal with these 4 teams. That doesn't sound like strong competition to me. He's didn't beat any 55+ win caliber teams here which is usually what you have to do in order to win a championship, so how is this year anything but weak competition wise?


Regardless of the competition angle, Duncan played at an unreal level the whole season and playoffs. I mean if you really wanted to point it out, you could say '91 MJ faced crappy competition in the playoffs too (and he did in his conference). Competition should be considered, but it also shouldn't be a requirement because you can only beat the teams put in front of you.

Also, painting the team as "garbage" is revisionist history. No he didn't have as much support as most championship teams, but none of these supposed one man teams are as bad as people say. Olajuwon's Rockets teams weren't as bad as people like to pretend and neither were Duncan's '03 Spurs. You have to look at how the team compliments the superstar. Spurs while lacking the secondary scorer had everything else sorted out.

Interior defense: Duncan, Robinson, Rose (post defense)
Rebounding: Duncan, Rose, Robinson (three guys who played 25+ mpg who had 15+ TRB%)
Perimeter defense: Bowen (best man to man defender in the league, essential piece in beating the Lakers...think Lakers are losing with Antonio Daniels defending Kobe again?)
Outside shooting: Ginobili, Bowen, Jackson
Playmaking off the dribble: Ginobili, Parker
Guard scoring: Parker, Ginobili, Jackson (inconsistent but two out three would usually step up in basically every game to give you 30-40 pts combined)
Bench: Ginobili, Rose, Claxton (one of the most productive benches in the playoffs)
Coaching: Pop (best coach of this era)

The team around Duncan was solid, but is one which can look worse in boxscore than it really is. It wasn't some fundamentally flawed team, it just lacked a consistent second scorer but gave you everything else need to be successful. The team complimented his game well, had strengths in the right categories and then of course Duncan's greatness brought it all together for them.

I do however think a one man team around Duncan like the '03 Spurs have a lower ceiling in beating elite teams in the playoffs than a one man team around someone like Olajuwon and couple of other big men (and this is because of Hakeem's go to scoring being on another level to Duncan's). This kind of reveals it self when you compare the type of teams they beat from '93-'95 and '01-'04. I don't see Duncan having that extra gear offensively to carry his teams over truly elite teams in this sort of setting. So on the "one man team" front, I don't think his ceiling is quite as high as people like to say based on '03 which is why his competition that year is a concern for me. On top of Olajuwon's better individual ability/versatility, this is something which creates a separation for me between the two.

[bastillon]

I have PMed the Dr. about being on the panel. Though I have not heard back yet, I will cast my vote. If I don't make it then just ignore.

I vote for Kareem 1971.

32/16 in the regular season
27/17 in the post season

Won the Finals and MVP. Towards his peak as a defensive player.

are you aware that Bucks were barely an above average defensive team ? Kareem's defense wasn't anything to brag about in that season. he also had no legititimate competition on a team level. West was injured for the Lakers, Reed was injured for the Knicks, Cowens was a rookie, the league was very unbalanced, top teams absolutely feasted on expansion teams. Bucks also won with an incredible offense and although Kareem was a huge part of this, Oscar was as well. let's remember Oscar was the offensive centerpiece of the 60s best offense (Royals). let's remember Bucks were like 6-0 in Kareem's absence in 72. it wasn't a scrub team that Kareem dragged into excellence. they had the best playmaker in the league, great 2-way forward as the 3 and bunch of excellent shooters and bruisers as role players. stacked team, no doubt about it.

[ElGee]

In general, I think it's been a brutal task trying to sort out the Sacred Peak players. I almost feel like we should take a vote and clarify that these 13 guys are in their own class (I know of only 1 poster thus far who feels there should be a different #13)...

I thought a more useful exercise right now might be laying out my concerns for each player and letting people bounce around ideas off of that. To clarify for those unaware, I'm doing this assuming everyone is aware of all the stats, performances, contexts, team results, dynamics, etc. surrounding these players at their most important career stages.

Bird -- On offense, I worry the development of McHale is somewhat understated, but then again it's hard to find a great offensive without good offensive players. (!) Defensively, I want to play Bird at the 4, and then the issue is how good is he? If I simply put a solid defensive center next to him (eg Parish on D), it looks like I have the basis for a really good defense. The worry with Bird seems to be him trying to guard 3's, but this is a bit of positional fudging since you really wouldn't want Bird trying to defend offensive wing players. Oh and if that's too many "what if's," consider the Celtics actual team DRtgs with Bird in during this period and his 3 consecutive all-D teams and all-D consideration in 86 http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=8q ... %2C2279024

In short, I see fewer what-if's about Bird than maybe anyone on my board. Maybe that's why I'm voting him next.

Magic -- I'm fairly confident Magic's close to a neutral defensive player. We can nitpick over whether he's a slight negative (-0.5) or not, but he's really a defensive forward who simply needs to be paired in the "backcourt" with a guard who can defend the point, and preferably someone who could shoot (B. Scott worked just fine). I'm about as confident in his offense as in Bird's, although I do think people perhaps underrated where the LA offense would have been without him, so I have some worry that if LA was a better offensive team outside of Magic than I realize, that I'm inflating Magic's value a bit.

Kareem -- I worry I underrate Kareem slightly. My analytical worry about him is with his Global Impact, something I've felt since the RPOY project when I watched every available game on him from the 70's. There is SUCH a tendency in basketball to overrate a player based on his one-on-one scoring ability, and although Kareem is special in this area (good) and he's actually a good passer (good), I don't think he encroaches on the great guards ever ITO of Global Impact.

The area that's really interesting for me is his defense. If you look at the film, his reputation, and his team's, there is some concern there that's he's a step back from the all-time defenders. A BIG step down. I think he's still a very good defensive player. But my concern with Kareem is that he could have been a great defensive player, he was only put in shoddy situations in the mid 70's and as a result you get what looks like Kevin Garnett in some of his Minnesota years. Well, you get what looks like KG with a less impressive defensive player on film.

Walton -- Love his impact, but I'm worried about the small sample. Probably my least confident evaluation of the Sacred Peaks (I could understand him not even being in the club entirely), because he clearly was a "value exceeds goodness" player in Portland. Then again, I don't dismiss this lightly because when you have one all-star caliber teammate, and all it takes is some nice coaching to run and use speedy guards and you totally dominate because Walton is a video-game dream pivot, obviously I think you're pretty good. But again, less confident in him than anyone else because it's possible he looks exceedingly good in one setting but we didn't get to see him another that would say lesser things about him.

Duncan -- I rewatched some old peak Duncan games recently. He was athletically so much more fluid than he was after 2003. His offensive game was more polished. In one sense, he was sick. In another, I think I might overrated Duncan -- it's a real concern for me. My knee-jerk reaction was to think in 03 "Well, Duncan passed KG and that's the end of the that debate," only I was lazy and never went back and updated the system with all the stuff I know now. The reality is Duncan probably isn't a huge impact offensive player. I'd make a really strong argument McHale was a better offensive player that he was. Duncan "Iversoned" a crappy offense, which has only a little merit for me. In other words, he's NOT Kareem or Wilt on offense.

It's on defense where Duncan is amazing (3-pt era GOAT-level IMO) and that's something that I've always believed. The Spurs, of course, were a defensive team. And they were a team that has been cast down as "garbage" around Duncan, and that's something I know isn't true from re-analyzing those games. One night it would be Parker. The next it would be Jackson. And so on...that's how they made it through those playoffs. People then look at the averages but they forget the team around him. I did. And now I'm worried I overrated Duncan.

Garnett -- As another modern player, I have a bevy of info on him. As such, he's easier to compare to contemporaries, harder to compare to old-timers. Garnett, like Hakeem, is one of the few players I look at and ask myself "am I still underrating him?" And I know most people think "wait, isn't he viewed higher than most around these parts?" Yes, but that's because of garbage like Losing Bias and "clutch scoring" and "1st options." All of which aren't essential and actually cloud someone from building better teams. And if Garnett can have massive impact in many different ways, then is it possible what the APM numbers were saying were more accurate than previously imagined?

Dr. J Pretty much everything I've said about LeBron applies to him, only significantly more so. I guess my "issue" with Dr. J is 1977. Unlike most people, I actually think 1977 Dr. J was pretty awesome and quite similar to 1976 Dr. J. And you can see how much better the team functioned when McGinnis went down, and Dr. J was pretty fantastic in the Finals. But how much of his nuclear explosion in 76 was facilitated by the weaker/split leagues?? There's no way to answer, but I suspect a decent amount because I think he's a similar player in 1977. Make sense? I've always had J in the Sacred Peaks, but as such, closer to the bottom.

[SDChargers#1]

I have PMed the Dr. about being on the panel. Though I have not heard back yet, I will cast my vote. If I don't make it then just ignore.

I vote for Kareem 1971.

32/16 in the regular season
27/17 in the post season

Won the Finals and MVP. Towards his peak as a defensive player.

are you aware that Bucks were barely an above average defensive team ? Kareem's defense wasn't anything to brag about in that season. he also had no legititimate competition on a team level. West was injured for the Lakers, Reed was injured for the Knicks, Cowens was a rookie, the league was very unbalanced, top teams absolutely feasted on expansion teams. Bucks also won with an incredible offense and although Kareem was a huge part of this, Oscar was as well. let's remember Oscar was the offensive centerpiece of the 60s best offense (Royals). let's remember Bucks were like 6-0 in Kareem's absence in 72. it wasn't a scrub team that Kareem dragged into excellence. they had the best playmaker in the league, great 2-way forward as the 3 and bunch of excellent shooters and bruisers as role players. stacked team, no doubt about it.

Although the league was watered down (interesting cause I don't see anyone mentioning that when bringing up Walton), Kareem did everything he was supposed to do that year. His team was supposed to dominate and win the title. They won 66 games and went 12-2 in the playoffs.

I don't see team defensive ranking on Basketball Reference. But they were 3rd in ppg allowed, and 1st in offense.

Essentially, Kareem had people saying he was the greatest player ever (a lot of hyperbole yes, but people were saying it none the less) after that season. You can't fault Kareem for the league being weaker at the time. He did everything he was supposed to.

And Oscar was no where near prime Oscar at this point in his career. 19/8/6 is great, but he was clearly behind Kareem in the teams pecking order.

[bastillon]

@fatal9, tremendous post per usual but I disagree on the Lakers part. this isn't only adressed to you, but to several other users. once upon a time I was going through entire 03 postseason uploaded on sport-scene.net which means pretty much every major series. I feel like the picture of that teams gets badly misrepresented. Lakers sucked big time at the beginning of the season, first because they had no legit bigs in Shaq's absence, then because Shaq didn't give a crap. they were far behind the playoffs on christmas. but then they turned it up, as veteran championship teams do.

they were playing elite basketball from now on, and played like a 60 win team to close the season. they ended up with poor record because of terrible start to the season, but with both Shaq and Kobe focused, Lakers were a tough team to beat. that being said, what also gets overlooked is Kobe's shoulder injury in the Wolves series. when you watch those games from 03, broadcasters mention this several times and it had major impact on the series. Kobe was clearly limited by this injury and he couldn't hit those outside shots as well. he still rocked the world against the Wolves, but thats only because of how terrible Peeler/Gill/Szczerbiak were at the time.

Lakers may have been a mediocre season to start the season, but they were by far the toughest opponent that Spurs beat in that postseason. Lakers would've likely dominated the Spurs with healthy Kobe and Horry playing at his normal capacity but they weren't dysfunctional or anything like that. their chemistry was always terrible off the court, but they left that drama come playoff time and performed. check out the Lakers records with Shaq and Kobe on the team:

Kobe 2000 (16g) 4.4 to 9.4
Shaq 2000-01 (11g) 7.7 to 6.5
Shaq 2002 (15g) 5.1 to 8.1
Shaq 2003 (15g) 7.6 to 3.7
Kobe 2004 (17g) 7.2 to 5.4
Shaq 2004 (15g) 1.4 to 4.2

now consider the fact their absence often overlapped. when both were playing, the Lakers were almost unbeatable. their playoff competition was elite and they survived time and time again. when both peaked at the same time Lakers 01 destroyed three major championship contenders (01 Blazers, 01 Kings, 01 Spurs).

[SDChargers#1]

When both peaked at the same time Lakers 01 destroyed three major championship contenders (01 Blazers, 01 Kings, 01 Spurs).

It's interesting that you don't mention the Sixers as a championship contender. They were the only team to beat the Lakers in a game in the postseason that year. I know they came out of a weak east, but they were definitely a very good team that could have definitely put up a fight if not won against the teams you listed.

[bastillon]

Although the league was watered down (interesting cause I don't see anyone mentioning that when bringing up Walton), Kareem did everything he was supposed to do that year. His team was supposed to dominate and win the title. They won 66 games and went 12-2 in the playoffs.

I don't see team defensive ranking on Basketball Reference. But they were 3rd in ppg allowed, and 1st in offense.

Essentially, Kareem had people saying he was the greatest player ever (a lot of hyperbole yes, but people were saying it none the less) after that season. You can't fault Kareem for the league being weaker at the time. He did everything he was supposed to.

And Oscar was no where near prime Oscar at this point in his career. 19/8/6 is great, but he was clearly behind Kareem in the teams pecking order.

as I said, they dominated vs very unbalanced league with major injuries to the best players and their playoff opposition was pitiful. this needs to get emphasized. Bucks record vs top teams would be much more interesting to see. also Kareem's team was stacked. team record isn't exactly the way you wanna go with this.

as far as defensive ratings, you can add up individual Defensive Win Shares. 20.5 DWS is average, Bucks were like 22. let's just say it's a very unimpressive feat, in a league THAT unbalanced in particular.

Kareem didn't do everything he was supposed to do. he lacked what Garnett and LeBron have been doing in their careers, Kareem rarely made hustle plays, he wasn't the one who was active on the floor, he wasn't someone who set a lot of screens to make someone free, he wasn't the one who could lead others, he wasn't playing well in transition defense. you know how players like Varejao or Collison get tons of praise from their coaches ? they do all the little things. Kareem was just bad in that regard. you just don't see his activity level being anywhere near the level of Russell/Walton/Olajuwon/Garnett. his leadership raised questions time and time again, and as I'll show you later, Oscar was the one everyone looked up to in 71, and NOT Kareem.

Oscar wasn't a mere 18/8 player, he was their leader, their playmaker, someone who controlled the tempo and coached them on the floor. he was the one telling Kareem to play defense when he lost his focus, he was the one who orchestrated fastbreaks, he was the one telling everybody to space the floor and he was the one hitting Kareem with the ball in the right place & at the right time. Oscar was a very impactful player whose value far exceeded boxscore numbers. if you put everything into context (Oscar leading top offenses in the 60s, Bucks TREMENDOUSLY improving on offense in 71, Bucks steadily dropping while he got older, and falling off a cliff when he retired) you get a better idea of how HUGE his impact really was.

posting.php?mode=quote&f=64&p=29182676

I was looking at the best SRS teams ever: http://bkref.com/tiny/KkpXB
my first thoughts: "okay, Bulls are actually underrated because Rodman missed some games at the start of that season and they went 14.2 SRS with him"; "Milwaukee must've been great two results in the top4"; "hey look there's another Milwaukee team... wait, another".

as we all know that team had Kareem on their roster. but what really stood out is the period... it didn't correlate directly with Kareem's presence, it correlated with the addition of Oscar Robertson. so let's take a tour into the 60s. Oscar joins his team, where he has the smallest bigs in the league. year after year he anchors top2 offenses in the league (mostly #1s)...and yet the Royals are mediocre to average most of the time. here's why: Jerry Lucas and co. couldn't play defense so every year Royals would've amazing offense, but were last in the league defensively, which caused them to suffer against the top teams.

anyway there goes his entire prime, he's still elite player going for 25/9/6 on league's best efficiency in his last two years in Royals uniform, but he's not recognized for his true greatness because his numbers don't seem to translate into team's success. (they actually did, Royals were the best offensive team of the decade by far)

so what happens now is key to understand Oscar's value. let's go back to 1969: Bucks win the lottery, select Lew Alcindor, who was later known as the great Kareem Abdul-Jabbar; they also select Dandridge, a Worthy-type player in terms of value. the turnaround is great: they're going from 27 wins to 56 wins...but what actually happened is Bucks overachieved in the RS, their SRS was at 4.25 which is consistent with ~52W team. now, having established the level of play of Milwaukee Bucks 1970, we also have to take into consideration it was Kareem's rookie year.

however big impact that may have made on their performance the next year, let's consider the following:

1)Traded Zaid Abdul-Aziz and cash to the Seattle SuperSonics for Lucius Allen and Bob Boozer.
well, solid role players who went later to become really good players, but they were too young to make any kind of significant impact and played 22 and 19 mpg, posting 9/5 and 7/3/3, respectively. and actually Abdul-Aziz besides having a really royal name (current Saudi Arabia dynasty is Abdul-Aziz) also contributed nicely with 7.5/7.5 in 20 mpg.

2) Traded Charlie Paulk and Flynn Robinson to the Cincinnati Royals for Oscar Robertson.
Paulk didn't even play on that 1970 team so he's pretty much irrelevant. Flynn Robinson however was their 2nd best scorer 22/5.5/3 on good efficiency - that must've hurt. they got Robertson instead but he was actually posting similar numbers - 19/8/6.

so Kareem made a rookie sophomore improvement, they traded for couple of good role players giving up a very good role player instead, and Flynn was swapped with Oscar whereas they produced similar boxscore stats.

so what you would've expected in this situation is a minimal progress. but what really happened was one of the greatest SRS improvements in league's history, an unprecedented +7.7 SRS jump. so to give you an idea of how much of a jump that is, let's put that into some perspective:

1) Bill Russell joins the Celtics +4 SRS
Bill Russell retires -7 SRS
2) Larry Bird joins the Celtics +12 SRS (wow thats big)
3) Magic Johnson retires due to AIDS -7 SRS
4) Shaq joins Magic +7 SRS
5) Michael Jordan retires in 93 -3 SRS; it'd be -7 if we're taking 92 as a comparison point
Michael Jordan comes back for 96 +7.5 SRS (+10 SRS with Rodman; +6.5 SRS without Rodman)
6) Tim Duncan joins the Spurs and David Robinson comes back from season ending injury +11 SRS
7) Steve Nash starts balling +10 SRS
8) Big Three arrives +13 SRS

now that we have a proper context, let's look at what Oscar did. the guy was a superstar, was posting ridiculous statlines on bad teams and everyone thought he was a loser. now the guy is traded for someone who puts up really solid numbers (22/5.5/3) and instead of barely improving his team, he makes them play at historical level - Milwaukee Bucks 1971 have the highest SRS rating of all time (but actually Bulls with Rodman would've been better had it not been for his missed games).

so long story short:
1970 Kareem and Dandridge are drafted +9 SRS
1971 Oscar shows up +7 SRS; they're now at all time best 11.9
1972 4th all time 10.8 SRS, Oscar missed some games during which Bucks played a lot worse
1973 30th all time 7.8 SRS as Oscar slowly finishes his career and his numbers drop to 15/7/5
1974 36th all time 7.6 SRS as Oscar plays his last season in the NBA; puts up 13/6/4
1975 Oscar retires, Bucks miss the playoffs as Kareem was injured for 20 games; -7.5 SRS

1) we should stop pretending Oscar Robertson is a top15-20 player of all time. based on this impact I'd be willing to say he's close to Magic Johnson. the guy came to a 4.2 SRS team and improved them to all time best 11.9. who else came close to that ? Michael Jordan came back and his team was +6.5 SRS (not accounting for Rodman).

2) is that impact attributable to Oscar ? how do I know it's him who made it work ? Oscar was leading the top2 offense annually in the 60s. then he proceeded to go to the Bucks and in 1971 Bucks had top4 offense of all time.

3) so what happened when Oscar missed games, how much of an impact did that make on his team ?
Bucks in 1968 went 3-14. for the rest we have Elgee's stats which are more accurate because they're showing pt differential with and without Oscar:

Robertson 1968 (21g) 14.4 to 2.5
Robertson 1972 (18g) 8.2 to 13
Robertson 1970 (11g) 5.8 to 2.1

basically, the improvement is immense. thinking about it now, 1972 Bucks were even a better team that year than in 1971, because 13 pts differential at that pace is still about 12.5 SRS...but Oscar was injured for the playoffs (went down in game 3) and this is what happened:

The teams split their first two games, and Robertson was injured late in the third game. The Lakers rallied to win and then swept the last two games, with Robertson playing at half speed in the fourth contest and not at all in the fifth.

that contest wasn't close anymore without Oscar. and again, it's not very surprising; Elgee's stats have Bucks at +4.8 pt differential and this is basically a 50 win team without him. thing to remember: 1972 Lakers were one of the greatest teams of all time - by SRS they're 3rd all time at 11.65.

basing on the evidence I've just presented I'm going to go out on a limb and say Oscar Robertson belongs to the Larry Bird/Magic/Duncan/Hakeem group and should be finally given credit for his tremendous impact during his entire career. he was arguably the greatest scorer of his days, he was arguably as good a passer as Magic or Bird.

join the Oscar bandwagon; give credit where it's due

a fantastic post by a great researcher:

Oscar May Be Key to Unlock Title Door for Young Bucks

If one super-star can lift the Milwaukee Bucks from last place to second, think of what two such stars can do. It’s certain the Bucks are thinking.

With Lew Alcindor and only a so-so supporting cast, the Bucks still managed to finish within only four games of the world champion New York Knicks in the Eastern Division last season.

Under the new National Basketball Association realignment of four divisions, the Bucks now reside in the Midwest Division, the Knicks in the Atlantic. And now the Bucks have Oscar Robertson.

If there was one thing the Bucks sorely needed last year, it was a ball handler and leader in the backcourt to take charge of a young team. Robertson more than fits the bill.

As an added strengthener, the Bucks also picked up Bob Boozer and Lucius Allen to fill out their bench.

Young starters Bob Dandridge, Greg Smith and Jon McGlocklin also should improve under Robertson’s guidance.

With Detroit, Chicago and Phoenix the other teams in the Division, Milwaukee’s biggest obstacles toward a spot in the NBA championship series should come from the Pacific Division with Los Angeles and San Francisco.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=rh ... 06,4317255

Superstars Lew and Oscar Turn Bucks Into Super Club

MILWAUKEE (AP) – The Big O and Big A are paid-up members of the Mutual Admiration Society.

“You know Oscar’s going to do the right thing all of the time,” said 7-foot-2 Lew Alcindor of his Milwaukee Bucks’ teammate, Oscar Robertson.

“Lew’s very agile and quick,” Robertson said. “He’s got a better shot. He’s very tough to guard.”

The two superstars are blending their talents together for the first time this season after Milwaukee obtained Robertson from the Cincinnati Royals in an off-season trade.

The mixture has been highly successful thus far. The Bucks have a healthy lead in the National Basketball Association’s Midwest Division.

Two of the most widely-heralded collegiate stars to enter the pro ranks, Alcindor and Robertson have one thing in common. Both are team players.

“Oscar’s a leader,” Milwaukee Coach Larry Costello said. “He comes to play. He creates situations and drives to the basket. The other teams can’t afford to sag on Lew and forget everybody else.”

The Royals’ top draft choice in 1960 following an outstanding career at the University of Cincinnati, Robertson has played in 10 straight NBA All-Star contest, all as a starter, and has won the game’s Most Valuable Player award three times and was runnerup for the award twice.

Oscar is the leading playmaker in the NBA and is third behind only Wilt Chamberlain and Elgin Baylor on the all-time scoring list.

Yet, at Cincinnati, he was called a “selfish player, one who was more interested in his own points rather than if his team was losing or winning.”

“They had to say something bad about me,” Oscar said. “They also said I didn’t like to run. But I’m the all-time leader in assists. I have to be doing something to get down there.”

The addition of Alcindor, a three-time All-American while at UCLA, lifted the Bucks last year from a last-place team to a contender.

Against the New York Knicks in the playoffs, however, the inability of Milwaukee’s guards to score was decisive in the Bucks’ defeat.

This season, Alcindor is scoring at a league-leading 32 points per game pace, four points a game over last year.

“He’s much quicker than other people think he is,” Robertson said of the Big A.

Oscar, on the other hand, has preferred to pass more and shoot less. His scoring average, consequently, has come down considerably from his lifetime mark of 29.3. Through November’s games, Oscar averaged 18 points per outing.

The difference in the team too, is up front where two of the smallest forwards in the NBA 6-6 Bob Dandridge and 6-5 Greg Smith, operate.

Dandridge’s point production has ballooned from 13.5 points a game last year to 19.9, including a high of 39. Smith has increased his averaged from 9.7 to 12.4.

“I’m getting better shots simply because Oscar is such a great passer,” Dandridge said.

“He knows when to give the ball to you and when not to.”

Smith admitted that he’s a harder worker without the ball now that Robertson is on the same team.

“You know if you get open Oscar will get the ball to you,” Smith said.

Both Robertson and Alcindor have helped the Bucks’ defense, also.

“He’s constantly getting on you to keep moving and to play defense,” Dandridge said of Oscar.

“He makes us talk defense,” Smith said of the Big O. “You’ve got to talk, You don’t have eyes in the back of your head. So somebody else has got to tell you what’s going on behind you.”

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ij ... 71,1582589

Oscar's leadership is what made that team click. they fell apart without him.

Oscar gets way too little credit for that season.

[bastillon]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkYosA1VNDw&feature=relmfu[/youtube]

see my points confirmed by contemporary accounts. Oscar's leadership and global impact had a huge value to those Bucks. 18/8 is a pathetic representation of how good he really was. he was also one year removed from 25/9 season. that means a lot. he could put up big numbers anytime. when Kareem was injured, Oscar's numbers got huge.

[SDChargers#1]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkYosA1VNDw&feature=relmfu[/youtube]

see my points confirmed by contemporary accounts. Oscar's leadership and global impact had a huge value to those Bucks. 18/8 is a pathetic representation of how good he really was. he was also one year removed from 25/9 season. that means a lot. he could put up big numbers anytime. when Kareem was injured, Oscar's numbers got huge.

What does Global impact have to do with peak?

I don't doubt Oscar's leadership was higher than Kareem's at that point. He was an 11 year veteran who many considered to be the greatest guard ever at that point. Kareem was a 23 year old 2nd year player, who happened to be the best basketball player on the planet.

Once again, you can't deduct points from Kareem's season cause other teams weren't very good. Once again, the Bucks did everything they were supposed to that season. They finished with one of the best records of all time and best post season records of all time. What more can you ask? Evaluating Kareem as a player because OTHER teams aren't as good as your think they should be is kind of ridiculous in my opinion. Say what you want about team defense, but that Bucks team outscored their opponents by 12 ppg that season.

Kareem won the MVP that season, not Oscar. Oscar may have been the emotional leader, but Kareem was clearly their best player. And Kareem did not miss any games that season.

[bastillon]

When both peaked at the same time Lakers 01 destroyed three major championship contenders (01 Blazers, 01 Kings, 01 Spurs).

It's interesting that you don't mention the Sixers as a championship contender. They were the only team to beat the Lakers in a game in the postseason that year. I know they came out of a weak east, but they were definitely a very good team that could have definitely put up a fight if not won against the teams you listed.

because Sixers were not a championship contender. they were +4.8 with Iverson in the lineup. not a championship contender by any margin. when Blazers were playing well, they were much better. 42-18 on march 3rd doesn't even tell you how good they were. them pushing the Lakers to the edge in game 7 of 00's WCFs does. Kings were one year away from their peak in 2002 when they also pushed the Lakers to the limit. most importantly Spurs were like +10 in the playoffs before they faced the Lakers. they finished the season 35-8 (excluding the last game of the season which they threw away) and 42-10 including the playoffs. truly epic play to end the season. they got destroyed vs Lakers.

[thizznation]

do you guys have a post with the list of the top 5 peaks that you have already determined?

[bastillon]

What does Global impact have to do with peak?

I don't doubt Oscar's leadership was higher than Kareem's at that point. He was an 11 year veteran who many considered to be the greatest guard ever at that point. Kareem was a 23 year old 2nd year player, who happened to be the best basketball player on the planet.

Once again, you can't deduct points from Kareem's season cause other teams weren't very good. Once again, the Bucks did everything they were supposed to that season. They finished with one of the best records of all time and best post season records of all time. What more can you ask? Evaluating Kareem as a player because OTHER teams aren't as good as your think they should be is kind of ridiculous in my opinion. Say what you want about team defense, but that Bucks team outscored their opponents by 12 ppg that season.

Kareem won the MVP that season, not Oscar. Oscar may have been the emotional leader, but Kareem was clearly their best player. And Kareem did not miss any games that season.

you're kind of missing the point. or more like every point I make. look, I'm not trying to make Kareem look worse. he was a great player. did everything he was supposed to do. put up huge numbers. his team dominated. I get that. I'm just trying to put things into context. opposition matters, dominating against expansion teams is not nearly as impressive as dominating in competitive league or against top teams. that Bucks team didn't change a lot in the following seasons. we have a lot more data on their performance so we need to put things into broader perspective. when Kareem was injured, Bucks still dominated and Oscar put up huge numbers. the point of saying this is to emphasize that Oscar put up 19/8 only because of how stacked Bucks were. he had just put up a 25/9 season in '70. he was capable of monster performances. Bucks went 6-0 in Kareem's absence. they were dominant supporting cast. Oscar was not just some random 18/8 guy, his value was much more than that, but you can't see those things unless you go to that season in detail. all of that is not a knock on Kareem, it's putting things into perspective. when Shaq puts up a 40/20 finals, it needs to be said he did against a center who was a complete mismatch, and not vs Patrick Ewing, for example. this is not complaining that Shaq didn't do enough, it's context. see my point now ?