#7 Highest Peak of All Time (Bird '86 wins)

[ElGee]

Here are the best D ratings relative to League average in the 3 point era:

04 Spurs: -8.8
08 Celtics: -8.6
93 Knicks: -8.3
94 Knicks: -8.1
04 Pistons: -7.5
05 Spurs: -7.3
99 Spurs: -7.2
11 Celtics/Bulls: -7.0
07 Bulls: -6.9

But what we need to factor in is that Duncan missed games during his 2 best seasons. Here are the defensive results in those games:

2004 (13 games missed):
with: 92.8 D rating (-10.1 rel to LA )
without: 101.0
Diff: -8.22

2005 (16 games missed):
with: 97.9 D rating (-8.2 rel to LA)
without: 102.6 D rating
Diff: -4.74

So if you adjust for that, they have by far the best defense in NBA history when Duncan plays in 2004 (1.5 pts/100 ahead of 2nd place 08 Celtics). The 05 Spurs move to 4th place all-time after adjusting for Duncan's injury. And this is without David Robinson. I would venture to say that Duncan was still the best player in the NBA in 2004. Duncan also missed 2 games in 2006 that would have moved the Spurs to -6.9 which is right around top 10.

Again, this needs further analysis. Let's control for Tony Parker in 04 and look at the 74 games he played:

2004 Spurs
64g w Duncan: -8.5 DRtg -- OREB% 29.4% DREB% 75.5%
10g w/out Duncan: -5.1 DRtg -- OREB% 32.4% DREB% 73.3% **Replaced by Malik Rose


Let's control for Manu in 05 and look at the 74 games he played:

2005 Spurs
61g w Duncan: -7.8 DRtg -- OREB% 28.7% DREB% 74.4%
13g w/out Duncan: -2.5 DRtg -- OREB% 29.0% DREB% 72.4% **Replaced by Robert Horry (11 of 13)

I actually see these data points as evidence for just how solid the defensive team/scheme around Duncan was. Keep in mind I think Duncan is a marvelous defender, but if we "believe" the numbers for a second (ignore error/variance which is present in this size sample) we see a 5 --> 8.5 shift by replacing Malik Rose, and then a 2.5 --> 8 jump by replacing Robert Horry.

I'm also inclined to agree with what others have said about 2004, which is it was a weird year with injuries and applications of rules, which probably led to some of the weird team distributions we see that year (eg Pistons, Spurs, Mavs).

[therealbig3]

I think I would take Walton over any of the big men left, and I would have taken him over Hakeem too. IMO, a slightly better version of Duncan/KG.

And playing down the competition for Duncan in 03 is just strange to me, since you can't do anything about the teams you go up against. He has destroyed elite competition in other years when he wasn't at his best, so we know he could do it.

And I think it's also pretty easy to argue 02 as Duncan's peak, when he destroyed the Lakers, who ended up winning the title.

Duncan's playoff averages against top 10 defenses, per 36 (98-07):

20.0 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 2.9 TOpg, 53.8% TS

His per 36 averages from 98-07 in the regular season:

21.0 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.8 TOpg, 55.4% TS

You're looking at very similar production, with a slight dropoff in efficiency...which should be expected since he's going up against top defenses. So this "Duncan doesn't bring it against the best defense" seems to be totally overblown, and out of the other legitimate big men candidates left, who did better against the best defenses (Walton/KG)?

And again, scoring/production is not the only way to impact a game anyway, and I'd contend that Duncan was the best defensive player of the 3pt era.

[colts18]

I think I would take Walton over any of the big men left, and I would have taken him over Hakeem too. IMO, a slightly better version of Duncan/KG.

And playing down the competition for Duncan in 03 is just strange to me, since you can't do anything about the teams you go up against. He has destroyed elite competition in other years when he wasn't at his best, so we know he could do it.

And I think it's also pretty easy to argue 02 as Duncan's peak, when he destroyed the Lakers, who ended up winning the title.

Duncan's playoff averages against top 10 defenses, per 36 (98-07):

20.0 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 2.9 TOpg, 53.8% TS

His per 36 averages from 98-07 in the regular season:

21.0 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.8 TOpg, 55.4% TS

You're looking at very similar production, with a slight dropoff in efficiency...which should be expected since he's going up against top defenses. So this "Duncan doesn't bring it against the best defense" seems to be totally overblown, and out of the other legitimate big men candidates left, who did better against the best defenses (Walton/KG)?

And again, scoring/production is not the only way to impact a game anyway, and I'd contend that Duncan was the best defensive player of the 3pt era.

Here are the numbers vs. top 10 defenses for KG and David Robinson.


Robinson vs. top 10 defense from 90-98:
22.1 PPG, .536 TS%, 11.9 Reb, 3.1 AST/2.5 TOV, 1.2 Stl, 3.3 blk

vs. not top 10 defenses

24.9 PPG, .564 TS%, 12.4 Reb, 2.7 AST/3.4 TOV, 1.3 stl, 3.0 blk


KG vs. top 10 defenses 97-08:

20.1 PPG, .510 TS%, 11.4 Reb, 4.3 AST/2.9 TOV, 1.2 stl, 1.3 blk

vs. not top 10 defenses:
23.3 PPG, .531 TS%, 13.4 Reb, 4.6 AST/3.0 TOV, 1.5 stl, 1.9 blk


So it looks like everyone declines against top defenses

[Dr Positivity]

I'm convinced the Timberwolves style of play artificially upped their ORTG and dropped their DRTG, which is why KG could only bring a lot of those teams to average defensive rankings, while they blew up to top 5 offensive ratings without a lot of talent suggesting why they'd get that high

He's in the mix for best offensive player in 04 though. But that be may a case of circumstance - 03 Shaq and Kobe, 03 Tmac, 05 Dirk, 05 Nash all clearly eclipse 04 KG offensively, so he kind of slipped in the window there

[colts18]

Again, this needs further analysis. Let's control for Tony Parker in 04 and look at the 74 games he played:

2004 Spurs
64g w Duncan: -8.5 DRtg -- OREB% 29.4% DREB% 75.5%
10g w/out Duncan: -5.1 DRtg -- OREB% 32.4% DREB% 73.3% **Replaced by Malik Rose


Let's control for Manu in 05 and look at the 74 games he played:

2005 Spurs
61g w Duncan: -7.8 DRtg -- OREB% 28.7% DREB% 74.4%
13g w/out Duncan: -2.5 DRtg -- OREB% 29.0% DREB% 72.4% **Replaced by Robert Horry (11 of 13)

I actually see these data points as evidence for just how solid the defensive team/scheme around Duncan was. Keep in mind I think Duncan is a marvelous defender, but if we "believe" the numbers for a second (ignore error/variance which is present in this size sample) we see a 5 --> 8.5 shift by replacing Malik Rose, and then a 2.5 --> 8 jump by replacing Robert Horry.

I'm also inclined to agree with what others have said about 2004, which is it was a weird year with injuries and applications of rules, which probably led to some of the weird team distributions we see that year (eg Pistons, Spurs, Mavs).

So the Spurs were about a -2 or -3 without Duncan, but with him they were a -9 or -10 team. That is more impressive to me than lifting a +5 team to -5. It's not like the Spurs had terrible big men. Rose, Rasho, and Nazr are fine defensive replacements for Duncan, but Duncan made that defense.

[colts18]

For those who hate counting games against weak opponents, here are the best SRS vs. playoff teams (regular season and PS games included) since 2000:

Rk Year Team SRS W L WPct
1 2005 SAS 9.39 43 23 0.652
2 2009 LAL 9.36 45 19 0.703
3 2007 PHO 8.93 34 19 0.642
4 2000 LAL 8.85 49 18 0.731
5 2002 LAL 8.84 45 18 0.714
6 2009 CLE 8.71 40 17 0.702
7 2001 LAL 8.65 43 17 0.717
8 2007 SAS 8.55 40 21 0.656
9 2008 UTA 8.42 34 20 0.630
10 2006 DAL 8.38 42 23 0.646


Based on that, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe should be propped up. So does LeBron 09. Nash's 07 season might be his peak, so keep that in mind later on when we discuss him.

[ElGee]

I'm not quite sure what question you're answering above -- you're listing 80% of the game. Aren't half these playoff teams just over .500 anyway? What about the top SRS's/MOV's against at least 4 or 5 SRS teams? Or something like that instead...

[colts18]

I'm not quite sure what question you're answering above -- you're listing 80% of the game. Aren't half these playoff teams just over .500 anyway? What about the top SRS's/MOV's against at least 4 or 5 SRS teams? Or something like that instead...

Playoffs is generally considered a good indicator of stronger opponents. Of course there are exceptions like the 86 Bulls, but in general the average playoff team is probably a 50-53 win team. That counts for something, plus SRS already adjusts for weaker playoff opponents.

I'm not doing the 4 or 5 SRS MOV because I don't know how to do it. I got those stats from B-R:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=7213

[MacGill]

but in general the average playoff team is probably a 50-53 win team.

You may want to consult with my Toronto Raptor's on that one

[colts18]

but in general the average playoff team is probably a 50-53 win team.

You may want to consult with my Toronto Raptor's on that one

I said playoff team so that would preclude the Raptors in any discussion of playoffs unless they hypothetically do make it and it that case, Raps in 4

[MacGill]

but in general the average playoff team is probably a 50-53 win team.

You may want to consult with my Toronto Raptor's on that one

I said playoff team so that would preclude the Raptors in any discussion of playoffs unless they hypothetically do make it and it that case, Raps in 4

You just crushed what little hope I had

One day Colts18, one day

[Woodsanity]

09 Lebron or 12 Lebron you can make a good case for either.

[ThaRegul8r]

I agree with ElGee that if you think Kareem has the #6 (or higher, based on the comments) peak of all time, then you pretty much need to have him at #1 or #2 on your personal list.

Why would that "have" to be the case? He's #3 on the Top 100 list, and the two players voted ahead of him were also voted to have higher peaks as well. So if two players had better careers and better peaks, and how does Kareem become minimum top #2?

[Doctor MJ]

So I might as well make my official vote here:

Vote: LeBron '09

To be honest if momentum got behind either LeBron '12 or Erving '76, I'd probably get behind them. Where I'm still falling toward though is toward these "do it all" guys.

Re: Walton. i am glad he's getting discussed. As I've said before, I consider Kareem vs Walton a very tough choice, and i think anyone who doesn't get how that can be needs to step some quality time meditating on Walton. Whether one agrees with the pro-Walton assessments of others, one should be able to explain how and why it is these assessments exist.

[lorak]

vote: LeBron 09

Bird 86 and Walton are next on my list

[bastillon]

LeBron is gonna take this one easily. let's just move on.

[ThaRegul8r]

I still have '76 Erving over LeBron on my own personal list, so I disagree with him being here.

I'm trying to decide where to put Walton.

[therealbig3]

From what I see:

09 LeBron - 5 (therealbig3, colts18, SDChargers#1, Doctor MJ, DavidStern)
03 Duncan - 3 (Dr Positivity, C-izMe, JordansBulls)
86 Bird - 2 (ElGee, PTB Fan)
87 Magic - 1 (ardee)
85 Magic - 1 (Josephpaul)

[therealbig3]

I'm a big Duncan fan, but why is his peak being considered better than Magic's or Bird's? I consider LeBron in their class too, but for the sake of historical perspective, let's leave him out. Magic and Bird are traditionally ranked ahead of Duncan. They do not have a longevity edge over Duncan. So by definition, they definitely have better peaks, no?

This obviously doesn't apply to the people who do have Duncan over Magic and Bird (I know Dr Positivity does)...but C-izMe and JordansBulls, you guys have Duncan ranked over both of them all time right? Because it's not like Magic and Bird saw big dropoffs in their non-peak years.

[mysticbb]

That counts for something

What should that "something" be?

The performance level against ALL teams is a better indicator of playoff success than the performance level against certain teams, whatever sample you select. That was tested in different ways, with capped MOV against weak teams, just against weak teams, just against strong teams, etc. pp. In the end the best predictor (on the team level) turned out to be SRS against all teams +HCA. Thus, that ranking doesn't tell much about the "real strength" of the teams.

Elgee, that aren't even 80% of the games, but rather below 65%. A team, which went out in a sweep in the 1st round, can have just 51% of their games included (7 non-playoff teams in the conference á 4 game plus 7*2 against non-playoff teams from the other conference makes 42 games left out from 86 games overall).