#15 Highest Peak of All Time (Kobe '08 wins)

[Lightning25]

A 10 or 11 point game with 5-6 minutes to go is not a blowout. McGrady was the only one doing anything in the 4th, and he was the only reason why it didn't become a blowout earlier. He was pulled with 2:38 left after the Hornets extended the lead to 16 points. He didn't really have an opportunity to stat pad, since I actually think that's a little early to wave the white flag...that's not an insurmountable lead.

A 10+ point margin is pretty much close to over. I know you want to defend McGrady in this case but it was pretty much over. McGrady's scoring wasn't doing anything for his team.

I already said that McGrady didn't play all that great in game 1, and he did struggle with his shot a bit down the stretch. Yes, he struggled in game 2 down the stretch, but the fact that Orlando won the game means that the whole premise of blaming T-Mac's 4th quarter struggles for the Magic losing doesn't make sense, because when he did play poorly in the 4th, it didn't cost them the game. And he ended up with an overall monster game.

It means that he would have clearly lost had Troy Hudson and his other teammates didn't show up. This would also mean that his teammates weren't as bad you were suggesting since they happened to have won him a game.

Meaning, in the games that Orlando lost, he played really well down the stretch in 2 of them.

He played well in game 3. Game 4 didn't matter because it was over. Game 2 he was pretty much carried and didn't play well in and Game 1, he absolutely lost for them.

And sample size is a huge issue here, we can't point to 1 or 2 games in a 4 game series and conclude anything. I'm just pointing out that the idea that McGrady struggled in the "clutch" and that's why his team lost can't really be backed up by anything.

It would appear that you did when you talked about McGrady vs. the Pistons in 2003 when he was dominating them in the first something games but I can't when McGrady struggles? That sounds quite fair.

And again, game 2 skews things. He went 0-5 (with 2 missed 3s) in the 4th and OT, and the scoring margin was within 5 points every time. Which means that in games 1, 3, and 4 (which is what he's being criticized for), he shot 3-7 and 1-2 from 3 (and he got to the line well throughout the series).

So you want me to completely ignore his 0-5 shooting even though it was a really close game? But you want me to count his stats when his team was losing by 10+?

I don't think so, he shot 0-5 and he would have damn well lost that game had his teammates not have his back.

It counts, whether you like it or not.

Also, I'm looking over his game 2 play by play, and T-Mac's playmaking is another big part of his offensive game, and he had 3 assists vs 0 TOs in the 4th quarter and OT, as well as 6 rebounds. If you're going to mention his poor shooting, you should mention that as well...which means he was still creating for his teammates, and that he still wasn't being "carried".

And assists is an incredibly deceiving stat considering how he could have made simple assists that even I or Luke Walton are capable of making. Until you want to highlight what kind of amazing passes/plays he made then I'll be impressed.

Based off of the play by play, Troy Hudson took over by getting to the line a ton and making his FTs unless you somehow want to find a way to credit McGrady for that.

I don't know what the point of this conversation is, 2002 is not peak McGrady.

And regardless, none of this stuff even really matters. 4th quarter scoring and "clutch" are pretty much irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. ElGee has posted about this in detail before, just look it up.

You are the one responding but it does matter as I already pointed out. I don't know what you're arguing anyways. It is well known that Mcgrady didn't play in the clutch moments of this series.

Mcgrady in 2002 vs. the Hornets was no different than Kobe in 2012 vs. the Thunder.

I am ready to concede that our discussion is pointless though because 2002 McGrady is not peak McGrady and whether he choked or not, is not leading us anywhere. If you tell me he didn't choke, it wouldn't matter because #1 I'm not saying McGrady's peak is not #15 because he was a choker and #2 that wasn't even peak McGrady. If I tell you he didn't choke, it still wouldn't matter because it's not McGrady's peak and you don't believe 1st 3 quarters of scoring are any different than the 4th quarter scoring.

I think we might need to just put it aside unless bastillion wants to come up and put his 2 cents in.

[therealbig3]

Ok, I agree we aren't really getting anywhere.

Just curious, where do you rank T-Mac's peak?

[Lightning25]

Ok, I agree we aren't really getting anywhere.

Just curious, where do you rank T-Mac's peak?

If I had to estimate it would be in the 18-25 range. I think Wade's and Kobe's peak are better, as a matter of fact I feel like those two should have been chosen by now.

I think McGrady name should start popping up as soon as Wade, Kobe, and Robinson are enshrined but as of now it should only be those three.

I'll make a post soon explaining why I do feel that way (Wade and Kobe being better than Mac) besides the simple/generic Kobe and Wade were just more rounded or what not like I have been explaining for most of this thread.

[ElGee]

Re: McGrady v Det

Remember that rough sketch of a star's supporting cast I brought up earlier? We can use GmSc to see the team's production around the star from "box score" POV:

08 Celtics PS 55.6 (18.0 std) -- 106.1 opp D
00 Lakers PS 51.3 (13.9 std) -- 101.4 opp D
03 Spurs PS 50.1 (12.3 std) -- 101.9 opp D
06 Heat PS 47.2 (13.5 std) -- 103.5 opp D
04 Wolves PS 46.5 (10.6 std) -- 103.1 opp D

...

03 Magic PS 32.2 (16.4 std) -- 99.9 opp D

Are you starting to understand the disparity in these teams now? The Magic supporting cast averaged a 49.2 GmSc for Mac in the RS, but of course in the PS they didn't have Mike Miller and Pat Garrity shot 24% from 3 with the team shooting 31% from 3 around McGrady. Drew Gooden shot 40% and Armstrong increased his TOV rate by 33% from the RS. They had 3 games in the series w a GmSc of 20 or below...as a supporting cast! This is beyond putrid. And it's not exactly like he was surrounded by defenders (Gooden, Garrity, DeClercq).

This series was a giant bright spot for McGrady then and to point to the last 3 games where he was unable to play like peak Michael Jordan is, indeed, a waste of time.

EDIT: Forgot about G6. 37-11-5 52% TS. That includes 2 shots against the shot clock buzzer and 2 desperation 3's at the end of the game...without those it's 37-11-5 59% TS.

[Lightning25]

Remember that rough sketch of a star's supporting cast I brought up earlier? We can use GmSc to see the team's production around the star from "box score" POV:

If you are talking to me, then no, I don't remember seeing that post.

Are you starting to understand the disparity in these teams now? The Magic supporting cast averaged a 49.2 GmSc for Mac in the RS, but of course in the PS they didn't have Mike Miller and Pat Garrity shot 24% from 3 with the team shooting 31% from 3 around McGrady. Drew Gooden shot 40% and Armstrong increased his TOV rate by 33% from the RS. They had 3 games in the series w a GmSc of 20 or below...as a supporting cast! This is beyond putrid. And it's not exactly like he was surrounded by defenders (Gooden, Garrity, DeClercq).

I'm not too 100% sure what that chart of stats was but I think those were the numbers of the supporting players minus their best player? Check me in because I'm not 100% sure.

However, couldn't one argue that Mcgrady didn't really make his teams better then? A star, a superstar, and the leader of the team in particular is suppose to make his team better by making their lives easier and getting them great looks.

Also, McGrady had some decent defensive players on the perimeter such as Jaque Vaughn, Darrell Armstrong, and Gordan Giricek. I wouldn't call Gooden and DeClarecq bad defensive players either, maybe average or above average, but certainly not horrible or liabilities.

The truth is that McGrady wasn't really the leader of the team to be quite honest, Darrell Armstrong was. McGrady was clearly the best player on the team and the superstar of the team, no one should ever deny that but he wasn't the leader that kept everyone in check which was why the Magic faltered as bad as they did in the '03-'04 season when the Magic got rid of Armstrong due to an arrest.

It is why I've always knocked on McGrady's lack of or negative intangibles because he was a childish leader.

[GrangerDanger]

Since people are starting to talk about the Admiral, here's a short highlight vid I made of one of his best games from 94

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km2EJAenG-4&feature=plcp[/youtube]

Put up 48/16/6 with 4 blocks and like 3 steals. Scored 19 of the team's 23 4th quarter points

[Lightning25]

Wade vs. McGrady

I actually found my old post addressing peak Wade vs. peak McGrady so I'll just copy and paste it here...and also make some edits.

I would break it down into categories and for the record peak Wade is 2008-09 to me and peak McGrady is 2002-03 to me.

Scoring - McGrady, I would give Mcgrady the very slight edge in this due to superior shooting ability. However, in terms of pure production, ppg, TS%, FG%, they were very very close but what gives Tmac the edge is the better shooting ability specifically from 3 point range and also the fact that he played against a tougher defensive era.

I do think Wade would do fine in McGrady's defensive era simply due to Wade's incredible athleticism and style of play. Wade's shot selection was also terrific as well and it would have easily have been the best among perimeter players in that time.

However, we don't know for sure how Wade would do in the situation.

I am glad that someone brought up the idea that McGrady did beat up a lot of bad teams back in his prime but he didn't play as well or as consistent against the better defensive teams. As we know with Wade, Wade would constantly destroy playoff defenses due to his style of play because he was probably the best player at splitting the double team and splitting the pick and roll.

So like I said, very slight edge to McGrady due to skill but even then I question it because Wade was much better against the elite teams and elite defenses than McGrady was.

I would like to see mysticbb update his GameScore chart with Wade in it this time instead of just Kobe and McGrady.

Code: Select all

Player              Year    ba     aa    Pace  adj_ba adj_aa  aa/ba
Michael Jordan      1991   25.85  24.64  94.3   27.41  26.13  0.953
LeBron James        2009   24.46  22.77  88.3   27.70  25.79  0.931
Shaquille O'Neal    2000   23.84  20.72  92.6   25.75  22.38  0.869
Magic Johnson       1987   24.92  22.39  101.4  24.58  22.08  0.898
David Robinson      1994   27.21  19.71  90.0   30.23  21.90  0.724
Larry Bird          1986   20.94  21.79  100.7  20.79  21.64  1.041
Dirk Nowitzki       2007   19.09  19.14  90.0   21.21  21.27  1.003
Kevin Garnett       2004   20.42  18.74  89.1   22.92  21.03  0.918
Kobe Bryant         2006   21.42  19.12  91.0   23.54  21.01  0.893
Hakeem Olajuwon     1994   20.99  19.71  93.9   22.35  20.99  0.939
Tracy McGrady       2003   24.21  19.38  92.7   26.12  20.91  0.800
Tim Duncan          2003   20.55  18.08  90.2   22.78  20.04  0.880


Passing - Wade, barely better but better is better. The numbers back it up.

Rebounding - Wade, Mcgrady may have averaged more but Wade goes after them more and works harder to get them.

Wade boxes out and is far more ferocious of a rebounder. I'm not going to argue Wade is a better rebounder because he gets more at his size because that is dumb, it's not worth anymore or any less of a rebound as a 7 footer grabbing one.

However, I do think Wade's boxing out and having better technique on the boards is much more vital to a team because it prevents the opposing team or the opposing player that Wade is fighting for on the board to get the board himself.

McGrady wasn't someone that would box out because he didn't want to hurt his back or something like that. It would annoy the hell out of me because I hated stars who refused to do the dirty work and McGrady refused to do it all the time.

In addition to that McGrady would play a good amount of SF too which brings him closer to the basket whereas Wade only played SG and sometimes PG which is further away from the basket. Wade was more of a combo guard while McGrady was a wing/swingman type player. It explains why McGrady got more boards despite being worse at it.

I would say they played with equal rebounders though. Tmac played with much better offensive rebounders on his team though.

2009 Heat were ranked 28th in total rebounding, 22nd in defensive rebounding, and 26th in offensive rebounding

2003 Magic were ranked 23rd in total rebounding, 22nd in defensive rebounding, and 18th in offensive rebounding.

For the first half of the season, I would say Wade's team was the better rebounding team. Wade had to compete with Shawn Marion and Udonis Haslem from the boards, two terrific rebounding forwards who play much closer to the basket than Wade does. However, by the trade deadline the Heat ended up trading Marion for Jermaine O'Neal which is probably a bad trade for Miami in hindsight because O'Neal was soft especially on the glass.

JO averaged less than 5.5 rpg in the regular season and he averaged less than 5 rpg in the post-season.

I do think a large reason why the Heat lost the 1st round against the Hawks was because they were dominated on the boards. The Magic on the other hand did do a great fight against the Pistons in the post-season on the boards. There were plenty of games where the Magic matched and outrebounded the Pistons.

Defense - Wade, this part is not close at all, Wade was a much better defender than McGrady and this is coming from someone who thinks Wade is slightly overrated defensively.

McGrady's defense was non-existent for the most part and you'll find plenty of criticism from players and coaches about McGrady's inconsistent and unwillingness defensively.

McGrady could play very good man D when he tried and when he wanted to due to his length and athleticism but for the most part he really never wanted to play D. His help defense was always non-existent whether he tried to play defense or not, he just didn't really know how to play help D. He was just too lazy on that end. You have to stay active to be a great help defender and Tmac was one of the most inactive defenders and players ever.

Wade's help D was tremendous and his man defense was above average as well but the real separation was consistency. Wade played defense practically every night in 2009 from what I could recall. As for other seasons though, it is kind of a different story.

Intangibles - Wade, this isn't close either.

Tmac had either no intangibles or negative intangibles. He was a just not an ideal teammate and a horrible leader. He was somebody that would always throw his teammates under the bus for his failures and acted like he never did anything wrong. While that may be true, you should never tell anyone about that and you should just keep it to yourself.

I've never recall Wade ever throwing his teammates under the bus for his failures.

I've talked to Magic fans about this and they've told me many times that McGrady was never really the leader on the team and that Darrell Armstrong was. The 2004 season proved that since Armstrong had left after the 2003 season. McGrady quit on the team like 10 games going into the season? He didn't have anyone to keep him and his team in check and the result was the worst record in the NBA.

To Conclude: I do believe Wade's peak is better. McGrady may have the very slight edge in scoring but Wade has McGrady beat when it comes to everything else. Wade is no slouch of a scorer either and he is very comparable which is why McGrady just has the very slight edge, if he actually should have the edge at all.

As for their post-season performances in their respective peak, as someone had already mentioned, Wade suffered back spasms and injuries during the playoff series. I'm not going to give him excuse because of that because in my opinion, if you play, you play. Wade was a bit inconsistent in the post-season but I do think overall he was better than McGrady in their post-seasons.

IMO, Wade went up against a tougher defensive matchup against the 09 Hawks than McGrady did against the 03 Pistons. I know the 03 Pistons were ranked better defensively but the Hawks had better and more athletic defenders to throw at Wade. Hawks threw Marvin Williams, Joe Johnson, Flip Murray, and Maurice Evans on him, all very athletic defenders that can bother Wade. McGrady wasn't really challenged defensively until Tayshaun Prince started guarding him in Game 4 or something like that and as soon as Prince started guarding him, McGrady struggled.

It's like Wade struggled because he simply struggled and because of injuries whereas Mcgrady started struggling due to a certain player guarding him.

So do you want a guy that can be stopped due to a defensive player being too good? Or do you want a player that can be stopped because he stopped himself because he is injured or other reasons?

[Expert-Sizzle]

Now that Wade / Kobe are in the mix I have some information I'd like to add in regards to those two.
Wade has performed much better over the years against the best defensive teams.

********************************************************************************************************************************

Detroit-
-----------
Kobe (2004) : 22 / 3 / 4 on 38%FG / 45%TS

Wade (2005) : 26 / 5 / 4 on 46%FG / 52%TS --- + 1.7spg / 1.0bpg
Wade (2006) : 27 / 5 / 6 on 62%FG / 68%TS --- + 1.8spg / 1.5bpg
___________________________________________

Boston-
-----------
Kobe (2008) : 26 / 5 / 5 on 40%FG / 50%TS
Kobe (2010) : 29 / 8 / 4 on 40%FG / 53%TS

Wade (2010) : 33 / 6 / 7 on 56%FG / 65%TS --- + 1.6spg / 1.6bpg
Wade (2011) : 30 / 7 / 5 on 53%FG / 62%TS

[ardee]

Now that Wade / Kobe are in the mix I have some information I'd like to add in regards to those two.
Wade has performed much better over the years against the best defensive teams.

********************************************************************************************************************************

Detroit-
-----------
Kobe (2004) : 22 / 3 / 4 on 38%FG / 45%TS

Wade (2005) : 26 / 5 / 4 on 46%FG / 52%TS --- + 1.7spg / 1.0bpg
Wade (2006) : 27 / 5 / 6 on 62%FG / 68%TS --- + 1.8spg / 1.5bpg
___________________________________________

Boston-
-----------
Kobe (2008) : 26 / 5 / 5 on 40%FG / 50%TS
Kobe (2010) : 29 / 8 / 4 on 40%FG / 53%TS

Wade (2010) : 33 / 6 / 7 on 56%FG / 65%TS --- + 1.6spg / 1.6bpg
Wade (2011) : 30 / 7 / 5 on 53%FG / 62%TS

This is not relevant at all, JingoWolf/SilkStream.

The 2004 Pistons were completely different from the 2005 and 2006 Pistons.

In '04, the Pistons had a -7.5 defense. With Rasheed, they were -13.5. That's easily, easily the GOAT defense.

In '05 they were 3.9. In '06 they were just -3.1. There was a huge difference in the level of defense Kobe and Wade were facing. Not to mention '04 was conveniently the last year that hand-checking was legal. '05 on, when Wade had his best years, defenses were far more restricted in terms of contact.

Look beyond the raw numbers and you'll see there's a lot more to it.

[mysticbb]

I would like to see mysticbb update his GameScore chart with Wade in it this time instead of just Kobe and McGrady.

I added Wade 2009 to the list. He is 3rd in terms of GameScore per 75 poss vs. above average teams.

[mysticbb]

Another thing is that when you remove a high impact offensive player from the court, the only way the other players can survive without him is to go all out on defense since they won't be able to generate enough offense.

That is possible. Or they spend more energy to create offense, thus they can probably maintain much of the offense while getting clearly worse defensively. We can assume such things, but in the end we don't really know that.

This is why I am weary of certain stats such as on-off defensive ratings.

Well, we can at least measure the overall difference with the on-off data, which is the important thing here. As I said before, the issue is more related to the differentiation between offense and defense, if we ignore that, we can look at the overall difference and go from there. Why is it important to know whether the difference comes from offense or defense? For me that seems only important to people who either want to use some "weird" result as a reason to dismiss the whole dataset or to just confirm their preconception.

If the overall defense of the team with a certain player on the court isn't good, his overall defensive abilities might not be as valuable in the grand scheme. That doesn't make him per se a bad defender, just maybe someone who isn't working well with the selected group of players around him on the defensive end. But then again, if that gets overshadowed by a massive increase in offensive efficiency, the worse defense just isn't a problem at all.

[Lightning25]

I would like to see mysticbb update his GameScore chart with Wade in it this time instead of just Kobe and McGrady.

I added Wade 2009 to the list. He is 3rd in terms of GameScore per 75 poss vs. above average teams.

How did you determine which teams were above average and below average? I am curious on that part. Did you use SRS rating or just simple standings? or what?

[Expert-Sizzle]

This is not relevant at all, JingoWolf/SilkStream.

Did you not see the post by Doc a few pages back?
This thread is for mature discussion, not for flaming other users and acting stupid.
Keep it in line and show some maturity or I'll report you.

I do think its relevant.

#1. You are using regular season numbers in a playoff comparison.
If you want to show me playoff numbers comparing their defense from separate years then I will happily listen.

The 2005 and even the 2006 Piston's had pretty much the exact same roster they had in 2004.
I don't see why its unfair for me to compare how two different players performed VS them.

We can also compare how each of them performed VS Detroit in the 2004 regular season.
(Used their 2 best games since Kobe (being in the West) only faced them twice.)

Kobe :
- 19 / 2 / 3 on 29% shooting
- 16 / 3 / 1 on 54% shooting

Rookie Wade :
- 15 / 7 / 4 on 67% shooting
- 17 / 4 / 6 on 50% shooting

I certainly do agree that the rule changes matter but they alone cannot even come close to accounting for such an enormous difference in overall performance and efficiency.

Wade was also incomparably better VS the late 00 Celtic's and you can't use the rule changes argument for that comparison.

There is nothing really to debate.
Wade just performed much, much better VS those two elite defensive teams.

[mysticbb]

How did you determine which teams were above average and below average? I am curious on that part. Did you use SRS rating or just simple standings? or what?

Sorry for not clarifying that earlier, but I used the reagular season SRS to determine that, above average teams just means above 0 SRS while below means below 0 SRS.

[therealbig3]

I'm re-watching the Magic-Pistons series, and using play by play data, and Prince started guarding T-Mac in game 2 after Curry got in foul trouble in the 3rd quarter. After Prince started guarding him, T-Mac went 3-8 from the field (including a 3) and 5-6 from the line for 12 points (56.4% TS).

In game 3, against Prince, T-Mac went 2-5 from the field (including a 3) and 3-4 from the line for 8 points (59.2% TS).

Prince didn't play in game 4.

In game 5, against Prince, T-Mac went 3-11 from the field and 2-3 from the line for 8 points (32.5% TS). This was a huge blowout win for the Pistons.

In game 6, against Prince, T-Mac went 5-14 from the field and 6-7 from the line for 16 points (46.8% TS). As ElGee pointed out, two of those shots were desperation shots at the end of the game (one of them was blocked by Wallace). So really, it was more like 5-12 from the field, which means his TS% was "really" 56.4%.

In game 7, against Prince, T-Mac went 5-13 (including a 3) and 3-3 from the line for 14 points (48.9% TS). Another blowout win for the Pistons.


It's really game 5, which Detroit won by 31 points, that Prince really had a lot of success against T-Mac. T-Mac more or less lit him up in games 2, 3, and 6, while Prince again had decent success against him in a 15 point win in game 7. But it was really nowhere close to T-Mac getting shut down or anything like that. Overall, T-Mac averaged 11.6 ppg on 47.4% TS. If we account for the two desperation heaves by T-Mac in game 6, he had a 49.1% TS.

Overall, yes, he did struggle with his shooting against Prince, but nowhere close to the extent that was implied. He was around 50% TS, and around 53% TS outside of his horrible game 5, (league average that year was 52% anyway), and he was being swarmed by the Pistons defense. From what I've seen, what was said about Kobe is true of T-Mac as well...he's getting by Prince pretty easily, Detroit's help defense was really good. Where Prince helped was that he was long enough to challenge T-Mac's outside shot, but T-Mac was also drawing fouls on Prince regularly.

[ardee]

This is not relevant at all, JingoWolf/SilkStream.

Did you not see the post by Doc a few pages back?
This thread is for mature discussion, not for flaming other users and acting stupid.
Keep it in line and show some maturity or I'll report you.

I do think its relevant.

We are comparing peaks here. Not how they did over their entire careers against X teams. If you show me a comparison tying '06-'08 Bryant to '09 Wade, then it is relevant.

#1. You are using regular season numbers in a playoff comparison.
If you want to show me playoff numbers comparing their defense from separate years then I will happily listen.

Ok, I'll play along even though this discussion means nothing.

The '04 Pistons had a DRtg of 92. The '05 Pistons were 99.2 and the '06 Pistons were 104.2. There's no point measuring the defenses relative to the average because the samples in the Playoffs were so small for some teams that the data is completely skewed.

The '08 Celtics were a 103.3 team in the Playoffs (-4.1). The '11 Celtics were a 103.6 team in the Playoffs (-2.4).

Bryant faced the MUCH better Pistons defense as well as the best Celtics defense.

Wade had the better series in '10, I'll give you that, and you could probably argue that '10 Wade was better than '10 Bryant, but no one is nominating 2010 Kobe as his peak.

The 2005 and even the 2006 Piston's had pretty much the exact same roster they had in 2004.
I don't see why its unfair for me to compare how two different players performed VS them.

Did you even read what I said? The '04 Pistons with Rasheed were a -13.5 defense. The '05 and '06 Pistons were -3.9 and -3.1 defenses in the regular season. That's a gap bigger than the gap between Russell's '65 Celtics and a team like the 2011 Mavericks! There was a VAST gulf in the defensive efficiencies of the Pistons Kobe faced the Pistons Wade faced.

We can also compare how each of them performed VS Detroit in the 2004 regular season.
(Used their 2 best games since Kobe (being in the West) only faced them twice.)

Kobe :
- 19 / 2 / 3 on 29% shooting
- 16 / 3 / 1 on 54% shooting

Rookie Wade :
- 15 / 7 / 4 on 67% shooting
- 17 / 4 / 6 on 50% shooting

I certainly do agree that the rule changes matter but they alone cannot even come close to accounting for such an enormous difference in overall performance and efficiency.

You're using two game samples from the REGULAR SEASON to try and prove something ?

Wade was also incomparably better VS the late 00 Celtic's and you can't use the rule changes argument for that comparison.

There is nothing really to debate.
Wade just performed much, much better VS those two elite defensive teams.

[/quote]

Actually, there is.

Put it this way: Wade played defenses about as good (relative to the league average) as the 2012 Knicks (-3.6)

Kobe played defenses at the level of (relative to the league average) as the '61-'65 Celtics (-9.2 over those 5 years).

[therealbig3]

The 04 Pistons through the first 3 rounds, to my estimation, had a -11.1 defense in the playoffs (92.3 DRating vs 103.4 ORating).

However, keep in mind that Jason Kidd was basically playing on one knee, and so he struggled big time. A healthy Jason Kidd, and the Nets probably win that series. Their offense would have certainly been better.

Still an elite, all-time great defense from the Pistons though.

The 05 Pistons, against everyone except the 05 Heat, had a -5.9 defense in the playoffs (99.8 DRating vs 105.7 ORating). If you would adjust for the Pistons, you would keep in mind that the Spurs missed Manu and Duncan for a bunch of games during the regular season, and that their offense would have been better in the RS had they been healthy. So you'd assume that the 05 Pistons look even better defensively in the playoffs.

Overall, sure, I'd say the 04 Pistons were the superior defensive ballclub, but the 05 Pistons were not that far off, especially when you consider the health of the opposing players. And it makes sense, you still had the same core in 05 that was there in 04.

Also, the 2010 Celtics were superior defensively in the playoffs than the 2008 Celtics were, and Wade clearly played better against them that year, although to be fair, 2010 is certainly not Kobe's peak.

Kobe should get props for how he's handled the Spurs defense over the years though, he's consistently destroyed them. But I think a lot of that is due to Popovich's "give up the midrange" defense, which plays right into Kobe's hands.

EDIT: Post-Webber trade, the 05 Sixers had a 104.9 ORating vs average DRating of 106.9 (-2.0). The Sixers on the season were a -2.6 team. So assuming they really were a -2.0 team with Webber, that's another thing you'd have to adjust in favor of the 05 Pistons. Instead of facing a 103.5 team for 5 games, they were actually facing a 104.1 team for 5 games. So adjusting for that (and still not adjusting for the health of the Spurs), the 05 Pistons were "actually" a -6.1 defense in the playoffs.

[JordansBulls]

What Wade did against Detroit and Dallas in 2006 is what makes me pick him that year over any other year.

Between these guys for me

--------- RS PER, WS48, --------- PER, WS48 playoffs
Moses Malone 1983: 25.1, 0.248 -----25.7, 0.260 (13 playoff games, title)
Dwyane Wade 2006: 27.6, 0.239-------26.9, 0.240 (23 playoff games, title)




http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/ ... ormances-1

2006 WADE'S STATS
Points per game: 34.7
Boards per game: 7.8
Steals per game: 2.7
PER: 33.8


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2 ... nces-11-20

MOSES MALONE FINALS STATS
Points per game: 25.8
Boards per game: 18.0
Blocks per game: 1.5
PER: 26.0



VOTE: Dwyane Wade 2006. This guy carried the Heat this season and his production was clearly superior to any of his teammates this season and then to top it off had a historic Conference Finals (27/5/5 on 61% FG) and NBA Finals.

[bastillon]

Wade - poor portability, needs to play with the ball in his hands, not a great addition to already stacked team

D-Rob - questionable postseason impact, falls off a cliff offensively against strong post defenders, very poor under pressure, great portability though

TMac - unimpressive offensive impact against good defenses, I really liked the discussion but the argument against TMac is not that he didn't win the series, it's how poorly Orlando played after taking that lead, losing the series was certainly understandable but getting blown out 3 times with TMac rendered ineffective, that's a problem. I just don't see TMac as a proven postseason performer against good defenses and I think he'd struggle mightily against Spurs/Celtics/Pistons type defenses

West - huge issues with durability, scoring numbers a little inflated due to pace, impact maximised only in certain type of offensive scheme

vote: Kobe 08 - proven postseason performer, struggled against the Celtics but so would everybody else, good portability, flexible skillset, potentially an impact defender though consistency is a concern. over TMac because of being proven against strong opposition, over Wade bc of portability, over West bc of durability, over D-Rob bc of postseason impact.

[ardee]

Wade - poor portability, needs to play with the ball in his hands, not a great addition to already stacked team

D-Rob - questionable postseason impact, falls off a cliff offensively against strong post defenders, very poor under pressure, great portability though

TMac - unimpressive offensive impact against good defenses, I really liked the discussion but the argument against TMac is not that he didn't win the series, it's how poorly Orlando played after taking that lead, losing the series was certainly understandable but getting blown out 3 times with TMac rendered ineffective, that's a problem. I just don't see TMac as a proven postseason performer against good defenses and I think he'd struggle mightily against Spurs/Celtics/Pistons type defenses

West - huge issues with durability, scoring numbers a little inflated due to pace, impact maximised only in certain type of offensive scheme

vote: Kobe 08 - proven postseason performer, struggled against the Celtics but so would everybody else, good portability, flexible skillset, potentially an impact defender though consistency is a concern. over TMac because of being proven against strong opposition, over Wade bc of portability, over West bc of durability, over D-Rob bc of postseason impact.

That's three Kobe votes.... Hope Josephpaul switches to '08 now.