#16 Highest Peak of All Time (Robinson '95 wins)

[Dr Positivity]

Some details on 66 West if that's the year more likely to gain traction for him...

STL
G1 – 28 pts
G2 – 36 pts
G3 – 32 pts
G4 – 42 pts
G5 – 31 pts
G6 – 38 pts
G7 – 35 pts

BOS
G1 – 41 pts (15-27 FG, 11-13 FT) – dominates overtime to win game for LA
G2 – 18 pts (7-18 FG, 4-4 FT) – Huge blowout by Celtics. West likely gets shut down fairly early
G3 – 34 pts (13-21 FG, 8-8 FT)
G4 – 45 pts (19-31 FG, 7-10 FT)
G5 – 31 pts (11-24 FG, 9-9 FT)
G6 – 32 pts (11-23 FG, 10-10 FT)
G7 – 36 pts (12-27 FG, 12-16 FT) – 2pt loss. Underrated heartbreak year.
Total for series: 33.8 pts, 51.5% FG, 87.1% FT (8.7/10), .585 TS%

Lakers rank 3rd in eFG (behind NY and PHI), 1st in FT/FGA in the regular season, I'm sure someone can check whether they lead in ORTG but if they don't they're close. This is with Baylor sucking with a 16.6pt 40.1% FG season, which is the lowest shooting % among rotation players on the team. This is one reason I have a hard time being convinced in the 68 team being better offensively as direct evidence West is better that year. In 66 Baylor is the mole, plus it's possible Clark/Goodrich were a significant upgrade over LaRusso, Abdul-Rahman, etc. Bob Boozer appears to help the 66 team with very nice efficiency, albeit in more limited minutes. The 66 team has 3 players chucking up a lot of shots at a weak efficiency, Baylor (15.9 FGA a game, 2nd on the taem, .456 TS%, 8th on teh team), Leroy Ellis (11.6 FGA a game, 5th on the team, .467 TS%, 7th on the team), and the young version of Goodrich (7.7 FGA, 7th on the team, .448 TS%, 10th on the team). In 68 their top 9 FGA users are above .5 in TS%, with Baylor being the lowest of the group at .505. So the question in regards to 66 vs 68 West is, do we attribute the Lakers efficiency as a team all jumping up to his change in play - or did coaching/roster really help bring out the best in them? 66 definitely passes the test for an enormous offensive impact to me, the Lakers have a strong scoring offense despite the team around him being much, much less efficient than in 68

[Dr Positivity]

68 West in the playoffs:

Bulls

G1 - 33 pts
G2 - 35 pts
G3 - 32 pts
G4 - 19 pts
G5 - 23 pts

Warriors

G1 - 27 pts
G2 - 36 pts
G3 - 40 pts
G4 - 29 pts

Celtics

G1 - 25 pts
G2 - 35 pts
G3 - 33 pts
G4 - 38 pts
G5 - 35 pts
G6 - 22 pts

Series average: 31.3ppg

Obviously it'd be nice to have the FG/FGA readily available for this series, but the 66 Finals appears a little more dynamic for him to me due to 41 and 45 pt games and being better in the close-out loss, though he could've just been taking less shots in 68

[Doctor MJ]

@Doc it's a well know fact Baylor was the driving force for that laker team even with him being in Berlin.... He set up a game wining shot for the 62 lakers . Had it gone in he would of been FMVP 62 finals.

I really don't know what argument's going to persuade you. You're clearly in love with how much he scored, how close they came to a title, and the fact that he missed time is actually a positive for you.

I will say this though:

In '60-61, Baylor played 73 games, and the Lakers won 36 total.
In '61-62, Baylor played 48 games, and the Lakers won 54 total.

I'm wondering what you think happened in those two years where Baylor missing 25 more games correlated with the team improving massively. Frankly I'm wondering if you've thought about this at all, apologies.

I can tell you what everyone else sees as the big change between those two years: Rookie Jerry West turned into superstar Jerry West, and his impact was so huge that the Baylor missing half the season wasn't a big deal at all in comparison.

[Josephpaul]

Well the 62 was better than the 61 team all together . Missing the RS wasn't a big deal anyways they were playoff bound in 62. Baylor avg 40 PTS in the WFC

[Expert-Sizzle]

I picked out a random 10 game stretch from Wade's 2009 season.

G56 - 65 : 37 / 7 / 11apg / 3.2spg / 1.2bpg on 55%FG / 65%TS... wow

[ThaRegul8r]

Obviously it'd be nice to have the FG/FGA readily available for this series, but the 66 Finals appears a little more dynamic for him to me due to 41 and 45 pt games and being better in the close-out loss, though he could've just been taking less shots in 68

I actually have the complete stats in my file on all the NBA finals of the Russell era.

[Doctor MJ]

Well the 62 was better than the 61 team all together . Missing the RS wasn't a big deal anyways they were playoff bound in 62. Baylor avg 40 PTS in the WFC

1. The '62 teams was FAR better than the '61 team with FAR less Baylor in it. How much impact can you possibly think Baylor had if his impact was so small that it could be dwarfed by changes to the rest of the team?

2. Stop quoting scoring totals by themselves as if they mean something. I've told you Baylor shot inefficiently in general. If that doesn't mean anything to you, that's your thing, but there's no sense repeating your first point as a rebuttal to a rebuttal.

[Josephpaul]

Ill admit it I like like high volume scoring but He shot at the league avg,
West didn't shoot much better than Baylor that year as well. I don't consider a 2 % a huge gap by any means.
Jerry was the 2nd option while Baylor was playing.. This video can definitely paint a picture to show you baylor was cosidered the number option of the team. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE23mU3q ... ata_player

[mysticbb]

He maintained 80% of his production against good teams, while Kobe maintained 89%...but as you can see, 80% T-Mac=89% Kobe. Just because T-Mac fell off more, doesn't mean he's worse, because he's starting off at a higher level.

While that is true, McGrady is still behind Wade and Nowitzki here. And going by this:

Code: Select all

Name              #  Year  Tm  SPM  RAPM Min   CPM NCPM
LeBron James      8  2010 CLE   8.4  9.8 3426  9.1  9.3
Kevin Garnett    10  2004 MIN   7.3  8.0 4013  7.7  8.5
Dwyane Wade       7  2010 MIA   5.9  8.4 3002  7.1  7.3
Tim Duncan       10  2007 SAS   6.4  8.8 3461  7.6  7.1
Dirk Nowitzki    10  2011 DAL   5.2  8.6 3330  6.8  6.7
Manu Ginobili     8  2005 SAS   5.2  6.4 2965  5.8  6.2
Shaquille O’Neal  4  2003 LAL   5.9  4.9 3016  5.4  6.2
Dwight Howard     5  2011 ORL   6.3  5.5 3193  6.0  5.9
Chris Paul        5  2009 NOH   6.1  5.8 3203  6.0  5.8
Kobe Bryant       7  2009 LAL   5.5  6.1 3900  5.8  5.6
Steve Nash        8  2007 PHO   5.5  6.3 3095  5.9  5.5
Kevin Durant      3  2010 OKC   5.7  4.1 3470  5.0  5.1
Jason Kidd        3  2003 NJN   4.8  3.8 3841  4.3  4.9
Yao Ming          3  2007 HOU   5.9  3.8 1884  5.0  4.7
Paul Pierce       3  2008 BOS   4.2  5.4 3864  4.8  4.5
Derrick Rose      2  2012 CHI   5.1  3.5 1412  4.4  4.4
Chris Bosh        4  2008 TOR   3.9  5.3 2624  4.6  4.3
Jermaine O’Neal   1  2004 IND   4.1  3.6 3392  3.8  4.3
Tracy McGrady     4  2007 HOU   5.2  3.6 2819  4.5  4.3
Baron Davis       1  2007 GSW   3.1  6.1 2666  4.5  4.2
Chauncey Billups  2  2008 DET   4.9  3.9 3002  4.5  4.2
Lamar Odom        1  2009 LAL   2.1  6.9 3051  4.4  4.2
Deron Williams    1  2010 UTA   3.8  4.3 3200  4.0  4.1
Elton Brand       1  2006 LAC   4.6  3.7 3616  4.2  4.0
Josh Smith        1  2012 ATL   3.9  4.1 2525  4.0  4.0
Sam Cassell       1  2004 MIN   3.7  3.5 3335  3.6  4.0
Brad Miller       2  2004 SAC   2.5  4.6 2986  3.5  3.9
Gilbert Arenas    1  2007 WAS   3.5  4.7 2942  4.1  3.8
Chris Webber      1  2003 SAC   4.3  2.5 2868  3.3  3.8
Brandon Roy       1  2009 POR   4.3  3.5 3141  4.0  3.8
Andrew Bogut      1  2010 MIL   2.9  4.5 2229  3.6  3.7
Kevin Love        1  2012 MIN   4.4  2.9 2145  3.7  3.7
Blake Griffin     1  2012 LAC   3.7  3.7 2785  3.7  3.7
Andrei Kirilenko  2  2005 UTA   2.7  4.2 1349  3.4  3.7
Rashard Lewis     1  2009 ORL   2.3  5.5 3845  3.8  3.6
Tony Parker       2  2012 SAS   3.9  3.2 2429  3.6  3.6
Carlos Boozer     1  2007 UTA   5.0  2.2 3211  3.7  3.5
Ben Wallace       1  2004 DET   2.7  3.6 3974  3.2  3.5
David Robinson    1  2003 SAS   2.2  3.8 2215  3.1  3.5
Pau Gasol         1  2009 LAL   4.1  3.1 3930  3.6  3.5
Ron Artest        1  2004 IND   2.5  3.7 3298  3.1  3.5
Amare Stoudemire  1  2005 PHO   4.9  1.6 3490  3.2  3.5
Paul Millsap      1  2012 UTA   2.1  5.0 2238  3.5  3.4


That list is compiled by taking all players from a respective season (playoffs and regular season combined) which are in average 1.5 standard deviations (minute weighted) above league average in SPM and RAPM. # says how often a player made that list during those 10 years, the years is the respective best season of the player and team the respective team the player played in the best season. Followed by the SPM and RAPM of the best season, the minutes played during that season (regular season plus playoffs). CPM is the composite of SPM and RAPM based on minute weighted standard deviation. NCPM is the normalised value, meaning, the average minute weighted standard deviation is used as the basis for each season to put all player season on equal footing.

McGrady shouldn't really be in the discussion at this point. I agree with that list in so far that Wade, Nowitzki, Paul, Nash and others should be ahead of McGrady. Especially 2003 McGrady, who produced big boxscore numbers against bad opponents, ends up as 107th out of 133 player seasons from 2003 to 2012.

If T-Mac played with better talent, his production isn't dropping off so much.

How would you know that?


I also find a bit weird, that some arguing with raw points, rebounds, assists, etc. when the pace differences are huge and thus that doesn't really tell us anything abouit the differences in impact.

[Doctor MJ]

Some details on 66 West if that's the year more likely to gain traction for him...

'66 seems about as good an alternative as any. Baylor really not doing a whole lot in the regular season, no other star to speak of, and it's the first year the Lakers actually become the best offense in the league. I could probably go in that direction if, as you say, it got traction. Just worth noting that up until '68, West's value basically becomes obvious whenever Baylor has issues, which while it says a ton about what Baylor was actually not doing for his team, doesn't say great things about West as a transcendant offensive talent. In '68, West's actually working wonders with Baylor & co.

[Doctor MJ]

Ill admit it I like like high volume scoring but He shot at the league avg,
West didn't shoot much better than Baylor that year as well. I don't consider a 2 % a huge gap by any means.

Well it was a 3% edge (TS is the stat to use) that became a 4% edge in the playoffs. I imagine it's pretty likely that still doesn't resonate much to you, but I'd ask you meditate on how big an edge would be significant.

The thing I'm really fixated on here though is the general trend. West's basically always more efficient than Baylor, often times by huge margins (By '64 it was a 7 point edge, '65 11 point, '66 12 point). All the while we're seeing West explode scoring-wise. No he never averaged 38 PPG over a RS, but he was in the 30s, and come playoff time he exploded harder than Baylor. ALL while shooting at a much more efficient clip than Baylor ever did.

I don't see any way it makes sense to say that Baylor at his peak was really a more explosive scorer than West at his peak, he isn't doing it as efficiently, and all the big correlation with winning seems to side with West's presence more than Baylor's.

I just see you really buying hard into a romantic narrative.

[ElGee]

Some details on 66 West if that's the year more likely to gain traction for him...

'66 seems about as good an alternative as any. Baylor really not doing a whole lot in the regular season, no other star to speak of, and it's the first year the Lakers actually become the best offense in the league. I could probably go in that direction if, as you say, it got traction. Just worth noting that up until '68, West's value basically becomes obvious whenever Baylor has issues, which while it says a ton about what Baylor was actually not doing for his team, doesn't say great things about West as a transcendant offensive talent. In '68, West's actually working wonders with Baylor & co.

In 66, Baylor was constantly bothered by his knee. He'd play full games one night, then rest the next (as it would bother him). I count 14 games where he played limited minutes, which warps his seasonal averages. He averaged 25.2 ppg in the last 16 games of the season as his wheels held up...and the team had a 2.1 SRS in that time. If we count those limited minute games as missed time, the Lakers were a +1.5 SRS team w/out him (29g) and 3.1 with him in. If we treat those games as normal, they were a +4.1 without him and +2.3 SRS team with him.

IN 1962, of course, young Baylor (off probably his best season in 1961) did make a big difference when he played for LA. The Lakers were =4.3 with him and -2.0 SRS without him. I have Baylor BARELY in him top 50 right now...so it seems wiser to discuss West...or Barkley...or Wade...or Robinson..or Karl Malone...etc.

[Zasterror]

I picked out a random 10 game stretch from Wade's 2009 season.

G56 - 65 : 37 / 7 / 11apg / 3.2spg / 1.2bpg on 55%FG / 65%TS... wow

[Josephpaul]

I also showed a video of what other players thought of Baylor in 62 . Across the board they said he was best scorer it may be romantic narrative but it's a visual evidence as well.

[therealbig3]

Why do you have Tmac above Wade? I'm curious because I'm really not sure if it makes sense. Tmac was a better shooter than him and that was it.

It's pretty much a toss-up to me, but I think the offensive gap is bigger than the defensive gap.

T-Mac was a better shooter, scorer, ballhandler, passer, and more portable. Wade's a better defender.

I also think that on a team that he doesn't have to do as much offensively for, he would be a comparable defender to Wade.

[lorak]

68 West in the playoffs:

Bulls

G1 - 33 pts
G2 - 35 pts
G3 - 32 pts
G4 - 19 pts
G5 - 23 pts

Warriors

G1 - 27 pts
G2 - 36 pts
G3 - 40 pts
G4 - 29 pts

Celtics

G1 - 25 pts
G2 - 35 pts
G3 - 33 pts
G4 - 38 pts
G5 - 35 pts
G6 - 22 pts

Series average: 31.3ppg

Obviously it'd be nice to have the FG/FGA readily available for this series,

West's TS%: .559

[Expert-Sizzle]

T-Mac was a better shooter, scorer, ballhandler, passer, and more portable.

Not sure T-Mac is the better scorer.
Better shooter... sure but Ray Allen > Jordan as a shooter that doesn't make him the better scorer.

I also think Wade is the better ballhandler and passer.

Also I don't get the portability thing.
Wade was at his best playing with Shaq and he has done a good job fitting in with Lebron.

I see no evidence you have to say Wade isn't portable or that T-Mac is more portable.

[therealbig3]

T-Mac was a better shooter, scorer, ballhandler, passer, and more portable.

Not sure T-Mac is the better scorer.
Better shooter... sure but Ray Allen > Jordan as a shooter that doesn't make him the better scorer.

I also think Wade is the better ballhandler and passer.

Also I don't get the portability thing.
Wade was at his best playing with Shaq and he has done a good job fitting in with Lebron.

I see no evidence you have to say Wade isn't portable or that T-Mac is more portable.

Maybe not a better scorer, but a comparable scorer for sure. But keep in mind that in 03, per 75 possessions, T-Mac averaged 31.5 ppg on +4.5% TS over league average. Wade in 09 was at 31.3 ppg on +3.0% TS over league average.

T-Mac was clearly better at taking care of the ball, as evidenced by his super low TO rate. And imo, from watching them both play, T-Mac was just special as a creator, and his court vision really set him apart from most wings. Wade, a lot like Kobe, is really very good, but T-Mac was on par with or better than LeBron imo in terms of passing and court vision.

T-Mac, specifically because of his outside shooting ability and thus off-ball ability, can fit in around talent better than Wade. Sure, Wade fit great with Shaq, because it's a traditional big-wing combo. But you can see how Miami hasn't been quite as special offensively with Wade and LeBron. LeBron got a lot of flack for that, but imo, most of that falls on Wade. IMO, as the 2nd option, it's mostly his job to fit his game around LeBron, not the other way around. Replacing him with T-Mac would yield better results, because he's someone who can play off-ball a lot better.

[ardee]

Ok, so I think I'm going here:

Vote: 1966 Jerry West

Fairly confident about this. Doc and Positivity have spoken a lot about this year, but to summarize:

West averaged 31-7-6 on 57% TS (league leader!). He took a Laker squad with barely any other offensive talent (Baylor was awful this year, he averaged just 16-9 on 40.1% from the field), to a 46-36 record and somehow, somehow the no. 1 offensive rating despite the fact that he was playing with such a terrible cast.

He was 2nd in MVP voting that year behind the Dipper (who had a 34-25-5 season on 54% from the field!), and finished ahead of a prime Robertson and Russell.

In the Playoffs West took the Lakers all the way to a 2 point loss in game 7 of the Finals despite the fact he had only one team-mate with an above-average PER. 34-6-6 on 58% TS is quite simply Jordan-esque.

Can't really pick nits with this year, West was just a beast. Wilt owned '67 and '68 but I feel this was the year the Logo should have been the MVP.

[thizznation]

I would think West would get a little more love from the RealGM community, givin' his track record of numerous monster post seasons.