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

[therealbig3]

For all the talk of 10 Wade playing amazing against Boston, and 09 Wade struggling against Atlanta...09 Wade had a 112 ORating against Atlanta, while 10 Wade had a 115 ORating. 10 Wade averaged over 5 TOpg in that series.

Wade had two really bad games against Atlanta, games 1 and 4. In the other 5 games, Wade averaged 32.6 ppg on 65.1% TS...eerily similar to what he did against Boston in 10, except without all the TOs. Granted, Boston was a better defensive team, but let's not sell that 09 Hawks defense short...they were an above average defense during the regular season, and as pointed out before, they had athletic defenders on the wings to throw at Wade.

So we have a comparable 5 game stretch in the playoffs between 09 Wade and 10 Wade...09 Wade just had two stinkers thrown in. Are those 2 games really enough to ignore 09 Wade's clearly superior regular season?

[Dr Positivity]

Ok, but what does a player being better in the regular season really do for a team? Is it that far fetched to say a better 1st rd playoff series gives a team more value than a better last 1/3 of the regular season? Playing better in the RS gets the team a better seed, which has some importance, but I tend to care more about them going full blast when the games matter in the PS

Furthermore in the case of 2010 vs 2009 Wade - how much more impact could 2009 Wade have been having than 2010 Wade in the RS, when the 2010 Heat did better. I don't like making assumptions about a player's impact based on W/L difference between years, but how much worse do we suppose the rest of the 09 Heat to be than 10 Heat, that 09 Wade would be a significant upgrade over 2010 Wade despite 09 Heat having 42 W pythagorean and 10 48 W. I have some issues with the way "impact" in the RS has been measured in this project (on/off), but I do appreciate the attempt to try and treat that as the most important thing. I think if one tries to evaluate how much Ws 2010 Wade added to his team vs 2009, the difference between the two seasons in the RS starts to look a lot less significant. 2010 Wade's regular season impact is VERY VERY impressive. More impressive than 06/07 Bryant taking those teams to a mid playoff seed IMO

[Lightning25]

]Furthermore in the case of 2010 vs 2009 Wade - how much more impact could 2009 Wade have been having than 2010 Wade in the RS, when the 2010 Heat did better.

I would say the 2010 Heat team was much better than the 2009 Heat team. Jermaine O'Neal was very good in the regular season from what I could recall while he flamed out badly in the playoffs by shooting 17% from the field. Quentin Richardson stepped up that season due to that season being a contract year. Dorell Wright started to get playing time and improve as a player. There were tons of variables that contribute to why the 2010 Heat did better than the 2009 Heat other than just simply Dwyane Wade.

[bastillon]

For all the talk of 10 Wade playing amazing against Boston, and 09 Wade struggling against Atlanta...09 Wade had a 112 ORating against Atlanta, while 10 Wade had a 115 ORating. 10 Wade averaged over 5 TOpg in that series.

Wade had two really bad games against Atlanta, games 1 and 4. In the other 5 games, Wade averaged 32.6 ppg on 65.1% TS...eerily similar to what he did against Boston in 10, except without all the TOs. Granted, Boston was a better defensive team, but let's not sell that 09 Hawks defense short...they were an above average defense during the regular season, and as pointed out before, they had athletic defenders on the wings to throw at Wade.

So we have a comparable 5 game stretch in the playoffs between 09 Wade and 10 Wade...09 Wade just had two stinkers thrown in. Are those 2 games really enough to ignore 09 Wade's clearly superior regular season?

there's a much bigger issue. Wade 09 had a back injury that would limit him even moreso going deeper in the postseason. I don't think there are any accounts saying Wade 10 was injured or anything. I'd give it to Wade 10 based on his health alone, even if his performance wasn't clearly superior (and it was!).

[C-izMe]

Slightly re-worded re-post blurb about why Robinson's peak should be next

Peak Robinson is one of the best defensive players the game has ever seen. He also can score a consistent 25 ppg on good efficiency as long as he's not asked to carry the offense on his own against an excellent team. I think people often look at that last line as "that mean's he's a flawed offensive player!", whereas in reality what it means is that he can't be the ONLY primary offensive threat and/or solely responsible for creating for both himself and his teammates. Offensively, he's a unique combo of Chris Bosh and Dwight Howard. Defensively, he's more of a souped up version of Dwight Howard with incredible speed to go along with the vertical gifts and rim protection. Put Robinson out there with some of the good offense-creating wings of this generation like a Ginobili, or a Pierce, or a Rockets TMac, or a Philly Iverson, or a Toronto Carter and I'm firmly convinced peak Robinson is the best player on a championship team. Put Robinson out there with perimeter players on the order of what some of the previously-voted in centers got to play with such as young Magic, old Oscar, young-prime Kobe or Wade, and you just might be looking at a dynasty. His peak years in San Antonio didn't show him to be flawed...it showed him to be miscast. But even miscast, Robinson was able to consistently maximize his team's potential while putting up video game individual numbers and having some of the best 2-way impact we've seen. He may not be as good as Shaq, Hakeem, KG or Duncan at their bests...but I think he's better than he's being given credit for, as he's not THAT far behind them.

Where we differ. I'm not comparing second options to first options yet. His defense is great but offensively he's a second option. I really think he's in the Ewing tier and shouldn't be mentioned now. Offensively he's slightly better than Ewing and I'll say he's slightly better defensively too. Definetly can't see him in yet.

I wish the terms "1st option" and "2nd option" would die a fiery death because of how terribly they're used on this board. I'm much, much more interested in the overall quality of the player than I am in what their role is called. By the "1st/2nd option" logic neither Bill Russell nor Bill Walton should even be up for debate yet, since neither are primary scorers. I completely reject that logic, as they were obviously the dominant players on their teams regardless of who was the leading scorer.

In Robinson's case it's even more ridiculous, because not only would he be the dominant defensive player on his team he would very likely be the leading scorer as well. Put him next to Manu or the other good 2nd-best-player-types that I laid out, and he's the best defender and leading scorer on a champion. He'd clearly be by far the best player.

That's what matters to me.

My bad. I really meant first option to mean best player. Shouldn't have typed up first option. Robinson is great in the regular season but not good enough to lead a championship level team. If Robinson played on any of those Duncan championship teams could you see him winning? I personally believe they would fall short. How about putting him in Shaq's place for the three peat. I personally think they don't make the Finals in any of those years. We can even go to Dirk; I still don't see him making the Finals in 06 and 11. His offense is just too weak to lead anyone and if you place him with a great wing scorer/playmaker he'll probably be better than DRob (or at least better in the PS and more valuable).

[ardee]

Slightly re-worded re-post blurb about why Robinson's peak should be next

Peak Robinson is one of the best defensive players the game has ever seen. He also can score a consistent 25 ppg on good efficiency as long as he's not asked to carry the offense on his own against an excellent team. I think people often look at that last line as "that mean's he's a flawed offensive player!", whereas in reality what it means is that he can't be the ONLY primary offensive threat and/or solely responsible for creating for both himself and his teammates. Offensively, he's a unique combo of Chris Bosh and Dwight Howard. Defensively, he's more of a souped up version of Dwight Howard with incredible speed to go along with the vertical gifts and rim protection. Put Robinson out there with some of the good offense-creating wings of this generation like a Ginobili, or a Pierce, or a Rockets TMac, or a Philly Iverson, or a Toronto Carter and I'm firmly convinced peak Robinson is the best player on a championship team. Put Robinson out there with perimeter players on the order of what some of the previously-voted in centers got to play with such as young Magic, old Oscar, young-prime Kobe or Wade, and you just might be looking at a dynasty. His peak years in San Antonio didn't show him to be flawed...it showed him to be miscast. But even miscast, Robinson was able to consistently maximize his team's potential while putting up video game individual numbers and having some of the best 2-way impact we've seen. He may not be as good as Shaq, Hakeem, KG or Duncan at their bests...but I think he's better than he's being given credit for, as he's not THAT far behind them.

Where we differ. I'm not comparing second options to first options yet. His defense is great but offensively he's a second option. I really think he's in the Ewing tier and shouldn't be mentioned now. Offensively he's slightly better than Ewing and I'll say he's slightly better defensively too. Definetly can't see him in yet.

I've said in team-building scenarios that I don't have a problem with choosing Robinson for a team so long as he isn't its best player, but I don't buy him being capable of being the best player on a championship team. I think I read somewhere about Robinson being able to play Garnett's role in Boston in '08, but Garnett was Boston's best player. No, it isn't necessary for a player to be a team's leading scorer in order to be its best player, but I believe that attempting to make Robinson the best player on a championship team is miscasting him. I will have to give some thought as to where to place him.

But do you think Garnett was actually better in '08 than a peak Robinson? Robinson CAN be the best player on his team, he just needs a good perimeter to carry the offense. His defensive impact can only be minimized if you actually go and tell him not to rebound or block shots. He may not be able to be the best offensive player on a title team (like '08 Garnett), but why can't he be the best overall player on a title team if he had better better offensive perimeter players?

[C-izMe]

I would say 08 KG is definetly better. He's clearly better offensively and defensively he led the best defensive title team ever (not counting Russell of course). Robinson only has better numbers.

[colts18]

I would say 08 KG is definetly better. He's clearly better offensively and defensively he led the best defensive title team ever (not counting Russell of course). Robinson only has better numbers.

How was 08 KG better offensively? The Celtics actually performed better offensively in the games KG missed than in the games he played. It's much easier to look good on offense when you have a good passer like Rondo and Pierce/Allen taking pressure off of you. Robinson would look so much better if he had Ray Allen on his side.

[colts18]

I'm surprised by the lack of Dirk talk. He led easily one of the worst casts to a title against one of the most difficult paths in NBA history and everyone had a worst title cast has been voted already.

[C-izMe]

I would say 08 KG is definetly better. He's clearly better offensively and defensively he led the best defensive title team ever (not counting Russell of course). Robinson only has better numbers.

How was 08 KG better offensively? The Celtics actually performed better offensively in the games KG missed than in the games he played. It's much easier to look good on offense when you have a good passer like Rondo and Pierce/Allen taking pressure off of you. Robinson would look so much better if he had Ray Allen on his side.

Without him they still had Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. It's possible they assumed they couldn't be good defensively without him and focused entirely on offense (and those two can definetly carry a team).

[colts18]

I would say 08 KG is definetly better. He's clearly better offensively and defensively he led the best defensive title team ever (not counting Russell of course). Robinson only has better numbers.

How was 08 KG better offensively? The Celtics actually performed better offensively in the games KG missed than in the games he played. It's much easier to look good on offense when you have a good passer like Rondo and Pierce/Allen taking pressure off of you. Robinson would look so much better if he had Ray Allen on his side.

Without him they still had Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. It's possible they assumed they couldn't be good defensively without him and focused entirely on offense (and those two can definetly carry a team).

Even with all 3 of those guys, the Celtics offense wasn't that good. I'm pretty sure if 94-96 Robinson had a legit 2nd and 3rd option like Allen/Pierce, he would look much better.

[ardee]

I would say 08 KG is definetly better. He's clearly better offensively and defensively he led the best defensive title team ever (not counting Russell of course). Robinson only has better numbers.

How was 08 KG better offensively? The Celtics actually performed better offensively in the games KG missed than in the games he played. It's much easier to look good on offense when you have a good passer like Rondo and Pierce/Allen taking pressure off of you. Robinson would look so much better if he had Ray Allen on his side.

Without him they still had Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. It's possible they assumed they couldn't be good defensively without him and focused entirely on offense (and those two can definetly carry a team).

That's a weak, hypothetical argument. KG in his Boston years could only shoot jumpers that others created for him. D-Rob at least had a face-up game that was devastating against non-elite post defenders, and you could run an offense through him against 90% of the teams in the league.

And Robinson when he had a good team anchored a defense almost as good as KG's '08 defense in 1999. So I don't see how KG is clearly better.

[Lightning25]

That's a weak, hypothetical argument. KG in his Boston years could only shoot jumpers that others created for him. D-Rob at least had a face-up game that was devastating against non-elite post defenders, and you could run an offense through him against 90% of the teams in the league..

KG was the first option and was the Celtics' post scorer in 2008. It was after the knee injury in 2009 when KG started relying on his teammates to create for him but he could do it in his first year in Boston when he was still in his prime.

[therealbig3]

Well who was the anchor of the 99 defense, Robinson or Duncan? Even if it was Robinson, you had another guy about as good as he was, so it's a little unfair to give Robinson credit as being the anchor (which implies that things fall apart without him). He was certainly not the same type of defensive anchor that KG was in Boston.

[colts18]

Old Robinson (01-03) was still a defensive anchor. If the old injured Robinson can be, I imagine prime Robinson that focused solely on defense could be an anchor too.

[drza]

My bad. I really meant first option to mean best player. Shouldn't have typed up first option. Robinson is great in the regular season but not good enough to lead a championship level team. If Robinson played on any of those Duncan championship teams could you see him winning? I personally believe they would fall short. How about putting him in Shaq's place for the three peat. I personally think they don't make the Finals in any of those years. We can even go to Dirk; I still don't see him making the Finals in 06 and 11. His offense is just too weak to lead anyone and if you place him with a great wing scorer/playmaker he'll probably be better than DRob (or at least better in the PS and more valuable).

I think if you put peak Robinson next to '99 Robinson in '99, there's a good chance they still win that title. Similar in 2005 and 2007, when Manu and Parker were both playing major offensive roles.

I think if you put peak Robinson in for Shaq in 2001 or 2002, where Kobe had started reaching his level and was a big impact player, they still have good chances to win.

I don't think peak Robinson gets it done in 2003 or 2000, which ties into my earlier stated belief that he wasn't as good as Duncan/Shaq at their absolute bests and each of those title teams required them at their absolute bests. But I do think Robinson could have been the best player on championship teams in other circumstances, including the circumstances under which many of the other greats actually got to play.

[C-izMe]

Old Robinson (01-03) was still a defensive anchor. If the old injured Robinson can be, I imagine prime Robinson that focused solely on defense could be an anchor too.

No he wasn't. I might not remember watching prime Robinson but I remember watching hin from 01-03. He was an Omar Asik level defender by then, great in about 25 minutes a game but he couldn't anchor a team at all. I'm pretty sure a certain someone on the list already anchored those teams...

And in 99 Duncan led that team on both ends or was at least equal to DRob defensively (I've only seen playoff games from 99 though but that's what I observed).

[C-izMe]

My bad. I really meant first option to mean best player. Shouldn't have typed up first option. Robinson is great in the regular season but not good enough to lead a championship level team. If Robinson played on any of those Duncan championship teams could you see him winning? I personally believe they would fall short. How about putting him in Shaq's place for the three peat. I personally think they don't make the Finals in any of those years. We can even go to Dirk; I still don't see him making the Finals in 06 and 11. His offense is just too weak to lead anyone and if you place him with a great wing scorer/playmaker he'll probably be better than DRob (or at least better in the PS and more valuable).

I think if you put peak Robinson next to '99 Robinson in '99, there's a good chance they still win that title. Similar in 2005 and 2007, when Manu and Parker were both playing major offensive roles.

I think if you put peak Robinson in for Shaq in 2001 or 2002, where Kobe had started reaching his level and was a big impact player, they still have good chances to win.

I don't think peak Robinson gets it done in 2003 or 2000, which ties into my earlier stated belief that he wasn't as good as Duncan/Shaq at their absolute bests and each of those title teams required them at their absolute bests. But I do think Robinson could have been the best player on championship teams in other circumstances, including the circumstances under which many of the other greats actually got to play.

Looking back on that I can see a title in 07 as the best player. Any title in LA would be because the Kobester led though.

[therealbig3]

4 hours left in the voting:


09 Wade - 3 (C-izMe, Lightning25, therealbig3)

66 West - 2 (ardee, Dr Positivity)

06 Wade - 1 (JordansBulls)

62 Baylor - 1 (Josephpaul)

95 Robinson - 1 (DavidStern)

83 M. Malone - 1 (PTB Fan)

[therealbig3]

BTW, I'd vote 11 Wade over 10 Wade, personally.

I'm actually considering switching to 11 Wade from 09 Wade. It's close, though.