Peaks Project #13

[Dr Spaceman]

It is worth considering that the Warriors were worse offensively with Curry off the floor than the Heat without Wade in 2009. The Warriors were also substantially better with Curry on than the Heat with Ware.

And that's highly irrelevant here given the supporting casts of Heat 09 vs. GSW 15. One is a joke of a cast, the other is one of the most stacked teams of all-time.

We can't have it both ways, talking about GSW beating teams by 20, having some historic point differential and then talks about how the "Warriors" were better with Curry on than the Heat were with Wade on. Yeah, they better be or it would be weird if they weren't.

In the context of the first sentence, the second one makes sense. All I'm saying is Curry's net on/off is higher than Wade's. Why would this be the case if the argument is Wade had to carry a worse cast?

[70sFan]

1st ballot - Julius Erving 1976
2nd ballot - Oscar Robertson 1964
2nd ballot - Bill Walton 1977

I don't have enough time to explain my votes. I'm suprised to see Paul and Curry over Oscar to be fair. I think they have a case, but people became a little biased to his era.

If Oscar has entered the ballot for you, why not West?

West will fight with Wade for the next spot in my voting. I'm not sure which one should I take. Right now West defense and range are key factors for me.

[Dr Spaceman]

Also as it pertains to Wade, i understand he doesn't provide the kind of spacing that Curry does, but i don't think enough weight is put into the way his agressive attacking style puts pressure on and collapses defenses. Even if Curry is a tad better offensively(i may or may not agree not really sure), it isn't a large gap like people are implying. The defensive gap is clearly bigger, and when it comes to Curry's defense people seem to sweeping under the rug that he had the best defensive squad in basketball backing him up. They won in part due to Curry's offensive brilliance but also their team defense had a whole to do with that. I think even with the offensive cast he had which was very underrated he probably should've had the #1 ranked offense if it was a top 5 or GOAT level offensive season like some claim. I have little to no doubt that Wade on the Warriors in place of Curry would've also resulted in a top 5 offense, 65-67 wins and a title. Wade wouldn't provide the same spacing but he'd still be getting his teammates open looks when he gets doubled on his drives. I think their offense would've been comparable but their d would be even stronger. Wade along with Iggy, Barnes and Klay on the perimeter would be nasty defensively. If you put Curry on the 09 heat how much would he elevate the offense when his best players are Beasley, and a part time injured past prime Jermaine Oneal and Marion who weren't great offensively even in their primes? Thats my 2 cents at least.

Wade is actually one of the best floor spacers in the game because of his movement with and without the ball. He has unprecedented gravity and he's always been one of the best cutters in the game.

No, I am not saying he has more gravity than Curry but it's good enough to the point where gravity or spacing shouldn't be an issue for peak Wade vs. Curry.

Give peak Wade another capable ball handler/play maker and he would have been even better offensively.

This is the link to the article: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11743150/nba-examining-why-defenders-play-close-dwyane-wade-3-point-line

If anybody wants a full copy feel free to PM me.

I'm sorry, but calling Wade "one of the best floor spacers in the game" just doesn't fly. There are multiple examples of smart playoff defenses taking advantage of the weaknesses in the LeBron/Wade pairing, most notably the Spurs. I get what this article is saying, but making a conclusion based on one stat is thin- remember the Grantland article about how Chris Paul was supposedly the best defender in the league based on his shot chart? Yeah. I'm certainly not going to use that to argue Paul here.

It also just goes against the nature of Wade's game on the most basic level. He's a dude who likes to dribble at the top of the key, and wait for holes in the defense that he can explode through. It's worked really well for him, but take away the most important part of anyone's game and they're not going to be as effective.

[thizznation]

Though I know you're not aiming this at me, fwiw, I'm not being dismissive of the '76 ABA. But there are some realities to deal with: the '76 ABA was a weaker league than the post-merger NBA (which encompasses the majority of the other candidates we're looking at presently)---I don't think this is even particularly debatable---and probably is not any tougher (perhaps even marginally weaker) than the NBA of the mid-60's (wrt: Oscar, West).

I wasn't and I admit I was being a tad dramatic. I can get that the league was perhaps not as strong in 76 than the merged league in 77. The thing is I think this gap is small. I could get behind that league strength was not very different from mid 60's NBA to mid 70's ABA as long as we account for pace difference and rule changes.

Some players thrived to a similar (or even higher) degree in the NBA as they did in the ABA. But the VAST majority of players who spanned both leagues saw their numbers take a significant dip upon joining the NBA, never again to even approach the quality of performance (relative to their peers) that they enjoyed in the ABA. I don't find that to be coincidence, nor something that can be explained away with injury or similar narratives in all cases.
Erving is among those who saw significant decline. Injury narrative aside, he still looks phenomenally athletic in the NBA (compared to the '74 and '76 footage I've seen), so I simply don't buy that as the sole reason.

I need to do more research but with Julius Erving and Rick Barry we can see that the drop of production is more of a function of the reduction of minutes rather than decrease in performance. I believe it is more than fair to give them a year to adjust to their new team. When LeBron had a drop in production after he joined the Heat in 2011, did the league get stronger from 2010? No, LeBron just needed a year to adjust to the chemistry of his new team.

And specifically wrt the Nets #1-rated defense, it's worth noting that they were only -2.4 to league average (that may not be sufficient for even top 10 status---and basically never good enough for top 5---in the modern NBA); and this in a league that didn't lend a lot of focus to defense, too.
You combine this with concerns about general strength of league, lack of indications of major defensive impact later in his career, and there's plenty of room to question or doubt whether or not peak Erving is actually a big impact (defensively) player.
***And this does NOT mean I don't think he was the biggest defensive impact player on the '76 Nets. It means I'm questioning how much value we should attach to being the biggest impact defender on the '76 Nets.

I agree with pretty much everything here. I am not saying that Erving is impacting as much as a Center. I used the term anchoring the best defense because he was the best defender on that team. Usually defensive anchor is synonymous with a Center with top level defensive impact but that isn't necessarily what I'm trying to imply Erving was. I'm trying to say that 1976 Dr J had half of 1977 Bill Walton's defensive impact. I realize that may be an overstatement when reading other people's opinions but I think that is less far fetched than saying that Dr J was barley above neutral defensively.

[trex_8063]

1st ballot - Julius Erving 1976
2nd ballot - Oscar Robertson 1964
2nd ballot - Bill Walton 1977

I don't have enough time to explain my votes. I'm suprised to see Paul and Curry over Oscar to be fair. I think they have a case, but people became a little biased to his era.

If Oscar has entered the ballot for you, why not West?

Didn't ask me, but since I also have Oscar as my 2nd ballot and no West, I figure the question applies to me as well.....

For myself, I feel Oscar was the more dominant and impactful offensive player (more impressive individual stat-lines and a string of #1 offenses to back that up). I consider West the better defensive player, but Oscar no slouch in that regard either (with general impressions about how much a guard can impact the defensive side of the ball vs. how much he can effect the offensive side, too....). Robertson a significantly more effective rebounder as well, for what that's worth in a PG.
And I forget who it was that presented WOWY data for both in another thread (Moonbeam??), and while West's was very impressive.....Oscar's was even more so.
Not a big gap overall imo; but even a small gap can be the difference of 4-8 places in a project like this.

[PaulieWal]

It is worth considering that the Warriors were worse offensively with Curry off the floor than the Heat without Wade in 2009. The Warriors were also substantially better with Curry on than the Heat with Ware.

And that's highly irrelevant here given the supporting casts of Heat 09 vs. GSW 15. One is a joke of a cast, the other is one of the most stacked teams of all-time.

We can't have it both ways, talking about GSW beating teams by 20, having some historic point differential and then talks about how the "Warriors" were better with Curry on than the Heat were with Wade on. Yeah, they better be or it would be weird if they weren't.

In the context of the first sentence, the second one makes sense. All I'm saying is Curry's net on/off is higher than Wade's. Why would this be the case if the argument is Wade had to carry a worse cast?

I have said this a few times on this board. I think Curry's 15 on/off should be taken with a grain of salt given how many games were the Warriors' bench scrubs vs. the other teams' bench scrubs in 4th quarters.

With more context overall the Heat were way worse without Wade than the Warriors were without Curry.

[PaulieWal]

Also as it pertains to Wade, i understand he doesn't provide the kind of spacing that Curry does, but i don't think enough weight is put into the way his agressive attacking style puts pressure on and collapses defenses. Even if Curry is a tad better offensively(i may or may not agree not really sure), it isn't a large gap like people are implying. The defensive gap is clearly bigger, and when it comes to Curry's defense people seem to sweeping under the rug that he had the best defensive squad in basketball backing him up. They won in part due to Curry's offensive brilliance but also their team defense had a whole to do with that. I think even with the offensive cast he had which was very underrated he probably should've had the #1 ranked offense if it was a top 5 or GOAT level offensive season like some claim. I have little to no doubt that Wade on the Warriors in place of Curry would've also resulted in a top 5 offense, 65-67 wins and a title. Wade wouldn't provide the same spacing but he'd still be getting his teammates open looks when he gets doubled on his drives. I think their offense would've been comparable but their d would be even stronger. Wade along with Iggy, Barnes and Klay on the perimeter would be nasty defensively. If you put Curry on the 09 heat how much would he elevate the offense when his best players are Beasley, and a part time injured past prime Jermaine Oneal and Marion who weren't great offensively even in their primes? Thats my 2 cents at least.

Wade is actually one of the best floor spacers in the game because of his movement with and without the ball. He has unprecedented gravity and he's always been one of the best cutters in the game.

No, I am not saying he has more gravity than Curry but it's good enough to the point where gravity or spacing shouldn't be an issue for peak Wade vs. Curry.

Give peak Wade another capable ball handler/play maker and he would have been even better offensively.

This is the link to the article: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11743150/nba-examining-why-defenders-play-close-dwyane-wade-3-point-line

If anybody wants a full copy feel free to PM me.

I'm sorry, but calling Wade "one of the best floor spacers in the game" just doesn't fly. There are multiple examples of smart playoff defenses taking advantage of the weaknesses in the LeBron/Wade pairing, most notably the Spurs. I get what this article is saying, but making a conclusion based on one stat is thin- remember the Grantland article about how Chris Paul was supposedly the best defender in the league based on his shot chart? Yeah. I'm certainly not going to use that to argue Paul here.

It also just goes against the nature of Wade's game on the most basic level. He's a dude who likes to dribble at the top of the key, and wait for holes in the defense that he can explode through. It's worked really well for him, but take away the most important part of anyone's game and they're not going to be as effective.

That's a pretty disingenuous argument to use when you are comparing a cripple Wade from 13 playoffs to make the point. I am not even sure what your argument is here given how much Wade struggled in those playoffs.

Crippled Wade doesn't factor here vs. healthy 13 RS or 09 Wade.

You may think it doesn't fly but he's shown that with another capable playmaker he's one of the best cutters, off-ball movers in the game and that creates gravity/floor-spacing. Countering that with an example of the Spurs when they got lucky facing a hesitant LeBron for the first 5 games and a crippled Wade...okay. That doesn't fly .

[thizznation]

And that's highly irrelevant here given the supporting casts of Heat 09 vs. GSW 15. One is a joke of a cast, the other is one of the most stacked teams of all-time.

We can't have it both ways, talking about GSW beating teams by 20, having some historic point differential and then talks about how the "Warriors" were better with Curry on than the Heat were with Wade on. Yeah, they better be or it would be weird if they weren't.

In the context of the first sentence, the second one makes sense. All I'm saying is Curry's net on/off is higher than Wade's. Why would this be the case if the argument is Wade had to carry a worse cast?

I have said this a few times on this board. I think Curry's 15 on/off should be taken with a grain of salt given how many games were the Warriors' bench scrubs vs. the other teams' bench scrubs in 4th quarters.

With more context overall the Heat were way worse without Wade than the Warriors were without Curry.

If Curry is sitting out 4th quarters and Warrior scrubs are playing the other team's scrubs, that isn't going to boost Curry's on/off. Curry does his work vs the starters and sits. He doesn't get to feast on the scrubs.

[Dr Spaceman]

1st ballot - Julius Erving 1976
2nd ballot - Oscar Robertson 1964
2nd ballot - Bill Walton 1977

I don't have enough time to explain my votes. I'm suprised to see Paul and Curry over Oscar to be fair. I think they have a case, but people became a little biased to his era.

If Oscar has entered the ballot for you, why not West?

Didn't ask me, but since I also have Oscar as my 2nd ballot and no West, I figure the question applies to me as well.....

For myself, I feel Oscar was the more dominant and impactful offensive player (more impressive individual stat-lines and a string of #1 offenses to back that up). I consider West the better defensive player, but Oscar no slouch in that regard either (with general impressions about how much a guard can impact the defensive side of the ball vs. how much he can effect the offensive side, too....). Robertson a significantly more effective rebounder as well, for what that's worth in a PG.
And I forget who it was that presented WOWY data for both in another thread (Moonbeam??), and while West's was very impressive.....Oscar's was even more so.
Not a big gap overall imo; but even a small gap can be the difference of 4-8 places in a project like this.

ElGee's WOWY? I got a very different impression from that data. And his interpretation was similar to mine FWIW.

Here's my spreadsheet, I have it saved in Drive: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cFY3Qk8eLJo8_bKK0z4k8K-A3UpwQRGOCAsrSuUeQl0/edit?usp=docslist_api

[Dr Spaceman]

And that's highly irrelevant here given the supporting casts of Heat 09 vs. GSW 15. One is a joke of a cast, the other is one of the most stacked teams of all-time.

We can't have it both ways, talking about GSW beating teams by 20, having some historic point differential and then talks about how the "Warriors" were better with Curry on than the Heat were with Wade on. Yeah, they better be or it would be weird if they weren't.

In the context of the first sentence, the second one makes sense. All I'm saying is Curry's net on/off is higher than Wade's. Why would this be the case if the argument is Wade had to carry a worse cast?

I have said this a few times on this board. I think Curry's 15 on/off should be taken with a grain of salt given how many games were the Warriors' bench scrubs vs. the other teams' bench scrubs in 4th quarters.

With more context overall the Heat were way worse without Wade than the Warriors were without Curry.

How many 4th quarters did Curry sit in 13-14? Because his on/off is actually better that year.

[trex_8063]

Some players thrived to a similar (or even higher) degree in the NBA as they did in the ABA. But the VAST majority of players who spanned both leagues saw their numbers take a significant dip upon joining the NBA, never again to even approach the quality of performance (relative to their peers) that they enjoyed in the ABA. I don't find that to be coincidence, nor something that can be explained away with injury or similar narratives in all cases.
Erving is among those who saw significant decline. Injury narrative aside, he still looks phenomenally athletic in the NBA (compared to the '74 and '76 footage I've seen), so I simply don't buy that as the sole reason.

I need to do more research but with Julius Erving and Rick Barry we can see that the drop of production is more of a function of the reduction of minutes rather than decrease in performance.

No, this isn't true. Look at Erving's per 100 possession numbers: they all go down......ALL of them. Pts, reb, ast, stl, blk, every single one takes dip (and by >20% in some instances); his shooting efficiency (even relative to league avg) also takes a marginal dip.
Can also scrutinize PER and WS/48, BPM, etc, (per minute stats).....they all take LARGE drops.

I believe it is more than fair to give them a year to adjust to their new team. When LeBron had a drop in production after he joined the Heat in 2011, did the league get stronger from 2010? No, LeBron just needed a year to adjust to the chemistry of his new team.

I'd like to say that's the case for Erving, except that we DON'T see things improve in '78 (or '79): '78 is basically the same, and '79 is a little worse. And as I think Rebel presently, his on/off data gets even worse in '78 and '79 relative to what it was in '77.

[PaulieWal]

If Curry is sitting out 4th quarters and Warrior scrubs are playing the other team's scrubs, that isn't going to boost Curry's on/off. Curry does his work vs the starters and sits. He doesn't get to feast on the scrubs.

Fair enough but the 09 Heat were -11 with Wade off the floor compared to -1.2 for Curry.

[Dr Spaceman]

Wade is actually one of the best floor spacers in the game because of his movement with and without the ball. He has unprecedented gravity and he's always been one of the best cutters in the game.

No, I am not saying he has more gravity than Curry but it's good enough to the point where gravity or spacing shouldn't be an issue for peak Wade vs. Curry.

Give peak Wade another capable ball handler/play maker and he would have been even better offensively.

This is the link to the article: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11743150/nba-examining-why-defenders-play-close-dwyane-wade-3-point-line

If anybody wants a full copy feel free to PM me.

I'm sorry, but calling Wade "one of the best floor spacers in the game" just doesn't fly. There are multiple examples of smart playoff defenses taking advantage of the weaknesses in the LeBron/Wade pairing, most notably the Spurs. I get what this article is saying, but making a conclusion based on one stat is thin- remember the Grantland article about how Chris Paul was supposedly the best defender in the league based on his shot chart? Yeah. I'm certainly not going to use that to argue Paul here.

It also just goes against the nature of Wade's game on the most basic level. He's a dude who likes to dribble at the top of the key, and wait for holes in the defense that he can explode through. It's worked really well for him, but take away the most important part of anyone's game and they're not going to be as effective.

That's a pretty disingenuous argument to use when you are comparing a cripple Wade from 13 playoffs to make the point. I am not even sure what your argument is here given how much Wade struggled in those playoffs.

Crippled Wade doesn't factor here vs. healthy 13 RS or 09 Wade.

You may think it doesn't fly but he's shown that with another capable playmaker he's one of the best cutters, off-ball movers in the game and that creates gravity/floor-spacing. Countering that with an example of the Spurs when they got lucky facing a hesitant LeBron for the first 5 games and a crippled Wade...okay. That doesn't fly .

It doesn't even have to be this complicated. If Wade were "one of the best floor spacers in the league", then why did the Heat decide to run smallball? Follow up: why is the Irving/Bron pairing so much more effective offensively?

Honestly, unless you have a good answer to these questions this isn't worth continuing because calling Wade "one of the best floor spacers in the league" in the context of a debate with Curry (!!!) without a truckload of evidence doesn't particularly strike me.

[PaulieWal]

It doesn't even have to be this complicated. If Wade were "one of the best floor spacers in the league", then why did the Heat decide to run smallball? Follow up: why is the Irving/Bron pairing so much more effective offensively?

Honestly, unless you have a good answer to these questions this isn't worth continuing because calling Wade "one of the best floor spacers in the league" in the context of a debate with Curry (!!!) without a truckload of evidence doesn't particularly strike me.

If you have a problem with "one of the best floor spacers", let's call him a good/underrated floor spacer. Mainly my point was that concerns about his lack of spacing are way overblown.

I don't care, he could just be a good floor spacer and that's good enough at his peak.

And you know why the Heat decided to go small. Because the league didn't have an answer for Bron at the 4 and because playing Haslem, Anthony, Pittman, Big Z or any other project big man was a death sentence for your offense in the playoffs. That's how the Celts were able to hang with the Heat in 2012 until that game 6.

Edit: The offense for smallball was mostly put LeBron/Wade in the post and let them find the 3 point shooters.

[thizznation]

Some players thrived to a similar (or even higher) degree in the NBA as they did in the ABA. But the VAST majority of players who spanned both leagues saw their numbers take a significant dip upon joining the NBA, never again to even approach the quality of performance (relative to their peers) that they enjoyed in the ABA. I don't find that to be coincidence, nor something that can be explained away with injury or similar narratives in all cases.
Erving is among those who saw significant decline. Injury narrative aside, he still looks phenomenally athletic in the NBA (compared to the '74 and '76 footage I've seen), so I simply don't buy that as the sole reason.

I need to do more research but with Julius Erving and Rick Barry we can see that the drop of production is more of a function of the reduction of minutes rather than decrease in performance.

No, this isn't true. Look at Erving's per 100 possession numbers: they all go down......ALL of them. Pts, reb, ast, stl, blk, every single one takes dip (and by >20% in some instances); his shooting efficiency (even relative to league avg) also takes a marginal dip.
Can also scrutinize PER and WS/48, BPM, etc, (per minute stats).....they all take LARGE drops.

I believe it is more than fair to give them a year to adjust to their new team. When LeBron had a drop in production after he joined the Heat in 2011, did the league get stronger from 2010? No, LeBron just needed a year to adjust to the chemistry of his new team.

I'd like to say that's the case for Erving, except that we DON'T see things improve in '78 (or '79): '78 is basically the same, and '79 is a little worse. And as I think Rebel presently, his on/off data gets even worse in '78 and '79 relative to what it was in '77.

I think there is some middle ground between ABA Julius Erving and the statistics we have from NBA on. Julius Erving in the NBA had a different role and was leaving his athletic prime and you could say there was a very slight increase of league strength. All three of those factors played into the statistical difference from ABA to NBA Juilus Erving. Having a black and white analysis of "the NBA numbers were never the same because the ABA was vastly weaker, thus explaining the reason for Erving's dominance" isn't taking into the whole picture in my opinion.

Rick Barry bringing up his NBA production to his ABA production after a season of adjusting to a new team also helps to debunk the vast superiority of the NBA.

[PaulieWal]

Follow up: why is the Irving/Bron pairing so much more effective offensively?

I missed this. Why exactly is the Irving/Bron pairing more effective offensively?

In before your answer is 33-3 or something.

[Dr Spaceman]

Follow up: why is the Irving/Bron pairing so much more effective offensively?

I missed this. Why exactly is the Irving/Bron pairing more effective offensively?

In before your answer is 33-3 or something.

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=43328782#p43328782

[trex_8063]

Quoting this here, Bob, as you just posted it in the now defunct #12 thread. Now I won't miss your ballots....

Tentative Ballot

10.Walton 77 +7.25 (+2.75 O/+4.50 D)

11.Robinson 94 +6.75 (+2.75 O/+4.00 D)

12. Magic 87 +6.75 (+7.00 O/-0.25 D)

13.Erving 76 +6.75 (+5.00 O/+1.75 D)

14.Jabbar 77 +6.50 (+5.00 O/+1.50 D)

[tie] 15.Wade 09 +6.25 (+5.00 O/+1.25 D)

[tie] 15.Curry 15 +6.25 (+6.25 O/+0.00 D)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Walton

Spoiler:

Walton's 77 I value pretty highly; I don't penalize for missed time much, but when we're talking about razor-thin divisions between players at the top like this, that's enough to push him from top 5 to lower top 10 for me (I might have considered him last thread if it weren't for that.

I definitely still see Walton's peak as higher than Kareem's though. With Kareem IMO his "super-peak" (best offensive year + best defensive year) would have probably have been top 5, but I don't think his two-way play ever peaked together, and as a result, I hold him in slightly lower regard than most others (probably 12 or 13), and might be considering Robinson over him as well. I think his offense peaked in his later years (late 70s - 80), while the defense peaked pretty high earlier in his Milwaukee years (overall I think his top years are pretty similar, but 77 is the standout). I think if his peak was really top 5ish, then he'd have to be considered the easy GOAT because those other top years aren't really that far below 77 and his longevity is exceptional, even amongst the other all-timers.

IMO, his offense is similar to the other high-post hubs, with weaker scoring skills (though he could scale up when the team needed). On defense, he stands out - I think his motor, shot-blocking, and overall lane presence makes him a better defensive player than those that we've discussed (outside of Russell of course).

Like I said earlier, health was the reason I had him this low to begin with, otherwise I would have pushed him at the 4-6 spots.

Curry

Spoiler:

On Curry's improvements in 2015

Huh. He's showed a marked improvement in his already amazing ability to shoot threes off the dribble, which he also seems to be doing better (and more frequently), despite the fact that he's now got a reputation for it and defenses that face GS will often make it a top priority to adapt to this ability.

Most clearly though, he's gotten much better at utilizing his crafty dribble to get into the lane (2014: 2.5 FGA at the rim and 4.4 FTA, 2015: 3.2 FGA at the rim and 4.8 FTA, despite minute decline from 36.5 to 32.8), and when he's there he's finishing at an elite level now (68%, gotten really comfortable with that floater, and his touch around the rim even in traffic is outstanding), up from 63%, despite the fact that he's become clearly more of a threat to get there and defenses are now more concerned with trying to control his penetration. Ultimately, this means he's more frequently able to collapse/disrupt defenses in the way that typical drive and dish guys are (while notably being a far superior pullup threat than any of those guys), and this is in addition to his already strong playmaking.

Building on that end, while he's no Nash/Paul, he's a clearly superior to most of the drive/kick wings/lead guards; he's more able to probe and force rotations/disruptions with his on-ball movement and then exploit openings/matchup advantages. Overall, his playmaking is certainly a step higher from before, he's more sound at running the system, he's brought his turnovers under control, and from what I've seen, his presence of mind/creation vision when he's off the ball seems to be, at the least, commendable, at best pretty remarkable.

I mean I can keep going. It seems pretty off base to suggest that he hasn't really improved "that much" this year, when he's gotten better at everything.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kind of conflicted on Wade vs. Curry. I'm a lot more firm in my evaluation of Wade than Curry. Its easier to find parallels for 09 Wade, in the RS, his offense is similar to 09 Lebron's. Lebron IMO is a better playmaker, better 3pt shooter, and a deadlier finisher, but Wade's better at actually getting to the basket, has a far superior complimentary midrange game, and has better instincts attacking defenses. Wade also measures out similarly to a younger Jordan, with a slightly less refined post-game/jumpshot/etc. It's easy for me to gauge him on that end, and on defense as well (high activity level in the lanes, weak-side shot blocking, has the length and athleticism to cover the rim while also being a versatile/pesky man defender, strong rebounding out of the two spot, etc.). I penalize him a slight bit for being injured during the postseason but its minor.

Curry I have a tougher time with. I've championed him pretty high, and I can see my thoughts on him fluctuating in both directions. Am I too high on his defense? He looks good in the GS system but I don't know how well that might translate to less disciplined teams (I don't see the smarts outside of just sticking with the system). Am I too high (or low) on his offense? We've never seen someone have degree of gravity outside the arc before (on and off the ball), so its hard to find a comparison, even for the sake of a relativity comparison.

Also, I really like 2010 and 2011 from Wade; IMO he's not far off from 09 in those years.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Might post some thoughts on Durant later.

[SideshowBob]

Quoting this here, Bob, as you just posted it in the now defunct #12 thread. Now I won't miss your ballots....

Tentative Ballot

10.Walton 77 +7.25 (+2.75 O/+4.50 D)

11.Robinson 94 +6.75 (+2.75 O/+4.00 D)

12. Magic 87 +6.75 (+7.00 O/-0.25 D)

13.Erving 76 +6.75 (+5.00 O/+1.75 D)

14.Jabbar 77 +6.50 (+5.00 O/+1.50 D)

[tie] 15.Wade 09 +6.25 (+5.00 O/+1.25 D)

[tie] 15.Curry 15 +6.25 (+6.25 O/+0.00 D)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Walton

Spoiler:

IMO, his offense is similar to the other high-post hubs, with weaker scoring skills (though he could scale up when the team needed). On defense, he stands out - I think his motor, shot-blocking, and overall lane presence makes him a better defensive player than those that we've discussed (outside of Russell of course).

Like I said earlier, health was the reason I had him this low to begin with, otherwise I would have pushed him at the 4-6 spots.

Curry

Spoiler:

On Curry's improvements in 2015

Huh. He's showed a marked improvement in his already amazing ability to shoot threes off the dribble, which he also seems to be doing better (and more frequently), despite the fact that he's now got a reputation for it and defenses that face GS will often make it a top priority to adapt to this ability.

Most clearly though, he's gotten much better at utilizing his crafty dribble to get into the lane (2014: 2.5 FGA at the rim and 4.4 FTA, 2015: 3.2 FGA at the rim and 4.8 FTA, despite minute decline from 36.5 to 32.8), and when he's there he's finishing at an elite level now (68%, gotten really comfortable with that floater, and his touch around the rim even in traffic is outstanding), up from 63%, despite the fact that he's become clearly more of a threat to get there and defenses are now more concerned with trying to control his penetration. Ultimately, this means he's more frequently able to collapse/disrupt defenses in the way that typical drive and dish guys are (while notably being a far superior pullup threat than any of those guys), and this is in addition to his already strong playmaking.

Building on that end, while he's no Nash/Paul, he's a clearly superior to most of the drive/kick wings/lead guards; he's more able to probe and force rotations/disruptions with his on-ball movement and then exploit openings/matchup advantages. Overall, his playmaking is certainly a step higher from before, he's more sound at running the system, he's brought his turnovers under control, and from what I've seen, his presence of mind/creation vision when he's off the ball seems to be, at the least, commendable, at best pretty remarkable.

I mean I can keep going. It seems pretty off base to suggest that he hasn't really improved "that much" this year, when he's gotten better at everything.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kind of conflicted on Wade vs. Curry. I'm a lot more firm in my evaluation of Wade than Curry. Its easier to find parallels for 09 Wade, in the RS, his offense is similar to 09 Lebron's. Lebron IMO is a better playmaker, better 3pt shooter, and a deadlier finisher, but Wade's better at actually getting to the basket, has a far superior complimentary midrange game, and has better instincts attacking defenses. Wade also measures out similarly to a younger Jordan, with a slightly less refined post-game/jumpshot/etc. It's easy for me to gauge him on that end, and on defense as well (high activity level in the lanes, weak-side shot blocking, has the length and athleticism to cover the rim while also being a versatile/pesky man defender, strong rebounding out of the two spot, etc.). I penalize him a slight bit for being injured during the postseason but its minor.

Curry I have a tougher time with. I've championed him pretty high, and I can see my thoughts on him fluctuating in both directions. Am I too high on his defense? He looks good in the GS system but I don't know how well that might translate to less disciplined teams (I don't see the smarts outside of just sticking with the system). Am I too high (or low) on his offense? We've never seen someone have degree of gravity outside the arc before (on and off the ball), so its hard to find a comparison, even for the sake of a relativity comparison.

Also, I really like 2010 and 2011 from Wade; IMO he's not far off from 09 in those years.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Might post some thoughts on Durant later.

My bad

[trex_8063]

I think there is some middle ground between ABA Julius Erving and the statistics we have from NBA on. Julius Erving in the NBA had a different role and was leaving his athletic prime and you could say there was a very slight increase of league strength. All three of those factors played into the statistical difference from ABA to NBA Juilus Erving. Having a black and white analysis of "the NBA numbers were never the same because the ABA was vastly weaker, thus explaining the reason for Erving's dominance" isn't taking into the whole picture in my opinion.

Absolutely I agree. And don't confuse what I'm saying: I'm not trying to suggest that '77 Erving='76 Erving. I simply feel that we cannot take his statistical dominance in '76 at face-value (at least not when comparing it to all these post-merger players).
Agreeing upon exactly where that middle ground is naturally going to be difficult.

Rick Barry bringing up his NBA production to his ABA production after a season of adjusting to a new team also helps to debunk the vast superiority of the NBA.

idk....again, if we take the stats at face-value, he clearly had his statistical peak between '69 and '70 in the ABA. I mean, his per 36 min numbers in '75 are barely behind what he was doing at his ABA peak, and his per 100 possessions stats---which I don't have up yet, but will try to get posted to that spreadsheet soon---are likely every bit equal (maybe even marginally better)......but on ~10% worse shooting efficiency (that's a MASSIVE gap in efficiency). He shredded the ABA in the '70 playoffs series, too. But no one considers that his peak because of where it occurred.

And though it's not my intent to suggest Barry wasn't athletic (he certainly was), he obviously wasn't the same class of athlete as Erving. His was a more skill-based game. And it's not uncommon for players with a more skill-based game to peak nearer to 30 years old (as opposed to the 25-27 age range we often see for your athletic outliers).