Peaks Project #17

[eminence]

Curry vs Dirk-My reasoning for picking Curry over Dirk. I feel most of both of their value came on the offensive end, so mostly going to focus on that. For what it's worth I'd slightly prefer Curry for defense for opportunity cost reasons (but not more than enough to break a virtual dead heat).

Reg season
Curry: 35.5 pts (10.4% rTS), 11.6 ast/4.7 TO
Dirk: 35.3 pts (7.1 rTS), 4.0 ast/2.9 TO

Playoffs
Curry: 36.9 pts(7.3% rTS), 8.3 ast/5.1 TO (vs #22 def, #4, #8, #18)
Dirk: 39.1 pts (6.8% rTS), 3.6 ast/4.4 TO (vs #14 def, #6, #15, #5)

Here are the numbers I generally look at when looking at an offensive players boxscore. Don't see a huge difference in terms of defenses face in the playoffs (slight edge Dirk, but not enough that I'm going to dig deeply into it). Cavs minus Love/Irving while worse overall were a better defense than #18 as well.

To me it seems pretty clear that Curry was directly generating more on ball offense than Dirk. Scoring volume is very similar for the two (slight edge Dirk), efficiency also similar (slight edge Curry), but in directly generating looks for his teammates Curry is pretty clearly ahead. In general I'll take direct offensive boxscore impact over indirect so to move Dirk ahead of Curry I'd have to believe Dirk has significantly more "gravity" on offense than Curry does. And I can't really convince myself of that. The main positive for Dirk is that he'll always be pulling an interior player away from the paint. Curry on the other hand is a better driver/ballhandler/passer and more likely to command additional attention, through the pick and roll or simply out on the perimeter as the Cavs tried to do. To me it comes down to Dirk pulling the more important player out(but rarely a teams true rim protector-eg Duncan hardly ever guarded Dirk), but Curry is pulling more players out, and to me that seems to be in Curry's favor. That's my gut feel on that, so to me Curry comes out slightly ahead in both direct boxscore and non-boxscore so overall is clearly a step ahead of Dirk offensively.

For the RAPM fans, haven't found a good source for 14-15 RAPM, but GotBuckets had their offensive FFAPM updated through mid February. Dirk in 2011 was at 7.91, while Curry through mid February was at 12.93 (would have been their 4th highest since 2005 behind '09 Paul, '10 Nash, and '10 Wade). Traditional RAPM isn't the biggest fan of Paul, but the other 2 seasons will appear in most top 5 RAPM seasons. So if I had to guess I'd say Curry would probably come out ahead of Dirk by RAPM as well.

[RSCD3_]

This will be my official ballot here:

11 Dirk
08 CP
08 Kobe

I wrestled with Kobe and KD but I think KObe had a great RS and a good playoffs until running into a a GOAT level defensive team in the Celts in the Finals.

11 Dirk is self-explanatory. His RS was good but his playoffs especially the first 3 rounds were spectacular. I actually think his Finals' performance gets overrated a tad but overall his playoffs were nothing short of complete dominance.

I have already made my case for 08 CP in the previous threads.

08 Kobe is an interesting choice for me because I really struggle with his peak all the time. I am putting him here but I am open to moving my ballot around as we move forward. I would be more than happy to consider KD, Curry, Tmac, Ewing, Nash etc. as the discussion moves forward.

Why not use 2009 Kobe as peak as he led a team to more success and had a better playoffs overall.

In your opinion how much of his 09 playoff success was due to maybe easier opponents? (in comparison to 08 ie)

By comparison

1ST Round

2008 Denver 3.71 SRS, 51 Wins, -1.2 RelDrtg
2009 Utah: 2.37 SRS, 48 Wins, -1.0 RelDRTG

WCSF

2008 Utah: 6.86 SRS, 54 Wins, -1.0 RelDrtg
2009 Rockets: 3.73 SRS, 53 Wins, -4.3 RelDRTG

WCF

2008 Spurs 4.73 SRS, 55 Wins, -5.7 RelDRTG
2009 Nuggets: 3.13 SRS, 54 Wins, -1.5 RelDRTG

Finals

2008 Celtics: 9.30 SRS, 66 Wins, -8.6 DRTG
2009 Magic: 6.48 SRS, 59 Wins, -6.9 RelDRTG

Averages

2008 6.12 SRS, 57.1 Wins -4.32 RelDRTG
2009 3.87 SRS, 53.5 Wins, -3.42 RelDRTG

Conclusion while the teams kobe may have faced were slightly better in 08, the defenses he faced where about the same. Not to mention his 2008 Finals was pretty poor. Since the teams he faced in 08 were stronger than 09 but relatively close defensively, the offensive edge was where a lot of the margin comes from since i havent been that high on kobe's defense i dont attribute much of his success towards better teams on the defensive end and thus i look more towards defensive ratings in the playoffs.

Also here's the RelDRTG's before the finals

2008: -2.64
2009:-2.60

And then in the finals he faces two dominant defensive teams

Here's what he puts up

2008 25.7 PPG on 50.5 TS%, 5.0 APG on 1.73 AST%-TOV% Ratio, 98 ORTG
2009 32.4 PPG on 52.5 TS%, 7.4 APG on 3.69 AST%-TOV% Ratio, 111 ORTG

The main crux of the argument is that 2008 and 2009 are relatively close and then in the playoffs stay the same. In the finals, Kobe plays poorly in one and admirably in the other. The scoring is still a little inefficent, his volume has increased though and his playmaking was fabulous, the assist numbers resemble a prime lebron series and it seemed he really boosted the team in this one. Do you see kobe's 2008 as clearly ahead of 2009 in the RS or PS, because the clear edge in the finals betwen two such close years before that seals the deals for me.

[Clyde Frazier]

On my phone, so just a quick point. The makeup of the 2011 mavs vs. 2015 warriors was pretty similar: star volume scorer who has elite floor spacing with a collection of outside shooters and above avg defenders. Both teams had great depth, with multiple players stepping up at different times in the playoffs. All that being said, I think players say 2-8 on the warriors were clearly better than 2-8 on the mavs. Does anyone disagree? To me, that's the difference in ranking dirk ahead of curry, small as it may be.

[trex_8063]

Calling all Curry voters


Short answer: I think Curry 15 was great, but that Dirk 11 was (at least in my mind) clearly better, with enough space for others to easily be voted in between. Have we had any other Dirk/Curry comparisons from the opposite POV? If not, I'd love to see some.

What Curry voters? It's like they've vanished. He had 25 pts in the last thread (more than double Dirk), barely losing to Wade. So far in this one: 12 pts.

Anyway, I think there's generally just a little more rose coloring in the glasses thru which you view Dirk than the ones with which you view Steph.

The space/defense-warping effect you're talking about, as to who did it better/more, is a somewhat subjective thing, imo. Both certainly had that effect to some degree.

wrt impact......again, it's not all about personal attributes where impact is concerned; somewhat about the circumstance around them too. And idk when full season '15 RAPM will be available, but I suspect it's going to indicate something like +7 PI RAPM for Curry (which isn't much behind '11 Dirk).

Box-based metrics look (as you noted) similar, and on a more talented roster, imo. Though I suspect Curry's more capable of scaling up the minutes (younger legs) than '11 version of Dirk would have been.


idk, so there's just a few tid-bits as I get ready to run out the door which maybe suggest it's closer than you're implying. That being said, I AM voting for Dirk ahead of Curry (though I'm going with '06, though it is nearly splitting hairs with '11).

[RebelWithACause]

Couldn't participate this time around, really busy right now.

PG ballot:
1. Curry
2. Nash
3. Paul
4. Penny
5. Baron

Wing ballot:
1. West
2. Kobe
3. McGrady
4. Durant

Big men ballot:
1. Nowitzki
2. Ewing
3. Barkley

That's my ballot going forward position wise.
Unfortunately Won't be able to contribute much until Monday though.

My overall ballot going forward:

1. Curry 2015
2. West 1966
3. Kobe 2008
4. Dirk 2011
5. Nash 2005
(6. Wade 2009)
7. McGrady 2003
8. Penny 1996
9. Durant 2014
10. Paul 2008 or 2015

Here are the explanations for Curry and West from last time.

I feel Curry is the ultimate top choice here. His never been seen before shooting, challenges defenses, like never before.
Incredible combination of shooting, playmaking and handles make him unstoppable.
One of my offensive GOATS.
Neutral defender which puts him slightly ahead of Nash among modern point guards. I have both of them ahead of Paul, who in my opinion quite clearly reached offensive heights like Curry or Nash.
In his peak year 08, he also wasn't a plus defender. Neutral probably.

With West and Robertson it comes down in-era domination.
The Wowy data really opened my eyes and made me curious about West.
I have West over Robertson because I believe West to be at least as good on offense as Robertson and a much better defender.
His portability is a lot better, because of his shooting and off-ball play and I would expect him to perform better in the modern era than the Big O.

The 3rd ballot was between Kobe and Dirk.
Basically a toss up for me.

[eminence]

On my phone, so just a quick point. The makeup of the 2011 mavs vs. 2015 warriors was pretty similar: star volume scorer who has elite floor spacing with a collection of outside shooters and above avg defenders. Both teams had great depth, with multiple players stepping up at different times in the playoffs. All that being said, I think players say 2-8 on the warriors were clearly better than 2-8 on the mavs. Does anyone disagree? To me, that's the difference in ranking dirk ahead of curry, small as it may be.

Not sure how this would equal ranking Dirk ahead... I agree the Warriors were better than the Mavs after the superstars and that led them to a more dominant season than those Mavs, but that says nothing about Curry vs Dirk. Why would I punish a guy for doing similar things on a better team? Your thought seems to essentially be: Dirk is better because the Mavs were worse.

In Math Terms:
'15 Warriors > '11 Mavs
'15 GSW 2-8 > '11 Mavs 2-8
'15 Curry ??? '11 Dirk

Unless you have definitive values on how much the GSW 2-8 were better than their Mavs counterparts and how much better the Warriors were than the Mavs a conclusion can't be reached using this logic for Curry vs. Dirk.

[thizznation]

Calling all Curry voters


Short answer: I think Curry 15 was great, but that Dirk 11 was (at least in my mind) clearly better, with enough space for others to easily be voted in between. Have we had any other Dirk/Curry comparisons from the opposite POV? If not, I'd love to see some.

What Curry voters? It's like they've vanished. He had 25 pts in the last thread (more than double Dirk), barely losing to Wade. So far in this one: 12 pts.

Anyway, I think there's generally just a little more rose coloring in the glasses thru which you view Dirk than the ones with which you view Steph.

The space/defense-warping effect you're talking about, as to who did it better/more, is a somewhat subjective thing, imo. Both certainly had that effect to some degree.

wrt impact......again, it's not all about personal attributes where impact is concerned; somewhat about the circumstance around them too. And idk when full season '15 RAPM will be available, but I suspect it's going to indicate something like +7 PI RAPM for Curry (which isn't much behind '11 Dirk).

Box-based metrics look (as you noted) similar, and on a more talented roster, imo. Though I suspect Curry's more capable of scaling up the minutes (younger legs) than '11 version of Dirk would have been.


idk, so there's just a few tid-bits as I get ready to run out the door which maybe suggest it's closer than you're implying. That being said, I AM voting for Dirk ahead of Curry (though I'm going with '06, though it is nearly splitting hairs with '11).

Yeah that is strange, Curry was neck and neck with Wade (I thought he was going to beat out Wade) and now he has experienced a fallout.

I'm still going with Curry as my number one pick. Curry was incredible in the post season and if it wasn't for him getting dropped on his head I have a feeling his stats would of been even higher. After he came back from that extremely nasty fall, late in the HOU series, he was a little bit off. Curry's offensive skill set is more valuable than any player on the table so far and he has proven himself at the highest level, through high pressure situations, injuries, and great defenses. With his improvement on defense he has the highest rating for me so far. He can take offenses to levels that they shouldn't be playing at, he isn't a liability on defense, he has high bbiq and leadership qualities, he can perform in the clutch. 2015 Curry has the total package.


1. Curry 2015
2. Bryant 2008
3. Ewing 1990


Kobe did heavy lifting with that 2008 team. I believe he sacrificed some individual stats for the triangle offense and could of increased his raw numbers if put in Tracy McGrady's situation. Even though the Lakers did have Phil Jackson, I think Kobe played a tremendous leadership role on that team. While the 2008 Lakers did have some talent, they weren't exactly star studded and more importantly they weren't the most seasoned and mature team. Odom, Bynum, Artest, Ariza, Gasol, all of these guys were either young, had maturity issues, or were not experienced post season performers, some had multiple checks by their names. Kobe did a great job playing the role as the mature and respected leader for this team and boosts his value for my rankings.

Ewing is going in for me because I just can't fit him in any lower. If you take into account his two way impact it gets to be problematic to try to get other guys ahead of him. He has great volume and efficiency but doesn't have the playmaking Curry and Bryant have. While Ewing has great raw stats, I think Curry and Bryant are having a better lift offensively due to playmaking and the gravity they command. Dirk is close for me but my main problem is the defense level he brings to you at the PF slot. PF is a more critical position to a teams' defense rather than PG or even SG so my main issue with Dirk is the defense he is giving you while occupying a front court position.

[PaulieWal]

Do you see kobe's 2008 as clearly ahead of 2009 in the RS or PS, because the clear edge in the finals betwen two such close years before that seals the deals for me.

That was a great post .

Yes, I do think Kobe's 08 RS was slightly better than his 09. In the playoffs as you mentioned 08 was slightly better teams though the defenses faced were about the same. I mean I am kinda hesitant to throw 08 out based on 6 games against an all-time Celts team peaking at the right time in the playoffs.

To be honest you can't go wrong with either, as I mentioned in my ballot post Kobe's the one guy I can never tell what his peak really is since the guy was annoyingly consistent in his prime for a lot of years. His defense has its ups and downs but his offense has been more or less consistent.

[Dr Positivity]

Ballot 1: Stephen Curry 2015

Ballot 2: Patrick Ewing 1990

Ballot 3: Jerry West 1966

Had same 3 last time

[Clyde Frazier]

On my phone, so just a quick point. The makeup of the 2011 mavs vs. 2015 warriors was pretty similar: star volume scorer who has elite floor spacing with a collection of outside shooters and above avg defenders. Both teams had great depth, with multiple players stepping up at different times in the playoffs. All that being said, I think players say 2-8 on the warriors were clearly better than 2-8 on the mavs. Does anyone disagree? To me, that's the difference in ranking dirk ahead of curry, small as it may be.

Not sure how this would equal ranking Dirk ahead... I agree the Warriors were better than the Mavs after the superstars and that led them to a more dominant season than those Mavs, but that says nothing about Curry vs Dirk. Why would I punish a guy for doing similar things on a better team? Your thought seems to essentially be: Dirk is better because the Mavs were worse.

In Math Terms:
'15 Warriors > '11 Mavs
'15 GSW 2-8 > '11 Mavs 2-8
'15 Curry ??? '11 Dirk

Unless you have definitive values on how much the GSW 2-8 were better than their Mavs counterparts and how much better the Warriors were than the Mavs a conclusion can't be reached using this logic for Curry vs. Dirk.

Considering much of the support for curry seems to be based on his championship run, I think comparing the rosters makes sense, especially since they mirror each other in many ways.

My point is that I'm not sure curry could lead that mavs team to a title. As unmatched as he is at creating 3s off the dribble, dirk really wasn't being stopped below the arc in isolation. He also made a living at the line in that postseason. And with the defense behind curry, I don't think he was relied on nearly as much relative to dirk. Chandler was a perfect fit, but dirk was still an integral part of that front line on the defensive end.

[theonlyclutch]

Final Ballot:
1st Ballot - 2015 Curry

AFAIK about the critiques around Curry in that "he had a great team of shooters, w/great spacing around him". I can't say I agree, apart from Klay:
-Draymond was shooting below league average from 3, with more than half of his shots being open, he shot 26.8% from open 3s in the postseason..., if he's a "great" shooter, then someone like Marion circa SSOL must have been as well (hint: he isn't)
-Barnes is hitting 40% on 3s, which is good in a vacuum...but more than a quarter of his shots are wide open, with around 3-quarters being open overall
-Iguodala was shooting around league average on 3s...and 60% on FTs, don't have the stats, but must imagine many of those shots are very open..
-Bogut obviously isn't shooting any 3s

2nd Ballot - 2014 Durant

3rd Ballot - 2011 Dirk

-Huge impact to the team, had an awesome playoff run, absolutely ridiculous post up numbers as provided by shutupandjam, his scoring skills don't bear repeating at that point, the Mavs (even accounting for Dirk missing games) certainly weren't dominant offensively in the way that the Warriors or the Thunder (were in 2013 w/ a healthy team), which takes away some points...

On that end though, would anyone want to make the case that 2003 might be Dirk's peak? He had a +20.4 net rating on a 8.00 SRS team, great individual production and impact on a team with a GOAT level offense without making other compromises..

[LA Bird]

Difference is that the Sixers didn't really deal with injuries

Still doesn't explain how Knicks BEFORE all the injuries and trades weren't as good as the 76ers.

Knicks (entire season): 1.41 MOV
Knicks (best 47 games): 2.96 MOV <-- Ewing/Oak/Strickland/Jackson all present
Sixers (entire season): 4.99 MOV
Sixers (best 47 games): 7.47 MOV

his supporting cast was actually pretty good (defensively they were 16th and Barkley wasn't good on that end, offensively only 3 of those top 8 rotation guys had lower than league average TS% and those guys all had low TOV%s which meant not a single one of them had a below average ORTG)

A -0.4 defensive support isn't exactly some major to write about. And if TS% is the way to judge offense...
Knicks minus Ewing: 53.0% TS
Sixers minus Barkley: 53.2% TS
... doesn't look too different to me.

We have Barkley's +/- for that year and an estimate of his on/off. He has a +8.9 ORTG and +0.6 DRTG that year but looking at the rest of the starting lineup Hawkins and Mahorn both had higher on/off estimates.

As far as I am aware, those aren't adjusted RAPM numbers so I didn't read too much into them.

Yeah I don't see how they're a similar level of supporting cast. Chuck had an average defensive supporting cast that produced offensively especially from the G spots (he had Hawkins putting up 19/4/3, Dawkins putting up 14/3/7, and Derek Smith/Scott Brooks off the bench).

Like Charles' 93 Suns, Knicks had multiple players at ~25 minutes, which deflates their box scores. Strickland/Jackson/Cheeks were all productive box score wise in the minutes they had. Barkley had a slightly better supporting cast (as shown in the original VORP data I posted) but it does not justify the huge difference in terms of team performance. I personally don't see how either of Smith or Brooks factor into this discussion. Derek Smith lost all his athleticism and explosiveness after the injuries (I did extensive research on him for the non-all-star draft a while ago so I know him quite well ) while Brooks was a lifetime bench player.

Also after looking I can't find that coach poll.

Don't usually trust the site but it's posted by fpliii so I think it is accurate:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=302303

Yes but if young Ewing could lead great defenses and a slightly older Ewing could too I see no reason why 89-91 Ewing couldn't lead a defense better than 10th. To me that seems to be more of a coaching/personnel issue.

Where do you rank 07 KG against other all time peaks? Do you factor in his defensive impact in 2012 (anchoring a -6.4 D) and project it 5 years ahead to imagine what his defense would be like in 2007 while being younger and far more mobile?

volume scorers lose less touches than role players as the game slows down

Agree with this to a certain extent but I would like to see data supporting this just out of interest.

90 Pat scored 29 ppg for a 13th ranked offense with terrible guard play. The year before when the team was healthy and Rod/Mark were performing well (a combined 26/7/13 per game on 54 TS with a 112 combined ORTG from the PG spot compared to 20/7/12 per game on 49 TS with a 105 combined ORTG pre trade) the Knicks had the 6th ranked offense with Pat only averaging 22.7 ppg and 2.4 apg on 60.7 TS% with a 115 ORTG (he finished 4th in MVP voting in 89 too).

So the argument is that 1990 Ewing with a competent supporting cast could theoretically lead a top offense plus a dominant defense just because he had proven he could do so in other non peak years? That's not how a "peak" works and if that is really true, we should all have been voting for 90 Ewing a long time ago. There is no player who is judged based on his impact other than the year that is being argued for (and definitely not a combination of 2 years) and I see no reason to treat Ewing differently.

I don't see how a player who was already seen as top 5 and on or around Chuck's level in 89 took such a huge step forward while Chuck took a small step forward (if he even took a step forward) and didn't get better than him.

The thing is that Ewing wasn't on Barkley's level in 1989. He was a defensive leader who was credited for the offensive success of the Knicks (+3.3 O, -0.3 D) similar to how 2011 Rose was credited in the MVP votes for the defensive success of the Bulls despite his impact primarily coming on offense.

Again a quote about how much they won. The only differences between Chuck's 89 and 90 seasons are Hersey Hawkins improving and Rick Mahorn + Hawk improving Philly to be around average defensively instead of worst in the league.

Barkley with or without a defensive big leads a +5 offense. If a GM can add a big of Mahorn's caliber (which isn't too uncommon), you will end up with a pretty good team with an elite offense centered around Barkley. OTOH, Ewing wasn't leading a dominant defense with or without better support in that same period. Knicks were -0.3 and -0.1 on defense in 1989 and 1990.

Pat improved in every way from the previous season statistically but because the team around him got worse and they won less the perception of his game shifted.

Knicks got worse because their offense dropped. Instead of brushing it aside, the question that should be asked then is: How much of an offensive impact is Ewing actually providing if the decline of his teammates (mainly Mark Jackson) is such a huge problem for the Knicks offensively. Just as a fictional example, if Magic upped his scoring on high efficiency in 1990 after Kareem retired but the Lakers' offense tanked, the first response should be to revise our previous thoughts on Magic's offensive impact relative to Kareem's. Now, I am not campaigning for Mark Jackson as some super impact player (he is not) but if his decline in 1990 is the main reason for the Knicks dropping even before the injuries and trades, that should raise concerns about Ewing's offense.

IMO, Ewing's offensive impact is not really close to what many here are proposing (eg. Quotatious calling him a damn good offensive centerpiece). Very rarely has a great team offense been built around a post centric volume scoring center and in general, their offensive impact appears to be much lower in RAPM data than what would be expected strictly looking from the box score (prime example being Yao Ming). Ewing should be judged first and foremost on his defense and despite being less mobile, I think he was more impactful defensively later on than he was in 1990.

[SideshowBob]

Ballot

16. Curry 15 +6.25 (+6.25 O/+0.00 D)

17. West 68 +6.75 (+5.75 O/+1.00 D)

18. Dirk 11 +5.75 (+5.75 O/+0.00 D)

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

Still not sure I want to pick 2011 for Dirk, but for now I'll stick with it.

[mischievous]

This will be my official ballot here:

11 Dirk
08 CP
08 Kobe

I wrestled with Kobe and KD but I think KObe had a great RS and a good playoffs until running into a a GOAT level defensive team in the Celts in the Finals.

11 Dirk is self-explanatory. His RS was good but his playoffs especially the first 3 rounds were spectacular. I actually think his Finals' performance gets overrated a tad but overall his playoffs were nothing short of complete dominance.

I have already made my case for 08 CP in the previous threads.

08 Kobe is an interesting choice for me because I really struggle with his peak all the time. I am putting him here but I am open to moving my ballot around as we move forward. I would be more than happy to consider KD, Curry, Tmac, Ewing, Nash etc. as the discussion moves forward.

What made you put Dirk over Cp3? I agree though, i think peak Dirk was clearly better than Paul. Not a big gap but i don't have to think real hard about it.

[trex_8063]

Calling it for Curry...

Thru post #114:

Stephen Curry - 25
Dirk Nowitzki - 18
Jerry West - 15
Patrick Ewing - 11
Tracy McGrady - 9
Kevin Durant - 8
Kobe Bryant - 8
Chris Paul - 5
Moses Malone - 3
Charles Barkley - 1

Will have #18 up shortly....

[Texas Chuck]

On that end though, would anyone want to make the case that 2003 might be Dirk's peak? He had a +20.4 net rating on a 8.00 SRS team, great individual production and impact on a team with a GOAT level offense without making other compromises..

What do you mean by not making other compromises? The team certainly made compromises defensively playing the foursome of Dirk, Fin, Nash, and NVE together a ton. But maybe you are speaking about Dirk specifically?

Interesting to hear you throw out 03 Dirk as contention for his peak something I have never heard suggested before. I have, however, heard a few posters here suggest the 03 Mavs were the best Mavs team ever even ahead of 2011, 2006, and 2007. Most of that is based on SRS and team ortg.

I disagree that the 03 team was teh best Mavs team. Because its easy to blow out bad teams with a high-octane offense like they had, but be less equipped to deal with the better teams in the PS. They ended up losing to the worst of the Spurs champions(albeit without Dirk for half the series) but they were very fortunate to avoid the Lakers whom they had no chance against. The Finals teams weren't nearly as talented--especially offensively, but were definitely better suited to play the best teams.


Anyway would love some more thoughts from you on 03 Dirk specifically. He was an athlete in ways 2011 Dirk couldn't approach and certainly played more in a more athletic manner than even 06 Dirk. He was taking guys off the dribble from the 3-pt line and dunking on guys including Duncan and Admiral multiple times in the WCF something we didn't see by 06 really and obviously not in 2011. For instance 41 dunks in 03, 23 in 06, 9 in 2011.

I actually think both 2005 and his MVP year of 2007 should be given some consideration as well. I know both years he has some playoff struggles which is why they get tossed out, but his RS numbers were legit MVP-worthy all 3 years 05-07. And considering the team record with Nash and then Finley walking out the door with no return shows his individual numbers were translating to team success. The team lost a lot of talent and never slowed down.

[mischievous]

03 was definitely not peak Dirk. To me it's 06 but i think 09 and 2011 have solid cases.
You can maybe argue 07 if you put minimal emphasis on playoffs. To me 06 and 2011 seem most reasonable since we know that he played great over a full playoff run. I feel like 2011 is chosen mostly because he won the title, but his 06 playoffs were just as good and his regular season was better. I'm not sure i can agree that Dirk was more complete offensively in 2011, it probably just seems that way because he won the title.

[PaulieWal]

This will be my official ballot here:

11 Dirk
08 CP
08 Kobe

I wrestled with Kobe and KD but I think KObe had a great RS and a good playoffs until running into a a GOAT level defensive team in the Celts in the Finals.

11 Dirk is self-explanatory. His RS was good but his playoffs especially the first 3 rounds were spectacular. I actually think his Finals' performance gets overrated a tad but overall his playoffs were nothing short of complete dominance.

I have already made my case for 08 CP in the previous threads.

08 Kobe is an interesting choice for me because I really struggle with his peak all the time. I am putting him here but I am open to moving my ballot around as we move forward. I would be more than happy to consider KD, Curry, Tmac, Ewing, Nash etc. as the discussion moves forward.

What made you put Dirk over Cp3? I agree though, i think peak Dirk was clearly better than Paul. Not a big gap but i don't have to think real hard about it.

Ultimately I was swayed by Dirk's spectacular playoff run and I was following the Dirk discussions. His offensive numbers are mind boggling and he's quietly been one of the best post players of this generation.