Peaks project update: #1

[ardee]

1. '66-'67 Wilt Chamberlain

Here's my post from the 2017 top 100 project:

1967: The greatest season anyone has ever played, at the very least in the top 3 with Jordan and Shaq. Sets a FG% record, becomes the first real point-center, is the keynote of Hannum's percusor to the triangle offense, and leads the Sixers to a record 68-13. I don't know how much I need to say about this year, but I'll let you guys take a look at his game-log from the Playoffs:

1967 EDSF vs. Royals

G1 - 41 points, 23 rebounds, 5 assists, 63% FG
G2 - 37 points, 27 rebounds, 11 assists, 67% FG
G3 - 16 points, 30 rebounds, 19 assists, 62% FG
G4 - 18 points, 27 rebounds, 9 assists, 50% FG

Series Average: 28.0 ppg, 26.8 rpg, 11 apg, 61% FG
Oscar Robertson: 24.8 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 11.3 apg, 51.6% FG

He had as many assists as Oscar and killed him everywhere else!

1967 EDF vs. Celtics

G1 - 24 points, 32 rebounds, 12 assists, 12 blocks, 69% FG
G2 - 15 points, 29 rebounds, 5 assists, 5 blocks, 45% FG
G3 - 20 points, 41 rebounds, 9 assists, 5 blocks, 57% FG
G4 - 20 points, 22 rebounds, 10 assists, at least 3 blocks, 44% FG
G5 - 29 points, 36 rebounds, 13 assists, 7 blocks, 63% FG

Series Average: 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, 6+ bpg, 56% FG
Bill Russell: 11.4 ppg, 23.4 rpg, 6.0 apg, 36% FG

1967 NBA Finals vs. Warriors

G1 - 16 points, 33 rebounds, 10 assists, 75% FG (including a game-saving block on Nate)
G2 - 10 points, 38 rebounds (26 in 1st half), 10 assists, 10 blocks, 40% FG
G3 - 26 points, 26 rebounds, 5 assists, 52% FG
G4 - 10 points, 27 rebounds, 8 assists, 11 blocks, 50% FG
G5 - 20 points, 24 rebounds, 4 assists, 60% FG
G6 - 24 points, 23 rebounds, 4 assists, 62% FG

Series Average: 17.6 ppg, 28.5 rpg, 6.8 apg, 56% FG
Nate Thurmond: 14.1 ppg, 26.6 rpg, 3.3 apg, 34% FG

That year, Wilt was fifth in scoring, first in rebounds, third in assists, and first in FG%. He was probably first or second in blocks too. How many players can achieve that level of statistical domination on an ELITE team?

He would get the rebound, either throw an outlet or let Greer bring it up before he got the entry pass at the high post again. Facing the basket, he then hit cutters, used a handoff to a guard to set a screen or either posted up to devastating effect (68% from the field!!!). Wilt was ungodly that year, there has never been anyone as good at basketball as Wilt was in 1967.

People are very high on Bill Walton. Well, imagine peak Bill Walton becoming an order of magnitude better as a rebounder, being able to take more primacy as a playmaker from the post, almost Jokic level, and becoming the best finisher in NBA history.

I think the other guys have cases but Wilt is my choice. If you acknowledge the Celtics as the greatest dynasty of all time you need to acknowledge that the one guy who beat them is stupendously great.

2. '16-'17 LeBron James

I debated this one heavily, almost went '13. I just think he was more complete of an offensive player in '17. The jumper would come and go while in Miami, in '17 it was always there. Athleticism was about the same too IMO, and overall feel for the game and instincts were the best they'd ever been (better only the very next year most likely but I think the RS disqualifies that year). All this translated into the GOAT Playoff offense, 120.3 ORtg over 18 games. This was with Kyrie actually having a pretty meh first two series: after he rounded into form against Boston the Cavs were a 22 SRS team for that series.

Defensively, I think he was as good as ever for the first 3 rounds. He had to take on a bigger offensive role for the Finals because I think the Cavs realized that they pretty much HAD to focus on outscoring the Warriors; they did not have the personnel to guard the GOAT shooter and a two time MVP, the second GOAT shooter who sometimes detonates larger than the GOAT one, a DPoY, another MVP and a Finals MVP off the bench.

I don't think anyone can reproach LeBron's play in that postseason.

3. '90-'91 Michael Jordan

Kind of weird having this number 3 but this is the competition he's facing. It's a question of "it's not you, it's me." I don't really have anything to criticize about Jordan's play, just think the other two were better: if I was quibbling, the playmaking of the other two which led to historic offenses might be the deciding factor. I also think overall Wilt and Jordan faced much greater competition over their careers, in particular in the years in question they faced two of the greatest dynasties of all time while the '91 Lakers were basically on their last legs and honestly easy pickings for Jordan at the time (again not a criticism of him, just minor things separating players at this level).

[ardee]

Hi guys, I just wanted to inform you that we changed the voting system a little bit. It was a mistake on my part, I didn't get what the consensus was on the previous thread. Basically it's the same (3 ballot choises, 4,5 pts for the 1st, 3 for the 2nd, 2 for the third, you can use your 3 choises to vote for different seasons of the same player if you want, highest point total wins the spot, 48 hours/thread, you can't vote for a player once he gets elected and gets his spot), but the big difference is that PLAYERS DON'T GET CREDIT FOR ALL OF THE VOTES THEY RECIEVE (EXAMPLE: IF JORDAN 91 GETS 30 POINTS AND JORDAN 90 GETS 20 POINTS, BUT SHAQ 00 GETS 37 POINTS AND SHAQ 01 GETS 4 POINTS, SHAQ WILL WIN BECAUSE HIS HIGHEST-VOTED SEASON IS THE ONLY ONE THAT COUNTS).
Remember, YOU CAN STILL USE YOUR 3 BALLOTS TO VOTE FOR THE SAME PLAYER TWICE OR THRICE.
You have time, this thread will last 72 hours instead of 48, so you have more than a day to change your vote if you want to. Edit your vote if you want, especially considering that I'm feeling like many didn't get that (not my mistake this time tbh) You can use your 3 choices to vote for different seasons of the same player more than once

I don't think this makes any sense. In the situation you described, a majority of people think Jordan wins yet he doesn't get the win.

Why not just allow people to vote for players and then within those votes choose whichever year has a majority (or plurality) of votes? So in your example since MJ had 50/91 points, choose him, and then go further to choose 91 MJ since he had 30/50 points.

It makes no sense to pick Shaq here.

Could even make a separate thread to choose the peak year like was done in the 2015 project.

[E-Balla]

Hi guys, I just wanted to inform you that we changed the voting system a little bit. It was a mistake on my part, I didn't get what the consensus was on the previous thread. Basically it's the same (3 ballot choises, 4,5 pts for the 1st, 3 for the 2nd, 2 for the third, you can use your 3 choises to vote for different seasons of the same player if you want, highest point total wins the spot, 48 hours/thread, you can't vote for a player once he gets elected and gets his spot), but the big difference is that PLAYERS DON'T GET CREDIT FOR ALL OF THE VOTES THEY RECIEVE (EXAMPLE: IF JORDAN 91 GETS 30 POINTS AND JORDAN 90 GETS 20 POINTS, BUT SHAQ 00 GETS 37 POINTS AND SHAQ 01 GETS 4 POINTS, SHAQ WILL WIN BECAUSE HIS HIGHEST-VOTED SEASON IS THE ONLY ONE THAT COUNTS).
Remember, YOU CAN STILL USE YOUR 3 BALLOTS TO VOTE FOR THE SAME PLAYER TWICE OR THRICE.
You have time, this thread will last 72 hours instead of 48, so you have more than a day to change your vote if you want to. Edit your vote if you want, especially considering that I'm feeling like many didn't get that (not my mistake this time tbh) You can use your 3 choices to vote for different seasons of the same player more than once

I don't think this makes any sense. In the situation you described, a majority of people think Jordan wins yet he doesn't get the win.

Why not just allow people to vote for players and then within those votes choose whichever year has a majority (or plurality) of votes? So in your example since MJ had 50/91 points, choose him, and then go further to choose 91 MJ since he had 30/50 points.

It makes no sense to pick Shaq here.

Could even make a separate thread to choose the peak year like was done in the 2015 project.

We've already discussed those rules and why they're way worse. Voting for players leaves people arguing who had the better careers basically. Tallying all years together means years that are controversial could possibly win and end up way higher than a significant amount of people will want. Allowing people to vote for whatever years they want lets us pick who the best player is from the consensus with every vote mattering some. Ranked voting is always the superior choice for a democratic decision and if it's good enough for the NBA MVP Award it's good enough for us.

And for Wilt I wanted to mention he averaged 12.2 TSA per 75 on +14.4 rTS%. That's the equivalent of averaging 17.2 points per 36 (remember he played 45.5 MPG) on 70.4 TS% in 2019. Absurd scoring production.

[Blackmill]

Third Vote: Can't decide between 1992-93 Hakeem and 2002-03 Duncan

I have to think more about this one. Based on what I've been working on recently, it seems that Hakeem was better, more consistent scorer. I can say without any doubts that Duncan was better and smarter passer overall but Olajuwon did tremendous job in Tomjanovic system. The question is defense and I'd love to have more time comparing their defensive tendencies and some impact stats. Maybe someone can help me here.

My initial response is that defending switches is where Hakeem might pull ahead of Duncan, and in most other areas, Duncan is the better defender. Do you think Duncan was much more mobile in 2003 than 2005? In the 2005 finals we see the Pistons were most successful when they got Duncan to switch onto one of their guards (especially Billups). I think Hakeem had the quickness to do a better job on switches, but at the same time, he was less aware of when it was correct to switch. And maybe more harmful to Hakeem's PnR defense, I think he misread when it was safe for him to recover to his man, and much more often than Duncan he would leave the ball handler before the ball handler's primary defender had recovered. I actually think Duncan's limitations are less problematic than Hakeem's and why I favored Duncan to Hakeem in my write up.

[DatAsh]

Not sure I like the multiple seasons per player idea. My top 3 are gonna be Jordan(followed by a bunch of Lebron and Russell years), but I guess if that's how we're voting.

1. 91' Jordan
2. 90' Jordan
3. 92' Jordan

[DatAsh]

My top 3
2003 Tim Duncan
2013 LeBron James
2000 Shaquille O'Neal

Spoiler:

The Case for The Big Fundamental



2003 Tim Duncan was one of the greatest NBA seasons of all-time. The combination of elite offense with GOAT-level defense makes this season worthy of consideration for one of the highest impact [and best] seasons not only in the modern-era but of all-time. Although Timmy is routinely regarded as a top 10 player of all-time, many contributors on this board don’t see his peak in the same light as most other “top 10 contenders”. I hope with a deep-dive into this spectacular season others can see just how great Tim Duncan was in 2003.



This season starts as a follow-up to what many believe as Tim Duncan’s “real peak”, circa 2002. Duncan came off a productive regular season in 2002 and a great playoff run which resulted in an unfortunate [for non-Laker fans] end in only the Western Conference Semi-Finals where Duncan showed why he was worthy of the MVP trophy by outplaying the dynamic duo of Shaq and Kobe. While Duncan and the Spurs lost in 5 games to the eventual NBA-Champions, the ever-silent Tim Duncan put on a showcase while missing his career-long running mate David Robinson to injuries while his second option Tony Parker experienced major growing pains as a 19-year old Rookie. Duncan showcased an ability in 2002 to carry an offensive load many doubted while still being the best defender in the league.



2003 Featured a new strategy for Popovich, Duncan and the rest of the San Antonio Spurs. After David Robinson’s body ended 2002 on the pavement the Spurs decided to rest Robinson during the season [78 GP in 2002, 64 in 2003] while actively grooming Tony Parker and featuring him more offensively as he buds into an NBA-level Point Guard. Knowing the aforementioned changes, the Spurs decided to “run it back” with a similar roster while bolstering the bench with the addition of Steve Kerr to add much needed spacing and a veteran presence; an aspect Antonio Daniels failed to deliver on in 2002. Ultimately this deal doesn’t show up in the box-score as Kerr was a DNP for a majority of the playoffs [averaging a mere 4.6 MPG in 10 games] while young players like Tony Parker (20), Manu Ginobili (25) and Stephen Jackson (24) took on larger roles on both ends of the court.



Enough story time, let’s look at the numbers.



Regular Season Stats:

Per Game: 23.3 Points, 12.9 TRB, 3.2 ORB, 3.9 AST, 0.7 STL, 2.9 BLK, 3.1 TOV

Per 100: 31.6 Points, 17.5 TRB, 4.3 ORB, 5.3 AST, 1.4 STL, 4.0 BLK, 4.2 TOV

Individual Ortg/Drtg: 112/94; +18

Advanced: 26.9 PER, 56.4 TS% [+4.5 Rel League Avg], 45.5% FTR, 19.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 28.0 USG%, 16.5 WS [.248 WS/48], 7.4 BPM, 7.6 VORP

On/Off (Offense then Defense): 107.9/97.5 +9.7; 98.1/103.2 -5.1; Net: +9.1 On Court, +14.8 On/Off



Post Season Stats:

Per Game: 24.7 Points, 15.4 TRB, 4.0 ORB, 5.3 AST, 0.6 STL, 3.3 BLK, 3.2 TOV

Per 100: 30.6 Points, 19.1 TRB, 5.0 ORB, 6.6 AST, 0.8 STL, 4.1 BLK, 3.9 TOV

Individual Ortg/Drtg: 116/92; +24

Advanced: 28.4 PER, 57.7 TS% [5.8 Rel League Avg], 56.3% FTR, 25.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 26.4 USG%, 5.9 WS [.279 WS/48], 11.6 BPM, 3.5 VORP

On/Off (Sample too Small): 105.3/90.0 +15.3; 96.2/104.0 -7.8; Net: +9.1 On Court, +23.1 On/Off



Statistical Comparison (Put in Spoiler Jacob)

RS Per Game: 23.3 Points, 12.9 TRB, 3.2 ORB, 3.9 AST, 0.7 STL, 2.9 BLK, 3.1 TOV

PS Per Game: 24.7 Points, 15.4 TRB, 4.0 ORB, 5.3 AST, 0.6 STL, 3.3 BLK, 3.2 TOV

RS Per 100: 31.6 Points, 17.5 TRB, 4.3 ORB, 5.3 AST, 1.4 STL, 4.0 BLK, 4.2 TOV

PS Per 100: 30.6 Points, 19.1 TRB, 5.0 ORB, 6.6 AST, 0.8 STL, 4.1 BLK, 3.9 TOV

RS Individual Ortg/Drtg: 112/94; +18

PS Individual Ortg/Drtg: 116/92; +24

RS Advanced: 26.9 PER, 56.4 TS% [+4.5 Rel League Avg], 45.5% FTR, 19.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 28.0 USG%, 16.5 WS [.248 WS/48], 7.4 BPM, 7.6 VORP

PS Advanced: 28.4 PER, 57.7 TS% [+5.8 Rel League Avg], 56.3% FTR, 25.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 26.4 USG%, 5.9 WS [.279 WS/48], 11.6 BPM, 3.5 VORP

RS On/Off (Offense then Defense): 107.9/97.5 +9.7; 98.1/103.2 -5.1; Net: +9.1 On Court, +14.8 On/Off

PS On/Off (Sample too Small): 105.3/90.0 +15.3; 96.2/104.0 -7.8; Net: +9.1 On Court, +23.1 On/Off



When doing a side-by-side comparison it is quite evident [and clear] that Duncan performed even greater in the post-season than he did during his MVP-level Regular Season. This alone should be a tell-tale sign that Duncan performed at his highest level against the highest level of competition. Duncan’s ability to be an elite playmaker from the post in combination with his elite rim protection has never been duplicated since the merger. Only 4 other times has a player averaged 5+ Assists and 3+ Blocks in a series: 1977 Walton and 2002 Tim Duncan and then two other times in 3 game series from Chris Webber and Bob Lanier. Duncan’s gigantic scoring advantage over Walton [24.7 PPG on +5.8 TS% vs 18.2 PPG on +1.6 TS%] makes Duncan’s run one of the most statistically unique Playoff Runs in NBA History.



Looking back at the 2003 season as a whole the league was in a slow, grindy and defensive era. With League Average Offensive Rating at 103.6, True Shooting Percentage at 51.9% and Pace at 91 Possessions/Game the game was at it’s apex for defense [Post-Merger] while yet to adapt to the space provided by the 3-point line. This resulted in the post being cluttered offensively and big men to have a great impact on the defensive end.



The Spurs figured out how to capitalize on the Slow and defensive minded era; Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan was utilized in a way to generate 3 point shots and specifically the corner 3. The Spurs led the league in Percentage of Corner 3’s taken with 40% of their 3 point shots being corner 3’s. This was in large part due to the driving ability of a young Tony Parker [still 20 years old] and the gravity which Duncan encompassed offensively. The second most important part of the Spurs offense was the ability to generate lay-ups; again generated by the ability of Duncan’s passing from the high-post, low-block and free-throw area.



The Spurs offense in the post-season, with the catalyst Tim Duncan, was able to play the type of game [Spurs Ball] in all of the series they played in. The Pace in their 4 series were 90.8, 90.4, 92.6 and 87.8 [FWIW the Spurs Pace for the season was exactly 90.0, the average of the 4 series being 90.4]. This was in large part because of Tim Duncan’s ability to control the game as a PF/C; a rarity in the history of the NBA.

When the Spurs were unable to play at the exact pace they wanted they were able to adapt and outplay their opponents at what they did best; specifically the Nets and Mavericks. As you may know, the 2003 Mavericks and 2003 Nets were each the best in the league at one aspect of the game. The Mavericks were the best offense in the NBA while the Nets were the best Defense in the NBA. Ultimately both teams were dismantled by the Spurs by their own game.



Mavericks: 110.7 Ortg played at their pace [92.5 RS, 92.4 PS] and outscored by 30 points over the 6 game series. The Mavericks were held to a 104.0 Offense [-6.7] while the Spurs nearly matched Dallas’ season Offensive Rating in 109.4.

Nets: 98.1 Drtg played at the Spurs pace [91.6 RS, 87.8 PS] which took away the ability to run with Jason Kidd, one of the most dynamic playmakers in the open-court in NBA History. The Nets were unable to stop the Spurs as the Spurs eclipsed the 98.1 Drtg the Nets had in the regular season [Spurs put up 100.0 Ortg] but the slower pace affected the Nets greatly, posting a mere 93.3 Ortg in the lopsided; 6 game series.



When the Spurs had the opportunity to close out series they did so on Duncan’s back [in his backpack, which had a smaller back-pack in it, then a third back-pack inside of that with 37-year old David Robinson and Tony Parker squished in there like a Matryoshka Russian Doll].

During the span of 5 potential “Elimination Games”, the Spurs and Tim Duncan went 4-1, with the only loss coming to Dallas.

Duncan Stats: 22.8/16.4/6.8 with 3.6 BLK, 2.8 TOV



Duncan’s ability to close out elimination games with his scoring, rebounding, shot-blocking and playmaking [While taking care of the ball] is a combination of skill and talent that no other all-time great has combined throughout a single post-season. The fact the Spurs had no “easy series” says a lot about the run Duncan put on. An average SRS of 4.15, the lowest being 1.56 and highest being 7.90 shows how Dominant Duncan was. The ability for Duncan and the Spurs to adapt and play the best offense in the league in one series and then the best defensive team in the next series shows a chameleon-like team minus the skittish-ness.



NBA Finals Deep-Dive:

While the Spurs and Nets faced off in the 2003 Finals the biggest match-ups were Parker/Kidd and Collins/Duncan. The Nets were going to win if Collins could help keep Duncan in check [Collins is an all-time great post-defender] or if Kidd could run up-and-down the floor. While I highlighted earlier in my post about the Spurs [and Duncan’s] ability to slow down the Nets by eliminating transition opportunities, one often major aspect to the series was Collins inability to stay out of foul trouble while guarding Tim Duncan [and Kenyon Martin].



Kenyon Martin fell into Foul Trouble in Games 1, 2, 4, 5 while Collins fouled out in Game 3 and was routinely in foul trouble throughout the series. This was, in large part, due to Duncan’s post-presence [averaging 9 FTA/G and a 49.5% FTR].



FWIW, Jason Collins was absolutely dominant in the post-season as a defender. In his 529 minutes on the court the Nets posted a 92.2 Defensive Rating [Absurd] but in his 446 minutes on the bench the Nets were a measly 106.1 [A difference of 13.1 Points per 100]. I understand it is a small sample size, but the fact remains that Jason Collins was a key part for a Nets victory in 2003 and Duncan single handedly took him out of the game [as well as Kenyon Martin].



Individual Offensive/Defensive Ratings: I know many people love these, I have been more interested in these statistics lately [in part because of E-Balla calling me out on not understanding them fully] and re-analyzing them with-in the statistical landscape and scope. They often line-up with my personal eye-test [though I do wear glasses] and they happen to capture a good part of the game.

Duncans in the 2003 NBA Finals: 109 Ortg/83 Drtg [Net + 26]

Jordan 1991: 125/102 [Net +23]

James 2012: 117/109 [Net +8]

Shaq 01: 115/101 [Net +14]



Scoring: Duncan was able to score 27.5% of his teams points in the post-season.

Jordan 1991: 30.8%

LeBron 2012: 28.0%

Shaq 01: 32.8%


While Duncan’s scoring isn’t as impressive as some of the other notable candidates for “GOAT PEAK”, his scoring is not far off. Considering the major defensive advantage Duncan has on the other candidates listed above I see little to no reason for these players to be considered over Duncan in the grand scheme of things.

What about 2016 or 2017 James?

[JoeMalburg]

Probably too late, but one idea for the format issue is to allow for up to three seasons for each player to be listed in order of preference in addition to the three players who you believe peaked highest.

So a ballot could look like this

1. Jordan 1991 (1990, 1996)

2. Wilt 1967 (1962, 1972)

3. LeBron 2013 (2009, 2016)

[Colbinii]

My top 3
2003 Tim Duncan
2013 LeBron James
2000 Shaquille O'Neal

Spoiler:

The Case for The Big Fundamental



2003 Tim Duncan was one of the greatest NBA seasons of all-time. The combination of elite offense with GOAT-level defense makes this season worthy of consideration for one of the highest impact [and best] seasons not only in the modern-era but of all-time. Although Timmy is routinely regarded as a top 10 player of all-time, many contributors on this board don’t see his peak in the same light as most other “top 10 contenders”. I hope with a deep-dive into this spectacular season others can see just how great Tim Duncan was in 2003.



This season starts as a follow-up to what many believe as Tim Duncan’s “real peak”, circa 2002. Duncan came off a productive regular season in 2002 and a great playoff run which resulted in an unfortunate [for non-Laker fans] end in only the Western Conference Semi-Finals where Duncan showed why he was worthy of the MVP trophy by outplaying the dynamic duo of Shaq and Kobe. While Duncan and the Spurs lost in 5 games to the eventual NBA-Champions, the ever-silent Tim Duncan put on a showcase while missing his career-long running mate David Robinson to injuries while his second option Tony Parker experienced major growing pains as a 19-year old Rookie. Duncan showcased an ability in 2002 to carry an offensive load many doubted while still being the best defender in the league.



2003 Featured a new strategy for Popovich, Duncan and the rest of the San Antonio Spurs. After David Robinson’s body ended 2002 on the pavement the Spurs decided to rest Robinson during the season [78 GP in 2002, 64 in 2003] while actively grooming Tony Parker and featuring him more offensively as he buds into an NBA-level Point Guard. Knowing the aforementioned changes, the Spurs decided to “run it back” with a similar roster while bolstering the bench with the addition of Steve Kerr to add much needed spacing and a veteran presence; an aspect Antonio Daniels failed to deliver on in 2002. Ultimately this deal doesn’t show up in the box-score as Kerr was a DNP for a majority of the playoffs [averaging a mere 4.6 MPG in 10 games] while young players like Tony Parker (20), Manu Ginobili (25) and Stephen Jackson (24) took on larger roles on both ends of the court.



Enough story time, let’s look at the numbers.



Regular Season Stats:

Per Game: 23.3 Points, 12.9 TRB, 3.2 ORB, 3.9 AST, 0.7 STL, 2.9 BLK, 3.1 TOV

Per 100: 31.6 Points, 17.5 TRB, 4.3 ORB, 5.3 AST, 1.4 STL, 4.0 BLK, 4.2 TOV

Individual Ortg/Drtg: 112/94; +18

Advanced: 26.9 PER, 56.4 TS% [+4.5 Rel League Avg], 45.5% FTR, 19.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 28.0 USG%, 16.5 WS [.248 WS/48], 7.4 BPM, 7.6 VORP

On/Off (Offense then Defense): 107.9/97.5 +9.7; 98.1/103.2 -5.1; Net: +9.1 On Court, +14.8 On/Off



Post Season Stats:

Per Game: 24.7 Points, 15.4 TRB, 4.0 ORB, 5.3 AST, 0.6 STL, 3.3 BLK, 3.2 TOV

Per 100: 30.6 Points, 19.1 TRB, 5.0 ORB, 6.6 AST, 0.8 STL, 4.1 BLK, 3.9 TOV

Individual Ortg/Drtg: 116/92; +24

Advanced: 28.4 PER, 57.7 TS% [5.8 Rel League Avg], 56.3% FTR, 25.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 26.4 USG%, 5.9 WS [.279 WS/48], 11.6 BPM, 3.5 VORP

On/Off (Sample too Small): 105.3/90.0 +15.3; 96.2/104.0 -7.8; Net: +9.1 On Court, +23.1 On/Off



Statistical Comparison (Put in Spoiler Jacob)

RS Per Game: 23.3 Points, 12.9 TRB, 3.2 ORB, 3.9 AST, 0.7 STL, 2.9 BLK, 3.1 TOV

PS Per Game: 24.7 Points, 15.4 TRB, 4.0 ORB, 5.3 AST, 0.6 STL, 3.3 BLK, 3.2 TOV

RS Per 100: 31.6 Points, 17.5 TRB, 4.3 ORB, 5.3 AST, 1.4 STL, 4.0 BLK, 4.2 TOV

PS Per 100: 30.6 Points, 19.1 TRB, 5.0 ORB, 6.6 AST, 0.8 STL, 4.1 BLK, 3.9 TOV

RS Individual Ortg/Drtg: 112/94; +18

PS Individual Ortg/Drtg: 116/92; +24

RS Advanced: 26.9 PER, 56.4 TS% [+4.5 Rel League Avg], 45.5% FTR, 19.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 28.0 USG%, 16.5 WS [.248 WS/48], 7.4 BPM, 7.6 VORP

PS Advanced: 28.4 PER, 57.7 TS% [+5.8 Rel League Avg], 56.3% FTR, 25.5 AST%, 12.9 TOV%, 26.4 USG%, 5.9 WS [.279 WS/48], 11.6 BPM, 3.5 VORP

RS On/Off (Offense then Defense): 107.9/97.5 +9.7; 98.1/103.2 -5.1; Net: +9.1 On Court, +14.8 On/Off

PS On/Off (Sample too Small): 105.3/90.0 +15.3; 96.2/104.0 -7.8; Net: +9.1 On Court, +23.1 On/Off



When doing a side-by-side comparison it is quite evident [and clear] that Duncan performed even greater in the post-season than he did during his MVP-level Regular Season. This alone should be a tell-tale sign that Duncan performed at his highest level against the highest level of competition. Duncan’s ability to be an elite playmaker from the post in combination with his elite rim protection has never been duplicated since the merger. Only 4 other times has a player averaged 5+ Assists and 3+ Blocks in a series: 1977 Walton and 2002 Tim Duncan and then two other times in 3 game series from Chris Webber and Bob Lanier. Duncan’s gigantic scoring advantage over Walton [24.7 PPG on +5.8 TS% vs 18.2 PPG on +1.6 TS%] makes Duncan’s run one of the most statistically unique Playoff Runs in NBA History.



Looking back at the 2003 season as a whole the league was in a slow, grindy and defensive era. With League Average Offensive Rating at 103.6, True Shooting Percentage at 51.9% and Pace at 91 Possessions/Game the game was at it’s apex for defense [Post-Merger] while yet to adapt to the space provided by the 3-point line. This resulted in the post being cluttered offensively and big men to have a great impact on the defensive end.



The Spurs figured out how to capitalize on the Slow and defensive minded era; Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan was utilized in a way to generate 3 point shots and specifically the corner 3. The Spurs led the league in Percentage of Corner 3’s taken with 40% of their 3 point shots being corner 3’s. This was in large part due to the driving ability of a young Tony Parker [still 20 years old] and the gravity which Duncan encompassed offensively. The second most important part of the Spurs offense was the ability to generate lay-ups; again generated by the ability of Duncan’s passing from the high-post, low-block and free-throw area.



The Spurs offense in the post-season, with the catalyst Tim Duncan, was able to play the type of game [Spurs Ball] in all of the series they played in. The Pace in their 4 series were 90.8, 90.4, 92.6 and 87.8 [FWIW the Spurs Pace for the season was exactly 90.0, the average of the 4 series being 90.4]. This was in large part because of Tim Duncan’s ability to control the game as a PF/C; a rarity in the history of the NBA.

When the Spurs were unable to play at the exact pace they wanted they were able to adapt and outplay their opponents at what they did best; specifically the Nets and Mavericks. As you may know, the 2003 Mavericks and 2003 Nets were each the best in the league at one aspect of the game. The Mavericks were the best offense in the NBA while the Nets were the best Defense in the NBA. Ultimately both teams were dismantled by the Spurs by their own game.



Mavericks: 110.7 Ortg played at their pace [92.5 RS, 92.4 PS] and outscored by 30 points over the 6 game series. The Mavericks were held to a 104.0 Offense [-6.7] while the Spurs nearly matched Dallas’ season Offensive Rating in 109.4.

Nets: 98.1 Drtg played at the Spurs pace [91.6 RS, 87.8 PS] which took away the ability to run with Jason Kidd, one of the most dynamic playmakers in the open-court in NBA History. The Nets were unable to stop the Spurs as the Spurs eclipsed the 98.1 Drtg the Nets had in the regular season [Spurs put up 100.0 Ortg] but the slower pace affected the Nets greatly, posting a mere 93.3 Ortg in the lopsided; 6 game series.



When the Spurs had the opportunity to close out series they did so on Duncan’s back [in his backpack, which had a smaller back-pack in it, then a third back-pack inside of that with 37-year old David Robinson and Tony Parker squished in there like a Matryoshka Russian Doll].

During the span of 5 potential “Elimination Games”, the Spurs and Tim Duncan went 4-1, with the only loss coming to Dallas.

Duncan Stats: 22.8/16.4/6.8 with 3.6 BLK, 2.8 TOV



Duncan’s ability to close out elimination games with his scoring, rebounding, shot-blocking and playmaking [While taking care of the ball] is a combination of skill and talent that no other all-time great has combined throughout a single post-season. The fact the Spurs had no “easy series” says a lot about the run Duncan put on. An average SRS of 4.15, the lowest being 1.56 and highest being 7.90 shows how Dominant Duncan was. The ability for Duncan and the Spurs to adapt and play the best offense in the league in one series and then the best defensive team in the next series shows a chameleon-like team minus the skittish-ness.



NBA Finals Deep-Dive:

While the Spurs and Nets faced off in the 2003 Finals the biggest match-ups were Parker/Kidd and Collins/Duncan. The Nets were going to win if Collins could help keep Duncan in check [Collins is an all-time great post-defender] or if Kidd could run up-and-down the floor. While I highlighted earlier in my post about the Spurs [and Duncan’s] ability to slow down the Nets by eliminating transition opportunities, one often major aspect to the series was Collins inability to stay out of foul trouble while guarding Tim Duncan [and Kenyon Martin].



Kenyon Martin fell into Foul Trouble in Games 1, 2, 4, 5 while Collins fouled out in Game 3 and was routinely in foul trouble throughout the series. This was, in large part, due to Duncan’s post-presence [averaging 9 FTA/G and a 49.5% FTR].



FWIW, Jason Collins was absolutely dominant in the post-season as a defender. In his 529 minutes on the court the Nets posted a 92.2 Defensive Rating [Absurd] but in his 446 minutes on the bench the Nets were a measly 106.1 [A difference of 13.1 Points per 100]. I understand it is a small sample size, but the fact remains that Jason Collins was a key part for a Nets victory in 2003 and Duncan single handedly took him out of the game [as well as Kenyon Martin].



Individual Offensive/Defensive Ratings: I know many people love these, I have been more interested in these statistics lately [in part because of E-Balla calling me out on not understanding them fully] and re-analyzing them with-in the statistical landscape and scope. They often line-up with my personal eye-test [though I do wear glasses] and they happen to capture a good part of the game.

Duncans in the 2003 NBA Finals: 109 Ortg/83 Drtg [Net + 26]

Jordan 1991: 125/102 [Net +23]

James 2012: 117/109 [Net +8]

Shaq 01: 115/101 [Net +14]



Scoring: Duncan was able to score 27.5% of his teams points in the post-season.

Jordan 1991: 30.8%

LeBron 2012: 28.0%

Shaq 01: 32.8%


While Duncan’s scoring isn’t as impressive as some of the other notable candidates for “GOAT PEAK”, his scoring is not far off. Considering the major defensive advantage Duncan has on the other candidates listed above I see little to no reason for these players to be considered over Duncan in the grand scheme of things.

What about 2016 or 2017 James?

I revoted with 2 James seasons and one Duncan.

[pandrade83]

Probably too late, but one idea for the format issue is to allow for up to three seasons for each player to be listed in order of preference in addition to the three players who you believe peaked highest.

So a ballot could look like this

1. Jordan 1991 (1990, 1996)

2. Wilt 1967 (1962, 1972)

3. LeBron 2013 (2009, 2016)

Good call. I'd hate for my '89 Jordan vote to be omitted simply because others rated a different peak year when my post clearly said that I think a reasonable mind could pick any of four different years as his peak.

[ardee]

Hi guys, I just wanted to inform you that we changed the voting system a little bit. It was a mistake on my part, I didn't get what the consensus was on the previous thread. Basically it's the same (3 ballot choises, 4,5 pts for the 1st, 3 for the 2nd, 2 for the third, you can use your 3 choises to vote for different seasons of the same player if you want, highest point total wins the spot, 48 hours/thread, you can't vote for a player once he gets elected and gets his spot), but the big difference is that PLAYERS DON'T GET CREDIT FOR ALL OF THE VOTES THEY RECIEVE (EXAMPLE: IF JORDAN 91 GETS 30 POINTS AND JORDAN 90 GETS 20 POINTS, BUT SHAQ 00 GETS 37 POINTS AND SHAQ 01 GETS 4 POINTS, SHAQ WILL WIN BECAUSE HIS HIGHEST-VOTED SEASON IS THE ONLY ONE THAT COUNTS).
Remember, YOU CAN STILL USE YOUR 3 BALLOTS TO VOTE FOR THE SAME PLAYER TWICE OR THRICE.
You have time, this thread will last 72 hours instead of 48, so you have more than a day to change your vote if you want to. Edit your vote if you want, especially considering that I'm feeling like many didn't get that (not my mistake this time tbh) You can use your 3 choices to vote for different seasons of the same player more than once

I don't think this makes any sense. In the situation you described, a majority of people think Jordan wins yet he doesn't get the win.

Why not just allow people to vote for players and then within those votes choose whichever year has a majority (or plurality) of votes? So in your example since MJ had 50/91 points, choose him, and then go further to choose 91 MJ since he had 30/50 points.

It makes no sense to pick Shaq here.

Could even make a separate thread to choose the peak year like was done in the 2015 project.

We've already discussed those rules and why they're way worse. Voting for players leaves people arguing who had the better careers basically. Tallying all years together means years that are controversial could possibly win and end up way higher than a significant amount of people will want. Allowing people to vote for whatever years they want lets us pick who the best player is from the consensus with every vote mattering some. Ranked voting is always the superior choice for a democratic decision and if it's good enough for the NBA MVP Award it's good enough for us.

And for Wilt I wanted to mention he averaged 12.2 TSA per 75 on +14.4 rTS%. That's the equivalent of averaging 17.2 points per 36 (remember he played 45.5 MPG) on 70.4 TS% in 2019. Absurd scoring production.

It's not perfect but it's a more accurate reflection. This current system will be punishing players who had multiple good seasons to the point where it's hard to choose one.

In a hypothetical case, say it's Kareem vs Walton. The Kareem supporters can't decide between 71, 74, 77 and 80, but all agree that he peaked higher than Walton. Combined he gets 70 votes. '77 Walton gets 30 votes which is more than any individual season of Kareem but 70/95 people thought Kareem peaked higher than Walton.

And do you really want people to list out three Jordan or three LeBron seasons? This is not the way IMO.

[ardee]

Probably too late, but one idea for the format issue is to allow for up to three seasons for each player to be listed in order of preference in addition to the three players who you believe peaked highest.

So a ballot could look like this

1. Jordan 1991 (1990, 1996)

2. Wilt 1967 (1962, 1972)

3. LeBron 2013 (2009, 2016)

Good call. I'd hate for my '89 Jordan vote to be omitted simply because others rated a different peak year when my post clearly said that I think a reasonable mind could pick any of four different years as his peak.

This setup makes no sense IMO. Project comish, please change something...

[Joey Wheeler]

Some general thoughts:

My first vote is on 91 MJ with Shaq at #2, but that may well change. Colbinii and Joey Wheeler both had really good arguments for Duncan and Bird. Both are clearly top 5 players at the very least. I would argue actually that Bird is the best scaling offensive player: offensive goat seems certainly fair. Jordan provides a respectable low turnover offense with even with the worst supporting cast in the league, and Lebron provides great all around offense with just average hustle and catch and shoot players. But Larry is unique in that you can keep adding any kind of talent around him, and there's no need for excuses of 'x is a 3rd/4th option of course his production will suffer a lot' because everyone thrives instead. Larry barely touches the ball, gets everyone in a rhythm and playing really hard, the ball moves constantly and he still makes an enormous tangible impact. The 86 Celtics had all time team assist levels despite having imo a pretty mediocre coach.

I actually hadn't even checked that, but I'm not surprised. Bird's greatest strength is a weakness for the most all-time level players, who are far too aware of their individual stats. It's just normal, human nature to worry about your own numbers, but when you can genuinely not care about it team play benefits massively. Bird was a guy who'd do anything to win, even at the expense of his own individual stats. It's why, along with his skills and IQ, everyone seemed to thrive with him, even marginal talent. Magic was the same for that matter.

A good modern comp would be Steph Curry, in that he's one of the league's best players but doesn't really need to monopolize the offense and will almost always make the play that's better for the team and not force his own scoring, which is why his teams seem to be better than the mere sum of talent on the roster and the Warriors can get good production from marginal talent.

Of course Bird has 15cm on Curry as well a vaster array of skills and much better court vision/IQ, but in terms of mentality they're similar. Lebron and Jordan are different, they're unbelievably dominant individually, but not the kind of players around whom everyone will flourish and look great; in order to achieve success, the rest of the roster has to compliment what they do as the offense will be all about them.

[JordansBulls]

I think of 4 guys in particular for highest peak of all time. MJ, Shaq, Wilt, Kareem at least statistically but in the end I feel MJ's 1991 was the greatest season and peak ever.

1st ballot selection: Michael Jordan '1991 - 31.5+ PER in the season, playoffs and finals and his finals was against another top 5 player all time and the #2 guy in the league. Also dominated the league in the season and dominated the playoffs with a fascinating record. 15-2

2nd ballot selection: Kareem 1971 - Dominated on the season, playoffs and also with a fascinating record of 12-2 in the playoffs.

3rd ballot selection:Open for debate - Shaq 2000, Wilt 1967, Lebron 2009, 2013, leaning towards Shaq 2000

--------- RS PER, WS48, --------- PER, WS48 playoffs
Jordan 91: 31.7, 0.32 -----------32.0, 0.33 (17 playoff game, title)
KAJ 1971: 29.0, 0.33, -----------25.0, 0.27 (14 playoff games, title)
Shaq 2000: 30.6, 0.28, --------- 30.5, 0.22 (23 playoff games, title)
Wilt 1967: 26.5, .285------------25.3, 0.25 (15 playoff games, title)

Regarding MJ 1991 vs Shaq 2000


MJ in the season = 20.30 Win Shares. Shaq = 18.65
MJ in the season = 31.63 PER, Shaq = 30.65


MJ in the playoffs = 4.77 Win Share, Shaq = 4.67
MJ in the playoffs = 32.04 PER, Shaq = 30.45


MJ in the finals = 31.5 PER and Shaq = 31.1


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-7
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-8

So these two were neck and neck.

MJ had over a 31.5 PER in the season, playoffs and finals in 1991


Wilt's 1967 was great as well however to me with it being his 8th best season PER wise and 7th best in the playoffs he kinda hurts him here. Also in the playoffs he was the 2nd leading scorer on his team and in the finals he was the 5th leading scorer on the team.

Remember scoring was probably Wilt's greatest strength and to be 5th in it on the team in the finals is major.

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1967.htm#

PHI. G FG-FGA FT-FTA REB AST PF PTS
Greer 6 59-148 38-46 48 37 23 156
Walker 6 46-102 48-62 53 20 23 140
Jones 6 50-110 21-28 21 32 22 121
Cunningham 6 48-107 22-40 34 18 27 118
Chamberlain 6 42-75 22-72 171 41 16 106

Others to consider:

Hakeem 1994: 25.3, 0.210----------27.7, 0.208 (23 playoff games, title)
Duncan 2003: 26.9, 0.248------------28.4, 0.279 (24 playoff games, title)
Magic 1987: 27.0, 0.263-------------26.2, 0.265 (18 playoff games, title)
Bird 1986: 25.6, 0.244--------------23.9, 0.263 (23 playoff games, title)
Lebron James 2012:30.7, 0.298-------30.3, 0.284 (23 playoff games, title)
Lebron James 2013: 31.6, 0.322 -----28.1, 0.260 (23 playoff games, title)


To me for best peak it has to be one that didn't go down in the battle or needed another team to choke in the end. Afterall we are talking greatest peak here. Now if you were playing some all time great team and lost then that is different.
I would be more apt to use 2001 Shaq here instead of 2000 Shaq (as LA needed a choke on the other teams part to pull off the series, same for 2013 Lebron.), but the missed games hurt 2001 Shaq here as well.

2009 Lebron was great and could be the #1 peak with a great finals, but the one thing I will say is that we don't know how he would have played in the finals. He could have beaten Orlando but his finals in 2009 could have been like his 2011 Finals. Since the finals are the highest stage that plays an important factor here. Also it would be one thing losing to the 2008 Celtics, 2007 Spurs or even 2009 Lakers in 2009 or any team that actually won it all, but 2009 Orlando wasn't some great team especially with it's PG out for the series.

[Dr Positivity]

Mikan played his whole career (outside of his rookie season) in an integrated league. He retired the year before Bill Russell entered the league and guys that were his contemporaries like Dolph Schayes, Paul Arizin, and Bob Pettit stayed great until the 60s while at the time not being anywhere near Mikan's level of play.


This is kinda why I love projects like these too. I know plenty of other people probably assume Mikan played in an non integrated league against nothing but mediocre white dudes but the bridge between him and someone like Russell is so small.

I'm of the opinion that basketball was more advanced by the 50s/60 than given credit for (it had been around a half century already) but there's a reason all of the best players in the league were white in the 50s. If technically integrated, it wasn't very much. Mikan's status as best player in the league is less impressive with his peers being white.

I would agree if he wasn't by far the best player over players that played until the 60s. If he was THAT much better than Schayes, Arizin, and Pettit in the 50s why would I assume he wouldn't be better than them by that same magnitude 5 years later?

I also question whether he really is the most valuable vs his era all time. It doesn't seem like he was the best offensive player in the league any more than Duncan was. So Mikan defensive dominance + great offense is the best player... But not sure it's a margin other players generational players Lebron Jordan Wilt Kareem haven't matched, unless you think he was Russell level on defense

He was clearly the best offensive player in the league to a degree Duncan wasn't. Was Tim Duncan ever even top 5 offensively in any given season? Like seriously Mikan led the league in scoring 3 straight years and led the postseason in scoring each of his first 4 seasons. Remember they created the shotclock for this man and the goaltending rule, if you don't adjust for era he's by far the most dominant player in league history. Personally I knock him down a few pegs because he played in an era before the shotclock when basketball wasn't remotely what it is now but when a player wins 5 rings in 6 years (the only year losing being because of a fractured leg) but he definitely has an argument for GOAT seeing as how he's the most dominant player ever and there's no doubt he still would've dominated earlier eras as other players dominated before and after the shotclock.

You're correct, Mikan was the best offensive player in the league at one point, but it was pretty early even for the shot clock era. (49-51). Another way that reflects it, his rank in OWS, PPG and TS

49 - 1st OWS, 1st PPG, 3rd TS
50 - 2nd OWS, 1st PPG, 4th TS
51 - 1st OWS, 1st PPG, 5th TS
52 - 7th OWS, 2nd PPG, 18th TS
53 - 5th OWS, 2nd PPG, 12th TS
54 - 10th OWS, 4th ppg, 14th TS

By the time of his last couple years he is clearly passed by a few players on offense in my opinion. He is still one of the highest scoring players in the league but both his volume and efficiency dropped hard. Neil Johnston is now scoring more points and doing it more efficiently, and there's a fair argument Cousy is the most valuable offensive player in the league, as PGs have an advantage over Cs on offense, and he was by far and away the best playmaker. There is also an argument for Schayes due to spacing. Arizin in 52 may have been the best offensive player before going to war as well. I don't think he's clowning the league anymore by 52-54 just based on the stats. It's possible that 49-51 Mikan is the most dominant player in NBA history, but later shot clock era Mikan is bringing the combination more like Duncan, Hakeem, Robinson, KG, etc. were for their league as being surpassed by a few offensive players, but being the best player when you consider DPOY level defense in addition to strong offense. The question therefore is that did Mikan's drop in offense from 49-51 compared to the rest of the league come because of rule changes, declining quickly athletically or injuries, or did the rest of the league just get better? Do we value Cousy, Johnston, Schayes and Arizin's peak over his on offense because they did it in the later, presumably better non shotclock era? And if the rule changes was the biggest thing that hurt Mikan starting in 52, is it fair to credit him for being the most dominant player? Kareem, Wilt, Shaq never got to play with 6 foot foul lane or else they might have broken the league.

Overall I'm a supporter of Mikan being underrated and likely an all-star in any era, but I think there's a handful of all time great Cs who I think proved themselves against harder competition

[freethedevil]

Probably too late, but one idea for the format issue is to allow for up to three seasons for each player to be listed in order of preference in addition to the three players who you believe peaked highest.

So a ballot could look like this

1. Jordan 1991 (1990, 1996)

2. Wilt 1967 (1962, 1972)

3. LeBron 2013 (2009, 2016)

Good call. I'd hate for my '89 Jordan vote to be omitted simply because others rated a different peak year when my post clearly said that I think a reasonable mind could pick any of four different years as his peak.

This setup makes no sense IMO. Project comish, please change something...

People have elaborately outlined why it makes sense.

Get over it.

[freethedevil]

I am going Russell 62, LeBron 13, and Jordan 91.

Now that i think about it, I can't really see any reason why russel's peaks wouldn't be in the mix. Can you make a case for russell's peak vs mj or lebron's?

[freethedevil]

...While I don't want to make this post too much about Russell, I will mention that the 6th best player on the Celtics was arguably better than the 3rd best on the Philadelphia Warriors....

The celtics had a -1.5 srs over games Russel didn't play. Using hof selections after a team wins 11 chips tells you nothing regarding the quality of the supporting cast. The celtics without russel were below average. The celtics with russel were one of the greatest teams ever.

The celtics didn't win on the basis of an average offence, they won because of what was by far, the greatest defence ever centered around one great defender.

The notion that russell won on the backs of a stacked team is a baseless one.

[Point-Forward]

My votes:

1. Michael Jordan 1990-1991

Basically the perfect basketball player. Lethal on both ends of the floor. Slashing, off the dribble, post up, dominant mid range game, can work off the ball, etc. This was the year Jordan conflated in one physical, technical and tactical dominance. He started working out with Tim Grover in the summer of 1989, specially doing weight lifting. But he took those workout sessions to the next level during the 1990-1991 season (as stated in Sam Smith's 'The Jordan Rules'). While the rest of the Chicago Bulls had to work with the team's trainers, Jordan had a natural advantage following Grover's plan (he even installed a sophisticated equipment of weights in his own basement). It might not be easy to spot, but there is a physical change between 1987-1990 Jordan and 1991 Jordan.

His performance in the 1991 Finals might be the best ever to date. 31,2 points/game on 61 TS % and a total of 57 assists in the whole series (only 5 less than Magic, the best playmaker of all time). And if you watch the games, he didn't dominate the ball too much to get those assists (like he did while he played PG during the last stretch of the 1988-1989 season). Worked within the flow of the offense perfectly. Scored a crucial basket in Game 3 over Divac to save the game and go to overtime (that was a pivotal game, Lakers could have gone 2-1 on the series if they won that game).

He was amazing.

2. Kareem Abdul Jabbar 1976-1977

Probably the peak offensive season for a center, while still being a dominant force on defense. Incredibly skilled, reliable in the clutch (unlike Shaq, you can't slow him down sending him to the free throw line), underrated passer (KAJ was one hell of a passer from the start of his career), and had to carry a huge load on his back. He was much more than the skyhook, he could kill you with the fadeaway and even had range. He dominated Walton in the WCF even though the Blazers steamrolled the Lakers (LA was playing without one of his key players in the frontcourt, Kermit Washington, and one of the few perimeter players that could create something off the dribble, Lucius Allen, missed two games). If you watch the two full games available on youtube, Lakers backcourt couldn't even bring the ball up to midcourt. This let Blazers defenders hang around and harass Kareem at all times, and even then they still couldn't stop him.

What about the prior series against Golden State? He willed his team to victory scoring 27, 40, 28, 41, 45, 43 and 36 points. All while those Warriors, who had been champions just two years earlier, were defending him like this:



He was unstoppable, and it's a damn shame peak Kareem got a little bit wasted on those late 70's Lakers teams (which were not necessarily bad but very bad constructed), and his peak version came before the NBA revolution of the mid 80's.

I feel the great public missed on a player that should always be considered for the GOAT.

3. Lebron James 2012-2013

Perhaps not as explosive off the dribble as 2009 Lebron, but had a much more complete post game and a more consistent mid range game against tough defenses (even though, just talking from my memory, Lebron's shot was working pretty well during the 2009 Playoffs). Also he faced a slightly tougher road up until the ECF in 2013 than in 2009. I feel the combination of 2013 Bucks + 2013 Bulls was a tougher combo than 2009 Pistons + 2009 Hawks.

The names might lead you to confusion. 2013 Heat didn't give Lebron that much help compared to 2009. Wade was not the same player up until that point and Bosh was an inconsistent player. I do feel the 2013 role players were more reliable than the 2009 ones, though.

Also, one thing that separates this version from the 2009, 2016 and 2018 one: defense. 2013 Lebron is one of the best perimeter defenders ever. Spoelstra basically built his defensive system around his versatility.

[Bel]

I'm running far shorter on time than I had anticipated, so this will probably be my last post.

Two quick points I see:

First, as per the Russell supporting cast debate, I agree with freethedevil that you can't isolate the performance of Russell's teammates due to the extreme anomaly of the Celtic's D, which is well-proven to rest on Russell. I'd go further and add that you cannot separate their stats from Russell, since there's also tons of written evidence from various people that he's making them better in practice and thus is providing extra value others don't. The simplest way to tell this effect is in how they kept up their intensity year after year after year despite constantly winning, all while avoiding problems of devolving into ego-fests, complacency, and the disease of more: Pat Riley found that the 2nd-peat was harder than the first, and the extreme rarity of the 3-peat is self-explanatory. Meanwhile the Russell Celtics are doing it 8 times in a row. That is something that goes on quietly in the background, but is unbelievably valuable.

I think the only fair way to analyze is to compare how the supporting cast played before and after they joined the team (after is not as reliable, since habits and confidence may have changed - before is the best bet). The perception of a supporting cast can look very different depending on the coach (i,e GSW Kerr vs Jackson, or Nash with MDA) and/or the team leader (compare the 79 Lakers vs the 80 Lakers, and the 79 Celtics vs the 80 Celtics). Nobody was saying the 1979 Celtics were some amazing supporting cast, but suddenly you change coaches and insert Larry Bird, and now they look great.

Second, I don't understand how people are coming to the conclusion that Jordan in his peak years (post 88) was not an elite playmaker. I feel like I'm watching a different person compared to some folks here. Maybe its because most highlights of Jordan cut out his passing and just focus on the scoring, I'm not sure. And there's plenty of great passes that lead to missed but high% shots that naturally won't get included. But in the full footage he's consistently beating 3-4 guys in a very packed paint and creating high % shots for teammates out of nowhere, since he would pull all their defenders onto himself. Drive and kick wide open looks were automatic and almost too easy (i,e 91 finals g5). His one weakness was that he still prioritized his own shot over a wide open teammate at times (i,e g3 vs the Pistons I remember several instances of this, and g5 of the finals), but on aggregate he's just creating a glut of opportunities. I think he probably made a few more difficult passes overall in 89 and 90 since his teammates were much worse, but his playmaking in 91 was still excellent.

To give one video example, here's one of the starting plays from g3 of the 91 first round that I've never seen in a highlight video. You see how he doesn't hold the ball for long, gives everyone a touch, moves off-ball, forces 3 defenders to stop his drive and dishes it out to an open Grant at the FT line while airborne out of bounds. The out of bounds part is unusual, but otherwise that's a pretty typical play where he has to beat a lot of guys with little spacing and hit open teammates in his blind spots. The time is: 9m12s since I can't figure out how to directly link the time while embedding.

Watch on YouTube

1. 91 Jordan
2. 03 Duncan
3. 62 Russell

86 Bird and 67 Wilt are right behind them, it was quite a hard choice. I worry that I may be picking the wrong Russell year here, it's difficult to tell. I am dinging Shaq who is otherwise a gimme, perhaps too hard, for how close the WCF were.

[freethedevil]

Imagine not having lebron in your top 3, T H R E E. Don't even get me started on kobe 05 06 i ring better than any lbj/mj season ever, or 1972 kareem goat season.
Be better guys, this isnt looking good

If you're going to get riled up about dissenting opinions maybe at least make an argument?