Peaks project update: #2

[Jaivl]

See? Now I want to watch some film but can't until tomorrow afternoon

[Timmyyy]

Great answer E-Balla thanks.

Then I will come to his scoring. How was Wilt's split between being a finisher in the paint and creating his own shot out of the post?
I ask because the intuition would say with a better team around him he would get more off ball looks, which is absolutely valuable but not as much as creating himself. Now when he had a lot of finishing in his FGA it would be clear that he wasn't as much in the post creating since he only had 14 FGA per game in the RS and 15 in the PS. When I then take that and see that he took 10-11 FTA per game on which he shot 44% in the RS and 39% in the PO's I just think that his scoring game might also be a little less impactful than his TS% makes you believe. But that of course depends on the answer to the question asked in the beginning.
Overall of course he had one of the best offensive seasons of a center of all time. But I am not quite sure HOW good he was and remain more on the skeptical side. But when you add to that that he was really great on defense too that season of course you are looking at one of the great peaks in the history. But competition is tough.

So remember the 67 Sixers had the #1 offense. Personally I say just look at this:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=1955&year_max=1970&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&c1stat=pts_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=20&order_by=ts_pct

Those are all 20 ppg scorers between 1955 and 1970 sorted by TS%. Sort it by FG% and it's even more absurd, he's 15% better than the next best volume scorer. Remember even now in 2019 that's still the highest FG% anyone has had while averaging 15+ ppg. I just think there's something to be said for the fact Wilt is far and away the best finisher in league history. In the modern NBA I have no doubt playing like he did then he could have a 70+ FG% while scoring 20 ppg.

I absolutely see the uniqueness. But looking at guys that were mostly finishers like Dwight or AD showed us that efficient finishing doesn't necessarily lead to a best in the league type offensive impact, because it is just finishing. Of course Wilt might be even greater as a finisher. But it COULD still overrate his impact. Hence the question about the split. (and of course paired with his passing it made him a waaay better player then the above mentioned).

Last question how do people see 2000 Shaq and his defense in the PO's? That is actually one of the points why I am a little lower then before on him. Maybe someone can give his opinion on how he sees it or if it is relevant.

His defense was great. I don't get what the issue is. Vlade shot 35.7% from the field in their series, Luc Longley shot 37.1% from the field in their series, Sabonis shot 38.2% from the field in their series, and Rik Smits shot 46.6% from the field. The Lakers defense overall underperformed slightly but they can thank Reggie Miller for that, he kills everyone's defense in the playoffs.

All the guys you talk about aren't really world beaters as post scorers and it just shows me that Shaq did a good job defending the post. The most impactful thing for him as a center is team defense, which leads me to your last statement.
Slightly underperforming is a really nice way to word it. The Lakers fell from best in the league in the RS to 4th worst of all playoff teams. I can't really credit that all to Reggie. He was the defensive anchor. I have to say I don't feel like he was completely bad when I see him but he spent more energy on offense clearly. The intensity on D seemed lower.

[DatAsh]

'62 Russell
'65 Russell
The defensive impact just dwarfs the overall impact of any other player in NBA history

13 LeBron -- because the modern basketball pool is both appreciably deeper and wider than ever in NBA history

What about 64 Russell?

[E-Balla]

1. 2000 Shaq - He was #1 last time on my list. Other players have been more well rounded but I feel that if you give everyone a decent supporting cast that fits their play and put them on 30 teams 2000 Shaq comes out on top. He was just unstoppable, at best you fouled him 20 times and prayed he missed 25 FTs. Once you have to sign players to stop him, he enters another realm of dominance. Plus he's still a top 5ish defender that year.

2. 2001 Shaq - Thinking on it more he should've been 2nd on my first ballot. When it comes to "perfect" seasons (seasons in which players were clearly the best player on the floor in almost every game played - let's say 90%) Hakeem, Jordan, Lebron, Wilt, etc. have them and usually I place them over a year like 2001 but on second thought maybe that was wrong. Shaq was half assing it this year. Defensively the Lakers ranked 21st and Shaq's on/off wasn't too hot on that end. There's no getting past that when discussing this season. Beyond that he was still the clear best offensive player in the league leading the Lakers to a +5.4 offense and when needed he became professional and absolutely obliterated teams now that he had another superstar in Kobe Bryant next to him.

At the end of the season Shaq decided to turn it on and averaged 34/13/4 on 63 TS% (122 ORTG) while going 9-1 (their one loss was by 1 point against the Knicks where Shaq had 31 points on 13 shots in 38 minutes while his team had 47 combined points on 30% shooting). Then in the playoffs they turned into the GOAT team next to the 2017 Warriors having a +21 net rating and going 15-1. In their one loss Shaq had 44 points, 20 rebounds (6 offensive), and 5 assists on 17/28 shooting against the DPOY and IMO the GOAT modern era defender. Overall Shaq had 20/10 in all but one of his last 33 games of the season (he had 19/14 against San Antonio in game 2). If 2000 Shaq is the most dominant season ever 2001 once Shaq gave a damn is what that same player would look like on a stacked team like the ones most of these guys we're mentioning outside of Duncan, Shaq, and Hakeem had.

3. 2003 Tim Duncan - He led a good but not great defensive supporting cast and a terrible offensive supporting cast to 60 wins, a +2 offense, and a -4 defense. The team had a +9.1 net rating with him on the floor and a -5.6 net rating without him on the floor. He was the only player with a negative off court rating on the team.

Once the postseason hit Duncan played like he did in 02 again absolutely dominating and having probably the best postseason next to 01 Shaq. Against Phoenix he seemed to focus more on his defense averaging a good but not special 18.7/16.0/5.2 but after that he exploded averaging 26.7/15.2/5.3 the rest of the way on the way to a Finals win. People like to mention Dirk's injury but I want to mention in games 1-3 vs Dirk San Antonio was 2-1 and Duncan was averaging 35/18/6 on 66 TS% (131 ORTG). So maybe they lose if Dirk doesn't get hurt, but they would've had to lose with Duncan still putting up 30+/15+/5+ each night.

I do want to mention it was hard to omit Hakeem. Usually I place him over Duncan mainly because of his head to head matchup domination but his best postseason (95) came on a team with another star player on it while Duncan had a performance on that level all alone. 93 is a good year too but Seattle was able to get the ball out of his hands pretty easily to win. Sure Seattle had an amazing defense but when we're talking about years this great any small issue can drop you out the top 3.

[E-Balla]

I absolutely see the uniqueness. But looking at guys that were mostly finishers like Dwight or AD showed us that efficient finishing doesn't necessarily lead to a best in the league type offensive impact, because it is just finishing. Of course Wilt might be even greater as a finisher. But it COULD still overrate his impact. Hence the question about the split. (and of course paired with his passing it made him a waaay better player then the above mentioned).

Yes I definitely get that but this is why I wanted to make it known exactly how amazing his finishing was. Make Dwight 10% better from the field in 2010 (for example, because that's the year they had a +4ish offense) and that's more of how good of a scorer Wilt was. Beyond that remember he was volume scoring the year before already, just because he was mostly used as a finisher (when it came to his scoring) doesn't mean he couldn't get buckets in another way if need be. Then you add in his passing which is something Dwight lacked completely and AD used to lack before this year when he became more of a primary ball handler and it makes sense why the 67 Sixers had the best offense of the decade by a distance (+0.5 over the next best which was the 68 Lakers IIRC but in their defense Jerry West missed half the season).

At the end of the day it's all based on imagination. Finishing is high level offense but nowhere near top tier, when added to Rondo type volume passing, and when made way better than any other finisher ever is it now ATG level? That's really on you to decide personally.

All the guys you talk about aren't really world beaters as post scorers and it just shows me that Shaq did a good job defending the post. The most impactful thing for him as a center is team defense, which leads me to your last statement.
Slightly underperforming is a really nice way to word it. The Lakers fell from best in the league in the RS to 4th worst of all playoff teams. I can't really credit that all to Reggie. He was the defensive anchor. I have to say I don't feel like he was completely bad when I see him but he spent more energy on offense clearly. The intensity on D seemed lower.

Oh no I wasn't speculating it was all Reggie, I was saying for a fact it was all Reggie. He had that Pacers offense (that was a +4.4 regular season offense, leading the league in ORTG) performing at a +16.3 level in the Finals. The relative defensive rating of the Lakers was very good through the Western Conference, the Finals alone skewed those numbers to where overall they performed at a +1.6 level on defense which seems pretty bad.

[No-more-rings]

1. 2000 Shaq - He was #1 last time on my list. Other players have been more well rounded but I feel that if you give everyone a decent supporting cast that fits their play and put them on 30 teams 2000 Shaq comes out on top. He was just unstoppable, at best you fouled him 20 times and prayed he missed 25 FTs. Once you have to sign players to stop him, he enters another realm of dominance. Plus he's still a top 5ish defender that year.

2. 2001 Shaq - Thinking on it more he should've been 2nd on my first ballot. When it comes to "perfect" seasons (seasons in which players were clearly the best player on the floor in almost every game played - let's say 90%) Hakeem, Jordan, Lebron, Wilt, etc. have them and usually I place them over a year like 2001 but on second thought maybe that was wrong. Shaq was half assing it this year. Defensively the Lakers ranked 21st and Shaq's on/off wasn't too hot on that end. There's no getting past that when discussing this season. Beyond that he was still the clear best offensive player in the league leading the Lakers to a +5.4 offense and when needed he became professional and absolutely obliterated teams now that he had another superstar in Kobe Bryant next to him.

At the end of the season Shaq decided to turn it on and averaged 34/13/4 on 63 TS% (122 ORTG) while going 9-1 (their one loss was by 1 point against the Knicks where Shaq had 31 points on 13 shots in 38 minutes while his team had 47 combined points on 30% shooting). Then in the playoffs they turned into the GOAT team next to the 2017 Warriors having a +21 net rating and going 15-1. In their one loss Shaq had 44 points, 20 rebounds (6 offensive), and 5 assists on 17/28 shooting against the DPOY and IMO the GOAT modern era defender. Overall Shaq had 20/10 in all but one of his last 33 games of the season (he had 19/14 against San Antonio in game 2). If 2000 Shaq is the most dominant season ever 2001 once Shaq gave a damn is what that same player would look like on a stacked team like the ones most of these guys we're mentioning outside of Duncan, Shaq, and Hakeem had.

3. 2003 Tim Duncan - He led a good but not great defensive supporting cast and a terrible offensive supporting cast to 60 wins, a +2 offense, and a -4 defense. The team had a +9.1 net rating with him on the floor and a -5.6 net rating without him on the floor. He was the only player with a negative off court rating on the team.

Once the postseason hit Duncan played like he did in 02 again absolutely dominating and having probably the best postseason next to 01 Shaq. Against Phoenix he seemed to focus more on his defense averaging a good but not special 18.7/16.0/5.2 but after that he exploded averaging 26.7/15.2/5.3 the rest of the way on the way to a Finals win. People like to mention Dirk's injury but I want to mention in games 1-3 vs Dirk San Antonio was 2-1 and Duncan was averaging 35/18/6 on 66 TS% (131 ORTG). So maybe they lose if Dirk doesn't get hurt, but they would've had to lose with Duncan still putting up 30+/15+/5+ each night.

I do want to mention it was hard to omit Hakeem. Usually I place him over Duncan mainly because of his head to head matchup domination but his best postseason (95) came on a team with another star player on it while Duncan had a performance on that level all alone. 93 is a good year too but Seattle was able to get the ball out of his hands pretty easily to win. Sure Seattle had an amazing defense but when we're talking about years this great any small issue can drop you out the top 3.

You’d take 2 versions of Shaq over peak MJ then?

Considering Shaq’s longevity was better, isn’t there a good chance he should rank higher overall?

[Timmyyy]

Yes I definitely get that but this is why I wanted to make it known exactly how amazing his finishing was. Make Dwight 10% better from the field in 2010 (for example, because that's the year they had a +4ish offense) and that's more of how good of a scorer Wilt was. Beyond that remember he was volume scoring the year before already, just because he was mostly used as a finisher (when it came to his scoring) doesn't mean he couldn't get buckets in another way if need be. Then you add in his passing which is something Dwight lacked completely and AD used to lack before this year when he became more of a primary ball handler and it makes sense why the 67 Sixers had the best offense of the decade by a distance (+0.5 over the next best which was the 68 Lakers IIRC but in their defense Jerry West missed half the season).

At the end of the day it's all based on imagination. Finishing is high level offense but nowhere near top tier, when added to Rondo type volume passing, and when made way better than any other finisher ever is it now ATG level? That's really on you to decide personally.

Yeah absolutely in agreement. That is why I said in my first post I think he was one of the best offensive C's of all time no matter if you are skeptical like me or you are a complete believer in his passing and scoring being exactly as impactful as the boxscore suggests. It's just when I compare him to Kareem, Duncan, Hakeem, Russell, Shaq me being skeptical might lead to me leaning towards these other guys (maybe not all of them but some).

Oh no I wasn't speculating it was all Reggie, I was saying for a fact it was all Reggie. He had that Pacers offense (that was a +4.4 regular season offense, leading the league in ORTG) performing at a +16.3 level in the Finals. The relative defensive rating of the Lakers was very good through the Western Conference, the Finals alone skewed those numbers to where overall they performed at a +1.6 level on defense which seems pretty bad.

Great point actually (not that I agree it was all Miller [there are still other guys on the court and Shaq might have been able to impact the game more than he actually did, Miller and the Pacers playing great doesn't change that], but that the Pacers series made up for a huge portion of the worse defense of the Lakers). Was partially aware of it but not quite to the degree. But I still see them with a DRTG of 103.5 without the finals which would be 8th for the playoffs (admittedly some first round exits in front). For the best defense in the NBA that is still really weak and a big drop off that needs to be explained somehow.

[E-Balla]

1. 2000 Shaq - He was #1 last time on my list. Other players have been more well rounded but I feel that if you give everyone a decent supporting cast that fits their play and put them on 30 teams 2000 Shaq comes out on top. He was just unstoppable, at best you fouled him 20 times and prayed he missed 25 FTs. Once you have to sign players to stop him, he enters another realm of dominance. Plus he's still a top 5ish defender that year.

2. 2001 Shaq - Thinking on it more he should've been 2nd on my first ballot. When it comes to "perfect" seasons (seasons in which players were clearly the best player on the floor in almost every game played - let's say 90%) Hakeem, Jordan, Lebron, Wilt, etc. have them and usually I place them over a year like 2001 but on second thought maybe that was wrong. Shaq was half assing it this year. Defensively the Lakers ranked 21st and Shaq's on/off wasn't too hot on that end. There's no getting past that when discussing this season. Beyond that he was still the clear best offensive player in the league leading the Lakers to a +5.4 offense and when needed he became professional and absolutely obliterated teams now that he had another superstar in Kobe Bryant next to him.

At the end of the season Shaq decided to turn it on and averaged 34/13/4 on 63 TS% (122 ORTG) while going 9-1 (their one loss was by 1 point against the Knicks where Shaq had 31 points on 13 shots in 38 minutes while his team had 47 combined points on 30% shooting). Then in the playoffs they turned into the GOAT team next to the 2017 Warriors having a +21 net rating and going 15-1. In their one loss Shaq had 44 points, 20 rebounds (6 offensive), and 5 assists on 17/28 shooting against the DPOY and IMO the GOAT modern era defender. Overall Shaq had 20/10 in all but one of his last 33 games of the season (he had 19/14 against San Antonio in game 2). If 2000 Shaq is the most dominant season ever 2001 once Shaq gave a damn is what that same player would look like on a stacked team like the ones most of these guys we're mentioning outside of Duncan, Shaq, and Hakeem had.

3. 2003 Tim Duncan - He led a good but not great defensive supporting cast and a terrible offensive supporting cast to 60 wins, a +2 offense, and a -4 defense. The team had a +9.1 net rating with him on the floor and a -5.6 net rating without him on the floor. He was the only player with a negative off court rating on the team.

Once the postseason hit Duncan played like he did in 02 again absolutely dominating and having probably the best postseason next to 01 Shaq. Against Phoenix he seemed to focus more on his defense averaging a good but not special 18.7/16.0/5.2 but after that he exploded averaging 26.7/15.2/5.3 the rest of the way on the way to a Finals win. People like to mention Dirk's injury but I want to mention in games 1-3 vs Dirk San Antonio was 2-1 and Duncan was averaging 35/18/6 on 66 TS% (131 ORTG). So maybe they lose if Dirk doesn't get hurt, but they would've had to lose with Duncan still putting up 30+/15+/5+ each night.

I do want to mention it was hard to omit Hakeem. Usually I place him over Duncan mainly because of his head to head matchup domination but his best postseason (95) came on a team with another star player on it while Duncan had a performance on that level all alone. 93 is a good year too but Seattle was able to get the ball out of his hands pretty easily to win. Sure Seattle had an amazing defense but when we're talking about years this great any small issue can drop you out the top 3.

You’d take 2 versions of Shaq over peak MJ then?

Considering Shaq’s longevity was better, isn’t there a good chance he should rank higher overall?

Thinking back on it yes I would even though this is something I only realized now after we did the first vote and I was trying to justify putting 03 Duncan and 94 Hakeem in my top 3 over 2001 Shaq.

But still I wouldn't take him over MJ because outside of 99-01 I wouldn't say he had the best season any other year. Dude just half assed it or was hurt for a significant amount of games through most of his prime. Jordan was the best player in the game from 88-93 and in both 96 and 97. Shaq's still 6th on my ATL mainly off the strength of his overall talent, not necessarily what he did on the floor and total value added (which isn't how I rank careers).

[E-Balla]

Yeah absolutely in agreement. That is why I said in my first post I think he was one of the best offensive C's of all time no matter if you are skeptical like me or you are a complete believer in his passing and scoring being exactly as impactful as the boxscore suggests. It's just when I compare him to Kareem, Duncan, Hakeem, Russell, Shaq me being skeptical might lead to me leaning towards these other guys (maybe not all of them but some).

It's understandable, especially when Kareem came through not much later and probably had more impact offensively. The main difference between the two IMO is whether you value the speed of Kareem's game over Wilt's rebounding and defense. Wilt's game in the modern NBA would look terrible but Kareem always got into his moves extremely fast which would still work now in 2019.

Personally my top 5 for the project (ignoring years for now) was Shaq-MJ-Duncan-Hakeem-Kareem with Wilt and LeBron fighting for that 6th spot. Overall I'd take Kareem over Wilt gun to head but it's really tough knowing I'm knocking Wilt back a peg because I don't see how effective it could be in a modern context.

Great point actually (not that I agree it was all Miller [there are still other guys on the court and Shaq might have been able to impact the game more than he actually did, Miller and the Pacers playing great doesn't change that], but that the Pacers series made up for a huge portion of the worse defense of the Lakers).

Yeah I mostly singled out Reggie because y'all know I love me some Reggie.

Was partially aware of it but not quite to the degree. But I still see them with a DRTG of 103.5 without the finals which would be 8th for the playoffs (admittedly some first round exits in front). For the best defense in the NBA that is still really weak and a big drop off that needs to be explained somehow.

I go off rDRTG personally. The Kings are underrated by their offensive rating in the regular season because as we saw in 01-04 the team was extremely talented offensively.

Overall the league average DRTG that year (not using estimates anymore but the real NBA.com numbers) was 102.3. The Lakers had a -5.9 relative defensive rating (same as the estimated numbers).

The Kings had a 103.6 ORTG, Phoenix had a 102.7, and the Blazers had a 106.5.

Against LA the Kings had a 103.0 ORTG (-0.6), the Suns had a 99.1 ORTG (-3.6), and the Blazers had a 107.1 ORTG (+0.6).

Personally looking at those you're right that the Lakers defense wasn't great in the playoffs. Still they were above average defensively in their first 3 series. It's definitely something I never noticed before, if someone else knows whether or not Shaq's help defense and rim protection was good feel free to chime in.

[euroleague]

I don’t understand the voting system- people just vote for the same player multiple times under different years?
1. Wilt 62
2. Wilt 67
3. Shaq 00

[euroleague]

While this project is a good way to see what people think, I don’t see arguments over players I’ve watched myself getting changed by stats.

Been interesting seeing the arguments about Cowens though

[penbeast0]

'62 Russell
'65 Russell
The defensive impact just dwarfs the overall impact of any other player in NBA history

13 LeBron -- because the modern basketball pool is both appreciably deeper and wider than ever in NBA history

What about 64 Russell?

Frankly, Russell was pretty consistent and I'd like to have someone harder worker than me make a case for his best 3 seasons.

[Blackmill]

'62 Russell
'65 Russell
The defensive impact just dwarfs the overall impact of any other player in NBA history

13 LeBron -- because the modern basketball pool is both appreciably deeper and wider than ever in NBA history

A few questions if you can spare the time.

1. What makes you say Russell's defensive impact dwarfs the overall impact of any other player? For instance, if you are using on/off as evidence, what makes you think the on/off estimate is reliable (both mathematically and qualitatively)?

2. There are impact estimates (i.e. WOWYR on backpicks) that go back to the 60s for which Russell does not have the highest estimated impact. What would be your rebuttal?

3. Are you considering in era impact or impact under some common conditions (i.e. assume all players played in the 2000s)? If you consider impact under common conditions, what are those conditions, and why do you think Russell's impact would remain the highest?

[scrabbarista]

'03 Duncan
'13 LeBron
'09 LeBron

My votes won't be counted, but that's who I'd vote if they were. (I also had '91 Jordan first. These are exactly my next three.)

[colts18]

I made the case that Shaq in 2000 was the GOAT. Here is that case. WARNING: It's long with a ton of numbers.

I'm going to outline the case of Shaq 2000 for the GOAT peak. Warning this post has a lot of numbers and is a pretty long read. I'll focus on his performance without Kobe, Defense, the Lakers as a team, 4th quarter, clutch, and playoffs.

Without Kobe:
Kobe started the 2000 season injured. He missed all of November. During that time, the Lakers and Shaq didn’t miss a beat at all.

11-3 record
6.61 SRS (would still be good enough to be #1 in the league)

Shaq performed admirably
28.7 PPG, 13.4 Reb, 3 AST, 59.5 FG%

More impressively is how the Lakers performed when Shaq was on the court during that span that Kobe missed.
107 O rating (+6.8 from League average)
94.3 D rating (-7.0 from league average)
+12.7 Net Rating

The most amazing thing about the above numbers is that Shaq’s full season numbers were 106 O rating and 95 D rating (11 Net) so that means the Lakers with Shaq on the court while Kobe didn’t play, played better offense and defense than the Lakers played with Shaq on the court in the games Kobe played. Shaq really stepped it up in that span.

Here is Shaq’s supporting cast during those games:
36 year old Ron Harper, 7 PPG 39.9 FG%
25 year old Derek Fisher, 6 PPG, 34.6 FG%
32 year old Glen Rice, 15.9 PPG, 43 FG%
36 year old A.C. Green, 5 PPG 44.7 FG%
2000 Shaq

Bench,
Brian Shaw
Rick Fox
Robert Horry
Travis Knight
John Celestand

Despite all of that, Shaq performed just as well and somehow got an on court 107 Offensive rating (+6.8 from league average) with Shaq on court. To put that into perspective, the #2 offense this year (Heat) are +6.5. They also played -7.0 defense which is the exact same that the 2011 Bulls and Celtics played.

In that month without Kobe, while the team played awesome with Shaq on the court, they were horrific without Shaq in that month

On court: +12 per 100
Off court: -44 in 197 minutes, (-11.17 per 100)
+23.19 per 100 possession difference

So Shaq was propping up a mediocre at best cast in Kobe’s absence to playing like the best team in the league when Shaq was on the court.

Defense:
Shaq’s 2000 season was his best defensive performance ever. The Lakers finished #1 in Defensive Rating (-5.9 relative to league average according to B-R), 1st in FG% allowed, 3P% allowed. Shaq led the league in Defensive Win Shares. Shaq’s man defense was a huge part of that. According to Hoopsstats.com, the Lakers in 2000 allowed 14.0 PPG, 40.7 FG% to opposing center. They had the best PPG against Centers, FG% against centers, and finished with the 2nd fewest FTA/game allowed to Centers.

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/opponentstats/00/10/pts/1-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Top TS% defense:
Lakers: .455 TS% (.453 in the games Shaq played)
Spurs: .486 TS%
Heat: .490 TS%
The League average center was .526 TS% so the Lakers were -7.1 TS% relative to League average and they beat the Robinson/Duncan Spurs by 3.1 TS% for 1st place. An impressive feat.

Here are some more facts from Hoopsstats.com. Here are the best opposing Center PPG and FG% defense since hoopsstats started collecting the stat (from 1998-2013)

Top opponent Center PPG defense from 98-13:
06 Heat: 12.8 PPG (Shaq)
04 Lakers: 12.9 PPG (Shaq)
06 Jazz: 12.9 PPG

Top opponent Center FG% defense from 98-13:
00 Lakers: 40.7 FG% (Shaq)
99 Spurs: 41.1 FG% (Duncan/Robinson)
99 Hawks: 41.9 FG% (Mutombo)
Shaq’s teams finished #1 in 00 and 05, #2 in 01, 02 and #3 in 98 and 06.

Here is a comparison between Shaq and Alonzo Mourning, the 2000 DPOY, for that season:
Teams On Court Defensive Rating:
Shaq 95.3 pts allowed per 100 possessions with Shaq on the court
Mourning: 97.7 points per 100 allowed

These are the stats of all Centers in the league that played 24 minutes in a game vs Shaq/Mourning in 2000. Numbers are Per 36:

vs. Shaq: 12.46 PPG, 42.5 FG%, .462 TS% 1.48 AST-1.68 TOV

vs. Mourning: 12.53 PPG, 45.4 FG%, .512 TS%, 1.23 AST-1.83 TOV

vs. league average: 13.97 PPG, 50.2 FG%, .547 TS%, 1.50 AST-2.02 TOV

*League average does not include Shaq

Dropoff: Shaq-League Avg: -1.21 PPG, -7.7 FG%, -8.5 TS%, -0.2 AST, -0.34 TOV


vs Shaq: 10% 20+ points, 25% 15+ points, 48% <10 points

vs. Mourning: 14% 20+ Points, 20% 15+ points, 44% <10 points

League average: 13.9% 20+ Points, 32.1% 15+ points, 38.2% <10 points

Here is what Shaq did vs. the top 5 non-Shaq scorers at Center that year:
vs. Shaq (parenthesis is their regular season average):

Mourning: 27 PPG, 44.2 FG%, .513 TS%(21.7 PPG, 55.1 FG%, .596 TS%)

DRob: 13.3PPG, 42.1 FG%, .462 TS% (17.8 PPG, 51.2 FG%, .568 TS%) (had 15 Points on 54.5 FG% in the game Shaq missed)

Ewing: 13 PPG, 32.4 FG%, .343 TS% (15 PPG, 46.6 FG%, .516 TS%)

Smits: 8 PPG, 47.1 FG%, .471 TS% (12.9 PPG, 48.4 FG%, .518 TS%), 10 PPG 46.6 FG% in finals vs. Shaq

Campbell: 7 PPG, 28.6 FG%, .308 TS% (12.7 PPG, 44.6 FG%, .500 TS%)

Average dropoff is -2.2 PPG, -10.3 FG%, -12.0 TS%. That is a significant dropoff.

Playoffs (regular season averages in parenthesis):
Divac: 11.2 PPG, 35.7 FG%, 423 TS% (12.3 PPG, 50.3 FG%, .552 TS%)
Longley: 5.2 PPG, 37.1 FG%, .330 TS% (6.3 PPG, 44.6 FG%, .512 TS%)
Sabonis: 8.3 PPG, 38.2 FG%, 22.2 3P%, .471 TS% (11.8 PPG, 50.5 FG%, 36.8 3P%, .568 TS%)
Smits: 10 PPG, 46.6 FG%, .495 TS% (12.9 PPG, 48.4 FG%, .518 TS%)
Average dropoff: 2.2 PPG, -9.3 FG%, -10.8 TS%

Shaq was elite on man defense again in the playoffs.

Here is a breakdown on the Lakers defense in the paint
With Shaq on court: 33.5 Points in the paint allowed per 48 minutes
Shaq off the court: 38.8 Points allowed per 48
5.3 points per 48 minute difference. Teams shot 148 more mid range shots with Shaq on the court than against any other player in the league.

Team performance:
The Lakers were an all-time team in the games Shaq played
Shaq played: 66-13 (.835), 9.27 SRS, +9.9 Efficiency Differential (would be 6th all-time)
Shaq missed: 1-2 (.333), -11.16 SRS

To get an idea of Shaq’s impact, I will give an anecdote. The Lakers and Shaq played a game vs. the Rockets at Houston. The Lakers won by 1 point. 2 days later the Lakers played the Rockets again this time at home and without Shaq. They lost by 16 points. So that’s a 24.1 Point turnaround when you adjust for HCA. Hakeem vs. Shaq shot 5-18 (.278), the next game without Shaq he shot 6-12 (.500)

Games Shaq and Kobe both played in:
54-10 (.844) (would be 2nd best win% in history)
9.71 SRS (4th best SRS in 3 pt era behind 92, 96, 97 Bulls)


Shaq on the court: +706 (#1 in the NBA) (+11.2 per 100 possessions)
Shaq off the court: -5 (-0.0 per 100 possessions)

4th Quarter:
For some reason there is a myth out there that Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter. The data does not show that at all.

Top 5 in 4th Quarter points per 36 minutes in 2000:
1. Shaq 29.4 PPG, .584 TS%
2. Malone 27.9 PPG, .604 TS%
3. Carter 26.3 PPG, .573 TS%
4. Iverson 25.9 PPG, .504 TS%
5. Hill 25.4 PPG, 56.6 TS%
Kobe was 9th at 23 point per 36.

The Lakers had a 110 O rating when Shaq was on the court in the 4th quarter. Here are those same ratings, except for the playoffs (min. 2 playoff series):
1. Shaq 32.3 PPG, .637 TS%
2. Wells 29.6 PPG, .617 TS%
3. Mourning 23.7 PPG, .524 TS%
4. Miller 23.0 PPG, .654 TS% (his team had a 124.3 O rating in the 4th with him on the court)
5. Malone 22.6 PPG, .490 TS%

Kobe was 9th at 21.4 points per 36 with a .479 TS%. The Lakers had a 116 O rating with Shaq on the court in the 4th quarter in the 2000 postseason.

Here is how Shaq compares to 97 and 98 Jordan in the 4th quarter:

Regular season (per 36):
97 MJ 29.5 PPG, .594 TS%, 113.4 on court O rating
98 MJ 31.1 PPG, .572 TS%, 108.0 O rating
00 Shaq 29.4 PPG, .584 TS%, 110 O rating

Playoffs (per 36):
97 MJ 33.2 PPG, .569 TS%, 114.4 on court O rating
98 MJ 33.5 PPG, .557 TS%, 108.5 O rating
00 Shaq 32.3 PPG, .637 TS%, 116.0 O rating

Shaq was very comparable to MJ and probably better in the playoffs. Shaq had 2 important series in the playoffs (Blazers, Pacers) and he averaged 33.5 points per 36 and 69.4 FG%, +18.2 Net rating per 100, 118.4 on court O rating in the 4th quarter in those 2 series.

Playoff Clutch:
Shaq was also clutch in the playoffs. In the 4th quarter when the score was within 5 points and 5 minutes left or less, Shaq dominated in the playoffs.

Per 48:
44.9 pts, .610 TS%, 19.8 reb, 4.0 ast, 6.6 blk, +33.0, 128 on court O rating

When the Lakers were down by 5 or less with 5 minutes or less left in the game:
11 minutes, 13 pts (5-8 FG), 6 reb, +15 +/-

Playoffs:
Shaq was as brilliant in the playoffs as he was in the regular season. His impact was certainly as high.
Shaq on court: +115 (+6 per 100 possessions)
Shaq off court: -61 (-27.3 per 100 possessions)
+33.3 per 100 possessions

That impact was more apparent in the final 2 rounds where the Lakers had their most difficult challenge. Shaq played 45.7 MPG in those 2 rounds, but the Lakers absolutely collapsed without him on the court.

On court: +21 (+1.8 per 100 possessions)
Off court: 35 minutes, -43 points (-61.0 per 100 possessions)
+62.8 per 100 possessions

Now granted it is a small sample size, but it’s absurd how the Lakers had a higher losing margin (-43) than they did minutes (35) without Shaq on the court. With Shaq on the court they had a 107.8 Offensive Rating. I estimated that they had a 73.4 Offensive Rating in the possessions that Shaq missed in the final 2 rounds.

1st round:
Vs. Sacramento, #7 in SRS, #10 in D rating:
29/17/3, 54.3 FG%. Shaq has a 32/18/4, 15-24 (.625) closeout game in a 27 point win.

Vs. Phoenix, #4 in SRS, #3 in D rating:
30/16/3, 55.9 FG%. Had games of 37/14, 38/20, and 37/17.

Vs. Blazers, #2 in SRS, #5 in D rating:
26/14/4, 53.7 FG%. Starts off really hot in the series. Has a bad game 6. Then in game 7, Shaq steps it up in the 4th quarter. He goes 3-3 and draws 5 fouls in the quarter. Sabonis starts the quarter with 2 fouls in the first 3 quarters. 9 minutes later, he fouls out of the game, with all 4 fouls coming against Shaq. He touched the ball 11 times in 16 halfcourt 4th quarter possessions. He passed it out 3 times and the other 8 times he went 3-3 FG and drew 5 fouls.

Vs. Pacers, #6 in SRS:
38/17/2, 61.1 FG%. Arguably the greatest finals in history. He had games of 43/19, 40/24, 33/13, 36/21, 35/11, 41/12. He shot 59% or better in 5 of those games. The Lakers had a 109 O rating with him on the court (+7.7 relative to playoff average). He did it while his top 2 offensive guys didn’t do much.
Kobe- 15.6 PPG, 36.7 FG%
Rice- 11.5 PPG, 40.0 FG%

The most impressive is what Shaq did to the Pacers frontline (Smits, Davis, Perkins, Croshere, and Tabak). They combined for 102 fouls in 6 games (17 per game) after they combined for 10.8 fouls per game in the regular season. Crazy thing is the only thing that held back Shaq was FT shooting. If he shot his regular season average at the FT line in the finals, he would have averaged over 40 PPG in this finals.

Shaq certainly had a few weaknesses that year like his FT shooting, but I think overall he has a great case as the best season of all-time or at least slightly below MJ at his absolute peak.

[Gibson22]

'03 Duncan
'13 LeBron
'09 LeBron

My votes won't be counted, but that's who I'd vote if they were. (I also had '91 Jordan first. These are exactly my next three.)

[url]

Watch on YouTube

[/url]

[scrabbarista]

'03 Duncan
'13 LeBron
'09 LeBron

My votes won't be counted, but that's who I'd vote if they were. (I also had '91 Jordan first. These are exactly my next three.)

[url]

Watch on YouTube

[/url]

See my signature.

[trex_8063]

1st ballot - '00 Shaquille O'Neal - I remember my perception at the time was that Shaq broke the league (indeed, he forced a rule-change [although should be noted it was a rule-changed prompted by how teams were exploiting his weakness]). I mean, the guy was averaging nearly 30/14/4 with 3 blocks.......which felt REALLY ridiculous in this particular slow, grind-it-out era. There was just no one else producing that kind of volume at the time. Some teams were signing additional lumbering stiffs just to absorb the foul-burden and/or to have bodies to platoon out to try and bang with Shaq. I remember entire defenses collapsing on him when he got the ball down deep (which you knew they were already screwed if he got the ball there).
And he had a really solid defensive year in '00 too (which is not something we can consistently say for Shaq).


2nd ballot - '13 Lebron James - I could see going with '09 (or potentially other years, too). I'll stick with my traditional year, as he was still very sharp and capable defensively at this point, had developed a bit of mid-range shot by this point, sucha savvy play-makers, and extremely efficient scoring with one of the best turnover economies of his career [and also snaring 8 boards/game]. LBJ could do everything at his peak, and anchor a contender-level team on BOTH sides of the ball. Could be convinced to move him up, tbh. Shaq and MJ both have striking cases, too, though.

3rd ballot - '09 Lebron James - As mentioned above, Bron has multiple years which could be perceived as his peak. He feels a pinch less refined at this stage (less midrange, maybe not quite as polished in the post), but his raw athleticism was perhaps never better. And he ends up having one of the best individual playoff runs [statistically; arguably THE best] of all time.


EDIT: My top HM's are probably Wilt and Kareem (with shout-outs to Timmy, Hakeem, maybe KG, too).

[Timmyyy]

Have to get my vote in now since I won't have time tomorrow.

1. 2009 Lebron James
2. 2012 Lebron James
3. 2016 Lebron James

Here are my explanaitions from the last thread where I voted exactly the same. For now I will leave it with that explanaitions since nothing changed for me, but I hope that Lebron gets voted in now, because when he is out it gets a lot more interesting in my eyes.

Spoiler:

I think at the top it is just so crowded but I have the feeling that there are two guys looking a small step ahead at their absolute best. These guys are Lebron and MJ for me. I used to have Shaq in this group too until yesterday but had the feeling I might have overlooked something when I evaluated him. With my new analysis he might be closer to the Kareem Russell TD Wilt Hakeem group.

Lebron just had a phenomenal impact on the game in his peak years and we have the RAPM data to support that claim. Comparing it to the other contenders we have the data of it seems that he was the guy that had the best RAPM values no matter what data set or year of his peak contenders you are looking at. The only other guys that have somewhat comparable years are only Duncan, KG and Shaq at their perceived peak for only one data set I have each. It shows to me that from a pure +/- standpoint his peak is comfortably above everybody in the RAPM era.
Comparing him to Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem and Russell is tougher but knowing what I know I have Lebron as the clearly best offensive player of the bunch with a pretty big margin (coming from an impact POV not boxscore). Sure all these guys have a big gap on defense too but looking at his defensive impact he always was somewhat of a +2-+3 at his peak and I don't think anybody can beat that combined with a contender for best offensive player ever.

MJ is in a similar boat. Looking how the Bulls in 91 did I can't help but think that their ATG offense was driven to an insane level by MJ especially since he upped his game in the PO and the offense became even better. Their defense was great too and while I see MJ as 'only' a perimeter defender he was a really important part to that D. Have a hard time seeing anyone having that great impact except Lebron.

Edit for new voting system. Still spoilering my previous thoughts for later discussion.

General thoughts of the competition and why I see 2 guys in front are above.

Hopefully my final ballot:

1. Lebron 2009

2. Lebron 2012

3. Lebron 2016

Why so much Lebron seasons over MJ? Because all these three seasons look like they are on the exact same level and I see Lebrons peak impact as slightly higher than MJs.
MJ is the slightly better offensive player for me because he is better off ball player and scorer overall whereas Lebron is the better playmaker. Both for me offensive GOAT candidates but give me MJ slightly.
On defense MJ was a great perimeter defender maybe one of the best ever BUT he was just that a perimeter defender. Lebron might have been worse as a pure perimeter defender but he also had a great impact on the inside as a help defender and even as a rim protector at times. When you look at 09 Cleveland, 12 Miami and 16 Cleveland, he was either a secondary defensive anchor or a primary anchor in a shared role on all of these teams. That boosts your defensive impact to a degree that can't be reached with pure perimeter defense.
In the end I consider the defensive gap a little bigger that the offensive one that's why I have him above.
To quantify it a little, according to Engelmanns multiyear and PI RAPM data for these years Lebron in all these years seems to be in the 6-6.5 ORAPM and 2.5-3 DRAPM range. If I would have to give my feeling about MJ I would go with 7-7.5 ORAPM and 1.5-2 DRAPM on the same scale. You see the range of total RAPM is actually the same but I believe Jordan to be a little on the lower side of what I took as range and therefor being a bit worse. But it also shows that they are so close that I have no problem with Jordan above Lebron either even with multiple years. But gun to my head I am confident with that choice.
Michael in 1991 would follow right after these 3 Lebron years and might have multiple years too until Lebron in 13, 17, 10, 14 would follow.

Little side note: RAPM is showing Lebron 2013 as a clear step below these other years defensively already. Wasn't really aware of that and didn't notice it at the time. Always thought that 14 was the first year he took step back in that regard.

A little extra explanaition for my choices is that I don't put too much stock in small differences between years of the same player and Lebrons RAPM these years is a pretty good indicator and hint to this. I believe players have multiple years with their peak level play and impact and only small differences in season outcome or boxscore are building the perception of differences. I believe these smaller differences to be mostly luck driven or random stuff and because of that mostly irrelevant.

[tihsad]

I'm not sure if I'm jumping into the project too late, or need to inform Lebron 3-14-3 of my desire to participate prior to posting (please let me know), but here are my picks, in order, for the 2nd spot:

Wilt 67’
Chamberlain, one of the biggest egos that have ever played basketball, significantly altered his game mid-career to fit the desires of his coach, Alex Hannum, and excelled. Wilt became a defensive force equal (or nearly so) to Russell, lead the league in rebounds and blocks, and tallied 3rd in assists as a center. Lead his team in points at 24.1 per game, making him fifth in the NBA, and at a ridiculous 68% FG when the league average was 44% (63.7% TS vs. League 49.3%). Wins the championship that long eluded him and was MVP on one of the GOAT teams. It might have taken Wilt half his career to “get it”, but when he did it there was few if any that could equal it.

Shaq 00’
Much like Chamberlain in 67’, O’neal finally got the right coach, and decided to give it his all on both sides of the court – and it wrecked the league. There are multitudes of seven foot, multi-millionaire stiffs that hopefully send holiday cards to Shaq every year, because without his warping the game and the constant need for fouls to give, they never would have played. Everyone knows about his offensive dominance, but forget how strong Shaq’s defense was this year. He lead the NBA in D-Win Shares, was 2nd team all defensive (this is with Duncan, KG, and Zo’ as competition), and wasn’t the pylon he became in subsequent seasons. With the exception of a moment’s weakness against Portland crushes the play-offs, wins the ring, and is near unanimous MVP (some sports writer in NYC thought it would be funny to give the 1st place vote to Iverson).

Lebron 13’
I recently wrote that I consider Lebron 16’ and Lebron 12’ better play-off run, and I do, but for the total package 2013 is apex Lebron. He still held all the physical tools of his younger years, but finally mastered the mental game in 2012 (you can actually see it during the Boston series), and perfected it in 2013. James bought into Spoelstra’s system (something he's less then fantastic at in Cleveland and beyond), bulking up and playing the 4 as much as 3, played amazing D at multiple positions, and could do it all on the other side of the court ( I can post all the crazy +/-, BPM, and Vorp numbers but I assume participants are aware). Led a banged up Heat to 66 wins and the finals, near unanimous MVP, and didn’t wilt (no pun intended) in the face of a very tough Spurs team as he had against the Mavs in 2011.