Peaks project update: #17

[LA Bird]

Also, are the quote notifications not working or is the project dead already? We have 7 votes total right now a few minutes from the deadline. I would have thought participation wouldn't drop this low until we get to the 30s.

Spoiler:

[quote="freethedevil"]
[quote="euroleague"]
[quote="eminence"]
[quote="Colbinii"]
[quote="70sFan"]
[quote="trex_8063"]
[quote="E-Balla"]
[quote="penbeast0"]
[quote="Ambrose"]
[quote="Lou Fan"]
[quote="Amares"]
[quote="Clyde Frazier"]
[quote="yoyoboy"]
[quote="DrSpaceman"]
[quote="dontcalltimeout"]
[quote="DatAsh"]
[quote="PCProductions"]
[quote="LA Bird"]
[quote="Gregoire"]
[quote="_Game7_"]
[quote="Point-Forward"]
[quote="Jaivl"]
[quote="drza"]
[quote="pandrade83"]
[quote="Timmyyy"]
[quote="HHera187"]
[quote="Bel"]
[quote="Dr Positivity"]
[quote="Vladimir777"]
[quote="Samurai"]
[quote="ardee"]
[quote="Owly"]
[quote="Sublime187"]
[quote="Homer38"]
[quote="Joey Wheeler"]
[quote="JoeMalburg"]
[quote="Blackmill"]
[quote="cecilthesheep"]
[quote="No-more-rings"]
[quote="liamliam1234"]

[E-Balla]

82 Moses's production wasn't any more godly than what we have seen from peak McAdoo, TMac, Harden, Durant, Kobe and many others. Moses's team did have playoff success in the surrounding years but 83 was a completely different animal and in 81, they only needed to beat a negative SRS team led by Reggie King in the conference finals. Without Murphy's 42 points in G7, the Rockets don't even make it past second round. I wouldn't say Moses had enough playoff success to say he is very proven at all.

Why jump all the way to the CF in 81 as proof Moses didn't beat anyone as if they didn't beat the 1st and 2nd seeded teams in the first 2 rounds? If they played the Kings in the first round and beat the 2nd and 1st seed after that would it be any different?

How is a championship and making it to game 6 of the Finals with 2 totally different squads not proving yourself?

How is Garnett a vastly better scorer and faceup player than Robinson? And even though they are more #2 option skills, being an elite roll man and finisher is still valuable for a center.

Because he is? His scoring production in the playoffs is flat out better than Robinson. Like way better.

Boston won the title off their defense, not KG's offense as a first option. It is not like 19 points per 36 on 54% TS is something that peak Robinson couldn't replicate. And why is it a disservice to Mourning to mention Robinson with him when Zo has not won a title as a championship level first option either?

It is though and that's my point. IDK why you jumped to per 36 production but 20.4 ppg on 54.2 TS% including 20.5 ppg on 52.7 TS% in the final 2 rounds against the stout Detroit and LA defenses is better production than Robinson has ever had against any defense that was good. My whole point is that not only could he not replicate production that unimpressive but also that he hasn't in the many chances given to him.

Depending on the criteria, we can also make Garnett look bad too...

Garnett Against Good Defenses (15.38% of playoffs games): 39.9 mpg, 12.1 rpg, 5.3 apg, 2.7 tov, 18.4 ppg on 41.0% FG, 78.1% FT and 45.8% TS (-7.56 rTS%)

Robinson Against Good Defenses (30.65% of playoffs games): 39.4 mpg, 12.8 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2.4 tov, 21.0 ppg on 45.9% FG, 64.8% FT and 51.7% TS (-1.54% rTS)

Source: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1836300

Neither of them are top tier #1 options offensively. If you are fine with Garnett at #11 why the pushback against Robinson?

I feel like you're just ignoring my posts. We can point to at least ONE time everyone else has had a good series against a good defense. There's not ONE example for Robinson as a first option having even mediocre production against a good defense in the playoffs. He failed literally every time. More than anyone else. KG isn't a top tier #1 option but he's a #1 option. Robinson just isn't. At all. On any level.

I've done series to series breakdowns, I've posted total numbers, and Robinson doesn't have a single good series against competition that's not bad. Proving other people have had bad series before isn't the same as showing a player has never had a good series before. I'll take a first option that might not show up over one that is guaranteed to never show up.

[E-Balla]

Posting this again for you LA Bird:

vs Portland 93 (4th ranked defense): 19.3 ppg, 2.3 orpg, 4.8 apg, 2.0 topg, 48.7 TS%, 107 ORTG. This 4 game series included a 6/20 performance and a 4/11 performance in games 1 and 2.

vs Utah 94 (7th ranked defense): 20 ppg, 3.3 orpg, 3.5 apg, 2.3 topg, 47.1 TS%, 104 ORTG. Again they lost in 4. This time lost games 2 and 3 (in a best to 3) with Robinson shooting 10-35 for 28 points in those games combined.

vs Denver 95 (with Deke): 19 ppg, 1.7 orpg, 3.3 apg, 2.0 topg, 49.3 TS%, 105 ORTG. They swept but he did struggle against Deke and they won mostly due to the offense which was flourishing despite bad performances from Robinson.

vs Utah 96 (8th ranked defense): 19.3 ppg, 3.7 orpg, 2.0 apg, 2.3 topg, 52.6 TS%, 107 ORTG. Looks better than the rest on paper but he had under a 50 TS% in 4 games and the other 2 games were blowout losses (73 TS% in a game 1 20 point loss and 74 TS% in only 24 minutes of a game 4 15 point loss). Honestly outside of games 1 and 2 he was flat out bad.

Houston in 95, which is a series in which he got dominated defensively, is the only series where his production hit KG's level from 08. 20.5 ppg on 52.7 TS% (or 19 points per 36 on 54 TS% like you mentioned before) isn't some super high water mark and it's still better production than we can expect from David Robinson, who never hit that TS% or PPG figure in a tough series before while being a first option (again outside of the Rockets and their 12th ranked, -0.9 defense). I'm not going to say he can obviously hit a level of production he never hit before as if that's a given. Saying Robinson can give me 20 ppg on 54 TS% in a tough postseason against 2 strong defenses is just assuming he couldn't possibly be as bad as he actually was on the court in his career.

[70sFan]

Robinson had one good scoring series against good defensive team in 1990 against Portland:

22.9 ppg on 55.8 TS% (+2.1% rTS%)

Other than that, yeah not so much. Garnett had two comparable scoring series against better defensive teams (in 2001 and 2008) but the rest is also quite weak. Karl Malone, for all his underperformances, was better scorer than either of them for example. Wilt (a player with "choker" reputation" has only two weak scoring series against elite defensive teams in comparison (1967 finals and 1968 ECF) but he faced good defensive teams far more times than Robinson and Garnett combined.

Robinson brings so much with his defense, rebounding and portability that I don't have any problems with him at that point. His scoring ability is overrated by RS numbers, but that doesn't stop him from being ATG player at his peak.

BTW, Moses is definitely more proven in playoffs than Robinson as a first option. His 1981 and 1983 runs are definitely enough to call him better go-to guy offensively and he faced 3 really good defensive teams in these runs (Boston in 1981, Bucks and Knicks in 1983), though he underperformed a bit in 1981 finals. He also had nice series against the Celtics in 1980 and some good performances after 1983.

I'm not sure if that's enough to call him better player, but he was better scorer than Robinson.

[E-Balla]

Robinson had one good scoring series against good defensive team in 1990 against Portland:

22.9 ppg on 55.8 TS% (+2.1% rTS%)

That's why I'm specifying as a first option. Terry Cummings took way more shots, scored 3 more PPG, was more efficient, and Robinson led San Antonio in scoring only once in that 7 game series. There's no doubt of what he can do as a 2nd option, I think he's the clear GOAT #2.

Robinson brings so much with his defense, rebounding and portability that I don't have any problems with him at that point.

Well my whole argument is that this all describes Draymond Green too, and no one is mentioning him right now. If the criteria was consistent these Robinson voters would have his votes split with Draymond right now at this spot, but obviously it isn't so I'm trying to get to how anyone by any criteria places Robinson first. If impact is the game Draymond is the guy, if production as a #1 is the game there's no way Robinson should be touching anyone's top 5.

[Franco]

Also, are the quote notifications not working or is the project dead already? We have 7 votes total right now a few minutes from the deadline. I would have thought participation wouldn't drop this low until we get to the 30s.

[spoiler]

You’re using quotes wrong, you have to puy a “[ /quote]” (without the space for obvious reasons) for each name you want to quote

[liamliam1234]

I did receive a notification both times, so I do not think that is the problem.

[ardee]

Also, are the quote notifications not working or is the project dead already? We have 7 votes total right now a few minutes from the deadline. I would have thought participation wouldn't drop this low until we get to the 30s.

[spoiler]

You didn't close the quotes.

[Mavericksfan]

1)1995 David Robinson-
He has all the boxes checked except one. Won MVP, has insane boxscore production and impact metrics. Was an anchor on both ends and led a top 5 offense and defense. 5.90 SRS indicates they were a legit contender but he was famously cooked by Hakeem. Hakeem is also in the top 10 and seeing Garnett so much higher despite playoff scoring woes makes me believe D-Rob is being underrated.


2)2011 Dirk-
Misses 9 games and has a pedestrian regular season in terms of boxscore production. Has great impact stats and led the Mavs to a dominant win % when he played. Absolutely insane playoff production leading the Mavs against two championship caliber teams(almost 6 SRS Lakers, almost 7 SRS Heat). Bonus points for portability as he can fit any offense.

3)Kobe Bryant 2008-
A top player according to impact, boxscore metrics and the his team results speak for themselves. Beat two championship caliber teams in the Spurs and Jazz while having an overall solid playoffs.

[Odinn21]

82 Moses's production wasn't any more godly than what we have seen from peak McAdoo, TMac, Harden, Durant, Kobe and many others.

I beg to differ. Not to some of the names you mentioned but many others? Come on now.

In that season, Moses went 38/17/2/1/1 in February and 35/14/2/2/1 in March. That’s 36.5/15.7/1.8/1.4/0.9 over 30 games.

You’re selling Moses short. Many others? Up until Harden in last season I wouldn’t be able to manage naming a player that would have b2b 35+ ppg months since the merger. (Apart from MJ obviously.)

[cecilthesheep]

Also, are the quote notifications not working or is the project dead already? We have 7 votes total right now a few minutes from the deadline. I would have thought participation wouldn't drop this low until we get to the 30s.

The quotes are working good for me. I know I did miss one thread, I apologize.

[LA Bird]

Final totals as at the deadline are:

1) 66 West = 9.0 points
T2) 95 Robinson = 7.5 points
T2) 69 West = 7.5 points
4) 70 West = 7.0 points
5) 06 Kobe = 6.0 points

66 West wins.... while receiving only 2 votes.
I will have to figure out some way to adjust the deadlines going forward with so little voting.

Spoiler:

Mavericksfan's vote came after the deadline so his vote wasn't counted.

[liamliam1234]

One way could be something like “60 hours or 12 votes, whichever comes second.” With a hard absolute deadline of like five days or something.

Although I personally do not hate having inordinate voting power.

[LA Bird]

Why jump all the way to the CF in 81 as proof Moses didn't beat anyone as if they didn't beat the 1st and 2nd seeded teams in the first 2 rounds? If they played the Kings in the first round and beat the 2nd and 1st seed after that would it be any different?

How is a championship and making it to game 6 of the Finals with 2 totally different squads not proving yourself?

A best of 3 in round 1 made it easier for an upset so it is not a given that the Rockets still beat the Lakers if they had played them in a later round. And they went to 7 against the Spurs, with Calvin Murphy being the hero in that game not Moses. If Sean Elliot had dropped 42 to lead the Spurs to the win while Robinson shot 6-19 for 21 in a G7, would you still be praising DRob for carrying a team of scrubs to victory? Winning the championship in 83 doesn't prove much because Robinson could also have won in Moses's place. The proof for Moses as a lone superstar came in 81 and I just don't think it is particularly impressive given the circumstances and his lack of playoff success in other seasons.

Because he is? His scoring production in the playoffs is flat out better than Robinson. Like way better.

Don't know of a postseason scoring stat has Garnett way better than Robinson so you should go ahead and post it. Way better production to me would be something like 5+ ppg or TS% higher and I just don't see it.

It is though and that's my point. IDK why you jumped to per 36 production but 20.4 ppg on 54.2 TS% including 20.5 ppg on 52.7 TS% in the final 2 rounds against the stout Detroit and LA defenses is better production than Robinson has ever had against any defense that was good. My whole point is that not only could he not replicate production that unimpressive but also that he hasn't in the many chances given to him.

20.4 ppg on 54.2% TS is not far from Robinson's prime average of 21.0 ppg on 51.7% TS against good defenses that you quoted.

We can point to at least ONE time everyone else has had a good series against a good defense. There's not ONE example for Robinson as a first option having even mediocre production against a good defense in the playoffs. He failed literally every time. More than anyone else. KG isn't a top tier #1 option but he's a #1 option. Robinson just isn't. At all. On any level.

Given the sample size is like 4 series against good defenses over his prime, I feel like you putting too much emphasis on the difference between having 0 and 1 good series. 0/4 and 1/4 are both poor. Not having that 1 good series doesn't mean Robinson is automatically on a lower tier than Garnett as first option scorers.

[Clyde Frazier]

Also, are the quote notifications not working or is the project dead already? We have 7 votes total right now a few minutes from the deadline. I would have thought participation wouldn't drop this low until we get to the 30s.

[spoiler]

They're working. Got very busy this week so wasn't able to vote in the last 2 threads. Should be good going forward assuming we have enough to keep going. I like the modified voting time/rules you came up with, though.

[Strepbacter]

First off this is a great post.

I mean, what puts him over 09 Kobe?

Well 01, 03, 06, 07, and 08 Kobe are over 09 IMO so 09 Kobe isn't even the peak I'm discussing with Kobe. I admit it's his best year ON PAPER but actually remembering how good Kobe was it's not his best year so I feel it's disingenuous to focus on it, similar to how I think it's disingenuous to vote for 17 Curry over 15 Curry because he has a more solid case or how I felt voting for 06 Wade instead of 09 Wade was disingenuous.

Beyond that I did mention 09 Kobe and it's still a great year worthy of the comparison so it's a good question.

--The 09 Lakers were one of the best teams ever, and I'd describe Kobe's support as very good but hardly special in all-time sense

--They won 65 gms with a 7.3 SRS and won a great conference by ten games. They were one of the best "healthy" teams ever:



2008 Lakers: +9.7
2009 Lakers: +9.0

2008-09 Lakers and Celtics. These teams were fantastic in an incredibly competitive league. The Celtics were +8.8 and +9.3 when healthy, and the Lakers +9.7 and +9.0 once Pau Gasol joined. Kevin Garnett’s injury robbed us of possibly the NBA’s greatest trilogy

Amazingly, of the top 40 healthy teams of all-time, seven are Pop’s Spurs teams. Five are Jordan’s Bulls. Four are Laker teams with Kobe Bryant.

The best NBA teams ever (according to Elo). The 09 Lakers ranked eighth all-time in overall ELO.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-warriors-are-in-the-goat-debate-but-they-blew-their-chance-to-end-it

*The 2011 Mavs rank #50

So this is all great but 3 things here:

1. The 08 Lakers were better than the 09 Lakers, which makes it harder to say 09 is THE peak for Kobe. I admit it's his best case here, but I feel like voting for it for that reason while not seeing it has his best is just an attempt to bypass the spirit of the project. If I can't make a case for 09 as Kobe's best year I'm not making a case for it against other years.

2. The Lakers were definitely stacked. Pau was all NBA, Odom was a borderline All-Star and +/- darling, Bynum was an All-Star level C when healthy, and Ariza/Fish/Walton/Shannon/Farmar weren't great but they were serviceable role players especially next to 4 top 50 players.

3. If you want to use healthy SRS the 2011 Mavs had a +8.0 SRS. I think the gap between their supporting casts can easily make up that +1.0 gap in SRS.

The 09 Lakers are higher than teams like the 92 Bulls, 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers,2014 Spurs, etc

The 09 Lakers had the [b]sixth greatest peak ELO Rating in NBA histroy at 1790.0:
[/b]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/last-years-warriors-werent-the-best-ever-but-this-years-might-be/

They completely dominated in the post-season:

Their post-season adjusted SRS of 12.7[/b] was the sixth highest since 1984: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors

Here they're ahead of teams like the 85 Lakers, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 97 Bulls.

If you're impressed by Dirk leading the Mavs team to 8-9 pt level at full strength, what about Bryant anchoring one of the most dominant teams in history? I say that speaks volumes about his ability to build synergy with other talent. Hell, the 09 Kobe/Pau/Odom was the most dominant trio we have on record. The Kobe/Pau/Odom 09 trio (+17.5 in 3739 possessions) was the best we have recorded. This says amazing things about Kobe's portability, and his ability to scale with other talent.

GAHHHHHHHH. This is a great argument. I flipped between Dirk and Kobe a bunch here, and this might've flipped me back because like I said before players that are proven are easier to argue for. That said the Mavs were still a +10.0 team even with a worse supporting cast. Could we say Dirk in 2011 with a better second option ala Pau could lead a +13 team like Kobe did?

Then there's the mentioning of his portability, which I accept for discussing him as a first option. I rank Kobe's offense well over most here mainly for that reason, but we know he couldn't be 2nd banana even to a vastly superior talent in Shaq. Dirk on the other hand doesn't seem like the type to have issues with that. I get this is splitting hairs, but I have Kobe and Dirk practically even.

I also didn't realize that was the top trio, I assumed Steph/Klay/Dray in 16 topped it. Even so Pau was still top 15 level, Kobe is Kobe, and Odom was a top 30 player. That's a combo that can't really be touched by any trios we've seen recently talent wise. Usually the 3rd isn't as good as Odom or the first isn't as flexible as Kobe (because LeBron should've had multiple better trios, but you should all know how I feel about LeBron's playmaking by now). Man now I'm thinking again, might have to switch to Kobe.

The 09 Lakers were also very arguably the best passing team in the league. Their team passer rating was #1 in the league and #61 all-time: http://www.backpicks.com/2018/07/15/nba-passer-ratings-since-1978/

And can I get a source on the Mavs full strength SRS? According to Ben Taylor, no Mavs team with was ever that dominant:

Among the top-20 players on this list, Dirk is one of five to never play on an 8-SRS team during his prime.

They never struck lightning in a bottle during his decade-plus prime, but the ’03 and ’11 teams nearly crossed the 8-SRS mark when healthy, and four other full-strength squads weren’t too far behind

Source: http://www.backpicks.com/2018/02/26/backpicks-goat-18-dirk-nowitzki/#easy-footnote-10-7090

I think he was saying +8 in the regular season in that first note, and the +8.0 figure came from Elgee's WOWY data. Maybe it rounded up to +8.0 at full strength so technically he's still correct and Dirk never played for a +8.0 team but instead for a +7.96 team.

Otherwise I don't really see how Dirk was better.

In the RS he's at 23.0/7.0/2.6/0.5/0.6/23.4 PER/11.1 WS/.213 WS/48/3.8 BPM with a 61% TS (+7) and 118 (+11) ORTG in 73 gms
Bryant was at 26.8/5.2/4.9/1.5/0.5/24.4 PER/12.7 WS/.206 WS/48/4.5 BPM with a 56.4% TS (+1.7) and a 115 ORTG (+7) in 82 games

* Dirk has better impact metrics, but Bryant beats him almost across in the box-score metrics (though how much that should matter...) and most importantly he has a fairly significant advantage in health (yes, I think those nine extra games makes a difference when you're talking about guys this close...)

Kobe gets the regular season edge but I don't really care about that. The regular season only affects seeding, and if you can win from a low seed toppling the top talent in the league it's irrelevant. I'd take just enough games of Hakeem to get me to the 8th seed over all 82 games of David Robinson if it meant I'd have Hakeem on my 8th seed squad come playoff time vs Robinson in the first round.

Then the post-season comes around and I don't see how Dirk had a better run at all.

*He puts up 27.7/8.1/2.5/0.6/0.6/25.2 PER/3.6 WS/.210 WS/48/3.8 BPM on 60.9% TS (+7.9 relative to opp avg) and a 115 ORTG (+9 relative to opp avg)
*Kobe puts 30.2/5.3/5.5/1.7/0.9/26.8 PER/4.7 WS/.238 WS/48/7.5 BPM on 56.4% TS (+3.5) and a 117 ORTG (+12)
* By the raw numbers Bryant is ahead in volume, APG, stls, blks, turnovers, MPG
*By the advanced box-score numbers he's ahead in PER/WS/WS48/BPM/VORP/USG/AST%/STL%/BLK% and ORTG
*Dirk is a slightly better scorer. He has a fairly noticeable lead in scoring efficiency, but Bryant scores at a higher per-game clip, and they're Per 100 scoring rate is even
*Kobe is easily more efficient OVERALL. He has a much lower turnover rate (8.7% to Dirk's 12.0%) AND a higher OREB% (2.4% to Dirk's 1.8%) which is reflected in their individual ORTG. 117 (+12) for Kobe vs 115 (+9) for Dirk
*Kobe crushes him as a passer. This is evident on tape and in the box-score. 5.5 APG/26.0% AST% vs 2.6/13%...(yes, I know APG isn't a perfect measure of passing but Kobe is also way ahead in passer rating so...
*If you place a lot of stock in Finals performances...I mean, it's not even close.
32.4/5.6/7.4/1.4/1.4/34.7% AST%/38% USG/9.4% TOV rate/111 ORTG (+9)/52.5% TS (+1.6) vs
26.0/9.7/2.0/0.7/0.7/10.6% AST%/33% USG/10.5% TOV rate/105 ORTG (+1)/53.7% TS (+1.9)
Kobe was much more efficient. He carried a bigger load and had a much higher scorer rate with virtually zero difference in scoring efficiency, obliterates Dirk as a passer, has a higher STL%, way higher BLK%, higher OREB%, took much better care of the ball,etc etc. I mean, it's close at all.

Moving on to the impact stuff...


Kobe had the higher recorded post-season +/- overall

Curry 15 - 166
Ginobili 14 - 181
James 13 - 129
James 12 - 199
Dirk 11 - 170
Kobe 10 - 98
Kobe 09 - 181
Garnett 08 - 184
Duncan 07 - 82
Wade 06 - 134
Duncan 03 - 172
Shaq 02 - 118
Shaq 01 - 186
[b]Kobe 01 - 213

Dirk was #1 in post-season RAPM. Kobe was #2 in post-season RAPM, but on a far stronger team
https://basketball-analytics.gitlab.io/rapm-data/season/2008-09/playoffs/
https://basketball-analytics.gitlab.io/rapm-data/season/2010-11/playoffs/

So first off those numbers aren't accurate.

But to the major point I don't judge playoff runs off aggregates, I go series to series since that's how the format works. One bad series can be recovered from even if it tanks your averages and one great series can overlap horrible production in other series.

Against Portland Dirk outplayed 2 All Star PFs every game of the series (LMA made his first ASG in 2012 but was a major snub and Wallace made the ASG at PF in 2010) and averaged 27/8/3 on 58 TS% against 2 tough defenders. Kobe's first round was less impressive. He played against Utah and killed them but IIRC they didn't have Raja Bell yet and Ronnie Brewer and old man AK47 had to check him. Not at all bad, but not as impressive as Dirk.

Against the Lakers in round 2 the Mavs in general, and Dirk specifically just embarrassed the defending champion Lakers. Ran them off the floor. Meanwhile Kobe's 2nd round was against Houston who had tons of Kobe stoppers and he was spectacular but he had a few games where they locked him up. Houston actually pushed it to 7 just by locking up Kobe three times. In this case I'm taking Dirk's performance over them.

Then we have the WCF. Kobe destroyed Denver. Like absolutely demolished them. It's an all time great series. Problem is Dirk's performance was so great we call a man Serge Nowitzki now because he must've been Dirk's son the way he got manhandled out there. He did that to an All Defensive player too, not a scrub.

Now in the Finals Kobe was way better. Kobe had one of the 20ish greatest Finals performances ever and just dismantled the Magic with his playmaking while Dirk was great but mostly in the 4th quarter, playing a bit lackadaisical through most of the games before turning it on. Still in all this Kobe never really had much competition at his own position as he played teams with more Fs than Gs. Dirk on the other hand beat up on 3 future HOFers in their primes at the PF position on his way to a ring.

Now maybe Kobe's numbers look better, but series to series, and game to game Dirk was the better performer IMO. If you disagree with my assessments of those series, let me know, maybe the gap can be found there or cleared up in there because I'm back to calling Kobe and Dirk a coin toss for now and not really comfortable voting for either right now.

I could go on but I'll stop here. Seriously tho..what exactly makes his season "not complete". Honestly, what more do you want? It's going to be a total joke when he finishes outside the top twenty but this is the PC board so...

What makes it not complete is I don't think Kobe was over Wade in 09 at all. I can't see anything that isn't just team strength to put him over Wade or any argument other than team strength to put him over Wade. I also don't think it's Kobe's best year even if it's the year where he accomplished the most.

You make some great points buuuut...

--I don't think it's fair to dismiss 09 as simply the year he accomplished the most. It's his best or second best season as a shooter, best season ITO taking care of the ball, best post-season run, his healthiest season, and best defensive season since the best three-peat. His defensive footwork in isolation was never better, his off-ball play was at it's peak (outside of maybe 2004 where he was a beast at cutting off Malone/Shaq/Payton) but he's clearly a better shooter in 09. It's also clearly his best season from a intangibles/maturity though this is admittedly subjective/nebulous.

--I don't see how the 08 Lakers were better than the 09 Lakers at all. They had a higher regular season peak and were crazy dominant after the Pau trade, but the 09 Lakers had the better version of Pau/better Bynum (at least he was available in the post-season...)/better Odom/better defense/they were tougher mentally and physically/better fitting SF with Ariza over Vlad Rad/ and were more capable of taking on teams with different styles and match-ups. Admittedly the 08 Lakers had the slightly better "healthy" SRS but they played harder in the RS in 08. I can't see them dominating the post-season the way the 09 team did.

--His supporting cast was excellent, but he took that supporting and anchored a ridiculously dominant team. A team that (statistically) was better than anything what several of the guys ahead of him on this list ever managed to anchor. Besides I think you're overstating the talent level of some of these guys. Bynum played 50 games in the RS, and was less than a shell of himself in the post-season. Then the post-season comes around and he throws up 6 ppg/4 rpg on horrible efficiency (49% TS) and only plays 17 MPG. Frankly, he was largely a non-factor throughout that run and that team STILL dominated in the post-season. I just don't see how you can really as proof of Bryant's stacked cast.
Pau--I'd actually have as a top ten guy, but OK.
Odom--I don't think top 30 is crazy at all but to me he's more of a top 40ish guy who is was in the absolute perfect situation to maximize his impact as a very distant #3 on offense and in a place where he could focus on defense/rebouding. His impact metrics are amazing but there's cleary some fluky/noisy/lucky aspects going on here as his numbers are a major outlier. He never came close to matching those numbers before or after. Another poster also highlighted possible collinearity issues going here:

08-11 Laker RAPM Context
Basically, in 2009, Kobe's chance at an outsize year by RAPM was “stolen” by the algorithms limitations in sussing out the multicolliniearity issues of such a (relatively) small data sample. Odom recorded a RAPM of 6.9 in 2009...his ORAPM was 3.1. Outside of 2009 his RAPM peaked at 3.7 (the next year, no doubt buoyed by his prior) with an ORAPM of 1.3. Quite obviously Lamar Odom is no MVP level player so it stands to reason he absorbed a significant portion of Kobe's on/off boost that year, and any fair examination of the math all but confirms that. There's actually not even any reason to believe 2009 was an outlier season for Odom.
Lamar Odom 06-08 Per 36: 13.7/9.1/4.3 54TS% 14.5TO%
Lamar Odom 09 Per 36: 13.8/9.9/3.2 54TS% 14.5TO%

In order to understand exactly what went wrong (and how it was “remedied” with more data) we need to not just look at Odom in a vacuum but Kobe, Lamar, and Pau as a trio. Provided below are the 3 multi-year RAPM splits for each listed as: 08-11 RAPM // 06-11 RAPM // 02-11 RAPM (although Odom's 02-11 split less relevant)

Kobe: 4.8 // 4.6 // 6.1
Lamar: 4.9 // 3.2 // 1.3
Pau: 4.4 // 2.1 // 2.5

So yeah, Odom is very clearly no +7 player. When the algorithm gets a a 4-year dataset it “learns” its mistakes regarding Odom's split and re-appropriates his split mostly to Pau; Pau lags way behind LO/Kobe in single year RAPMs between 2008-2011 but in an extended split it “understands” it was underrating Pau. The problem is on that window there is still not nearly a sufficient amount of separate lineup data for Kobe and Pau. As soon as you introduce the 2006/2007 seasons into Gasol's window RAPM corrects the spurious “boost” Pau & Lamar got and summarily drop them by a combined 4.4 points. However, due to the aforementioned idiosyncrasies of the LASSO penalty used here Kobe does not “re-absorb” the “lost” impact...rather those +/- parameters simply get regressed closer to O until there is a sufficiently large dataset provided (02-11) for him to be credited with said impact; in the 10-year dataset Kobe & Pau's RAPM sum to 8.6 (vs 9.2 in the 08-11 Split)...so while RAPM was very accurate in assessing the total RAPM offered by the pair (or trio) over the 08-11 window there was not anywhere near enough independent possessions to parse multicollinarity between Kobe/Pau/LO remotely accurately.

If all of that still isn't enough the 2015/2016 Warriors are a PERFECT case of virtually the exact same issue. Below are the 2015/2016 RAPM splits for Steph/Klay/Draymond (the 2015 data includes playoffs).

2015 – Steph: 8.3 (4.7) // 2015 Klay: 2.9 (2.9) // 2015 Green: 11.4 (5.0)
2016 – Steph: 6.2 (4.6)// 2016 Klay: 4.6 (2.9) // 2016 Green: 7.9 (3.4)

These situations, on the face, are effectively identical. You have an absolute GOAT offensive talent (even moreso in Steph's case) allowing the 3rd guy to shrink his role to the point where he can be a defensive stud (Green probably would be without Steph, Odom never had that motor as a top 2 option) and, due to unique deployment (based on the #1 guy's transcendent talent and the team's system) their specialization counfounds short-term RAPM splits and paints them as far more impactful offensive players than they are (directly at expense of the lead guy). Without the Kobe/Pau duo Lamar was a +0.5 type ORAPM guy. Green probably maxes out at around +1.7, MAYBE +2 ORAPM without Steph/Klay duo. In both of these cases you can probably give the #1 guy 2/3 the credit for the additional offensive +/- of the third guy and the #2 guy the other 1/3 credit. Even if you want to be facetious/stubborn and go completely against logic you would STILL have to at least acknowledge Steph and Kobe as the 2 GOAT team “elevators” for extracting that level of impact from utility guys.

So yeah, if I wanted to be conservative and say Odom's 2nd highest ORAPM represented where he was probably at in 2009 that leaves 1.8 ORAPM points “floating.” Ascribing 2/3 of these to Kobe his 2009 Split all of a sudden baloons to 7.3, effectively deadlocking him with KG for 2nd and clearly separating him from Wade. And in all likelihood the jump is far greater than that...the difference between Odom's 2009 ORAPM and his 06-11 RAPM is 2.3, which would put Kobe's split boost closer to 1.8, basically putting him in +8 territory for 2009. And I suspect once we get a 6-year and especially a 10-year split for this generation of players Curry will end up showing as the clear offensive standout on these Warrior teams

*He was right about Curry...

Overall I see the 09 Lakers as a team that clearly outperformed their talent level and were clearly more than the sum of their parts. Bryant deserves a great deal of credit for that. He didn't obstruct or hurt the production or impact of his fellow standouts in any way, shape, or form and honestly I don't think this something you'll get from several of his peers...as you yourself have pointed out concerning LBJ and their respective flexibility
*
--I agree with you about the RS. It's largely just another tiebreaker in Bryant's favor in my mind. Like you said, we're just splitting hairs.

--Going series to series is fine but I think we also have to try to look at things holistically and I can't how Dirk ahead in that regard

--Even if you go series by series...

First round: 27.4/5.0/5.6/2.4/0.4/111 ORTG/31% USG/57.0% TS (+1.8%)/111 ORTG (+4) vs 27.3/7.8/3.0/0.5/0.5/111 ORTG/35% USG/57.5% TS (+2.3%)

I don't know. Dirk playing two all-star PF's is nice (though I'm not sure if Wallace was really at THAT level in 2011) but Brewer/Harpring/AK47 isn't exactly a cakewalk, and the Jazz (#10 ranked defense, -1 relative to league average ) were a better defensive team than the Blazers (exactly at league average). Otherwise it looks like Dirk's scoring is a little more impressive but Bryant has the edge almost everywhere else. The other thing is the defense where Kobe was fairly impressive in that series. The way he completely ignored Brewer to cut off Deron's lanes and help down on Boozer was certainly a positive, and he averaged a whooping 2.5 SPG to go along with a whole bunch of strips/deflections/loose ball recoveries. He certainly had some part to play in the Jazz seeing a massinve drop in ORTG It's been a while since I've seen the Mavs/Blazers series, but I doubt Dirk played a better defensive series.

Second Round: Definitely agree with Dirk having a second round, but I don't think it's fair to point out their respective match-ups in the previous round, and then around and ignore that Kobe was literally playing 40+ min a night against the best perimeter defender in basketball while Dirk was going up against...yeah. Nobody close to that level. And I wouldn't say they locked up Bryant in Game 1 (32/8/4/2/48% TS/5.7% TOV rate/102 ORTG (-2) and especially not Game 6 (32/2/3/1/3/51% USG/41% USG/6.0% TOV rate/112 ORTG (+8). Overall Bryant put up 27/5/5/2+/1 on 53.5% TS against a Rockets defense that held opponents to a 51.6% TS during the regular season, so his rTS was at a pretty good +1.9. To put that into perspective, Bryant's rTS in the post-season was +1.7. Kobe also did an INCREDIBLE job of taking care of the ball in that series as his turnover rate was at a ridiculously low 5.8%; his overall efficiency (ORTG) was at 114 for the series, +10 relative to the Rockets defensive rating of 104. In other words, his individual efficiency in this series was quite excellent and BETTER than it was in the regular season.



And here's the final kicker: the Lakers offense torched the Rockets. They posted a 109.2 ORTG against a Rockets defense that held opponents to 104.0, for a relative ORTG of +5.2.



The Lakers won their four games by an average margin of 21.5 PPG and their net rating for the series was +8.2



It wasn't a close series at all. I just don't care about the three L's when they completely dominated the series. But...yeah. Dirk was better.

Here's the thing tho. You want to look at it at a series by series basis...but Kobe had the better WCF, and had the way better Finals (as you've already conceded

1) The Nugs were a better defensive team (#8 in DRTG, -1.5) compared to OKC (#15 in DRTG, -0.0 ) 2) Their respective SRS numbers were nearly identical at 3.7 OKC and 3.1 for the Nugz and 3) Here's the thing. The Nugz were playing at freaking GOAT level coming into that WCF. Yeah its only two series and blah and blah but they were playing historically well. 4-1 with a +27!!! ortg diff vs the Hornets, and 4-1 with a +9 diff vs the Mavs.

Check this out:

Milwaukee's +8.8 point differential in the playoffs was the best in the 16-team era for a team that did not reach the NBA Finals. Leaderboard:

+8.8 Milwaukee 2019
+8.6 Orlando 2010
+8.6 Denver 2009
+8.5 Cleveland 2009
+7.7 Utah 1996
+7.6 L.A. Lakers 1986
+7.1 Phoenix 1989

Or this:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lMHVWmmq6lEy9O9XqLk0Ji-xawtX8gPRtHHwbvV9634/edit#gid=999526014

That team was playing at an absurd level heading into that series, which makes what Bryant did to them all the more impressive IMO

I don't see Dirk having the better series at all.

34.0/5.8/5.8/0.8/0.5/62.7% TS(+9.1)/7.4% TOV rate/31.5% USG/131 ORTG (+24) against 32.2/5.8/2.6/0.4/0.8/70% TS(+16.5)/15.5% TOV rate/31.5% USG/125 ORTG (+18)

Kobe played a better team. He definitely played the better defense. He scored at a higher rate, had a AST% that was almost twice as high, somehow was virtually tied in TRB% as a GUARD (8.1% to Dirk's 8.6%), took waaaaay better care of the ball, played more minutes, generated more stls...Dirk's series is revered for his efficiency but Kobe was MORE efficient overall and honestly it's not close. Look at raw ORTG or relative ORTG and Bryant has the healthy lead... which isn't too surprising considering his turnover rate was half of that of Dirk's (7.4% to Dirk's 15.5%) and his ORB% was a couple of points higher.

*yes, I know it's a lot of box-score stuff*

Then the Finals come along and Bryant is way better against a better defense.

*shrug* I know this is late but I felt that your post deserved a reply. You're one of the best posters here. Keep it up man.