#27 - GOAT peaks project (2019)

[migya]

Unbelievable that Karl Malone isn't already on the list and even isn't mentioned.

[liamliam1234]

^ Curious whether the Barkley voters switch to him. I never really saw a reason why his 1992 profile deserved to be below Barkley's. Speaking for myself, I will be at least considering him once Nash is in.

Speaking of which...

N.1 STEVE NASH 2005
One of the best offensive season of all time, no doubt. Some advanced stats of his unbelievable season:
13 Box Creation / +7.7 rTS% / 9.5 passer rating
A goat level combination of scoring and playmaking. Amazing playoffs run, take a look at his WCF VS San Antonio defense.

I want to say it looks like there's a big disconnect in the project right now, we have votes all over the place. Which is fine, but i think it may make for some weird results. This spot is more than likely going to CP3 or Barkley, I'm not buying anymore that they give you a better shot at a title than Nash. Paul and Barkley, they got huge numbers and sure they're very impactful, but i have some doubt about winning with them as your best player, not because they weren't talented enough but for other reasons. With Paul, i think he doesn't always properly balance his scoring/passing, or doesn't do it at the right times. What i mean by that is, there seems to be playoff games, where they need him to be more of a scorer and he instead will be more worried about setting people up. And vice versa. Nash in 05 averaged 30 ppg on 64 ts% against the 9th ranked DRTG Mavs, Paul never showed that level of scoring instinct/ability.
...
3. 2005 Nash- Monster offensive force, perpetual leader of insanely good offenses and if his defense were even neutral he'd be fighting with the likes of West, Oscar, Wade etc. He's probably the 2nd best passer ever honestly.

I am quoting you two here because I want to see if anything I have posted has potentially changed your opinion on 2007 versus 2005 in terms of playoff impact via Nash's increased focus on passing over scoring? Or whether there is specific concern you would need to see addressed?

[E-Balla]

1st ballot - '15 Chris Paul - Wicked efficiency (both in terms of shooting and turnover economy) while leading a top-tier offense, and also being one of the best defensive PG's in the game. Played brilliantly in the playoffs, too, the only blemished being that he missed two playoff games [and did that cost them something?]; which was ironic, given he didn't miss a single game in the long rs.
I could see going for '08, but I just feel his defense was better in the later portions of his career, and his on-court impact has perhaps never looked better than in '15.


2nd ballot - '08 Chris Paul - More explosive, better athlete than his '15 version, which left him with better endurance and ability to penetrate the paint. But he wasn't yet the mid-range shooter that he was in '15, nor did he yet have the defensive IQ that he would in '15. Those are the primary reasons I put this season a pinch behind '15.


3rd ballot - '19 Giannis Antetokounmpo - I don't have a ton of time just now, but suffice to say he was a fairly dominant offensive player during the rs (still easily and All-Star level offensive player in the playoffs, too), while arguably being a top 2 DPOY candidate thru the whole season.

NOTE: I may end up switching that 3rd ballot. Also thinking on Anthony Davis, Karl Malone, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard, Dwight Howard, or perhaps McAdoo, Pettit, Baylor, or Gilmore. If I don't change it before the deadline, I'm OK going with Giannis, though.

Quoting you because you voted Giannis and might change it so how do you feel about my case for 2016 Kawhi?

So for 2016 Kawhi vs 2019 Giannis there's 2 ways I'm going with this headed into the post:

1. Giannis wasn't better than Kawhi defensively and was most likely slightly worse.
2. Giannis at the same time wasn't as useful an offensive weapon in the postseason, while also not being meaningfully better than Kawhi in the regular season.

I'll refrain from bringing up anything Kawhi accomplished after 2016 here, because unlike my argument for 2016 Kawhi vs 2017 and 2019 Kawhi there's no reason to mention these other years.

I do want to add that after completing this post I'm higher on Giannis and now think he might belong in the top 30 over someone like Nash because while I think he's worse than Kawhi on both ends both players have a similar statistical profile, similar roles on their teams (just accomplished in different ways), and similar impact on both sides of the ball. It never occurred to me how close these years were stylistically and the only gap Kawhi has IMO is he stepped up in the playoffs while Giannis took a slight step back.

Offense -

Spoiler:

So it looks like Giannis has the clear edge here, right? I mean he scored 27.7 ppg on +8.7 rTS% in the regular season and 25.5 ppg on 57.0 TS% in the playoffs while Kawhi averaged only 21.2 ppg on +7.5 rTS% in the regular season and 22.5 ppg on 59.7 TS% in the playoffs.

The thing is when looking into their playoff scoring once you adjust for pace Giannis averaged 23.5 TSA per 75 and Kawhi averaged 21.8 TSA per 75.

Once you adjust for opponent quality (the expected TS% for Giannis given his opponents and shots per series is 55.1 TS%) his efficiency was a solid +2.4 in the playoffs while Kawhi's (the expected TS% for Kawhi given his opponents and shots per series is 53.7 TS%) was a spectacular +6.0.

That means overall adjusted for their opponents(*) Giannis averaged 26.5 points per 75 and Kawhi averaged 26.2 points per 75. Given the efficiency gap, the variety in their scoring games, the gap in ability to work off ball, and the large gap in turnovers on scoring attempts I'd say Kawhi isn't just a better scorer but he's a way better scorer. More than enough to make up for the small volume gap and small gap in playmaking ability.

*I always use 54 TS% as a baseline because it's roughly the average over the whole post merger era and I felt this needed to be mentioned because Memphis was banged up but outside of Kawhi San Antonio's offense scored at a rate damn near equal to what Memphis gave up in the regular season so I don't think it had that much of an effect on their already subpar defense.

In terms of the impact numbers we see the same. The Spurs had a +3.9 offense that played at a +5.8 in the postseason. The Bucks had a +3.4 offense that played at a +3.9 level in the postseason. Giannis had a +6.3 offensive on/off in the regular season (+3.7 in the playoffs). Kawhi had a +4.2 offensive on/off in the regular season (+6.9 in the playoffs).

We have single year RAPM for both years too and while I don't have where they ranked offensively I can say Kawhi had a +2.1 ORAPM and ranked 6th overall in RAPM while Giannis had a 1.9 ORAPM and ranked 6th overall also.

Defense -

Spoiler:

I've already broken down Kawhi's defensive game in my first post on him and my post to freethedevil (spoiler alert, he's great) and I've already alluded to the fact that according to +/- numbers Kawhi and Giannis are damn near even with both players ranking 2nd in DRAPM (Kawhi being 2nd to Draymond, Giannis being 2nd to PG13). Both guys were arguably DPOY even though Kawhi is the only won that actually won it.

Overall Giannis is an odd defender. He's below average as a man defender, and has some giant weaknesses (which is why prior to this year his defense was never as impactful as it should've been - he was arguably the most misused defensive anchor for years), but the unique nature of his strengths combined with a system/teammates meant to maximize his talents makes him one of the best in the league right now.

As a man defender Giannis is solid on big men. He can stick to his man and uses his length to contest well. He uses his size in the post just as effectively. The issue is when Giannis is switched onto a small. He's not really quick enough to keep up with smaller guards and while he's not Gobert out there he's not particularly solid either. I'd say he's at best average for a PF.

In the PNR Giannis is an odd one because given those things you'd think he'd do well guarding the roll man but they actually trap hard and switch because Giannis off a PNR action becomes a player that can guard shooters well. He does a good job of not biting for fakes knowing he can recover easily with his length and (and this is key) off a PNR with his man diving he knows unless the PG slows down to isolate the paint is probably going to be packed so he doesn't have to play so far under that he gives up an open shot. On the other end of that I've seen Giannis lose his man when they don't switch and he has to go from helping on the G to running to the roll man. For some reason he's just not that good at that action.

Where Giannis makes the most of his impact on that end is as a dominant weakside rim protector (ala KAT at UK) and hustle player. He's the 11th ranked rim defender in the league (minimum 41 games played, 3 shot attempts a game) holding opponents to -10% under their average when he contests. He's also not someone that boxes out on the boards or gets a lot of deflections but he's top 5 in loose balls recovered per game with 2. All in all Giannis is probably the most impactful defender I've ever seen that doesn't guard the opposing team's best player, isn't a primary rim defender, and all in all doesn't contest that many shots (he's one of the lowest ranking bigmen in contested shots per minute). He thrives off just being help for the other 4 defenders while he's on the floor.

With that said why do I take Kawhi over him on defense even though their impact is about even? Well like I said Giannis is unique. I don't think on a team without Brook Lopez he could play this role (Brook led the league in contested shots a night contesting 18.1 shots in 28.7 mpg while LMA was 2nd place contesting 16.3 shots in 33.2 mpg). I don't think on a team where he wasn't in the lineup with long players like Bledsoe (only 6-1 but has a 6-8 wingspan), Brogdon, Snell, Maker (half the season), Mirotic, and Middleton he's still as great. The Bucks with their extreme amount of length has the ability to completely shut down passing lanes inside the arc and thanks to that they probably have the best 2 point defense I've ever seen. The other side of that is that they allowed more 3 point attempts and makes than anyone ever has with this unique scheme. Kawhi on the other hand is a way more traditional defender at the SF position which means he can fit basically anywhere. He doesn't need a whole defensive scheme around him to be effective, he's plug and play. Even Jason Kidd couldn't **** up his impact.

Overall that's how I feel about Kawhi and Giannis' games compared. Like I said their impact was damn near even, so putting Giannis over him based on accolades is fine, but when talking better seasons and better players I like to imagine how they'd do on other teams as well and I can see Kawhi having the exact same impact on most teams. Can't say the same for a player with as many flaws as Giannis.

[No-more-rings]

^ Curious whether the Barkley voters switch to him. I never really saw a reason why his 1992 profile deserved to be below Barkley's. Speaking for myself, I will be at least considering him once Nash is in.

Speaking of which...

N.1 STEVE NASH 2005
One of the best offensive season of all time, no doubt. Some advanced stats of his unbelievable season:
13 Box Creation / +7.7 rTS% / 9.5 passer rating
A goat level combination of scoring and playmaking. Amazing playoffs run, take a look at his WCF VS San Antonio defense.

I want to say it looks like there's a big disconnect in the project right now, we have votes all over the place. Which is fine, but i think it may make for some weird results. This spot is more than likely going to CP3 or Barkley, I'm not buying anymore that they give you a better shot at a title than Nash. Paul and Barkley, they got huge numbers and sure they're very impactful, but i have some doubt about winning with them as your best player, not because they weren't talented enough but for other reasons. With Paul, i think he doesn't always properly balance his scoring/passing, or doesn't do it at the right times. What i mean by that is, there seems to be playoff games, where they need him to be more of a scorer and he instead will be more worried about setting people up. And vice versa. Nash in 05 averaged 30 ppg on 64 ts% against the 9th ranked DRTG Mavs, Paul never showed that level of scoring instinct/ability.
...
3. 2005 Nash- Monster offensive force, perpetual leader of insanely good offenses and if his defense were even neutral he'd be fighting with the likes of West, Oscar, Wade etc. He's probably the 2nd best passer ever honestly.

I am quoting you two here because I want to see if anything I have posted has potentially changed your opinion on 2007 versus 2005 in terms of playoff impact via Nash's increased focus on passing over scoring? Or whether there is specific concern you would need to see addressed?

I mean i don't really know lol, i mean they are comparable seasons to me and i can see either one being ranked higher. His postseason run felt bit more complete to me, so yeah i guess i still do prefer him a little more aggressive scoring wise, the passing wasn't quite as good but it was still damn good.

Also, the 07 roster looks a little better yet the results are pretty much the same or arguably lightly worse in 07.

[homecourtloss]

Unbelievable that Karl Malone isn't already on the list and even isn't mentioned.

Ok then make a case for him over others. He has incredible longevity, remarkable production, but hasn’t peaked n a RS+ PS over others in his era so he comes up short in peaks projects.

[liamliam1234]

I want to see if anything I have posted has potentially changed your opinion on 2007 versus 2005 in terms of playoff impact via Nash's increased focus on passing over scoring? Or whether there is specific concern you would need to see addressed?

I mean i don't really know lol, i mean they are comparable seasons to me and i can see either one being ranked higher. His postseason run felt bit more complete to me, so yeah i guess i still do prefer him a little more aggressive scoring wise, the passing wasn't quite as good but it was still damn good.

Also, the 07 roster looks a little better yet the results are pretty much the same or arguably lightly worse in 07.

Okay, I can work with that a little.

So in terms of results, I do immediately want to push back against that idea. Generally a conference finals loss is preferred to a second loss, sure, but both postseasons featured elimination by the would-be champion Spurs. The 2007 team had a better SRS than they did in 2005, but because Dallas won 67 games that year, the Suns were fated to match up with the Spurs in the second round (because the NBA does not reseed in the event of upsets, the fourth-seeded Jazz were given a clear path to the conference finals once the Mavericks were upset).

More importantly, the 2007 Suns, even despite the hip-check and suspension fiasco, were more successful against the Spurs than they were in 2005. To some extent, that can kind-of be indicated by the numbers I posted on the previous page: despite having fewer postseason “wins”, and having a tougher team make up a larger percentage of the playoff sample, Nash still had a better postseason raw plus/minus and Net Rating in 2007 than he did in 2005.

Against the Spurs in 2007, Nash averaged 21.3/12.7/3.7 on 60.5% true shooting, with a series plus/minus of +11 and a general assist percentage of 55.2. Against the Spurs in 2005, Nash averaged 23.2/10.6/3.8 on 57.5% true shooting, with a series plus/minus of -5 and a general assist percentage of 40.2. I personally feel that clearly favours 2007, although I would be interested in whether you disagree.

The progression of the two series also seems to favour 2007. The 2007 Suns lost by 5 in Phoenix, won by 20 in Phoenix, lost by 7 in San Antonio, won by 6 in San Antonio, lost by 3 with an unjustly short-handed roster back at home in Phoenix, and lost by 8 on the road in San Antonio. That was an extremely close series, with Phoenix capturing the only blowout (and therefore actually outscoring San Antonio overall); who knows what would have happened if they had their usual front court in the fifth game, but it is rather easy to imagine that their presence makes up the three-point difference and the series goes back to Phoenix for a seventh game.

In contrast, the 2005 Suns lost by 7, 3, and 10, going down an historically insurmountable 3-0, then won by 5 to avoid the sweep, and ultimately lost by 6 back at home; despite having home-court advantage, they failed to win a single home game. This was also despite Tim Duncan clearly playing at less than full strength, which itself led to what was likely the best series of Amar’e’s entire career: 37/10 averages for the series, leading both teams in scoring every single game and never scoring fewer than 31 points.

Is that at all convincing?
(And again, the reason I am harping on this is because I think people already voting for Nash are in the best position to vote for a different Nash season and thus help him be more likely to be admitted at the proper spot; I am voting for both seasons, but this seems easier than trying to convince you to move two Nash seasons over Harden, haha).

[No-more-rings]

So in terms of results, I do immediately want to push back against that idea. Generally a conference finals loss is preferred to a second loss, sure, but both postseasons featured elimination by the would-be champion Spurs. The 2007 team had a better SRS than they did in 2005, but because Dallas won 67 games that year, the Suns were fated to match up with the Spurs in the second round (because the NBA does not reseed in the event of upsets, the fourth-seeded Jazz were given a clear path to the conference finals once the Mavericks were upset).

Their SRS was 2nd in the league in 05 as opposed to 3rd in 07, and their ORTG was 114.5 vs 113.9 in 07, then 62 wins vs 61. I suppose we can get into league average ortg though i don't know where to find the average for each year, nor do i think it's moves the needle being just 2 years apart.

So the regular season results are comparable no matter how to slice it. Then on paper, i like that roster a little more in 07, they didn't have Joe Johnson, but adding Raja Bell, Borris Diaw, James Jones and Kurt Thomas along with Barbosa's improvement more than makes up for it imo. They were just clearly a deeper team, sure there's some diminishing returns for regular season, but what Nash did in 05 just seems a little more impressive given the roster.

Nash still had a better postseason raw plus/minus and Net Rating in 2007 than he did in 2005.

I don't care about +/- or net rating for such small samples, sorry.

Against the Spurs in 2007, Nash averaged 21.3/12.7/3.7 on 60.5% true shooting, with a series plus/minus of +11 and a general assist percentage of 55.2. Against the Spurs in 2005, Nash averaged 23.2/10.6/3.8 on 57.5% true shooting, with a series plus/minus of -5 and a general assist percentage of 40.2. I personally feel that clearly favours 2007, although I would be interested in whether you disagree.

The progression of the two series also seems to favour 2007. The 2007 Suns lost by 5 in Phoenix, won by 20 in Phoenix, lost by 7 in San Antonio, won by 6 in San Antonio, lost by 3 with an unjustly short-handed roster back at home in Phoenix, and lost by 8 on the road in San Antonio. That was an extremely close series, with Phoenix capturing the only blowout (and therefore actually outscoring San Antonio overall); who knows what would have happened if they had their usual front court in the fifth game, but it is rather easy to imagine that their presence makes up the three-point difference and the series goes back to Phoenix for a seventh game.

In contrast, the 2005 Suns lost by 7, 3, and 10, going down a historically insurmountable 3-0, then won by 5 to avoid the sweep, and ultimately lost by 6 back at home; despite having home-court advantage, they failed to win a single home game. This was also despite Tim Duncan clearly playing at less than full strength, which itself led to what was likely the best series of Amar’e’s entire career: 37/10 averages for the series, leading both teams in scoring every single game and never scoring fewer than 31 points.?

Hmm, should maybe be noted that the 05 Spurs were a 98.8 drtg, and the 07 a 99.9. I don't know the league averages on that either(Eballa usually has this type of info), but again it's more than likely apples to apples anyway.

The Suns i remember being quite thin on depth in the 05 series, that could explain some of the assist % stuff, and why they didn't put up the same fight in 05.

Also you know Joe Johnson missed the first 3 games right? They definitely don't go down 0-3 otherwise, i mean dudes like Steven Hunter and Jim Jackson were getting significant minutes, like who are these dudes?

Is that at all convincing?

I'm not sure it didn't tell me anything i didn't expect, but like i said they're close enough where i don't see a clear advantage for either season.

[liamliam1234]

Alright. Again, Duncan’s injury is why I do not think the Spurs were defensively better in the 2005 playoffs than in 2007, but the point about Johnson, depth, and slightly reduced offensive efficiency is fair.

Also, I would agree the 2005 regular season was better, hence why I focused on the postseason.

[No-more-rings]

Alright. Again, Duncan’s injury is why I do not think the Spurs were defensively better in the 2005 playoffs than in 2007, but the point about Johnson, depth, and slightly reduced offensive efficiency is fair.

Also, I would agree the 2005 regular season was better, hence why I focused on the postseason.

Yeah I don’t know the numbers on it, but Duncan still seemed to perform quite well in the playoffs for his supposed injury, not saying it didn’t happen but how much difference did it really make in mobility? For example i know he shut down Rasheed basically..

[cecilthesheep]

1. 1949 George Mikan - Mikan's peak was so far above his contemporaries that I don't think I can leave him out any longer. He was the most unstoppable scorer of basketball's first decade or two, he raised his game in the playoffs to lead his team to 5 titles in 6 years and create the league's first dynasty, and this was his most dominant year.

2. 1950 George Mikan - same player, second-best year, basically the same level of performance

3. 2007 Steve Nash. I'd just rather have this guy to win a title with than anyone left. Very very close with some version of Ewing and with '97 Karl Malone, but the way Nash totally transforms an offense is not something that anyone remaining in this tier can do on either end, in that I think if you have this version of Nash your offense is guaranteed to be one of the best in the league.

I am TEMPTED to put Nash first just to try and help end this slide, but I really do think Mikan's the highest peak remaining so that's what I'm sticking with

[cecilthesheep]

Unbelievable that Karl Malone isn't already on the list and even isn't mentioned.

I'm probably voting for Malone next after Mikan and Nash, but I think around 30th is probably about right for him. He gets a significant boost to his all-time rank from longevity, which doesn't matter for a peaks project. If this were about overall careers I'd have him in the top 20, but it's not.

[ccameron]

Defensively he's on the shortlist of the GOATs. He was DPOY back to back in 99 and 2000 and watching him it's obvious why. He was someone that chased shots but didn't seem to foul because his jump speed was so fast. Next to Bill Russell he's the most effective shot blocker ever. One thing I always noticed watching Zo is he kept the ball inbounds. If his back was to the basket he went straight up and only flicked his wrist. If he was behind the play he pinned it on the backboard. Either way he always found a way to keep it in play and I'm taking him as the best rim protector ever next to Deke. In this clip you can see exactly how fast he gets off the floor and how effortless it is for him.

Watch on YouTube

Mourning was my favorite player growing up. I'm surprised you have him this high, it seems like no one else does. But I just needed to comment on that block at 1:20 of the video. So rare to see that, usually people are swatting shots away. But this is such a soft touch, effortless, like that's how you block a little kid's shot.

[Sublime187]

Is Malone for peak better then Mourning? Mourning is a much better defender and if Mourning had someone like Stockton probably not as good as Malone on offense but the combination of offense and defense could push him over.

[No-more-rings]

Is Malone for peak better then Mourning? Mourning is a much better defender and if Mourning had someone like Stockton probably not as good as Malone on offense but the combination of offense and defense could push him over.

It’s possible i mean i have Dwight slightly over Karl.

[liamliam1234]

Malone’s value was not remotely as tied to Stockton as people assume. It is a fair question whether the defence of Mourning/Howard, and to a lesser extent (on both sides) Davis and Giannis, outweigh Malone’s offensive advantages, but the gap between them on offence (especially in terms of Malone’s 1992 peak) is large with even the most basic understanding of their respective ability as scorers (and passers, if you prefer later career Malone).

[Vladimir777]

I'm glad some of you guys are voting for Mikan. I'm surprised he wasn't added earlier honestly. I don't know enough about stats and basketball in general to vote in this thread, but he struck me as his era's Shaq or Wilt.

[LA Bird]

We only have 6 votes with 10 hours left until the hard deadline. Please vote!

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Posters not listed above can also vote.
Just need to follow the voting guidelines (3 player-season picks, 1 line of reasoning for each choice).

[ardee]

We only have 6 votes with 10 hours left until the hard deadline. Please vote!

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Posters not listed above can also vote.
Just need to follow the voting guidelines (3 player-season picks, 1 line of reasoning for each choice).

Yeah I apologize man, the app hasn't been sending me notifications so I forget to check the PC board.

Sent from my SM-A505F using RealGM mobile app

[ardee]

1. 2015 Chris Paul

He has a really solid case as the best player in the league that year. Blake missed a bunch of games but he still led the Clippers to a 6.8 SRS and the best offense in the league. At least regular season wise it's a feat comparable to 2008 Kobe. 19-5-10 on 49-40-90, 60% TS, 26 PER, numbers are definitely there. The Spurs series was masterful and it truly marked his ascenion to Point God. I can't really put the Rockets loss on him at all, now when we averaged 26-10 efficiently for the last 3 games. The one missed game, well, if 2016 Curry is already in with 7 missed Playoff games, then that is a moot point here.

The way he controlled games this year was unreal, his BBIQ was ludricious.

2. 2008 Chris Paul

Basically just as good in every way as 2015 but less experienced and a slightly worse shooter. Raw numbers are utterly absurd (even better in 2009, which is IMO the 2nd best regular season for a PG after 2016 Curry, but of course he was terrible in the Playoffs). Absurd Playoffs too, 30.7 PER for a PG is just wtf.

3. 2019 Kawhi Leonard

Basically at this point there are no "perfect" candidates left. Malone and Harden have issues with their regular season impact translating to the Playoffs. Howard has the lack of a reliable offensive game. Kawhi's biggest flaw is games missed, which I usefully penalize but I think in terms of title odds it doesn't put any of these other guys over him still. Playoff injuries are a different ballgame tho and it's why I'm voting for 2019 Kawhi over the 2017 version whom I think was the more impactful player... in fact 2017 Kawhi would be in the low 20s had he not gotten hurt.

Sent from my SM-A505F using RealGM mobile app

[penbeast0]

Haven't been active on this thread recently but although Karl Malone was tempting, I have to throw a vote to the guys who carried the load in the playoffs. Both these players suffer from playing in the two weakest eras in NBA history but they were the alpha and omega of their championship teams. And I always disliked Barry.

1. George Mikan 1949
2. George Mikan 1950
3. Rick Barry 1975