[Project] Top 5 single season peaks by franchises: The Suns

[Doctor MJ]

The Suns results;

Code: Select all

1. 7-4-0-0-0 / 98 points / 0.891 share / '07 Steve Nash
2. 4-7-0-0-0 / 89 points / 0.809 share / '93 Charles Barkley
3. 0-0-6-4-1 / 43 points / 0.391 share / '90 Kevin Johnson
4. 0-0-2-2-1 / 17 points / 0.155 share / '70 Connie Hawkins
5. 0-0-1-2-3 / 14 points / 0.127 share / '99 Jason Kidd

6. 0-0-1-1-3 / 11 points / 0.100 share / '79 Paul Westphal
6. 0-0-1-1-0 /  8 points / 0.073 share / '05 Amar'e Stoudemire
6. 0-0-0-1-3 /  6 points / 0.055 share / '06 Shawn Marion

Results on Google Sheet

Man, all these Matrix haters!

[70sFan]

Fat ass who didn't care about defense.

I mean, neither did Nash, at least not to the point when he became average...

Ooh, I think a clarification is in order.

Nash's issue was physical limitation. His decision making on defense - playing his role, not making mistakes - was generally spot on, but because of his limitations the Suns did need to support/hide him.

Barkley just took the defensive possession off a lot. In fact I know our mutual friend Ben expressed exasperation at just how egregious Chuck's defensive laziness was.

Not saying folks are crazy for putting Barkley first, but Nash's defensive issues were not Barkley's defensive issues.

I agree that Barkley was more lazy on defense than Nash, but the fact remains that both were bad on that end. It's not like 30 years old 6'5 "bigman" doesn't have physical limitations. I also don't view Nash as smart defender either, not sure if he has any advantage over Barkley here.

Still, calling him Melo-esque doesn't sound right just from offensive perspective - he was still arguably the best offensive player in the league during this 1993-95 period.

[Doctor MJ]

I mean, neither did Nash, at least not to the point when he became average...

Ooh, I think a clarification is in order.

Nash's issue was physical limitation. His decision making on defense - playing his role, not making mistakes - was generally spot on, but because of his limitations the Suns did need to support/hide him.

Barkley just took the defensive possession off a lot. In fact I know our mutual friend Ben expressed exasperation at just how egregious Chuck's defensive laziness was.

Not saying folks are crazy for putting Barkley first, but Nash's defensive issues were not Barkley's defensive issues.

I agree that Barkley was more lazy on defense than Nash, but the fact remains that both were bad on that end. It's not like 30 years old 6'5 "bigman" doesn't have physical limitations. I also don't view Nash as smart defender either, not sure if he has any advantage over Barkley here.

Still, calling him Melo-esque doesn't sound right just from offensive perspective - he was still arguably the best offensive player in the league during this 1993-95 period.

I've seen Nash making super-heady defensive plays so I don't think there's much reason to think his BBIQ only was possible one way. I tend to think that Nash on defense, contrary to his offense, was fundamentally risk-averse - and I think it makes sense. If the 5th most talented defensive teammate is prone to risky gambles, he's likely to be resented by his teammates.

[Owly]

Barkley anchored Suns to extremely good offenses:

1993: +5.3 in RS, +5.2 in playoffs
1994: +5.4 in RS, +8.2 in playoffs
1995: +6.2 in RS, +12.3 in playoffs

Why do you think he was Carmelo-esque? Sure, his defense was bad but he was still highly efficient and he was much better playmaker than Melo.

Fat ass who didn't care about defense.

I mean, neither did Nash, at least not to the point when he became average...

Hmmm ... I'd guess Nash did get to circa average for a point guard ...

But in any case where the point is caring ... I'm inclined to think (especially in the Suns era) that he was trying. For Barkley I've read multiple sources and his own comments (half-joking, but certainly not ideal for a defensive culture) suggesting defensive effort was inconsistent, not a priority or simply poor.

Now you could do that and still be a net monster by offensive impact. But it's something that sours me on Suns' Barkley.


It's been noted that Barkley had physical limitations which is true. However some reporters and other sources felt conditioning was an issue which might be seen as him generating his own limitations (and increasing exposure to injury). My limited impression (Philly +/-, box stats, limited eye test) is that (a fitter, healthier and admittedly younger, and sometimes a 3, less offensive responsibility) Barkley could be effective defensively (though by at least the late 80s defensive effort would become a noted issue).

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Disappointed at Nash ending up above Barkley. Both phenomenal players but I still feel like Barkley is not getting enough credit. And Barkley was a more impactful player than Melo ever was.

People make the argument that Nash made a terrible team great and Barkley joined a team that was already good, but as I illustrated before, there was a bigger gap between Barkley and the next highest guys on his team in BPM and WS/48 than there was for Nash on his team. I do not know much stock anyone puts in PIPM or RAPTOR - perhaps not much - but I'm just putting this out there(obviously RAPM doesn't exist for 93 Barkley):

93 Barkley: 5.76PIPM
05 Nash: 3.69 PIPM
07 Nash: 4.36 PIPM

Defensively:

93 Barkley: 1.13 DPIPM
05 Nash: -1.78 DPIPM
07 Nash: -0.9 DPIPM

RAPTOR:

93 Barkley: 7.2 RS RAPTOR/7.0 PS RAPTOR
05 Nash: 5.6 RS RAPTOR/6.5 PS RAPTOR
07 Nash: 6.5 RS RAPTOR/5.1 PS RAPTOR

Defensively:

93 Barkley: 1.6 RS D-RAPTOR/1.8 PS D-RAPTOR
05 Nash: -1.5 RS D-RAPTOR / -1.8 PS D-RAPTOR
07 Nash: -1.1 RS D-RAPTOR / -1.9 PS D-RAPTOR

Obviously numbers don't always tell the whole story, but felt like it was worth sharing this.

[Doctor MJ]

Disappointed at Nash ending up above Barkley. Both phenomenal players but I still feel like Barkley is not getting enough credit. And Barkley was a more impactful player than Melo ever was.

People make the argument that Nash made a terrible team great and Barkley joined a team that was already good, but as I illustrated before, there was a bigger gap between Barkley and the next highest guys on his team in BPM and WS/48 than there was for Nash on his team. I do not know much stock anyone puts in PIPM or RAPTOR - perhaps not much - but I'm just putting this out there(obviously RAPM doesn't exist for 93 Barkley):

93 Barkley: 5.76PIPM
05 Nash: 3.69 PIPM
07 Nash: 4.36 PIPM

Defensively:

93 Barkley: 1.13 DPIPM
05 Nash: -1.78 DPIPM
07 Nash: -0.9 DPIPM

RAPTOR:

93 Barkley: 7.2 RS RAPTOR/7.0 PS RAPTOR
05 Nash: 5.6 RS RAPTOR/6.5 PS RAPTOR
07 Nash: 6.5 RS RAPTOR/5.1 PS RAPTOR

Defensively:

93 Barkley: 1.6 RS D-RAPTOR/1.8 PS D-RAPTOR
05 Nash: -1.5 RS D-RAPTOR / -1.8 PS D-RAPTOR
07 Nash: -1.1 RS D-RAPTOR / -1.9 PS D-RAPTOR

Obviously numbers don't always tell the whole story, but felt like it was worth sharing this.

Understandable perspective, and appreciate your tone. Here's what I'll say:

We don't have actual +/- data from Barkley's '92-93 season (to my knowledge), so all the stats you're referring to are based on stats that try to approximate +/- data with the box score, and this is something that tends to underrate players underrated by the box score.

Here's what data we do have that pertains to Barkley.

1. As luck would have it, the 76ers were the first franchise that we have on record tracking their team's raw +/- data. While this is nowhere near as powerful as having a more complete dataset (and we only have regular season data), we can get something of a sense for Barkley looking at his data here.

'84-85 On: +4.8 On/Off: +1.9, 5th on team in Total +/- (Malone 1st)
'85-86 On: +5.0 On/Off: +10.6, 2nd (Cheeks 1st)
'86-87 On: +2.3 On/Off: +7.9, 1st
'87-88 On: -0.9 On/Off: +2.7, n/a (negative)
'88-89 On: +3.9 On/Off: +11.0, 1st
'89-90 On: +7.0 On/Off: +8.3, 1st
'90-91 On: +3.1 On/Off: +8.8, 1st
'91-92 On: +0.3 On/Off: +6.0, 4th (Bol 1st)
Total On: +3.2 On/Off+6.8

2. In addition to bkref now going back to '96-97, we also have (regular season data) from'93-94 to '95-96 with at least numbers such as the ones above for all teams, which means we can see what Barkley's numbers look like for those year:

'93-94 On: +7.8 On/Off: +6.8, 2nd (KJ)
'94-95 On: +6.7 On/Off: +6.8, 1st
'95-96 On: +3.0 On/Off: +7.8, 2nd (KJ)

(There's also Barkley's Houston years which can be found on bkref, feel free to post further about them, they say good things about Barkley as well.)

3. I'll note that I've been trying to get a gauge of how well Barkley & KJ successfully harmonized. We are talking about a team who was already scoring at a 112-113 ORtg clip for 4 years prior to Barkley's arrival and that the team only broke 114 once during '94-95, so I think it's important to recognize that this team was great before Barkley and really didn't rise up that much with him.

4. Bringing this back to the +/- data, I'd be surprised if Barkley's numbers in '92-93 looked drastically more impressive than his other years given that the Suns weren't in fact much better in '92-93 than those other years.

Barkley seems like the kind of guy who tended to have number like the ones you see above.

5. Now, how does Nash look in Phoenix? (Note using bkref's team page for the first two, but RS/PS combined for Total

'04-05 On: +12.7 On/Off: +14.9, 1st
'05-06 On: +8.7 On/Off: +9.1, 1st
'06-07 On: +11.5 On/Off: +11.7, 2nd (Marion)
'07-08 On: +10.0 On/Off: +14.5, 1st
'08-09 On: +4.6 On/Off: +6.9, 1st
'09-10 On: +6.7 On/Off: +3.9, 1st
'10-11 On: +4.7 On/Off: +14.9, 1st
'11-12 On: +3.6 On/Off: +10.6, 1st

Phoenix Average (weighed down some by his 1st stint on the club)
On: +7.5 On/Off +9.7

I hope it's clear why I just see Nash during this run as someone who just seemed to have more net impact than Barkley. While it may be the case that '92-93 turned out to be something entirely different from the rest - because we don't have that data - my best estimation is that the trend would continue into that year as well.

6. I want to acknowledge that +/- style impact is not the only way to look at the game. If you simply thought Barkley could hang better against more elite competition deep in the playoffs, that alone would be enough to justify ranking him higher than Nash.

But in practice, I don't see any evidence of Barkley leading fundamentally better teams than Nash, and I think Nash was helping you more day-in and day-out.