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

[70sFan]

DJ was #4 on the Celtics. True, and Gus would have no place on a team that good other than perhaps 6th man.

I very strongly disagree, Celtics offense would be much better with another creator and they wouldn't have to rely on Bird so much in playoffs. Celtics always needed secondary creator, old Archibald wasn't good enough. Gus would be excellent addition for them.

I'm also biased by the fact that I don't take that Seattle team all that seriously in general, particularly on offense, which is where Gus' argument comes in.

Why? They were 6th in SRS in 1979 and 3rd in 1980. They were the best team in the league in 1979 and arguably 2nd best in 1980 (with Sixers being their only rivals). Of course they weren't top 10 ever, but not taking them seriously is a bit too much. This team was well coached, deep and talented. I don't think Bad Boy Pistons were that much better if you exclude expansion effect to be honest.

[Odinn21]

DJ was #4 on the Celtics. True, and Gus would have no place on a team that good other than perhaps 6th man.

I feel like that's a bit too stretched. I mean, come on, would you really have Gus below Ainge?

Re: If DJ were as impactful as Gus, Suns would have done better in 1982 relative to 1981 & 1983. Aside from the fact that replacing a volume scorer isn't the best way to judge DJ's impact, it's worth noting that DJ led them to a playoff advancement in 1982 which they didn't have in 1981 & 1983, making it a strange here to argue "they fell apart" logic.

DJ's performance and impact were closer to fell apart than something like the swing the Knicks experienced from 1971 to 1972 without Reed and Frazier stepping up. Considering 1982 for DJ and Gus, and the situation of their teams in the prior season, I think it's safe to say while DJ's impact was closer to fell apart, Gus' impact was closer to Frazier's.

Though, it must be mentioned that Gus is helped by his stronger suit over DJ, scoring mattering a bit more than DJ's stronger suit, defense in this comparison.

Re: being a complementary piece should not mean he's favored. As I've said before, I tend to be focused on who can play a role on a championship team, and I think DJ is better suited for this than Gus. I know you see things differently though.

I actually agree with your approach. If I didn't, I wouldn't point out scalability gap between the 2 players. The fundamental disagreement, which leads us to different conclusions, is coming from that I just don't think playing on a contending team is common enough to favour that approach over variance.

Re: Surprised; spoken at the time. Not saying we must defer to those at the time, only that I deviate from them only when I have good cause.

I'm also biased by the fact that I don't take that Seattle team all that seriously in general, particularly on offense, which is where Gus' argument comes in.

I will say arguments against DJ's defensive impact matter to me. I do think DJ's argument over Gus has everything to do with defense, so if that turns out to be overrated, that changes things.

One of the things surprised me is that you know guards were favoured over wings and bigs on defense until like Eaton/Olajuwon/Ewing. Reputation wise, DJ is one of the oversold G defenders at the time. He was definitely one of the better defensive Gs in the league, he earned to be championed. Otoh, not that much because the argument for him was already skewed from the beginning.
In grand scheme of things, I think having DJ that high on defense, especially compared to Sikma, is like having Mo Cheeks over Bobby Jones with more playtime. At least that's how I see it.

[Owly]

Okay well, as others note, they bounce back really strong with Gus back. And the coach and respected veteran independently called him a cancer. And the Suns give him away 3 years down the line. So was it a mistake to trade him if Westphal is destined to be injured. Sure. But without being on the inside the impression is that Supersonics didn't feel like they had a choice. And to be honest it seems like how you perceive the Marion in Phoenix issue, in this case (beyond the aforementioned coach and veteran "cancer" comments) with the coach openly and repeatedly stating the resentment of teammates (after the fact of course) and concluding a paragraph about DJ with what could be read as an implication ... well

Good points in general. Responding here because you mentioned my feelings about Marion.

Much of why I criticize is that he was in the perfect situation for him, fantasized completely unrealistically about being the main offensive force on another team, and then ended up leaving and showing the world how much the Phoenix context is what made him special.

DJ? Plays largely the same role his entire career and proves valuable wherever he goes.

To be clear, I rank Marion's peak ahead of DJ's without hesitation. Nash or no, I saw what Marion was doing and how effective he was. I don't think DJ was ever having that much impact.

But yeah, I specifically tend to penalize guys' careers who blew up their best possible situation, and DJ doesn't qualify given that he played on some of the greatest teams of all time and what they all had in common was there was an alpha way better than Gus.

Well
1) Marion impactful, productive pre-Nash if less so, still impactful, though less so, through 2010.

2) I can't speak to him wanting to be an alpha; if he did that was weird.

3) DJ's usage varies a fair bit. So to his assist %. His defensive box suggests what he's doing at that end changes too. So I'm not super confident but somewhat skeptical regarding same role.

4) "That core was really quite young there was good reason to think that the team's best days would still be ahead of them."
"Much of why I criticize is that he was in the perfect situation for him, fantasized completely unrealistically about being the main offensive force on another team"

Players are the first to know when a teammate is no longer on the same page with them. And it's easy for them to say, "Screw it; if that guy is going to shoot all the time, so am I."

You see where I'm going with this. DJ was in a very good situation. He wanted more shots and more recognition and didn't get his greatest impact was in being a defender but he wanted to take more shots despite showing no chops in that role (significantly negative ts% in that final usage up year in Seattle, as it transpired he would manage one year in Phoenix, his second, where he sustained that higher usage with a slightly positive ts add - he got to be the lead scorer on a -1.1 rel ORtg offense). He resented popular teammates. It seems similar to me.

5) That DJ behaved having comprehensively burnt bridges in his first two stops is ... yeah, not such an endorsement to me. I can't really credit him for generating that team's greatness and the how he arrived there doesn't help. Thus, that he didn't happen to destroy the most beautiful thing he happend to be on seems more about chance and the criteria about luck than rationality.

I guess I just have a different perspective to you on this.

[Doctor MJ]

DJ was #4 on the Celtics. True, and Gus would have no place on a team that good other than perhaps 6th man.

I very strongly disagree, Celtics offense would be much better with another creator and they wouldn't have to rely on Bird so much in playoffs. Celtics always needed secondary creator, old Archibald wasn't good enough. Gus would be excellent addition for them.

You think the '86 Celtics would be better with Gus than DJ?

I'm also biased by the fact that I don't take that Seattle team all that seriously in general, particularly on offense, which is where Gus' argument comes in.

Why? They were 6th in SRS in 1979 and 3rd in 1980. They were the best team in the league in 1979 and arguably 2nd best in 1980 (with Sixers being their only rivals). Of course they weren't top 10 ever, but not taking them seriously is a bit too much. This team was well coached, deep and talented. I don't think Bad Boy Pistons were that much better if you exclude expansion effect to be honest.

6th in SRS. I mean, I'm not saying they were a below average team for their own league. I'm comparing them with other champions. They weren't a dominant team, and they played in an era that was clearly between dominant champions. Put them in an average NBA season, they're not a team you're expecting to get to the finals.

Re: 3rd SRS & arguably 2nd best team in 1980. This was them at their best to be sure, and they got beat pretty soundly by a team I think everyone agrees was considerably better than they'd ever been. Also, I would say 4th is pretty arguable behind the Celtics. Of course the thing is that with the Celtics, as with the Lakers, they were going to get better.

Re: Seattle well coached. I think it's clear Lenny Wilkens did a great job building the team around defenders he could run a tight ship around. On the other hand, offensively, I'd be reluctant to say that, though I won't claim I've done an exhaustive analysis. In general, much more elite DRtg rather than ORtg, and I also can't help but think about the fact that Portland became amazing because they moved on from Lenny. Maybe not fair to compare Wilkens with Jack Ramsay, but if I were trying to get the most out of my offense, I wouldn't have wanted Lenny.

Re: Bad Boy Pistons much better? The Pistons showed considerably more domination than the Sonics did - both by SRS, and by literally being the most dominant team through seasons. When you add in the greater competition of their time period to be the very best, I don't see the two teams that similar other than their defensive emphasis.

[Doctor MJ]

DJ was #4 on the Celtics. True, and Gus would have no place on a team that good other than perhaps 6th man.

I feel like that's a bit too stretched. I mean, come on, would you really have Gus below Ainge?

Gus would be the better 1st option, Ainge the better guy to play with the Celtics' core. Your priority when you have Bird & McHale is not a volume scorer.

Re: If DJ were as impactful as Gus, Suns would have done better in 1982 relative to 1981 & 1983. Aside from the fact that replacing a volume scorer isn't the best way to judge DJ's impact, it's worth noting that DJ led them to a playoff advancement in 1982 which they didn't have in 1981 & 1983, making it a strange here to argue "they fell apart" logic.

DJ's performance and impact were closer to fell apart than something like the swing the Knicks experienced from 1971 to 1972 without Reed and Frazier stepping up. Considering 1982 for DJ and Gus, and the situation of their teams in the prior season, I think it's safe to say while DJ's impact was closer to fell apart, Gus' impact was closer to Frazier's.

Though, it must be mentioned that Gus is helped by his stronger suit over DJ, scoring mattering a bit more than DJ's stronger suit, defense in this comparison.

Again, the Suns went further in the playoffs in the year in question with DJ as their focal point than they did in the surrounding years.

Re: Gus impact. Well, it gets really tricky here because of the fact that Seattle lost both of their starting backcourt - who were the top two scorers on the team - that year. It's entirely possible that if they'd been able to keep either of those two guy, the team looks pretty good still but we'll never know.

I'm also biased by the fact that I don't take that Seattle team all that seriously in general, particularly on offense, which is where Gus' argument comes in.

I will say arguments against DJ's defensive impact matter to me. I do think DJ's argument over Gus has everything to do with defense, so if that turns out to be overrated, that changes things.

One of the things surprised me is that you know guards were favoured over wings and bigs on defense until like Eaton/Olajuwon/Ewing. Reputation wise, DJ is one of the oversold G defenders at the time. He was definitely one of the better defensive Gs in the league, he earned to be championed. Otoh, not that much because the argument for him was already skewed from the beginning.
In grand scheme of things, I think having DJ that high on defense, especially compared to Sikma, is like having Mo Cheeks over Bobby Jones with more playtime. At least that's how I see it.

Well as I've said, if DJ's defensive impact is overrated, then I may overrate his role on Seattle as well.

It's a fair point that there seems to have been an overrating of defensive guards back in this time period, so maybe DJ's Finals MVP is a product of this.

What is clearly the case though is that teams who with elite defenses relied on DJ over and over again, so I think at the very least we can say is that his bonafides as an elite defensive guard are solid. Whereas I look at someone like Alvin Robertson and think, "Did they just confuse SPG for defensive impact?"

[70sFan]

You think the '86 Celtics would be better with Gus than DJ?

It's worth arguing at very least. Celtics needed strong defender at guard spot, so maybe they wouldn't be better with him. On the other hand, I'd take Gus over DJ in 1980s Sixers and 1980s Pistons without thinking twice.

6th in SRS. I mean, I'm not saying they were a below average team for their own league. I'm comparing them with other champions.

Sure, they weren't dominant RS team if that's what you meant. At the same time, they beat two teams with better SRS in the playoffs in 1979, in addition of beating two very strong teams in 1978 (though it should be noted that Portland missed Walton) and one in 1980 playoffs. They were very resiliant in postseason, which isn't that clear for every solid RS team.

They weren't a dominant team, and they played in an era that was clearly between dominant champions. Put them in an average NBA season, they're not a team you're expecting to get to the finals.

I don't agree with this, late 1970s era was very strong and full of solid teams. 1979/80 season is one of the strongest in history in terms of top tier teams and as I said - I have Seattle clearly 3rd in the league at worst.

Re: 3rd SRS & arguably 2nd best team in 1980. This was them at their best to be sure, and they got beat pretty soundly by a team I think everyone agrees was considerably better than they'd ever been. Also, I would say 4th is pretty arguable behind the Celtics. Of course the thing is that with the Celtics, as with the Lakers, they were going to get better.

1. "Got beat soundly by considerably better team" - they lost in 5 games, but it should be noted that three of Lakers wins were very close and the gap between these two teams are not as big as 5 games series suggest. Lakers also were a bad matchup for Seattle - they were too big for them.
2. I'd argue that Seattle were visibly better than Boston in that season - they beat Celtics twice in two close games. They also beat Sixers once and lost another game in OT. Celtics also lost to Sixers in playoffs by smiliar margin to Seattle vs Lakers series, but Lakers were better team.
3. About Celtics and Lakers getting better - I don't think that the Lakers got better until 1985 and while Celtics got better indeed, it doesn't paint a clear picture against Seattle. Sonics lost DJ and Gus in 1981 (for different reasons) and they were never the same (though, they did their last run after Gus return). Saying that Celtics got better and Seattle got worse don't tell us anything without proper context. I'm positive that without losing Gus and DJ, Seattle would still be a major force in 1981 and 1982, challenging Lakers in WC.

Re: Bad Boy Pistons much better? The Pistons showed considerably more domination than the Sonics did - both by SRS, and by literally being the most dominant team through seasons. When you add in the greater competition of their time period to be the very best, I don't see the two teams that similar other than their defensive emphasis.

Pistons had only one outlier RS in 1989, other than that 1988 and 1990 teams look comparable to 1980 Sonics:

1978 Sonics: 47-35, 1.5 SRS (6th) - 57 wins pace with Wilkens as a coach
1979 Sonics: 52-30, 2.7 SRS (6th)
1980 Sonics: 56-26, 4.2 SRS (3rd)

1987 Pistons: 52-30, 3.5 SRS (6th)
1988 Pistons: 54-28, 5.5 SRS (2nd)
1990 Pistons: 59-23, 5.4 SRS (4th)

It's also important to note that although 1988 Pistons faced better competition in playoffs than any Seattle team, 1989 Pistons faced clearly worse competition than any of these Seattle teams.

Were Pistons overall more dominant? Yes, they were.
Is the gap big enough to call one team a dynasty and the other one to take not seriously? Definitely not.

[70sFan]

Also - people shouldn't look at Gus like at strictly volume scorer. He was one of the best playmakers in the league during the time when it wasn't easy for a small guard to be elite playmaker. Seattle were defensive minded team and despite being deep overall, their offensive talent was questionable. Sikma was decent, but he didn't reach his best then and the next best guy on offense was probably Lonnie Shelton or old Fred Brown in limited minutes.

[Doctor MJ]

Okay well, as others note, they bounce back really strong with Gus back. And the coach and respected veteran independently called him a cancer. And the Suns give him away 3 years down the line. So was it a mistake to trade him if Westphal is destined to be injured. Sure. But without being on the inside the impression is that Supersonics didn't feel like they had a choice. And to be honest it seems like how you perceive the Marion in Phoenix issue, in this case (beyond the aforementioned coach and veteran "cancer" comments) with the coach openly and repeatedly stating the resentment of teammates (after the fact of course) and concluding a paragraph about DJ with what could be read as an implication ... well

Good points in general. Responding here because you mentioned my feelings about Marion.

Much of why I criticize is that he was in the perfect situation for him, fantasized completely unrealistically about being the main offensive force on another team, and then ended up leaving and showing the world how much the Phoenix context is what made him special.

DJ? Plays largely the same role his entire career and proves valuable wherever he goes.

To be clear, I rank Marion's peak ahead of DJ's without hesitation. Nash or no, I saw what Marion was doing and how effective he was. I don't think DJ was ever having that much impact.

But yeah, I specifically tend to penalize guys' careers who blew up their best possible situation, and DJ doesn't qualify given that he played on some of the greatest teams of all time and what they all had in common was there was an alpha way better than Gus.

Well
1) Marion impactful, productive pre-Nash if less so, still impactful, though less so, through 2010.

2) I can't speak to him wanting to be an alpha; if he did that was weird.

3) DJ's usage varies a fair bit. So to his assist %. His defensive box suggests what he's doing at that end changes too. So I'm not super confident but somewhat skeptical regarding same role.

4) "That core was really quite young there was good reason to think that the team's best days would still be ahead of them."
"Much of why I criticize is that he was in the perfect situation for him, fantasized completely unrealistically about being the main offensive force on another team"

1) Right but look at his shooting efficiency. He turned into something offense with Nash that he never was before and never was again.

2) It was weird. It was also brought on by the whole curse of believing you deserve more credit than you're getting. Had he been the guy winning MVPs, I'm sure he'd have been fine playing the role he played. When he got treated like the 3rd man though, it made him want to show the world what he was truly capable of.

I should say however that in the end there was a money thing going on. He wanted more money than Phoenix was going to give him, so he bet on himself...and end up making far less money than if he'd just stayed put.

3) Fair enough. His shooting rate seems pretty consistent from team to team though most of the time.

4) Well played, but is that actually what was going on in DJ's mind? He doesn't seem to me like a guy who had issues shooting less in Phoenix or Boston. I'd also note the difference in role between Marion & DJ. Marion was an off-ball player who wanted the ball passed to him more. DJ was an on-ball player who at one point called his own number too much. While the self-centeredness of personality could be the same, their respective contexts have to be seen as pretty different.

Players are the first to know when a teammate is no longer on the same page with them. And it's easy for them to say, "Screw it; if that guy is going to shoot all the time, so am I."

You see where I'm going with this. DJ was in a very good situation. He wanted more shots and more recognition and didn't get his greatest impact was in being a defender but he wanted to take more shots despite showing no chops in that role (significantly negative ts% in that final usage up year in Seattle, as it transpired he would manage one year in Phoenix, his second, where he sustained that higher usage with a slightly positive ts add - he got to be the lead scorer on a -1.1 rel ORtg offense). He resented popular teammates. It seems similar to me.

5) That DJ behaved having comprehensively burnt bridges in his first two stops is ... yeah, not such an endorsement to me. I can't really credit him for generating that team's greatness and the how he arrived there doesn't help. Thus, that he didn't happen to destroy the most beautiful thing he happend to be on seems more about chance and the criteria about luck than rationality.

I guess I just have a different perspective to you on this.

I do see where you're going, and it's a good case.

Re: Fact he didn't destroy most beautiful is about luck. There's certainly some luck with getting on the Celtics, but it's not the case that the Celtics gave him a try out and decided to stick with him. They went after him, and crowed about about getting him("We finally have a big defensive guard!"), and afterward immediately won a title and became the best version of the Bird Celtics. And this, I'll admit weights heavily in my mind.

[Odinn21]

DJ was #4 on the Celtics. True, and Gus would have no place on a team that good other than perhaps 6th man.

I feel like that's a bit too stretched. I mean, come on, would you really have Gus below Ainge?

Gus would be the better 1st option, Ainge the better guy to play with the Celtics' core. Your priority when you have Bird & McHale is not a volume scorer.

Gus was better at everything bar 3pt shooting than Ainge. He was a better at reading the floor, he was better at passing and playmaking, he was a better defender. Why would Gus complement the Celtics worse?

Again, the Suns went further in the playoffs in the year in question with DJ as their focal point than they did in the surrounding years.

If I were to use such argument, you'd be the one calling out circumstances.

The Suns won a bo3 by 2-1 against the Nuggets (+0.5 NRtg, 13th of 23) in '82 to go further. They were walloped by the Lakers in a sweep with -12.8 ppg differential. The only close game was the 4th game in which the Suns trailed the Lakers in entire game.
Then they lost to 1-2 in a bo3 against the Nuggets (+0.6 NRtg, 12th of 23) in '83.

I mean, let's give DJ for making it past the Nuggets in '82 but is that credit really that big like 1st round exit vs. 2nd round exit would sound? Especially considering the 1st round series were bo3s back then?

If we're down that road, despite winning less games the Suns went further in '84 without DJ and they put up a more convincing fight against a far better team in the round they were eliminated. Though I wouldn't hold this against DJ. Just looking at variances in here.

Re: Gus impact. Well, it gets really tricky here because of the fact that Seattle lost both of their starting backcourt - who were the top two scorers on the team - that year. It's entirely possible that if they'd been able to keep either of those two guy, the team looks pretty good still but we'll never know.

As I listed earlier, in 1982, the team performed like they didn't lose DJ in the regular season. Gus' impact masked the further issues other than DJ's departure which became apparent in the playoffs. The Sonics actually outscored the Spurs despite losing a bo7 in 5 (a pretty rare sight) because the games were pretty close and other than himself and Sikma couldn't do sh.t without relying on those 2.
Gus' impact should be pretty obvious how well it turned for the team regarding all of the issues they were having, especially with Gus' production in mind (Gus was arguably a better player than Gervin in that series for instance, I've never seen such a series that can be called like that for DJ).

What is clearly the case though is that teams who with elite defenses relied on DJ over and over again

But DJ was one of the most fortunate players ever. The consistency he had proves him having a value. I'm definitely not arguing against that. But not the extent. I see where you're coming from. You're looking at how well the Sonics performed on defense when he was 2nd best defensive piece next to Sikma, then the Celtics stint, then the Suns stint as the cherry on top (especially 1982). I agree that those DRtg numbers are making a compelling argument for DJ. But I just can't agree with having DJ's defense that high because on my personal notes, in terms of taking efficiency from opponents, decrease in ppp on various defensive situations, or running certain defensive schemes against high quality offensive schemes, etc, DJ comes off as an overrated G. A good defensive player indeed, that's why I drew a similarity between Mo Cheeks and Bobby Jones, but not what his reputation would suggest. Despite his health worries and way limited playtime, I have Walter Davis as a better defensive presence than Dennis Johnson in 1982 playoffs for instance.

[Doctor MJ]

I don't agree with this, late 1970s era was very strong and full of solid teams. 1979/80 season is one of the strongest in history in terms of top tier teams and as I said - I have Seattle clearly 3rd in the league at worst.

You continue to make good points, but I need to move on to other things, so I just wanted to hit this.

You have a situation where a) the league gets considerably more teams, and b) no one seems to be able to dominate, and it becomes a question of whether this means that the entire league is super-strong, super-weak, or super-meh. In theory any of those is possible, and I welcome more thoughts on this from you, 70sFan, in particular.

This is one of those things where it's hard not to be shaped by what came later. If we'd never seen big SRSes again, then we'd probably say that such extreme dominance could only exist in an immature league, but we did see big SRSes soon enough, and when they came, the teams that dominated the new era were largely new cores rather than teams from the late '70s growing into domination.

While I'll acknowledge imperfect information and imperfect thinking on my part, I suppose what I'd say is that I'm generally someone who sees parity in sports that often have dominance as a sign of weakness at the top, and when I see that in the late '70s teams were winning titles with meh records, meh SRSes, and offensive attacks that lack any kind of top tier offensive threat, to me it paints a pretty clear picture.

Re: '79-80 strong and Seattle among strongest. I'm saying late '70s for a reason. Once LA & Boston really show up, I think they quickly surpass what Seattle was ever going to be...and then keep getting better after that.

Question: Do you think these Sonics at their best was better than the Johnson-Moncrief Bucks?

[Dr Positivity]

1. Kevin Durant 2014 - MVP level season carrying the team during Westbrook injury. I think his 2016 playoff run is underrated by his stats but not as great in regular season.

2. Gary Payton 1998 - Impressive season after the Kemp trade. Seems like he gets better on offense but worse on defense from 96 to 00, 98 being somewhere in the middle.

3. Russell Westbrook 2017 - Gets over PG for injury reasons

4. Paul George 2019 - Injured in playoffs but kind of amazing regular season

5. Ray Allen 2005 - Allen in his prime doing more than just shooting

Couldn't fit the Williams/Johnson/Sikma core

After thinking about I'll change #5 to Gus Williams 1982. I originally docked him for a worse league than mid 2000s, but I think having a penetrating/playmaking PG like that was harder in a non 3pt era and would have likely made him one of the most valuable offensive players in the league.

[HeartBreakKid]

While the 79 Sonics were an ensemble team I don't think anyone was all that close to Gus Williams.

He can help a contending team considerably more than DJ. Gus Williams is a guy who can consistently rack up 25 PPG or so in his era during the post season, while also playmaking and playing some defense. That's a guy who already did that in some serious stakes and with no other big time volume scorer on his team. DJ would be a great #2 on a traditional contending team, which is quite a bit up the depth charts compared to what DJ was.

DJ is only better if we are talking about a silly stacked team like the 17 Warriors or maybe the 83 Sixers. At that point you're playing with house money already.

[falcolombardi]

While the 79 Sonics were an ensemble team I don't think anyone was all that close to Gus Williams.

He can help a contending team considerably more than DJ. Gus Williams is a guy who can consistently rack up 25 PPG or so in his era during the post season, while also playmaking and playing some defense. That's a guy who already did that in some serious stakes and with no other big time volume scorer on his team. DJ would be a great #2 on a traditional contending team, which is quite a bit up the depth charts compared to what DJ was.

DJ is only better if we are talking about a silly stacked team like the 17 Warriors or maybe the 83 Sixers. At that point you're playing with house money already.

that is usually my view too, if a player is only better in super stacked teams then that is such a specific scenario that it is not worth much

[70sFan]

I don't agree with this, late 1970s era was very strong and full of solid teams. 1979/80 season is one of the strongest in history in terms of top tier teams and as I said - I have Seattle clearly 3rd in the league at worst.

You continue to make good points, but I need to move on to other things, so I just wanted to hit this.

You have a situation where a) the league gets considerably more teams, and b) no one seems to be able to dominate, and it becomes a question of whether this means that the entire league is super-strong, super-weak, or super-meh. In theory any of those is possible, and I welcome more thoughts on this from you, 70sFan, in particular.

This is one of those things where it's hard not to be shaped by what came later. If we'd never seen big SRSes again, then we'd probably say that such extreme dominance could only exist in an immature league, but we did see big SRSes soon enough, and when they came, the teams that dominated the new era were largely new cores rather than teams from the late '70s growing into domination.

While I'll acknowledge imperfect information and imperfect thinking on my part, I suppose what I'd say is that I'm generally someone who sees parity in sports that often have dominance as a sign of weakness at the top, and when I see that in the late '70s teams were winning titles with meh records, meh SRSes, and offensive attacks that lack any kind of top tier offensive threat, to me it paints a pretty clear picture.

Re: '79-80 strong and Seattle among strongest. I'm saying late '70s for a reason. Once LA & Boston really show up, I think they quickly surpass what Seattle was ever going to be...and then keep getting better after that.

Question: Do you think these Sonics at their best was better than the Johnson-Moncrief Bucks?

Thanks for the discussion, I think we should move on at this point

Yes, I do think Sonics were better than 1980s Bucks. Healthier and more consistent in postseason. Not a big gap though.

[Odinn21]

2 hours and 45 minutes left on the clock for this one.

---

5. Ray Allen 2005 - Allen in his prime doing more than just shooting

Couldn't fit the Williams/Johnson/Sikma core

After thinking about I'll change #5 to Gus Williams 1982.

When there's a change in your votes, please update your vote post.

[Odinn21]

The Thunder results;

Code: Select all

1. 6-3-0-0-0 / 81 points / 0.900 share / '14 Kevin Durant
2. 3-4-2-0-0 / 68 points / 0.756 share / '17 Russell Westbrook
3. 0-2-6-0-1 / 45 points / 0.500 share / '98 Gary Payton
4. 0-0-1-2-4 / 15 points / 0.167 share / '19 Paul George
5. 0-0-0-4-3 / 15 points / 0.167 share / '80 Gus Williams

6. 0-0-0-2-1 /  7 points / 0.078 share / '05 Ray Allen
7. 0-0-0-1-0 /  3 points / 0.033 share / '20 Chris Paul

Results on Google Sheet

[ShotCreator]

19 George - All-time defensive season for a wing while producing borderline elite volume creating offense.

17 Westbrook - GOAT offensive season in OKC Thunder history with defense that treads water enough for a #2 spot

16 Durant - Borderine elite offense with good defense

00 Payton - Borderline elite offense with so so defense

95 Detlef - Very high level two way season from the impact metrics I’ve seen

[VeggieBurger]

This thread just further goes to show how truly underrated Dale Ellis was:

1989 =
- 28 pts per game
- 51% shooting
- 48% 3pt on 4 attempts a game

Keep in mind this was during a time where 4 attempts would be like 10 attempts today. This guy was just an absolutely cold blooded shooter with one of the quickest releases ever. First to 1000 3s in NBA history. The guy was ahead of his time. He definitely has his shortcomings (eg he wasn't much of a shot creator/dribbler), but he definitely was one of the best shooters of time whose 1989 season is one of the most efficient ever if you factor the time he was doing that type of 3 point volume.