70sFan wrote:It's more of a narrative than reality though. Knicks offense wasn't good in that series and in fact, it wasn't nearly as close as some may believe when you look at point differential.
That's the whole problem - we assume that King had no help similary to how Iverson had no help in 2001. King had elite defensive team around him with excellent coach. We shouldn't focus too much on volume scoring. This team was literally the best defense in the league that year.
The reality is that both players went to Conference Semis and Dantley also played very well against the Suns. If you go by pace, the difference isn't big either:
Sure, King peaked higher in playoffs but his playoffs averages are inflated by his Pistons series when he faced all-offense and no defense Pistons in the first round. His scoring numbers against Celtics looks much more normal.
Then again, I could be wrong but I feel that Dantley gives you a little more outside of scoring. He was better offensive rebounder, more willing passer, better shooter and I don't think there is a huge difference on defense either (I'd actually take Pistons Dantley over King, but he was a bit lazy on that end in Utah).
No, I'm not really assuming anything tbh. I've been following the nba long enough to understand all the nuances and how teams are built and all that. I think its fair though to recognize how good King was and how he had two insanely good scoring nights to get the series to 7 games(against a Celtic team which destroyed Mil before winning the title) after he demolished Det for almost 43ppg on 60% shooting. Det's defense was closer to league average than the bottom that year as well. Regardless of how we portray all that though my larger point was that if you pair him up with Ewing and he stays healthy I think he'd be thought of as top 40-60 all time(obviously a ring gets him in the lower range). Close to Gervin though I think.
