RealGM Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #3 - 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal

OhayoKD · Post #21 » by **OhayoKD** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 7:32 am

Im gonna make a case for Hakeem as the #3 here by arguing he was clearly the best floor raiser of the 80's/90's.

Let's start with 86 where the rockets were 7-7 without him and were 40-20 without him in the rs before they smashed a 62 win team and then took the gsw of the 80's to 6 with hakeem upping all his box-stuff. That's jordan-level regular szn impact+elite playoff elevation as a 3rd year player.

In 88, Rockets were a 45 win team with him and a 10 win team without him and hakeem broke nba statistics in a first round exit before lebron rebroke them in 09.

In 92 the rockets went 2-10 without him and 40-30 with him, missed the playoffs because he missed team.

(That's a similar drop off to the cleveland cavs without lebron from 08-11 albeit on a worse team.)

Finally in 93 with basically the same team and some improvement from a rookie, The rockets won 55 GAMES with Hakeem playing every game. For comparison jordan's bulls won 27 games before they drafted him and won at a 25 win pace withtout him when he hurt his foot. But jordan could never get that team to more than 50 wins until pippen/phil jackson/rodman arrived.

For most of his prime hakeem was roughly a +14 plus/minus player and he elevated massively in the playoffs. In 94 and 95 he led teams that played like a 60 win team agaisnt playoff opponents. Hakeem's skillset may not have lent itself to 72 win teams or the like, but he was probably the best floor raiser of his era and he was still able to lead dominant teams when provided with spacing. Given that Hakeem seems to have been this crazily impactful player for most of his prime i'm going to vote multiple hakeem seasons here. Even 2nd year hakeem was probably on the same tier as peak shaq or jordan imo, I think from 92-95 his passing improved and he was capable of also leading dominant title teams so those three will be my picks here.

1. 93 Hakeem 7-7 team to 55 wins and elevated in the playoffs
2. 94 Hakeem
3. 95 Hakeem
I think u could probably also push for 86, 88, or 95 hakeem.

65 wilt
warriors were horrible without wilt but with wilt they often did marginally worse than the uber dominant celtics in the playoffs. Then he had a career year with the sixers and won. Also took bill's celts to 7 with his co-stars hurt the following season.
63 bill russell
took average teams to dynasties, won a ring with a bad team in 69. along with wilt better than any modern peak relative to era.

DraymondGold · Post #22 » by **DraymondGold** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 7:55 am

Going into this project, I assumed I'd be voting for Shaq as 3rd and Hakeem as a strong argument for top 5. But the more I look at the data and the previous discussions, the less sure I am that's the case. I'm starting to wonder whether Kareem, Duncan, Curry, and Wilt are all on a tier above Shaq and Hakeem. If you're still planning on voting for Shaq or Hakeem, I'd love to hear what your counterarguments are against the advanced stats we have!

1. The Statistical Case Against Shaq
1a) Curry vs Shaq: To my surprise, the data actually supports 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq. Here are the various statistics I've used before:

Spoiler:

In short, 2017 Curry beats 2000 Shaq in 8/14 of these total stats and in 5/5 of the playoff-specific stats. If we add healthy 2016 Curry to the mix, Curry beats Shaq in 11/14 stats. Adding 2001 Shaq to the mix does not help Shaq.

The only 3 stats where Shaq beats Curry are Goldstein's regular season RAPM (but not PIPM), WOWY (which is a particularly noisy stat in smaller samples), CORP (which is Ben Taylor's personal evaluation). Put simply, I’m not sure the data supports having peak Shaq clearly over peak Curry. Do any contextual factors help? Not enough as far as I can tell, but here they are:

Spoiler:

1b) Kareem vs Shaq: There's also an argument for Kareem > Shaq.

Spoiler:

Shaq wins 5/10, Kareem wins 5/10. Kareem wins 4/4 playoff-only numbers. Adding 2001 Shaq and 78 Kareem doesn’t make a difference. If you value the playoffs, Kareem has a surprisingly compelling case over peak Shaq. Check out 70sFan's previous comment for some fascinating film analysis!

2. The Statistical Case Against Hakeem
2a) Curry vs Hakeem. There's an even more compelling statistical case for Curry > Hakeem.

Spoiler:

2017 Curry beats 1994 Hakeem in 9/10 stats. If we add 2016 Curry and either 1993 or 1994 Hakeem (whichever helps Hakeem more), Curry beats Hakeem in 8/10 stats with 1 tie. In the four of the stats that aren’t old enough for Hakeem, Curry is at least 2nd all time in three of them.

****

If you still have Shaq or Hakeem next, but I'd love to hear what case there is to overcome the data!

DraymondGold · Post #23 » by **DraymondGold** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 8:04 am

DraymondGold wrote:Going into this project, I assumed I'd be voting for Shaq as 3rd and Hakeem as a strong argument for top 5. But the more I look at the data and the previous discussions, the less sure I am that's the case. I'm starting to wonder whether Kareem, Duncan, Curry, and Wilt are all on a tier above Shaq and Hakeem. If you're still planning on voting for Shaq or Hakeem, I'd love to hear what your counterarguments are against the advanced stats we have!

1. The Statistical Case Against Shaq
1a) Curry vs Shaq: To my surprise, the data actually supports 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq. Here are the various statistics I've used before:
Spoiler:
Plus minus data
Ai. AuPM: 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq (and healthy 2016 Curry (2nd all time) >> 2000 Shaq )
Aii. Postseason AuPM: 2017 Curry (2nd all time) >> 2000 Shaq (4th all time)
Bi. Goldstein RAPM: 2000 Shaq (5th all time) > 2017 Curry
Bii. Goldstein Playoff PIPM (3 years for sample size): 2017 Curry (8th all time) > 2000 Shaq
Additional plus minus stats: C. on/off: 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq
Additional plus minus stats: D. WOWY: 2000 Shaq > 2017 Curry
Additional plus minus stats: E. ESPN’s RPM: 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq
Additional plus minus stats: F. Backpicks’ CORP evaluation: 2000 Shaq (2nd all time) > 2017 Curry (though healthy 2016 Steph Curry is 4th all time)
 Box score-based data
Gi. Backpicks BPM: 2000 Shaq > 2017 Curry (but healthy 2016 Curry (2nd all time) > 2000 Shaq)
Gii. Postseason Backpicks BPM: 2017 Curry (4th all time) >> 2000 Shaq
Hi. BR’s BPM: 2000 Shaq > 2017 Curry (but healthy 2016 Curry (4th all time) > 2000 Shaq)
Hii. BR’s Postseason BPM: 2017 Curve > 2000 Shaq
Additional box score stats: Ii. WS/48: 2000 Shaq > 2017 Curry (but healthy 2016 Curry (5th all time) > 2000 Shaq)
Additional box score stats: Iii. Postseason WS/48: 2017 Curry > Shaq
In short, 2017 Curry beats 2000 Shaq in 8/14 of these total stats and in 5/5 of the playoff-specific stats. If we add healthy 2016 Curry to the mix, Curry beats Shaq in 11/14 stats. Adding 2001 Shaq to the mix does not help Shaq. The only 3 stats where Shaq beats Curry are Goldstein's regular season RAPM (but not PIPM), WOWY (which is a particularly noisy stat in smaller samples), CORP (which is Ben Taylor's personal evaluation). Put simply, I’m not sure the data supports having peak Shaq clearly over peak Curry. Do any contextual factors help? Not enough as far as I can tell, but here they are:
Spoiler:
possible contextual factors worth considering:
1. Scalability. If you value ceiling raising over floor raising, this supports 2017 Curry > 2000 Shaq.
2. Resilience. Shaq may have the advantage here over the course of his prime, but the data universally shows 2017 Curry as the better playoff performer over 2000 Shaq. Further studies have shown Curry does not play statistically worse in the playoffs when he’s healthy (which he is in 2017). Again, according to the data: Playoff 2017 Curry > Playoff 2000 Shaq. (though for overall primes, Shaq > Curry in resilience largely due to health). Speaking of health...
3. Health. Both Shaq and Curry are injury risks. Although Shaq is healthier in his prime, injuries are not a factor in their peak years.
4. Defense. Shaq is the better defender in a vacuum, but I’m not sure he’s that much better relative to position, and the data suggests the defensive advantage is not enough to put peak Shaq over peak Curry.
5. Fit. Both had favorable team circumstances, though in my estimation 2017 Curry had a more favorable fit than 2000 Shaq. Here's a point for Shaq!
6. Time machine. Hard to know for sure. People say Curry would suffer if forced to shoot less 3s in the past; on the other hand, if he found a coach that did let him shoot 3s in volume, his relative offensive advantage would be even greater. People say Shaq would be more valuable offensively playing bully-ball against smaller lineups today; on the other hand, higher pace (with Shaq’s poorer conditioning), stricter big man offensive fouling calls, and a massive increase in the importance of perimeter and pick and roll defense would decrease Shaq’s value.

1b) Kareem vs Shaq: There's also an argument for Kareem > Shaq.
Spoiler:
Plus-minus based stats:
A. AuPM (no data available for Kareem. Shaq 6th)
Bi. Goldstein RAPM / Historical Square2020 RAPM: 2000 Shaq(5th all time) > 1985 Kareem (6th all time) > Curry (But only a 41 game sample for Kareem and non peak).
Bii. Goldstein Playoff PIPM (3 years for sample size): 2017 Curry (8th all time) > 1977 Kareem (10th) > 2000 Shaq
Additional plus minus stats: C. on/off: (no data available for Kareem)
Additional plus minus stats: D. WOWY: Shaq > Kareem > Curry (not full stats for Curry)
Additional plus minus stats: E. ESPN’s RPM: (no data available for Kareem)
Additional plus minus stats: F. Backpicks’ CORP evaluation: Shaq > healthy Curry > Kareem

Box score-based data
Gi. Backpicks BPM: (healthy 2016 Curry) 2000 Shaq > (Curry) > 1977 Kareem (though 71/72 seasons compare)
Gii. Postseason Backpicks BPM: (2017 Curry 4th all time) > Kareem (7th all time) > 2000 Shaq
Additional box score stats: Hi. BR’s BPM: Kareem > Shaq (just barely)
Additional box score stats: Hii. BR’s Postseason BPM: Kareem > Shaq
Additional box score stats: Ii. WS/48: Shaq > Kareem (just barely)
Additional box score stats: Iii. Postseason WS/48: Kareem > Shaq
Shaq wins 5/10, Kareem wins 5/10. Kareem wins 4/4 playoff-only numbers. Adding 2001 Shaq and 78 Kareem doesn’t make a difference. If you value the playoffs, Kareem has a surprisingly compelling case over peak Shaq. Check out 70sFan's previous comment for some fascinating film analysis!

2. The Statistical Case Against Hakeem
2a) Curry vs Hakeem. There's an even more compelling statistical case for Curry > Hakeem.
Spoiler:
Plus-minus based stats:
Ai. AuPM: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem
Aii. Postseason AuPM: (no data for peak Hakeem. 2017 Curry 2nd all time)
Bi. Goldstein RAPM / Historical Square2020 RAPM: (no data for peak Hakeem. Partial data in 91/96 and 97 Hakeem are far below Curry, who’s 7th all time).
Bii. Goldstein Playoff PIPM (3 years for sample size): 2017 Curry (8th all time) > 1994 Hakeem
Additional plus minus stats: C. on/off: (no data available for Hakeem. Curry 1st all time)
Additional plus minus stats: D. WOWY: 1993-1995 Hakeem > 2016-2017 Curry (not sure about full prime WOWY. I brought in 16 Curry because Ben hasn't finished publishing Curry's mid/post-2017 WOWY numbers yet).
Additional plus minus stats: E. ESPN’s RPM: (no data for Hakeem. 16 Curry 2nd all time)
Additional plus minus stats: F. Backpicks’ CORP evaluation: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem (healthy 2016 Steph Curry and 1993 Hakeem tied 4th all time)

Box score-based data
Gi. Backpicks BPM: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem (and healthy 2016 Curry is 2nd all time)
Gii. Postseason Backpicks BPM: 2017 Curry (4th all time) > 1994 Hakeem
Hi. BR’s BPM: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem (but healthy 2016 Curry (4th all time) > 2003 Duncan)
Hii. BR’s Postseason BPM: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem
Additional box score stats: Ii. WS/48: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem (but healthy 2016 Curry (3rd all time) > 2003 Duncan)
Additional box score stats: Iii. Postseason WS/48: 2017 Curry > 1994 Hakeem
2017 Curry beats 1994 Hakeem in 9/10 stats. If we add 2016 Curry and either 1993 or 1994 Hakeem (whichever helps Hakeem more), Curry beats Hakeem in 8/10 stats with 1 tie. In the four of the stats that aren’t old enough for Hakeem, Curry is at least 2nd all time in three of them.

****

If you still have Shaq or Hakeem next, but I'd love to hear what case there is to overcome the data!

If any of this data is compelling and you're wondering who to vote for next, here's the same analysis on the rest of this tier of peaks. I'm again using Curry as a barometer, just for consistency. Let me know what you think!

3. Curry vs Kareem:

Spoiler:

1977 Kareem and 2017 Curry are tied 3–3 in my preferred stats. If we include the additional stats, Kareem wins 6-4. The playoff-only stats are tied 2-2. In all four of the stats that aren’t old enough for Kareem, Curry is either 1st or 2nd all time. If we add 2016 Curry and either 1976 or 1978 Kareem (whichever helps Kareem more), Curry beats Kareem by 6 to 4 stats.

4. Curry vs Duncan:

Spoiler:

Duncan beats Curry 7 stats to 6, including 3 to 2 postseason stats and 1 postseason tie. If we add 2016 Curry and either 2003 or 2004 Duncan (whichever helps Duncan more), Curry beats Duncan 8 to 5. Like Kareem, it seems the single year is close but slightly favors the big man, while the larger sample favors Curry.

5. Curry vs Wilt:

Spoiler:

We barely have any metrics to compare vs Wilt. Of the limited sample we do have, Wilt and Curry are tied 3 to 3. Curry leads in the postseason-only stats. If we add a neighboring year (2016 for Curry and either 1966 or 1968 for Wilt), Curry comes out on top in 5/6 stats. Still, we’re missing the majority of my preferred stats, so there's more uncertainty here.

LukaTheGOAT · Post #24 » by **LukaTheGOAT** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 8:25 am

MyUniBroDavis wrote:Where Jokic/curry/Giannis/Durant rank is gonna be interesting

With Jokic, it depends on how bad you think the offense would have been without him + how much you think his playoff defense being a liability in certain matchups matter

With Curry, if you think his 2022 year dispelled the notion he can’t lead a playoff offense I think going with his 2017 season in the 5-10 range is fair

With Giannis, I think it depends on how much you think the regression of his regular season defensive impact from 2019 and 2020 vs 2021 and 2022 is a defensive role thing, and a playoff effort thing on that end

Giannis is probably the most interesting one because it’s not as if his offensive load changed either.

His 2020 year defensively IIRC really stands out in a three point era where defensive impact isn’t really as high as it used to be, for various reasons, and more importantly he is versatile in that end. His 2020 year defense compares favorably to the Duncan and pre Boston garnett years relative to league average in RAPM (in fact I think it compares to Garnett’s years even in Boston although I’d have to check that). Them being a -7.7 dfrtg relative to league abg team in defense is also pretty significant

If you take his 2020 defense as his “ability”, (or 2019 for that matter), you have a 30-13-5 guy on great effeciency with upper tier DPOY level defense, of course if you don’t that drops him considerably

As it stands I think the two things that go against him are, that he does have some limitations in the half court, which is fair but he was great in level of play in 2020, and he did face a Celtics team hilariously equipped to defend him and did quite well overall (and his off ball skills as a roll man and finisher, as well as someone that if you help off of he will catch it with space and drive and kill you) should still provide alot of value under optimal coaching

The other thing is him missing the 2 games in the ECF with injury. But it’s one of those things like, if we are docking someone for missing 2 games off an injury that kept him out of the first half of training camp 3 months later, and him coming back in the finals a week after the injury and putting in one of the absolute greatest finals performances of all time…

There’s a level of

“ok well under my hypothetical if he had done this in 1865 with teammates chuckle fincetone and George Lopez when it was raining my calculations tell me there would be a 65% chance it worked out”

And there’s a level of

Its basketball, what he did was bad*** asf and epic, and practically speaking they won

I’m in the latter camp, and I think it’s pretty reasonable

With Curry it’s interesting, the point against him I think is his potential ability to lead playoff offenses because he’s probably the best offensive RS player ever throughout his peak in context, and I wonder if the past year where the playoff offense was great dispelled any notions

Jokic it’s gonna be how big of a deal is his playoff defense being exploitable in certain matchups to you, and AD is based on how much you care about playoffs vs RS

Off the bat my assumption is Giannis and Curry would be in the 5-15 range for me and Jokic and AD would be in the 15-25 range for me

2017 Curry leading the best offense in nba history come playoff time with him on the court, while himself being great shooting wise throughout, and Giannis being legendary in the playoffs speaks to me a lot. I can pretty reasonably see an argument for both of them in the upper tiers to be honest.

When evaluating giannis vs guys like Duncan/garnett, I do think the defensive gap between his DPOY seasons and their defense during their peaks isn’t nearly as much as people tend to believe. I feel there’s an assumption that the best guys today are worse defenders, vs that defensive impact today in general is lessened. I wouldn’t be surprised if you place a guy like Gobert in previous eras and he appears as a mutombo type, more mobile and switchy less interior maybe. I think Giannis peaked higher on that end than gobert.

It’s really interesting when you think of 2019 or 2020 Giannis on defense, there’s not much counter evidence, the teams defense were about league average in the 20 or so games he missed especially considering competition iirc between those two years and ATG (-5.2 and -7.7)
(1999 Spurs were -7.2, 2008 Celtics were -8.6 for comparison). Especially impressive when you consider that the defense iirc was a tad better than league average in the 20 ish games he didn’t play, and that bud is even more annoying than Kerr with his rotations

I’m of the opinion that any difference between 2021 or 2022 Giannis and 2019 or 2020 Giannis defensively is a situation of either deployment (if someone could link me to the article on this one that’d be great) or RS effort, it’s the same player and there isn’t much different from an ability standpoint that would make me thing he was worse as a player on that end

It’s hard to get proof for his defense stepping up in the playoffs aside from his raw impact stats on that end seeming a bit better

In any case, I think if you view 2021 or 2022 Giannis as defensively the same as his 2020 or 2019 season, you can make a sufficient argument for him being in a really high tier, and people are already high on his offense

Regarding Giannis' defensive impact compared to past greats:

Giannis' peak

D-PIPM-4.27 (Hakeem had 4 seasons better than this, Duncan had 2, Garnett had 2, Robinson had 3)

D-RAPTOR-3.4 (Robinson had 13 better seasons than this, Hakeem had 12, Garnett had 9, Duncan had 9).

Not saying this is the end all be all, but it is suggestive that GIannis' peak impact on D might lag behind.

Dutchball97 · Post #25 » by **Dutchball97** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 8:55 am

1. 2000 Shaquille O'Neal - Near unanimous MVP who went on a dominant play-off run capped off by arguably the most dominant finals performance ever. The Lakers were a pretty well rounded team but not incredibly stacked. Even Kobe wasn't quite at his peak either. What definitely works in Shaq's favor is their strength of competition in the post-season. They faced the 7th, 4th, 2nd and 6th highest SRS teams despite being the 1st seed, making this one of the hardest roads to a title by a top seed. I get that some people might have some other guys over him as a "better player" but when looking at the best seasons 2000 Shaq is most certainly up there with the best of them.

2. 1967 Wilt Chamberlain - An insanely dominant season all around that was difficult to keep below Shaq and LeBron. His play-off left me with some questions about the effectiveness of Wilt's scoring though as the more he shot, the more likely the 76ers were to drop a game. He was also very poor in free throw shooting during the finals, even more so than Shaq. I can't drop it too much though as Wilt was incredibly effective on both sides of the floor. The 76ers also had massive success with 68 wins followed by an imposing title run with Wilt as the clear leading player on the team.

3. 2003 Tim Duncan - Clear driving force for his team on both sides of the ball. Followed up a strong MVP regular season with imo probably the most impressive post-season carryjob. This was razor close with 94 Hakeem but I'm more impressed by Duncan's offensive resiliency, especially against tough defenses. Defensively it's a wash although if I had to pick one I'd give the slight edge to Hakeem. I think Duncan was definitely better in the regular season as well and faced marginally stronger competition in the play-offs.

Next up would be 94 Hakeem > 64 Russell > 65 Russell > 86 Bird

ardee · Post #26 » by **ardee** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:41 am

70sFan wrote:
ardee wrote:Thank you, good sir.

I really still can't decide, but I think for now I'm gonna go with Hakeem and not overthink too much because 1) I think he's the best defender of the 3 and 2) that jump in all offensive stats going into the Playoffs is very impressive to me, especially given his lack of offensive support and the fact that he played a historic Knicks defense in the Finals.

I used to have Wilt at 1 but I really think he might be down to 6 for me this project. Trying to be as objective as possible.

No problem! Two questions to you:

1. How do you see Hakeem's passing vs the rest? To me he's by far the worst passers among top tier centers and I think it clearly limits the offense led by Olajuwon.

2. What made you become lower on Wilt than before?

Carrying from the last thread:

1. As far as I can tell, peak Hakeem's passing wasn't that much worse than the others in his tier. It WAS a lacking area of his game earlier in his career but the narrative seems to be that he fixed that in '93 and it was one of the things that took him up a level. He may well be worse than Kareem/Duncan/Wilt on that end but I don't think it's a huge gap and he's definitely the best defender of the lot by a similar margin.

2. I'm not. I just am higher on Hakeem/Duncan in particular. My argument for Wilt was that he did EVERYTHING that run, which is true... but Hakeem/Duncan can be said to have done the same in '94 and '03 respectively.

I definitely think there is an argument for Wilt at the 4 spot still... but I watched some Olajuwon highlights recently and man what an absolute monster he was, so my vote may be colored by that haha.

I know you are going with Kareem here, but how do you rank Duncan/Hakeem/Wilt?

MyUniBroDavis · Post #27 » by **MyUniBroDavis** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 10:16 am

LukaTheGOAT wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Where Jokic/curry/Giannis/Durant rank is gonna be interesting

With Jokic, it depends on how bad you think the offense would have been without him + how much you think his playoff defense being a liability in certain matchups matter

With Curry, if you think his 2022 year dispelled the notion he can’t lead a playoff offense I think going with his 2017 season in the 5-10 range is fair

With Giannis, I think it depends on how much you think the regression of his regular season defensive impact from 2019 and 2020 vs 2021 and 2022 is a defensive role thing, and a playoff effort thing on that end

Giannis is probably the most interesting one because it’s not as if his offensive load changed either.

His 2020 year defensively IIRC really stands out in a three point era where defensive impact isn’t really as high as it used to be, for various reasons, and more importantly he is versatile in that end. His 2020 year defense compares favorably to the Duncan and pre Boston garnett years relative to league average in RAPM (in fact I think it compares to Garnett’s years even in Boston although I’d have to check that). Them being a -7.7 dfrtg relative to league abg team in defense is also pretty significant

If you take his 2020 defense as his “ability”, (or 2019 for that matter), you have a 30-13-5 guy on great effeciency with upper tier DPOY level defense, of course if you don’t that drops him considerably

As it stands I think the two things that go against him are, that he does have some limitations in the half court, which is fair but he was great in level of play in 2020, and he did face a Celtics team hilariously equipped to defend him and did quite well overall (and his off ball skills as a roll man and finisher, as well as someone that if you help off of he will catch it with space and drive and kill you) should still provide alot of value under optimal coaching

The other thing is him missing the 2 games in the ECF with injury. But it’s one of those things like, if we are docking someone for missing 2 games off an injury that kept him out of the first half of training camp 3 months later, and him coming back in the finals a week after the injury and putting in one of the absolute greatest finals performances of all time…

There’s a level of

“ok well under my hypothetical if he had done this in 1865 with teammates chuckle fincetone and George Lopez when it was raining my calculations tell me there would be a 65% chance it worked out”

And there’s a level of

Its basketball, what he did was bad*** asf and epic, and practically speaking they won

I’m in the latter camp, and I think it’s pretty reasonable

With Curry it’s interesting, the point against him I think is his potential ability to lead playoff offenses because he’s probably the best offensive RS player ever throughout his peak in context, and I wonder if the past year where the playoff offense was great dispelled any notions

Jokic it’s gonna be how big of a deal is his playoff defense being exploitable in certain matchups to you, and AD is based on how much you care about playoffs vs RS

Off the bat my assumption is Giannis and Curry would be in the 5-15 range for me and Jokic and AD would be in the 15-25 range for me

2017 Curry leading the best offense in nba history come playoff time with him on the court, while himself being great shooting wise throughout, and Giannis being legendary in the playoffs speaks to me a lot. I can pretty reasonably see an argument for both of them in the upper tiers to be honest.

When evaluating giannis vs guys like Duncan/garnett, I do think the defensive gap between his DPOY seasons and their defense during their peaks isn’t nearly as much as people tend to believe. I feel there’s an assumption that the best guys today are worse defenders, vs that defensive impact today in general is lessened. I wouldn’t be surprised if you place a guy like Gobert in previous eras and he appears as a mutombo type, more mobile and switchy less interior maybe. I think Giannis peaked higher on that end than gobert.

It’s really interesting when you think of 2019 or 2020 Giannis on defense, there’s not much counter evidence, the teams defense were about league average in the 20 or so games he missed especially considering competition iirc between those two years and ATG (-5.2 and -7.7)
(1999 Spurs were -7.2, 2008 Celtics were -8.6 for comparison). Especially impressive when you consider that the defense iirc was a tad better than league average in the 20 ish games he didn’t play, and that bud is even more annoying than Kerr with his rotations

I’m of the opinion that any difference between 2021 or 2022 Giannis and 2019 or 2020 Giannis defensively is a situation of either deployment (if someone could link me to the article on this one that’d be great) or RS effort, it’s the same player and there isn’t much different from an ability standpoint that would make me thing he was worse as a player on that end

It’s hard to get proof for his defense stepping up in the playoffs aside from his raw impact stats on that end seeming a bit better

In any case, I think if you view 2021 or 2022 Giannis as defensively the same as his 2020 or 2019 season, you can make a sufficient argument for him being in a really high tier, and people are already high on his offense

Regarding Giannis' defensive impact compared to past greats:

Giannis' peak

D-PIPM-4.27 (Hakeem had 4 seasons better than this, Duncan had 2, Garnett had 2, Robinson had 3)

D-RAPTOR-3.4 (Robinson had 13 better seasons than this, Hakeem had 12, Garnett had 9, Duncan had 9).

Not saying this is the end all be all, but it is suggestive that GIannis' peak impact on D might lag behind.

I think of RAPTOR as the same way I think of what I throw in the garbage lol

Where’d you get PIPM data isn’t it the wizards now? I more mean relative to the league but I recall it heavily weighs blocked shots into its box score prior which would explain why giannis might not appear so good on it

70sFan · Post #28 » by **70sFan** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 10:35 am

Doctor MJ wrote:So on offense, I should be clear that I'm thinking about the '94-95 post-season. Feel free to say some stuff about why that's not a fair sample - that's clearly a concern.

Second, I love that you're bringing up other players for comparison, and in particular I'm glad you're bringing up Reggie Miller, who I don't think most would realize deserves such consideration, but I sure think he does. In my post I said Hakeem had an argument not that it was definitive, and yeah, Miller has an argument for best offensive player basically for the duration of the Jordan Hiatus.

I must say that I'm pretty influenced by the combination of a) Hakeem's volume and b) the Rockets' ORtg.

On (a)

In '94-95, here are the players with the most 30 point playoff games:

1. Olajuwon 16 (in 22 games)
2. Jordan 5 (in 10 games)
(tie) Miller 5 (in 17 games)
(tie) Robinson 5 (in 15 games)
5. Shaq 4 (in 21 games)

Barkley 3 (in 10 games)

So, we're talking about a post-season where Olajuwon was just far more likely to break 30 points on any given night than anyone else.

Let me also note that 16 is the record in NBA history, matched only by Jordan in '91-92, who also played 22 games that year.

Further, the list is largely dominated by perimeter players. For perspective, there are 20 post-seasons in history where players have scored 30+ in 12 or more games (earliest being Baylor in '61-62, 12 in 13 games, which shows why there's going to be a bias toward more recent players who play longer post-seasons). Here are the seasons that make that list as bigs:

1. Olajuwon '94-95 (16 in 22 games)
9. Giannis '20-21 (13 in 21 games)
(tie) Shaq '99-00 (13 in 23 games)

/end

Now, I'd be misleading if I didn't include some other all-time bigs with their top performances by this (very coarse) metric:

Kareem '79-80 (11 in 15 games) (Also in '73-74 in 16 games)
Wilt '61-62 & '63-64 (9 in 12 both times)
Mikan '49-50 (8 in 12)

Of course everyone should consider all sides of this sort of data, along with its weaknesses, but the thing that strikes me here is this:

It's unusual for a player to so reliably score beyond that threshold, and all the more so among bigs. While what I present probably would not convince a Kareem or Wilt supporter that Olajuwon's offense was more impressive, it at least makes clear why he belongs in a certain conversation.

I think the problem with this comparison is that we don't take into account shooting efficiency and that's where Hakeem was clearly behind the rest, even in 1995:

1995 Hakeem: 31.2 pts/75 on +2.0 rTS%

2021 Giannis: 29.0 pts/75 on +3.1 rTS%
2000 Shaq: 31.2 pts/75 on +6.7 rTS%
1980 Kareem: 29.6 pts/75 on +9.9 rTS%
1974 Kareem: 27.0 pts/75 on +9.0 rTS%
1962 Wilt: 23.6 pts/75 on +2.9 rTS%
1964 Wilt: 28.9 pts/75 on +8.1 rTS%

Hakeem scored on crazy volume in that run, but he wasn't particulary efficient - only 1962 Wilt run is below +3.0 rTS% here, with Kareem, Shaq and 1964 Wilt having massive efficiency advantage.

It's not to criticize Hakeem for what he did, because it worked but using raw volume numbers isn't the best possible evaluation of scoring value, especially when Hakeem clearly lacks in other areas. If we go by Ben Taylor's ScoringValue stat, Hakeem doesn't look the best:

1995 Hakeem: 1.7

2021 Giannis: 1.3
2000 Shaq: 2.4
1980 Kareem: 3.1
1974 Kareem: 2.9
1962 Wilt: 1.9
1964 Wilt: 2.8

Again, clearly worse than Shaq, Kareem and 1964 Wilt. I get that he scored a lot and drew a lot of attention, but he didn't make Rockets players shoot 40% from three point line throughout the postseason. If he's not the best scorer here (and he's not), then what's his case for the best offensive player here? He's clearly the worst passer, clearly worse offensive rebounder than Wilt/Shaq and his off-ball game is probably the worst as well (depending on how you view Wilt in this apsect).

His defense can shorten the gap, so I don't think having his as number one center is unjustifiable. I don't think his case on offense though.

(b)

I always try to look at team success context when evaluating players. When you do this, of course, winning bias is a concern, but that doesn't mean not doing this is without harm.

In particular, something that's been a recurring theme throughout the history of the big man in basketball is a situation where the big man scores a lot, and even scores a lot on high relative efficiency, and yet the team offense is stagnant. (This is literally something the Minneapolis Lakers had to work to figure out, because at first the team got worse when Mikan joined despite him putting up eye-popping numbers.) (I'll add that this is a criticism I have had of the WNBA since I started turning a more critical eye over there.)

And so in '94-95, we have these Rockets. 115.2 ORtg in the playoffs - a higher mark than anyone achieved in the regular season.

Looking at their others against mutual opponents, the Rockets have a massive ORtg edge over those who played against their Western Conference opponents, and a massive edge over all who played the Orlando Magic...except Miller's Indiana Pacers.

Considering more closely the Pacers, let's remember that Miller was the original Steph Curry and Shaq was Shaq. This would not be the first nor the last time a Shaq-defense struggled with a Reggie-offense, and while Reggie deserves a lot of credit for it, I think the matchup edge for Reggie is pretty clear - bigs too big get exploited by outside shooting.

The Rockets of course also had a lot of outside shooting, and that was certainly key to their success...but if you're the Magic, you certainly think you're more prepared for an interior big-oriented offense, and the Dream-centered offense proved quite effective there.

My question would be - why do you think Hakeem Rockets never replicated such a successful offensive run before 1995? Do you think it was related to Olajuwon's improvement? If so, what kind of improvemet?

If not, then how much should we give Hakeem credit for that offense vs Rockets being very hot from three point line?

While I do hear the criticisms about Hakeem's passing limitations, those would bother me a lot more if I hadn't seen how well things seemed to thrive once you started embracing spacing around him.

Again, this is something I'm not sure how to interpret. It seems that Rockets offense looks great when their shooters made shots at unusal rate, but they weren't anything special in most seasons.

Re: Shaq. It concerns me that the Magic were one of the worse offensive performers against the Rockets relative to the Suns and Jazz. While those other teams were loaded to be sure, so were the Magic. Between Penny, Grant, and a perspective on spacing that like the Rockets was very ahead of its time, to me this was about as good of an offensive supporting cast as Shaq could ask for, and it just doesn't seem like it reached a ceiling up there with the state of the art at the time.

That's 4 games sample though, don't you think it's not enough to make a clear conclusion from that? Especially since Shaq didn't really play badly.

70sFan · Post #29 » by **70sFan** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 11:50 am

Dutchball97 wrote:By the time I've finally decided which Kareem season I see as his peak he'll likely have been voted in already. So I've got 2000 Shaq and 1967 Wilt as my first two choices on my ballot and I expected to go with 1971 Kareem as my third choice but I'm not so sure. With these top level seasons I think there is very little seperating them so I'm looking for the most complete season with the least amount of flaws. Kareem won MVP in 1971 as the clear best player in the regular season and went on a dominant run to the title. The thing is I'm not as impressed by his post-season run anymore as that Bucks team was very stacked, while the opposition they faced was extremely lackluster. This might just be the easiest road to a ring ever. The Warriors and Bullets were middling teams, while the Lakers were good but were without West AND Baylor that year. Somehow Kareem still managed to take a step down from his regular season form.

I mean, Kareem's production in 1971 postseason looks notably lower despite facing mediocre competition as a whole, but:

1. Bucks were utterly dominant and Kareem anchored all-time great defense during that run (-9.5 rDRtg), while their offense didn't take a hit either (+4.5 rORtg).

2. Maybe opposing teams weren't super impressive, but Kareem faced Nate Thurmond, Wilt Chamberlain and Wes Unseld at his position. That's extremely tough h2h competition, so even though overall teams weren't super strong, Kareem's individual production was definitely influenced by facing three of the best centers ever.

It seems to be between 71 and 77 looking at the votes so far but I'm also much lower on 77 than most. It's just one of those seasons like 62 Wilt, 88 MJ and 09 LeBron where we're faced with complete outlier statistical (boxscore) impact where the results don't match the dominance. I've been vocal about Wilt's insane volume scoring early in his career not always being the best way to go about winning as a team and with 1977 Kareem getting swept by the Blazers I'm just questioning whether they couldn't have made it at least a bit more competitive.

1. That was overall Kareem's best performance, but it's not "complete statistical outlier". Kareem had a lot of elite postseason runs, which I already mentioned in previous thread.

2. If you question how possible it was to beat Portland, you should watch these games. Three out of four are available in basically complete form. If you still think that Kareem should have done more in this series after watching it, then I'd love to hear specifics.

I don't see the 1977 Blazers as such an impossibly good team that of course Kareem at his best couldn't take a game off them. There is an argument to be made that similarly like Jokic this season, Kareem had just about no help but we have seasons from Hakeem and Duncan where they had little help and still won the title while beating good teams along the way.

Well, comparing 1994 Rockets or 2003 Spurs to 1977 Lakers in terms of help is either lack of deeper analysis from your part, or sheer dishonesty. I'm almost sure that it's not the latter, so I think you should look at that 1977 Lakers playoff roster and watch these games closely. LAL had no guard rotation with Allen missing games and playing poorly, they also missed their 2nd best defender for the playoffs. I'd argue it was a worse roster than 2022 Nuggets (only for postseason) and Duncan/Hakeem definitely wouldn't have won anything with such roster.

1974 and 1980 aren't as spectacular in the regular season but overall I think they might be more complete seasons than either 71 or 77. I'm really pulling a brainmuscle here to find an answer for a question that will be answered by the time I've got there but it just goes to show that Kareem is such a problematic player to pick a peak for as someone who judges peak by best season.

I think you focus a bit too much on "completeness" of the season (even though I said myself that I believe in such term). Kareem was clearly better player in 1977 than 1980 and I have no doubt in my mind that he'd have won the title in 1980 while being 3 years younger.

1974 has a strong case for Kareem's peak, but definitely not 1980.

70sFan · Post #30 » by **70sFan** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 12:00 pm

Thanks for the reply!

ardee wrote:Carrying from the last thread:

1. As far as I can tell, peak Hakeem's passing wasn't that much worse than the others in his tier. It WAS a lacking area of his game earlier in his career but the narrative seems to be that he fixed that in '93 and it was one of the things that took him up a level. He may well be worse than Kareem/Duncan/Wilt on that end but I don't think it's a huge gap and he's definitely the best defender of the lot by a similar margin.

2. I'm not. I just am higher on Hakeem/Duncan in particular. My argument for Wilt was that he did EVERYTHING that run, which is true... but Hakeem/Duncan can be said to have done the same in '94 and '03 respectively.

I definitely think there is an argument for Wilt at the 4 spot still... but I watched some Olajuwon highlights recently and man what an absolute monster he was, so my vote may be colored by that haha.

I know you are going with Kareem here, but how do you rank Duncan/Hakeem/Wilt?

1. Well, based on my film studies, the gap is still quite big. Tomjanovic likely saw Hakeem's weakness as a decision maker, so he decided to give him as much time and as much space as possible to make the right decision. Rockets offense was built the way to maximize the number of easy reads for Hakeem and it made him look notably better as a passer than ever before, but the reality is that he still missed a lot of more advanced reads and he still took a lot of shots he shouldn't have. For example, crosscourt passes from the post were normal thing for guys like Kareem or Shaq, but Hakeem rarely even looked for such opportunities. When teams doubled him hard with the closest man, Hakeem could take advantage out of it more and more frequently as he matured under Rudy T, but when he faced more sophisticated attempts to swarm him, he couldn't make it fluid like other top post players.

The truth is that it was more about the system that helped Hakeem than his own improvement. His approach was different and he became more willing passer, but he never fixed it. I'd say that he was inarguably worse than the rest and it's visible when you watch games closely.

2. Fair enough, but you did change your evaluation of these three seasons. Is it simply because you started appreciating Duncan/Hakeem more, or have you found some holes in Wilt's peak resume?

3. It's always cool to watch highlights, I wouldn't base the voting on it (not saying you did). Hakeem looks probably more impressive in highlight reel than any other center in the history of the league, but it doesn't mean he's the best. You won't find his biggest weaknesses on such film - like passing for example.

4. How I rank Duncan/Hakeem/Wilt - I still don't know, I'd have to check some of my tracking numbers for Wilt and Hakeem (I haven't tracked Duncan yet). They are all incredibly close to me and I have them as my next 3 players to vote (with Shaq or Russell probably being next).

Dutchball97 · Post #31 » by **Dutchball97** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 12:32 pm

70sFan wrote:I mean, Kareem's production in 1971 postseason looks notably lower despite facing mediocre competition as a whole, but:

1. Bucks were utterly dominant and Kareem anchored all-time great defense during that run (-9.5 rDRtg), while their offense didn't take a hit either (+4.5 rORtg).

2. Maybe opposing teams weren't super impressive, but Kareem faced Nate Thurmond, Wilt Chamberlain and Wes Unseld at his position. That's extremely tough h2h competition, so even though overall teams weren't super strong, Kareem's individual production was definitely influenced by facing three of the best centers ever.

I'm not saying Kareem crumbled or that he should've dropped 60 points on them every game but you've got to understand in these comparisons between all-time greats that when one player shows a weakness somewhere, no matter how small, where someone else doesn't that could be enough of a difference.

70sFan wrote:1. That was overall Kareem's best performance, but it's not "complete statistical outlier". Kareem had a lot of elite postseason runs, which I already mentioned in previous thread.

2. If you question how possible it was to beat Portland, you should watch these games. Three out of four are available in basically complete form. If you still think that Kareem should have done more in this series after watching it, then I'd love to hear specifics.

It's as much of a statistical outlier as the other seasons I mentioned though. Wilt, MJ and LeBron all have multiple seasons of extremely high level play as well but it's no coincidence all of them had their statistical peaks on weak teams where they had to do pretty much everything and none of those seasons are generally seen as their peak.

70sFan wrote:Well, comparing 1994 Rockets or 2003 Spurs to 1977 Lakers in terms of help is either lack of deeper analysis from your part, or sheer dishonesty. I'm almost sure that it's not the latter, so I think you should look at that 1977 Lakers playoff roster and watch these games closely. LAL had no guard rotation with Allen missing games and playing poorly, they also missed their 2nd best defender for the playoffs. I'd argue it was a worse roster than 2022 Nuggets (only for postseason) and Duncan/Hakeem definitely wouldn't have won anything with such roster.

Maybe my wording wasn't clear enough but I didn't say Hakeem and Duncan had just as little to work with as Kareem did in 1977. I didn't mean to say if Kareem was really as good as you say that he should've beat the Blazers. Where my problem comes in is where you say Duncan and Hakeem definitely wouldn't have won anything but who knows, maybe as better defensive anchors they could've made it closer. You're also implying with that statement that Kareem would've been able to get past the Blazers if he had a supporting cast along the lines of the 94 Rockets/03 Spurs, which is pure speculation, OR you're saying the 77 Blazers are at least a clear tier ahead of anyone Hakeem and Duncan faced during their runs, which I'm also going to have to disagree on.

Could Kareem have won in 77 with a slightly more capable supporting cast? Yeah, probably. Is it something we should take for certain? I don't think so. It's the same old KG discussion pretty much where you either focus on what he could've done or what he actually did.

70sFan wrote:I think you focus a bit too much on "completeness" of the season (even though I said myself that I believe in such term). Kareem was clearly better player in 1977 than 1980 and I have no doubt in my mind that he'd have won the title in 1980 while being 3 years younger.

1974 has a strong case for Kareem's peak, but definitely not 1980.

Possibly but I personally find looking for seasons that were as well rounded or "flawless" as possible to be more productive than trying to split statistical hairs across wildly different eras. As to your point, I do agree 77 Kareem would've most likely won the title in the place of 80 Kareem but would he have been able to do that the way he played in 1977 or would he have to play more team oriented in a way that produces better results but does slightly lower his statistical output? I'm leaning towards the latter. That's why I'm not as high on these statistical monster years on teams devoid of talent and also why I view 91 MJ on a tier of it's own because of the insane statistical output on a great team.

Dr Positivity · Post #32 » by **Dr Positivity** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:28 pm

I'd need someone who's 20-40 years before Shaq to have a clearly more dominant peak for their era to vote them over him, otherwise I think I think doing it against more modern talent and strategy makes up the difference. I don't see that right now, you could argue Kareem for 77 or Wilt for 67 possibly could be better, but not by that much. The other alternative is a player more modern than Shaq such as Giannis or Curry who's not as dominant as him, but close enough that 15-20 year gap makes up for it. My only issue is their regular season and playoff peaks don't quite line up. Still, I think it's an argument that 2021 Giannis is as impressive as 2000 Shaq if you believe 2021 vs 2000 difference is meaningful.

LukaTheGOAT · Post #33 » by **LukaTheGOAT** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 7:24 pm

MyUniBroDavis wrote:
LukaTheGOAT wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:Where Jokic/curry/Giannis/Durant rank is gonna be interesting

With Jokic, it depends on how bad you think the offense would have been without him + how much you think his playoff defense being a liability in certain matchups matter

With Curry, if you think his 2022 year dispelled the notion he can’t lead a playoff offense I think going with his 2017 season in the 5-10 range is fair

With Giannis, I think it depends on how much you think the regression of his regular season defensive impact from 2019 and 2020 vs 2021 and 2022 is a defensive role thing, and a playoff effort thing on that end

Giannis is probably the most interesting one because it’s not as if his offensive load changed either.

His 2020 year defensively IIRC really stands out in a three point era where defensive impact isn’t really as high as it used to be, for various reasons, and more importantly he is versatile in that end. His 2020 year defense compares favorably to the Duncan and pre Boston garnett years relative to league average in RAPM (in fact I think it compares to Garnett’s years even in Boston although I’d have to check that). Them being a -7.7 dfrtg relative to league abg team in defense is also pretty significant

If you take his 2020 defense as his “ability”, (or 2019 for that matter), you have a 30-13-5 guy on great effeciency with upper tier DPOY level defense, of course if you don’t that drops him considerably

As it stands I think the two things that go against him are, that he does have some limitations in the half court, which is fair but he was great in level of play in 2020, and he did face a Celtics team hilariously equipped to defend him and did quite well overall (and his off ball skills as a roll man and finisher, as well as someone that if you help off of he will catch it with space and drive and kill you) should still provide alot of value under optimal coaching

The other thing is him missing the 2 games in the ECF with injury. But it’s one of those things like, if we are docking someone for missing 2 games off an injury that kept him out of the first half of training camp 3 months later, and him coming back in the finals a week after the injury and putting in one of the absolute greatest finals performances of all time…

There’s a level of

“ok well under my hypothetical if he had done this in 1865 with teammates chuckle fincetone and George Lopez when it was raining my calculations tell me there would be a 65% chance it worked out”

And there’s a level of

Its basketball, what he did was bad*** asf and epic, and practically speaking they won

I’m in the latter camp, and I think it’s pretty reasonable

With Curry it’s interesting, the point against him I think is his potential ability to lead playoff offenses because he’s probably the best offensive RS player ever throughout his peak in context, and I wonder if the past year where the playoff offense was great dispelled any notions

Jokic it’s gonna be how big of a deal is his playoff defense being exploitable in certain matchups to you, and AD is based on how much you care about playoffs vs RS

Off the bat my assumption is Giannis and Curry would be in the 5-15 range for me and Jokic and AD would be in the 15-25 range for me

2017 Curry leading the best offense in nba history come playoff time with him on the court, while himself being great shooting wise throughout, and Giannis being legendary in the playoffs speaks to me a lot. I can pretty reasonably see an argument for both of them in the upper tiers to be honest.

When evaluating giannis vs guys like Duncan/garnett, I do think the defensive gap between his DPOY seasons and their defense during their peaks isn’t nearly as much as people tend to believe. I feel there’s an assumption that the best guys today are worse defenders, vs that defensive impact today in general is lessened. I wouldn’t be surprised if you place a guy like Gobert in previous eras and he appears as a mutombo type, more mobile and switchy less interior maybe. I think Giannis peaked higher on that end than gobert.

It’s really interesting when you think of 2019 or 2020 Giannis on defense, there’s not much counter evidence, the teams defense were about league average in the 20 or so games he missed especially considering competition iirc between those two years and ATG (-5.2 and -7.7)
(1999 Spurs were -7.2, 2008 Celtics were -8.6 for comparison). Especially impressive when you consider that the defense iirc was a tad better than league average in the 20 ish games he didn’t play, and that bud is even more annoying than Kerr with his rotations

I’m of the opinion that any difference between 2021 or 2022 Giannis and 2019 or 2020 Giannis defensively is a situation of either deployment (if someone could link me to the article on this one that’d be great) or RS effort, it’s the same player and there isn’t much different from an ability standpoint that would make me thing he was worse as a player on that end

It’s hard to get proof for his defense stepping up in the playoffs aside from his raw impact stats on that end seeming a bit better

In any case, I think if you view 2021 or 2022 Giannis as defensively the same as his 2020 or 2019 season, you can make a sufficient argument for him being in a really high tier, and people are already high on his offense

Regarding Giannis' defensive impact compared to past greats:

Giannis' peak

D-PIPM-4.27 (Hakeem had 4 seasons better than this, Duncan had 2, Garnett had 2, Robinson had 3)

D-RAPTOR-3.4 (Robinson had 13 better seasons than this, Hakeem had 12, Garnett had 9, Duncan had 9).

Not saying this is the end all be all, but it is suggestive that GIannis' peak impact on D might lag behind.

I think of RAPTOR as the same way I think of what I throw in the garbage lol

Where’d you get PIPM data isn’t it the wizards now? I more mean relative to the league but I recall it heavily weighs blocked shots into its box score prior which would explain why giannis might not appear so good on it

Last update before it got taken down.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EIZvj_3-9SZULWomHz54V1CPL092j70u_0vUhoEEaIk/edit?usp=drivesdk

homecourtloss · Post #34 » by **homecourtloss** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:30 pm

70sFan wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:So on offense, I should be clear that I'm thinking about the '94-95 post-season. Feel free to say some stuff about why that's not a fair sample - that's clearly a concern.

Second, I love that you're bringing up other players for comparison, and in particular I'm glad you're bringing up Reggie Miller, who I don't think most would realize deserves such consideration, but I sure think he does. In my post I said Hakeem had an argument not that it was definitive, and yeah, Miller has an argument for best offensive player basically for the duration of the Jordan Hiatus.

I must say that I'm pretty influenced by the combination of a) Hakeem's volume and b) the Rockets' ORtg.

On (a)

In '94-95, here are the players with the most 30 point playoff games:

1. Olajuwon 16 (in 22 games)
2. Jordan 5 (in 10 games)
(tie) Miller 5 (in 17 games)
(tie) Robinson 5 (in 15 games)
5. Shaq 4 (in 21 games)

Barkley 3 (in 10 games)

So, we're talking about a post-season where Olajuwon was just far more likely to break 30 points on any given night than anyone else.

Let me also note that 16 is the record in NBA history, matched only by Jordan in '91-92, who also played 22 games that year.

Further, the list is largely dominated by perimeter players. For perspective, there are 20 post-seasons in history where players have scored 30+ in 12 or more games (earliest being Baylor in '61-62, 12 in 13 games, which shows why there's going to be a bias toward more recent players who play longer post-seasons). Here are the seasons that make that list as bigs:

1. Olajuwon '94-95 (16 in 22 games)
9. Giannis '20-21 (13 in 21 games)
(tie) Shaq '99-00 (13 in 23 games)

/end

Now, I'd be misleading if I didn't include some other all-time bigs with their top performances by this (very coarse) metric:

Kareem '79-80 (11 in 15 games) (Also in '73-74 in 16 games)
Wilt '61-62 & '63-64 (9 in 12 both times)
Mikan '49-50 (8 in 12)

Of course everyone should consider all sides of this sort of data, along with its weaknesses, but the thing that strikes me here is this:

It's unusual for a player to so reliably score beyond that threshold, and all the more so among bigs. While what I present probably would not convince a Kareem or Wilt supporter that Olajuwon's offense was more impressive, it at least makes clear why he belongs in a certain conversation.

I think the problem with this comparison is that we don't take into account shooting efficiency and that's where Hakeem was clearly behind the rest, even in 1995:

1995 Hakeem: 31.2 pts/75 on +2.0 rTS%

2021 Giannis: 29.0 pts/75 on +3.1 rTS%
2000 Shaq: 31.2 pts/75 on +6.7 rTS%
1980 Kareem: 29.6 pts/75 on +9.9 rTS%
1974 Kareem: 27.0 pts/75 on +9.0 rTS%
1962 Wilt: 23.6 pts/75 on +2.9 rTS%
1964 Wilt: 28.9 pts/75 on +8.1 rTS%

Hakeem scored on crazy volume in that run, but he wasn't particulary efficient - only 1962 Wilt run is below +3.0 rTS% here, with Kareem, Shaq and 1964 Wilt having massive efficiency advantage.

It's not to criticize Hakeem for what he did, because it worked but using raw volume numbers isn't the best possible evaluation of scoring value, especially when Hakeem clearly lacks in other areas. If we go by Ben Taylor's ScoringValue stat, Hakeem doesn't look the best:

1995 Hakeem: 1.7

2021 Giannis: 1.3
2000 Shaq: 2.4
1980 Kareem: 3.1
1974 Kareem: 2.9
1962 Wilt: 1.9
1964 Wilt: 2.8

Again, clearly worse than Shaq, Kareem and 1964 Wilt. I get that he scored a lot and drew a lot of attention, but he didn't make Rockets players shoot 40% from three point line throughout the postseason. If he's not the best scorer here (and he's not), then what's his case for the best offensive player here? He's clearly the worst passer, clearly worse offensive rebounder than Wilt/Shaq and his off-ball game is probably the worst as well (depending on how you view Wilt in this apsect).

His defense can shorten the gap, so I don't think having his as number one center is unjustifiable. I don't think his case on offense though.

I really have a hard time putting any ATG center’s offense ahead of Kareem’s as Kareem was able and willing passer and an exceptionally consistent, lowest variance scorer who didn’t need to draw fouls to score.

One mitigating factor, though, in favor of Hakeem (not over Kareem but others) is his incredibly low FTr. His rTS% suffers in comparison to others’ rTS% numbers because he didn’t draw fouls. When watching him play, I feel he was fouled more than his FTr suggests, but he moved so beautifully and effortlessly and scored and/or got off the shot before being fouled that his FTr and his rTS% and TOV% suffered as well. You can say the same about Kareem and his fluidity leading to a lack of FTA.

FTr
Shaq, 2000, .586
Giannis, 2021, .469
Wilt, 1964, .442
Wilt, 1962, .431
Kareem, 1980, .303
Hakeem, 1995, .283
Kareem, 1974, .226

There’s an argument to be made about a player like Hakeem taking difficult shots, creating his offense often out of nothing, and scoring well enough that the offense added by others on ostensibly “easier,” i.e., higher expected PPS (especially off of double teams Hakeem demanded) should lead to very good offenses, but the data doesn’t bear that out since the Rockets produced a top playoffs offense once in 1997, top 3 in 1995, and then another top 5 and then top 6. All the other playoff offenses were mediocre or poor. Since I love Hakeem and grew up watching him, I’d want to argue that maybe the Rockets didn’t take as many threes before the mid 1990s, which is true, but in 1990, 1991, and 1993 the Rockets led the playoffs in 3P attempt rate or were in the top 3, though they didn’t take anywhere near the rates later on.

MyUniBroDavis · Post #35 » by **MyUniBroDavis** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:48 pm

LukaTheGOAT wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
LukaTheGOAT wrote:
Regarding Giannis' defensive impact compared to past greats:

Giannis' peak

D-PIPM-4.27 (Hakeem had 4 seasons better than this, Duncan had 2, Garnett had 2, Robinson had 3)

D-RAPTOR-3.4 (Robinson had 13 better seasons than this, Hakeem had 12, Garnett had 9, Duncan had 9).

Not saying this is the end all be all, but it is suggestive that GIannis' peak impact on D might lag behind.

I think of RAPTOR as the same way I think of what I throw in the garbage lol

Where’d you get PIPM data isn’t it the wizards now? I more mean relative to the league but I recall it heavily weighs blocked shots into its box score prior which would explain why giannis might not appear so good on it

Last update before it got taken down.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EIZvj_3-9SZULWomHz54V1CPL092j70u_0vUhoEEaIk/edit?usp=drivesdk

I don’t have my computer right now but off a cursory look I don’t understand how they have pre 1996 data when a large component is luck adjusted on-off data

ceiling raiser · Post #36 » by **ceiling raiser** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 10:15 pm

So I'm trying to think through this with Hakeem. In the regular season, from the limited +/- stats we have, he seems to consistently be a top 5-10 player in the league.

For the most part he elevates his level of play in the postseason, and looks more like a consistent strong MVP than an All-NBA guy.

Eye test wise, he looks like the most impressive player I have seen, with his combination of size, mobility, and skill.

Hard to reconcile.

Something I am curious about...for people selecting Hakeem (who I think has a case for GOAT peak):

(1) How do you treat his passing?
(2) How much better do you view his defense compared to Duncan's?

LukaTheGOAT · Post #37 » by **LukaTheGOAT** » Sat Jun 25, 2022 11:58 pm

MyUniBroDavis wrote:
LukaTheGOAT wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
I think of RAPTOR as the same way I think of what I throw in the garbage lol

Where’d you get PIPM data isn’t it the wizards now? I more mean relative to the league but I recall it heavily weighs blocked shots into its box score prior which would explain why giannis might not appear so good on it

Last update before it got taken down.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EIZvj_3-9SZULWomHz54V1CPL092j70u_0vUhoEEaIk/edit?usp=drivesdk

I don’t have my computer right now but off a cursory look I don’t understand how they have pre 1996 data when a large component is luck adjusted on-off data

"An estimate of on-off data is calculated using simple interaction terms. This simple interaction adds a great deal of accuracy for earlier seasons without the typical downfall of statistics interacting outside of the training set of data in ways they were not intended to."

Djoker · Post #38 » by **Djoker** » Sun Jun 26, 2022 1:07 am

1. 1977 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Why Kareem > Shaq and why 1977?

In terms of rTS, Kareem blows Shaq out of the water. He's a 70% free throw shooter and has the sky hook so he is the most valuable during crunch time of all the top centers. Kareem is a more active defender. He can't foul out entire frontcourts but on the other hand he has no exploitable weaknesses. Shaq's weakness in P&R defense was exploited by many teams namely the Kings and Spurs and teams resorted to Hack-a-Shaq in crunch time. In the 2000 Finals Shaq shot 38% from the line and missed a whopping 57 free throws in that series.

Per 75 Regular Season Stats:
1977 Kareem: 24.5 pts, 12.5 reb (3.0 o), 3.6 ass, 3.0 blk, 1.1 stl on 60.8 %TS (+9.7 rTS) with ? to
2000 Shaq: 28.6 pts, 13.1 reb (4.1 o), 3.7 ass, 2.9 blk, 0.5 stl on 57.8 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 2.7 to

Per 75 Playoff Stats:
1977 Kareem: 28.4 pts, 14.6 reb (3.8 o), 3.4 ass, 2.9 blk, 1.4 stl on 64.6 %TS (+13.5 rTS) with ? to
2000 Shaq: 28.2 pts, 14.2 reb (4.7 o), 2.9 ass, 2.2 blk, 0.5 stl on 55.6 %TS (+3.3 rTS) with 2.3 to

That efficiency really jumps out at you! And given Kareem's lack of weaknesses and more active defense I don't see how he doesn't get a nod over Shaq for me. It's not a slam dunk or anything but I have more faith that peak Kareem is the better basketball player. And even though this is a peaks project not a longevity discussion, Kareem's better longevity still makes me more confident in his peak. He was a very similar player from 1974-1980 while IMO definitely peaking in 1977. The reason I pick this version of Kareem over 1971 and 1974 is that he's a lot thicker and more capable of dealing with physicality than in his Bucks' days. Unlike his early career, he weighed around 260 lbs so could also bang with big centers. And in 1979/1980 he's still the same guy offensively but has lost a little bit of motor and become a worse rebounder and also started cruising in the regular season a bit too much to be among the GOAT peaks.

(1971 Kareem, 1974 Kareem, 1980 Kareem)

2. 2000 Shaquille O'Neal

I take 2000 Shaq over 1967 Wilt who was hard to believe an even worse free throw shooter. And unlike Shaq he legitimately struggled against Nate Thurmond in the 1967 Finals offensively. Wilt is by far the better defender but in terms of scoring it isn't close. Wilt did his best Bill Russell impersonation in his peak season more than a Shaq impersonation. And quite honestly at the risk of offending old school Wilt fans, I'm just not totally sold on Wilt from the eye test. I've watched all the available footage on the internet. His footwork in the post seems rudimentary and while he is an athletic goliath maybe the most athletic basketball player ever considering his size, he rarely went at people the way Shaq did with physicality. And it's shame too because he could have been better than he was just with a more aggressive mentality. When defenses boxed him out and came back in transition, Wilt just doesn't seem like an effective offensive force in the halfcourt comparable to Shaq. He would resort to fadeaways or just hold the ball and meekly pass it out instead of taking it strong for two points.

Shaq played at a similar level in the 2001 and 2002 postseasons but never had a complete campaign comparable to 2000 and that whole season he was consistently unreal start to finish. I don't think those or any other Shaq seasons are serious contenders.

3. 1967 Wilt Chamberlain

(1964 Wilt)

MyUniBroDavis · Post #39 » by **MyUniBroDavis** » Sun Jun 26, 2022 2:19 am

LukaTheGOAT wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
LukaTheGOAT wrote:
Last update before it got taken down.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EIZvj_3-9SZULWomHz54V1CPL092j70u_0vUhoEEaIk/edit?usp=drivesdk

I don’t have my computer right now but off a cursory look I don’t understand how they have pre 1996 data when a large component is luck adjusted on-off data

"An estimate of on-off data is calculated using simple interaction terms. This simple interaction adds a great deal of accuracy for earlier seasons without the typical downfall of statistics interacting outside of the training set of data in ways they were not intended to."

How would they possibly do the luck adjustment though? Even if they had an estimate of on off data the luck adjustment shouldn’t be possible without any sort of data on that

MyUniBroDavis · Post #40 » by **MyUniBroDavis** » Sun Jun 26, 2022 2:25 am

Djoker wrote:1. 1977 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Why Kareem > Shaq and why 1977?

In terms of rTS, Kareem blows Shaq out of the water. He's a 70% free throw shooter and has the sky hook so he is the most valuable during crunch time of all the top centers. Kareem is a more active defender. He can't foul out entire frontcourts but on the other hand he has no exploitable weaknesses. Shaq's weakness in P&R defense was exploited by many teams namely the Kings and Spurs and teams resorted to Hack-a-Shaq in crunch time. In the 2000 Finals Shaq shot 38% from the line and missed a whopping 57 free throws in that series.

Per 75 Regular Season Stats:
1977 Kareem: 24.5 pts, 12.5 reb (3.0 o), 3.6 ass, 3.0 blk, 1.1 stl on 60.8 %TS (+9.7 rTS) with ? to
2000 Shaq: 28.6 pts, 13.1 reb (4.1 o), 3.7 ass, 2.9 blk, 0.5 stl on 57.8 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 2.7 to

Per 75 Playoff Stats:
1977 Kareem: 28.4 pts, 14.6 reb (3.8 o), 3.4 ass, 2.9 blk, 1.4 stl on 64.6 %TS (+13.5 rTS) with ? to
2000 Shaq: 28.2 pts, 14.2 reb (4.7 o), 2.9 ass, 2.2 blk, 0.5 stl on 55.6 %TS (+3.3 rTS) with 2.3 to

That efficiency really jumps out at you! And given Kareem's lack of weaknesses and more active defense I don't see how he doesn't get a nod over Shaq for me. It's not a slam dunk or anything but I have more faith that peak Kareem is the better basketball player. And even though this is a peaks project not a longevity discussion, Kareem's better longevity still makes me more confident in his peak. He was a very similar player from 1974-1980 while IMO definitely peaking in 1977. The reason I pick this version of Kareem over 1971 and 1974 is that he's a lot thicker and more capable of dealing with physicality than in his Bucks' days. Unlike his early career, he weighed around 260 lbs so could also bang with big centers. And in 1979/1980 he's still the same guy offensively but has lost a little bit of motor and become a worse rebounder and also started cruising in the regular season a bit too much to be among the GOAT peaks.

(1971 Kareem, 1974 Kareem, 1980 Kareem)

2. 2000 Shaquille O'Neal

I take 2000 Shaq over 1967 Wilt who was hard to believe an even worse free throw shooter. And unlike Shaq he legitimately struggled against Nate Thurmond in the 1967 Finals offensively. Wilt is by far the better defender but in terms of scoring it isn't close. Wilt did his best Bill Russell impersonation in his peak season more than a Shaq impersonation. And quite honestly at the risk of offending old school Wilt fans, I'm just not totally sold on Wilt from the eye test. I've watched all the available footage on the internet. His footwork in the post seems rudimentary and while he is an athletic goliath maybe the most athletic basketball player ever considering his size, he rarely went at people the way Shaq did with physicality. And it's shame too because he could have been better than he was just with a more aggressive mentality. When defenses boxed him out and came back in transition, Wilt just doesn't seem like an effective offensive force in the halfcourt comparable to Shaq. He would resort to fadeaways or just hold the ball and meekly pass it out instead of taking it strong for two points.

Shaq played at a similar level in the 2001 and 2002 postseasons but never had a complete campaign comparable to 2000 and that whole season he was consistently unreal start to finish. I don't think those or any other Shaq seasons are serious contenders.

3. 1967 Wilt Chamberlain

(1964 Wilt)

I’ve heard aggressive back downs weren’t allowed back then although I might be wrong