#9 Highest Peak of All Time (Duncan '03 wins)

[bastillon]

Again, the Celtics offense wasn't anything great with KG in 08, when he was still in his prime and he had two really good offensive players around him, and some decent role players.

I still don't get why he should be ranked ahead of Duncan. It's generally agreed Duncan can drag lesser supporting casts to better results, but the reason why KG is supposed to be better is because he can take good teams to better results than Duncan can.

But compare the 05 and 07 Spurs to the 08 Celtics, and I don't see why that would be the case. Duncan was a part of two really good teams, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. He was having huge impact and was the reason why they were contenders, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. The 05 and 07 Spurs were comparable teams to the 08 Celtics, and Duncan was having similar impact.

So if Duncan is pretty much equal in terms of being able to lift a good team to elite heights, and is a little better at lifting a mediocre team to above average heights (which can still be good enough to win a title, like in 03, if the competition is weak), doesn't that make him a little bit better?

so you believe 05 Pistons and 07 Suns were also equally good as 08 Celtics ? because Spurs basically lucked out both times. first when Horry suddenly transformed into Reggie Miller for 4thQ + OT in game 5 (Billups had like 40 pts in that game, Duncan was pitiful), then Donaghy + suspensions happened... and I think Suns still outscored them for the series. I don't see 07 Spurs anywhere near 08 Celtics. they were basically the same year later and were dominated by the Lakers who were dominated by the Celtics. 05 Spurs were a lot better IMO, Ginobili was unstoppable that year and I thought he was Spurs best player for long stretches of that PS run (definitely deserved fMVP).

[Doctor MJ]

Even Dirk's 2011 defense was elite (Mavs were -4.3, and the Mavs were -4.57 better on defense with Dirk on court). I like LeBron's 12 season, but I believe Dirk's 2011 run was better. The run where the Mavs went 2-7 without Dirk convinced me of his massive impact on the game. He is literally an offensive savant. Dirk beat 2 6+ SRS teams without HCA in huge upsets. KG lost to a team with a 4.35 SRS with his team having HCA.

See, I don't understand how you can notice "Hey Dallas had an elite defense!" and not think, "Hmm, guess there was a lot going on here more than just Dirk".

I understand Dirk that has huge +/- impact now in Dallas, but doesn't it strike you as odd that Dirk's +/- numbers are going through the roof late in his career, and that the team improvement is coming from defense?

Put it another way: Dirk's a stretch 4. When you use such a player in a traditional scheme that's a clear strategy where you are cheating toward offense (helps the offense more than it hurts the defense). It's pretty much inconceivable to me that you could put Dirk on a normal team in place of a normal power forward and the team would improve significantly on defense.

So what we're talking about here is a team that's had a long time to build around a stretch 4, and now they have schemes in place and pieces around him that fit really well...and since stretch 4's are not normal players these schemes and pieces really struggle whenever Dirk goes off the court.

Now, recognizing this, exactly what you do with it is up to you, but when he's getting compared to players who haven't had systems built around them to anywhere near the same degree I think you have to at least be thinking about his advantage on that front.

[bastillon]

also it should be noted that the storyline of the 2008 PS was Ray Allen disappearing off the face of the earth. they needed to come together in the PS and at first Garnett was carrying the team on both ends of the floor. Pierce was rejuvenated since game 5 of the Cavs series, Ray Allen regained his shooting touch in game 3 vs Pistons. the 2nd half of ECFs + finals Celtics were playing at unbelievable level. both Pistons and Lakers were very strong teams (Lakers were like +11 team with Gasol that year) and they were dominated. the defensive intensity vs Pistons was really incredible. I could post some clips from that series if I knew how. either way, I don't think posting numbers from the entire PS represents what KG is able to do when his teammates are playing at normal level. once Pierce and Ray started looking like NBA players Celtics offense was very strong.

[drza]

Again, the Celtics offense wasn't anything great with KG in 08, when he was still in his prime and he had two really good offensive players around him, and some decent role players.

I still don't get why he should be ranked ahead of Duncan. It's generally agreed Duncan can drag lesser supporting casts to better results, but the reason why KG is supposed to be better is because he can take good teams to better results than Duncan can.

But compare the 05 and 07 Spurs to the 08 Celtics, and I don't see why that would be the case. Duncan was a part of two really good teams, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. He was having huge impact and was the reason why they were contenders, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. The 05 and 07 Spurs were comparable teams to the 08 Celtics, and Duncan was having similar impact.

So if Duncan is pretty much equal in terms of being able to lift a good team to elite heights, and is a little better at lifting a mediocre team to above average heights (which can still be good enough to win a title, like in 03, if the competition is weak), doesn't that make him a little bit better?

Wait, when was that agreed to? I don't believe we've ever seen Duncan with a "lesser" supporting cast. The worst cast that Duncan ever had in his career, likely 2003, was comparable to the best pre-Boston cast that KG ever had. If either of them has shown the ability to lift lesser casts at their peaks, it was Garnett.

[colts18]

Comparison between KG/LeBron/Dirk's team in the playoffs.

Playoff SRS (includes HCA adjustment):
09 LeBron 11.67 SRS
11 Dirk 10.13 SRS
12 LeBron 9.98 SRS
04 KG 3.62

Team O rating relative to opponent:
12 LeBron +8.43
11 Dirk +7.34
09 LeBron +7.33
04 KG -1.19

Team D rating relative to opponent:
09 LeBron -6.01
04 KG -5.02
11 Dirk -4.32
12 LeBron -3.54

Ortg-Drtg relative to opponent:
09 LeBron +13.34
12 LeBron +11.97
Dirk 11 +11.66
04 KG +3.83


So based on that, I have LeBron 09 in the lead with Dirk 11 with a very slight lead over 12 LeBron but both are on the same level. With Kg lagging way behind.

[Dr Positivity]

Definitely. In fact I think I remember voting for Walton that year, admittedly with my vote for Kareem being higher here. If we reran the RPOY my vote might be for Kareem this time, I may have underestimated how killer that season was.

With that said, a person could argue Walton was more important to HIS team in 77 and thus had the more impactful year, but Kareem's season is more valuable in a vacuum, if that makes sense. I could see someone calling the voters our for inconsistency though. Personally though the complaint seems stronger about the RPOY vote than in this project - that the voters were too biased by Walton winning the title and Kareem not in 77 and that if they both lost, Kareem likely blows him out in the voting - so for the purposes of this project it's probably irrelevant whether we may have made that RPOY vote too close

I think you should elaborate on "valuable in a vacuum". Clearly you're saying at least one of these players was in a situation abnormal enough that it isn't a good gauge of what typically could be expected. The obvious question in response to that is Why? What was it specifically about the other players on these teams that made each player so unusual in his impact compared to what you'd normally expect?

The Blazers seemingly needed Walton to make everything work. Obviously his defensive impact is enormous, but in addition to that the ball movement/passing centric offense relied on Walton's unique high post abilities. I definitely buy into his offensive value not being as high if he was placed on most other situations. 77/78 Blazers seem like a lightning in a bottle situation in terms of the whole being greater than the sum of their parts due to fit, cohesion, etc. Without the system being so good to maximize his impact they wouldn't be able to maximize how Walton made his teammates better.

I think Walton has been getting a bit of a short stick though. How far could he be behind 65 Russell? I guess once again it comes down to the fact that all these seasons are too flawless

[bastillon]

Even Dirk's 2011 defense was elite (Mavs were -4.3, and the Mavs were -4.57 better on defense with Dirk on court). I like LeBron's 12 season, but I believe Dirk's 2011 run was better. The run where the Mavs went 2-7 without Dirk convinced me of his massive impact on the game. He is literally an offensive savant. Dirk beat 2 6+ SRS teams without HCA in huge upsets. KG lost to a team with a 4.35 SRS with his team having HCA.

See, I don't understand how you can notice "Hey Dallas had an elite defense!" and not think, "Hmm, guess there was a lot going on here more than just Dirk".

I understand Dirk that has huge +/- impact now in Dallas, but doesn't it strike you as odd that Dirk's +/- numbers are going through the roof late in his career, and that the team improvement is coming from defense?

Put it another way: Dirk's a stretch 4. When you use such a player in a traditional scheme that's a clear strategy where you are cheating toward offense (helps the offense more than it hurts the defense). It's pretty much inconceivable to me that you could put Dirk on a normal team in place of a normal power forward and the team would improve significantly on defense.

So what we're talking about here is a team that's had a long time to build around a stretch 4, and now they have schemes in place and pieces around him that fit really well...and since stretch 4's are not normal players these schemes and pieces really struggle whenever Dirk goes off the court.

Now, recognizing this, exactly what you do with it is up to you, but when he's getting compared to players who haven't had systems built around them to anywhere near the same degree I think you have to at least be thinking about his advantage on that front.

first of all Dirk is not a stretch 4. Ryan Anderson is a stretch 4. Matt Bonner is a stretch 4. they are 3pt spot up shooters. Dirk is not a spot up shooter, he's the guy Mavs ran their offense through. he was playing mid post offensive anchor, basically a lot like Bird did, except Dirk was much more of a scorer and never passed as well.

second and more importantly, what the hell does Dirk's offensive role have to do with his defense ? this is a huge logical flaw. if Dallas is building around a stretch 4 (he isn't a stretch 4 anyway), then they're doing that on offense. defensively that's a different story.

it doesn't strike me as odd at all that Dirk is peaking this late. he improved a lot over the last couple of years. he's been a much better post defender, particularly with stronger base and good hands. he's been among the league leaders in isolation defense. he's a very good defensive rebounder. he's the first big guy to be back on defense because he's playing away from the basket. he doesn't turn the ball over. all of that has a huge impact on defense.

[colts18]

See, I don't understand how you can notice "Hey Dallas had an elite defense!" and not think, "Hmm, guess there was a lot going on here more than just Dirk".

I understand Dirk that has huge +/- impact now in Dallas, but doesn't it strike you as odd that Dirk's +/- numbers are going through the roof late in his career, and that the team improvement is coming from defense?

Put it another way: Dirk's a stretch 4. When you use such a player in a traditional scheme that's a clear strategy where you are cheating toward offense (helps the offense more than it hurts the defense). It's pretty much inconceivable to me that you could put Dirk on a normal team in place of a normal power forward and the team would improve significantly on defense.

So what we're talking about here is a team that's had a long time to build around a stretch 4, and now they have schemes in place and pieces around him that fit really well...and since stretch 4's are not normal players these schemes and pieces really struggle whenever Dirk goes off the court.

Now, recognizing this, exactly what you do with it is up to you, but when he's getting compared to players who haven't had systems built around them to anywhere near the same degree I think you have to at least be thinking about his advantage on that front.

This is absurd. Dirk has been doing the same thing for the last 12 years with different players, different coaches, and different systems. The only constant is Dirk. You can't say the 2004 Mavs system was anywhere near resembling the 2011 Mavs.

[Doctor MJ]

Again, the Celtics offense wasn't anything great with KG in 08, when he was still in his prime and he had two really good offensive players around him, and some decent role players.

I still don't get why he should be ranked ahead of Duncan. It's generally agreed Duncan can drag lesser supporting casts to better results, but the reason why KG is supposed to be better is because he can take good teams to better results than Duncan can.

My gripe with you here is that it seemed pretty dang clear to me that when Garnett went to Boston one of his most important moves was to be the one who sacrificed his offensive game. They didn't redesign the offense with Garnett as point forward. Instead they had Garnett focus more of his energy to defense than ever before, and let Pierce & co be more the focal point on offense.

This is important because it was probably the best usage of resources AND the best way to placate the egos of the other stars, but it was by no means a strategy meant to produce the best possible offense. And yet, still it produced ORtgs better than any prime-Duncan-led offense ever did.

I'm also a little confused when you say Duncan can drag weaker teams better than Garnett. The whole +/- with Garnett started because he produced alien-like +/- stats in Minnesota when he most certainly had weaker casts than Duncan ever had. It's truly amazing to me that Duncan, who lucked into more supporting cast through his career than almost any star around, has somehow gained a reputation as someone who can drag bad talent with him.

To be clear, not saying the '03 Spurs supporting cast was strong by champion standard, it wasn't and that was clearly the low point for his supporting cast...but it still wasn't a bad supporting cast by any means. In that same year, Garnett's top sidekick was Troy Hudson for goodness sake, a man who only had played one year (THAT being the year) at starter-level minutes in his entire career.

But compare the 05 and 07 Spurs to the 08 Celtics, and I don't see why that would be the case. Duncan was a part of two really good teams, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. He was having huge impact and was the reason why they were contenders, just like KG was with the 08 Celtics. The 05 and 07 Spurs were comparable teams to the 08 Celtics, and Duncan was having similar impact.

I would not call those teams the equal of the '08 Celtics. This is a team with a 9+ SRS despite the fact that the Big 3 were all playing in the 32-35 minute range instead of 40+ (like at their peak), who coasted after their even more dominant start, and who had injury issues. There isn't another team since Jordan that showed that level of consistent domination, and for the reasons mentioned there is good reason to think they could have done even more had they been motivated and younger.

I do understand that the way those Celtics muddled through the playoffs isn't the most impressive, but it's pretty hard to take the Atlanta struggle seriously when they win Game 7 by over 30 points, and then proceed to finish off their final two opponents in less games than the first round took.

[bastillon]

Comparison between KG/LeBron/Dirk's team in the playoffs.

Playoff SRS (includes HCA adjustment):
09 LeBron 11.67 SRS
11 Dirk 10.13 SRS
12 LeBron 9.98 SRS
04 KG 3.62

Team O rating relative to opponent:
12 LeBron +8.43
11 Dirk +7.34
09 LeBron +7.33
04 KG -1.19

Team D rating relative to opponent:
09 LeBron -6.01
04 KG -5.02
11 Dirk -4.32
12 LeBron -3.54

Ortg-Drtg relative to opponent:
09 LeBron +13.34
12 LeBron +11.97
Dirk 11 +11.66
04 KG +3.83


So based on that, I have LeBron 09 in the lead with Dirk 11 with a very slight lead over 12 LeBron but both are on the same level. With Kg lagging way behind.

again, good post, but you're overlooking a big factor in a small sample size. Pistons and Hawks were far worse than they had been in the RS. Pistons had a terrible year. that was the year they traded for Allen Iverson. Hamilton was unhappy. chemistry was terrible. they started the season 22-12 and finished 17-31. Pistons 09 might have been the worst playoff team of the last decade. Hawks were playing well all year, but they were really banged up in that series. I think Marvin Williams was injured and I believe Horford was already missing games in the 1st round. then JJ got injured as well. pretty much everybody was playing sprained ankles or something.

the real test of Cavs strength was in the ECFs, when they finally met a real playoff team. they failed. they blew multiple 20 pts leads and then got blown out in the elimination game. Magic were dominating when it mattered.

[Doctor MJ]

See, I don't understand how you can notice "Hey Dallas had an elite defense!" and not think, "Hmm, guess there was a lot going on here more than just Dirk".

I understand Dirk that has huge +/- impact now in Dallas, but doesn't it strike you as odd that Dirk's +/- numbers are going through the roof late in his career, and that the team improvement is coming from defense?

Put it another way: Dirk's a stretch 4. When you use such a player in a traditional scheme that's a clear strategy where you are cheating toward offense (helps the offense more than it hurts the defense). It's pretty much inconceivable to me that you could put Dirk on a normal team in place of a normal power forward and the team would improve significantly on defense.

So what we're talking about here is a team that's had a long time to build around a stretch 4, and now they have schemes in place and pieces around him that fit really well...and since stretch 4's are not normal players these schemes and pieces really struggle whenever Dirk goes off the court.

Now, recognizing this, exactly what you do with it is up to you, but when he's getting compared to players who haven't had systems built around them to anywhere near the same degree I think you have to at least be thinking about his advantage on that front.

This is absurd. Dirk has been doing the same thing for the last 12 years with different players, different coaches, and different systems. The only constant is Dirk. You can't say the 2004 Mavs system was anywhere near resembling the 2011 Mavs.

Oh no you didn't.

Here's part of what you said before:

The run where the Mavs went 2-7 without Dirk convinced me of his massive impact on the game.

Do not tell me that your entire estimation of Dirk's "massive impact" was cemented by a single 2-7 stretch one of his teams had. Either you're moving the goal post, or you're sense of sample size is screwier than a slithering snake sneaking through spiraled siphons. Either way, don't tell me.

When you say:

Dirk has been doing the same thing for the last 12 years with different players, different coaches, and different systems.

You're absolutely right. Dirk has been doing mostly the same thing. However, his on/off impact, the thing that you're so sold by, that's something has not stayed the same. It's gone up and up despite the changes in Dirk's game being subtle enough that you (and most of us) are hard pressed to see a difference in a typical game.

So why has it gone up and up then? Because everything around Dirk has been tailored over the course of time to take advantage of Dirk's unique talents.

[bastillon]

I would not call those teams the equal of the '08 Celtics. This is a team with a 9+ SRS despite the fact that the Big 3 were all playing in the 32-35 minute range instead of 40+ (like at their peak), who coasted after their even more dominant start, and who had injury issues. There isn't another team since Jordan that showed that level of consistent domination, and for the reasons mentioned there is good reason to think they could have done even more had they been motivated and younger.

yup, Celtics murdered top teams that year. they lost to terrible teams like Raptors, Bobcats and Wizzards (or lucked out at the end of games to come back after terrible games) but they ran through every strong team. they even swept the Texas Triangle as the first team to do so in like 12 years. to do so they ended Houston's 22 win streak as well. statement games were painful to watch for their opponents. when Celtics were about to send a message, you got the message.

[colts18]

Oh no you didn't.

Here's part of what you said before:

The run where the Mavs went 2-7 without Dirk convinced me of his massive impact on the game.

Do not tell me that your entire estimation of Dirk's "massive impact" was cemented by a single 2-7 stretch one of his teams had. Either you're moving the goal post, or you're sense of sample size is screwier than a slithering snake sneaking through spiraled siphons. Either way, don't tell me.

No it was that sample + his performance in the playoffs that convinced me that his 2011 impact was amazing. He took a lottery team to a title and beat 2 6+ SRS teams without HCA in the process

When you say:

Dirk has been doing the same thing for the last 12 years with different players, different coaches, and different systems.

You're absolutely right. Dirk has been doing mostly the same thing. However, his on/off impact, the thing that you're so sold by, that's something has not stayed the same. It's gone up and up despite the changes in Dirk's game being subtle enough that you (and most of us) are hard pressed to see a difference in a typical game.

So why has it gone up and up then? Because everything around Dirk has been tailored over the course of time to take advantage of Dirk's unique talents.

His +/- hasn't really gone up

2001- 53 wins, 4th in O rating
-11.3 off, +20.1 plus/minus

2002- 57 wins, 1st in O rating
-3.0 off, +10.3 plus/minus

2003-60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -8.8 off court, +21.7 Plus/minus

2004- 52 wins, 1st in O rating: Rated the #1 offense of all-time by O rating
-2.0 off court, +9.2 plus/minus

2005- 58 wins, 4th in O rating
DIrk: -6 off court, +15.3

2006- 60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -0.6 off court, +8.5

2007-67 wins, 2nd in O rating
Dirk: -1.6 off court, +12.4

2008- 51 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -4.4 off court, +12.7

2009- 50 wins, 5th in O rating
Dirk: -4.2 off court, +8

2010- 55 wins, 10th in O rating
Dirk: -6.2 off court, +11.7

2011- 57 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -6.1 off court, +16.3


His average +/- season from 01-05 was +15.32. He only surpassed that once since then (his 2011 run). Every other year shows lesser +/- impact.

[Doctor MJ]

first of all Dirk is not a stretch 4. Ryan Anderson is a stretch 4. Matt Bonner is a stretch 4. they are 3pt spot up shooters. Dirk is not a spot up shooter, he's the guy Mavs ran their offense through. he was playing mid post offensive anchor, basically a lot like Bird did, except Dirk was much more of a scorer and never passed as well.

Good point. Dirk's moved into that role.

second and more importantly, what the hell does Dirk's offensive role have to do with his defense ? this is a huge logical flaw. if Dallas is building around a stretch 4 (he isn't a stretch 4 anyway), then they're doing that on offense. defensively that's a different story.

Good observation, but step away from the literal here. Do you know of any stretch 4's who are known for playing great, traditional, power forward defense? I mean, they put "power" in the name for a reason.

I'll totally grant that there's more than one way to skin a cat here, but typically if you're going with a 4 who's #1 weapon is his outside shooting, the guy's probably not going to be built like Mo Lucas. Yes, I think Dallas has found a way to really make use of what Dirk has to give on defense, but it took some time.

it doesn't strike me as odd at all that Dirk is peaking this late. he improved a lot over the last couple of years. he's been a much better post defender, particularly with stronger base and good hands. he's been among the league leaders in isolation defense. he's a very good defensive rebounder. he's the first big guy to be back on defense because he's playing away from the basket. he doesn't turn the ball over. all of that has a huge impact on defense.

I think the "odd" part of it is that Dirk's "peak" here came years after developing his strongest weapons, happened with the team improving in his weaker areas, and happened so dramatically as to take everyone by surprise. You put those things together, and it seems to me pretty clear that in addition to Dirk rounding out his game, you had the team that invented on/off data as we know it making adjustments that allowed their star to make huge leaps in on/off data.

[bastillon]

Good observation, but step away from the literal here. Do you know of any stretch 4's who are known for playing great, traditional, power forward defense? I mean, they put "power" in the name for a reason.

you can't use your prejudice against good shooting bigs to affect your judgement of the hard evidence. data clearly shows you Dirk has been making a good defensive impact. it's got nothing to do with his team being built in a certain way, it's about his style of play on offense (first back on defense, doesn't turn the ball over, makes his teammates better so they don't turn the ball over and make more shots) helping to cut transition baskets. this has always been the case. but now Dirk also improved as a man defender, pick and roll defender, and IMO he's better at rotating as well. he's just a lot more experienced, a lot smarter.

I think the "odd" part of it is that Dirk's "peak" here came years after developing his strongest weapons, happened with the team improving in his weaker areas, and happened so dramatically as to take everyone by surprise. You put those things together, and it seems to me pretty clear that in addition to Dirk rounding out his game, you had the team that invented on/off data as we know it making adjustments that allowed their star to make huge leaps in on/off data.

can you elaborate ?

[therealbig3]

so you believe 05 Pistons and 07 Suns were also equally good as 08 Celtics ? because Spurs basically lucked out both times. first when Horry suddenly transformed into Reggie Miller for 4thQ + OT in game 5 (Billups had like 40 pts in that game, Duncan was pitiful), then Donaghy + suspensions happened... and I think Suns still outscored them for the series. I don't see 07 Spurs anywhere near 08 Celtics. they were basically the same year later and were dominated by the Lakers who were dominated by the Celtics. 05 Spurs were a lot better IMO, Ginobili was unstoppable that year and I thought he was Spurs best player for long stretches of that PS run (definitely deserved fMVP).

And you also think that the 08 Hawks and 08 Cavs are up there too, right? I like how the narrative about that Celtics team has become "they dominated everyone on their way to a title"...they played at least 6 games against every opponents, and they "lucked" out in game 4 against the Lakers. There could have been a different result if the Lakers held on in game 4.

also it should be noted that the storyline of the 2008 PS was Ray Allen disappearing off the face of the earth. they needed to come together in the PS and at first Garnett was carrying the team on both ends of the floor. Pierce was rejuvenated since game 5 of the Cavs series, Ray Allen regained his shooting touch in game 3 vs Pistons. the 2nd half of ECFs + finals Celtics were playing at unbelievable level. both Pistons and Lakers were very strong teams (Lakers were like +11 team with Gasol that year) and they were dominated. the defensive intensity vs Pistons was really incredible. I could post some clips from that series if I knew how. either way, I don't think posting numbers from the entire PS represents what KG is able to do when his teammates are playing at normal level. once Pierce and Ray started looking like NBA players Celtics offense was very strong.

Ray Allen and Paul Pierce were very good in every series except the Cavs series. And this reasoning can be used for everyone: if so and so played better, then the team would have done better. Obviously. You could say the same thing about Tony Parker in 05, or Ginobili in 07.

Wait, when was that agreed to? I don't believe we've ever seen Duncan with a "lesser" supporting cast. The worst cast that Duncan ever had in his career, likely 2003, was comparable to the best pre-Boston cast that KG ever had. If either of them has shown the ability to lift lesser casts at their peaks, it was Garnett.

My bad, it wasn't generally agreed upon, but it came up when ElGee and I were discussing it. His reasoning was that he was leaning towards KG because yes, TD can take a mediocre supporting cast to more respectable levels, but KG can do more on a better team. I disagree with the latter. Since nobody really commented on that, I figured that's how people generally felt.

And when I say "lesser", I didn't mean lesser than KG's, I meant "not good". I wouldn't say the 02 or 03 Spurs were a "good" offensive supporting cast.

My gripe with you here is that it seemed pretty dang clear to me that when Garnett went to Boston one of his most important moves was to be the one who sacrificed his offensive game. They didn't redesign the offense with Garnett as point forward. Instead they had Garnett focus more of his energy to defense than ever before, and let Pierce & co be more the focal point on offense.

You're underselling Garnett's role in that offense, he wasn't like 2012 Garnett, who just operated off spotting up from midrange and off PnP/PnRs. He was their 2nd leading scorer, and their go-to scorer in many situations throughout the year. He was an integral part of the offense.

And yet, still it produced ORtgs better than any prime-Duncan-led offense ever did.

That's not really true. I've posted the data before:

offensively first:

08 Celtics: +2.7 (+3.3 PS)

05 Spurs: +1.4 (+4.7 PS)
06 Spurs: +1.1 (+9.0 PS)
07 Spurs: +2.7 (+2.2 PS)


Now defensively:

08 Celtics: -8.6 (-5.8 PS)

05 Spurs: -7.3 (-4.2 PS)
06 Spurs: -6.6 (+2.2 PS)
07 Spurs: -6.6 (-6.6 PS)

In the RS, the Celtics were +11.3 with a 9.31 SRS. In the PS, the Celtics were +9.1.

In the RS, the 05 Spurs were +8.7 with a 7.84 SRS. In the PS, the Spurs were +8.9.

In the RS, the 07 Spurs were +9.3 with an 8.35 SRS. In the PS, the Spurs were +8.8.

The Celtics were slightly better in the regular season, and they were on the same level in the playoffs. I'm seeing two very similar teams here.

And your point about the Celtics coasting...you could apply the same thing to the Spurs. Tim Duncan got his minutes monitored a lot more closely those seasons, and he played 33 mpg in 05, and 34 mpg in 07. He was also injured in 05 and missed 16 games, and using with/without...he had monster impact on that defense when he played.

[therealbig3]

And just to add, the reasoning that the Celtics weren't dominant offensively because they were focused on playing defense can also be applied to the Spurs.

[colts18]

That's not really true. I've posted the data before:

offensively first:

08 Celtics: +2.7 (+3.3 PS)

05 Spurs: +1.4 (+4.7 PS)
06 Spurs: +1.1 (+9.0 PS)
07 Spurs: +2.7 (+2.2 PS)


Now defensively:

08 Celtics: -8.6 (-5.8 PS)

05 Spurs: -7.3 (-4.2 PS)
06 Spurs: -6.6 (+2.2 PS)
07 Spurs: -6.6 (-6.6 PS)

In the RS, the Celtics were +11.3 with a 9.31 SRS. In the PS, the Celtics were +9.1.

In the RS, the 05 Spurs were +8.7 with a 7.84 SRS. In the PS, the Spurs were +8.9.

In the RS, the 07 Spurs were +9.3 with an 8.35 SRS. In the PS, the Spurs were +8.8.

The Celtics were slightly better in the regular season, and they were on the same level in the playoffs. I'm seeing two very similar teams here.

And your point about the Celtics coasting...you could apply the same thing to the Spurs. Tim Duncan got his minutes monitored a lot more closely those seasons, and he played 33 mpg in 05, and 34 mpg in 07. He was also injured in 05 and missed 16 games, and using with/without...he had monster impact on that defense when he played.

If you factor in injury, The Spurs were a +10 SRS team in the games Duncan played in 2005. Duncan was the main catalyst of that team. That team went 13.9 SRS in the games Ginobili missed and 7.2 in the games he played. In the games Duncan/Ginobili played, I estimated their SRS at about 10.4. So they were an elite team before injuries struck in the 2nd half of the season.

[Doctor MJ]

His +/- hasn't really gone up

2001- 53 wins, 4th in O rating
-11.3 off, +20.1 plus/minus

2002- 57 wins, 1st in O rating
-3.0 off, +10.3 plus/minus

2003-60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -8.8 off court, +21.7 Plus/minus

2004- 52 wins, 1st in O rating: Rated the #1 offense of all-time by O rating
-2.0 off court, +9.2 plus/minus

2005- 58 wins, 4th in O rating
DIrk: -6 off court, +15.3

2006- 60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -0.6 off court, +8.5

2007-67 wins, 2nd in O rating
Dirk: -1.6 off court, +12.4

2008- 51 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -4.4 off court, +12.7

2009- 50 wins, 5th in O rating
Dirk: -4.2 off court, +8

2010- 55 wins, 10th in O rating
Dirk: -6.2 off court, +11.7

2011- 57 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -6.1 off court, +16.3


His average +/- season from 01-05 was +15.32. He only surpassed that once since then (his 2011 run). Every other year shows lesser +/- impact.

His RAPM ranking went through the roof as of '10-11. Before that year he never really threatened for the top spot, but the last two seasons he's not only been #1, but #1 by a large margin.

Clearly you're not in the habit of using RAPM so we might be at an impasse here, but when you talk about him leading meh casts to the title you undoubtedly notice he had never done it before.

My question to you is for you to ask yourself how you'd think of Dirk if his '11 team had lost in the 1st round like they did in '10.

[colts18]

His +/- hasn't really gone up

2001- 53 wins, 4th in O rating
-11.3 off, +20.1 plus/minus

2002- 57 wins, 1st in O rating
-3.0 off, +10.3 plus/minus

2003-60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -8.8 off court, +21.7 Plus/minus

2004- 52 wins, 1st in O rating: Rated the #1 offense of all-time by O rating
-2.0 off court, +9.2 plus/minus

2005- 58 wins, 4th in O rating
DIrk: -6 off court, +15.3

2006- 60 wins, 1st in O rating
Dirk: -0.6 off court, +8.5

2007-67 wins, 2nd in O rating
Dirk: -1.6 off court, +12.4

2008- 51 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -4.4 off court, +12.7

2009- 50 wins, 5th in O rating
Dirk: -4.2 off court, +8

2010- 55 wins, 10th in O rating
Dirk: -6.2 off court, +11.7

2011- 57 wins, 8th in O rating
Dirk: -6.1 off court, +16.3


His average +/- season from 01-05 was +15.32. He only surpassed that once since then (his 2011 run). Every other year shows lesser +/- impact.

His RAPM ranking went through the roof as of '10-11. Before that year he never really threatened for the top spot, but the last two seasons he's not only been #1, but #1 by a large margin.

Clearly you're not in the habit of using RAPM so we might be at an impasse here, but when you talk about him leading meh casts to the title you undoubtedly notice he had never done it before.

My question to you is for you to ask yourself how you'd think of Dirk if his '11 team had lost in the 1st round like they did in '10.

I wouldn't think as highly of Dirk. He got the opportunity to face the Lakers, Thunder, and Heat and he stepped up more than your typical superstar is expected. He didn't have a good team and no one would have blamed him if they lost to the Lakers or even the Heat. Yet he rose above that won both series without HCA. That moves him up. No one here blames KG for losing to the Lakers, like no one would have blamed Dirk for losing to a better Lakers team than the 04 Lakers, not only that but he swept them without HCA. Winning without HCA like that is better than losing in 6 with HCA.

Then Dirk's clutch performance led his team to a beat a real good Heat team (better than the 12 version). The Heat entered the Finals with a 27-6 record with a 9.55 SRS. Some of those games didn't even include healty Haslem and Miller, so the Heat were on track to be a legitimate juggernaut. Then Dirk beats them without HCA after being down 1.75. His 4th quarters singlehandedly won the series for the Mavs. Dirk averaged 10.3 PPG, 68 TS% in the 4th quarter of that series. His 4th quarter points was the same as LeBron and Wade combined. He didn't miss a 4th quarter FT in that series (24-24). In the clutch moments of the finals, Dirk scored 26 points on 76.7 TS% with no missed FT's. His performance was simply brilliant and better than LeBron 12 IMO