Greatest Peaks series (Thinking Basketball/Ben Taylor)

[Djoker]

to change the topic a bit away from jordan vs lebron

what does everyone else feel about hakeem or shaq placing above kareem?

agree or disagree?

All three are actually quite close in terms of peak impact and very different players as well. I can see a case for each of them as the GOAT big man peak and possibly Wilt as well who wasn't featured in the series.

Kareem has the fewest weaknesses and it's a gut feel but I think he was the most difficult to stop on offense. For example people sometimes forget that Shaq got stymied against the Blazers (very pedestrian in key Game 6 and 7 in 2000; small detail but with such small margins to begin with it feels justified to say that he wasn't great in those two huge games) and also against the Spurs in several years he looked more ordinary. He wasn't always the unstoppable diesel as people claim. Hakeem got stymied by the Sonics a few times and Knicks in 94, his efficiency was generally hit and miss and his passing was always somewhere between somewhat and quite limited. Kareem even if we extend to surrounding years like 1974 and 1980 always gave you super efficient scoring with very good passing and despite his slow decline by the late 70's still really good rebounding. The Per 75 stats also underrate Kareem slightly because he always played more minutes something that I wouldn't penalize him for and is independent of pace. Compared to Shaq, Kareem was also clearly a better defender and the skyhook made him capable of getting baskets on demand.

At the end I can see Shaq over Kareem due to his offensive dominance, physicality (fouling out entire frontcourts shouldn't be underestimated), and offensive rebounding which added a ton of value. His gravity pulling defenders inside was something else which led to really efficient offenses. Both he and Hakeem had plenty of shooters but Shaq's offenses were much better.

With Hakeem his case is a tougher sell IMO. Yes he was the best of the three defensively but offensively I don't even find him in the same ballpark. I think the stats don't tell the whole story. Worst efficiency, worst offensive rebounder, and worst passer of the three by a solid margin. His teams were also never dominant offensively the way some of the teams built around Kareem and Shaq were but conversely the defenses around Kareem and Shaq were almost as good and in the case of Kareem perhaps even better (1971 to 1973 Bucks) than on Hakeem's teams. When it comes down to it, I think a focused Kareem could be in the same ballpark as Hakeem as a defender... getting tons of blocks, intimidating guys from driving in the lane, good man defender but Hakeem couldn't touch Kareem offensively due to passing deficiencies and quite frankly missing a skyhook.

50% of me thinks Kareem is the best, 40% of me thinks Shaq and 10% of me thinks Hakeem.

Playoff Stats Per Game

77-79 Kareem: 31.4 ppg, 15.3 rpg, 4.3 apg, 1.3 spg, 3.8 bpg on 62.6 %TS (+10.8 rTS) with 3.9 topg in 44.0 mpg
00-01 Shaq: 30.6 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.1 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.4 bpg on 55.9 %TS (+3.9 rTS) with 2.9 topg in 43.0 mpg
93-95 Hakeem: 29.8 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.5 spg, 3.7 bpg on 56.4 %TS (+2.8 rTS) with 3.5 topg in 42.7 mpg

Playoff Stats Per 75 Possessions

77-79 Kareem: 25.2 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.4 apg, 1.1 spg, 3.0 bpg on 62.6 %TS (+10.8 rTS) with 3.0 topg
00-01 Shaq: 28.2 ppg, 14.3 rpg, 2.9 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.2 bpg on 55.9 %TS (+3.9 rTS) with 2.7 topg
93-95 Hakeem: 27.6 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 4.1 apg, 1.4 spg, 3.4 bpg on 56.4 %TS (+2.8 rTS) with 3.2 topg

Firstly, Olajuwon was a great passer hence why the Rockets made those threes and won two straight championships.

Look at the stars, Olajuwon got more assists out of the there of them.

Most importantly, Olajuwon had far less talent than the other two did, making his assists number and team success far more significant.

Olajuwon was far more skilled offensively and defensively than both Kareem and Shaq. He scored in many ways and in his peak he was unguardable. His jumpshot was efficient, he had a nice hook and he scored from all angles.

Hakeem was objectively the worst passer of the three. Assists don't tell the whole story. You think those shooters made 3's because of Hakeem? I think they made those 3's because they were good shooters.

Having more moves doesn't mean being better either. Hakeem's scoring efficiency was much worse than Kareem and he didn't collapse the defense and foul out people the way Shaq did.

Also worth noting that Kareem and Shaq didn't just win titles but did so in much more dominant fashion. Meanwhile Hakeem's Rockets were in a dogfight in almost every series. Sure Hakeem played really well for the most part but they had other breaks go their way too.

[70sFan]

The issue I have with Shaq (and Kareem, to a certain extent) is that they have been offensive centers who always had all time great level help form the perimeter, when successful.
We know that's the biggest knock on offensive big men retaining their impact, and they got in the best possible situation.

Guys like Hajeem or Timmeh, managed to get it done without that level of support, and to me that makes their case so much stronger.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

Kareem didn't have all-time great help from perimeter in 1974. Of course, it depends on whether you view 1977 as success or not but Duncan never played with as bad team as 1977 Lakers - Kareem still carried them to 50+wins and a win over strong Warriors team with injured roster.

You can even look at his rookie season - he didn't have terrible team but it wasn't that talented either and he led them to ECF.

This criticism is fair against Shaq, but Kareem played with weak supporting cast for most of his prime.

Kareem's career before Magic arrived is pretty ordinary, besides winning it all in 1971. He had Goodrich and some other good players in the 70s on the Lakers and they didn't achieve anything, losing more than half their games two straight years even. Think about it, no Magic and probably no Lakers championships and Kareem looks much different.

Olajuwon won back to back with role players and oone of those with an over the hill Drexler. Unlikely Kareem or Shaq could've done that.

So, if you don't win the title your career is oridinary? Then how would you describe basically whole Hakeem's career outside of 1994 and 1995?

Kareem played total of 1 season with Goodrich, in 1976 Gail was 33 years old and way past his prime. Here are his stats from that season:

19.5/2.9/5.6 on 49 TS%, -0.4 BPM, .092 WS/48 and 17.1 PER

Yeah, what an amazing second option he was!

It's not true that Kareem failed to win more than half games in two seasons - they indeed finished 40-42 in 1976, but Bucks in 1975 had clearly a winning record in games Kareem played - they just were all-time bad without him, which again disproves your narrative that Kareem had more help than Hakeem during mid-70s.

If we want to play this game, then Rockets won 42 games in 1987 and 41 games in 1990 - identical results as Lakers in 1976. The only difference is that it was enough during late 1980s, but it wasn't in 1976. Lakers didn't make the playoffs even though they had better record than Bucks or Pistons that year by the way.

Again, show me Hakeem carrying as bad team as 1977 Lakers to such results.

[migya]

All three are actually quite close in terms of peak impact and very different players as well. I can see a case for each of them as the GOAT big man peak and possibly Wilt as well who wasn't featured in the series.

Kareem has the fewest weaknesses and it's a gut feel but I think he was the most difficult to stop on offense. For example people sometimes forget that Shaq got stymied against the Blazers (very pedestrian in key Game 6 and 7 in 2000; small detail but with such small margins to begin with it feels justified to say that he wasn't great in those two huge games) and also against the Spurs in several years he looked more ordinary. He wasn't always the unstoppable diesel as people claim. Hakeem got stymied by the Sonics a few times and Knicks in 94, his efficiency was generally hit and miss and his passing was always somewhere between somewhat and quite limited. Kareem even if we extend to surrounding years like 1974 and 1980 always gave you super efficient scoring with very good passing and despite his slow decline by the late 70's still really good rebounding. The Per 75 stats also underrate Kareem slightly because he always played more minutes something that I wouldn't penalize him for and is independent of pace. Compared to Shaq, Kareem was also clearly a better defender and the skyhook made him capable of getting baskets on demand.

At the end I can see Shaq over Kareem due to his offensive dominance, physicality (fouling out entire frontcourts shouldn't be underestimated), and offensive rebounding which added a ton of value. His gravity pulling defenders inside was something else which led to really efficient offenses. Both he and Hakeem had plenty of shooters but Shaq's offenses were much better.

With Hakeem his case is a tougher sell IMO. Yes he was the best of the three defensively but offensively I don't even find him in the same ballpark. I think the stats don't tell the whole story. Worst efficiency, worst offensive rebounder, and worst passer of the three by a solid margin. His teams were also never dominant offensively the way some of the teams built around Kareem and Shaq were but conversely the defenses around Kareem and Shaq were almost as good and in the case of Kareem perhaps even better (1971 to 1973 Bucks) than on Hakeem's teams. When it comes down to it, I think a focused Kareem could be in the same ballpark as Hakeem as a defender... getting tons of blocks, intimidating guys from driving in the lane, good man defender but Hakeem couldn't touch Kareem offensively due to passing deficiencies and quite frankly missing a skyhook.

50% of me thinks Kareem is the best, 40% of me thinks Shaq and 10% of me thinks Hakeem.

Playoff Stats Per Game

77-79 Kareem: 31.4 ppg, 15.3 rpg, 4.3 apg, 1.3 spg, 3.8 bpg on 62.6 %TS (+10.8 rTS) with 3.9 topg in 44.0 mpg
00-01 Shaq: 30.6 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.1 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.4 bpg on 55.9 %TS (+3.9 rTS) with 2.9 topg in 43.0 mpg
93-95 Hakeem: 29.8 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.5 spg, 3.7 bpg on 56.4 %TS (+2.8 rTS) with 3.5 topg in 42.7 mpg

Playoff Stats Per 75 Possessions

77-79 Kareem: 25.2 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.4 apg, 1.1 spg, 3.0 bpg on 62.6 %TS (+10.8 rTS) with 3.0 topg
00-01 Shaq: 28.2 ppg, 14.3 rpg, 2.9 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.2 bpg on 55.9 %TS (+3.9 rTS) with 2.7 topg
93-95 Hakeem: 27.6 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 4.1 apg, 1.4 spg, 3.4 bpg on 56.4 %TS (+2.8 rTS) with 3.2 topg

Firstly, Olajuwon was a great passer hence why the Rockets made those threes and won two straight championships.

Look at the stars, Olajuwon got more assists out of the there of them.

Most importantly, Olajuwon had far less talent than the other two did, making his assists number and team success far more significant.

Olajuwon was far more skilled offensively and defensively than both Kareem and Shaq. He scored in many ways and in his peak he was unguardable. His jumpshot was efficient, he had a nice hook and he scored from all angles.

Hakeem was objectively the worst passer of the three. Assists don't tell the whole story. You think those shooters made 3's because of Hakeem? I think they made those 3's because they were good shooters.

Having more moves doesn't mean being better either. Hakeem's scoring efficiency was much worse than Kareem and he didn't collapse the defense and foul out people the way Shaq did.

Also worth noting that Kareem and Shaq didn't just win titles but did so in much more dominant fashion. Meanwhile Hakeem's Rockets were in a dogfight in almost every series. Sure Hakeem played really well for the most part but they had other breaks go their way too.

If you watched the games you'd see Olajuwon was havoc for the other team when on offense. In 1994 Houston was a poor the point shooting team, 33.4%, 15th in nba. In 1995, 36.8% and 14th in nba. Both championship seasons and the three point shooting was ordinary, the talent level of his team was far worse. Who did Olajuwon have to pass to that could score?? Not Robertson, Magic, Scott or Worthy. Not Penny, Nick Anderson, Dennis Scott, Kobe, Eddie Jones or Van Exel.

Kareem's Lakers barely won it in 1988, three seven game series. Shaq's Lakers had game seven lost in 2000 against Portland, had it lost in game seven in 2002 against Sacramento. They were dominant mostly besides that but could've easily won just one championship.

Olajuwon's untalented Rockets thrashed Utah in the WCF in 1994 and swept the strong Magic in the finals the next year.

[migya]

Kareem didn't have all-time great help from perimeter in 1974. Of course, it depends on whether you view 1977 as success or not but Duncan never played with as bad team as 1977 Lakers - Kareem still carried them to 50+wins and a win over strong Warriors team with injured roster.

You can even look at his rookie season - he didn't have terrible team but it wasn't that talented either and he led them to ECF.

This criticism is fair against Shaq, but Kareem played with weak supporting cast for most of his prime.

Kareem's career before Magic arrived is pretty ordinary, besides winning it all in 1971. He had Goodrich and some other good players in the 70s on the Lakers and they didn't achieve anything, losing more than half their games two straight years even. Think about it, no Magic and probably no Lakers championships and Kareem looks much different.

Olajuwon won back to back with role players and oone of those with an over the hill Drexler. Unlikely Kareem or Shaq could've done that.

So, if you don't win the title your career is oridinary? Then how would you describe basically whole Hakeem's career outside of 1994 and 1995?

Kareem played total of 1 season with Goodrich, in 1976 Gail was 33 years old and way past his prime. Here are his stats from that season:

19.5/2.9/5.6 on 49 TS%, -0.4 BPM, .092 WS/48 and 17.1 PER

Yeah, what an amazing second option he was!

It's not true that Kareem failed to win more than half games in two seasons - they indeed finished 40-42 in 1976, but Bucks in 1975 had clearly a winning record in games Kareem played - they just were all-time bad without him, which again disproves your narrative that Kareem had more help than Hakeem during mid-70s.

If we want to play this game, then Rockets won 42 games in 1987 and 41 games in 1990 - identical results as Lakers in 1976. The only difference is that it was enough during late 1980s, but it wasn't in 1976. Lakers didn't make the playoffs even though they had better record than Bucks or Pistons that year by the way.

Again, show me Hakeem carrying as bad team as 1977 Lakers to such results.

Olajuwon took an untalented team to two straight championships. Neither Kareem or Shaq did that, even Jordan didn't.

[70sFan]

Kareem's career before Magic arrived is pretty ordinary, besides winning it all in 1971. He had Goodrich and some other good players in the 70s on the Lakers and they didn't achieve anything, losing more than half their games two straight years even. Think about it, no Magic and probably no Lakers championships and Kareem looks much different.

Olajuwon won back to back with role players and oone of those with an over the hill Drexler. Unlikely Kareem or Shaq could've done that.

So, if you don't win the title your career is oridinary? Then how would you describe basically whole Hakeem's career outside of 1994 and 1995?

Kareem played total of 1 season with Goodrich, in 1976 Gail was 33 years old and way past his prime. Here are his stats from that season:

19.5/2.9/5.6 on 49 TS%, -0.4 BPM, .092 WS/48 and 17.1 PER

Yeah, what an amazing second option he was!

It's not true that Kareem failed to win more than half games in two seasons - they indeed finished 40-42 in 1976, but Bucks in 1975 had clearly a winning record in games Kareem played - they just were all-time bad without him, which again disproves your narrative that Kareem had more help than Hakeem during mid-70s.

If we want to play this game, then Rockets won 42 games in 1987 and 41 games in 1990 - identical results as Lakers in 1976. The only difference is that it was enough during late 1980s, but it wasn't in 1976. Lakers didn't make the playoffs even though they had better record than Bucks or Pistons that year by the way.

Again, show me Hakeem carrying as bad team as 1977 Lakers to such results.

Olajuwon took an untalented team to two straight championships. Neither Kareem or Shaq did that, even Jordan didn't.

If you think that 1994 or 1995 Rockets were comparably untalented to 1977 Lakers, then we have nothing to talk about anymore...

[migya]

So, if you don't win the title your career is oridinary? Then how would you describe basically whole Hakeem's career outside of 1994 and 1995?

Kareem played total of 1 season with Goodrich, in 1976 Gail was 33 years old and way past his prime. Here are his stats from that season:

19.5/2.9/5.6 on 49 TS%, -0.4 BPM, .092 WS/48 and 17.1 PER

Yeah, what an amazing second option he was!

It's not true that Kareem failed to win more than half games in two seasons - they indeed finished 40-42 in 1976, but Bucks in 1975 had clearly a winning record in games Kareem played - they just were all-time bad without him, which again disproves your narrative that Kareem had more help than Hakeem during mid-70s.

If we want to play this game, then Rockets won 42 games in 1987 and 41 games in 1990 - identical results as Lakers in 1976. The only difference is that it was enough during late 1980s, but it wasn't in 1976. Lakers didn't make the playoffs even though they had better record than Bucks or Pistons that year by the way.

Again, show me Hakeem carrying as bad team as 1977 Lakers to such results.

Olajuwon took an untalented team to two straight championships. Neither Kareem or Shaq did that, even Jordan didn't.

If you think that 1994 or 1995 Rockets were comparably untalented to 1977 Lakers, then we have nothing to talk about anymore...

You stick with 1977, Kareem played twenty more seasons. 1994 and 95 performance by Olajuwon is probably the best by a Center in history.

[70sFan]

Olajuwon took an untalented team to two straight championships. Neither Kareem or Shaq did that, even Jordan didn't.

If you think that 1994 or 1995 Rockets were comparably untalented to 1977 Lakers, then we have nothing to talk about anymore...

You stick with 1977, Kareem played twenty more seasons. 1994 and 95 performance by Olajuwon is probably the best by a Center in history.

I can use 1974, Kareem didn't have better team at that point.

You vastly underestimate 1994 and especially 1995 Rockets team. They weren't amazing, but they were well constructed and well-coached.

[migya]

If you think that 1994 or 1995 Rockets were comparably untalented to 1977 Lakers, then we have nothing to talk about anymore...

You stick with 1977, Kareem played twenty more seasons. 1994 and 95 performance by Olajuwon is probably the best by a Center in history.

I can use 1974, Kareem didn't have better team at that point.

You vastly underestimate 1994 and especially 1995 Rockets team. They weren't amazing, but they were well constructed and well-coached.

Those Houston teams relied so heavily on Olajuwon. Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Otis Thorpe wouldn't have started anywhere else and would have had short careers if not for landing with Olajuwon. One of the best ways (Doesn't always fit but generally works) to compare players at the same position is to think switching them on their respective teams. Olajuwon at his peak on any Shaq teams gives better success I think. On those 80s Lakers, obviously wasn't peak Kareem but even early career Olajuwon, they probably win six or more championships.

[70sFan]

Those Houston teams relied so heavily on Olajuwon. Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Otis Thorpe wouldn't have started anywhere else and would have had short careers if not for landing with Olajuwon.

Kenny Smith was a career 40% shooter from three point line and was decent all-around player. He was already decent in his sophomore season before he went to Houston, so you are simply wrong.

Thorpe was an all-star, he averaged 21/10/3 in Sacramento before going to Houston. He was solid all-around player and he kept playing well after he left the Rockets.

Maxwell was nothing special, I will give you that but he wasn't even Rockets 3rd best player - Horry and Cassell were better than him.

One of the best ways (Doesn't always fit but generally works) to compare players at the same position is to think switching them on their respective teams. Olajuwon at his peak on any Shaq teams gives better success I think. On those 80s Lakers, obviously wasn't peak Kareem but even early career Olajuwon, they probably win six or more championships.

It's terrible way, because it only shows your opinion that Hakeem is better than them, nothing else.

[migya]

Those Houston teams relied so heavily on Olajuwon. Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Otis Thorpe wouldn't have started anywhere else and would have had short careers if not for landing with Olajuwon.

Kenny Smith was a career 40% shooter from three point line and was decent all-around player. He was already decent in his sophomore season before he went to Houston, so you are simply wrong.

Kenny Smith was a pretty good passer and very good outside shooter for his era, which obviously went well with Olajuwon drawing defenders. At 28 years of age, when Houston win their first championship, he did little besides betting a good outside shooter. He was past any sort of prime.

Thorpe was an all-star, he averaged 21/10/3 in Sacramento before going to Houston. He was solid all-around player and he kept playing well after he left the Rockets.

Thorpe was an allstar once when in Houston and did average 21 and 10 on a 24 win Sacramento team. He was decent for a couple of seasons in Detroit adder leaving Houston, way less effective even with Grant Hill playmaking than with Olajuwon drawing all the attention and dumping it to him for easy dunks. Thorpe had no game but was a good rebounder and pretty good position defender. His success is soley due to Olajuwon for years.

Maxwell was nothing special, I will give you that but he wasn't even Rockets 3rd best player - Horry and Cassell were better than him.

Well stats showed that he did more than they did and was a pretty good defender, Horry and Cassell were at the start of their careers and role players. Yea, he wasn't that good though, compared to most team's third or fourth best players.

One of the best ways (Doesn't always fit but generally works) to compare players at the same position is to think switching them on their respective teams. Olajuwon at his peak on any Shaq teams gives better success I think. On those 80s Lakers, obviously wasn't peak Kareem but even early career Olajuwon, they probably win six or more championships.

It's terrible way, because it only shows your opinion that Hakeem is better than them, nothing else.

It doesn't show my opinion at all. If one player does better in the other player's situation it may prove that he is a better player.

[70sFan]

Kenny Smith was a pretty good passer and very good outside shooter for his era, which obviously went well with Olajuwon drawing defenders. At 28 years of age, when Houston win their first championship, he did little besides betting a good outside shooter. He was past any sort of prime.

Kenny averaged 11/4 with only 1.4 tov on 60 TS% and 40% from three point line in 1994 and 1995 playoffs. He was very important piece of this team and he certainly wasn't shot.

Thorpe was an allstar once when in Houston and did average 21 and 10 on a 24 win Sacramento team. He was decent for a couple of seasons in Detroit adder leaving Houston, way less effective even with Grant Hill playmaking than with Olajuwon drawing all the attention and dumping it to him for easy dunks. Thorpe had no game but was a good rebounder and pretty good position defender. His success is soley due to Olajuwon for years.

Hakeem didn't make Thorpe elite rebounder. He didnt make him elite finisher or strong defender. Thorpe was good basketball player, limited and far from amazing but good at his best. He held his own as a backup center when Hakeem rested.

Well stats showed that he did more than they did and was a pretty good defender, Horry and Cassell were at the start of their careers and role players. Yea, he wasn't that good though, compared to most team's third or fourth best players.

I'd say that he's 4th best Rockets player at best, maybe even lower than that.

It doesn't show my opinion at all. If one player does better in the other player's situation it may prove that he is a better player.

How can you prove that Hakeem would fare better than Kareem in the same situation? It's just your opinion, nothing else.

Hakeem after 1997 (13th season) was shot, how could he replicate Kareem's success with Showtime Lakers then? 1998-01 Hakeem vs 1983-87 Kareem is not a debate, Jabbar crushes him here.

When would Hakeem win the title before 1980? 1987 Hakeem wasn't good enough to beat 1972 Lakers with injured Oscar. I doubt he'd win the title in 1974 either. At best he would have a chance in 1978 because he was healthier, but 1978 Lakers were far worse team than 1993-95 Rockets.

[Owly]

Otis Thorpe wouldn't have started anywhere else and would have had short careers if not for landing with Olajuwon

Thorpe was an allstar once when in Houston and did average 21 and 10 on a 24 win Sacramento team. He was decent for a couple of seasons in Detroit adder leaving Houston, way less effective even with Grant Hill playmaking than with Olajuwon drawing all the attention and dumping it to him for easy dunks. Thorpe had no game but was a good rebounder and pretty good position defender. His success is soley due to Olajuwon for years.

Disregarding how a player with "no game" got all-star game appearances in and out of Houston, and how a player with 9621 minutes (321 games, 205 starts) before Houston and 11570 (418 games, 270 starts) after would have had a "short career" if not for Olajuwon and "wouldn't have started anywhere else"...

Do you have any footage of this Olajuwon to Thorpe play? I'm not a great Xs and Os guy but Hakeem "drawing attention" seems likely to have him posting (and surely broadly basket adjacent), but Thorpe in a "dumpable" position and the defense helping off another post player and one of the most prolific dunkers of his era (league leader in '92). What I have seen and read suggested he got his points primarily (and most effectively) by running the floor, pick and rolls and hitting the offensive glass.

[Djoker]

In 1995, Hakeem also had Drexler who was a really good 2nd option and exploded in the playoffs.

[PistolPeteJR]

Well, sadly, this thread’s been deteriorating... it was fun while it lasted.

Thanks to those who made it fruitful.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Well, sadly, this thread’s been deteriorating... it was fun while it lasted.

Thanks to those who made it fruitful.

well, what did you expect? the series is over...

[Goudelock]

Watch on YouTube

Anyone got any thoughts on this?

[PistolPeteJR]

Well, sadly, this thread’s been deteriorating... it was fun while it lasted.

Thanks to those who made it fruitful.

well, what did you expect? the series is over...

I dared to expect better.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Watch on YouTube

Anyone got any thoughts on this?

I see no lies.

[Morb]

This dude is T-Mac hater? Like zero mentions, kek.))

Sent from my Nokia 5.1 Plus using RealGM mobile app

[Odinn21]

I think this patreon post by Ben might be for you regarding KG https://backpicks.com/2021/04/20/kevin-garnett-and-the-slow-gish-gallop/

As Ben always does with Garnett, he sidesteps some of the issues and talk from a different angle.

For example he argues against Garnett being more dependant on his environment compared to all-time top 15 level players. And it's true that Garnett was more limited than those players. Garnett's combination of creating his own shot, going through contacts and putting his matchup foul trouble, drawing doubles was definitely weaker than the other players in the top 15.

He sidesteps talking about the issue by looking at on/off numbers without acknowledging it's about roster and lineup construction.

The team with Kevin Garnett on their roster reached '02-'03 Duncan level high value shot distribution when Garnett's team also had Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. For someone who always sees Duncan's case downgraded with Popovich's, Ginobili's and Parker's presence, it's just bizarre to me that Taylor never does this with Garnett and interpolates stuff from Garnett's time in Boston.

Taylor mentions Garnett's layup assist percentages compared to league average, and highlights impact of the seasons with Flip Saunders. If we look at the RealGM post he's responding to, that change in assist distribution did not mean much considering the Wolves were still at the bottom of the league in terms of high value shots. Maybe we should look for shooting distribution, among players and spots on the floor.
Taylor's entire post is about disproving the claim, so I'm not hard on what he's saying. His point says "it's not directly related, and we should look for more". However, when he wants to prove otherwise, he's just doing what O_6 did in his post. Assumptions.

In the latest parts, he compares Garnett's performance to Duncan's performance and as it's about disproving, also irony is obvious. But I truly get annoyed by how he still refuse to acknowledge any of the health issues Duncan and the Spurs had to play through in Duncan's peak seasons. With Garnett, he's all like "look, it's all context dependant and the team around him sucked", then proceeds to do the exact opposite with Duncan to make it an argument. It's just annoying.
I'm very curious how hard Taylor'd whine about Troy Hudson going down instead of going hot in 2003 playoffs and the Lakers could afford to triple Garnett like 70% of the time.