Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #9 - 1985-86 Larry Bird

[CharityStripe34]

Going to try and get three peak seasons across the eras.

1. Larry Bird (1986): Many of you outlined what many people already know, and that this was Bird's greatest year of his storied career, on a historically great team that dominated from start to finish. Absolutely otherworldly "feel for the game" level of passing with elite rebounding, crafty defense and offensive brilliance. Arguably the greatest ever SF season in history.

Honorable mention: Larry Bird (1984, 1987)

2. Giannis Antetokounmpo (2021): Had another awesome season with 1st Team All-Defense and historic levels of efficiency offensively, only this was the season he made the mini-leap in the playoffs to put it all together with a phenomenal post-season run, capping it with one of the most dominant Finals series ever.

Honorable mention: Giannis Antetokounmpo (2020, 2022)

3. Bob Pettit (1959) : A man much forgotten in the annals of NBA lore, but who's entire career was almost one extended peak. He had an awesome season the year before, even leading the Hawks to their lone title over the vaunted Russell/Cousy Celtics. But his following year was his second MVP season with ridiculous averages of 29-16-4. He's the guy who essentially created/defined the PF position once he bulked up and added a long-distance jumpshot when mostly everyone was shooting hook-shots and set shots. 1959 he also led the league with 14.8 WS.

(1958, 1962)

[Doctor MJ]

We are fresh off a season when top 3 MVP candidates played at center, just to remind you

Giannis mostly doesn't play center.

Jokic plays virtually nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.

Embiid is the closest thing to these guys but with an ability to shoot from 3 and attack from the perimeter, and by the end of the playoffs the question was whether he was Top 5 or not.

Giannis played almost full season at center. He wasn't any less center in 2022 than Duncan in 20003.

Russell virtually played nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.
Shaq and Wilt played nothing like any other players ever.

Embiid is nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in.

Re: Giannis. Fair enough, but he typically isn't playing center when things are going according to plan, and it's not like the regular season Bucks this year looked like a champion a la Duncan in '2003.

Re: Russell played nothing like any of the guys either. That's not a counter argument. My point with Jokic is that he can succeed like he does today because he has abilities they didn't have that are more valuable today. Opposite is true with Russell, and most of these guys.

Re: Shaq & Wilt...played big. Shaq would have huge defensive issues today with spacing, Wilt would handle it better but would still be hurt by it.

Re: Embiid nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in. Not really looking to argue pro-Embiid here, but it's interesting to me you're so sure of that.

[eminence]

The thing is that competition didn't change anything in Magic-led teams offensive results:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

Curry didn't face siginifcantly better defensive competition in any of his title seasons:

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg

Magic faced significantly stronger defensive competition in 1988-91 period than Curry did and Lakers offense was still better than Warriors (outside of massive outlier in 2017).

I'm unsure why these particular seasons were chosen for the comparison?

[70sFan]

The thing is that competition didn't change anything in Magic-led teams offensive results:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

Curry didn't face siginifcantly better defensive competition in any of his title seasons:

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg

Magic faced significantly stronger defensive competition in 1988-91 period than Curry did and Lakers offense was still better than Warriors (outside of massive outlier in 2017).

I'm unsure why these particular seasons were chosen for the comparison?

Because these are the best seasons for both players. Would you include any other season?

[70sFan]

Giannis mostly doesn't play center.

Jokic plays virtually nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.

Embiid is the closest thing to these guys but with an ability to shoot from 3 and attack from the perimeter, and by the end of the playoffs the question was whether he was Top 5 or not.

Giannis played almost full season at center. He wasn't any less center in 2022 than Duncan in 20003.

Russell virtually played nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.
Shaq and Wilt played nothing like any other players ever.

Embiid is nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in.

Re: Giannis. Fair enough, but he typically isn't playing center when things are going according to plan, and it's not like the regular season Bucks this year looked like a champion a la Duncan in '2003.

Re: Russell played nothing like any of the guys either. That's not a counter argument. My point with Jokic is that he can succeed like he does today because he has abilities they didn't have that are more valuable today. Opposite is true with Russell, and most of these guys.

Re: Shaq & Wilt...played big. Shaq would have huge defensive issues today with spacing, Wilt would handle it better but would still be hurt by it.

Re: Embiid nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in. Not really looking to argue pro-Embiid here, but it's interesting to me you're so sure of that.

Your first argument was that the center position is dominated by roleplayers now and we don't have dominant players at this position. Now you're saying that the three players I mentioned are great because they impact the game in unique way. The same thing can be said to any all-time great player though. It's easy to simply label the 6 players voted in as "traditional centers", but there is nothing traditional in their game - all of them did it in unique way.

Let's run a thought experiment. You say that Jokic works, because he's unique. Would you say it had he played in the 1970s for example? He's such an outlier that we probably would have a very hard time evaluating how he'd translate to modern game. I mean, who else is Jokic-like in 2022 NBA? The best comparison is young Sabonis? Would you be sure about Jokic translating to modern NBA if his closest comparison would be Sabonis? How about Giannis? Someone who can't shoot and relies heavily on his physicality and has big part of his impact on defensive end. It doesn't sound like someone built for 2022 game, but he made it work. We don't have any comparison for Shaq, Wilt or even Kareem now. We can speculate that they might have a tough time to adjust, but there are a lot of reasons to believe they would do just fine.

Nobody in any era would say that Shaq archetype could work as the best player in the league... until we saw it.

[falcolombardi]

Repeating my vote from last time below, but thought I'd add this video that's been making the rounds recently:

Watch on YouTube

There's obviously some issues with listening to the assessment of someone who has just watched one game from every era, so make of that what you will, but I think it's pretty clear when you watch how the game has just gotten more and more skilled and sophisticated over time, with radical changes made since the turn of the millenium.

And this would be my reminder as we've now said that 6 of the 8 top players in history play a position that is now largely manned by role players, that in the cutting edge of the game, it's been guys who are a threat on the perimeter that have come to reign supreme.

It's tough to know what to do with era shifts, and as I've said, there's no athlete I respect more than Bill Russell, but I think this dichotomy is what that we all need to chew on going forward, and not just in this project.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Steph Curry '16-17 (or '15-16 or '20-21 or '21-22)

As I've said, I think it's a really big deal that Curry effectively represents the cutting edge of the game we currently see.

We're no longer in a league where things are mostly pretty static like were arguably for about 40 years from somewhere in the '60s to the mid-00s. We've reached a new hockey stick in the sigmoid function.



We don't know where it will end, or what will come next. All we really know is that the game is more strategically optimized today because of greater use of the 3-point shot with a massively improved skill at this shot and complementary/oppositional skills.

And so the best teams today would beat the best teams of the past so long as the 3-point line is on the court.

And Curry's teams keep coming out as the best teams of today.

I respect folks' philosophy who are trying to be more era-neutral than this, but regardless of how it factors into your rankings, I think it's something to really chew on, because it's certainly not how most of us expected the game to go.

2. Magic Johnson '86-87 (pretty accepted I think)
3. Larry Bird '85-86 (pretty accepted I think)

Previously I focused on Magic's "solving" of the game as the reason why I just have a smidge more confidence in Magic than Bird.

But honestly I'd rather just gush about the two of them together. I think these guys might be the two greatest offensive geniuses we've ever seen, and for them to come out of college at the same, first as NCAA Championship rivals, and then proceeding the best in the West and the East for the better part of the following NBA decade...I mean just, wow, the basketball gods smiled upon the NBA at that time.

There's a part of me that feels like these guys would prove to be the best offensive players in the world in any era, and so anyone who has Magic or Bird ahead of Curry, I certainly get it and question myself.

Honorable Mention:

Julius Erving remains the next guy on my mind, and frankly I can definitely see arguments for him over all of the guys on my list above.

Also, I wanted to specifically shout out Bill Russell here after seeing '70s posts. Certainly gives me more confidence in continuing to think of Russell not simply as the defensive GOAT, but as a defensive talent remains unique in what we've seen since.

I dont like how that video talks about the evolution of the game in a "imrpoving and optimizing" way because basketball is not a sport who has stayed static rules and reffing wise, far from it. If basketvall had the same rules and reffing as the 60's then i could agree with the idea moderm basketball is the ultimate version of it until now

The reason why curry can revolucionize the game is because 70+ years into the game story someone got a radical idea to implement a 3 point line, and to a lesser degree because over the decades new changes like looser ballhandling rules or loose reffing on moving screens elevated the potential of what curry ball would eventually be able to achieve

Imagine if in soccer it was decided that goals from outside the goal area (the bigger of the two squares) was worth 2 goals, the whole game would change in a way that goes counter to current meta

Would that mean players and teams from the 2010's should be punished cause their style was optimized for the rules of the time? If nba decides to implement rules and reffing that nerfs 3 point shooting and makes the game mpre like the 90's will we punish curry for it?

Even the word "evolution" doesnt actually mean "improving" it actually means -adapting- and adapting to rules (aka the 3 point line) and reffing (aka looser ballhandling, seconds in the paint rules that limit post ups, refs that dont like calling fouls on post ups but do on slashing)

Just as 3 point shooting became the new meta, post up basketball could come back as the new meta dependign on how the game evolves or rules and reffing changes and it wouldnt be any less valid or
-artificial- than creating the 3 point line was

There is nothingh more "real" about a version of basketball with 3 point shooting that with it, with ilegal defense than without it, with second in the paint that without it, with strict ballhandling rules than without them

I prefer modern basketball style and rules but i dont like acting like they are tge ultimate or definitve version of basketball

As to your point about bigs, literally the top 3 mvp candidates and the mpst common picks for current top 2 players (jokic and giannis) who won the last 4 mvps are all bigs. Add that davis was a top 3 player in the world just 2 years ago and that zion (unless you see him as a wing) is the most hyped prospect of the last 5-6 years too

Gobert, towns, adebayo,ayton, green among other high impact players. The most hyped prospect of this draft is a big (chet holgrem) and the most hyped prospect since maybe davis (a big too) is wenbayama, another center

Guards are coming of a golden generation of sorts (curry, harden, paul, westbrook, lillard and others)

and wings may have had their own golden era (lebron, kawhi, durant being 3 of the most talented wings ever + george, butler, etc)

These two coincided with a nadir in big man talent that many thought would be the new normal across the 2010's but since then big man talent made a huge resurgence and is now looking like one the most talented crop of bigs ever in the 2020's

Is not unlikely that the 2020's will be a resurgence era for big dominance of the league overall, the 2020 (davis althoufh admiteddly co leading with an all time wing) and 2021 (giannis) already show that trend going on

[eminence]

The thing is that competition didn't change anything in Magic-led teams offensive results:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

Curry didn't face siginifcantly better defensive competition in any of his title seasons:

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg

Magic faced significantly stronger defensive competition in 1988-91 period than Curry did and Lakers offense was still better than Warriors (outside of massive outlier in 2017).

I'm unsure why these particular seasons were chosen for the comparison?

Because these are the best seasons for both players. Would you include any other season?

If '15/'18 are included for Curry I'd say his '19/'22 ('21 too, but playoffs...) are on that level.

I'd need to go back to look at Magic again to see if I like '87 as his starting point, but conservatively it's very tough to argue '89 as not worth being included for analysis (MVP, 1st seed, long playoff run).

[falcolombardi]

Giannis played almost full season at center. He wasn't any less center in 2022 than Duncan in 20003.

Russell virtually played nothing like any of the guys who have been voted in.
Shaq and Wilt played nothing like any other players ever.

Embiid is nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in.

Re: Giannis. Fair enough, but he typically isn't playing center when things are going according to plan, and it's not like the regular season Bucks this year looked like a champion a la Duncan in '2003.

Re: Russell played nothing like any of the guys either. That's not a counter argument. My point with Jokic is that he can succeed like he does today because he has abilities they didn't have that are more valuable today. Opposite is true with Russell, and most of these guys.

Re: Shaq & Wilt...played big. Shaq would have huge defensive issues today with spacing, Wilt would handle it better but would still be hurt by it.

Re: Embiid nowhere near the talent the 6 who got voted in. Not really looking to argue pro-Embiid here, but it's interesting to me you're so sure of that.

Your first argument was that the center position is dominated by roleplayers now and we don't have dominant players at this position. Now you're saying that the three players I mentioned are great because they impact the game in unique way. The same thing can be said to any all-time great player though. It's easy to simply label the 6 players voted in as "traditional centers", but there is nothing traditional in their game - all of them did it in unique way.

Let's run a thought experiment. You say that Jokic works, because he's unique. Would you say it had he played in the 1970s for example? He's such an outlier that we probably would have a very hard time evaluating how he'd translate to modern game. I mean, who else is Jokic-like in 2022 NBA? The best comparison is young Sabonis? Would you be sure about Jokic translating to modern NBA if his closest comparison would be Sabonis? How about Giannis? Someone who can't shoot and relies heavily on his physicality and has big part of his impact on defensive end. It doesn't sound like someone built for 2022 game, but he made it work. We don't have any comparison for Shaq, Wilt or even Kareem now. We can speculate that they might have a tough time to adjust, but there are a lot of reasons to believe they would do just fine.

Nobody in any era would say that Shaq archetype could work as the best player in the league... until we saw it.

This

Is easy to say duncan is "just" a classic defensive anchor with post up scoring, tons of players in theory fit that profile right?

In practice there are exactly 3 players across history who combine all time level center defense with efficient/resilient volume scoring and ability to create tons of shots for teammates: wilt hakeem duncan

And all of them did in different ways with different skillsets and body types

Kareem is "just" a post up big but nobody in history can score in the post with his volume, efficiency and resiliency to anythignh the defense does

By definition most goat level players dont have anyone similar to them, there is no point forward with lebron combination of defense, scoring and passing

There is no point forward with magic ballhandling passing amd efficiency combination

There is no point forward (stretching the word a bit) with larrt bird off ball game, scoring passing amd rebounding combination

[70sFan]

I'm unsure why these particular seasons were chosen for the comparison?

Because these are the best seasons for both players. Would you include any other season?

If '15/'18 are included for Curry I'd say his '19/'22 ('21 too, but playoffs...) are on that level.

I'd need to go back to look at Magic again to see if I like '87 as his starting point, but conservatively it's very tough to argue '89 as not worth being included for analysis (MVP, 1st seed, long playoff run).

To be honest, I excluded 1989 because Magic missed games in the finals, but it was inconsistent from my part - as I included 2016 for Curry. It wasn't caused by me trying to prove a point, I just forgot excluding 2016 after I excluded 1989.

Anyway, here are the years you included to see:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1989 Lakers: -1.3 defense faced, +9.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg
2019 Warriors: -0.5 defense faced, +5.4 rORtg
2022 Warriors: -2.8 defense faced, +6.0 rORtg

I don't think it changed my point overall.

[LukaTheGOAT]

For those voting for KG, why do you consider his peak above David Robinson's?

[falcolombardi]

Because these are the best seasons for both players. Would you include any other season?

If '15/'18 are included for Curry I'd say his '19/'22 ('21 too, but playoffs...) are on that level.

I'd need to go back to look at Magic again to see if I like '87 as his starting point, but conservatively it's very tough to argue '89 as not worth being included for analysis (MVP, 1st seed, long playoff run).

To be honest, I excluded 1989 because Magic missed games in the finals, but it was inconsistent from my part - as I included 2016 for Curry. It wasn't caused by me trying to prove a point, I just forgot excluding 2016 after I excluded 1989.

Anyway, here are the years you included to see:

1987 Lakers: +0.9 defense faced, +10.7 rORtg
1988 Lakers: -2.2 defense faced, +8.3 rORtg
1989 Lakers: -1.3 defense faced, +9.3 rORtg
1990 Lakers: -3.8 defense faced, +8.4 rORtg
1991 Lakers: -2.1 defense faced, +5.9 rORtg

2015 Warriors: -1.0 defense faced, +4.1 rORtg
2016 Warriors: -0.1 defense faced, +4.2 rORtg
2017 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +11.4 rORtg
2018 Warriors: -1.2 defense faced, +6.5 rORtg
2019 Warriors: -0.5 defense faced, +5.4 rORtg
2022 Warriors: -2.8 defense faced, +6.0 rORtg

I don't think it changed my point overall.

Magic offense numbers are just mindblowing

[falcolombardi]

For those voting for KG, why do you consider his peak above David Robinson's?

I suppose you could argue his offense skillset is more valuable?

[ceoofkobefans]

8. 2016 Steph Curry

Now you can use 17 as his peak if you’re gonna tax 16 for the PO injury but 16 clearly has better shot making and the years aren’t much different everywhere else. 16 Steph curry is a clear t4 offensive peak ever. What makes Steph such an amazing player is that he gives you the best off ball movement ever while being the greatest shooter ever and him being an elite on ball player makes not only his offense the most unique style ever but also how defenses have to guard him. He’s being doubled at half court and you have to keep 2 guys on him regardless of if he has the ball which makes shot creating for him very easy (**** he’s creating shots without ever touching the ball). Being the best off ball creator ever while still being elite on the ball makes him a t10 playmaker Imo and I don’t even need to go into how he’s a t10 scorer ever. The 30 PPG on +10 rTS (and being 1 of 2 players ever to lead the league in scoring rate and efficiency) speaks for itself. While he isn’t an elite defender he has a good motor (which is crazy for how active he is on the ball) and has good off ball awareness. He’s a very solid team defender but would get “hunted” on the ball due to how good the rest of the warriors defenders were. I feel like him being a slight + on D is very fair. I like the 8 spot for him but could see him in the tier up or down depending on how high you are on his scoring and defense (and how much you value on ball playmaking)


9. 1986 Larry Bird

Larry bird has a very interesting playstyle. He’s one of the few ATG players to prefer off ball to on ball (and with good reason as he’s one of the best off ball movers ever). He’s one of the pioneers of the 3ball and one of the best shooter of the 20th century. Bird’s an elite scorer (averaged 25 IA PTS/75 on +4.1 rTS in the RS from 84-87) that garnered a lot of attention from the defense thanks to him being one of the best floor spacers of the entire decade (took the second most 3PA from 80-89 despite missing almost the entire 89 season). Bird didn’t have a very good handle and wasn’t athletic so he didn’t apply much rim pressure but he had a deep bag and was really good at faking out defenders and getting open jumpers that way. He was much better off the ball than on and new where to go to get open even tho he wasn’t athletic he was very smart. Although he’s elite as a His best trait is easily his passing ability (specifically his touch passing). Where he lacked in applying rim pressure as a scorer he made up for with his elite rim passing. He was great at finding cutters and rollers and was able to hit passes through tight windows easily. While bird doesn’t have the same gravity as most other all time greats, his all time passing vision was able to help him still be a top 10 playmaker ever as he was able to essentially create advantages where there weren’t any with his passes. Defensively this certainly isn’t his peak but he’s still good. Bird was a really solid post defender and was used more as a weakside rim protector / interior help defender since he was too slow to guard most perimeter players but he was a really solid interior defender. The Celtics generally had good defenses and he was a contributor to those (although clearly not the teams best defender)

Bird does have a bit of a reputation as a playoff dropper because of years like 85 and 87 where he had playoff injuries but i think he retains his regular season value mostly. I could see him over Steph depending on how good you think his O is (or if you’re low on Steph) but I could also see him below the guys in my 10-12 range.

10. 2008 Kobe Bryant

I know this is probably going to be controversial on this forum since he’s usually fringe t15 on peak lists around here (due to what seems like RS impact metrics). Most Impact metrics generally do have him around the fringe t15 range (like 13-17ish) but Kobe is one of the biggest PO risers ever. Here’s 08-10 Kobe from the RS to PO (biggest peak PO sample we have without 2 first round exits skewing results).

(Box numbers are IA/75)
RS
28.3 PTS
5.3 AST
5.8 TRB
3 TOV
+1.8 rTS
+5.3 BBR BPM (+3.9/g)
+5 BP BPM/g (+6.7/100)
+4.1 AuPM/g (+5.5/100)
+5.96 RAPTOR (+4.4/g)

PO
30.5 PTS
5.6 AST
5.8 TRB
3 TOV/75
+3.9 rTS
+7.8 BPM (+6/g)
+6.3 BP BPM/g (+8.2/100)
+4.7 AuPM/g (+6.1/100)
+8.07 RAPTOR (+6.2/g)

Here’s just 2008 since that’s his best season

RS
28.1 PTS
5.3 AST
6.1 TRB
3 TOV
+3.6 rTS
+5.8 BBR BPM (+4.5/g)
+6.1 BP BPM/g (+7.9/100)
+4.2 AuPM/g (+5.4/100)
+7.09 RAPTOR (+5.5/g)

PO
30.5 PTS
5.6 AST
5.6 TRB
3.2 TOV
+4.9 rTS
+7.4 BBR BPM (+5.9/g)
+6.7 BP BPM/g (+8.4/100)
+2.1 3yr AuPM/g (+2.6/100 this is obviously skewed by the 2 previous years)
+7.63 RAPTOR (+6.06/g)

31 IA PTS/75 on +5 rTS is absolutely insane when you consider that he’s playing in 2 center lineups with his best spacer being him and facing more gravity than anyone in nba history that’s name doesn’t start with an S. Him being able to pretty much maintain that in the PO over a 3yr stretch of finals runs against GOAT tier PO comp (same points on +4 rTS) is pretty damn good evidence for him being not only an all time PO riser but this scoring production being real for him. Him being an all time PO riser makes since because he’s arguably the best tough shot maker of all time and is a clear all time self creator which is the number 1 way for your scoring to be resilient in the PO against tougher defenses and more defensive attention. His defense was also pretty solid in 2008. He did still have a bit of a motor issue in the RS but it consistently would shoot up in the PO and this was no different in 08. He was a very good on ball defender but was also a good off ball defender (really good trapper, was the lakers’ primary communicator, and I thought his off ball awareness was improved from his past few years, although his closeout D wasn’t great which hurt his overall off ball D)

Overall i think it’s pretty fair to put Kobe in that top 10 range although I could see him at like 14ish(?) depending how high you are on others/low on him

[Proxy]

For those voting for KG, why do you consider his peak above David Robinson's?

I think his offensive skillset is more resilient and probably more valuable. One thing is how I believe Drob's offensive value is more dependent on his scoring and that he drops off even more than KG against elite defenses - although i'd still call him a better scorer, but also believe things like KG's off ball value, passing, etc. are harder to deal with and also more scalable(I mention them in my posts talking about why he's on my ballot). So really I just prefer his offense a bit more which matters when these players are all this close, and I also prefer his defense(my main preferences ig are his motor, communication and awareness, and schematic versatility) but I view them on the same level on defense and it could prob go either way.

[LukaTheGOAT]

For those voting for KG, why do you consider his peak above David Robinson's?

I think his offensive skillset is more resilient and probably more valuable. One thing is how I believe Drob's offensive value is more dependent on his scoring and that he drops off even more than KG against elite defenses - although i'd still call him a better scorer, but also believe things like KG's off ball value, passing, etc. are harder to deal with and also more scalable(I mention them in my posts talking about why he's on my ballot). So really I just prefer his offense a bit more which matters when these players are all this close, and I also prefer his defense(my main preferences ig are his motor, communication, and versatility) but I view them on the same level.

Gotcha.

[trex_8063]

I've not been participating [other than a few discussion posts] to this point, but I'm going to jump in for this round at least.....

1. '04 Kevin Garnett
I'll perhaps point to the #8 spot just taken by Bill Russell.......because I feel Kevin Garnett is one of just a few who is probably very near him in his defensive chops. No one ever achieved the level of defensive impact that Bill Russell did.......but to be fair, players like Garnett, Duncan, Mutombo, Hakeem, big Ben, etc never had the opportunity to be a defensive anchor in an era where the floor was so condensed (fully potentiating the impact of a rim-protecting big).
I don't know if any player could have matched Russell's impact in his own time......but I think Garnett [and perhaps Duncan] are the guys who'd have a shot. Both of them appear to be the top of their era in defensive IQ [Draymond Green is the only other defensive big of the last 25 years I can think of who perhaps can match them in this]; and they have Russell's length (and Garnett has at least really close to his athleticism, too).

On the flip-side, I'm skeptical Russell could do appreciably better in the modern(ish) era than Garnett did.

Short-version: I think Garnett is pretty close to Russell as a defensive juggernaut; but whereas Russell was merely fair-to-decent offensively, Garnett is actually REALLY good [though perhaps short of "great"] on that end too.

imo, such two-way dynamos at least marginally out-shine the more one-sided player peaks. So I personally feel he peaked slightly higher than Russell [or Magic Johnson, for example].
fwiw, this is not a purely retrospective viewpoint fueled by analytics. I distinctly remember composing an "NBA update" email to my dad in early 2004, and thinking fairly definitively at the time that Kevin Garnett was the best player in the world (which was perhaps striking in my mind, considering the league contained prime [if not peak] Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal, and Kobe Bryant).


2. '95 David Robinson ('96 DRob, '94 DRob)
Not sure the best year to go with; each has a slightly differing selling point, and honestly I think he was near the same level in all three years.
I imagine this will be a contraversial pick, but it sort of follows in the same vein as my Kevin Garnett pick: two-way dynamos.
I think people sometimes fail to acknowledge how extraordinary an OFFENSIVE player Robinson was in the regular season.......they just focus on the playoff decline.
I've made this [only slightly hyperbolic] statement before: Robinson was essentially asked/expected to be Bill Russell on defense AND Michael Jordan on offense for those early-mid 90s Spurs teams.

And the crazy as **** part of it is: he was mostly successful during the rs.

Frankly if he HAD been able to maintain that in the post-season, he'd have more than a puncher's chance of taking the #1 greatest peak of all-time.

In addition to his off-the-chart box-derived metrics [in the rs], look at his rs impact metrics over this same three-year span:
'94 Top 5 APM (from colts18)
1. David Robinson: +7.31
2. Kevin Willis: +5.44
3. Karl Malone: +5.37
4. Hakeem Olajuwon: +5.10
5. Nate McMillan: +4.85
(NOTE: the separation between Robinson [at #1] and #2 is greater than the separation between #2 and #11).

'94 Top 5 AuPM (Backpicks)
1. David Robinson: +6.7
2. Karl Malone: +5.2
3. Nate McMillan: +4.8
4. Hakeem Olajuwon: +4.5
5. Kevin Willis: +4.3
(NOTE: the separation between Robinson [at #1] and #2 is greater than the separation between #2 and #6).


'95 Top 5 APM
1. David Robinson: +7.42
2. Shaquille O'Neal: +5.80
3. Karl Malone: +4.93
4. Anfernee Hardaway: +4.68
5. Scottie Pippen: +4.63
(NOTE: the separation between Robinson [at #1] and #2 is greater than the separation between #2 and #6).

'95 Top 5 AuPM
1. David Robinson: +8.7
2. Scottie Pippen: +5.9
3. Shaquille O'Neal: +5.6
4. Anfernee Hardaway: +5.6
5. Karl Malone: +5.3
(NOTE: the separation between Robinson [at #1] and #2 is equal to the separation between #2 and #24).


'96 Top 5 APM
1. Michael Jordan: +6.67
2. David Robinson: +5.89
3. Anfernee Hardaway: +5.26
4. Scottie Pippen: +4.99
5. Karl Malone: +4.89

'96 Top 5 AuPM
1. David Robinson: +6.7
2. Michael Jordan: +6.5
3. Scottie Pippen: +5.8
4. Anfernee Hardaway: +5.7
5. Karl Malone: +5.2


I mean, holy cow. You look at these three years, and he's not just outperforming the competition......he's obliterating them! Except for a prime Michael Jordan [in '96], there's no one remotely close to him in the rs. And these are all-timers he's obliterating.
In the playoffs, he comes back to Earth: down to maybe being only maybe like the 2nd or 3rd-best player in the league. Oh dear.

So how much deduction should he get for going from GOAT-candidate in rs to circa-2nd best in any given year in the playoffs?
idk.....decide for yourself. But don't sleep on how friggin' unearthly he was in the rs.
For myself, he's near the region of Duncan/Hakeem/Garnett; usually just behind, but really really close.


EDIT:
3. '21??? Giannis Antetokounmpo ('20, '22)
I don't have time, but continuing with the two-way juggernauts. Giannis is that.
I reserve the right to switch my last pick to one of my HM's below, but for now I'll go this route.

Other people I considered were Magic Johson, Nikola Jokic, Larry Bird, Steph Curry. Bill Walton crossed my mind, but health/missed games is just enough of an issue to me that I back him out of consideration.

[SickMother]

For those voting for KG, why do you consider his peak above David Robinson's?

Admiral 94-95: 29.1 PER | .602 TS% | 111 TS+ | 17.5 WS | .273 WS/48 | 9.2 BPM | 120 ORtg | 99 DRtg
Admiral 94-95 Playoffs?!?: 22.6 PER | .536 TS% | 2.3 WS | .176 WS/48 | 6.1 BPM | 108 ORtg | 98 DRtg

Garnett 03-04: 29.4 PER | .547 TS% | 106 TS+ | 18.3 WS | .272 WS/48 | 10.2 BPM | 112 ORtg | 92 DRtg
Garnett 03-04 Playoffs?!?: 25.0 PER | .513 TS% | 2.7 WS | .163 WS/48 | 6.5 BPM | 100 ORtg | 95 DRtg

Both players drop off in playoff production is too high for me to consider them for the Top 10 when there are so many all time greats who carried their production over into the postseason, but I would probably have 94-95 Admiral over 03-04 Garnett.

[falcolombardi]

This may be a hot take that nobody will agree with.....

But if curry and magic are being so heavily considered, why not nash too?

His offense impact is up there with them (his offense team results may be more impressive than curry and even magic) and while he may be a worse defender i am not sure is a huge gap as last i checked there is no clear +/- evidence of him being a big defensive handicap

[70sFan]

This may be a hot take that nobody will agree with.....

But if curry and magic are being so heavily considered, why not nash too?

His offense impact is up there with them (his offense team results may be more impressive than curry and even magic) and while he may be a worse defender i am not sure is a huge gap as last i checked there is no clear +/- evidence of him being a big defensive handicap

I think the difference in defense is significant. Nash wasn't WOAT on defense, but he was a clear negative to me.

I haven't checked Nash RAPM/RPM/etc. numbers in a long time, but I remember him always finishing with negative results on defense.

[SickMother]

This may be a hot take that nobody will agree with.....

But if curry and magic are being so heavily considered, why not nash too?

His offense impact is up there with them (his offense team results may be more impressive than curry and even magic) and while he may be a worse defender i am not sure is a huge gap as last i checked there is no clear +/- evidence of him being a big defensive handicap

Nash's production is a pretty clear step below both Magic/Steph for me. Not as strong in the regular season & not as resilient in the playoffs...

Magic 86-87: 27.0 PER | .602 TS% | 112 TS+ | 15.9 WS | .263 WS/48 | 8.8 BPM | 124 ORtg | 106 DRtg
Magic 86-87 Playoffs?!?: 26.2 PER | .607 TS% | 3.7 WS | .265 WS/48 | 9.3 BPM | 129 ORtg | 107 DRtg

Curry 14-15: 28.0 PER | .638 TS% | 119 TS+ | 15.7 WS | .288 WS/48 | 9.9 BPM | 122 ORtg | 101 DRtg
Curry 14-15 Playoffs?!?: 24.5 PER | .607 TS% | 3.9 WS | .228 WS/48 | 8.8 BPM | 114 ORtg | 102 DRtg

Nash 05-06: 23.3 PER | .632 TS% | 118 TS+ | 12.4 WS | .212 WS/48 | 5.0 BPM | 121 ORtg | 109 DRtg
Nash 05-06 Playoffs?!?: 21.3 PER | .615 TS% | 2.6 WS | .153 WS/48 | 3.7 BPM | 120 ORtg | 116 DRtg