Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #19 - 2007-08 Kobe Bryant

[AEnigma]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

[Dutchball97]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

Dirk was the clear leader on the team that had arguably the most impressive post-season run in NBA history (although I'd probably still give that honor to the 95 Rockets who beat the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 6th best teams according to SRS) but I'm not convinced Dirk was necessarily better in 2011 than he was in 06. I think Wade outplaying Dirk in the finals is enough to put Wade above him here but other than that they've got very comparable seasons with Dirk even having a small advantage in the regular season and he's not far behind in the play-offs. Like the Rockets in 95, the 06 Mavericks faced 4 of the top 6 teams in their post-season run. A lot harder of a road than the Heat faced. The Pistons were elite but the Bulls and Nets were middling teams at best.

[falcolombardi]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

That seems like too much time machine speculation imo, we dont really "know" how dirk or kobe would do in other eras so we judge them for what they did in theirs which is the approach that makes more semse in my opinion

[No-more-rings]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

Eh, I don’t really see what makes this era better for Kobe any more than Dirk. Kobe is one of the least willing passers among all time lead guards, he’d definitely have to be more willing in an era that relies of ball movement more than ever. People will probably bring up Dirk being hurt defensively like Jokic is, but it really comes down to not having unrealistic expectations from a player. Like if Jokic had Duncan like impact on defense, he’d be easily the goat. It comes down to putting a competent anchor next to Dirk, and see the ceiling go way higher. I don’t think it’s something that hard to do really.

[AEnigma]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

That seems like too much time machine speculation imo, we dont really "know" how dirk or kobe would do in other eras so we judge them for what they did in theirs which is the approach that makes more semse in my opinion

You are free to take that approach, but it is certainly no more objective, and if anything makes comparisons between guys like Erving and Mikan and Moses and Dirk feel a lot more arbitrary.

[falcolombardi]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

That seems like too much time machine speculation imo, we dont really "know" how dirk or kobe would do in other eras so we judge them for what they did in theirs which is the approach that makes more semse in my opinion

You are free to take that approach, but it is certainly no more objective, and if anything makes comparisons between guys like Erving and Mikan and Moses and Dirk feel a lot more arbitrary.

Sure, but just to be on the same page

What is it that make you think dirk played in the best era possible for him but kobe in the worst he could be?

[AEnigma]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

Eh, I don’t really see what makes this era better for Kobe any more than Dirk. Kobe is one of the least willing passers among all time lead guards, he’d definitely have to be more willing in an era that relies of ball movement more than ever.

This is a terribly ignorant comment and is exactly what people are talking about when they say Kobe’s critics are not actually paying attention to his game.

People will probably bring up Dirk being hurt defensively like Jokic is, but it really comes down to not having unrealistic expectations from a player. Like if Jokic had Duncan like impact on defense, he’d be easily the goat. It comes down to putting a competent anchor next to Dirk, and see the ceiling go way higher. I don’t think it’s something that hard to do really.

Unrealistic expectations? Yeah, Jokic would be better if he could defend. That is the entire problem. It is about acknowledging the obvious limitations of having a targetable big man, or otherwise not waving them away simply because his offence is just so darn special. Look at that Mavericks team, they skewed defence hard around Dirk. Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, Tyson Chandler. They got their title out of it, power to them, but do you think they were a Chandler re-signing away from getting right back into serious title contention against the rapidly improving Heat, Thunder, and Spurs? How high is that ceiling really looking at it relative to others? Like this is just an inverted Robinson argument (part of why I am struggling to decide between them), except for the to-his-credit fact we know Dirk can win a title with that support. It “should not be hard” to put David Robinson in a position where he can be a secondary scorer… and also give him good wing defence… and also give him a better creator than Avery Johnson… Easy stuff! Turns out a lot of players are “not that hard” to build around if you just decide to cover up their most glaring weaknesses!

[falcolombardi]

For me too much of Dirk’s argument comes from being an era outlier. Good player, he is probably next on my ballot, but contrast that with someone like Kobe who was maybe in the least favourable era for his playstyle, and it is hard to put him higher the way he has been in the past.

Great 2011 postseason run though, and he has an impressive history of those kinds of series throughout his career, so it was not some inexplicable instance of playing well above his expected level. Like I said, probably next on the ballot for me.

Eh, I don’t really see what makes this era better for Kobe any more than Dirk. Kobe is one of the least willing passers among all time lead guards, he’d definitely have to be more willing in an era that relies of ball movement more than ever.

This is a terribly ignorant comment and is exactly what people are talking about when they say Kobe’s critics are not actually paying attention to his game.

People will probably bring up Dirk being hurt defensively like Jokic is, but it really comes down to not having unrealistic expectations from a player. Like if Jokic had Duncan like impact on defense, he’d be easily the goat. It comes down to putting a competent anchor next to Dirk, and see the ceiling go way higher. I don’t think it’s something that hard to do really.

Unrealistic expectations? Yeah, Jokic would be better if he could defend. That is the entire problem. It is about acknowledging the obvious limitations of having a targetable big man, or otherwise not waving them away simply because his offence is just so darn special. Look at that Mavericks team, they skewed defence hard around Dirk. Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, Tyson Chandler. They got their title out of it, power to them, but do you think they were a Chandler re-signing away from getting right back into serious title contention against the rapidly improving Heat, Thunder, and Spurs? How high is that ceiling really looking at it relative to others? Like this is just an inverted Robinson argument (part of why I am struggling to decide between them), except for the to-his-credit fact we know Dirk can win a title with that support. It “should not be hard” to put David Robinson in a position where he can be a secondary scorer… and also give him good wing defence… and also give him a better creator than Avery Johnson… Easy stuff! Turns out a lot of players are “not that hard” to build around if you just decide to cover up their most glaring weaknesses!

This i agree with. I feel like portability arguments have sometimes gone way too far when it comes to all time greats if you can just go "his offensive weaknesses wont matter if you pair with with an offense all time great"

[AEnigma]

What is it that make you think dirk played in the best era possible for him but kobe in the worst he could be?

The 2000s were basically the worst era to be a volume wing scorer. Efficiency was down, rule-changes were explicitly unfavourable for a large chunk of that time, spacing had yet to truly take off, heliocentrism had yet to take off, for Kobe specifically he played in a 1990s system that still worked well enough but even further limited some of this statsheet stuff…

But Dirk was a spacing big in an era that was at least willing to encourage that but otherwise had few; he was an outlier then in a way he would not be now, but he was freely allowed to be an outlier in a way he might not have been earlier (in before 70sFan or Penbeast bring up McAdoo or Jerry Lucas lol). He was a limited defender who hit a sweet point between offences evolving toward making that a legitimate postseason liability and evolving away from a focus on post-scoring (in part stylistic, in part because of a change/drop-off in frontcourt talent) and man-defence in that capacity. I am not saying he would be bad in other eras, but I think early eras would be a tougher adjustment and would struggle to maximise him on both ends, and playing later would mean encounters against defences more accustomed to his offensive playtype and more capable of deliberately attacking him on defence.

[iggymcfrack]

What is it that make you think dirk played in the best era possible for him but kobe in the worst he could be?

The 2000s were basically the worst era to be a volume wing scorer. Efficiency was down, rule-changes were explicitly unfavourable for a large chunk of that time, spacing had yet to truly take off, heliocentrism had yet to take off, for Kobe specifically he played in a 1990s system that still worked well enough but even further limited some of this statsheet stuff…

But Dirk was a spacing big in an era that was at least willing to encourage that but otherwise had few; he was an outlier then in a way he would not be now, but he was freely allowed to be an outlier in a way he might not have been earlier (in before 70sFan or Penbeast bring up McAdoo or Jerry Lucas lol). He was a limited defender who hit a sweet point between offences evolving toward making that a legitimate postseason liability and evolving away from a focus on post-scoring (in part stylistic, in part because of a change/drop-off in frontcourt talent) and man-defence in that capacity. I am not saying he would be bad in other eras, but I think early eras would be a tougher adjustment and would struggle to maximise him on both ends, and playing later would mean encounters against defences more accustomed to his offensive playtype and more capable of deliberately attacking him on defence.

Now it sounds like you’re implying Dirk was a below average defender which he absolutely wasn’t after the very early part of his career. He had a positive DRAPM 10 seasons in a row. He was never a weak link to attack on any of the contending Dallas teams. If you wanna say he’d go from a significant positive on defense to a smaller positive in an era with more pick and roll, I guess that’s…. some sort of point but I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in it.

If he played in the modern game, he also would have shot and practiced a LOT more threes. He was one of the greatest mid-range shooters of all-time and if he’d been more focused on higher efficiency locations, he could have been an even more dominant scorer.

[ardee]

1. 2008 Kobe Bryant (HM: 2006)

I've spoken about Kobe's raw impact quite a bit in different threads. In this season specifically, he led the Lakers to a 7.34 SRS with just 27 games of Pau and 35 games of Bynum. Odom was the only other player on that team who could generate much of his own offense. The rest of the rotation consisting of Fisher, Vladimir Radmanovic, Farmar, Vujacic and Turiaf doesn't exactly scream a 7.3 SRS cast.

On top of that, he put together a Jordan-esque Playoff run. 32-6-6 on 60% TS against 3 50 win teams in the Western conference, including a 6.9 SRS Jazz team and a -5.7 defensively Spurs team. His Finals weren't anything to write home about but honestly were not any worse than Jordan against similarly good defensive teams (the '93 Knicks for example).

2. 2011 Dirk Nowitzki (HM: 2006)

I do find it ironic that we have 3 different guys here who's second best season were all in 2006. But it makes perfect sense for him to be ranked here, considering I have Kobe-Wade-Dirk 1-2-3 in 2006.

That being said, what 2011 Dirk accomplished was an enormous degree of difficulty. I think he is also pretty close to Walton and in many ways was the offensive version of the defensive championship run Walton pulled off in 1977.

The impact numbers bare his lift out pretty clearly, and the box score in the Lakers and Thunder series is pretty crazy too.

In my eyes, Dirk is a no brainer over Durant, and that goes for all 3 guys here.

3. 1995 David Robinson (HM: 1994, 1996)

People have posted about him quite a bit already. His raw RS impact is up there with some of the greatest of all time. Arguably a top 3 defender of all time, and still a very good offensive player who unfortunately just had certain limitations in the Playoffs that could be exploited by the right kind of defender. I think without those fatal flaws he would likely be a Hakeem level guy.

[ardee]

Can't complain since I haven't been voting, but surprised at lack of love for 2011 Dirk here. Then again there are several other elite level seasons not in yet like 76 Erving.

I've been busy so have been voting but not participating much. Oscar and West both getting in so early over Kobe and Wade (or any of the other more modern wings/guards) surprised the hell out of me.

[CharityStripe34]

Thanks to these threads I'll be a master of using the words portability, scalability and resilience.

Sent from my LM-K500 using RealGM mobile app

[AEnigma]

What is it that make you think dirk played in the best era possible for him but kobe in the worst he could be?

The 2000s were basically the worst era to be a volume wing scorer. Efficiency was down, rule-changes were explicitly unfavourable for a large chunk of that time, spacing had yet to truly take off, heliocentrism had yet to take off, for Kobe specifically he played in a 1990s system that still worked well enough but even further limited some of this statsheet stuff…

But Dirk was a spacing big in an era that was at least willing to encourage that but otherwise had few; he was an outlier then in a way he would not be now, but he was freely allowed to be an outlier in a way he might not have been earlier (in before 70sFan or Penbeast bring up McAdoo or Jerry Lucas lol). He was a limited defender who hit a sweet point between offences evolving toward making that a legitimate postseason liability and evolving away from a focus on post-scoring (in part stylistic, in part because of a change/drop-off in frontcourt talent) and man-defence in that capacity. I am not saying he would be bad in other eras, but I think early eras would be a tougher adjustment and would struggle to maximise him on both ends, and playing later would mean encounters against defences more accustomed to his offensive playtype and more capable of deliberately attacking him on defence.

Now it sounds like you’re implying Dirk was a below average defender which he absolutely wasn’t after the very early part of his career. He had a positive DRAPM 10 seasons in a row. He was never a weak link to attack on any of the contending Dallas teams. If you wanna say he’d go from a significant positive on defense to a smaller positive in an era with more pick and roll, I guess that’s…. some sort of point but I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in it.

If he played in the modern game, he also would have shot and practiced a LOT more threes. He was one of the greatest mid-range shooters of all-time and if he’d been more focused on higher efficiency locations, he could have been an even more dominant scorer.

Yet again I encourage you to actually read the comments to which you respond and to think about the meaning behind the RAPM numbers you seem to love so much.

[trex_8063]

1. '94 David Robinson (> '95 DRob > '96 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 (as I've said in all of the last several rounds). So this round I've opted to swing with '94, which seems to be the consensus fav, as I'd like to see Robinson off the table. It was arguably his most bonkers rs (his rs APM/AuPM makes peak Hakeem, prime Mailman, and peak(ish) Pippen look like chumps), and likely his best all-around offensive year.

He might be the last two-way giant on the table.
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 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 it! Except for a prime Michael Jordan [in '96], there's no one remotely close to him in the rs.
And these are almost exclusively 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 pretty close.


**Noticeable gap to anyone else for me, considering nearly everyone else I maybe considered sort of close have already been voted in. Getting nigh on FAR overdue for DRob, imo.



2nd ballot: '76 Julius Erving
A hard one to place, given it's hard to gauge the strength of the ABA at that stage. But '76 Dr J is statistically bonkers, and appears to be doing EVERYTHING for this team [that wins the ABA title]. They're the #1 defense in the ABA, leading the league in opp TOV% (with Erving leading in spg and total steals [handily]), 3rd-best opp eFG% and 2pt% (with Erving leading the team in blocks), and he's team leader in DRebs [close 2nd in ORebs, too]. Leads team in ppg and apg, too, 2nd [to a low-volume scorer] in eFG%, while getting to the line more than twice as often as anyone else on the team [making >80%, too].
The one [or two?] games from this season I've seen, he looks like he's everywhere, doing everything. Given he was an NBA MVP in the early 80's, too [marginally past his physical peak], it's easy to believe he was as legit as his numbers suggest.


3rd ballot: oh boy (throws dart)......'14 Kevin Durant ('17 > '16; I think '17 was perhaps the best overal version of him, but the 20 missed games is just enough for me to put it marginally behind '14)
One of the best pure-scoring seasons of all-time (a league-leading 32 ppg on absurd efficiency), and came while being the point of a 6th-rated +3.8 rORTG, despite Westbrook missing 36 games and them having not much offensive power/depth beyond those two. This was the first [or maybe 2nd] year he felt like a somewhat relevant play-maker, too, and also coincides with leading the team in DRebs (they were 9th in the league in DREB%, fwiw). May have been a marginal positive defensively for the first time in his career that year, too.

His playoff numbers decline.....but for cryin' out loud, he was still averaging nearly 30 ppg on decent efficiency, while facing the 7th-rated -2.1 rDRTG (with on of the best perimeter stoppers of his generation: Tony Allen), followed by the 9th-rated -1.9 rDRTG, and then the 3rd-rated -4.3 rDRTG [eventual champs] who had arguably the best perimeter stopper of the decade in '14-'16 Kawhi.


4. '06 Dirk Nowitzki ('07 Dirk, '11 Dirk)
5. '17 Kawhi Leonard ('16 Kawhi)

[falcolombardi]

Right now i feel like voting between kobe/dirk/kawhi in wade spot now that he got choosen

Dirk and kobe are both incredible offensive players with versatile and resilient skillsets but who dont add much impact in defense per games i watched (2008 and 2009 playoffs for kobe, 2011 playoffs for dirk)

Dirk has more of a defense warp effect in possesions where he screens or spots up where kobe has the ability to be a team main scorer/ballhandler/passer sinultaneously. Both of these thinghs are stuff i really value in a lead star

Is kind of hard for me to choose between those two


Kawhi is though to me cause i am evaluating how high i have his 2017 defense and willingness to not settle for tough shots compared to his more rudimentary passing disadvantage against kobe

I considered erving but the inconsistwnt plus-minus metrics across his career are somewhat worrisome and the late 70's aba was essentially half a league as it split talent in half with the nba (i will have similar concerns about mid 70's nba too when rick barry or havlicek come up)

although i recognize the doctor profile in the 76 run is remarkably similar to 2006 wade who i voted already. Really Remarkable rim protector for a perimeter player, ok but unspectscular 1vs1 defender, strong rebounder. Elite scoring run with tons of rim pressure leading to playmaking. Similar jumpshoot concerns (maybe more with wade) and won a ring with unremarkable teams (more so julius actually)

I recognize the rough similiarities and wonder if i am sleeping on the doctor

Moses malone and his unusual skillset but intriguin results

Durant incresible talent who i try really hard as a okc fan to not be biased against

harden monster production vs the apparent playoffs drop off

chris paul mix of fragility/absurd +/- metrics/ lack of team succes but near all timr tier offense results + good individual defense

Barkley historical scoring and rebounding vs his bad reputation defense

Karl malone weak playoffs scoring vs his team strong offensive results and plus to great defense/passing/rebounding (limiting the bulls in the glass is such a unheralded feat)

Reggie miller ridiculous gravity + scoring efficiency making him dirk-lite in some ways, a dirk who cannot easily create his shot on his own in a way (yes i know is weird to compare him with dirk over curry)

Ewing hakeem-lite profile of sorts (good scoring + great defense) led historical defenses but in a fairly favorable context, and failed to floor raise knicks offense beyond mediocrity (but in a unfavorable context for a good offense)

[SickMother]

I considered erving but the inconsistwnt plus-minus metrics across his career are somewhat worrisome and the late 70's aba was essentially half a league as it split talent in half with the nba (i will have similar concerns about mid 70's nba too when rick barry or havlicek come up)

although i recognize the doctor profile in the 76 run is remarkably similar to 2006 wade who i voted already. Really Remarkable rim protector for a perimeter player, ok but unspectscular 1vs1 defender, strong rebounder. Elite scoring run with tons of rim pressure leading to playmaking. Similar jumpshoot concerns (maybe more with wade) and won a ring with unremarkable teams (more so julius actually)

I recognize the rough similiarities and wonder if i am sleeping on the doctor

As someone who has had Dr. J at the top of his ballot for about the last ten votes or so, I'll give some insight into my reasoning.

- The inconsistent +/- across his career doesn't really concern me since it is unavailable (that I am aware of) for his actual peak season. During NBA regular season he topped the league in PER (79/80), WS/48 (80/81 and 81/82), BPM (79/80, 80/81 and 81/82), and VORP (80/81) on multiple occasions over numerous seasons. In the playoffs, same story, PER (81/82), WS (76/77 and 81/82), and VORP (76/77 and 81/82). He was a dominant force across multiple leagues for essentially a decade.

- talent level of ABA. Legit concern on one hand, of players to make the list so far only the four sixties guys (Wilt, Russell, Oscar, West) likely faced similar or worse competition. On the other hand, Erving was so good that he was able to competitively legitimize & carry an upstart league to the point that the NBA had no choice but to absorb it to get him under their banner. Pretty much no other player has ever done that, maybe Mikan?. Also, the ABA was the best league available to Julius at the time. Holding it against him is essentially blaming Capitalism. The split was out of his control, but no one player was more responsible for the eventual merger.

- unremarkable team. Feel like this gets overlooked a lot. As much as the quality of the ABA may be a detriment to the Doctor's case, the quality of his teammates negates a large portion of that for me. Rich Jones, John Williamson, Kim Hughes, Al Skinner, Tim Bassett and Brian Taylor. Those are the six other 75/76 Nets that played 1700 or more minutes. Those six guys combined for -227 TS Add. Doctor had no choice but to do it all & he did just that.

[falcolombardi]

1- 1950 george mikan (alternate 1951)

I feel weird ranking mikan but i feel like he is the last "best player in the world for a long period of time" player left

he may not be a mvp if time machine'd forward and that is a valid concern more than with anyone else.

But i dont feel comfortable ranking him below players who didnt come even close to dominating their nba eras as much as mikan

If i am gonna arbitraly decide where to rank mikan i prefer to put his peak in a spot that more accurately reflects how dominant he was when he played. Otherwise i would prefer to leave pre-shotclock players out of the project and as honorable mentions

2- 2007 nash (2006)

This may be a controversial pick but after watching footage of playoffs kobe (2008,2009), kawhi (17,19) paul (15), dirk (11) and nash i surprised myself (even as someone high on nash) with beimg more impressed with him out of all of them

His offense eye test impressed me a fair bit more than everyone else i am comparing him with. He combined brilliant scoring ability with some of the best passing i have seen and the offensive numbers of his suns teams match the eye test here

His defense off ball was rather solid although his size and strenght (lack of) made him a vulnerable target in isolation and probably a small negative overall (+/- metrics seem to usually peg him neutral ish) But i am high enough in his offense to still pick him here

If his defense was as big of a negative as i expected it to be he would have been last of all these guys. But instead he looked neutral in the playoffs game against spurs and lakers i watched.

If i change my mind that his defense is actually as big of a negative as the consensus opinions says i will move him lower

3-2009 kobe (2008)
I have a bunch of concerns on kobe that are why he will be "only" this high for me. Such as Hero ball over giving the ball back at times, Low impact defense per my evaluation (not bad, just unremarkable, so much less of an advantage over nash that i expected before watching the film of both) and "just" good efficiency rather than great one like other all time level offensive players

But the results dont lie, his game was resilient in the playoffs and produced elite offensive results in both "floor raising" situations (such as 2006 or his 2008 regular season) and "ceiling raising" ones of making good offensive casts into great offense results (lakers once they added pau)

his off ball shooting and movement gives him a bit of portability points. his great interior passing gives his teams a extra bit of offensive punch where his great tough shot making gives them a high floor

4-2011 dirk (2006)

Dirk impressed me a lot. Willing and underated passer as he doesnt makes too many brilliant highlight dimes but instead makes the right/boring/correct pass quickly and keeps the ball moving. Just a Brilliant scorer as we all know too

The combo of scoring/off ball gravity/ willing and solid passer is just lethal offensively.

His defensive role in modern eras would worry me but i dont put too much weight in across era hipotheticals

I honestly flipped s coin and went with my gut instinct between him and kobe

5-2019 kawhi (2017)

i didnt think 17 kawhi was much better if at all than 19 kawhi over the full season.albeit in 17 he was more durable and played more minutes and games

His series vs sixers impressed me more than the 17 one vs grizzlies because of the rival amazing defenders (simmons, butler and embiid is quite the trio for a perimeter scorer to deal with and he passed with an A+++)

but i penalize the sixers version for durability issues and needing load management. I think since this is a peak project and kawhi was healthy in the playoffs over 4 rounds (vs 2017 two) i wont penalize the load management too much

Kawhi on the other hand doesnt have as many great assists and brilliant passes as kobe which is why i prefer kobe as a offensive player overall even if what kawhi did against those sixers was mindblowing (off the top of my head i cannot remember 08-10 kobe destroying a defense so well equipped to defend him like that)

although kawhi willingness to pass the ball when there is not a good shot available after he starts his moves is a nice positive that bridges the gap.

I have nash/dirk/kobe/kawhi neck and neck so a lot of this is honestly just gut feeling with the specific rank.

6- julius erving (1976)

Have some concerns about his up and down plus-minus metrics in the sixers. The aba relative weakness as it was essentially one half of what the 76 professional basketball in the usa should have been but this is still too great of a "carry job" title to not include

In fact the rough similarities with 2006 wade make me wonder if i am sleeping on the doctor a bit as he did a similar kind of run with a seemingly less remarkable roster

I am going to rewatch some footage of 76 kawhi and see if his defense or passing are better thsn i remember them as being

6-davis robinson 1994 (1995)

I feel like he may be the best regular season player left in the whole project. And his defense + rebounding + spot up shootint makes him a perfect player to pair with a co-star

But i value guys who can win as their team only "superstar" a bit more than i value guys who are more "portable" and can do it better in a superstar duo

Robinson offensive profile didnt scale that well in the post season although i womder if he got rockets level spacing like hakeem did if the story may have been different

7-2014 durant (2017, 2016)

I think it was his best combo of regular season and playoffs as a first option, tempative placeholder placing, will look into film and stats of him more to decide where to rank him

8-2015 chris paul (2014,2016)

his offensive results and impact metrics are up there with nearly anyone (they are neck and neck with steph for example)

His offensive profile is prolly underated based on aesthetic reasoning as people think a player who is so turnover/risk averse cannot be that impactful or must be somethingh wrong. Adds plus defense for his position on top of a nearly flawless offensive package

My main concern is how his body always seems to break or slow down over the course of the post season and even his best years seem to always end with him running on fumes (the 2015 loss to rockets is still really hard to understand to this day)

[No-more-rings]

I feel like Dirk definitely belongs over Durant. Statistically it’s probably not easy to argue, but Dirk played with a lot less talent and made two finals even winning one. Most intelligent people don’t take KD’s rings seriously, and on the other hand I can’t fathom KD winning a ring with Chandler, old Marion and Kidd as his next best players. He definitely doesn’t make a finals and just barely lose a finals with Terry and Josh Howard as his 2nd and 3rd. Let’s be serious here. Dirk along with prime Curry, Draymond and Klay definitely run through the league in dominant fashion.

[falcolombardi]

I feel like Dirk definitely belongs over Durant. Statistically it’s probably not easy to argue, but Dirk played with a lot less talent and made two finals even winning one. Most intelligent people don’t take KD’s rings seriously, and on the other hand I can’t fathom KD winning a ring with Chandler, old Marion and Kidd as his next best players. He definitely doesn’t make a finals and just barely lose a finals with Terry and Josh Howard as his 2nd and 3rd. Let’s be serious here. Dirk along with prime Curry, Draymond and Klay definitely run through the league in dominant fashion.

I think in a vacuum durant is the most "skilled" player who can do more thinghs than dirk, offensively and defensively, and in general his boxscore reflects that, even the most efficient jumpshooter too (and that is hard to beat dirk at)

But dirk to me just made better use of his slightly less complete gifts to the point his impact may have been greater. A good example is their dribble

Both are flawed dribblers butdurant can do more with his than dirk. But he dribbles a bit more than he should which becomes a issue in the playoffs in most of his non warriors years (and even within the warriors it came up a bit against the rockets)

Dirk in comparision knows exactly what he can do witgout increasing the risk of a turnover too much so he chooses more decisively when to isolate, when to drive if a straight line path opens amd when to just give back the ball and keep the play moving

here i think his post up is more resilient in the playoffs snd more likely to lead to playmaking that durant perimeter or post gsme are, likely a product of better post footwork and strenght (but dursnt got really good with footwork in brooklyn)

Defensively dursnt should be better but i think his defense effort is a tad inconsistent, but i think he may have peaked higher here with his mobility helping as a rim protector

I think is arguably between both, dont disagree with the idea durant is a superior player in a vacuum, but basketball doesnt always work out as it does in vacuums

And leadership intangibles may be a nice tie breaker bonus for durant if it comes to it