2011-12 RealGM Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[Krodis]

I'd go with something like:

1. LeBron
2. Durant
3. Garnett
4. Paul
5. Nash

Was probably LeBron/Paul/Nash/Durant/Garnett before the playoffs.

[C-izMe]

So I just typed up my explanations to have my computer crash but I'll have the order:
1. Lebron
2. KD
3. CP3
4. KG
5. Need to hear some arguments.

[Vinsanity420]

I'm still puzzled at the Westbrook love. I feel like people are just divvying up OKC 2nd place finish for credit with Westbrook getting a lot because he plays a big role and makes some spectacular plays. I remain patient with him because I know that what OKC wants from him isn't what he was ever groomed to do before, but be honest, if we did basketball mad libs, and you had to fill out:

"____________ with another bad decision"
"____________ with another novice mistake"

Is there ANY other star in the name you're thinking of except Westbrook?

These mistakes have consequences. These possessions where he still has the ball at the end because he couldn't see and/or manipulate the court well, boy do they have consequences when there is a vastly superior scoring threat on the same team not getting the ball.

Again, sympathize with Westbrook doing the best he can, but elevating him to top 5 status at this point seems to me like it should only be coming to people's minds reluctantly.

Well, he's young and bound to make these types of mistakes. I feel they're a little exaggerated because he made a boneheaded one with the game on the line in his 43 point outing. He's got a high APM in the playoffs ( and the regular season), so it must mean he's been still having a high impact despite his occasional bad decision making.

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

[parapooper]

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

Kobe was only top10 in impact 2006-10 (possibly 2001)
From 2002 to 2004 (the earliest RAPM data) Kobe was ranked
18, 15 and 65

for comparison
Shaq:
1, 3 and 2
Duncan:
3, 2 and 3

Westbrook was 48th this regular season and Kobe 47th

[Vinsanity420]

Kobe was only top10 in impact 2006-10 (possibly 2001)
From 2002 to 2004 (the earliest RAPM data) Kobe was ranked
18, 15 and 65

for comparison
Shaq:
1, 3 and 2
Duncan:
3, 2 and 3

Westbrook was 48th this regular season and Kobe 47th

Westbrook was Top 5 by basketballvalue's APM measures in the playoffs and his RS was only slightly below guys like Love and Dirk. Kevin Pelton's stat based analysis had him in All NBA First Team for the regular season - http://basketballprospectus.com/article ... cleid=2230

His raw numbers are on Wade's level in both RS and playoffs. He's been on par with Wade for me.

And Kobe's 10 year RAPM ranking from englemann has him in the Top 5. From the threepeat days, his offense in 02 was 2nd only to Shaq and in 03 was Top 5. I don't have the 01 measure on him.

So yes, both are having a high impact on offense at a young age.

[Doctor MJ]

[
People are always wanting to say Kobe is the generation's Jordan in terms of game, but I've always seen Wade as a much more accurate "poor man's Jordan".

No, Kobe and Jordan could actually shoot the ball.

Kobe Bryant, like Adam Morrison, is actually a better shooter than Michael Jordan. This does not make him Jordan 2.0 any more than it makes Morrison Jordan 2.0.

As much as people try to hype Jordan's transition in to a shooter, the fact remains that when he was playing like a GOAT, it was based on a level of aggression toward the defense that Kobe has never had. Jordan only started to play more like Kobe when his athleticism waned.

I call Wade the closest thing to Jordan because of that same aggressive take-it-to-the-rim mentality that they both have, and have in part because they have stronger bodies than Kobe does.

[Doctor MJ]

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

Well I think this is a great example to consider, but it only solidifies my stance to be honest. Does anyone hear actually think Westbrook is as valuable as early prime ('00-01 on) Kobe?

[colts18]

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

Well I think this is a great example to consider, but it only solidifies my stance to be honest. Does anyone hear actually think Westbrook is as valuable as early prime ('00-01 on) Kobe?

He could be in this era, but no way does Westbrook have that same impact in 01. His ceiling in 01 is AI.

[Mo26]

..

[C-izMe]

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

Well I think this is a great example to consider, but it only solidifies my stance to be honest. Does anyone hear actually think Westbrook is as valuable as early prime ('00-01 on) Kobe?

Comparing them to who else is in the league I would say he is. They're are barely any (if there are any) people on top 5 in 01 level (I say only Lebron). Compare Westbrook to only this season. He comes out pretty strong IMO. Also he outplayed KD in 3 of 4 series so he deserves a majority of the hype from there PO run.

[ecnirp]

Whats crazy about LeBron in 2010 (beside Game 5 against the Celtics)...people called his 27/19/10 game in game 6 vs. the Celtics a D- game....Well...Skip Bayless did..

[Mo26]

Yeah, too bad Jordan in his athletic prime was still a great shooter unlike D-Whistle. Wade is horrible.

And young Kobe was more of slasher than a shooter. Watch some games from 2001 where he put up 29+/7+/6+/2. He was destroying teams with his attacking. It wasn't until about 2006 that he became more of a jump-shooter.

SMH.

[Josephpaul]

Kobe is still top 5 . Lead the lakers to the 3rd seed. Come on

[Doctor MJ]

For a comparison, young Kobe did plenty of mistakes... like, you can tell there's a clear difference between the way he played in the early 00's and the late 00's... but he still had a Top 5 impact in the early 00's. ( I am not saying Westbrook is as good as Kobe, just making a comparison of similar situations).

Well I think this is a great example to consider, but it only solidifies my stance to be honest. Does anyone hear actually think Westbrook is as valuable as early prime ('00-01 on) Kobe?

Comparing them to who else is in the league I would say he is. They're are barely any (if there are any) people on top 5 in 01 level (I say only Lebron). Compare Westbrook to only this season. He comes out pretty strong IMO. Also he outplayed KD in 3 of 4 series so he deserves a majority of the hype from there PO run.

I'm confused.

Are you actually saying that in a year where Iverson won the MVP, the superstar talent in the league right now is significantly worse? If so, I'd say you're making the mistake of assuming that the stars of that era all had peak performance in '01...which of course they didn't, or Iverson wouldn't have gotten close to an MVP.

I also don't agree with outplaying Durant, though if people really feel that way, it's worth them expounding on it.

[JordansBulls]

Kobe is still top 5 . Lead the lakers to the 3rd seed. Come on

I wouldn't go that far because stats wise, he was 3rd on his team in Win shares and 2nd in PER on his team and 4th in WS/PER 48 minutes on his own team.

[Mo26]

Kobe is still top 5 . Lead the lakers to the 3rd seed. Come on

Yup. And that's on a team with the worst bench in the league, the worst 3-pt shooting, the worst PG and SF rotation, the worst at creating turnovers (by far), the worst head coach in the NBA, the least productive 4-15 in the entire league, and a totally new offensive and defensive system. Incredible how they overachieved and Kobe was the biggest reason for that. Put up 28/5/5/1.3. #2 in PPG. #3 in APG among non-PG's trailing only LeBron and Iggy. 5.4 RPG as a SG. Led Lakers in SPG. #1 in 30+ pt and 40+ pt games. 1st Team All-NBA. 4th in MVP voting.

Then in the playoffs he was excellent. Put up 30/5/5/25 PER in 12 games with a bunch of great games.

31/5/4/2/54% TS
38/4/2/3/59% TS
22/8/6/2
43/6/5/2/58% TS
31/4/3/1/59% TS
17/8/2
36/7/6/2/55% TS
38/8/6/55% TS
42/5/2/1/59% TS

SMH @ people putting guys like Dirk/Nash/KG/Westbrook ahead of him.

Easily top 5 this year.

[MisterWestside]

Except they play offense and defense in basketball, and Kobe gave a lot of those points back on the defensive end of the floor. Kobe's high per game averages were also mainly due to his volume shooting.

He can still ball, but he wasn't top five.

[Josephpaul]

Why is Dwight in the convo ? He was hurt doesn't mean he gets a pass.

[mysticbb]

Yup. And that's on a team with the worst bench in the league, the worst 3-pt shooting, the worst PG and SF rotation, the worst at creating turnovers (by far), the worst head coach in the NBA, the least productive 4-15 in the entire league, and a totally new offensive and defensive system.

Well, it is weird. If that all would be true, it should have showed up in the 7 competitive games the Lakers played without Bryant. But somehow they managed to win 5 of those games and ended up with 2.02 SRS. In the 58 games with Bryant they had 2.31 SRS. Somehow the Lakers when playing without Bryant didn't show that they are the "worst" on everything you mentioned. Somehow they were able to convert 37% of their 3pt attempts, way better than Bryant's 30% for example. Somehow the Lakers played way better than the worst team in the league when Bryant was out. In fact they would have easily qualified for the playoffs with the performance level they showed without Bryant. And it is not like they only played bad teams, in fact they played the Spurs twice, the Nuggets, the Mavericks, the Suns, the Hornets and the Warriors.

So, if Bryant is so good and so important to the Lakers, why haven't they showed that in the games he played? In fact when Bryant was on the court in about 5000 possessions, the Lakers played +1.7, when he was off they played -2.3 per 100 possesssion in about 2000 possessions. Nothing indicates that the Lakers can't play basketball anymore without Bryant. So, either the reality is wrong here or you just made up things in order to prop up your favorite player.

In comparison, when Nowitzki was off the court for about 2000 possessions the Mavericks played -6.7. That is 4.4 points worse than the Lakers played without Bryant. And yet, when Nowitzki was on the court, the Mavericks were able to play +4.8, 3.1 points better than the Lakers with Bryant.

Suns without Nash: -7.1, with Nash: +3.6.
Celtics without Garnett: -6.8, with Garnett: +8.1
Thunder without Westbrook: +3.4, with Westbrook: +6.9

And you really don't understand why people would choose Garnett, Nash and Nowitzki ahead of Bryant? Those people are seeing that the respective teams are playing better basketball while those players are on the court in comparison to Bryant's Lakers, while without Garnett, Nash and Nowitzki the Celtics, Suns and Mavericks were clearly worse than the Lakers without Bryant. Producing boxscore numbers is one thing in basketball, but helping your team win as in making your team play better basketball is another. Bryant can put some numbers into the boxscore, but even then, once you normalised those numbers, they aren't looking any better than Nash's, Garnett's and Nowitzki's.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y4=2012

There is a reason that all 4 players are rather close in terms of PER and WS/48. If we combine the regular season and playoffs, we are getting:

Bryant: 22.3 PER, 0.135 WS/48
Garnett: 20.4 PER, 0.170 WS/48
Nowitzki: 21.8 PER, 0.172 WS/48
Nash: 20.3 PER, 0.144 WS/48

In comparison to the league average, Garnett and Nowitzki are ending up ahead of Bryant in terms of boxscore numbers, while Nash ends up on par with him. Garnett, Nash and Nowitzki are blowing Bryant away in terms of +/- based numbers, APM, 2yr APM or RAPM has Nowitzki, Garnett and Nash EASILY better than Bryant. So, on what kind of objective basis can we conclude that Bryant would have been easily a better player within a 5on5 game of basketball?

[drza]

I also don't agree with (Westbrook) outplaying Durant, though if people really feel that way, it's worth them expounding on it.

I figured this was as good a place as any to talk about this year's Thunder, their relative values, and the chasm-like difference between LeBron and Durant. Despite not being a Heat fan at all and the fact that LeBron's cockiness can drive me crazy at times, I found myself pulling for the Heat in these Finals because I knew that if the Thunder won the narrative would be that this suddenly made Durant better than LeBron. When in reality they aren't even in the same zip code in my opinion...I'm not even sure that Durant separates himself from his own teammates (let alone the rest of the candidates in this year's top-5).

When I watch Durant play, I am consistently amazed by how easy scoring comes to him. To quote Bill Walker (who was talking about Melo, but still), Durant's shot is wet all the time. From out to like 27 feet. He's a nightmare cover by being a reported 6-11 guy who can handle the rock, has a great first step and quickness for his size, and just having a pure scorers mentality. High volume scoring on high efficiency. Just a scorer's dream.

But in the other aspects of the game, Durant hasn't impressed me yet. I saw a comparison the other day about Wade and Nash, about how Wade is a stylistic descendent of Jordan while Nash is a descendent of Magic, with a question about which style can produce the better, more impactful offensive player. The thing with Durant is, despite his all-world scoring ability, in terms of offensive style he's more of a megatron Ray Allen than a descendent of Jordan. Which means that he scores brilliantly and is a sniper from everywhere on the court, but he doesn't do much to create offense for his teammates. And this is important as we look at the best players in any given season, because despite the eye-popping scoring volume/efficiency combo I'm not yet convinced that Durant's actual offensive impact is as large as it should be.

Similarly, on defense, Durant just hasn't impressed as much as he should. I don't think Ibaka deserved 2nd in the DPoY vote, nor that Perkins is anything more than just a solid defensive role player, but put them together and that's still one of the better defensive frontlines in the NBA. Mix in a plus defender like Sefolosha starting on the wing, and you're looking at the framework for an excellent team defense. Yet the Thunder finished only 11th in Defensive Rating. Durant has the length/quickness ratio to be a devastating defensive player, on the order of LeBron...but he's not there yet. He's merely average, as his -0.1 defensive RAPM on the year indicates.

So in Durant we've got an all-history scoring talent, mixed with just "alright" everywhere else. He's an ok defender. He's an ok playmaker. He's maybe slightly above average as a rebounding SF, but he's not a good enough rebounder/defender to consistently play the 4. And that affects his spacing benefit, because unlike Dirk (who's probably the best Durant comp right now) when Durant goes to the perimeter he's only bringing another wing out of the paint. If/when Durant does make a shift to full-time PF I expect we'll see his offensive +/- numbers go through the roof...but he's not there yet.

Which brings us to the other Thunder. Russell Westbrook might make bone-headed decisions at times, may not be a real floor-general type point guard, and might not be as impactful as 2001 Kobe. But on the other hand, his ridiculous athleticism and aggressiveness puts pressure on opposing defenses in a way that even Durant's sleek efficiency doesn't. Plus, Westbrook also creates more for his teammates than Durant does...which may be a function of team role as the Thunder try to force Westbrook into the point guard slot...but still, he does it. And then there's James Harden, who just turned in the closest thing we've seen to a prime Manu Ginobili season since...prime Manu Ginobili. When Harden is in the game, like Ginobili, he assumes that great balance between shooting threat/penetrating threat/creating-for-others threat that always has him on the verge of being the best player on the floor.

The end result is an offensive balance on the Thunder where no one of the three, including and especially Durant, really separates himself from the others. On the season Durant rocked an offensive RAPM of +3.5 (+3.4 total RAPM), good for about 10th in the NBA. Westbrook was slightly worse on offense at +2.5 (+2.3 RAPM overall), while Harden measured out the best at +4.6 on offense (+3.0 overall) which put him in the top-5 at that end of the court (just behind Nash). In the playoffs we have more limited +/- data to work with due to sample size, but here again the broad-terms arguments you might make with this level of data suggests that Durant at the least didn't separate himself from his teammates. Both Westbrook and Harden had better on/off +/- values than Durant on both offense and defense, and basketballvalue's postseason APM (for whatever that's worth) had both Westbrook and Harden solidly higher than Durant.

Bottom line: this NBA Finals was styled as the best two players in the game going head-to-head. But to me, the reality was that we saw by-far the best player in the game go heads up with an excellent player that just completely isn't on his level. And even among the Thunder, I don't see much in the way of evidence (either visual or statistical) that Durant really separated himself in terms of impact from either Westbrook or Harden. Durant was obviously the player that the Thunder looked to as a leader, was the guy they went to late, and was the guy that opponents game-planned for the most. Put that with his better advanced box score scores (and the egg that Harden laid in the Finals), and I'm fine with calling Durant the best player on the team. But I don't see where he really creates much space from his teammates, nor necessarily any space from the rest of the field in this top-5 thread.