2022-23 NBA Season Discussion

[LA Bird]

Random stat I found - Lowry is the active leader in career fouls but he is only #93 all time. The highest active big man is DeAndre Jordan at only #199.

[Heej]

Might be buying the top here but I just got a Murray jersey. Absolutely inspirational to see him come back from injury and have a young Kobe-esque playoff run. Thought it was cool what a contrast he was wearing his heart on his sleeve compared to the stoic Jokic

[ardee]

True

Considering that the Lakers literally played like a 62-win team without Oscar the following year and outscored an atg 72 Lakers side with Oscar playing like an injured shell, I'm going to go and say no, post-prime Oscar was not "one of the best no2s" ever regardless of the hype.

Juiced Oakley is nice, but an exceptional 3rd option he was not. As is, rookie Kareem already had the Bucking jumping somewhere from 18-23 wins with rookie bob who really was just 88 Oakley-lvl.

The Sixers cast that played like a 53-win team without him? I'm skeptical to say the least.

None of your first four guys were close to "goat" on the defensive end. Jordan and Shaq are not even close to second-tier defenders like Pippen and Lebron. And Kareem is pretty clearly ahead of those two in defensive impact over extended samples(The bucks defense improved by 4-points with Kareem on the court from 70-74).

As it so happens when we base "Overall impact" on the actual disparities between team performance rather than random assumptions(shooting-guard who has led exactly one good regular season defense(-2) is now a goat-lvl defender? BIg-man whose defenses got better without him over extended stretches?), your list does not track with what's actually there. Russell clocks Wilt, Hakeem rivals Jordan, and Duncan and KG match/edge-out Shaq. Kareem and Lebron are relative outliers who stand out more the more you factor in surrounding years/prime.

Methinks you overrate the value of man defense.

Ok fair enough, I think I misworded that, don't know why I put it that way. You're right, neither Jordan nor Shaq were GOAT level defensively.

It really just comes down to how I perceive overall impact... the offensive gap they have on guys like Duncan/Hakeem outweighs the defensive gap that Duncan/Hakeem have on them. Simple as really.

Why though? I guess I can get the skepticism with Hakeem or Garnett given their resumes. But over his 8-year prime, Duncan won 4 championships, two against historically strong competition(05, 07), one as a lone-star, one where they ran over everyone else(1999) and was able to win with the core/approach completely changing. Not much to suggest those teams were stacked empirically(they played worse without Duncan than the Shaq-less Lakers, the Wilt-less Sixers, or the Jordan-less Bulls) and none of them seem loaded to me the way people conventionally assess these things.

Injuries crippled the length of his prime, but Duncan's peak is pretty hard to construct a case against

I'm not skeptical of any of them, I think they are all legendary and are among the best half a dozen players of all time. I don't think saying Hakeem and Duncan have the 5th and 6th best peaks ever is selling them short... I just think LeBron/Jordan/Shaq/Wilt are a bit better.

I don't have a problem if you believe the reverse, I think at that level you're basically splitting hairs. But for me, both Shaq and Wilt led 67-68 win teams and were GOAT-level on offense (more debatable for Wilt but when you set efficiency and passing records as the anchor for a then GOAT-level offense I think your offense can be called GOAT-level) while still being elite defensively (both were probably top 3 defenders that season).

Whereas Duncan and Hakeem are GOAT-level defensively but their offense is just a bit more questionable (just don't think their variation of post offense is the most efficienct thing around). Good enough to still be one of the best peaks ever but not enough to be in the top 4, in my mind.

[eminence]

Thoroughly underwhelmed with that Ja suspension.

[MartinToVaught]

Only 25 games is a slap on the wrist, not a punishment. Silver should thank Bettman and Manfred every day for making him look good by comparison.

[Doctor MJ]

Thoroughly underwhelmed with that Ja suspension.

Seems like they just made it enough to make him ineligible for awards. Makes sense to me to be honest. Beyond this we'd be looking at either a half-season or a full-season suspension. I could see the half-season, but I'd have to see more to consider a full-season.

[Colbinii]

Might be buying the top here but I just got a Murray jersey. Absolutely inspirational to see him come back from injury and have a young Kobe-esque playoff run. Thought it was cool what a contrast he was wearing his heart on his sleeve compared to the stoic Jokic

I bought a Josh Okogie in 2019.

[eminence]

Thoroughly underwhelmed with that Ja suspension.

Seems like they just made it enough to make him ineligible for awards. Makes sense to me to be honest. Beyond this we'd be looking at either a half-season or a full-season suspension. I could see the half-season, but I'd have to see more to consider a full-season.

Fair enough, guess I'm seeing this as a bit of a third strike type of thing.

1) Pretends to point guns at the Pacers with laser pointers to threaten them. (I say pretend, because if the league believes he was actually pulling guns on the Pacers after the game to me that's an immediate lifetime ban situation even if they don't have the evidence to pursue criminal penalty). Gets a talking to about the whole thing, promises to not do it again blah blah. No serious punishment.

2) In the club flashing guns again, pretty clearly against the terms of earlier promises. Eats a minor suspension, learns some breathing exercises, yada yada. More lip service.

3) Still thinks he needs to be showing his guns off on social media, is allowed to finish out the season, and now there's the first real suspension, but damn is this guy getting a lot of chances. A half season really felt like the minimum bar to me.

[jalengreen]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

[eminence]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

The 2nd/3rd situations on their own would be things I'd consider a game or two suspension for, but agreed not extremely serious.

It all ties back to the first situation, which I feel was quite serious, they let him off with no penalty at all (mistake) and asked him to dissociate his image from firearms. And he's failed miserably.

[Heej]

Might be buying the top here but I just got a Murray jersey. Absolutely inspirational to see him come back from injury and have a young Kobe-esque playoff run. Thought it was cool what a contrast he was wearing his heart on his sleeve compared to the stoic Jokic

I bought a Josh Okogie in 2019.

Bro I'm still bagholding an RJ Barrett jersey from 3 years ago...

Okogie is tough tho haha damn

[Heej]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

Yea I'm sorry I thought anything over 25 would be ridiculous honestly. Guys have done a lot worse and gotten away for a lot less

[Fadeaway_J]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

Agreed. Guys have gotten less (by a lot) for domestic violence.

[OhayoKD]

Ok fair enough, I think I misworded that, don't know why I put it that way. You're right, neither Jordan nor Shaq were GOAT level defensively.

It really just comes down to how I perceive overall impact... the offensive gap they have on guys like Duncan/Hakeem outweighs the defensive gap that Duncan/Hakeem have on them. Simple as really.

Why though? I guess I can get the skepticism with Hakeem or Garnett given their resumes. But over his 8-year prime, Duncan won 4 championships, two against historically strong competition(05, 07), one as a lone-star, one where they ran over everyone else(1999) and was able to win with the core/approach completely changing. Not much to suggest those teams were stacked empirically(they played worse without Duncan than the Shaq-less Lakers, the Wilt-less Sixers, or the Jordan-less Bulls) and none of them seem loaded to me the way people conventionally assess these things.

Injuries crippled the length of his prime, but Duncan's peak is pretty hard to construct a case against

I don't have a problem if you believe the reverse, I think at that level you're basically splitting hairs.

Gaps being small at the top is a common assumption, but I'm not sure it's supported by much. Even when we use something like say RAPM(which tends to suppress outliers, thereby artifically shrinking gaps), there's a pretty big per-possessoin difference between #1 Lebron and #2 KG or #3 Duncan/Shaq despite the former playing alot more posessions. I think eminence had it at something like 15% just scaling it off the data(the real-world gap would probably be bigger). Not to say it's neccesarily large for the sake for a duncan vs wilt or shaq(at least going by "peak), but we shouldn't assume parity just because players are a few numbers seperated in terms of ranking position.

But for me, both Shaq and Wilt led 67-68 win teams and were GOAT-level on offense (more debatable for Wilt but when you set efficiency and passing records as the anchor for a then GOAT-level offense I think your offense can be called GOAT-level) while still being elite defensively (both were probably top 3 defenders that season).

Not comfortable making strong claims about Wilt given lower point-differential tresholds, but with Shaq, I see a couple issues here.

1. The 2000 Lakers did not a play like a 67-68-win team in the postseason. Their defense collapsed with their playoff opposition specifically overperforming at the rim as Shaq was exploited by multiple problematic center matchups. They only ever posted a goood playoff defense in 2001 after grant was added(following what was a bad regular season defense). Shaq ever being a top 3 defender seems pretty dubious to me. I think you could make a stronger case for KG, Hakeem and Duncan being top 1 offensively in 04, 94, and 03 respectively. Especially accounting for the playoffs, I don't see a good argument for Shaq defensively against Mourning, Duncan, Robinson, and Dikembe.

2. Were Shaq's offenses really GOAT-lvl?

Looking at 5-year opponent-adjusted relative offenses...

Lebron
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

jordan* (i had to use his first 5 championship seasons)
1991 +6.7(RS) +11.7 (PS)
1992 +7.3(RS) +6.5 (PS)
1993 +4.9 (RS) +9.8 (PS)
1996 +7.6 (RS) +8.6 (PS)
1997 +7.7(RS) +6.5(PS)
average +6.85 (RS) +8.6(PS)
combined average:+7.7

nash

2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: +8.5

shaq

1998 +6.9(RS), +10.1(PS)
1999 +5.4(RS), +4.7(PS)
2000 +3.2(RS), +9.3(PS)
2001 +5.4 (RS) +13.6(PS)
2002 +4.9(RS), +6.4 (PS)
Average +5.2(RS) +8.8(PS)
combined average: +7

magic

1986 +6.1(RS) +6.7
1987 +7.6 (RS) +10.7
1988 +5.1(RS) +8.3
1989 +6 (RS) +9.3
1990 +5.9(RS) +8.4
Average +6.1(RS), + 8.7 (PS)
combined average: +7.4

Shaq scores the lowest here using combined average and even limiting things to the playoffs he is well behind both Lebron and Nash here. Notably all the other guys here are better ball-handlers and passers with the top 2-playoff guys, the top-2 rs guys, and the top 2 combined guys all being do-it-alls who score, pass, are primary ball-handlers, act as coaches/floor generals on the floor, and direct their teammates where to go verbally. Magic, Nash, and Lebron also have led top-tier offenses in different systems with different types of co-stars.

Shaq, has not, which gets us to...

3. Was he really goat-lvl on offense? Without a "for a big" caveat, Shaq is not a remarkable passer or a above average ball-handler. His best playoff scoring stretches also trail Lebron, Kareem and Jordan(all who are probably better at the first two categories). Even if his volime creation metrics were top-tier(iirc they aren't really clear of even Duncan), that does not speak to the quality/efficiency of what he's making(shaq trails behind in passer-rating significantly), or the advantage someone like Lebron, nash, Magic(or jokic/cp3) offers a team by knowing their and the other team's playbook:

Watch on YouTube

(Was telling toronto players where to go, warrior-cavs battles are in part described as chess matches between lebron and draymond)
https://youtu.be/Rcuf28mqhkA?t=57
(signals cleveland to make a sub that baits the wizards into subbing in an exploitable matchup)
IQ is about more than just making the right reads. Shaq physically doesn't do all the things players I consider"goat-tier" offensively do, and he isn't matching up with what they offer mentally either.

All considered, I'd say Shaq is worse on both ends than you're putting him. Incidentally both the holsitic stuff, and his degree of "accomplishment"(even just looking at prime) trails behind guys you put him on par with or ahead of. Shaq was pretty close to unstoppable physically he got the ball at the right spots, but I don't think that actually translates to him being more "unstoppable" overall.

[OhayoKD]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

Yea I'm sorry I thought anything over 25 would be ridiculous honestly. Guys have done a lot worse and gotten away for a lot less

Also think the idea that repeated offenses should see punishment scale indefinitely is ridiculous. There should be a set-maximum based on what is considered proportionate to the offense.

[eminence]

Based on the precedent of prior NBA suspensions, I think some people had unrealistic expectations. 25 sounds right to me given that the offense is not really that serious but he's a repeat offender.

Silver probably shouldn't have hyped it up like he did, though.

Yea I'm sorry I thought anything over 25 would be ridiculous honestly. Guys have done a lot worse and gotten away for a lot less

Also think the idea that repeated offenses should see punishment scale indefinitely is ridiculous. There should be a set-maximum based on what is considered proportionate to the offense.

I can respect that, I generally see the scaling method as giving young people who are still developing a chance, but starting with whatever the max should be is an understandable position. They currently have a bit of a scaling system, so it would be a change.

If we'd had that system in place at the time I would've supported a lifetime ban after the Pacers incident (still would, but obviously that's not happening at this point). Pulling a gun on a fellow employee is 100% in the no-fly zone.

[OhayoKD]

Yea I'm sorry I thought anything over 25 would be ridiculous honestly. Guys have done a lot worse and gotten away for a lot less

Also think the idea that repeated offenses should see punishment scale indefinitely is ridiculous. There should be a set-maximum based on what is considered proportionate to the offense.

I can respect that, I generally see the scaling method as giving young people who are still developing a chance, but starting with whatever the max should be is an understandable position. They currently have a bit of a scaling system, so it would be a change.

If we'd had that system in place at the time I would've supported a lifetime ban after the Pacers incident (still would, but obviously that's not happening at this point). Pulling a gun on a fellow employee is 100% in the no-fly zone.

I mean there should be a maximum ending point. Whether you start lower is another matter, but, using an extreme to illustrate the principle, petty theft should never be worth 10-years of jail-time.

Now what would constitute as a proper punishment for pulling a gun is another matter, but the consequences for doing something a 3rd-time should never exceed what is deemed as "proportionate" to the act in a vacuum.

[eminence]

Also think the idea that repeated offenses should see punishment scale indefinitely is ridiculous. There should be a set-maximum based on what is considered proportionate to the offense.

I can respect that, I generally see the scaling method as giving young people who are still developing a chance, but starting with whatever the max should be is an understandable position. They currently have a bit of a scaling system, so it would be a change.

If we'd had that system in place at the time I would've supported a lifetime ban after the Pacers incident (still would, but obviously that's not happening at this point). Pulling a gun on a fellow employee is 100% in the no-fly zone.

I mean there should be a maximum ending point. Whether you start lower is another matter, but, using an extreme to illustrate the principle, petty theft should never be worth 10-years of jail-time.

Now what would constitute as a proper punishment for pulling a gun is another matter, but the consequences for doing something a 3rd-time should never exceed what is deemed as "proportionate" to the act in a vacuum.

Agreed with that, especially in real life.

I won't hold the NBA to quite the same standard as our courts. So I expect there will be situations they haven't anticipated and do need to wing it a bit, but they could certainly afford to improve their system with more clearly set consequences etc.

On an even smaller scale, accumulating techs is a bit weird.

[OhayoKD]

I can respect that, I generally see the scaling method as giving young people who are still developing a chance, but starting with whatever the max should be is an understandable position. They currently have a bit of a scaling system, so it would be a change.

If we'd had that system in place at the time I would've supported a lifetime ban after the Pacers incident (still would, but obviously that's not happening at this point). Pulling a gun on a fellow employee is 100% in the no-fly zone.

I mean there should be a maximum ending point. Whether you start lower is another matter, but, using an extreme to illustrate the principle, petty theft should never be worth 10-years of jail-time.

Now what would constitute as a proper punishment for pulling a gun is another matter, but the consequences for doing something a 3rd-time should never exceed what is deemed as "proportionate" to the act in a vacuum.

Agreed with that, especially in real life.

I won't hold the NBA to quite the same standard as our courts. So I expect there will be situations they haven't anticipated and do need to wing it a bit, but they could certainly afford to improve their system with more clearly set consequences etc.

On an even smaller scale, accumulating techs is a bit weird.

Naturally things can be looser, but I would still want the general principle to be applied even in situations where there is no legal obligation to. Off course I'm saying this on a site which uses indefinite scaling...

[eminence]

I mean there should be a maximum ending point. Whether you start lower is another matter, but, using an extreme to illustrate the principle, petty theft should never be worth 10-years of jail-time.

Now what would constitute as a proper punishment for pulling a gun is another matter, but the consequences for doing something a 3rd-time should never exceed what is deemed as "proportionate" to the act in a vacuum.

Agreed with that, especially in real life.

I won't hold the NBA to quite the same standard as our courts. So I expect there will be situations they haven't anticipated and do need to wing it a bit, but they could certainly afford to improve their system with more clearly set consequences etc.

On an even smaller scale, accumulating techs is a bit weird.

Naturally things can be looser, but I would still want the general principle to be applied even in situations where there is no legal obligation to. Off course I'm saying this on a site which uses indefinite scaling...

Ahh, did not know that about the site. Start a petition, I'll consider signing.

Completely unrelated note - anybody have any theories on why the league doesn't move the 1st row/benches/scorers table/cameras/etc further from the court? The safety benefits seem obvious. Would they really lose significant revenue moving 1st row seats a few feet back if they're still in the 1st row?