Its like choosing between rocks-paper-scissors, isn't it?

At least in certain years cuz I dont know if this applies to damn near perfect squads vs their respective competition. Like lets say MJ's Bulls flat out didn't exist, I remember the 90's for the West having that highly matchup dependent aspect come playoffs.

Chuck's Suns, GP and Kemp's Sonics, Hakeems Rockets all seemingly had that dynamic (the Stockton/Malone Jazz figured in that somehow). IIRC, Kenny Smith spoke about this phenomena on TNT once.

Chuck would more than neutralize Kemp and just destroy the Sonics, the Sonics could (illegally) D up Hakeem better than anyone and the Rockets had no answer for Kemp/GP but the Rockets could beat the Center less (soft)Suns. I believe the biggest reason the Rockets moved so much of their quality depth for Chuck was to solve the Kemp problem and help keep him away from Hakeem (his quickness really bothered him as both the man defender and the helper).

So if I were to ask you to grade these cores in various years, how would you go about it if you were to believe the end result of any tournament would be based on the standings? Do you just grade them based on how they fared vs the league at large at that point?