PSD Top 25 GOAT Rankings Summary (Opinion Thread - Overrated/Underrated/Snubbed?)

[valade16]

You went in depth to just focus on the same thing, ignoring that the question was Lillard vs Iverson.

You only commented on how they fared in a statistical category (or you could put them all, still irrelevant) against the league, somehow pretending this holds any weight to the initial question:

Do you pick Iverson over Lillard or Lillard over Iverson. And why?

What does each player bring to the table, what is their weakness, how do they fare against tougher opposition, how do they fare when they have to carry a team of scrubs, how much that differs from playing in a strong team where they do not need to be as selfish, how coachable are they, in how many ways can a team play using either player on the court, does either player restrict a gameplan in order to highlight his strengths and hide his weaknesses... Those are just basic questions a scout asks himself when compiling a review of a player's report.

All this TS% stuff is fancy talk for just ignoring the actual question. And all you did now is just prove that you really do not get why gluing yourself into this narrative of advanced statistics is at all relevant to comparing players from different eras, heck, even across a different division in the same season at times.

You cannot standardize basketball, not within the same season and it's a heck no across different seasons.

The reason I restricted it to a single facet of their game (their scoring efficiency) is A. Because he specifically used that as an example in his question and B. I did not feel like taking literal hours to breakdown their entire game considering how much effort it took into breaking down a single facet of their game and all the variables that entails.

So you ask a lot of good questions, and many of those questions can be answered through statistical analysis. But you will ignore the statistical analysis so I won't bother going through all that work to show you as I did for Warfelg since he actually seems interested in learning. But consider the alternative option to some of your questions:

How do they fare against tougher competition? Well statistics could show you a breakdown of how they played against Top 5 defenses, or against top defensive players who guarded them. But you want to ignore that and use your subjective evaluation to determine who they played that was good and how they did against those players and teams. Which one do you think is more likely to yield results? The one based on pure opinion or the one based on objective data?

And this can be applied to pretty much all the questions you asked. How does either player restrict a gameplan? Every team in the NBA is using analytics to tell them that. literally every one. You don't think they broke down analytically how Westbrook and Harden played and how it impacted their offensive and defensive sets in order to determine the best way to use them? You think they decided to go small because the coach was of the opinion that would work as opposed to looking at the data that told him the team's offense did far better when it had more spacing and less size to accommodate Westbrook's drives and lack of shooting while not suffering a debilitating drop in defensive efficiency due to Tucker's versatility?

Do you honestly believe those kinds of decisions are made without any data?

To go back to your accusation of me ignoring the initial question, I would spend a lot of time in answering and coming to a conclusion based on objective data. You would simply go "NBA suckz now, back then was better, AI would totally pwn" while having put 0 thought into the question.

So whose method deserves criticism here?

[valade16]

When it comes to top SFs of all time, in terms of peak, I'm struggling to see him over Bird, Lebron, Hill, Nique, Baylor, Erving, King, Durant, Cunningham, Havlicek while I'd put Pippen, Melo, Artest and Pierce possibly ahead of him. He's on the same level as Mark Aguirre, James Worthy, Adrian Dantley, Alex English, Rick Barry, Chris Mullin etc in terms of peak. Why? Because offense trumps defense when it comes to peak, otherwise Gary Payton would be the GOAT point guard from the list. That's the unfortunate truth for these guys and peak. Bill Russell as well suffers from this. Scoring is what counts in basketball as valuable as not letting someone score is, he'll still get buckets.

I think this paragraph stands for itself. Kawhi inferior to Nique, Melo, and Artest? On the same level as Aguirre, Dantley, English and Mullin?


Every time you open your mouth you show how little you know. Imagine my disappointment to find you're one of those "scoring is so cool" guys who lives by PPG. Your losing what little credibility you have left at this point.

[NYKalltheway]

I think this paragraph stands for itself. Kawhi inferior to Nique, Melo, and Artest? On the same level as Aguirre, Dantley, English and Mullin?


Every time you open your mouth you show how little you know. Imagine my disappointment to find you're one of those "scoring is so cool" guys who lives by PPG. Your losing what little credibility you have left at this point.

You still don't get what 'peak' means.

As for PPG, sorry, you got it wrong once again. Imagine my disappointment when I thought you could actually argue basketball instead of attack someone by misquoting them and drawing conclusions out of things that were never said nor implied...

[NYKalltheway]

The reason I restricted it to a single facet of their game (their scoring efficiency) is A. Because he specifically used that as an example in his question and B. I did not feel like taking literal hours to breakdown their entire game considering how much effort it took into breaking down a single facet of their game and all the variables that entails.

So you ask a lot of good questions, and many of those questions can be answered through statistical analysis. But you will ignore the statistical analysis so I won't bother going through all that work to show you as I did for Warfelg since he actually seems interested in learning. But consider the alternative option to some of your questions:

How do they fare against tougher competition? Well statistics could show you a breakdown of how they played against Top 5 defenses, or against top defensive players who guarded them. But you want to ignore that and use your subjective evaluation to determine who they played that was good and how they did against those players and teams. Which one do you think is more likely to yield results? The one based on pure opinion or the one based on objective data?

And this can be applied to pretty much all the questions you asked. How does either player restrict a gameplan? Every team in the NBA is using analytics to tell them that. literally every one. You don't think they broke down analytically how Westbrook and Harden played and how it impacted their offensive and defensive sets in order to determine the best way to use them? You think they decided to go small because the coach was of the opinion that would work as opposed to looking at the data that told him the team's offense did far better when it had more spacing and less size to accommodate Westbrook's drives and lack of shooting while not suffering a debilitating drop in defensive efficiency due to Tucker's versatility?

Do you honestly believe those kinds of decisions are made without any data?

To go back to your accusation of me ignoring the initial question, I would spend a lot of time in answering and coming to a conclusion based on objective data. You would simply go "NBA suckz now, back then was better, AI would totally pwn" while having put 0 thought into the question.

So whose method deserves criticism here?

I never said no data, I said no to your data because it's not actual data, it's just a pile of numbers you found under a rug.

The bold part is the reason why you cannot be taken seriously here.

It does not answer the Iverson vs Lillard question, it only applies to Iverson vs his era and Lillard vs his era. It offers nothing to the argument of Iverson vs Lillard.

[valade16]

You still don't get what 'peak' means.

As for PPG, sorry, you got it wrong once again. Imagine my disappointment when I thought you could actually argue basketball instead of attack someone by misquoting them and drawing conclusions out of things that were never said nor implied...

No, I know what peak means. For example: Saying Dominique Wilkins, Ron Artest, or Mark Aguirre’s peak is better than Kawhi’s is peak stupidity.

[valade16]

I never said no data, I said no to your data because it's not actual data, it's just a pile of numbers you found under a rug.

The bold part is the reason why you cannot be taken seriously here.

It does not answer the Iverson vs Lillard question, it only applies to Iverson vs his era and Lillard vs his era. It offers nothing to the argument of Iverson vs Lillard.

Except I have asked you many times for the data you use and you have not answered, because you’re a liar. You don’t use data.

As for the Bolded, we can compare their relative strengths across eras, and how the rule changes affected the defense in guarding certain aspects. Certainly better than You going “today sucks, all defense was better back then!”

But again, there’s no point going in-depth. You’re a Luddite who has no basketball insight or knowledge. Your a man baby stuck in the past who cannot grow up, and so you throw a tantrum at those that do.

The only thing you being apart of a Greek basketball organization tells me is the Greek’s are as bad at basketball as they are at finances.

[naps]

Why? He is literally better than Wade in every aspect of the game minus playmaking.

Kawhi is the better defender, the more efficient scorer, the better shooter/spacer, more clutch, didn't need to ride anyone's coat to win multiple championships, more FMVPs...

If Kawhi is puke worthy, what does that make Wade?

Where did you get Wade into this??

You are just a sad basement dweller since 2006.

[naps]

He has no holes in his game. What are you talking about?

I will just give you one example. I will take prime Kobe over prime Kwahi for a game any day. It's landslide in my book to be honest.

[KnicksorBust]

No, I know what peak means. For example: Saying Dominique Wilkins, Ron Artest, or Mark Aguirre’s peak is better than Kawhi’s is peak stupidity.

Yeah I don't even know what to do with that. It's like I want to engage/debate with everyone on PSD but how do you even begin when the guy rattles off a list like? I honestly don't even know what possible criteria would remain consistent that shows Artest is better than Kawhi and Melo is better than Kawhi.

[KnicksorBust]

I will just give you one example. I will take prime Kobe over prime Kwahi for a game any day. It's landslide in my book to be honest.

That's not an example of a weakness in Kawhi's game?

[Chronz]

I will just give you one example. I will take prime Kobe over prime Kwahi for a game any day. It's landslide in my book to be honest.

I think it depends on the team too tho. They both have an awesome post game but thats been more limited in todays game where you have to be an incredible passer to operate from there (something Kobe was better than Kawhi at), but lemme put it this way. If you have Karl Malone, Shaq and GP, gimme Kawhi any day. He would maximize the ball handling abilities of a true PG, space the floor better for a post scorer like Shaq and play a decent 2 man game with any of the above.

I think you put Kawhi on the Warriors in place of KD all these years, they stay winning 70 games and are an even greater fit. Kawhi to me is the ultimate ceiling raiser, hes an excellent floor raiser too but hasn't really had the chance to prove it as much but I would admit, a guy like LeBron would prolly do better with bums and take that team to a higher level of play. To me, thats the least important trait I want in a star so if a guy like Kobe could carry trash better, which Im not sure of btw, it wouldn't matter as much to me as having the guy with the most portability team to team. Kobe's on that level too tho.

[NYKalltheway]

Except I have asked you many times for the data you use and you have not answered, because you’re a liar. You don’t use data.

As for the Bolded, we can compare their relative strengths across eras, and how the rule changes affected the defense in guarding certain aspects. Certainly better than You going “today sucks, all defense was better back then!”

But again, there’s no point going in-depth. You’re a Luddite who has no basketball insight or knowledge. Your a man baby stuck in the past who cannot grow up, and so you throw a tantrum at those that do.

The only thing you being apart of a Greek basketball organization tells me is the Greek’s are as bad at basketball as they are at finances.

I do use data, I just don't express myself in numbers because I'm not talking presenting a data analysis but a basketball take. Numbers are there, but they're at the bottom of the pile as much as you want to make it the epicenter of the discussion.


P.S: Enjoy your beloved Lebron sucking our ****
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTEkgoCLWaI

[Redrum187]

That's not an example of a weakness in Kawhi's game?

It's easier for him to make personal attacks than it is to defend Wade. I mean, at least WaDe03 actually tried refuting my post where I showed actual data which illustrates how Kawhi's peak postseason was superior to Wade's.

[Redrum187]

I think it depends on the team too tho. They both have an awesome post game but thats been more limited in todays game where you have to be an incredible passer to operate from there (something Kobe was better than Kawhi at), but lemme put it this way. If you have Karl Malone, Shaq and GP, gimme Kawhi any day. He would maximize the ball handling abilities of a true PG, space the floor better for a post scorer like Shaq and play a decent 2 man game with any of the above.

I think you put Kawhi on the Warriors in place of KD all these years, they stay winning 70 games and are an even greater fit. Kawhi to me is the ultimate ceiling raiser, hes an excellent floor raiser too but hasn't really had the chance to prove it as much but I would admit, a guy like LeBron would prolly do better with bums and take that team to a higher level of play. To me, thats the least important trait I want in a star so if a guy like Kobe could carry trash better, which Im not sure of btw, it wouldn't matter as much to me as having the guy with the most portability team to team. Kobe's on that level too tho.

Honestly, you've made great points that I haven't even considered. I think I agree pretty much with everything.

This isn't showing disrespect to Kobe either, no more than it is disrespectful to say Wade had a higher peak than Kobe. I say that and I obviously dislike Wade. Career wise, Kobe beats Kawhi and Wade easily though.