#3 NBA Player Peak Of All-Time According to InsideHoops

[lilgodfather1]

Gotta go with Wilt here. His individual numbers are too great to ignore any further despite the lack of titles.

[Shade8780]

Wilt

[silenc]

Wilt

[chains5000]

wilt

[Kiddlovesnets]

I'd give this to Wilt too.

[Nash]

The guy averaging 30/8/7 while leading his team in every category(points, steals, assists, rebounds) and being 2nd best defender in the league.

Lebron James.

[fpliii]

30 minutes left, Wilt's up 20-15

[Hands of Iron]

The guy averaging 30/8/7 while leading his team in every category(points, steals, assists, rebounds) and being 2nd best defender in the league.

Lebron James.

Olajuwon did the same thing over two title runs and was a better defender than James.

[Freedom Kid7]

Olajuwon did the same thing over two title runs and was a better defender than James.

^This.

I love Hakeem and all, but I gotta give this to Wilt. Wilt at his peak was something else. Possibly as dominant as Shaq and took down Russell the winner and warrior in '67.

[upside24]

Wilt. As another poster mentioned, his statistical achievements during his peak earn 3rd.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Edit: Was too late with the vote, but would have gone with Hakeem.

Thought about Kareem, but what years would I go by? I'm pretty much using this definition of "peak" as my definition of "prime" for reference, but I'd probably consider Kareem's prime to be too long compared to the others mentioned since Kareem's prime was from '74 to '80 or '81, imo. Arguably even longer.

So should I go with '77-'80 Kareem?

I put down Bird from 84 to 87 since that was the time span people went with in the 1st thread

are you fine with that, or do you think 88 was part of his peak? if so, hopefully someone from the other thread can chime in for the purpose of this discussion

It's debatable whether '84 is Bird's prime. He was close, he vowed to work harder than ever before in the offseason after getting swept by Milwaukee and focused on conditioning and 1 on 1 moves and he did have his best season to that point and what still stands as at least his 2nd best playoff run.

But he said he worked even harder in the next offseason, this time pretty much focusing on shooting and the results were obvious. He took a clear step as a shooter and scorer compared to previous seasons.

1984- 24.2 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 6.6 apg, 3 TO, 1.8 spg, 49.2 FG%, 24.7 3P%(0.2 3P%), 88.8 FT%, 38.3 mpg, 79 games
1985- 28.7 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 6.6 apg, 3.1 TO, 1.6 spg, 1.2 bpg, 52.2 FG%, 42.7 3P%(0.7 3PM), 88.2 FT%, 39.5 mpg, 80 games
1986- 25.8 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 6.8 apg, 3.2 TO, 2 spg, 49.6 FG%, 42.3 3P%(1 3PM), 89.6 FT%, 38 mpg, 82 games*
1987- 28.1 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 7.6 apg, 3.2 TO, 1.8 spg, 52.5 FG%, 40 3P%(1.2 3PM), 91 FT%, 40.6 mpg, 74 games
1988- 29.9 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 6.1 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.6 spg, 52.7 FG%, 41.4 3P%(1.3 3PM), 91.6 FT%, 39 mpg, 76 games

*= Back injury prior to ;85-'86 season, affected his performance until seeing a therapist for his back and the difference in play was noticeable.

Through Christmas '85-'86- 23.8 ppg, 9.4 rpg, 6.1 apg, 3.5 TO, 2 spg, 44.6 FG%, 34.8 3P%(0.6 3PM), 92.4 FT%, 39 mpg, 21-7 record, 28 games
After Christmas '85-'86- 26.8 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 7.1 apg, 3.1 TO, 2 spg, 52.3 FG%, 44.6 3P%(1.2 3PM), 88.3 FT%, 37.4 mpg, 54 games

Accounting for the injuries early in '85-'86, there was a clear difference in Bird's shooting compared to any season before that, and with remarkable consistency. Before the '84-'85 season, Larry was a 49-50% shooter (47-48% his first 2 seasons), and his 3 point shooting wasn't a factor yet other than his rookie year strangely when he had a similar 3 point season to '85.

But from '85 on, Bird was a 52-53% shooter and a 40%+ 3 point shooter. '86 was the first time he averaged at least 1 made 3 per game and continued that the next 2 seasons. And from '85-'88, he was between 28-30 ppg every year except '86 when he was still at almost 26 ppg, almost 27 ppg after Christmas and that was clearly his most dominant and talented team. Prior to '85, he had never averaged 25 ppg.

I'm fine with '84 being included in Bird's prime, but I think that '88 has to as well. Bird got in much better shape dropping from 234 pounds midseason in '87 to 215 pounds in '88, had what some were calling his best season and he set career highs in scoring, FG% and 3s made that still stand as well as his career high at the time in FT%, although he's broken that.

I usually call '84-'88 Bird's prime, but after reading the article about Bird focusing more on shooting prior to '85 and seeing the results, I've started to think that's the more logical year to start with.

98-99 through 01-02

Why not '97-'98 then? That was clearly a better season for Shaq than '98-'99? He didn't add anything to his game between those 2 years that I noticed and simply played noticeably better in the regular season and especially the playoffs.

You could argue '97-'98 was his 3rd best year. At worst, it's his 4th best behind only the 3peat.

Shaq in '98 was pretty much as capable as he'd ever be individually. Most of the improvements were due to Phil Jackson such as dedicating himself to defense and rebounding more in 2000 and improving his passing more in the triangle. The only improvement he made in 2000 that didn't have to do with Phil is his turnaround jumper which seemed a bit more reliable and something he seemed to go to more often.

But he was more than capable of dominating the game in the same ways. For his all around dominance there's the Seattle series when he dominated with his scoring despite getting double teamed, made Seattle pay for the doubles by killing them with his passing as well as well as being a dominant shot blocker.

There's no way you think Lebron had a better peak (so far) than Wilt, Hakeem, Bird, or Kareem.

With Magic (85-90), Duncan (01-05), and Kobe (06-09) highly debatable, if not ultimately better after close analysis.

'85-'90 for Magic? I'd say Magic's prime was clearly either '87-'90 or '87-'91. He had his complete game those years, outside shot, post game, great passing and rebounding of course and the perfect balance between scoring and passing.

But this isn't something that has a set in stone definition. Some people view a peak as a 2-3 stretch sandwiched by another 2-3 years on each side of more "prime" seasons.

As I said, I know some don't view it as just 1 season. But when it gets to a certain length such as 4-5 seasons, it's really too much, imo because a lot of the "peaks" listed are pretty much player's entire primes.

For example, I can see someone saying Shaq was still at his peak level in '01. '00 has always been his peak, imo, but he was the exact same player to my eyes in '01 with the same skill set, in about the same shape with the same athleticism, very similar stats and the team accomplishments.

For Hakeem, I can see someone saying he was at his peak from '93-'95, it's tough to choose which of the 3 was when he was at his best, the only difference is that Hakeem seemed to focus on offense a little more due to the personnel than defense like he did when he started that run.

For Kobe, I can see someone saying he was at his peak from '06-'08 because it's difficult to determine his best season. '06 was his greatest individual display, '08 was his greatest all around display, and '07 showed his '08 approach early in the year and '06 approach late in the year.

Same thing with MJ, it's tough to choose between '90-'92. His skills,ability and all around game were about the same each season with the difference being that he had to do a little less each of the 3 seasons as his team got better, with the other difference being more team success because of the improved teasm.

Or KG, he was just a step better than any other year in '03 and '04, imo with the difference being he had a better team in '04 and obviously had more team success.

For me personally, I look for a tiebreaker to choose 1 season when it's close if I'm comparing peaks, but I can understand

I think most people get that there's a difference, but it's just how we personally interpret the difference between the two and, ultimately there's really not a wrong answer. Well, unless you start trying to say someone had a 12 year prime and 8 year peak.

Well, Kareem and Karl Malone may have been pretty close to 12 year primes.

[KG215]

But he said he worked even harder in the next offseason, this time pretty much focusing on shooting and the results were obvious. He took a clear step as a shooter and scorer compared to previous seasons.

1986- 25.8 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 6.8 apg, 3.2 TO, 2 spg, 49.6 FG%, 42.3 3P%(1 3PM), 89.6 FT%, 38 mpg, 82 games*

*= Back injury prior to 85-'86 season, affected his performance until seeing a therapist for his back and the difference in play was noticeable.

Through Christmas '85-'86- 23.8 ppg, 9.4 rpg, 6.1 apg, 3.5 TO, 2 spg, 44.6 FG%, 34.8 3P%(0.6 3PM), 92.4 FT%, 39 mpg, 21-7 record, 28 games
After Christmas '85-'86- 26.8 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 7.1 apg, 3.1 TO, 2 spg, 52.3 FG%, 44.6 3P%(1.2 3PM), 88.3 FT%, 37.4 mpg, 54 games

Was that the season he went on a triple double tear in the second half of the season? And I'm glad you mentioned what year it was he injured his back. I can never remember if it was before or after the '85-'86 season.

As I said, I know some don't view it as just 1 season. But when it gets to a certain length such as 4-5 seasons, it's really too much, imo because a lot of the "peaks" listed are pretty much player's entire primes.

For me personally, I look for a tiebreaker to choose 1 season when it's close if I'm comparing peaks, but I can understand

Yeah, I agree that if you start to include more than 2-3 years you're going to pretty much encompass their entire prime. It's something I go back-and-forth on. I think you could almost refine it to their best two seasons as a peak but distinguishing between some players skill, talent, etc. in a three year stretch is nearly impossible.

[Hands of Iron]

For example, I can see someone saying Shaq was still at his peak level in '01. '00 has always been his peak, imo, but he was the exact same player to my eyes in '01 with the same skill set, in about the same shape with the same athleticism, very similar stats and the team accomplishments.

For Hakeem, I can see someone saying he was at his peak from '93-'95, it's tough to choose which of the 3 was when he was at his best, the only difference is that Hakeem seemed to focus on offense a little more due to the personnel than defense like he did when he started that run.

For me, it's a disservice to Shaq not to include 2001 as I too view him as being as close as he possibly could've been to his 2000 form in terms of individual play and impact on the floor. His overall playoff numbers were also almost identical - back-to-back 30/15/3 title runs with elite defense look good together. He also faced tougher opposition defensively (Twin Towers/Mutombo, two top five defenses in WCF and Finals) and dominated the same. There was some definite regression and injury issues in 2002 but I think for some people it's hard to leave it out considering it was a completion of the run and yet another thoroughly dominating Finals performance, so out of it you get: 3-Peat Shaq.

With Hakeem, I hate to play 'what if' scenarios but the three blown calls in that Game 7 against Seattle along with what we know regarding Phoenix/Houston make me seriously consider that the Rockets very well could've been in the 1993 NBA Finals. I think Hakeem was operating at the same level and was even more dominant defensively but was robbed of the opportunity to perform in the final two rounds in the way he would in both 1994-1995. I have to include all three for that reason. He wasn't the same force defensively in year three at age 32 in 1995, but the magnitude of what he did during that particular run from a historic and offensively standpoint just simply can't be left out. Taking the lowest seeded team in NBA history to a championship, going through the top four seeds in the NBA to do it, outplayed fellow Great Centers in MVP/DPOY Robinson and Scoring Champ O'Neal in the championship rounds. That playoff run saw Hakeem asked to take an additional 5 shots per game from the regular season, up to over 26 with absolutely no decline in his efficiency. I think his WCF series is arguably the greatest there's been since the post-Merger considering a number of different factors. Hell, maybe the greatest ever considering the circumstances, the opposition, the statistics of both premier players and what you get visually. Hakeem won two championships, but that series is the first thing that pops in my mind when I think of his defining moment(s).