Why does it seem like that? On what team wouldn't a power forward who can pass really well, shoot from outside, handle the ball and defend at a DPoY level be valuable? If you mean that he's best playing with another star, that hardly cuts down the teams. So he'd only be valuable on the Warriors, Spurs, Cavs, Rockets, Mavericks, Bulls, Hawks, Thunder, Clippers, Grizzlies, Pacers, Heat, Knicks, Wizards, Kings, Pelicans, Blazers and Timberwolves. He wasn't at his peak, but he was starting his prime. He was already a top defender, his Assist Rate was already near 30%, he was already posting an elite Rebound Rate for his position...the main difference from his peak was that he wasn't an elite finisher yet. His raw numbers were lower because he wasn't playing the extreme minutes he played later, as KG, Allen and Pierce declined, but by the advanced metrics, he was definitely into his prime.
I don't think it's even fair to say he was starting his prime in 2008. In 2008, his assist rate was 28.2%. His career high was in 2012 at 52.5%. In 2008, he was clearly behind Pierce/Allen/Garnett in terms of usage, and his PER was 15.6. That number was depressed due to his relatively fewer minutes and usage, but that just makes it clearer he wasn't in his prime. Does anyone think McGrady "started" his prime in his last year in Toronto?
Again, I think you're confusing "prime" with "peak." He wasn't in his peak years, but his production was strong. 28.2% Assist Rate isn't nearly as good as his peak Assist Rate, but it's still excellent. His defense was already great and a huge part of that champion Celtics team's amazing defense. Being behind three probable Hall of Famers also doesn't bear on whether his prime had started. Yes, I think McGrady's prime had started in Toronto, which is why he was one of the hottest free agents when he went to Orlando on a max deal. He peaked in Orlando and then, due to injury, declined in Houston even though he had some more prime (but not peak) seasons.
In my opinion, a player's prime is the period in a player's career where he is most productive. A player's peak is his best year(s) within his prime. In his 2nd year, Rondo was clearly behind KG/Allen/Pierce. In other words, he was a role player. You may have seen his potential to be great, but that doesn't mean he was already great. Most people would disagree with you. In his last year in Toronto, McGrady averaged 15 ppg. If that's what Orlando expected of him, there's no way they would've offered him a max deal. They saw that he had the potential to be much better than he was. They were paying for the player they hoped he would become....not the player he was.
McGrady was already playing at a high level...he had a 20+ PER in his final two years in Toronto. Playing behind Vince Carter as a second option kept his scoring lower. Obviously, he jumped to a higher level in Orlando in addition to getting more shots, but that's why I differentiate prime and peak. By using "most productive years" you seem to be attaching "prime" to raw stats, which are affected by minutes played, role, teammates. I prefer to pin it to "years in which they were playing at a high level." Rondo in his second year and McGrady in his final year in Toronto were already playing at a high level, so they were in their (early) prime, in my view. Not the peak range of their primes.
not sure how you think mcgrady's prime started in Toronto in his 3rd season in the league. A player's prime does not begin at 20-21 years ago. They are very much still learning the game for several more years. Now if you said Tmacs prime started in Orlando somewhere between the years he first arrived while it peaked in Houston and then obviously declined in his last years here, that would make more sense. Because that's what exactly happened.
It begins when they start playing at a high level, as I said in my previous post. LeBron James' prime definitely started at 20-21, for example. He had a 25.7 PER at 20 and a 28.1 PER at 21. McGrady wasn't James, but he (and Kobe) were already putting up PERs around 20 at ages 20-21, even if their raw stats were lower because they weren't being featured yet due to the presences of Shaq and Carter.
LOL Lebron's prime did not start at 20-21. Completely false. You're saying this started in his 2nd season in the league. I think your definition of prime is completely different from everyone else. I don't think you even realize how long it takes to be in the league and the amount of work put in until a player truly reaches their prime status. Numbers do not tell the entire story at all especially in this case.
We're going to have to agree to disagree, because we have very different ideas of what "prime" means. To me it means the portion of a player's career that he was playing at a high level. James was already one of the very best players in basketball by his second year...to consider that not part of his prime is absurd to me. What you call prime, I call peak...when they had attained the highest level of their game. But further argument will basically be repetition of what we've already said.
Could we beat GSW? Yes. Is it likely? No. It is illogical to say we can't beat a team. It is logical, however, to say that are odds of winning are very very low.
You think 20 year old McGrady, who had a PER of 20, was in his prime. Let's say that 23 year old McGrady, who had a PER of 30, was peak McGrady. If that's the case, how would you classify 21-22 year old McGrady, who had a PER of 25? A 22 year old McGrady was clearly better than a 20 year old McGrady. For most people, a player's prime must be reasonably (in the context of his career) close to a player's peak. A PER of 20 isn't reasonably close to a PER of 30. A PER of 25 is.
Yao was a great defender, but against anyone who could shoot he was a huge liability. We lost to Utah the first time mainly because of his inability to guard Boozer. And Boozer was taking, statistically, the worst shot in basketball: the midrange jumper. Against a 41% 3pt shooter like Draymond or anyone else on GS's roster he would have to be benched.
Sure, Green may shoot 41% from the 3pt line. But if Green were guarding Yao, what percentage do you think Yao would shoot from the post?
They would probably go with the way Boris Diaw guarded him and front him the entire time. We would waste 20 seconds of the shot clock trying to feed him.
I'm going to jump in here and +1 this. Prime and Peak should be measured in relation to the player at hand, not relative to the league. Exaggerated example but, if a 19 year old comes in as a rookie and averages 30/10/10 for four years and then averages 50/20/20 for 7 years with a year or two of 55/25/25 and immediately retiring, that doesn't mean he was in his prime for the first four years of his career despite obviously being an MVP type player.
West All-stars (minus Warriors players) could probably take on the Warriors. East All-stars, I just don't think so.
Would love to see a Vernon maxwell antagonizing steph. If he could get under Jordan's skin I'm sure he could get under Curry's
