Kawhi Leonard has spent the past three seasons slowly evolving from a defensive specialist into an all-around offensive force. During Leonard's MVP performance in the 2014 Finals and his subsequent breakout season in 14-15, a complaint familiar to NFL fans began to surface; a subset of fans, analysts, and even players believed Leonard's success was primarily a result of the San Antonio infrastructure. They believed Leonard was a system player.

While some detractors disappeared forever after Leonard followed up his 14-15 campaign with an MVP caliber 15-16, a quick Twitter search reveals plenty of people who still believe his accomplishments should be tempered because of the organization and coach he plays for.

The Spurs have routinely maximized every ounce of potential from their players' skillsets - look no further than Marco Bellinelli, who fell flat in Sacramento after a fantastic run with San Antonio. With that in mind, accusing any player from the Spurs' ecosystem of being a system player is not entirely illogical. Realistically, however, are these allegations correct? Or are they merely another off-base excuse to discredit a superstar caliber talent?

*****

Proponents of the system player theory would likely point to Leonard's three-point shooting as the best evidence that he benefits from his organization more than other superstar players. Leonard shot an unbelievable 44 percent from 3, a nearly 10 percent increase from his previous season, but a closer look shows that those numbers are a bit deceiving in the bigger picture. Over 84 percent of Leonard's attempts from beyond the arc were classified as "open" or "wide open", a luxury many primary scorers do not enjoy. As you might expect, he shot significantly better under those circumstances.

Even with an abundance of open opportunities, Leonard hits his three-pointers at an elite rate. Contextualizing his three-point shooting is important, but it is equally important to remember that his numbers are impressive regardless.

This discovery poses a deeper question - are all these open shots a result of the elegant ball movement of the Spurs, or is this a result of Leonard intelligently picking his spots? The answer lies somewhere in between.

Leonard unquestionably benefits from his position in the ball handling heirarchy - he is usually the secondary ball handler on the floor while taking on duties as the tertiary handler in certain lineups. This allows his teammates to handle primary shot creation duties and draw extra defenders into the paint, leaving Leonard free to fill space without the ball and feast on open catch-and-shoot jumpers (86 percent of Kawhi's three-point makes were assisted). But Leonard is well aware that his shooting ability is best leveraged in catch-and-shoot situations, and he plays with that knowledge in mind. He will occasionally attempt a pull-up three-pointer in the pick and roll to keep defenders honest, but only 22 percent of Kawhi's three-point attempts are off the dribble. He knows what he's good at, and his decision-making reflects his strengths.

On the other hand, Leonard's detractors tend to ignore the fact that his three-point shooting is merely a small piece of his remarkably versatile game. Leonard is a phenomenally efficient offensive player, placing in the 73rd percentile or above in every major offensive role:

Ball Handler: 1.02 PPP, 95th percentile

Isolation: .99 PPP, 84th percentile

Post Up: 1.02 PPP, 89th percentile

Transition: 1.21 PPP, 73rd percentile

Off Screen: 1.15 PPP, 87th percentile

Once again, Leonard's numbers are outstanding regardless of context, but craftier critics will point out that the San Antonio infrastructure provides a buffer that other players do not have. Players like Carmelo Anthony and Paul George may elect to attempt a low percentage shot because it is often a better alternative than what their teammates could come up with late in a possession; Leonard, on the other hand, can trust his teammates to create a decent look even when the initial action fails.

When Leonard gets stuck creating a shot in the final 4 seconds of a possession, he posts a much more reasonable 40.9 percent effective field goal percentage, a figure 4.3 percent lower than Gordon Hayward in the same situations.

This pick-and-choose mentality is reflected in his overall per-game shot volume, another bullet in the collective magazine of Leonard denigrators. Even after controlling for pace, elite scorers like Paul George and Carmelo Anthony take about three more shots per game. Three shots may not seem like much, but they do make a difference - increasing shot attempts while maintaining the same level of efficiency is usually (outside of 15-16 Steph Curry) impossible.

The Spurs accentuate strengths and minimize weaknesses as a whole. Gregg Popovich always puts his players in the best position to succeed; even after switching to an atypical offense (for them) focused more on isolation play, the Spurs used ball and player movement better than any other isolation-heavy team in the league. Constant movement around the court by all five players, over the course of 24 seconds, slowly opens cracks in the defense - cracks that Leonard exploits with ease.

Leonard is at his best when he can get to one of his many spots and eviscerate a reeling defense quickly and decisively - the longer he holds the ball, the lower his shooting efficiency drops. When his touch time eclipses two seconds, Leonard's eFG% plummets by a substantial 14 percent. Taking too long to attack allows the defense time to tighten up, sealing up the aforementioned cracks that emerged during a possession. Higher touch time can also indicate Leonard is more likely to be pounding the rock, and Leonard's handle can be shaky.

Basically, Leonard generates much of his offense opportunistically, which conveniently addresses the most common criticism from the system player troupe - his career high is only 33 points. Since the Spurs were a ridiculously dominant regular season team, Leonard really didn't need to take on a massive scoring load that required him to put up lower quality shots - shots that lower overall efficiency over the course of a season, but allow players to go off for 40+ points when they are hot.

Even with this in mind, it's important to note that Danny Green never scored with such volume and efficiency - clearly Leonard has scoring chops that are underscored by his role within the Spurs offense. This is obvious when Leonard gets closer to the rim - his offensive game within 16 feet of the hoop is almost entirely generated by himself. Even though he has the rare luxury of picking his spots (for a superstar), the onus is still on Leonard to create space to exploit; only 37 percent of Leonard's makes in the paint and midrange areas were assisted by teammates. Leonard also manufactures points in the one-on-one meta game by using his pump fake to great effect - a skill nearly every superstar has mastered.

The Spurs offense clearly puts Kawhi in a position to succeed, but ultimately it is on Leonard to create good shots and score efficiently - a mentality that also applies to every superstar in the league, even if the coaching cannot match that of San Antonio.

As for his defense: if you truly believe Kawhi Leonard wouldn't be a DPOY-caliber player on any other team in the league despite plenty of objective and subjective evidence, trying to change your mind at this point is futile.

**********

It's exceedingly obvious Kawhi Leonard does benefit from his place on the Spurs, as does every other player to put on their uniform in the past 15 years. The whole point of coaching, however, is to put your players in the best possible position - penalizing Leonard for maximizing his role better than any other player in the league is a shallow attempt to demean an MVP caliber talent. Calling Leonard a system player implies he would not be a game changing offensive talent on another team, in another system.

Yet the skillset described above would fit into any system in the league. A secondary ball handler with fantastic decision-making who can efficiently post up, isolate, get out in transition, and run off screens. Where would such a player not have a massive impact?

To answer the question Kevin Durant posed back in June of 2014 - if Kawhi Leonard and Paul George switched places, George's efficiency would increase while Leonard's decreased. Leonard would look worse, and George would look better. No question about that. But that's what happens when you play on a better team, with better coaching and better roster construction. Tim Duncan also played for the Spurs, and the Spurs played to his strengths as well - is Tim Duncan a system player?

It is true that we cannot, and likely will not, see how Leonard would perform absent (arguably) the best infrastructure in the history of sports. But using that infrastructure as an excuse to discredit rather than contextualize one of the most impactful players in the NBA is a fallacy. Leonard would thrive on any team in the NBA.

Do the Spurs place Leonard in the best possible position to excel? Yes.

Do Kawhi's teammates help him do his job better than he would elsewhere? Yes.

Does that make Kawhi Leonard a system player? No.