penbeast0 wrote:Lets' look at this Milwaukee narrative that ElGee is putting out --
Starting in 1976 with the trade of Kareem, core of Bridgeman/Winters/Dandridge
1976 38-44 (15th offensive/12th defensive)
1977 30-52 (12 off/21 def) Brought in Don Nelson to take over as coach
Marques Johnson drafted and instant star (Dandridge leaves after accusations he was dogging it)
1978 44-38 (8 off/ 18 def) strong improvement in Nelson's first full season (still a negative SRS)
1979 38-44 (6off/16 def) actually better SRS and ratings despite record
Sidney Moncrief drafted to add to outside core of Johnson/Bridgeman/Winters/Buckner. In ElGee's narrative shouldn't make much difference as only a part time player in a deep outside rotation; in my narrative, his defensive intensity picks up the team defense and should improve team performance
1980 49-33 (5off/8def) offense still strong, sudden jump defensively
1981 60-22 (2off/3def) Moncrief's first full time year, another defensive jump
1982 55-27 (9off/1def) Marques injured 22 games, Moncrief leads in scoring; defense best in league
1983 51-31 (10off/6def) both healthy but Dave Cowens joins team then quits halfway into year
1984 50-32 (12off/2def) last year together as they are still 1A/1B offensively (Moncrief scores .2ppg more)
Now the team deals Marques Johnson to Clippers for post-surgery Terry Cummings. In ElGee's narrative there should be a dropoff if Marques is the clear best Buck; in mine not so if Sidney is the star
1985 59-23 (6off/2def) no dropoff
1986 57-25 (4off/2def) still no dropoff
Sidney Moncrief gets injured, Milwaukee is still deep on the wings with Paul Pressey and Ricky Pierce who step up -- this hurts Moncrief's case as there is no huge dropoff as he misses 50 games
1987 50-32 (7off/4def)
1988 42-40 (11off/13def) Moncrief comes back as a much slower 25mpg player and now the dropoff
1989 49-33 (10off/6def) Moncrief still a 25mpg player though team makes strong comeback
Moncrief leaves team; replaces by former fellow Razerback DPOY Alvin Robinson
1990 44-38 (17/14)
1991 48-23 (10/11)
In ElGee's narrative, Marques comes in and leads Milwaukee to new heights -- and he does lead Milwaukee to a strong improvement, particularly offensively. In my narrative, Milwaukee has good offensive talent (even before Marques) but Sidney comes in and inspires a defensive mindset which leads them to a strong of elite defensive years while improving the already good offense to elite -- and in my defense, this goes on even when Marques leaves the team. On the other hand, Milwaukee has one good year left after Sidney's injury then declines despite adding Alvin Robertson in his place. From the yearly results, however, it looks to me like Moncrief's effect on the team is stronger than Marques's.
And, their 3 ECF finishes were in 83/84 (with both) and 86 (after Marques leaves). Looking at their big playoff wins those years . . . in 83, Marques declined to an 18PER, Sid to a 15.3 but in the playoff sweep of the Celtics, while Bird had a 20PER (not great), Sidney abused Danny Ainge defensively holding him to an 8.5PER (not a typo). In 84, it was Moncreif with the 18PER and Marques with the 15 and in their semifinal win over the Nets, Sidney abused NJ's leading scorer Otis Birdsong (1984 playoff PER of 10.7). In 86, Marques was gone and Sid was injured. But it sure looks like Moncrief's defense was a key factor in the Bucks's biggest playoff runs of the Nellie years.
What are you suggesting? That my "narrative" is false?
This is what I've written about the team in those early years:
The Bucks were a -3 SRS team when Marques was drafted. His rookie year they were ~.500.
77 primaries to 78 primaries:
Winters (2700 mp) --> Winters (2800)
Dandridge (2500) --> Marques (2800)
Bridgeman (2400) --> Bridgeman (1900)
Buckner (2100) --> Buckner (2100)
Nater (2000) --> Gianelli (2300)
Meyers (1300) --> Meyers (2400)
Restani (1100) --> English (1600)
Lloyd (1000) --> Benson (1300)
A young Alex English is in the rotation and they go from Lloyd to Benson and Nater to Gianelli. Yet by replacing a prime Bob Dandridge they improve ALMOST as much as Unseld's Bullets in his rookie year.
Only Wes didn't replace an all-star level player...
In 79 the Bucks improve again to +2.2. It's basically the same team as listed above, only (1) Marques is better (2) Grunfeld has an expanded role (3) A player already nominated, English, left and (4) George Johnson plays 1200 minutes.
And just to be clear, Milwaukee by SRS post Kareem:
76 -1.6
77 -3.0
78 -0.6 (Marques' rookie year)
79 2.1
80 3.6
Then, you go on to say in "your narrative" Moncrief is the key to the "sudden" defensive jump. To be clear, they went from a 0.2 Drtg team to a -2.4 one in 1980.
79 --> 80 MP primaries
Marques 2800 mp --> Marques 2700
Winters 2600 --> Winters 2600
Benson 2100 --> Benson 1400 +
Lanier 700 (trade)
Gianelli 2100 -->
Meyers 2200
Bridgeman 2000 --> Bridgmeman 2300
Grunfeld 1800 -->
Moncrief 1600
Buckner 1800 --> Buckner 1700
Meyers, Moncrief and the Lanier trade are notable changes. Penbeast apparently wants you to believe that in 20 mpg, rookie Sidney Moncrief was moving a team's defense 2.5 points/100. Ilardi's 6-year APM study has the following defensive players having the greatest impact on the game:
Garnett -5.0
B. Wallace -3.4
Duncan -3.2
Artest -3.2
Bogut -3.0
For Moncrief to be the primary driver of that change, in 20 mpg's off the bench,
he'd have to be impacting the defense at a rate of ~-5 per 40 minutes played. Or, in 100 possessions played, single-handedly shifting the defense ~6 points. I'll let the reader decide if that sounds plausible.
But wait, there's one more thing about the 80 team, which is Lanier's 26 games. Milwaukee gave up 104.9, down from 106.7 before the trade. If we assume pace remained the same (a fair but not sturdy assumption), that means the DRtg before and after the trade would look like:
Before: 104.2
After: 102.4
Which means before the trade, they were -1.1 defensively. So again, you decide if
Penbeast wrote:in my narrative, his defensive intensity picks up the team defense and should improve team performance
1980 49-33 (5off/8def) offense still strong, sudden jump defensively
is actually what happened...
Then we jump to 1982, when Marques was indeed injured and Moncrief did indeed lead the team in those categories.
Then what happened in the playoffs?Moncrief RS averages: 20-7-5 (37 mpg) on 60% TS
Moncrief PS averages 15-5-4 (42 mpg) on 51% TS
The final part of Beast's "narrative" is Moncrief's defense and how it faded when he left, implying strong causality. But we've examined this before and I don't see how that fits the data:
In 1987, Sidney Moncrief starts 30 games.
Mil 1986 -4.5 Drtg
Mil 1987 -2.7 Drtg
86-->87 Bucks
Cummings 2700 --> Cummings 2800
Moncrief 2600 --> Moncrief 900
Pressey 2700 --> Pressey 2100
Pierce 2100 --> Pierce 2500
Lister 1800 -->
Sikma 2500
Breuer 1800 --> Breuer 1500
Hodgers 1700 --> Hodges 2200
John Lucas picks up 1400 mp too. So is the Lister for old Sikma swap and injury time to Pressey possibly something that also changed the defense?
And for the record, in 1988 they regress defensively (-0.4) with Moncrief playing 56 games (1400 mp) but heavy injuries to Pierce and Hodges. And again, we can look at with/without within seasons:
1987 (43g)
with Moncrief: +4.1 (108.5 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +3.8 (104.7 ppg against)
1986 (9g)
with Moncrief: +9.0 (105.9 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +9.8 (101.8 ppg against)
1985 (9g)
with Moncrief: +6.8 (104.7 ppg against)
w/out Moncrief: +7.3 (98.3 ppg against)
To me, it's clear this was a loaded, athletic, multipolar team with some excellent coaching. (Interestingly, that was also it's reputation.)
But I don't know how to look at those years, look at Moncrief fade in the PS, look at the team without him and think he was all that excellent. Of course, that's what my eyes tell me too as I evaluate his contributions on film. And Marques Johnson was on some excellent Bucks teams too (as I've outlined, starting with the 1980 season), so it's not like he should get all sorts of credit. But it's paramount to understand that these guys, are at worst case scenario, close. Only Marques is more praised by SI, by local journalism, has better PS numbers and to me, looks better on film.
In the year he was injured, 1982, I have all but 2 of the games:
w/Marques: +6.6
w/out Marques: +3.2
So again, in summary:
Chris Paul has little evidence of impact within seasons he missed time in either. Only with Paul, there's a bevy of other evidence, including the eye test, and including some of his postseason games, that indicate a major-impact player. Those positive counterpoints just don't exist with Moncrief. And again, at the end of the day, I like the guy's defense and contributions.
But what is the argument for him over Marques? A player who, yes, unarguably was at the forefront of the Buck's escape from the doldrums and was (rightfully) considered the most versatile and complete forward for the late 70s/early 80s.
