2024 Retro Player of the Year Project UPDATE [Discussion Thread]

[ceoofkobefans]

Idk if y’all already started this but I would like to join!

[ceoofkobefans]

Answering the question I think 1955 is the earliest we should start since that’s the start of the shot clock era but whenever I’m going back and looking at seasons and ranking players and what not I generally start around 1960 since that’s when we start to get more footage and stats on players and we aren’t having to rely on almost purely ppg apg and rpg to rank players

I think we should end sometime in the 2010s id say 2015 since this server has alr seemingly done voting for 2015 and onward

I think it’d be fine to add the original ballots but i would rather keep them separate so we can compare the rankings and try to see where the differences in the rankings are and why that might be

[Djoker]

Yea all the posts here have convinced me that we should keep the new voting separate from the original.

This starts July 8?

[falcolombardi]

Is not like this project being wrong about wjho the best players of 1948 were is gonna hurt anyone and if we are wrong about very early nba that is just a opportunity to learn and became less unkownledgeable about those early eras

I would want to cover all nba seasons

[AEnigma]

Okay, so this is where I am with the start-up questions based on everyone’s responses:

1. A majority of you prefer to start with 1955 (looks like roughly two thirds). However… no one is obligated to vote in every thread, and I am not particularly convinced by oblique citations to the shot clock making votes clearer. Mikan is as automatic an inclusion every year as Russell was throughout his career, and Dolph Schayes is not far behind. Between Bob Cousy and Bob Davies, it is easy to recognise the league’s best point guard. And then you have a mix of star talent with Paul Arizin, Neil Johnston, Max Zalofsky, Bobby Wanzer, Larry Foust, Alex Groza, etc. Admittedly Defensive Player of the Year voting is trickier, but I think that is generally true until ~1967, where Thurmond’s elevation starts offering a consistent rotation of options outside of Russell and Wilt. Any of you have strong opinions on the second and third best defenders of 1959?

Therefore, I intend to start the project with 1950, the first year of the NBA. Again, for those uncomfortable voting for early years, that is fine. I am not going to be auditing activity levels until around 1970 anyway (the approximate point where I will stop accepting brand new entrants to the project).

In recognition of the potential for lessened voting, I will set a standard where an award vote will not be counted until there are at least five (5) valid ballots for that award. If that means I leave an award open indefinitely until we receive the requisite number of ballots, so be it. In that event, I will proceed with threads for other years but continue to make note of and encourage people to provide input on any yet-to-be closed awards.

I am somewhat flexible on the number, so feedback there is welcomed, but I have no intent to give “official” results where only three people provided any input.

2. We will go through 2014 — the last year without OPoY or DPoY voting.

3. Official results will not include the 2010 project votes. However, for spreadsheet purposes, I will be recording what the results would be if these votes were added to the old ones (each voter has one vote applied equally), as well as what they would be if we gave the end results equal weight.

I will start the 1950 thread sometime in the next 36 hours. I will keep balloting open for at least 72 hours. For staggering purposes, I will likely start the subsequent year’s thread two days after opening the prior year’s thread.

Feedback is welcomed, but major changes to the above will likely not occur unless there is near unanimous opposition, or at least a sufficiently convincing case on behalf of a majority. Thank you.

[ZeppelinPage]

Certainly interested in the in-era aspect of this project. I'll try to chime in and vote when able!

[Tim Lehrbach]

I know I am chiming in late, and I am also a chronic project-abandoner -- I get too intimidated and overwhelmed by the research and writing involved! -- but I really do like helping in the run-up to this board's projects even if I'm not up to participating in them. So I ran through this and the previous discussion thread and have a few things to share.

1. The original project started with the present year and went backwards. This was very helpful in generating momentum, I recall as a non-contributing observer. Doctor MJ recommended starting at the beginning and going forward this time, as seems to be the intended direction:

My recommendation would be to go chronologically forward this time around rather than backward.

I ran the original project backward strategically because it was a new concept that I figured it would be easiest to buy-in for the most recent years and that the project could still feel like a success even if we ran out of juice…and I think it worked not just because I personally see it as successful, but because we did run out of steam in the ‘50s.

But having gone through this process myself multiple times now, I feel like it’s easier to get your head around a given year when you just did the year before it, than it is when you just did the year after it.

I am torn, tbh. I think starting with the present does generate initial interest. Further, I think the disorientation, so to speak, of going backwards is a feature and not a bug. Going backwards, I feel, makes it more difficult to become swept up in a multiyear narrative about a player or to vote on one year with future years in mind (e.g., is LeBron judged more harshly for 2007-2011 seasons if one knows he'll get "redemption" votes in the coming years vs. having already taken care of later years first and being left with only each of those seasons on the table, on their own merits, for consideration?). Maybe this wouldn't affect everyone, but I kinda like the thought of breaking up the sweeping arc of NBA history. In fact, years could even be plucked at random to truly isolate them from surrounding years' context! Wild, but it could have a benefit.

On the other hand, two perks of starting at the very beginning (aside from it being a very good place to start) and going forward in time are (1) that it is opposite of the first project, so it may lend to different approaches and interestingly distinct results, and (2) that maybe the narrative arc of NBA history matters in a way this project could capture, i.e., maybe this is an opportunity for a whole new telling of NBA history, season-by-season, learning and re-learning the important developments in the sport along the way.

I'll stop short of making a recommendation, but I think there are merits to several different approaches.

2. About the endpoint... here's where it gets tricky. "Officially" speaking, the Retro Player of the Year project (viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1004743) stopped being "retro" and began incorporating the results of the PoY voting each year. In a sense, it's still going. So it's not a static project in the same way that the Top 100 captures opinions at a moment in time. What becomes of that "living" tally of PoY shares when the redo takes its place alongside the original? I guess part of the answer is that the "new retro" votes for 2014 through 2024 may differ from the contemporary votes of each year, so RPOY and RPOY2 could be distinguished by different results in those years, too. But then, do you keep both projects going into the future?

I suspect that, to avoid confusion, each project will have to have a defined beginning and end. But this would mean undoing the active tallying of POY votes that gets appended on to the original RPOY project every year. Or, again, doing such tallying for both. But doesn't it become confusing if both projects go on like that? Which one becomes RealGM's definitive scoresheet for all-time POY votes?

Maybe I'm seeing a problem that isn't really there, but the RPOY (original) project feels like one that morphed into an ongoing concern, such that it is challenging to place another alongside it.

3. About the starting point... I can't imagine leaving out anything that the NBA counts in its official history, which includes the three preceding BAA seasons. But, the original project recognized the limitations of available information and was appropriately curtailed at '54-'55. Have we recovered more data or footage sufficient to run the project all the way back? I have no idea, but I support reaching as far as we can. As limited as the information may be, it's not as though we have perfect knowledge about, say, 1958, either.

4. Tying the last two points together, I think there needs to be a board consensus as to what the status of "live" year-end awards voting is and how it relates to "static" projects. Right now we've got the RPOY project doubling as the ongoing count of all-time POY votes. While I think this produces one of the most fascinating looks at all-time achievements anywhere (period), the relaunch or redo of this projects brings us to a fork in the road. Does the original RPOY project continue to serve this purpose, or is that project, and now this one, better left as standalone, static chronicles of year-by-year player achievement within the demarcated time period only?

5. If any of that made any sense, I'll add why I think getting these questions right matters and what I recommend. The original RPOY project is arguably the best work this board has ever produced, and it is some of the most complete, collaborative NBA historical analysis ever produced. Because of this, I think two imperatives present: (1) preserve the coherence and integrity of the original project, and determine its scope (whether to cut it off at the date of its original completion or continue appending post-RPOY project votes to it), and (2) make absolutely sure this redo happens and is successful because we would all benefit tremendously from having the exercise repeated with new voices and new information.

Therefore, to avoid confusion mid-or-post-project, I recommend starting with the questions of what becomes of the original project and how the RealGM PC board wants to tally its all-time POY votes. I think the latter is of no small importance for the simple reason that POY shares is an incredibly compelling indexing of player achievement. I suspect I am probably not alone in valuing it equal to or higher than the Top 100 project as such an index. (Not that one produces a more correct GOAT ranking, but that the POY shares contains, IMO, vastly more inputs and is inherently a more complete historical picture of player seasons and careers.)

6. I would like to participate, but I've made big promises before and have fallen woefully short every time. So, I will chime in where I can but do not intend to vote. I accept that I am more at home discussing the mechanics and parameters of these projects than actually analyzing basketball or distilling observation, data, and principles into readable, meaningful comments. Anyway, if anything I've written here is worth considering, please let me know how I can help.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

I haven't done a project here before so this might be fun.

Keeping it real: I don't know how much I'll participate.

[Dutchball97]

I have to say I'm glad with the decisions on how we'll handle the project. 1950 as a starting point makes by far the most sense to me as the first year of the NBA, while it'd be weird not to continue until at least the last season we have OPOY and DPOY votes for.

The tally being split in different results seems like a best of both worlds thing. I'll just admit I'm really not looking forward to the 84-98 period so if that turns as ugly as prior threads on the board about Jordan at least we have the previous results to fall back on.

[ardee]

Can we get this thread pinned?

[bastillon]

1. A majority of you prefer to start with 1955 (looks like roughly two thirds). However… no one is obliged to vote in every thread, and I am not particularly convinced by oblique citations to the shot clock making votes clearer. Mikan is as automatic an inclusion every year as Russell was throughout his career, and Dolph Schayes is not far behind. Between Bob Cousy and Bob Davies, it is easy to recognise the league’s best point guard. And then you have a mix of star talent with Paul Arizin, Neil Johnston, Max Zalofsky, Bobby Wanzer, Larry Foust, Alex Groza, etc. Admittedly Defensive Player of the Year voting is trickier, but I think that is generally true until ~1967, where Thurmond’s elevation starts offering a consistent rotation of options outside of Russell and Wilt. Any of you have strong opinions on the second and third best defenders of 1959?

Therefore, I intend to start the project with 1950, the first year of the NBA. Again, for those uncomfortable voting for early years, that is fine. I am not going to be auditing activity levels until around 1970 anyway (the approximate point where I will stop accepting brand new entrants to the project).

Not thrilled with this approach. Vast majority voted to start at shot clock era and you overruled the majority? Hopefully you will be more receptive to the feedback next time. As I understand it, this is a PC board project, not your personal project.

[OhayoKD]

1. A majority of you prefer to start with 1955 (looks like roughly two thirds). However… no one is obliged to vote in every thread, and I am not particularly convinced by oblique citations to the shot clock making votes clearer. Mikan is as automatic an inclusion every year as Russell was throughout his career, and Dolph Schayes is not far behind. Between Bob Cousy and Bob Davies, it is easy to recognise the league’s best point guard. And then you have a mix of star talent with Paul Arizin, Neil Johnston, Max Zalofsky, Bobby Wanzer, Larry Foust, Alex Groza, etc. Admittedly Defensive Player of the Year voting is trickier, but I think that is generally true until ~1967, where Thurmond’s elevation starts offering a consistent rotation of options outside of Russell and Wilt. Any of you have strong opinions on the second and third best defenders of 1959?

Therefore, I intend to start the project with 1950, the first year of the NBA. Again, for those uncomfortable voting for early years, that is fine. I am not going to be auditing activity levels until around 1970 anyway (the approximate point where I will stop accepting brand new entrants to the project).

Not thrilled with this approach. Vast majority voted to start at shot clock era and you overruled the majority? Hopefully you will be more receptive to the feedback next time. As I understand it, this is a PC board project, not your personal project.

They changed the ending date and old-votes policy because of people's feedback.

The difference between those two factors and this is there is an option to opt-out of the decision's primary consequence personally by not voting yourself.

You can just...not vote in the early threads instead of trying to prevent people who want to vote from voting you know

[eminence]

The more I think on it, the happier I am starting with '50.

It's the first season with the NBA name, has decent statistics, and is clearly head and shoulders above any competition.

I'm going to be driven mad deciding how to weight different leagues during the ABA seasons.

[Dutchball97]

The more I think on it, the happier I am starting with '50.

It's the first season with the NBA name, has decent statistics, and is clearly head and shoulders above any competition.

I'm going to be driven mad deciding how to weight different leagues during the ABA seasons.

I think there is a pretty clear upward trend for the ABA, although there is no exact science for just how much to weigh them year by year. The first couple years I'll probably consider the 1-2 best players from the ABA to round out my ballot but none will be in serious contention for the top spot. 1972 is a definite turning point imo since the MVPs from that point onwards were all rookies this season (Gilmore, Erving, McGinnis) or joined the league the next season from the NBA (Cunningham). The last 2-3 seasons of the ABA I'd consider a 1B league with multiple guys in contention for the top 5 and even realistic chances for some of them to actually get the #1 spot (mainly Dr J in 1976).

[trelos6]

I’d like to participate also, though I’m
Currently on vacation for another couple of days.

[Colbinii]

One thing I am looking forward to in this project--making an active GOAT-type list. Mikan is off to a massive lead in terms of CORP and GOAT listing.

[Dutchball97]

Not sure if others are doing it as well but I haven't seen any overall rankings yet after 3 seasons so here is how it stands after the 51-52 season:

Player of the Year

Spoiler:

1. George Mikan - 3.000
2. Dolph Schayes - 1.291
3. Alex Groza - 0.911
4. Bob Davies - 0.717
5. Paul Arizin - 0.565
6. Bob Cousy - 0.400
7. Arnie Risen - 0.397
8. Ed Macauley - 0.145
9. Jim Pollard - 0.100
10. Al Cervi - 0.064
10. Nat Clifton - 0.064
12. Max Zaslofsky - 0.055
13. Bobby Wanzer - 0.045
14. Fred Schaus - 0.036
15. Harry Gallatin - 0.010

Offensive Player of the Year

Spoiler:

1. Alex Groza - 1.279
2. George Mikan 1.054
3. Bob Davies 0.996
4. Paul Arizin 0.650
4. Bob Cousy 0.650
6. Ed Macauley 0.428
7. Dolph Schayes 0.200

Defensive Player of the Year

Spoiler:

1. George Mikan - 3.000
2. Arnie Risen - 0.536
3. Vern Mikkelsen - 0.267
4. Nat Clifton - 0.242
4. Jim Pollard - 0.242
6. George Senesky - 0.211
7. Al Cervi - 0.200
8. Red Rocha 0.175
9. Milo Komenich - 0.150
10. Slater Martin - 0.100
11. Larry Foust - 0.067
12. Kleggie Hermsen - 0.050
12. Joe Grabowski - 0.050
14. Dolph Schayes - 0.044
14. Harry Gallatin - 0.044

[IlikeSHAIguys]

So just going to say

I feel kind of bad I haven't voted but I really haven't even heard of the players right now but Mikan. If I was to put 5 people it would really just be me saying stuff other people said and I don't know if that's really what you guys are looking for. I hope its okay if I chill until like at least I've heard of the guys who people are talking on.

[Dutchball97]

Just for POY for now but here is how it stands for the pre-shot clock era, the shares for the 2015-2024 years we'll be adding at the end and a virtual ranking with the 2 lists combined

1950 - 1954

Spoiler:

George Mikan 4,940
Dolph Schayes 2,351
Bob Cousy 1,600
Alex Groza 0,911
Bob Davies 0,717
Paul Arizin 0,565
Arnie Risen 0,397
Ed Macauley 0,275
Neil Johnston 0,260
Nat Clifton 0,194
Jim Pollard 0,170
Paul Seymour 0,150
Harry Galatin 0,130
Larry Foust 0,090
Al Cervi 0,064
Max Zaslofsky 0,055
Bobby Wanzer 0,045
Fred Schaus 0,036
Slater Martin 0,020
Vern Mikkelsen 0,010

2015 - 2024

Spoiler:

LeBron James 4,291
Nikola Jokic 4,110
Steph Curry 3,659
Giannis Antetokounmpo 2,646
James Harden 1,996
Kawhi Leonard 1,315
Anthony Davis 1,246
Jayson Tatum 0,964
Joel Embiid 0,924
Luka Doncic 0,819
Kevin Durant 0,723
Russell Westbrook 0,683
Jimmy Butler 0,682
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander 0,647
Chris Paul 0,565
Draymond Green 0,326
Rudy Gobert 0,151
Jalen Brunson 0,147
Victor Oladipo 0,045
Paul George 0,021
Jaylen Brown 0,018
Blake Griffin 0,006
Anthony Edwards 0,006
Tyrese Haliburton 0,006
Kyrie Irving 0,005
John Wall 0,004

Combined rankings 1950-54 and 2015-24

Spoiler:

George Mikan 4,940
LeBron James 4,291
Nikola Jokic 4,110
Steph Curry 3,659
Giannis Antetokounmpo 2,646
Dolph Schayes 2,351
James Harden 1,996
Bob Cousy 1,600
Kawhi Leonard 1,315
Anthony Davis 1,246
Jayson Tatum 0,964
Joel Embiid 0,924
Alex Groza 0,911
Luka Doncic 0,819
Kevin Durant 0,723
Bob Davies 0,717
Russell Westbrook 0,683
Jimmy Butler 0,682
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander 0,647
Paul Arizin 0,565
Chris Paul 0,565
Arnie Risen 0,397
Draymond Green 0,326
Ed Macauley 0,275
Neil Johnston 0,260
Nat Clifton 0,194
Jim Pollard 0,170
Rudy Gobert 0,151
Paul Seymour 0,150
Jalen Brunson 0,147
Harry Galatin 0,130
Larry Foust 0,090
Al Cervi 0,064
Max Zaslofsky 0,055
Bobby Wanzer 0,045
Victor Oladipo 0,045
Fred Schaus 0,036
Paul George 0,021
Slater Martin 0,020
Jaylen Brown 0,018
Vern Mikkelsen 0,010
Blake Griffin 0,006
Anthony Edwards 0,006
Tyrese Haliburton 0,006
Kyrie Irving 0,005
John Wall 0,004

[AEnigma]

And if these votes were just added to the prior project, Mikan would be 11th (narrowly behind Erving), Schayes would be 13th (between Karl Malone and Bob Pettit), and Bob Cousy would be 25th (narrowly ahead of Wade).