RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #16 (George Mikan)

[LukaTheGOAT]

This whole conversation is trying to determine how much it matters that CP3 appears to fall off during the course of a series? Do I have that right?

I have no answer to that, but I will say that I'm not as high on CP3 as some of you, and that in comparing three PGs who seems likely to come up in the near future - CP3, Nash, and Stockton - that I am probably in the minority in that I would take Stockton over the others.

RS / PS career rTS averages:

Stockton: +7.6 / +3.6
Paul: +3.5 / +3.6
Nash: +7.5 / +5.3

Both Stockton and Nash are much more efficient during the larger sample of the regular season than CP3, with Nash being the most efficient in the post-season. They are both 4+ percentage points ahead of CP3 in the RS. Yes, Stockton falls the most in the PS, but +3.6 is still solid PS efficiency and there's no getting around CP3's RS deficiency.

Nash is the most efficient overall of the three, but of course his (lack of) defense hurts his case.

Career average DRAPMs:

Stockton: 1.77(11 seasons, JE RS+PS and Squared2020)

Paul: 0.94(14 seasons, JE RS+PS, I don't have his RAPMs post-2019)

Nash: -0.78(18 seasons, JE RS+PS)

Stockton's defense impact grades out well ahead of CP3, while Nash's is predictably much worse than either.

Career Average Turnover Economy PER 100 Possessions:

Some of you have lauded CP3 for being goat-tier in this category, and that's true, but Stockton seems to be right there with him.

Stockton: 16.8/4.5(3.73) RS, 15.4/4.3(3.58) PO
Nash: 13.8/4.7(2.94) RS, 12.8/4.6(2.78) PO
Paul: 14.1/3.5(4.03) RS, 11.6/3.6(3.22) PO

CP3 indeed leads in the RS, but Stockton is in the ballpark, just .3 behind in assist/turnover ratio. And in the playoffs, Stockton actually leads by a similar margin.

Career RS/PS On/Off

Stockton has superior on/off in RS and PS to both. Though I acknowledge that we only have on/off from 1997 onwards and that it's possible Stockton's numbers would lower if we had all the data. I'm not entirely sure of that though.

Stockton: +10.8 / +7.9
Nash: +7.0 / +4.7
Paul: +9.6 / +6.2

Durability:

Career average games played per season:

Stockton: 79.2
Nash: 67.6
Paul: 67.4

Total number of career playoff games missed / total number of playoff games played by team

Stockton: 0/182
CP3: 12/161(all 2015 and later)
Nash: 3/123

In conclusion, I just think Stockton is the most complete player of the three with the fewest holes - more efficient than CP3 by a wide margin in the regular season, better defender than Nash(than both, actually, by DRAPM), more durable than both, highest on/off, etc.

Given the sheer impact of Nash's offensive game - beyond his individual efficiency, his teams had an average rORtg of +4.66 over his 18 seasons vs CP3's teams having an average of +2.49 over his 18 seasons so far, with 6 #1 finishes and 9 consecutive Top 2 finishes vs CP3's 3 #1 finishes and 4 Top 2 finishes - I might be tempted to take him over CP3 as well despite the defensive gap. This is also the one area where Stockton lags behind both.

The 2022 and 2023 isn't in the database yet, so it can't be counted. However, if we look at CP3's 14 PS from 08-21, it does not show him to be an inferior player to Stockton on a per-game basis.

CP3 from 08-21 in the PS averaged an adjusted 22.7 pts per 75 on rTS% of 4.4%

Stockton from 86-99 in the PS (Stockton I don't think played enough MPG to be picked up in the Backpicks database, however, this ends up helping his PS averages) averaged an adjusted 16.5 pts per 75 on rTS% of 5.3%.

So Stockton maintains the efficiency advantage, however he is also scoring 5.7 pts less per 75 possessions in exchange for +1.3% of efficiency. Philosophically, if the much higher volume is worth may come down to preference, however, I will generally people favor Kobe and Hakeem as scorers over CP3, so I would say the same should extend to be true for CP3 being over Stockton in this case.

According to PS ScoreVal during those spans, CP3's scoring looks more valuable:

CP3 ScoreVal-0.7

Stockton ScoreVal-0.3


CP3's general PS metrics do look better as well:

Backpicks BPM-5.7

PER-23.7
BPM-7.1
WS/48-.193


Compared to Stockton

Backpicks BPM-5.3

PER-20.1
BPM-6.3
WS/48-.163

It's not just the PS either. Paul's RS play looks better on a per-possession basis too.

Paul
Adjusted 21.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 4.3%)

PIPM-5.7

PER-25.3
BPM-7.8
WS/48-.251


Stockton
Adjusted 16.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 7.9%)

PIPM-5

PER-22.2
BPM-7.4
WS/48-.214

Both Paul and Stockton have playstyles that are generally pretty well represented by the box-score and full encapsulates what they bring to the table. Even with Stockton's RS efficiency advantage, the numbers don't suggest that Stockton's lower volume was preferential to Paul. I think it is fair to argue Stockton's durability helps in a comparison to Paul, however, I certainly don't get the impression that Stock is a better basketball player than Paul.

We also have numbers heavily using the on/off and plus-minus from we have from 97 onward. And while Stockton looks great, none of the numbers suggests he surpassed Paul's peak years in this regard. I don't doubt younger Stockton might look better in his younger years, but that is more of a projection than a certainty.

[AEnigma]

Is the 2nd or 3rd best defender of all time good enough to go over Dirk Nowitzki?

…

David Robinson is arguably the best defensive player of all time not named Bill Russell.

…

It is almost universally agreed that David Robinson is a better defender than Tim Duncan. It is very difficult to parse through which elite defender is better than others, yet on this board, it feels like everyone is in agreement that Robinson > Duncan. Duncan is a top ten defensive player of all time, likely a full tier above someone like Rudy Gobert.

…

I am not entirely convinced Robinson > Nowitzki. But as I said, while reading this thread, I was hoping someone might comment on how David's defense may not be as good as advertised. A lot of the focus is on offense (which I suppose is to be expected), but I just don't think that is really the argument here. I think we should pull back on David Robinson's two way play and look at him more as a defensive juggernaut.

I hate how often RealGM pages crash. Going to make this more concise.

Starting at the end, I posted a compilation of some criticisms of Robinson’s defence on page one of this thread, and I could dig up more (I have read several compelling cases for Dikembe with which I tend to agree, although I prioristised a Ewing comparison more because he has a shot at top 25 and Dikembe has none).

As for the rest, I strongly dispute that Robinson has any particularly valid claim to second-best defender, and I also do not see it as any particular “universal” sentiment that his prime was better than Duncan’s.

Robinson has this alluring physicality to him (…), and he shows up well in the defensive box score, but I think he very clearly lacks the fluid versatility and defensive dynamism of Hakeem and Ben Wallace and Garnett, or possibly even Dwight Howard, and I also do not see the overall value of his rim protection (considering era) distinguishing itself from players like Wilt, Thurmond, Dikembe, Hakeem, Gobert… nor do I think he had the standout defensive intelligence of other players in that tier. His comparatively lesser ability to disrupt top tier offences in his own era make me very much question the often assumed translation into later eras — again I find myself looking at the Jazz as a sort of test case — and although he did thrive in a more dedicated defensive role next to a similarly elite defender, I do not see why that would be an assumed advantage over others: we saw what happened when the Wallaces were paired together, when Garnett was next to Perkins, when Ewing was next to Oakley, when Howard was next to Davis, and when Robinson left Duncan and the Spurs… among others (Thurmond and Wilt look more impressive in their own time, but it was an era with an even heavier emphasis on rim protection)…

To whatever extent I do see the conceptual case made for him, it is not by enough that I feel he deserves any particular separation. He is among the best defenders ever, but I myself feel I can list him as easily at like tenth as I can at third or fourth — and that is indeed where I lean.

[One_and_Done]

Definitely don't think D.Rob was the defensive GOAT, for mine that's Duncan. He's close though, in terms of his peak. It's not hard to believe he's better than KG and Russell for example.

Combine with him being good enough to lead the league in scoring on the offensive end and he's a worthy inclusion here. I might take KD instead, but he won't get any support yet.

[f4p]

Voting Post
1. George Mikan
2. Dirk Nowitzki

Nomination
1. Nikola Jokic
2. Kevin Durant



Mikan: before this project, i figured i'd be voting for george mikan once we got everyone else out of the way. that's what you do. you vote for all the people who have won an alpha championship, throw in some longevity guys whose careers you remember real well, and then you eventually vote for "that guy". mikan. guy who played in the 40's. with the plumbers. and not even the good plumbers.

but then you think about it, and the guy started his nba career 12 years before west and oscar. those guys played in a modern league, right? and they were nowhere close to the era-relative dominance of mikan. like, not even a little. and then you go back a little further. bill russell won a title in 1957 as a rookie, and we all just lump that in with his other 10 titles. all from the modern nba, right? and yet just 3 years earlier, mikan won a title as the best player in the league. could the league have changed that much? it's not like the league suddenly became massively more popular and money started flooding in and the 1957 talent pool swamped the 1954 talent pool.

while i do think it's reasonable to think that there was a fairly rapid increase in the league talent in the early days, it's hard to think that titles in 1953 and 1954 could really be that different from a title in 1957.

obviously, if you are going to play in the weakest era, perhaps weakest by a bit, you better absolutely dominate. and mikan does. enough that i think that's it's certainly right to start talking about him now. we are talking about west and oscar, and they are seemingly fairly distant 3rd/4th in their era. is a clear cut #1, arguably a bill russell-level winner with wilt chamberlain-level stats, from just 12 years before not better than them? there obviously isn't much to go on as far as stats or videotape for mikan, but what we do have in stats is dominant.

once they start counting minutes in 1952, which is after the lane-widening, mikan leads the league in PER for the next 3 years. actually peaking at 29.0 in 1954. he finishes 2nd, 1st, and 3rd in WS48.

in the playoffs, he leads the league in PER all 3 years. he finishes 3rd, 1st, and 1st in WS48.

in fact, in 1954, the year that is only 3 years before bill russell wins his first title, mikan sets the playoff record for PER (33.6) and WS48 (0.391), records which would stand for a multi-series playoff run until 2009 lebron. the 0.391 WS48 is just enormous. so he had the most statistically dominant playoffs for most of NBA history while winning a title, including winning as an SRS underdog in the finals against +4.3 team.

and of course, by all accounts this is the weak part of his career. from 1949-1951, he average 28.0 ppg on 41.7 FG% compared to 20.7 ppg and 38.8 FG% from 1952-1954. the league was a little faster-paced in the earlier 3 year era, but considering the gulf between these stats and given that he was leading the league in basically everything from '52-'54, he was almost certainly having the highest PER seasons in history from '49-'51. he played 40 mpg in 1952. even if we assume he played 43 mpg in 1949, 1950, and 1951, his WS48 in the regular season would beat 1972 kareem all 3 years for the nba record.

in the playoffs, the statistical difference between '49-'51 and '52-'54 is basically the same. so again, almost certainly at least in 2nd all-time in PER behind 2009 lebron and possibly in first. even if he played all 48 minutes in 1949, he would have the WS48 record at 0.420. so mostly like somewhere around 0.450 WS48 if he played 45 minutes. only 1951 shows a drop off.

and what probably impressed me the most when i started looking at numbers before this project, things that were supposed to impress me about hakeem, mikan stands out as an amazing playoff riser.

Actual Championships vs Expected Championships - 5 vs 2.31 (2.69 delta is 7th), +116% is 13th

how did this happen? well, playoff resiliency. i looked at the last project's Top 33 (just stopped at pippen due to time and less interest in the players below him) plus newer guys like jokic, giannis, embiid, and kawhi and then put in tatum and butler. i would've put in doncic but i only did ages 22-35 and doncic only had one season (though he would have led the list below).

all the data is from ages 22 to 35 and it looks at the BBRef stats PER, WS48, BPM, and TS% and compares each year to the regular season. the resilience at the end is just an average of the normalized increase/decrease for each value. +1 is a top 95% value and -1 is a bottom 6.5% value (couldn't use 5% because the lower values were so low that they were making the average season as slightly "resilient"). for playoff runs shorter than 10 games, the final value was multiplied by "Games/10" so a 5 game, 1 round playoffs would get weighed at 50%. the table is their career average (each playoff run weighed equally to essentially average your resiliency from year to year). mikan comes in 3rd behind kawhi and hakeem. so the guy who absolutely kills regular season stats also shows up as one of the great individual playoff risers ever. and he's a huge team riser as well.

Code: Select all

Rank   Player Name             Career Avg       
1      Kawhi Leonard           0.4561           
2      Hakeem Olajuwon         0.3315           
3      George Mikan            0.3246           
4      Lebron James            0.2747           
5      Bill Russell            0.2548           
6      Walt Frazier            0.2318           
7      Jerry West              0.2142           
8      Michael Jordan          0.2081           
9      Tim Duncan              0.166             
10     Magic Johnson           0.0968           
11     Scottie Pippen          0.0963           
12     Oscar Robertson         0.0865           
13     Kobe Bryant             0.0856           
14     Charles Barkley         0.0779           
15     Kareem Abdul-Jabbar     0.0554           
16     Dirk Nowitzki           0.0534           
17     Jayson Tatum            0.0247           
18     Nikola Jokic            0.0205           
19     Shaquille O'neal        0.0179           
20     Moses Malone            0.0093           
21     Dwyane Wade             -0.0021           
22     Chris Paul              -0.0156           
23     Julius Erving           -0.0231           
24     Jimmy Butler            -0.0341           
25     Wilt Chamberlain        -0.0851           
26     Kevin Garnett           -0.1115           
27     Larry Bird              -0.1327           
28     Kevin Durant            -0.1435           
29     Patrick Ewing           -0.1446           
30     David Robinson          -0.1552           
31     Steve Nash              -0.1582           
32     Stephen Curry           -0.1613           
33     Bob Pettit              -0.1624           
34     John Stockton           -0.182           
35     Giannis Antetokounmpo   -0.1975           
36     James Harden            -0.1982           
37     Karl Malone             -0.2959           
38     Joel Embiid             -0.533           


the following table shows how much better a player was in the playoffs to explain how many championships they won. well, it turns out for mikan it would be a massive 13.5 wins per season or 5.0 SRS. even above hakeem.



won like russell, dominated stats like wilt, playoff riser like hakeem. at some point, winning 7 titles in 8 years, dominating basically every regular season stat that was available, dominating every playoff stat that was available, being one of the great playoff risers ever, and still basically being able to do it all within 3 years of bill russell entering the nba, tells me mikan needs to be above other players from the league's first 25 years who weren't nearly as dominant in their era.


Dirk
Won a title as an alpha over great competition. Impact metrics tend to really like him. Not a super riser in the playoffs but a small riser nonetheless. I think of his 2006 victory over the Spurs as arguably his best series and something I never saw from leading man Robinson. Too much of DRob's case is based on his time as a second fiddle. Even if he arguably has a case for first chair in 1999, it would be more like Pau in 2010. Some stats might say they were the best but heavy lies the head that wears the crown, and they weren't the ones wearing it. Shouldering all of the burden and coming through is still more important. Which is what Dirk did in 2011, even if he had other people taking care of specific parts of the team (Chandler on defense, Kidd running the offense). Simply too much from Dirk as a leader to put Robinson above him.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

The 2022 and 2023 isn't in the database yet, so it can't be counted. However, if we look at CP3's 14 PS from 08-21, it does not show him to be an inferior player to Stockton on a per-game basis.

CP3 from 08-21 in the PS averaged an adjusted 22.7 pts per 75 on rTS% of 4.4%

Stockton from 86-99 in the PS (Stockton I don't think played enough MPG to be picked up in the Backpicks database, however, this ends up helping his PS averages) averaged an adjusted 16.5 pts per 75 on rTS% of 5.3%.

So Stockton maintains the efficiency advantage, however he is also scoring 5.7 pts less per 75 possessions in exchange for +1.3% of efficiency. Philosophically, if the much higher volume is worth may come down to preference, however, I will generally people favor Kobe and Hakeem as scorers over CP3, so I would say the same should extend to be true for CP3 being over Stockton in this case.

According to PS ScoreVal during those spans, CP3's scoring looks more valuable:

CP3 ScoreVal-0.7

Stockton ScoreVal-0.3


CP3's general PS metrics do look better as well:

Backpicks BPM-5.7

PER-23.7
BPM-7.1
WS/48-.193


Compared to Stockton

Backpicks BPM-5.3

PER-20.1
BPM-6.3
WS/48-.163

It's not just the PS either. Paul's RS play looks better on a per-possession basis too.

Paul
Adjusted 21.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 4.3%)

PIPM-5.7

PER-25.3
BPM-7.8
WS/48-.251


Stockton
Adjusted 16.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 7.9%)

PIPM-5

PER-22.2
BPM-7.4
WS/48-.214

Both Paul and Stockton have playstyles that are generally pretty well represented by the box-score and full encapsulates what they bring to the table. Even with Stockton's RS efficiency advantage, the numbers don't suggest that Stockton's lower volume was preferential to Paul. I think it is fair to argue Stockton's durability helps in a comparison to Paul, however, I certainly don't get the impression that Stock is a better basketball player than Paul.

We also have numbers heavily using the on/off and plus-minus from we have from 97 onward. And while Stockton looks great, none of the numbers suggests he surpassed Paul's peak years in this regard. I don't doubt younger Stockton might look better in his younger years, but that is more of a projection than a certainty.

I'm not as familiar with Ben Taylor's stuff as a lot of you are, and I don't put a whole lot of stock in PER, but your point re BPM and WS/48 is taken and well worth consideration - though I'm a little confused where you're getting those numbers from? BBRef says CP3's RS BPM is 7.1 and WS/48 is .236, and Stockton's 6.8 and .209, respectively. Doesn't change your point, but the numbers look a bit different.

Where I would push back a little is where you use the phrase "much higher volume" to characterize Paul's 5.7 point per 75 possession advantage. If you round up to 6 points, that's 3 shots, 2 if we're talking about threes. It's nitpicking, but I wouldn't call that much higher.

BTW, is there an advantage to using Per 75 Possessions instead of Per 100? Genuinely asking.

I still lean Stockton, but I will think on it some more. We probably have five or six threads until CP3 has a real shot(he may not even win this nominee vote).

[OldSchoolNoBull]

This vote is close on all counts right now.

With preferences taken into consideration, DRob leads Mikan 8-7. Dirk has 5 first place votes and 2 secondary votes from Mikan voters(the rest are from DRob voters), so he's in the mix too.

Dr. J, CP3, and Jokic are in a three-way tie, with 6 votes apiece with preferences counted. Actually, there is one voter who has Jokic listed #1 and CP3 #2, and one voter who has Jokic #1 and Dr. J #2, so it might actually be Jokic with 6 and Dr.J/CP3 with 5.

[Doctor MJ]

Induction Vote 1: David Robinson



Robinson does that natural slide from 2 to 1. As I said in my nomination ruminations, I've spent a lot of time debate Robinson, Malone & Nowitzki, and so I'd expect them to be my next 3 votes.

If we evaluated exclusively bad on what each guy did as the primary scoring option, Robinson would certainly be last among the 3, but aside from Robinson's killer defense, there's the way he so seamlessly was able to slide to a secondary option effectively - and we was pretty effective sliding back to the #1 option after Duncan's 2000 injury.

In the end then, I'm more impressed by the entirety of what Robinson brings on the court, and I do think Robinson's attitude had everything to do with why Spur culture was able to develop the way it did.

Induction Vote 2: Karl Malone

Debating Malone & Nowitzki, I have something of a pull toward Nowitzki. Great attitude allowing the team to keeping building around him and eventually win a title that way. But I do think that Malone was the more consistent superstar performer, and if Dirk didn't win the title I doubt I'd even see this as much of a debate. The fact Dirk won means something big of course, but Dirk also didn't have to top Jordan to get there. Topping LeBron sounds great of course too, and it is great don't get me wrong...but there were kinks in the 1st year Heatles that really got ironed out by the next season.

Nomination Vote 1: Julius Erving



I'm honestly still seriously pondering whether Erving is going to drop further in my list, but I'm out of time for this round, and at this time I'm not comfortable putting anyone else ahead of Dr. J.

The plus minus stuff concerns me, but:

1. I see no reason to doubt his ABA impact, and I don't think his fall off in the NBA was really about greater competition.

2. He did quite a lot of winning in his career even when his team was disappointing with respect to their lofty expectations. Erving won a total of 24 playoff series as a core player, which puts him ahead of all the other Nominees here (apologies to Mikan who obviously is being held back here based on the shorter playoff structure in his day).

3. There's really just no doubt in my mind that Erving's playoff opponents were focused on stopping him above all others all the way up through '81-82, and his extremely graceful athleticism was central to how he was able to carry that gravitational burden in ways his teammates realistically could not.

Nomination Vote 2: Dwyane Wade

So I'd guess this vote surprises folks who know of opinions on Wade. While I insist that I've always been a Wade fan and saw him as a superstar before most, what's been a matter of debate more recently has been me having concerns about Wade projecting into the future given that he's a shooting guard who isn't so good at shooting.

But as I've said, in the 2023 project, my criteria has shifted, and it turns out this is helping Wade in my ranking. The more I focus on what actually happened as opposed to what might have happened, the more real Wade sees as a candidate.

The other two guys most on my mind were Moses Malone and Chris Paul.

At this time I'd have Moses as my next guy. I was a bit surprised to side with Wade over Moses, but it feels right.

Paul is a guy I could see jumping up above either Erving or Wade, but I'm still hesitant to fully embrace his +/-.

[ZeppelinPage]

Vote: George Mikan
Nomination: Moses Malone

Decided to go Mikan here as I find his dominance in the regular season and playoffs more impressive. Mikan often had to play through injuries throughout his career and I think he was a talented overall player. He could score, pass, rebound, and defend, and the Lakers often finished #1 in defense throughout his career. I'm a fan of Robinson's all-around game and he is certainly worthy of a spot but I can't deny the impact Mikan had on the history of the game as well as his own era. Moses is just a ridiculous rebounder, along with everything else he can do, which causes quite the match-up problems come playoff time--as Pat Riley says: "No rebounds, no rings."

[One_and_Done]

Vote: George Mikan
Nomination: Moses Malone

Decided to go Mikan here as I find his dominance in the regular season and playoffs more impressive. Mikan often had to play through injuries throughout his career and I think he was a talented overall player. He could score, pass, rebound, and defend, and the Lakers often finished #1 in defense throughout his career. I'm a fan of Robinson's all-around game and he is certainly worthy of a spot but I can't deny the impact Mikan had on the history of the game as well as his own era. Moses is just a ridiculous rebounder, along with everything else he can do, which causes quite the match-up problems come playoff time--as Pat Riley says: "No rebounds, no rings."

More impressive... but in a league where possibly zero players would make the league today. Is that really that impressive?

[One_and_Done]

Vote

1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Karl Malone

I prefer Dirk on offense to Malone as I feel his skillset translates to playoffs and the spacing has impact, albeit you can say Malone is better passer/defender. Close but edge goes to slightly more modern player. I prefer Robinson as a player to Malone (the defensive gap is bigger than offense) but there is a pretty significant longevity difference.

Nominate

1. CP3
2. Barkley

If you think it's close between D.Rob and Malone you might as well switch to D.Rob this round so your vote counts. I've got Karl around here too, but this round he's not in the running with only 1 vote out of 20.

[Owly]

BTW, is there an advantage to using Per 75 Possessions instead of Per 100? Genuinely asking.

Obviously if its the same source and the same general process it shouldn't make a difference in terms of the proportion of the numbers.

The idea, I think, is that a good player might play circa 75 possessions a game. Unless you're a 1960s superstar, you're not playing 100. So some people like it as a pace-neutralized, minutes neutralized representation where the numbers might feel more familiar, make more intuitive sense: a "if they were all playing star minutes at the same pace ..." it's kind of like a per game idea.

At least I think that's what I've heard.

[OhayoKD]

Okay just going to copy and paste

Vote

1. George Mikan
-> best winner left
-> most dominant player left
-> probably most career value left

2. Dirk


As for nomination...

Yeah, I think this might be a good time to refresh everyone's memories of what each of these players "failures" looked like.

Keeping in mind Giannis has made 8 post-seasons to Jokic's 5

Giannis and the Bucks in the playoffs
2015: lose to the bulls as a role-player

2017: Giannis becomes a fringe superstar, team sees +3 srs improvement and plays a razor-close series(<1 ppg, 6 games) vs the +3.65 srs opponent(Giannis puts up strong offensive production)

2018: Giannis is a fringe MVP candidate, team mantains in the rs, and then playes an even closer series vs +3.2 srs Boston who nearly make the finals after beating the near +4.5 srs Sixers

2019: Giannis gets a not bad coach for the first time in his career and breaks out as a historically strong MVP winner as the Bucks jump by 8 points to post a historically remarkable +8 srs team(almost never happens in non-expansion periods) despite a cast that plays at .500 without him form 19-20(and marginally above from 21-23. That team improves to +13.75 in the playoffs on the back of a big defensive improvement. They are merely +7 in that oh so bad 6-game(1 ppg) loss to a coasting Toronto side which saw a cast capable of 60-win basketball add Kawhi Leonard, aka, clutch Durant, aka "resiliency king". In the conference finals Giannis's offensive production falters against one of the best defenses ever but he also puts up one of the best defensive performances ever to push a toronto side about as good as anyone Jokic has ever faced and far better than any team Jokic has ever beat to the brink(double-overtime and giannis fouling out prevented a 3-0 defecit).

2020: Giannis has one of the very best regular seasons ever(arguably better than any regular season from certain players who have already been voted in) and the Bucks post a +9.41 SRS(basically unheard of in non-expansion periods) with a team that plays average basketball without Antetokounmpo. Team collapses defensively in the bubble and are upset by the eventual finalists despite Giannis's offensive production improving from last year as their defense is torched by Miami. There is injury context with Giannis eventually missing a game and 3 quarters.

2021: Giannis coasts as merely a top 3 regular season player in the regular season and the Bucks post a +5.6 SRS(4th in the league) with a team that is a bit above .500 without him. The Bucks again get significantly better in the playoffs on the back of their defense and Giannis is good to great on both ends throughout as Giannis becomes one of the few players to win a championship...
-> without a 2nd superstar
-> without perennial all-star
-> without "help" that is significantly > .500 without him
-> without a strong playoff coach

The competition is fairly weak, but so was the support, and ultimately it's topped off with Giannis posting one of the greatest performances ever against a very good team on both ends of the floor

2022: Giannis is again, merely a top 3 regular season player, and the Bucks regress to +3(7th best) with the big-three missing a significant number of games. Bucks are(opponent-adjusted) more than +12 against the Bulls with Middleton and take a near-champion to 7 without a middleton in a not that close series(+8 point differential). Overall Bucks improve dramatically. again, on the back of their defense.

2023: Every contender is coasting and Giannis is again merely a top 3 regular season player as the Bucks post a 3rd best +3.61 SRS despite Middleton missing a bunch of games. Against Miami, Giannis misses almost half the series and is injured throughout. Consequently, the Bucks defense collapses as they lose to the eventual finalists(again)

8 postseasons total, 7 as a superstar, and the Bucks underperform twice and overperform 5 times despite a deeply flawed postseason coach, a cast who generally falls off in the playoffs(shooting especially). Both underperformances have injury context and when they lose, they are mostly losing to champions or finalists,

Now let's do Jokic:

Jokic and the Nuggets in the playoffs

2019 Jokic is a fringe MVP candidate and Nuggets see a 2.5 SRS improvement to post a strong +4.13(7th best). They win a razor-close series against the +1.8 Spurs(7 games, 1 ppg) and then lose a razor-close series(7 games, actually outscore by 1 ppg) against the +4.4 SRS Nuggets who proceed to get destroyed in a sweep against a losing-finalist. You may recall the champion that year was that Raptors side that just about survived Giannis.

2020 Jokic is again a fringe MVP candidate and the Nuggets regress to +2.5 thanks to injuries to Jokic's best teammates. In the playoffs they get lucky against the +2.5 Jazz winning in 7 despite getting outscored by 3-points a game. They then upset the +6.6 Clippers in a close series(7 games, <1ppg) before getting thumped by the eventual champs(5 games, 4 ppg). You may recall the Heat, without their leading scorer and with their defensive anchor hobbled, were the only team all playoffs to take the Lakers to a 6th game.

2021 MVP Jokic leads a +4.8 Nuggets side(6th best) despite a team that is outright bad without him. They proceed to win a razor-close series against the +1.8 Trailblazers(6 games, actually outscored) and are then obliterated in a sweep against the +5.5 eventual finalist Suns(15! ppg). Those suns would lose to...checks notes...Giannis's Bucks. Nuggets are bad without Jokic

2022 B2B MVP Jokic leads a +2.15 Nuggets team(injuries play a big-factor) and then is thumped in 5 by the +5.15 eventual champs(8 ppg).

2023 Should have been B2B2B MVP Jokic, with a team that is still bad without him in 13 games, leads the Nuggets to a +3 srs(6th best in the league). Against a relatively weak field(though everyone coasting undersells the competition) they are dominant in the postseason going 16-6 with a m.o.v of +8. This is an all-time dominant run, but it also coincides with dramatic cast elevation and unusually favorable injury context(like Milwaukee's 2021 Run). Nonetheless as a singular note it has a decent case against anything Giannis has done considering
-> team is bad without him(in the regular-season anyway)
-> unusually dominant
-> One-superstar(Murray is close)

5 postseasons total, I think it's fair to say the Nuggets overperformed in 2 and underperformed in 2. A weaker trackrecord than Giannis's Bucks despite
-> a better playoff coach
-> teammates generally elevating(Murray arguably outplayed Jokic in 2020)

The Nuggets are also flatly a far worse regular-season and postseason team getting destroyed when they face eventual finalists and champions which Milwaukee only really do if Giannis gets hurt. When the Nuggets faced a 2019 Raptors-calibre opponent, they were crushed despite Murray playing like a superstar. The Bucks have never suffered a defeat like the Nuggets did against the suns despite running into an eventual or defending finalist each of the last 5 playoffs.

Giannis's Bucks have also posted 2 regular-seasons where their srs nearly doubled any of the suns and one of those regular-seasons was followed by post-season improvement and a tough fight against the type of team the nuggets tend to get dominated by.

All considered, saying Giannis has "Playoff issues" and Jokic doesn't seems like you're applying a gigantic double-standard because Jokic id a one-way player while Giannis is a two-way one. Just like when we act like Jordan was "perfect" any-run he posts sub-2009 Lebron box-aggregates or when we act like Shaq is more "unstoppable" than two-way bigs because defense doesn't matter.

Excepting their championship years, Giannis has led far better regular season and playoff teams, and has also has a significant longetivity advantage, while elevating more often. And while Jokic's regular-season impact looks great(like Giannis)...

So, I'm very convinced by the Jokic > Giannis arguments. Time to change my nomination as well as my all-time list.

[/quote][/quote]
Since you've used playoff on/off as justification before...



And yet Giannis is the one with "issues" apparently


Nominate: Giannis
Do not plan on voting him soon as my criteria is era-relative and values longetvity but at this point I am nominating based on who I think has the most viable arguments and for Giannis

-> arguably top 15 resume with 2 mvps and a lone-superstar championship with an FMVP to boot to go with multiple all-time regular season teams
-> better longetivity than another top 15 resumes
-> arguably best player in the most talented version of the nba
-> all-time peak/prime, era-relative or absolute
-> one of the most versatile players ever and one of a handful who has carried a contender as his team's best defender, best playmaker, and best scorer.



It may feel weird I'm not nominating a 4x MVP in Julius but
-> played in the weaker of the two leagues in the 70's and did not look all that when he went to the stronger one
-> was probably not the best player on his own team when he finally conquered the mountain top

[One_and_Done]

...

So to clarify, if nobody has a majority after the nominations are split up, do we add an extra day?

Right now even after preferences D.Rob and Mikan appear to be tied on 9 votes each out of 21 votes, so neither has a majority.

[OhayoKD]

Induction Vote 1: David Robinson



Robinson does that natural slide from 2 to 1. As I said in my nomination ruminations, I've spent a lot of time debate Robinson, Malone & Nowitzki, and so I'd expect them to be my next 3 votes.

Given your focus on accomplishment, I'm curious why Mikan isn't one of the 3 you're considering. He's comfortably the most accomplished and dominant and if I'm tracking correctly, you are not trying to use a modernist lens here.

If we evaluated exclusively bad on what each guy did as the primary scoring option, Robinson would certainly be last among the 3, but aside from Robinson's killer defense, there's the way he so seamlessly was able to slide to a secondary option effectively - and we was pretty effective sliding back to the #1 option after Duncan's 2000 injury.

Is an ineffecient 23 ppg while you lose to playoff-fodder "pretty effective"? I'm not using this as some indictment of what he was in his prime, but I do not really understand how this helps him comparatively

[OhayoKD]

Well this is supposed to be "against good defenses". The conjecture must be "this good defense is making him miss free throws".

They certainly aren't doing it actively; like there's evidently no on-court strategy which is causing him to suck at the line more, we agree there. I meant more, is the pressure of playing against good defenses and the effort expended to do so a point of correlation with his weaker FT shooting? You know what I mean?

It's relevant data if it's reasonably consistent in those situations. Not as directly involved with the defense itself as, say, his FG%, but again, if it's a consistent trend, it matters.

Okay so
1) If "pressure and effort of a good defense" causes players to drop was established as a real thing ... I'd feel better about it. It seems more like, it seems to have happened in this instance, let's backfit a semi-plausible narrative to explain it.

Is fatigue affecting free-throw shooting just semi-plausible?

Because if fatigue does effect free-throw shooting than how those free-throws were earned(as well as the volume) would probably be relevant

[falcolombardi]

I never know how to weight mikan in these kind lf projects.

My vote is dirk, who imo has a fairly comparable longevity/prime and even profile to kobe (elite isolationist floor raisers who can elevate a offense pretty far while working very well alongside other O stars, non remarkable on D)

I prefer kobe due to his position being less valuable defensively mostly

My alternate to dirk is mikan because at some point a player who dominated for over half a decade as undisputed best player needs to be acnowledged at some point

[OhayoKD]

...

So to clarify, if nobody has a majority after the nominations are split up, do we add an extra day?

Right now even after preferences D.Rob and Mikan appear to be tied on 9 votes each out of 21 votes, so neither has a majority.

Assuming your count is correct, it would be 10-9 now in Mikan's favor

[Owly]

They certainly aren't doing it actively; like there's evidently no on-court strategy which is causing him to suck at the line more, we agree there. I meant more, is the pressure of playing against good defenses and the effort expended to do so a point of correlation with his weaker FT shooting? You know what I mean?

It's relevant data if it's reasonably consistent in those situations. Not as directly involved with the defense itself as, say, his FG%, but again, if it's a consistent trend, it matters.

Okay so
1) If "pressure and effort of a good defense" causes players to drop was established as a real thing ... I'd feel better about it. It seems more like, it seems to have happened in this instance, let's backfit a semi-plausible narrative to explain it.

Is fatigue affecting free-throw shooting just semi-plausible?

Because if fatigue does effect free-throw shooting than how those free-throws were earned(as well as the volume) would probably be relevant

Fatigue affecting anything if there's enough of it is plausible.

And yes the manner earned would matter. But neither is measured by opponent team level regular season defense. That would be physiological and the manner of the foul.

For the broader picture see the full response that's taken from. If this were a real thing, I'd imagine we'd see greater variance at a career level in free throw shooting, especially on the downside. Based on the evidence cited above, I believe it isn't there and bucket variations, like yearly variations, are noise from small samples (in this instance a single player, playoff only, partial career, 621 attempts split into smaller buckets, exact size of each bucket not given).

If you actually do this analysis with all players, look at their RS splits between defense levels because you think fatigue-based free throw team level defense is real and significant thing and you have the evidence I'm willing to listen. (Or if you now find it a compelling theory and want to try it now, perhaps compelled by the theory of David Robinson being 85% against bad defenses and 65% against good ones as sustainable ...)

However my suspicion is that you don't do this and this theory is, per above, an ad hoc back-fitting of a rationalization onto noise.

[Doctor MJ]

Induction Vote 1:

Mikan - 8 (cupcake, Samurai, OSNB, ShaqA, beast, f4p, ZPage, Ohayo)
Dirk - 6 (AEnigma, rk, Gibson, Dr P, falco, Colbinii)
Robinson - 7 (ltj, OaD, trelos, iggy, DGold, HBK, Doc)
Karl - 1 (trex)

No majority. Going to 2nd vote between Mikan and Robinson.

Mikan - 2 (AEnigma, falco)
Robinson - 2 (trex, Gibson)
neither - 3 (rk, Colbinii, Dr P)

Mikan wins 10-9.

George Mikan is Inducted at #16.



Nomination Vote 1:

Erving - 6 (cupcake, OaD, Samurai, OSNB, Gibson, Doc)
Paul - 5 (rk, trex, Colbinii, Dr P, DGold)
Moses - 2 (ltj, ZPage)
Giannis - 3 (trelos, beast, Ohayo)
Jokic - 4 (iggy, ShaqA, HBK, f4p)
none - 2 (AEnigma, falco)

No majority. Going to 2nd vote between Erving and Paul.

Erving - 1(HBK)
Paul - 2 (trelos, iggy)
neither - 8(AEnigma, falco, ltj, ShaqA, beast, f4p, ZPage, Ohayo)

Tie between Erving and Paul at 7.

Both Julius Erving and Chris Paul are added to Nominee list.
There will be no Nomination vote in the next thread.

[Owly]

If we evaluated exclusively bad on what each guy did as the primary scoring option, Robinson would certainly be last among the 3, but aside from Robinson's killer defense, there's the way he so seamlessly was able to slide to a secondary option effectively - and we was pretty effective sliding back to the #1 option after Duncan's 2000 injury.

Is an ineffecient 23 ppg while you lose to playoff-fodder "pretty effective"? I'm not using this as some indictment of what he was in his prime, but I do not really understand how this helps him comparatively

I don't think it matters to the big picture (it's a tiny sample) but
1) fwiw, playoffs isn't the full sample. But just looking at that ...
2) Offense isn't just scoring. He's really low turnover, he's passing okay (looks better in light of that turnover number) and he's hitting the offensive glass. And the team hold up well with him on court and go to pieces without him. And despite the increase in minutes and net load (now you're first option and the sole rather than just primary defensive anchor) and facing a very good (RS) defense he manages to hold up his free throw percentages solidly. So if "number 1" is just scoring and we're primarily focusing on playoffs sure there's criticism to be had here. But if overall offense and/or net impact whilst fulfilling that number one role - in the playoffs its a 5.3 OBPM and 25.6 PER (mostly offense) +25.2 on-off, winning whilst he's on - are more important ... this looks quite significantly positive for Robinson.