Retro POY '91-92 (Voting Complete)

[ronnymac2]

Yeah, but it isn't their fault. That's on their teammates. Look at those rosters man. I mean, Barkley and Hakeem all of a sudden didn't just become much better players midway through their primes and become top three players a year later. Both of you are docking Hakeem and Charles for a team failure. All I'm doing is docking Robinson for an individual black mark- something I've done the whole time.

[kaima]

The problem is that in many ways, the former and latter are synonyms based upon where you stand on the debate. For example, I've never thought that Malone was as good as his box score stats indicate.

Sub out the name 'Malone' for 'Robinson' and I think you'd be a lot closer to the truth.

Never seen a supposed superstar exposed so badly or so consistently. Likewise, never seen so many people so ready to either excuse or totally ignore this. If Robinson was as great as his supporters say, I find it more than curious that his three year peak coincides with massive beatings by another star post player in every one of those parallel playoffs -- very much proof that Robinson was better at stat-line filling than skillset challenges that result from tighter focus, gameplanning and, last but not least, skillsets of the player or star going against him. Not a good lead-man in a playoff run, to put it mildly.

Which is to say, a guy who is not nearly as good as his numbers indicate. Stats are one thing, but tape will tell you at least as much -- in Robinson's case, a lot more -- and the fact is that stats would either desert Robinson or amalgamate with the negative skillset-levels against better stars like Olajuwon and Malone.

Which brings us back to this year's vote. Based upon the arguments in this thread, which are built upon the trends from the project so far, I should be choosing between Malone and Drexler for my 2nd slot. Both have good statistical resumes (for the stats that are available) and had more team success, and neither got injured. So if I vote the way it seems as though the project is dictating that I "should", then I'd go Jordan, Malone, Drexler, Ewing, and my choice between Pippen, Olajuwon, or Robinson in my 5th slot.

Interesting that it sounds like you're not convinced of your vote's validity -- as opposed to selective, and seemingly not terribly well-argued or defended, player bias -- yourself. The preamble reads as shaky justification of a wrong. Just an observation.

Anyway, my vote:

1) Jordan
2) Malone
3) Drexler
4) Ewing
5) Pippen

Jordan was ridiculously easy. The ultimate player, arguably, just as far as making key judgments that were equal to his will. Watching Jordan in a focused scenario -- kill or be killed -- is uniquely intense. That Blazers series goes unnoticed because it's now seen as expected; think about that.

Malone was pretty damned obvious -- second best regular season and playoffs; tore through teams even while lacking very good support or even good space to work in. A monster. For anybody watching Jazz/Blazers, that's how a superstar frontcourt player should bring it in a tough, outmanned playoff series.

Drexler? Great season. I question the leadership, as the Blazers from that period may remain the greatest collection of talent I've seen, but with so few brains to match. But that's easy to forget when you just watch Clyde at work. Might be the greatest open-court player from this or any era.

Another really nice regular season from Ewing, with a playoffs to match. The Knicks got fried in game 7, but they pushed the Bulls (more ways than...). That series was ugly. That's a compliment, and I want to watch more because of that very factor. If Ewing represents that, then he deserves a lot of respect.

The argument against Scottie is who he played with. But his numbers are quite similar to his "peak" in 94, and his impact is often underrated or unnoticed. Perfect forward for the triangle. Still watching the big and little things he does on gambles, roaming and man. I love Phil Jackson, and I think Pippen might be the ultimate on-court expression from a skillset, if not mental, standpoint.

HM: Barkley, Olajuwon, Mullin, Robinson

All quite similar in their problems -- either regular season versus playoffs (the Mullin cave-in was something), or team success versus the individual. I'm not big on the latter argument, but I thought Pippen was impressive in both seasons, while these guys were somewhat tightly grouped by their pro forma 'negatives'.

Tie-breaker went to the guy who got to demonstrate more for longer. One good or decent (Mullin, come on with that crap) playoff series could have easily changed that.

Not totally convinced on the five spot. But I think that was the nature of what we got from this season.

[lorak]

Yeah, but it isn't their fault. That's on their teammates. Look at those rosters man. I mean, Barkley and Hakeem all of a sudden didn't just become much better players midway through their primes and become top three players a year later. Both of you are docking Hakeem and Charles for a team failure.

No, I'm docking Hakeem and Barkley in comparison with Robinson because Admiral was better that year. Simply as that.

Besides, look at the rosters. Spurs and 76ers were very close, maybe only Hakeem's support was worse.

[kaima]

Yeah, but it isn't their fault. That's on their teammates. Look at those rosters man. I mean, Barkley and Hakeem all of a sudden didn't just become much better players midway through their primes and become top three players a year later. Both of you are docking Hakeem and Charles for a team failure.

No, I'm docking Hakeem and Barkley in comparison with Robinson because Admiral was better that year. Simply as that.

Besides, look at the rosters. Spurs and 76ers were very close, maybe only Hakeem's support was worse.

I have no problem with the idea that many stars get unduly punished for lousy team support.

I do question, however, the logic behind Robinson over Barkley/Olajuwon in this instance, because the latter group were more let down by a lacking team while Robinson, even if dealing with lacking roster support, let his team down; yes, due to injury (as opposed to the usual, where showing up is oxymoronic depending on post matchup).

This is from the angle of your own logic. If teammates can cause Robinson so much grief that we're supposed to rank him higher, what about the inverse?

Therein is the broad question about Robinson from 92, 94, 95 and 96. Those who support him only seem able to consider and equate the positive.

[lorak]

I have no problem with the idea that many stars get unduly punished for lousy team support.

I do question, however, the logic behind Robinson over Barkley/Olajuwon in this instance, because the latter group were more let down by a lacking team while Robinson, even if dealing with lacking roster support, let his team down; yes, due to injury
.

Well, so Hakeem also let his team down due to injury because he missed almost as many games as Robinson (Admiral missed two more). Barkley also missed several games (7).

[kaima]

I have no problem with the idea that many stars get unduly punished for lousy team support.

I do question, however, the logic behind Robinson over Barkley/Olajuwon in this instance, because the latter group were more let down by a lacking team while Robinson, even if dealing with lacking roster support, let his team down; yes, due to injury
.

Well, so Hakeem also let his team down due to injury because he missed almost as many games as Robinson (Admiral missed two more). Barkley also missed several games (7).

Hm, but does the moment matter? Extrapolation is one thing -- butterfly effect -- but on a direct, one to one basis, Robinson disappeared when his team needed him most. Sounds familiar.

[sp6r=underrated]

Well how much worse was he in 92 compared to 93?

The gap between 1-3 and 3-6 is very small, it doesn't take much of a difference to make the leap. Notice, I voted him 5th, while admittedly having him around 3-8 in rough analysis. That is not really that big of a difference. His scoring improved nearly 5 points and his assist to turnover ratio also improved. As Dzra said in another post it is frusturating that all we have right now is PER with regards to box score sorters. He did make a big leap from 92 and 93. There was also the personal thing that his relationship with management was quite poor in the early 90s.

How could one guy be insanely good in his second, third, and fourth years, and then have a bunch of down years, before peaking into a titan of a player? The dude manhandled Magic's Showtime and Bird's Celtics individually before his peak, and yet he isn't the same player?

His offensive game in the mid 80s was a lot more about pure athleticism than raw skill. He developed the ability to read double teams better. He also learned how to avoid foul trouble and ejections, which were problems from mid 80s Hakeem. All minor improvement but enough to explain the difference between 93 Hakeem and mid 80s Hakeem.

I can buy that his game steadily improved (and that his development could be unorthdox since he learned basketball later in life than most NBA players), including the technical aspects of passing and reading defenses.

He deserves tons of credit for that 86 run, which to be clear wasn't as good as what he accomplished in the 90s, but that really looks like an outlier out of his 80s seasons. I think people mistakenly look at that 86 run and what happened in the mid 90s and like to pretend there was no difference to the two players

Hakeem did have somewhat of a strange arc. But quite a few players in NBA history had far stranger career arcs: Bellamy, Macadoo, Nash.

But the extent to which the anti-Hakeem group emphasizes this is too large in degree to logically work.

Yea, and the extent pro-Hakeem group loves to pretend he had this historic bad supporting cast for a half decade is a big stretch as well.

[kaima]

Well how much worse was he in 92 compared to 93?

The gap between 1-3 and 3-6 is very small, it doesn't take much of a difference to make the leap. Notice, I voted him 5th, while admittedly having him around 3-8 in rough analysis. That is not really that big of a difference. His scoring improved nearly 5 points and his assist to turnover ratio also improved. As Dzra said in another post it is frusturating that all we have right now is PER with regards to box score sorters.

I wouldn't disagree about the limitations of certain formulas, but at this point in history we also have tape. Which is something that certain posters, such as Dzra, seem to ignore when comparing players.

It's like desperately searching for a location while ignoring your GPS.

[Doctor MJ]

My vote:

1. Jordan
2. Malone
3. Drexler
4. Ewing
5. Pippen

Malone again rates higher than I expected. The arguments for him are working on me, will have to review after the project.

Agree that Drexler got a bit overhyped but not a ton.

Ewing, I'm so impressed with the Knick defense and the trouble they gave the Bulls.

Pippen sneaks into the voting with a strong year, and off years from others.

Honorable Mention:

Robinson - Would have made the top 5 with a solid playoff performance.

KJ - Stellar year. Thought about him in my top 5.

Daugherty & Price - Great players driving a great team.

Barkley - So Barkley gets my last honorable mention spot, Hakeem doesn't. I feel elaboration is in order. Barkley's team didn't succeed this year, but this really wasn't a good cast. The team's SRS dropped 4 points without him the next year, and stayed down at that level for the next half decade. I knock Barkley some, but I know Hakeem a bit harder.

This was the low point for the Rockets, despite the fact that Hakeem missed way more time the previous year, and the cast was basically the same. The team's SRS *dropped* 4 points this year. Add in that both of these year come at the low point in Hakeem's general productivity. There were just major issues this year that can't be attributed to Hakeem just having a horrible cast - and we know that Hakeem was involved in making the locker room situation not that great.

[Doctor MJ]

Last call. Please make clear any changes you make from this point.

[Doctor MJ]

'91-92 Results

Code: Select all

Player             1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Pts   POY Shares
1. Michael Jordan   23   0   0   0   0 230   1.000
2. Karl Malone       0  14   8   1   0 141   0.688
3. Clyde Drexler     0   7   9   4   1 107   0.465
4. Patrick Ewing     0   0   2  11   4  47   0.204
5. David Robinson    0   2   2   4   2  38   0.165
6. Scottie Pippen    0   0   0   2   9  15   0.065
7. Hakeem Olajuwon   0   0   2   0   1  11   0.048
8. Charles Barkley   0   0   0   1   1   4   0.017
9. Kevin Johnson     0   0   0   0   3   3   0.013
10. Brad Daugherty   0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004
    John Stockton    0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004


[jicama]

I had Pippen #3, yet he's got no 3rd place vote?

[semi-sentient]

Site updated: www.dolem.com/poy

The only change in the top 5 all-time share leaders is Malone moving into 4th place ahead of Kobe, as expected. Jordan, assuming he gets the unanimous 1990-91 vote (which he absolutely should), will pass up Shaq for the #2 spot after the next round of voting is completed.

Code: Select all

1. Tim Duncan        6.153
2. Shaquille O'Neal  5.910
3. Michael Jordan    4.916
4. Karl Malone       4.070
5. Kobe Bryant       3.658

[ronnymac2]

Sp6r=underrated....I'd continue, but voting is done, and we'll probably be able to have this discussion in a few more of the years left.

[Doctor MJ]

I had Pippen #3, yet he's got no 3rd place vote?

Sorry you're not in the project.

Here's how this works: The voting panel is nominally closed, but I will add people if they prove themselves good additions. If you want to be added to the project, start contributing to the conversation, and when I'm convinced you're reliable in participation and solid in understanding and objectivity, I'll officially let you in. Realize going in that this probably won't happen quickly - I'm not in need of more participants and I'm wary of adding people in I don't know at this stage. If you enjoy the process of the conversation though, I'd encourage you to participate simply for that.

[sp6r=underrated]

Which is something that certain posters, such as Dzra, seem to ignore when comparing players.

Huh, Dzra certinally watches and focuses on what he sees in his game, just read his post about The Mailman. You may disagree with his conclusion but he isn't a B-R man.

[Dr Positivity]

Yeah, but it isn't their fault. That's on their teammates. Look at those rosters man. I mean, Barkley and Hakeem all of a sudden didn't just become much better players midway through their primes and become top three players a year later. Both of you are docking Hakeem and Charles for a team failure. All I'm doing is docking Robinson for an individual black mark- something I've done the whole time.

One thing about Hakeem and Charles. This year was their zenith in terms of bad air with their team. I do believe that plays into a team's chemistry and performance, and it's no coincidence both the Rockets and Sixers missed the playoffs.

[jicama]

.. The voting panel is nominally closed, but I will add people if they prove themselves good additions. .

Thanks for the explanation.
Here's my resume':
http://www.apbr.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=25

Feel free to make contact.

[DavidSterned]

I would definitely put Drexler ahead of Malone for this year.