Real GM Top 100 List #11

[Pistol Pete Vescey]

What is the argument against Oscar Robertson at this spot? Lack of sustained playoff excellence?

Nine straight All-NBA first teams, MVP, championship, 3 All-Star game MVPs, but certainly his statistical achievements separate him more than anything. The Wilt of PGs: those numbers will never be replicated.

If his numbers from 61-62 were inserted into our last NBA season, he would have been 1st in points, 1st in assists, and 3rd in rebounds. Legendary stuff.

[Gongxi]

But not if he played at the same pace as everyone else last season.

[lorak]

I was planning to vote Pettit in somewhere around Bob Lanier and Dave Cowens. Good big man but I feel like his dominance rising to the #1/#2 guy in the league was about Oscar, Wilt, West not being there yet.

I disagree. Even at the end of his career he was sometimes rated higher than players mentioned above. For example in 1961 Pettit was 2nd in MVP voting, before Wilt, Robertson and West. In 1963 he was 4th, before Wilt and West and in 1964 (his last full season) he was before West (already 29-6-6 player).

[lorak]

Well, in 1992 we have two nice sets of games with either Cummings or Robinson out. In the 12 games without Cummings the Spurs were -1.8, with him +4.2. In the 14 games without Robinson the Spurs were -2.5, with him +4.6. We have a +7 Net and +6 Net for Robinson respective Cummings that season, while both played when the other was out.

My numbers are different (ortg/drtg calculations based on team log from b-r):

Robinson
with: +4.6 differential
without: -3.5 differential
net +8.3

Cummings
with: +3.7 differential
without +1.7 differential
net +2.0

win-loss record says similar story:
with Robinson 61.8% (42-26), without 35.7% (5-9), difference -26.1%
with Cummings 58.6% (41-29), without 50% (6-6), difference -8.6%

BTW, I was watching 1994 Jazz vs Spurs and at the beginning of 3rd quarter of G2 Robinson injured his right knee and commentators said it was injured and operated before.

[lorak]

Moses dominated a tail-end prime KAJ on the glass. Jabbar still torched him offensively.

Moses Malone never outplayed a prime Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

What about 1981 playoffs?

[lorak]

Robinson had all the stats in the world, but when it came to a skill-set back-to-basket game it was a glaring offensive flaw. Already stated that Malone in '94 completely exploited his to play and teams began to strictly catch on.

Where in the '95 WCF run it was evident that those teams started to take advantage of his capability of playing a fantastic face-up game, but teams with tall above average to great defensive centers started to take advantage of that---just look at how he did against Mutombo in that run against the Nuggets, or Cambell/Divac against the Lakers, maybe even Olajuwon against the Rockets who completely exploited those abilities. They wouldn't have even gotten that far if it weren’t for Elliot & Avery.

So much untrue informations... and the last sentence is just

Maybe you missed my post from previous thread about that nonsense that Dikembe stopped Robinson in 1994:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQyaZGWq_GA
That's from beginning of game 3 and when we look at game logs we'll see that Robinson's worst game was #1 (poor %, 90 ortg (!), 1 ast, 3 tov - in other games he was great at passing out of double teams, ortg around 110), when Dikembe played only 18 minutes. So it wasn't the case that Mutombo held DRob down, it was rather effort of whole team and even without Dikembe they played great D on Robinson (G1).

In 1994 not only Robinson was injured but also wholeJazz team defended him. Just like in series against Rockerts in 1995 he was CONSTANTLY double teamed and Spurs players can't hit open shots. Well, if anyone remembers: Elliot can't even hit free throws at the end of close G1 and Rodman leaves his man Horry who hits game winner. But I guess it's also Robinson's fault...


BTW, against Campbell/Divac in 1995 Robinson had very good series:
30 ppg, 15.7 rpg, 3.5 apg, 1.2 spg, 3.7 bpg on 54 TS%

Even against Hakeem in 1995 he was at least good (however Olajuwon was much better): 23.8 ppg on 55.3 TS% (above LA), 11.3 rpg, , 2.7 apg, 1.5 spg, 2.2 bpg.

[q Why did Robinsons team get so far? he had players on the perimeter that were capable of creating their own offense,

Spurs offense was created off the double teaming Robinson. Spurs players can't create much on their own and most of their good shots was after good ball movement after Robinson was double teamed, but they still missed many open shots...

[lorak]

You will have a case if both those Lakers teams won the championships in those respective years. But they didnt.

'11 Mavs were expected to bow down to the 2 time defending champs too, why didnt they?

The '03, '04 and '11 Lakers are flawed. Lets not mystify them into some super teams.

Nuance is your friend brother. Just because a team is not championship good does not they aren't better than their record. There is room in between those two poles.

The same applies to 1993 Blazers - played without Drexler ~half the season and were in the finals two times in 3 previous years.

[mysticbb]

My numbers are different (ortg/drtg calculations based on team log from b-r)

Your numbers are correct. I done that awhile ago and had those numbers just written on a piece of paper, thus I can't say what went wrong. There are a couple of notes next to a lot of numbers, but I likely messed that up.

Anyway, because I started already collecting the numbers in order to confirm your numbers, I found some other stuff for those seasons.

When David Robinson and Terry Cummings were starting the Spurs were +6.2 for 115 games in 1990/91 and 1991/92. Then we have 34 games in which Robinson started and Cummings not and the Spurs were -1.1. We have 14 games in which Cummings started and Robinson not, and the Spurs were -3.3.
And we have one game left in which neither started and the Spurs actually won, but whatever.

We have:

Robinson: +9.5 Net
Cummings: +7.3 Net

Then we have Cummings not starting in all games in 1992/93 and Elliot missed 12 games. The Spurs were -3.8 in those games. In the remaining 70 games the Spurs were +3.8.

We have:

Elliot: +7.8 Net

We should keep in mind that the Spurs added Dale Ellis at the start of 1992/93, that screws up the comparison in regard of Cummings, but we still see a difference of 2.4 between the games with Cummings+Robinson (+6.2) starting and Elliot+Robinson (+3.8) in 1992/93.

Btw, with Cummings starting in 1991/92 the Spurs were +4.2 (seems like the numbers I wrote for Cummings before), while they were -0.5 with him not starting. Which makes +4.7 Net.

For 1995/96 we have 5 missed games by Elliot with the Spurs being +3.4, with him they were +6.5, again a difference of +3.1 Net. And we have further evidence for Elliot making a positive impact, in 1994 the Pistons were in 9 games without him at -15.2, with him they were -6.9, +8.3 Net.

It seems like the addition of Cummings and Elliot in 1989/90 made at least combined the same impact as Robinson's addition. As I said before in no way was Robinson alone responsible for the difference between 1988/89 and 1989/90 in the quality of the Spurs.

All things considered it seems like we are rather talking about a player with +10 than those 14+ we saw for guys like Duncan, Garnett or Nowitzki. Which, btw, can explain the disappointments during the playoffs for Robinson.

All numbers are not pace adjusted, the difference would be marginal anyway.

[mysticbb]

The same applies to 1993 Blazers - played without Drexler ~half the season and were in the finals two times in 3 previous years.

But there was basically no difference in team performance with and without Drexler in 1993. Additional to that Drexler missed the first game, a game which the Spurs won by 1 point. After that the Spurs had quasi HCA, they lost the next game and won both home games by an average of 4.5 points (taking the +3.6 HCA into account, that is basically the expected value). It is not like they completely blow the Blazers out. The scoring margin after 4 games was +0.25 for the Spurs. The Blazers were at +2.7 with Drexler, the Spurs with Elliot at +3.8, without any team having more homegames, we can expect a +1.1 for the Spurs.
The Lakers with Malone were +7.3, the Timberwolves were +5.5, we expect a +1.8 for the Lakers in a series with neither team having more home games, they had +2.2.
As we can see all teams played basically like we should have expected them to play. The Spurs took game 1, when the Blazers were without Drexler, that gave them the chance to win, the Timberwolves lost the first game which gave the Lakers the chance for the win. But the overall performance should not be unexpected at all.

[lorak]

It seems like the addition of Cummings and Elliot in 1989/90 made at least combined the same impact as Robinson's addition. As I said before in no way was Robinson alone responsible for the difference between 1988/89 and 1989/90 in the quality of the Spurs.

Oh, for sure, it would be silly to think that Robinson alone made so big difference (Cummings is very underrated player). I think the only player who achieved something like that "alone" is Bird, not KG in 2008, not Robinson in 1990, not Duncan in 1998 but Larry Lenged in 1980 (and that's one of the reasons why it's a shame that Wilt was chosen before him).

But I'm not sure if I agree with your distinction below:

All things considered it seems like we are rather talking about a player with +10 than those 14+ we saw for guys like Duncan, Garnett or Nowitzki.

Robinson's +8.3 in 1992 looks like pretty elite number.
For example when Duncan missed similar amount of games his with/without net was:
+5.3 in 2004
and
+11.9 in 2005

Of course his on/off court numbers from 82games are even better, but almost for sure so will be with Robinson in 1992 if that data would be available

[Laimbeer]

I'm wavering on my John Havlicek nomination. Someone tell me why Bob Pettit or Dwyane Wade or Dirk Nowitzki or someone else deserves the nomination instead.

Dirk has been nominated (undeservedly IMO) and I won't argue Wade (he's not close to this level) but I think Pettit is a clear choice over Hondo, as much as I like him.

Think of Pettit v. Hondo like Malone v. Pippen. He's an MVP, first option kind of guy. He won two MVPs, finished top four 8 of 9 years (Hondo didn't have any that high IIRC), made first team ten consecutive years, ranked very high in PER, scoring and rebounding for eight or ten years. He was so ahead of his time some say he "invented" the power forward position. Scan his profile at basketball reference, it's amazing.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ibo01.html

Hondo was one of the world's great Robins, and he did it under Russell and Cowens. But he wasn't the top dog, and when he was his teams didn't do as much. He doesn't have nearly the recognition Pettit does.

[Laimbeer]

@Doc and NO -

Erving's teams were awful. Yes, fit matters, but I fail to see how those no talents provided any better fit or support than Garnett's. There are different levels of bad, but that team of Doc's looks worse to me if anything.

Give me Wally over Super John any day.

[pancakes3]

Look guys, when I see these statements made against Garnett, it really baffles me because from my perspective, these years JUST happened...I know it was actually almost a decade ago. It's no great sin if you simply weren't following the NBA that closely back then. I wasn't around in the 60s & 70s, and I don't let that stop me from doing analysis.

If that's the issue here, that you just weren't paying that much attention, then your takeaway needs to be a general one about the danger of making big statements based on a couple of events over the course of a player's career.

Of course, if you were around back then, and paying as much attention then as now, well, then you need to ask yourself, whether you're paying as much attention as you think you are.

so you're telling me that there weren't literally millions of people out there who saw his game as good defensively but not good enough offensively to win? that each of his 7 straight 1st round exits didn't raise any eyebrows around the league? that after Tim Duncan being a near-consensus "best PF in the game" he was constantly competing against Dirk and Webber for 2nd place? That the only seasons where people generally saw him as the consensus 2nd best PF, (or 1b at best) in the league was '03 and '04.

or how about from '05-'07 he complete fell out of the radar even though his stats stayed comparable to his MVP season? that people thought his rebounding numbers were inflated because he had no low post presence paired up with him much like current T-wolf kevin love? that his impact simply wasn't enough to win games? that he quickly became an afterthought in the league because his 20/13 seasons wowed NOBODY because he was losing more games than he won?

[mysticbb]

Of course his on/off court numbers from 82games are even better, but almost for sure so will be with Robinson in 1992 if that data would be available

I wrote "all things considered", which means also the weaker performance against better teams (including playoffs here). His On/Off Court numbers might be higher, but I meant rather adjusted for strength of teammates and opponents, we get a +10 player, not a +14 like Duncan or Garnett had (talking about normal APM here). That's just a guess, maybe an educated one, but more a guess.

[Laimbeer]

My reasoning for Wade is that he's not too far away from LeBron. The past three seasons he's been a comparable player (LeBron is better, obviously), but if we're comparing their play he's just slightly worse, and that's no cheap shot at Wade, considering LeBron's current play the past three seasons has been on a consistent GOAT level. Aside from that, I think the 2006 dominant all-time historic run actually brings the two a little bit closer.

Nominate: D-Wade

Baller, I respect you a lot as a poster but I think you pretty much captured the view of Wade and why he's pretty overrated here. I know that makes me a hater, but whatever.

Your basic arguement is he's "not too far away from LeBron". Why do you asscoiate him so closely with LeBron and LeBron's level? I think it has a lot to do with the fact they played together this year and the Heat were such a topic of conversation. I've seen Wade skyrocket in terms of chatter and ranking here over the months since they joined forces. But did he do or accomplish anything this season that warrants a huge leap in GOAT rankings? Does he somehow deserve to be associated with LeBron's MVP-type years?

In 2008 we had him at 52. And he has logged three more high caliber years and deserves to climb some. I know the philosophy of the rankings has changed some, but if we're talking about a jaw-dropping leap of 30 spots in three years for a guy that didn't win a title or a MVP, we need to take a step back and ask why.

[mysticbb]

or how about from '05-'07 he complete fell out of the radar even though his stats stayed comparable to his MVP season? that people thought his rebounding numbers were inflated because he had no low post presence paired up with him much like current T-wolf kevin love? that his impact simply wasn't enough to win games? that he quickly became an afterthought in the league because his 20/13 seasons wowed NOBODY because he was losing more games than he won?

But that sounds more like uneducated opinions about a player, not based upon real evaluation of his impact. And Love's rebounding isn't inflated, because of a lack of low post presence alone, but also due to his way to leave his defensive assignments in order to gain a positional advantage for the rebound. A complete different thing we saw from Garnett. And the fact still remains that the Timberwolves with Garnett on the court were clearly much better than without him.

We want to see how a player really played, not how some people viewed him as a player. ;)

[mysticbb]

In 2008 we had him at 52. I know the philosophy of the rankings has changed some, but if we're talking about a jaw-dropping leap of 30 spots in three years for a guy that didn't win a title, MVP, or even a first-team, we need to take a step back and ask why.

Well, that explains a lot. ;)

Wade won TWO 1st team awards and one 2nd team award since then. One first in 2009 and another one in 2010. Wade was 3rd in MVP voting in 2009, was 5th in 2010 and 7th in 2011. And obviously, his higher rank in voting and his two first team awards had nothing to do with James, because neither in 2009 nor in 2010 did he play with James.

So, now you should step back and ask why did you miss the last three seasons?

[lorak]

Of course his on/off court numbers from 82games are even better, but almost for sure so will be with Robinson in 1992 if that data would be available

I wrote "all things considered", which means also the weaker performance against better teams (including playoffs here). His On/Off Court numbers might be higher, but I meant rather adjusted for strength of teammates and opponents, we get a +10 player, not a +14 like Duncan or Garnett had (talking about normal APM here). That's just a guess, maybe an educated one, but more a guess.

Well, my guess is different His impact beyond box score is huge, even RAMP show how great impact defensively Robinson had at the end of his career.


BTW, I checked some numbers today, with/without based on ortg/drtg:

Code: Select all

net   year   games w/o   player
17,1   2007    6   KG
12,6   2011    9   Dirk
11,9   2005   16   Duncan
 8,3   1992    14   D. Robinson
 7,4   2006     6   KG
 5,9   2009    25   KG
 5,3   2004    13   Duncan
 1,9   2008    11   KG


For KG in 2006 and 2007 it's very small sample and for example in 2007 Minnesota had two games without drtg 136 and 126 so it screwed the results.

[pancakes3]

And the fact still remains that the Timberwolves with Garnett on the court were clearly much better than without him.

We want to see how a player really played, not how some people viewed him as a player.

[/quote]

so... discounting raw stats, discounting TS%'s, discounting dratings, discounting people's memories, discounting the lack of wins - both playoff and regular season, discounting the conspicuous lack of a finals MVP, consistent 1st team noms, and other accolades, and using APM to show that his wolves team were a lot better with him than without... we get a real view of how KG played?

i think we need to start this entire project over then.

[Laimbeer]

In 2008 we had him at 52. I know the philosophy of the rankings has changed some, but if we're talking about a jaw-dropping leap of 30 spots in three years for a guy that didn't win a title, MVP, or even a first-team, we need to take a step back and ask why.

Well, that explains a lot.

Wade won TWO 1st team awards and one 2nd team award since then. One first in 2009 and another one in 2010. Wade was 3rd in MVP voting in 2009, was 5th in 2010 and 7th in 2011. And obviously, his higher rank in voting and his two first team awards had nothing to do with James, because neither in 2009 nor in 2010 did he play with James.

So, now you should step back and ask why did you miss the last three seasons?

Mea culpa on the first teams, and I'll correct the post. But throwing in the two first teams, I still don't see that kind of climb. Is it unreasonable to think some of it is simply playing alongside LeBron and being compared to him and Kobe, as well as all the Heat chatter, rather than what he's really added?