Retro POY '94-95 (Voting Complete)

[Doctor MJ]

Last call. If you change your vote after now, please make clear what you changed.

[ElGee]

There's a big problem with that, mainly because the stats say Robinson was the best offensive player, but film and skillset analysis would tell anyone that he was the worst.

Well, the basketball game itself is not just about "having more skills", but about efficiency. How efficient can a player be while using his skillset. Robinson was far more efficient, is offense was well suited for game, especially in the regular season. And as not only I pointed out in the games between the Rockets and the Spurs the game plan for the Spurs was more about stopping everyone else and defend Olajuwon 1on1. Someone said already that the Spurs overall did a better job defensively against the Rockets than other teams. On the other side the Rockets focussed more on stopping Robinson and Olajuwon got way more help for that.
Also in the finals Olajuwon looked worse 1on1 against Shaq than Shaq looked against Olajuwon.

I really don't see how Olajuwon can be ahead of Shaquille O'Neal when he played in reality not as good in the finals against O'Neal, while for Robinson and Olajuwon is the 1on1 duell used.

I just want to point out that that narrative might not be true at all. I haven't finished G6, but in G2 San Antonio doubled Hakeem furiously. Sometimes it was 3 guys. Dude set up his teammates for 13 open shots off of this action! That's an absurd number because he also took 31 shots! One of the issues was Hakeem would quickly spin away from the double to his baseline bread and butter. He went quickly - it was devastating and difficult to defend.

Interestingly, Robinson created essentially no offense off of doubles for the Spurs.

[Gongxi]

But I feel like the argument that he was 2nd in the regular season and 2nd in the postseason, so he should be 2nd overall...it doesn't really work for me, because the two guys that he's competing against were both first at least once.

That's not what I'm saying, most especially because 20 games in the postseason aren't equivalent to 80 games in the regular season.

But let's explore that: both guys he's competing against were also below him at least once. That merits mentioning. In the regular season, Robinson was comfortably ahead of Olajuwon, but barely ahead of Shaq. In the postseason, Olajuwon was greatly above Robinson, but still barely ahead of Shaq. In the team success category, Olajuwon was ahead of both of them- the Magic got to the Finals but were swept, the Spurs didn't get to the Finals but lost to the same team and at least weren't swept. We can call that a draw (if people even need to count team success at all).

So looking at it in several different ways...I just don't see it. Have Robinson at first? Okay, I don't agree, but that logic Shaq should be in second. Have Olajuwon at first? Okay, I don't agree, but that logic dictates Shaq should be second.

The only argument I'm seeing in most these cases is "Robinson had an amazing year and would have been in first if Olajuwon didn't best him, so Hakeem will be first and Robinson will be second" which sounds good, yes, and sounds logical, yes, but is really not once you start to break it down: what is it about Robinson's year that makes it so amazing and who compares? What is it about Olajuwon's play that elevates him? It requires more thought than I'm afraid is going into this.

Again, it sounds good at first glance. But I can't stress enough how what sounds like it might be plausible, isn't always plausible. You're on a game show and you have three doors to choose from. Behind one is a new car, behind the other two are screwdrivers. You pick door B. The gameshow host says "Hey, I'm gonna mix it up!" He opens up door #1 and you see a screwdriver. He says "Well, do you wanna change your door?" Common sense says it's still 50/50, it doesn't matter. That sounds right. It's also wrong. You're a white, heterosexual male that doesn't use intravenous drugs. You take an HIV test and your doctor calls you back and says "Sorry dude, you tested positive. 1 out of every 1000 samples get a false positive to you're probably not gonna make it too many more years: 999 out of 1000 chances that you're gonna get AIDS." Yeah, that sounds correct, but it's not.

No need to go with what seems the most convincing due to one or two phrases, guys.

[ElGee]

Monty Hall Bayes, I get what you're saying if that is someone's criteria.

But I do think it's possible to just think Olajuwon was right there in the regular season and better in the playoffs and think Robinson played well in the playoffs and not hold the h2h matchup against him too much and you think those are the top 2 guys and that ends up with Shaq in 3rd.

In other words, it's not necessarily as neat of a comparison as you're making it out to be in theory. It doesn't mean some people haven't committed the logical error your pointing out IF that's their criteria, but I can understand a Dream-Robinson-ONeal ballot.

[Optimism Prime]

You're a white, heterosexual male that doesn't use intravenous drugs. You take an HIV test and your doctor calls you back and says "Sorry dude, you tested positive. 1 out of every 1000 samples get a false positive to you're probably not gonna make it too many more years: 999 out of 1000 chances that you're gonna get AIDS." Yeah, that sounds correct, but it's not.

That hooker told me she was clean.

But seriously. AIDS? No laughing matter, guys. Don't do drugs.

ETA: No, I don't have AIDS.

[Gongxi]

Monty Hall Bayes, I get what you're saying if that is someone's criteria.

But I do think it's possible to just think Olajuwon was right there in the regular season and better in the playoffs and think Robinson played well in the playoffs and not hold the h2h matchup against him too much and you think those are the top 2 guys and that ends up with Shaq in 3rd.

In other words, it's not necessarily as neat of a comparison as you're making it out to be in theory. It doesn't mean some people haven't committed the logical error your pointing out IF that's their criteria, but I can understand a Dream-Robinson-ONeal ballot.

I just don't get it. It's almost like we're doing a mini-POY project in this individual season, evaluating 2-3 different 'seasons'. And Shaq's 'POY shares' in this analogy might not trump either one in each situation, but I can't see how it's not second. If that analogy makes no sense, my girlfriend is talking my ear off about something stupid right now and I need to talk about important stuff like Shaq and Hakeem and David Robinson 15 years ago.

[Gongxi]

You're a white, heterosexual male that doesn't use intravenous drugs. You take an HIV test and your doctor calls you back and says "Sorry dude, you tested positive. 1 out of every 1000 samples get a false positive to you're probably not gonna make it too many more years: 999 out of 1000 chances that you're gonna get AIDS." Yeah, that sounds correct, but it's not.

That hooker told me she was clean.

But seriously. AIDS? No laughing matter, guys. Don't do drugs.

ETA: No, I don't have AIDS.

I believe you. Odds are that even if you tested positive, you probably wouldn't have it. Although the test is very rarely wrong, still 10 out of 11 people that do test positive end up on the scary end of a false positive.

If you stopped reading at "the test is very rarely wrong" though, you might not have thought that and came to your own conclusion. Which is what I'm talking about re: the big 3 in this thread.

[kaima]

There's a big problem with that, mainly because the stats say Robinson was the best offensive player, but film and skillset analysis would tell anyone that he was the worst.

Well, the basketball game itself is not just about "having more skills", but about efficiency. How efficient can a player be while using his skillset. Robinson was far more efficient,

Simply, if efficiency particular to Robinson, trumped skill, then he wouldn't have had the series he did against Olajuwon.

Nor the series he would proceed to have, and had prior, with Malone.

is offense was well suited for game, especially in the regular season.

That's rather circular though, isn't it? The loop is cut when we move into playoff basketball.

When matchups became key, and skillset breadth versus limitation became a direct issue between two stars, Robinson come up empty.

And as not only I pointed out in the games between the Rockets and the Spurs the game plan for the Spurs was more about stopping everyone else and defend Olajuwon 1on1.

I've been watching ten minute stretches of those games. (I've watched more early series stuff than late, as a caveat)

I'm seeing a lot of rotation to Olajuwon in the post. The difference is that he has the skillsets to manage this gameplan.

Robinson looks like a first-year player by contrast.

[Doctor MJ]

'94-95 Results

Code: Select all

Player             1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Pts   POY Shares
1. Hakeem Olajuwon  22   2   3   0   0 249   0.922
2. Shaquille O'Neal  5  12   9   1   0 182   0.674
3. David Robinson    0  13   9   5   0 151   0.559
4. Karl Malone       0   0   6  16   4  82   0.304
5. Charles Barkley   0   0   0   1  10  13   0.048
6. Scottie Pippen    0   0   0   1   5   8   0.030
7. Patrick Ewing     0   0   0   0   7   7   0.026
   John Stockton     0   0   0   2   1   7   0.026
9. Clyde Drexler     0   0   0   1   0   3   0.011


[JordansBulls]

Why is it that Robinson performs so badly in the playoffs?

[ronnymac2]

Why is it that Robinson performs so badly in the playoffs?

The 12 pages in this thread answer that question. Multiple posts by multiple participants have addressed the reasons why.

[semi-sentient]

Site updated: http://www.dolem.com/poy

Dayum... Shaq has a shot at catching Tim Duncan after all. Malone will likely pass up Kobe and KG with the next round or two of voting.

Code: Select all

1. Tim Duncan         6.153
2. Shaquille O'Neal   5.572
3. Kobe Bryant        3.658
4. Kevin Garnett      3.388
5. Karl Malone        3.146

[lorak]

Maybe someone will be interested - some time ago I uploaded every shooting possession when Hakeem and Robinson were guarding each other from Game 1 of 1995 WCF.

At the end of part 2 there's ending of 4th quarter with Rodman's antics. Robinson had 12 points (4/5 FG) in 4th quarter, while Hakeem 6 points (2/5 FG). Elliot missed two clutch FTs and Horry hit one of his many game winners... So imagine how close it was and history could goes completely different way...

part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvCdFeYKggM
part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ghf6dbag-Tk

[DatWasNashty]

I wrote a Russian novel. But in my defense I love post play, and this post-season was post player nirvana. I don't know if it was ever better.

I'm going to preface this very (very) simply: Hakeem's Number 1.

Now, onto the more complex analysis of post play to determine who follows in the context of where from why.

Starting simply enough, with closeout game numbers between Hakeem and the opposing star:

Game 5, Jazz/Rockets

Malone: 35 points, 10 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl

Olajuwon: 33 points, 10 reb, 4 ast, 1 blk

Game 7, Suns/Rockets

Barkley: 18 points, 23 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk

Olajuwon: 29 points, 11 reb, 4 ast, 1 blk

Game 6, Spurs/Rockets

Robinson: 19 points, 10 reb, 5 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk

Olajuwon: 39 points, 17 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk

Game 4, Magic/Rockets

Shaq: 25 points, 12 reb, 3 ast, 4 blk

Olajuwon: 35 points, 15, reb, 6 ast, 3 stl

By the standard(s) advocated in previous threads, particularly those of NO-KG-AI in the 99-00 thread on KG v Malone, it should be considered that Barkley and Malone's teams pushed the Rockets to the limit, whereas the proceeding two series actually became easier, and that Malone is the only player to play Olajuwon to a standstill in a deciding game that playoffs.

Barkley was limited in game 7, looking at scoring, but he was also battling a serious injury, which makes those 23 rebs all the more staggering.

Now, broader series issues, keyed by the star matchups in the post:

Utah V Houston

Mail: 30.2 ppg, 13.2 reb, 3.8 ast, 1.4 stl, 0.4 blk

Olajuwon: 35 ppg, 8.6 reb, 4 ast, 0.8 stl, 2.6 blk

In the Utah series, it's interesting to note that it was Drexler, not Olajuwon, that seemed to decide outcome.

Oh, to be sure Hakeem was spectacular, but that was expected. When Drexler put up big numbers, that's when they won. When his scoring was bad or lacking, Utah would win.

In the two Utah wins, Drexler had twenty four comibined. In the Houston wins, he never had less than thirty a game.

On the other side of it, Malone again was the only player that took on a dominant scoring role for Utah. Houston had, in the instance of game 2, two players score over thirty; neither was named Hakeem Olajuwon. I don't know if that ever happened in Malone's playoff career to his side, and it certainly didn't in this series.

In fact, no one other than Malone had a single game over 28 points (Stockton, game 1). All that said, I don't want to underrate Stockton; but that's the problem, in that Stockton is a great player whose numbers don't tell the whole story. I really don't think we have the system to fully equate Stockton's worth; he could very well be underrated. It's the same way I feel about Scottie Pippen.

I will say that Stockton was a very rare player, especially as regards pace-control; I don't think there's a PG in the league right now that has Stockton's ability to dominate both teams in the arena through ball-handling and individuated pace adjustment/diversity. The anti-Nash.

The problem becomes, without a secondary volume scorer a team then relies on depth. Utah's depth, looking at this series, was mediocre. Bench production was simply bad.

Another factor that played in Houston's favor was Utah losing their starting Center before the series started. It hurt Utah's rotation, throwing guys out of traditional roles and, even acknowledging that Felton Spencer was servicable at best, left Utah with a guy whose only eye-popping stat was his age: 37. Well, his stats for the series were rather standout for a starting C as well: 2.8 points, 1.8 rebounds, 0 assists, 0.5 blocks and 0 steals. This guy sucked so bad that Utah couldn't even use him for his fouls.

Taking out Spencer was a blow.

The series finale came down to Malone and Olajuwon playing nearly dead-even, with the result being broadly decided by the Drexler stat and, specifically and simply, six more points in surrounding talent to Hakeem's side versus Malone's.

Was the first of three straight playoffs Utah lost a series with championship implications by four points.

PHX V Houston

Charles: 22.3 ppg, 13.2 reb, 3.1 ast, 1.1 stl, 0.8 blk

Olajuwon: 29.6 ppg, 9 reb, 3.7 ast, 0.8 stl, 2.3 blk

Two sides to this: on one hand the Suns and Barkley face the ignominy of blowing a three-one series lead; on the other hand, this might have happened because of Barkley's health.

Is that an excuse or a compounding point? I think it's open to debate, specifically because of Chuck's known tendencies to blow off consistent conditioning.

The Suns also lost Danny Manning for the season long before this series took place. He was their second leading scorer in the limited time he played. With Manning, the Suns had the best record in the league at 36-9. Arguably the most loaded team in the league -- on paper.

The stat to Phoenix's side that sticks is the combined scoring of Barkley and Johnson; not just conflated and, then, aggregate, but in the balancing. When they played well, together, the Suns won. When one was off, even if the other was playing lights out, they lost.

Kevin Johnson was monstrous in the scoring department. 2 games over 40, four games of at least 28, and five of 20+.

Game 1, the Suns win with 21, 13 and 5 from KJ with Barkley putting up 26 and 11. Game 2 sees Barkley go for 30 and 9, KJ follows up with 29 and 12, and the Suns lead 2-0.

Game 3 is where the trouble starts. Barkley goes 0-10, scores 5 and sits out the entire fourth quarter of a Houston blowout; plausibly, he was starting to ail physically here. KJ puts up 14.

Game 4, KJ takes the game by the throat, and it suddenly appears that this is the case for Phoenix's side in the overall series. Done? One would think so, after going up 3-1 off of a 43 point, 9 assist night from Kevin. Round throws in 26 and 9.

Game 5 looks like a closeout. It's actually time for the Rockets to rise. KJ throws in 28, but Barkley only scores 17.

Game 6 is symmetrical: this time Barkley scores at a prodigious rate, while Johnson goes MIA. Even with Barkley going for 34 and 14, it's not enough; not when Johnson only puts up 14.

Portentously, Barkley looks beat down near the end of the game.

Game 7, in retrospect, was a funeral procession for a franchise's title hopes, and maybe a career. Both were probably noted at the time, but the latter is an example of bait and switch soap opera placement: with all the focus being Barkley, it's Kevin Johnson who is about to fall off a cliff, with the NBA audience being left with collective amnesia as to his career and worth. Hey, it was sweeps season.

The way the game plays out, it certainly looks like it's Barkley that's done. Cracks are showing on the court and on the sidelines, with Westphal demanding that KJ, not Barkley, be the focus of the offense in the second half.

Can this game be blamed on Westphal? Statistical tracking would say yes.

Kevin Johnson comes through individually. 46 points. Barkley only puts up 18, but manages 23 rebounds. All on one leg.

Key to this game comes in the third quarter. With the Suns up by 9, the Rockets make a 22-11 run.

Again, Clyde Drexler is the key figure, while Olajuwon is on the bench for the entire Houston run. By the end of the third Houston has the lead by a slim margin of 81-79.

They will win the game by an even slimmer sum. One point.

1 point.

Think about that the next time you analyze Barkley's career placement versus Olajuwon's. The smaller the number separating, the bigger the moment.

Or maybe just zero-sum. Winner versus loser. Health versus ailment.

People play and reference that Stockton three over and over again. It is the more dramatic and iconic shot in Barkley's career; almost his Ehlo or Russel moment. But this series, forgotten, has got to play over and over in Chuck's mind as well.

Gut-wrenching.

SA V Houston

Robinson: 23.8 ppg, 11.3 reb, 2.6 ast, 1.5 stl, 2.2 blk

Olajuwon: 35.3 ppg, 12.5 reb, 5 ast, 1.3 stl, 4.2 blk

There has been talk of Robinson lacking help and being swarmed in this series, and I'd have more sympathy if film and stats didn't point to outcome being tilted by Robinson's lacking skillsets on, get this, both sides of the court.

On offense, Robinson was trying to play against a collapsing defense with, far too often, faceup drives that either left him with a shot he was incapable of making or a bad pass that was a likely turnover. He had no back to the basket game which, against a defense that's by definition and design paint-oriented, made it the wrong answer to a remedial math question. A real post player, even with a swarming defense coming at or for him, can find a way to make reads and create some positive result in individual or team counterpoint; Robinson spent the series panicked, because his athleticism could not solve the problem.

He'd go into the post, receive a pass, and pass it back out almost immediately. Why? Because nothing easy would come, and he had no post game to work with.

His jumper was fundamentally shaky. He had no real go-to moves. He wasn't good at all at battling for position, ala Shaq or Karl, and then making an explosive move from the low post to the rim. He was mediocre at sealing his man and receiving a lob. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

And, as nail (in the coffin, through the heart) or lynchpin to all this, he was a lacking passer. With the defense in a collapse mode, you would think that Robinson's assist numbers would be decent, yet he produced at the worst rate of any of Olajuwon's post opponents with a 2.6 average. But that's only half the story, as he averaged 6.25 turnovers over the 4 losses.

The two games the Spurs won, he averaged one turnover. His assist/TO ratio in the four losses was a 0.42. By comparison, Malone averaged a 1.36 on A/TO ratio, Barkley a 1.15, Olajuwon (in the SA series, in this case) a 1.19 and Shaq a 1.19.

So we've got another key stat as to W/Ls, and it's centered, appropriately, on Robinson.

Now, a mediocre or even bad passing big man could be defensible if he had fundamental talent for any real type of post play. Unfortunately, this is a non-starter for Robinson.

Meaning that another star, having a ridiculously bad series passing the ball, could a find a way to create offense for his team that doesn't lead directly back to his statline; rotational feeds, where it's passed out of the post and moved around would be an easy example. But because of Robinson's other limitations, this type of offensive creation is not likely to be there.

All this, and I haven't mentioned the most staggering ratio in the series yet. 11.5. The difference in scoring average. How did this happen?

Well, it would be reasonable enough to expect that this was a result of Robinson's lacking offensive aresenal.

But that's only part, maybe half, the story. A ratio within a ratio, i.e. offense+(-?)defense.

Shocking as it may seem, a frontcourt with Dennis Rodman and David Robinson gave up the most points in the playoffs to Olajuwon. This is in comparison to a Utah frontcourt with Karl Malone and a non-NBA Center, Charles Barkley and Joe Kleine, and Shaq plus Horace Grant.

How can this be? I think it falls within the same paradigm as Robinson's offensive flaws: a mix of mental frailty and lack of fundamentals.

For all the hype about Robinson's defense, Olajuwon did whatever he wanted in this series. He didn't have it as easy against Barkley/Klein/AC, Shaq or Malone+a-guy-from-the-local-Y.

If Robinson's defense is not overhyped, then there has to be a dichotomy here. Either between regular season worth and playoff failure, or man to man post defense as opposed to being the Center in a team scheme.

Robinson was wonderful at rim protection, which was mostly timing and innate physical gifts. But positional defense requires a lot more. It's a game of chess, and Robinson was playing checkers against Bobby Fischer in the post. He wasn't good at countering Olajuwon's footwork (and considering the hype about his defense, isn't that another negative?), he often let him set up too deep, and he would give Olajuwon way too much room, as a last defense (bomb shelter D), on his 15 foot jumper.

If Robinson deserves praise for his award-laden regular season, then the matchup game means he should be excoriated, rather than exhonerated, for his post-season play.

Second year in a row, and again at his absolute peak, he allows himself to be dominated on both ends. In 94, against Malone, the ratio was 9. This time it's over 11.

Dreadful. Disgusting.

Orlando V Houston

Shaq: 28 PPG, 12 reb, 6.25 ast, .25 stl, 2.5 blk

Olajuwon: 32.75, 11.5 reb, 5.5 ast, 2 stl, 2 blk

This series was really boring, unless you look at it in the context of Nick Anderson.

Then it's kind of fascinating.

It's not just that Nick Anderson blew FT's. Or choked. It's the carryover. Orlando looked like the better team for most of game 1, and Nick Anderson's statline is more than respectable.

Talk about zero-sum. It's not the choke of the moment, it's the fact, then, that it's so far beyond that moment. Watch a guy's psyche, and perhaps his team's, blow up over the course of 40 seconds.

Nick Anderson's inability only starts with the misses. What's more striking is that he couldn't move past it, a sure sign of mental weakness. And the same could be said for Orlando.

Did they ever look like they were seriously in it again after that?

You can try laying that on Shaq, but once again he was awesome in a sweep. 28 points. 12 boards. Almost 7 assists.

He's in his third year, and he's playing the league's best frontcourt player real tight.

It's the contrast between a guy like Shaq and Robinson. The Magic crashed harder, but it does not trace back to their best player's performance.

Losing is sometimes unavoidable, no matter individual greatness.

And that's at the center (ha ha) of my argument here. Matchups, who played well and who didn't.

Robinson fails on that scale. Malone and Shaq pass.

Olajuwon? Come on. Fait accimpli.

But what proved Olajuwon was the best? The context and carrythrough of head to head matchups won, not just team outcome. By that same standard, I have trouble seeing Robinson as the superior player, certainly overall but, yet still, in this season, to names like Malone and Shaq, two players that actually played damned good basketball against Olajuwon and the Rockets.

Otherwise, we're just looking at the serendipity of playoff brackets. Even there, Robinson fails. For if a supporter of his cries "if not for Olajuwon" I reply, what about Malone? Robinson is in the same XXX position at that point.

And despite regular season stats (after all, those looked decent against Hakeem and Mail as well), I have no faith that Robinson would have been dominant or even very good in a contrasted matchup with Shaq.

Best post I've ever read on a forum. You just deconstructed Robinson like Hakeem did in that series. Bravo.

I do have a couple of points to make, though. I don't necessarily agree with Drexler being the "X-factor" to Houston's success against Utah. I remember that series quite well and it was more about controlling tempo. The two games Utah won, they executed extremely well in the halfcourt (running their predictable offense involving a ton of PnRs). Stockton actually hit a gamewinner in G1 over Hakeem, I think. First two games Houston won, they set a record for most 3 pointers made in one of them and were absolutely running the Jazz out of the building. Smith/Drexler/Horry were all feasting in transition. G5 was a strange. I thought Utah absolutely folded down the stretch and had no movement off-ball for some strange reason. I think they were trying to drain the clock; too early for that, though. Dream hit that RIDICULOUS baseline bankshot.

Regarding the Suns, I have vivid memories of that series and the person I would blame the most is easily Charles Barkley. Not a big fan of the guy despite being a Suns fan. He absolutely CHOKED in G5. No other way to put it. He only converted on 1 out of 6 FTA, had 6 turnovers and shot an abysmal 36.4% from the field. K.J also had a turnover down the stretch which lead to Hakeem hitting the game-tying jumper and Wesley Person missed the three at the buzzer to win it. Rox had the momentum in overtime and took it with them back to Houston. Ghey series, definitely. Charles also had a stinker (like 0/10 shooting) in one of the earlier games which was due to him clubbing and partying the night prior.