Retro POY '82-83 (Voting Complete)

[KING JAMES1978]

Moses is an underrated player like Duncan today..Many people forget or don't know how good he was especially 81'/82'/83'.
Imo he was the best player in the game not only 82'-83' but also 81'-82' and 80'-81'.

[JordansBulls]

That is why I am surprised there isn't more mention of Moses Malone in debates.

[sp6r=underrated]

That is why I am surprised there isn't more mention of Moses Malone in debates.

I think what hurts Moses is similar to Howard he is the classic "sum is greater than the parts" player. Often times on the PC board we have a tendency to divide player's skill sets into several different areas, and just mechanically add up how the players do in each area to determine their value. Players with unbalanced games (Moses, Howard, Nash, Gervin, etc.) always do worse in this type of comparison.

[ronnymac2]

This thread isn't getting enough juice.


Final Ranking:

Moses Malone
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Sidney Moncrief

Honorable Mention: Julius Erving

[Dr Positivity]

1. Moses - Easy pick
2. Bird - Think he was pretty easily #2 in the RS at in overall ability level. Sweep looks bad but it's enough for 2
3. Magic - Magic's getting a bit younger now, but still a huge impact on the offense
4. Moncrief - Probably one of his best years culminating the Bucks win over the Celtics. Did it all
5. Kareem - Still extremely productive, but played less minutes than the rest and got outmuscled in the finals

[Optimism Prime]

1. Moses Malone
2. Larry Bird
3. Magic Johnson
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
5. Julius Erving

[lorak]

1. Moses
2. Bird
3. Moncrief
4. Dr J
5. Magic

BTW, Kareem - 7.5 RPG - Abdul-Jabbar is so overrated that year. People are putting him above Dr J or Moncrief….

[An Unbiased Fan]

1) Moses
2) Moncrief
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Dr. J

[sp6r=underrated]

Vote
1. Moses: I like the point about how Philly perfectly used Moses strengths while limiting the impact of his weaknesses, which are more pronounced than that of the typical all time great.
2. Moncrief: He had a very well respected RS. Moncrief was a monster defensively and was a very good offensive player. In the PS his efficiency did decline, but I think he is worthy of the second spot.
3. Magic: I thought about both of the LA guys here. Normally, I'm not that big into minutes played. If a superstar is playing 30mpg in the RS, but in the PS or in important games he is able to turn it up to 37mpg, I'll still consider him the team's best player even if another guy plays a lot more minutes . The thing is Magic was just as productive as KAJ while being able to play more minutes. Also I think Magic is maybe the best or certinally top 3 or 4 in his ability to raise the games of his teammates.
4. Bird: probably top 2 in the RS, but his PS was a big dropoff. This was very common for early Bird and was not an isolated occurrance.
5. KAJ

HM
Gervin: if he had a better PS, I may have put him top 5

[kaima]

I'm going to re-read some of the previous posts and review the Celtics series with Milwaukee. Bird's overall numbers took a huge hit in the PS this year. His dip this year and next was as bad as what got people to hammer the crap out of Robinson.

The problem with Robinson was not only the numbers, but the context for them that came about, at his peak, from being overwhelmed on skillsets by better post players. A matchup issue.

He not only underwhelmed, he was overwhelmed. Exposed. Shown to be inferior positionally.

Moses is number 1 and KAJ is my number 2 in all likelihood. I'm not sure were I'm going from there.

Moses V Kareem is an interesting issue by the standards of Robinson's playoff failures as well.

[Doctor MJ]

Hmm, lack of activity here. Maybe because the current season thread is stealing the thunder? I'm going to let this go one more day without adding the next year's thread.

[kaima]

I want to chime in briefly on something that's been mentioned: Lakers didn't have to play many tough teams to get to the finals most years. This is a natural counterargument when someone brings up Boston's playoff disappointments.

Here's the thing though: No one argues for Lakers on the basis of their playoff overachievement.

But what about the underachievement? That's gone largely unnoticed when ranking Magic/Kareem certain years, but has been used against other great players in this project, and now is being argued against Bird.

I'm also concerned by how lacking the West was for much of LA's dominance over it.

There have been years where this franchise and it's two best players have skated by without a scratch on this basis, or under those rubrics. Vitiated.

It's been under-reported as to how LA underachieved -- with huge talent, remember -- and/or simply played in an underwhelming era/conference relatively.

I've seen no one really argue against this, so much as argue around it or ignore it altogether. Considering the way other players -- fairly or unfairly -- have been judged on team result and impact, I find it disappointing and revealing that Magic and Kareem seem to be praised independent of team issues...at least when team issues are more purple than gold(en).

Considering Magic's rep, I would have thought that this would have been a bigger discussion point. Instead, I saw one poster also handicap at least one pick based on age, giving Kareem credit based on a MPG argumentation and standardization -- a benefit no other player has gotten in this project, that I'm aware of.

That ties in with team-result as well, as Kareem was moved up based on a Finals performance conflated with his work in limited minutes. The contrast is striking on a number of levels, whether it be criticism and praise relating to team result and how that very result only seemed to fully matter when the Lakers won it all, or when looking at the criticism under this same paradigm that other players were attacked for and on in multiple votes when their teams either won too few games or fell early.

And then there's the fact that more than one great player was ignored in their twilight years, even when they were putting up great stats on a per-minute basis.

The Lakers are just another team.

If that's the case, then they've truly been overrated.

They got upset a couple times, they pulled off the upset a couple times. And Boston's not just a team that got upset a couple times, they have by far the most embarassing record regarding this in all of history. Upset 7 times, and never pulling off an upset.

Context and conference matter. Boston played in the tougher conference in the eighties.

I would be willing to consider that both these all-time teams were overrated, the Bird/Magic Era as less than it's hyped to be, but I'm not seeing how Boston has more embarrassing numbers against it than LA does (some of those sub-.500 playoff comp runs are truly laughable).

Now, one of the reasons I like this format we're using is that people are forced to either holistically bash a team for playoff disappointment, or ignore the disappointment.

I believe that the latter has taken place to the Lakers' side already, particularly as relates to individuated hype and reward. Name-recognition topping analysis.

When Boston does well in the post-season, they justifiably get praised.

The question is, have they, or Bird, been unjustifiably praised relative to other great players and past polling standards? I believe the Lakers have been.

In a year like this one, I think it at the very least needs to be discussed without concerns for how easy or hard the route was for others.

Level of competition is an inherent concern. To a greater degree when considering the nature of these threads, I would think.

How can one fairly analyse Bird and Boston when throwing that out? That's the very basis of what we're doing.

Without proper context, what of meaning?

[JordansBulls]

Hmm, lack of activity here. Maybe because the current season thread is stealing the thunder? I'm going to let this go one more day without adding the next year's thread.

After the Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, Kobe era, etc, you aren't going to get a bunch of people's opinion when Moses Malone is considered the best player in the league. I think the 70's will be tough as well for voting for a bunch of people as well.

[sp6r=underrated]

Hmm, lack of activity here. Maybe because the current season thread is stealing the thunder? I'm going to let this go one more day without adding the next year's thread.

After the Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, Kobe era, etc, you aren't going to get a bunch of people's opinion when Moses Malone is considered the best player in the league. I think the 70's will be tough as well for voting for a bunch of people as well.

I think some dropoff is due to the years were coming to. But a lot of it is

Holiday Weekend: a lot of people take their vacation this week
09/10: more recent

[Optimism Prime]

Hmm, lack of activity here. Maybe because the current season thread is stealing the thunder? I'm going to let this go one more day without adding the next year's thread.

After the Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, Kobe era, etc, you aren't going to get a bunch of people's opinion when Moses Malone is considered the best player in the league. I think the 70's will be tough as well for voting for a bunch of people as well.

I think some dropoff is due to the years were coming to. But a lot of it is

Holiday Weekend: a lot of people take their vacation this week
09/10: more recent

Yup. Why talk about Moses/Erving or debate Bird/Moncrief when we can rehash the events of the past couple months and do the never-been-done before Lebron/Kobe/Wade discussion? /greenfont /bitterness

[kaima]

Hmm, lack of activity here. Maybe because the current season thread is stealing the thunder? I'm going to let this go one more day without adding the next year's thread.

After the Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, Kobe era, etc, you aren't going to get a bunch of people's opinion when Moses Malone is considered the best player in the league. I think the 70's will be tough as well for voting for a bunch of people as well.

Portions of the seventies are quite exciting, actually.

But that's my perspective. My concern is whether we'll have enough info to really get into the issues.

As far as votes, it's a busy time. I think it's hurting the project. I don't even know if I'll vote in this thread, because I refuse to do so without having analyzed the data available to a specific degree.

[Gongxi]

Just for posterity's sake, I'm going to say that throughout this thing I'm going mostly by on-court production, with games in December mattering as much as games in March, and games in the playoffs meaning only about 50% more than games in the regular season. Which is to say: if you play 20 playoff games and 82 regular season games, your regular season still accounts for roughly 2/3rds of where I'm placing you. Why? Because a 20 game sample size pales in comparison to 82 or, together, 102 games.

Also, I don't much care about how well your team did. It's basketball, not ping pong- one player can't dictate whether an entire team wins or loses.

Here we go....

1- Moses Malone. 25/15, anchoring the paint. 1 assist per game is epically bad, but I think a rebound rate over 20% will alleviate some of that. 58% TS is pretty good, but not great (comparative to other superstars) but this year felt a little blah as far as individual performances went. He stepped up his game in the playoffs (26/16/2 with 59% TS) and that'll put him comfortably here.

2- Magic Johnson. Not his best season, but still played a very efficient game in leading a very potent offense. Led the league in assists and topped 60% TS. Played very well in the playoffs, with near triple-double like numbers.

3- Larry Bird. He's right here with Magic, really: 24/11/6. His efficiency kinda takes a dive relative to some of his other years (and certainly compared to Magic this year), and he's not getting bonus points for running the offense. Also played very well in the playoffs, with near triple-double like numbers. Magic did it over a larger number of games, though.

4- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. I'm not really a fan of putting a big guy here who averages barely 8 boards a game, but he made the most of his touches (22 ppg on 62% TS, a 1-for-1 a/to that isn't horrible for a volume big man, etc). Really produced during the playoffs (27ppg on nearly as good shooting.

5- Julius Erving. Probably would've had him at 4 if he played a bit more and hadn't laid a huge egg in the playoffs. But he did. So that's that.

[ItsMillerTime]

My vote

1. Moses Malone
2. Larry Bird
3. Sidney Moncrief
4. Magic Johnson
5. Dr. J

HM: KAJ, Gervin, Williams

[Manuel Calavera]

1. Malone
2. Bird
3. Magic
4. Erving
5. Kareem

[Doctor MJ]

But what about the underachievement? That's gone largely unnoticed when ranking Magic/Kareem certain years, but has been used against other great players in this project, and now is being argued against Bird.

I'm also concerned by how lacking the West was for much of LA's dominance over it.

There have been years where this franchise and it's two best players have skated by without a scratch on this basis, or under those rubrics. Vitiated.

It's been under-reported as to how LA underachieved -- with huge talent, remember -- and/or simply played in an underwhelming era/conference relatively.

I've seen no one really argue against this, so much as argue around it or ignore it altogether. Considering the way other players -- fairly or unfairly -- have been judged on team result and impact, I find it disappointing and revealing that Magic and Kareem seem to be praised independent of team issues...at least when team issues are more purple than gold(en).

Not really sure what to say. The Lakers won 5 titles, and got to the finals 9 times. Using lack of competition against them is not illogical, but underachievement? Those are phenomenal results - and like I said, they had as much history of upsetting teams as getting upset.

I'm thinking you're talking about actual regular season records, which is interesting generally, but hard to take that seriously when damning a team.

The Lakers are just another team.

If that's the case, then they've truly been overrated.

Christ, way to tear up context to make a punchline. You need to stop doing this. You're too smart to resort to cheap tricks that fool no one.

They got upset a couple times, they pulled off the upset a couple times. And Boston's not just a team that got upset a couple times, they have by far the most embarassing record regarding this in all of history. Upset 7 times, and never pulling off an upset.

Context and conference matter. Boston played in the tougher conference in the eighties.

I would be willing to consider that both these all-time teams were overrated, the Bird/Magic Era as less than it's hyped to be, but I'm not seeing how Boston has more embarrassing numbers against it than LA does (some of those sub-.500 playoff comp runs are truly laughable).

I was about to ask if there was any number of playoff disappointments that would raise your eyebrows - thinking that maybe you just are a guy who believes in not overreacting to small sample sizes. Then I remember you were the main guy crucifying Robinson. Do you realize that Bird's the only star in history with a worse track record for getting upset than Robinson? I don't know how you can care so much about it for Robinson, and not care about it for Bird.

The question is, have they, or Bird, been unjustifiably praised relative to other great players and past polling standards? I believe the Lakers have been.

I think there's some truth to this. I thought the way King got left off people's ballots was crazy - and it helped guys like Magic.

Level of competition is an inherent concern. To a greater degree when considering the nature of these threads, I would think.

How can one fairly analyse Bird and Boston when throwing that out? That's the very basis of what we're doing.

Without proper context, what of meaning?

Okay - you're right that you should always seek to understand in context. What I'm trying to say is things are pretty glaring this year. Getting swept by an average of double digits by an underdog is a big deal. To state otherwise is just wrong.