Retro Player of the Year 2002-03 UPDATE — Tim Duncan

[EmpireFalls]

I can’t vote on this but please, someone please give TMac his flowers for this season.

[penbeast0]

My fault, looked it up and read it wrong.

[homecourtloss]

2003 RPoY

1. Duncan —honestly, the 2003–2007 or 2002—2007 or 2001-2007 or even 1998-2007 stretch by Duncan might be the most underrated peak stretch in NBA history. 2003 looked to be the best player in the world and performed like it with his supporting cast young or old.
2. KG—monster impact year in which his presence affects every facet of the game. Good series vs. the Lakers in which both Shaq and Kobe played well.
3. Shaq—Took a step back, missed games, but was still a dominant force. 2003 PI RAPM still looking strong
4. Dirk—it was really fun watching younger Dirk and the way he moved on court. Too bad he missed those final games though not sure it would have mattered. Dirk could be number #2 or even #1 in different years but this year is stacked.
5. Kidd—2003 to 2006 Kidd is a highly underrated player. I could go with McGrady here though liked Kidd better in the playoffs though not mcgrady’s fault he got worn down by Pistons’ defense.

[Djoker]

Let's do a quick Kobe vs. T-Mac comparison here, shall we...

Regular Season

Kobe: 30.0/6.9/5.9 on 55.0 %TS (+3.1 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 32.1/6.5/5.5 on 56.4 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 2.6 topg

T-Mac has an edge statistically and led an absolutely putrid roster to a 41-win pace season. And when I say putrid, this Orlando roster is actually horrific. After T-Mac, the next seven guys in minutes were Pat Garrity, Darrell Armstrong, Mike Miller, Jacques Vaughn, old-ass Shawn Kemp, Andrew DeClerq and Jervi Sasser. Yikes! There's a lot of hyperbole on this sort of thing but this team without T-Mac really wins like 15 games. It's that freaking bad. Kobe led a much better team but with way way better support. Kobe is the slightly better defender to me so that does bridge the gap just a bit. Overall I'd give T-Mac a small edge for the RS.

Postseason

Kobe: 32.1/5.1/5.2 on 53.1 % TS (+2.7 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 31.7/6.7/4.7 on 56.1 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 3.7 topg

In the PS, their performances are a wash. T-Mac dragged his Orlando team to a 3-1 lead over the Pistons and then an eventual loss though I don't hold it against him. It was just a way better team turning on the jets and crushing a superstar surrounded by journeymen. The Magic should have never led 3-1 to begin with. Lakers lost to the eventual champ Spurs with Kobe playing very well so not much to nitpick against him either.

When it comes down to it and I realize it may not be fair, I would go with Kobe overall just by a hair because I'm simply more convinced by his intangibles. T-Mac, through not fault of his own, never could demonstrate the ability to lead a championship team. And so I would go with a guy who is a proven winner. Basically their average and high end valuations are the same but T-Mac's low end valuation is a bit lower simply because there is that little bit of doubt "Can he lead a championship team?" which is still there because, fair or not, there is no evidence that he could.

Anyways I don't really get how anyone can have T-Mac high on their ballot but not include Kobe or vice versa. They are very very close. And both of their seasons are very impressive to me so they'll slot in after Timmy.

The rest of the ballot will be between KG, Shaq and Dirk. And honestly Dirk is probably the odd man out and gets the dreaded HM/#6 slot. He had a subpar series against the Kings and then a disaster against the Spurs where he got injured and DNP for half it. And as I've justified in several earlier threads, I do penalize PS injuries pretty heavily.

[One_and_Done]

Well, you're right about T-Mac having a putrid team, but you then say Kobe 'led' his better support cast to a superior record. The Lakers were 6-8 under Kobe in games Shaq missed. He led his better team to a worse record than T-Mac's putrid Magic squad, and it doesn't look like small sample noise. In games without Shaq from 00-07 Kobe 'led' the Lakers to a 135-137 record. He was proven to not have much floor lift, whereas McGrady dragged multiple bad teams to the playoffs in between back injuries.

15 wins for that Magic team might be generous btw. Without T-Mac they didn't have cast single starting quality player other than maybe Mike Miller, and most of their rotation for fringe NBA guys or G-Leaguer quality. The next year, when T-Mac had back injuries, the team was 2-13 in games he missed. From 02 to 04 they were 6-23 in games T-Mac wasn't starting.

[70sFan]

15 wins for that Magic team might be generous btw. Without T-Mac they didn't have cast single starting quality player other than maybe Mike Miller, and most of their rotation for fringe NBA guys or G-Leaguer quality. The next year, when T-Mac had back injuries, the team was 2-13 in games he missed. From 02 to 04 they were 6-23 in games T-Mac wasn't starting.

That's quite misleading representation of facts:

2001-03 Magic were 8-10 without Tmac (36 wins pace).
2001-03 Magic were 121-107 with Tmac (44 wins pace).

2004 Magic were 2-13 without Tmac (11 wins pace).
2004 Magic were 19-48 with Tmac (23 wins pace).

Tmac didn't carry sub-20 wins teams to the playoffs, simply because the team became considerably worse in 2004. 2004 Magic didn't have a single 2003 player from top 6 minutes played other than Tracy (no Garrity, Armstrong, Miller, Vaughn and Kemp).

What's the point of using 2004 for the sample when rosters are completely different?

[OhayoKD]

Let's do a quick Kobe vs. T-Mac comparison here, shall we...

Regular Season

Kobe: 30.0/6.9/5.9 on 55.0 %TS (+3.1 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 32.1/6.5/5.5 on 56.4 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 2.6 topg

T-Mac has an edge statistically and led an absolutely putrid roster to a 41-win pace season. And when I say putrid, this Orlando roster is actually horrific. After T-Mac, the next seven guys in minutes were Pat Garrity, Darrell Armstrong, Mike Miller, Jacques Vaughn, old-ass Shawn Kemp, Andrew DeClerq and Jervi Sasser. Yikes! There's a lot of hyperbole on this sort of thing but this team without T-Mac really wins like 15 games. It's that freaking bad. Kobe led a much better team but with way way better support. Kobe is the slightly better defender to me so that does bridge the gap just a bit. Overall I'd give T-Mac a small edge for the RS.

Postseason

Kobe: 32.1/5.1/5.2 on 53.1 % TS (+2.7 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 31.7/6.7/4.7 on 56.1 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 3.7 topg

In the PS, their performances are a wash. T-Mac dragged his Orlando team to a 3-1 lead over the Pistons and then an eventual loss though I don't hold it against him. It was just a way better team turning on the jets and crushing a superstar surrounded by journeymen. The Magic should have never led 3-1 to begin with. Lakers lost to the eventual champ Spurs with Kobe playing very well so not much to nitpick against him either.
.

Considering one of the two played with Shaq and the other didn't, I would not say their performances were a wash, no. Putting the same numbers on worse efficiency next to Shaq would suggest you played significantly worse actually

[lessthanjake]

Let's do a quick Kobe vs. T-Mac comparison here, shall we...

Regular Season

Kobe: 30.0/6.9/5.9 on 55.0 %TS (+3.1 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 32.1/6.5/5.5 on 56.4 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 2.6 topg

T-Mac has an edge statistically and led an absolutely putrid roster to a 41-win pace season. And when I say putrid, this Orlando roster is actually horrific. After T-Mac, the next seven guys in minutes were Pat Garrity, Darrell Armstrong, Mike Miller, Jacques Vaughn, old-ass Shawn Kemp, Andrew DeClerq and Jervi Sasser. Yikes! There's a lot of hyperbole on this sort of thing but this team without T-Mac really wins like 15 games. It's that freaking bad. Kobe led a much better team but with way way better support. Kobe is the slightly better defender to me so that does bridge the gap just a bit. Overall I'd give T-Mac a small edge for the RS.

Postseason

Kobe: 32.1/5.1/5.2 on 53.1 % TS (+2.7 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 31.7/6.7/4.7 on 56.1 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 3.7 topg

In the PS, their performances are a wash. T-Mac dragged his Orlando team to a 3-1 lead over the Pistons and then an eventual loss though I don't hold it against him. It was just a way better team turning on the jets and crushing a superstar surrounded by journeymen. The Magic should have never led 3-1 to begin with. Lakers lost to the eventual champ Spurs with Kobe playing very well so not much to nitpick against him either.
.

Considering one of the two played with Shaq and the other didn't, I would not say their performances were a wash, no. Putting the same numbers on worse efficiency next to Shaq would suggest you played significantly worse actually

Is that right, though? On one hand, playing with a better teammate will tend to make things easier due to their gravity and whatnot. But, on the other hand, we might expect the team to run a substantial portion of their plays for their other star (in this case, Shaq). Which means that, in order to achieve the same amount of production as McGrady, we might expect Kobe to have had to have a higher percent of his shots be on broken plays and whatnot and a lower percent be on plays designed to get him his preferred opportunities. Those two factors go in opposite directions, and I’m not really sure how they cut overall. And, looking at this question more generally, it’s also not clear to me that superstar players like this actually tend to consistently be more or less efficient alongside another superstar high-volume scorer.

[OhayoKD]

Let's do a quick Kobe vs. T-Mac comparison here, shall we...

Regular Season

Kobe: 30.0/6.9/5.9 on 55.0 %TS (+3.1 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 32.1/6.5/5.5 on 56.4 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 2.6 topg

T-Mac has an edge statistically and led an absolutely putrid roster to a 41-win pace season. And when I say putrid, this Orlando roster is actually horrific. After T-Mac, the next seven guys in minutes were Pat Garrity, Darrell Armstrong, Mike Miller, Jacques Vaughn, old-ass Shawn Kemp, Andrew DeClerq and Jervi Sasser. Yikes! There's a lot of hyperbole on this sort of thing but this team without T-Mac really wins like 15 games. It's that freaking bad. Kobe led a much better team but with way way better support. Kobe is the slightly better defender to me so that does bridge the gap just a bit. Overall I'd give T-Mac a small edge for the RS.

Postseason

Kobe: 32.1/5.1/5.2 on 53.1 % TS (+2.7 rTS) with 3.5 topg
T-Mac: 31.7/6.7/4.7 on 56.1 %TS (+5.5 rTS) with 3.7 topg

In the PS, their performances are a wash. T-Mac dragged his Orlando team to a 3-1 lead over the Pistons and then an eventual loss though I don't hold it against him. It was just a way better team turning on the jets and crushing a superstar surrounded by journeymen. The Magic should have never led 3-1 to begin with. Lakers lost to the eventual champ Spurs with Kobe playing very well so not much to nitpick against him either.
.

Considering one of the two played with Shaq and the other didn't, I would not say their performances were a wash, no. Putting the same numbers on worse efficiency next to Shaq would suggest you played significantly worse actually

Is that right, though? On one hand, playing with a better teammate will tend to make things easier due to their gravity and whatnot. But, on the other hand, we might expect the team to run a substantial portion of their plays for their other star (in this case, Shaq). Which means that, in order to achieve the same amount of production as McGrady, we might expect Kobe to have had to have a higher percent of his shots be on broken plays and whatnot and a lower percent be on plays designed to get him his preferred opportunities. Those two factors go in opposite directions, and I’m not really sure how they cut overall. And, looking at this question more generally, it’s also not clear to me that superstar players like this actually tend to consistently be more or less efficient alongside another superstar high-volume scorer.

I don't think this it cuts both ways equally with shaq who scores or assists(creatoin isn't what's measured here) from a specific area of the court and might have the most gravity ever. (Kareem, pre-miami lebron, wilt other contenders for that).

[AEnigma]

Well there is a pretty easy way to look up how Kobe produced without Shaq this year.

With Shaq: 34.9 points and 7.4 assists per 100 possessions on 56.2% true shooting
Without Shaq: 42.8 points and 6.6 assists per 100 possessions on 50.9% true shooting

If you assess Kobe as an elite defensive wing still, or think he fits with other stars better than McGrady does, I understand preferring him to McGrady as an overall player, but offensively I do not think Kobe reaches that level until 2006.

[One_and_Done]

15 wins for that Magic team might be generous btw. Without T-Mac they didn't have cast single starting quality player other than maybe Mike Miller, and most of their rotation for fringe NBA guys or G-Leaguer quality. The next year, when T-Mac had back injuries, the team was 2-13 in games he missed. From 02 to 04 they were 6-23 in games T-Mac wasn't starting.

That's quite misleading representation of facts:

2001-03 Magic were 8-10 without Tmac (36 wins pace).
2001-03 Magic were 121-107 with Tmac (44 wins pace).

2004 Magic were 2-13 without Tmac (11 wins pace).
2004 Magic were 19-48 with Tmac (23 wins pace).

Tmac didn't carry sub-20 wins teams to the playoffs, simply because the team became considerably worse in 2004. 2004 Magic didn't have a single 2003 player from top 6 minutes played other than Tracy (no Garrity, Armstrong, Miller, Vaughn and Kemp).

What's the point of using 2004 for the sample when rosters are completely different?

Your sample is more misleading, because T-Mac had back issues in 2004, and because the previous 3 year sample consists of 18 games spread out in clumps of 4-1, 1-5, and 3-5 (once you take out the game T-Mac wasn't healthy enough to start in and was held to 25 mins in). Closer inspection reveals:

- In 01 the 4 wins the Magic eeked out without T-Mac were against 4 terrible teams (25 win Hawks twice, 23 win Vancouver once, and the Cavs without Z-Ill; the Cavs were 15-41 that year without Z-Ill).
- In every other year they were a losing team without T-Mac

I don't think the 04 Magic support cast was worse either; the 03 team started fat Shawn Kemp and DeClercq. The 04 team had guys like still solidish 30 year old Juwan Howard, Lue, Bogans, Gooden and Stevenson. Not good players, but I think a good argument can be made they were better than Fat Kemp, Garrity, D.Armstrong, etc. The 03 team had Miller, but only for 49 games and the Magic played better after the Magic swapped him for Gooden.

[AEnigma]

So this is going to be like with Bird where an abstract gesture at “back issues”, despite offensive production right on par with his peak years, means the player immediately became dramatically worse — in this case, roughly 20 wins worse on an individual level, if you think the casts are equal…

[One_and_Done]

I mean, I think the front office wanted the team to tank once all was lost, which played a big part too. I wouldn't say 04 T-Mac was significantly worse than 03 T-Mac, but his well documented back issues clearly reduced his impact on a night to night basis.

The Magic opened 04 with a 1-19 start. That was probably due to a range of factors, but T-Mac's back problems were part of it. After that the FO likely saw all hope as lost and threw the towel in.

Aside from how his back injuries were well documented, the decline is pretty visible if you look for it. In the previous 3 Magic seasons his FG% was 451 to 457. That dropped to 417. Similarly, his 3pt% dropped from 373 over the previous three seasons down to 339.

[lessthanjake]

Well there is a pretty easy way to look up how Kobe produced without Shaq this year.

With Shaq: 34.9 points and 7.4 assists per 100 possessions on 56.2% true shooting
Without Shaq: 42.8 points and 6.6 assists per 100 possessions on 50.9% true shooting

If you assess Kobe as an elite defensive wing still, or think he fits with other stars better than McGrady does, I understand preferring him to McGrady as an overall player, but offensively I do not think Kobe reaches that level until 2006.

I don’t know that box stats from 15 games is enough to be particularly meaningful. You seem to want to use it as a baseline for what his stats would be in the absence of Shaq, but that’s just not a lot of games (for instance, we’d surely not look at a player’s stats 15 games into the season and conclude that that’s how it would end). That said, looking at PBPstats data regarding what happened with Shaq off the court, it does seem like Kobe’s efficiency tended to be lower with Shaq off the court during their years together, albeit not generally to the same degree as the specific not-very-big sample in 2002-03 that you point to. Overall, between 2000-01 and 2003-04 (the years PBPstats has data), with Shaq off the court, Kobe had a 52.7% TS%, with 41.54 points per 100 possessions. With Shaq on the court, it was 56.3% TS% with 32.33 points per 100 possessions. Obviously, the efficiency is better with Shaq, but it’s not as pronounced as in the smaller sample you were using. And the difference in production is significant. It’s not surprising that Kobe would have lower efficiency when producing a good deal more—there’s definitely a trade-off there. My point was about what the effect on efficiency is from being alongside another great high-volume scorer if the production is similar to another player who isn’t alongside such a player. Can we really say from this data that if Kobe hadn’t scaled up his production without Shaq then he still would’ve had lower efficiency? I don’t really know that we can.

And, importantly, these numbers also come in the context of a team that is more used to focusing its offense around Shaq. That sort of thing matters, because teams become more well-oiled machines at getting the main guy his preferred looks, so you’d expect a second-fiddle player to do worse in one-off games and limited minutes without that guy than he would if that were the team’s general situation all the time. This is probably demonstrated fairly aptly by Kobe himself, who, as noted above, did tend to be less efficient without Shaq in the years they played together, but who then didn’t have an efficiency drop-off when Shaq left the team permanently. In the three years after Shaq left the Lakers, Kobe scored 40.3 points per 100 possessions on a TS% of 56.70%. In other words, when Shaq wasn’t on the team, Kobe produced about as much as he had without Shaq on the court in the Shaq years, but at an efficiency that was very similar to what he produced with Shaq on the court in those years. This doesn’t suggest that Kobe’s production/efficiency combination was improved by playing with Shaq.

All that said, I actually probably think McGrady was better than Kobe in 2002-03, so this is definitely not something I’m invested in arguing too much about.

[One_and_Done]

In the period from 00 to 04 the Lakers were a sub-500 team in games Kobe played without Shaq, and played at a 60 win pace in the games Shaq played without Kobe.

[Homer38]

In the period from 00 to 04 the Lakers were a sub-500 team in games Kobe played without Shaq, and played at a 60 win pace in the games Shaq played without Kobe.

They had also a true scrubs at the backup center who was a factor too....

[One_and_Done]

In the period from 00 to 04 the Lakers were a sub-500 team in games Kobe played without Shaq, and played at a 60 win pace in the games Shaq played without Kobe.

They had also a true scrubs at the backup center who was a factor too....

Shaq played with the exact same 'scrubs', and led the team to a 60+ win pace.

[Homer38]

In the period from 00 to 04 the Lakers were a sub-500 team in games Kobe played without Shaq, and played at a 60 win pace in the games Shaq played without Kobe.

They had also a true scrubs at the backup center who was a factor too....

Shaq played with the exact same 'scrubs', and led the team to a 60+ win pace.

Not true...I talk about the backup center that the lakers had,it was not caliber

[Homer38]

It was him the starting center when Shaq was out because he was out of shape to start the season after the three peat....

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/walkesa01.html

[Lost92Bricks]

Kobe was amazing this year but the problem is he started off slow because of knee surgery.