Retro POY '72-73 (Voting Complete)

[Sedale Threatt]

I generally do respect advanced stats, so I don't discard that out of hand. I do find it interesting when they are used with prejudice, to enhance the candidacy of some while being ignored for others. But that's another thread entirely.

Clyde is obviously a great player. It's just that, as much as he might have been a player who was better than the numbers suggest, so was that team. Absolutely everything I've ever read about the Holzman Knicks stresses how well they played collectively, and that they might have been the smartest team ever.

As such, it's hard for me to single one guy out, especially when I factor in some of the other thoughts I've already elaborated on. He just wasn't that dominant.

I guess that's what gets me more than anything. It's like I said for LeBron -- I was itching to knock him off the top spot, because I didn't think anybody who had already mentally checked out of a playoff series really deserved to be singled out. But in the end, I couldn't make a better case for anybody else. Kobe and Wade had too many flaws.

It seems like pretty much the same thing here. There's just a dearth of good candidates, in my opinion. The old guard is getting older (West, Wilt). Dr. J was great but apparently lacks sizzle without any team success. Archibald seems to have been nothing more than a statistical freak show. Cowens was good but overrated in light of his undeserved MVP.

Then you have Frazier, the best player on one of the legendary teams in NBA history. Nothing to scoff at, obviously. If this was 77 Walton we were talking about, no question. Welcome to second place, Kareem. But I guess I expect more from the top guy, especially when matched up against somebody who, if we're talking pure game, is head and shoulders above his peers.

One last thought about the LeBron comparison...if we're going to cut him slack for going against a historically great defense, should we cut Kareem slack for going against a historically great defender? Just throwing that out to chew on.

[Dr Positivity]

I have the same itch about Frazier in the top spot Sedale. Just hard for me to vote for a guy who was never in the MVP conversation throughout his career, was never a top 5 statisical guy, and who was as much the star on his team as Billups was on the Pistons. If the Celtics bounce NY in the ECF, Frazier does about as well as in 74, which is a handful of 5th place sneak-ons. How come Frazier is in contention for #1 but Jerry West hasn't even been mentioned once? West put up 23/9/4 with a 23 PER, made 1st team All-NBA over Frazier (+ finished higher in MVP voting despite 69 GP), was still a 1st team defensive guy, and led a 60 win team. Shouldn't that be pretty close to Frazier's resume?

I dunno this just seems like one of the weirdest years to vote for on the top. It definitely feels shaky to put Kareem there (I didn't realize HOW bad his efficiency in that series was at first - .447 TS% is so bad that his offensive win shares were actually negative for the playoffs). Can't vote for Erving, Tiny, or Lanier despite great stats, as they didn't win. Hondo's off my list cause of his playoff injury which I always ding players for.

Maybe I'll just vote for Cowens. 68 wins, MVP, maybe would've won title if Hondo didn't get injured. Anybody who can be the best player on a team that good is doing something right. Like a Gimley dwarf version of Walton/Russell

[Sedale Threatt]

I have the same itch about Frazier in the top spot Sedale. Just hard for me to vote for a guy who was never in the MVP conversation throughout his career, was never a top 5 statisical guy, and who was as much the star on his team as Billups was on the Pistons. If the Celtics bounce NY in the ECF, Frazier does about as well as in 74, which is a handful of 5th place sneak-ons. How come Frazier is in contention for #1 but Jerry West hasn't even been mentioned once? West put up 23/9/4 with a 23 PER, made 1st team All-NBA over Frazier (+ finished higher in MVP voting despite 69 GP), was still a 1st team defensive guy, and led a 60 win team. Shouldn't that be pretty close to Frazier's resume?

I dunno this just seems like one of the weirdest years to vote for on the top. It definitely feels shaky to put Kareem there (I didn't realize HOW bad his efficiency in that series was at first - .447 TS% is so bad that his offensive win shares were actually negative for the playoffs). Can't vote for Erving, Tiny, or Lanier despite great stats, as they didn't win. Hondo's off my list cause of his playoff injury which I always ding players for.

Maybe I'll just vote for Cowens. 68 wins, MVP, maybe would've won title if Hondo didn't get injured. Anybody who can be the best player on a team that good is doing something right. Like a Gimley dwarf version of Walton/Russell

Yeah, I saw your previous post and I agree completely -- great as he was, Clyde just isn't on that tier.

It's totally fair to knock Kareem. That was probably the worst playoff series of his career. I just think he had such a substantial lead over a pretty weak cast of candidates that it's easier to tolerate than it otherwise might be.

[Doctor MJ]

Maybe I'll just vote for Cowens. 68 wins, MVP, maybe would've won title if Hondo didn't get injured. Anybody who can be the best player on a team that good is doing something right. Like a Gimley dwarf version of Walton/Russell

Lemme get this straight. You don't want to vote for a guy just cause he's on the champs, but you'll vote for a guy who wins the MVP with worse statistics (lower PER, lower WS) only because the voters overestimated his team wrongly thinking that they would be the champs?

A lot of the concerns about Frazier are real, but let's be clear: Frazier finished 4th in the MVP race in '70 when people thought his team would win the title, and he was decreed to be the 2nd best player on his team, and finished 6th this year as the star of the team thought to be 4th best in the league.

I don't think there's any doubt that he'd have been ahead of at least all but Kareem, Tiny, and Wilt if they had been the favorites to win the title this year. Then of course they went and won the title, which I'd hope would count for more than just being the title favorites.

Personally, while Tiny's impressive, I'm extremely skeptical of a point guard who plays like that. The top spot from the NBA is definitely between Kareem, Wilt, and Frazier for me. (I don't think anyone from the ABA will win over that trio, but I'm still thinking on it)

[Manuel Calavera]

Didn't the players/coaches/GMs votes for the MVP this year (and any year prior to the merger)?

[Dr Positivity]

The Knicks won 57 games. That hasn't stopped anyone from getting MVP votes. The Celtics never got close to their 68 win season again, but Cowens still finished top 4 the following 3 years with 73 Knicks like seasons

Racism might have an impact. But that didn't stop Walt from finishing behind Wilt and Tiny. (and Kareem, but that's a given) and other players in the surrounding years

More likely is voters at the time thought Cowens was better. As did they in the following 3 years. Now not all stock should be put into MVP voting, but like I said, anyone who is the star of a 68 win team deserves a real look and I seriously doubt Frazier could ever lead a team to that heights. He had as stacked a team as you can get in these Knicks and topped at 60 and 57. Cowens' offensive games is a cross of Russell and Walton's (and the 3 of them have proven that's a very potent, more than stats impact), defensively he is very very good, though not elite, and he's a dominant rebounder. If Cowens game was Russell/Walton with 25% less defense, that's an elite star to me. Not sure if I can say that about Frazier. The Knicks beat them in the PS, but that was assisted by Hondo's shoulder injury, so I'm not putting too much stock into that matchup.

Cowens was recognized as an MVP caliber player during his 4 year statistical peak and Frazier was not. Whether that's fair is up to debate, but it's certainly not a point that should be ignored.

[Doctor MJ]

The Knicks won 57 games. That hasn't stopped anyone from getting MVP votes. The Celtics never got close to their 68 win season again, but Cowens still finished top 4 the following 3 years with 73 Knicks like seasons

Racism might have an impact. But that didn't stop Walt from finishing behind Wilt and Tiny. (and Kareem, but that's a given) and other players in the surrounding years

More likely is voters at the time thought Cowens was better. As did they in the following 3 years. Now not all stock should be put into MVP voting, but like I said, anyone who is the star of a 68 win team deserves a real look and I seriously doubt Frazier could ever lead a team to that heights. He had as stacked a team as you can get in these Knicks and topped at 60 and 57. Cowens' offensive games is a cross of Russell and Walton's (and the 3 of them have proven that's a very potent, more than stats impact), defensively he is very very good, though not elite, and he's a dominant rebounder. If Cowens game was Russell/Walton with 25% less defense, that's an elite star to me. Not sure if I can say that about Frazier. The Knicks beat them in the PS, but that was assisted by Hondo's shoulder injury, so I'm not putting too much stock into that matchup.

Cowens was recognized as an MVP caliber player during his 4 year statistical peak and Frazier was not. Whether that's fair is up to debate, but it's certainly not a point that should be ignored.

Boston had the #2 record, the #1 record, and the #2 record in those subsequent years. So first off, no, it was not similar team standing with respect to MVP consideration.

Second, if you really want to draw guys into tiers, well in '72-73 Frazier got 4 first place votes. In '73-74 Cowens only got 3. So Cowens getting less first place votes, despite being much closer to the best record than Frazier was. Nah, there's not evidence that Cowens was way more respected at this time. The Celtics just won a ton of games this year.

Okay so that was a legit debating point. I think I've shown the error in that thinking, but maybe I could be proven wrong. But then you go into land again.

anyone who is the star of a 68 win team deserves a real look and I seriously doubt Frazier could ever lead a team to that heights. He had as stacked a team as you can get in these Knicks and topped at 60 and 57

What the heck man? Winning 68 games is really not a big deal if you can't close the deal. As we saw with the Mavericks a few years back, a great team can run their record up to all-time great levels if they're lucky and they really care to. The Celtics this year had only the 3rd best record in the league - and no SRS this year was as good as the '70 Knicks. This Celtic team was not an all-time great team that just got unlucky. They lost because they weren't as good as their record to start with, and the Frazier and the Knicks rose up in the playoffs.

I dunno man. Any argument for Cowens over Frazier this year that doesn't start out with "Of course Frazier has the greater team success but..." just makes me shake my head. The ring's the thing my man.

[Dr Positivity]

Boston had the #2 record, the #1 record, and the #2 record in those subsequent years. So first off, no, it was not similar team standing with respect to MVP consideration.

NY had #1 in 70, #2 in 71, #4 in 73 (but with 57 Ws). Knicks won enough games that if the voters wanted to garner Frazier and MVP candidate like Cowens 73, 75, that wouldn't be an excuse.

Second, if you really want to draw guys into tiers, well in '72-73 Frazier got 4 first place votes. In '73-74 Cowens only got 3. So Cowens getting less first place votes, despite being much closer to the best record than Frazier was. Nah, there's not evidence that Cowens was way more respected at this time. The Celtics just won a ton of games this year.

Neither guy was in the conversation that year. Cowens however did get a ton of points in 75 and 76 (300+) more than Frazier, ever, to go along with his 73 win. Frazier getting 4th in '70 doesn't mean much to me because that was a 3 man race with Reed, West, Kareem getting all the votes and Frazier being left with 4 1st place votes and 50 points (more or less what he matched in following years, despite lower rankings). Cowens was a 300point+ guy in 73, 75, and 76 indicating a much higher recognition peak

anyone who is the star of a 68 win team deserves a real look and I seriously doubt Frazier could ever lead a team to that heights. He had as stacked a team as you can get in these Knicks and topped at 60 and 57

What the heck man? Winning 68 games is really not a big deal if you can't close the deal. As we saw with the Mavericks a few years back, a great team can run their record up to all-time great levels if they're lucky and they really care to. The Celtics this year had only the 3rd best record in the league - and no SRS this year was as good as the '70 Knicks. This Celtic team was not an all-time great team that just got unlucky. They lost because they weren't as good as their record to start with, and the Frazier and the Knicks rose up in the playoffs.

I dunno man. Any argument for Cowens over Frazier this year that doesn't start out with "Of course Frazier has the greater team success but..." just makes me shake my head. The ring's the thing my man.

[/quote]

I regret adding a Frazier dig to that sentence. The 68 Ws comment is more of a compliment to Cowens. I don't know if it's possible for a guy who's the star of a 68 win team (and I'd call 07 Dirk one) to not be a superstar impact guy, and if Cowens didn't have a clear superstar/MVP caliber player's impact this year, I don't know what would be the results of someone who did. But you're right about the point differential and the 70 and 73 Knicks being more or less as good as those Celtics.

To me Walt Frazier is kind of a PG version of Pippen. Which is great. I love Pippen, I love Frazier. But if Pippen's leading title teams, it's as a complete collaborative unit which likely dominates defensively, which is what these Knicks teams were. And if Pippen is the RPOY of a season, something went really wrong that year.

Meh I dunno, I'm considering Frazier for the top 2 more than I originally was. I have Kareem, Frazier, Cowens in the mix, and I still think the gap between Frazier and West in this thread (one splitting #1/#2, the other on 0 lists) is bizarre and should be addressed

[JordansBulls]

To me Walt Frazier is kind of a PG version of Pippen. Which is great. I love Pippen, I love Frazier. But if Pippen's leading title teams, it's as a complete collaborative unit which likely dominates defensively, which is what these Knicks teams were. And if Pippen is the RPOY of a season, something went really wrong that year.

Meh I dunno, I'm considering Frazier for the top 2 more than I originally was. I have Kareem, Frazier, Cowens in the mix, and I still think the gap between Frazier and West in this thread (one splitting #1/#2, the other on 0 lists) is bizarre and should be addressed

Well Pippen wasn't leading his teams in the season and playoffs in Win Shares and PER like Frazier was. Not only that but Frazier led the entire playoffs in WS this season in 1973.
Also in 1972 Frazier led in total points in the playoffs.

[Dr Positivity]

I think the team success of Russell, Cowens, Walton considered together paints an interesting picture. Russell went 11 of 13, Walton looked like on his way to 3-6 easily, Cowens won 2 in a short 73-76 peak and had another 68 win season hampered by Havlicek's injury. All 3 don't have dominant stats, but crushed in team success. All led awesome offenses despite less than stellar scoring numbers. I think it's clear that at least pre 3pt line, team results indicates that probably the most valuable thing to have was a C who scores 16ppg+, has 16rpg+, with elite passing and fastbreaking starting skills, and who play hard defense and are amazing leaders. All of the teams with these guys killed it. Now I think Cowens is clearly worse than Russell or Walton (continuing a LOTR allusion I made earlier - Russell is Aragorn, Walton is the guy Orlando Bloom played, and Cowens is Gimley the dwarf), but still, maybe his impact shouldn't be underestimated with the love Russell and Walton get for those intangibles

pseudo edit - I forgot Wes Unseld who made 4 finals in the 70s, can kind of fit under that umbrella too

[Optimism Prime]

I think the team success of Russell, Cowens, Walton considered together paints an interesting picture. Russell went 11 of 13, Walton looked like on his way to 3-6 easily, Cowens won 2 in a short 73-76 peak and had another 68 win season hampered by Havlicek's injury. All 3 don't have dominant stats, but crushed in team success. All led awesome offenses despite less than stellar scoring numbers. I think it's clear that at least pre 3pt line, team results indicates that probably the most valuable thing to have was a C who scores 16ppg+, has 16rpg+, with elite passing and fastbreaking starting skills, and who play hard defense and are amazing leaders. All of the teams with these guys killed it. Now I think Cowens is clearly worse than Russell or Walton (continuing a LOTR allusion I made earlier - Russell is Aragorn, Walton is the guy Orlando Bloom played, and Cowens is Gimley the dwarf), but still, maybe his impact shouldn't be underestimated with the love Russell and Walton get for those intangibles

pseudo edit - I forgot Wes Unseld who made 4 finals in the 70s, can kind of fit under that umbrella too

Orlando Bloom played Legolas; and it's spelled Gimli.

Sorry, Tolkien fanatic here.

[Doctor MJ]

NY had #1 in 70, #2 in 71, #4 in 73 (but with 57 Ws). Knicks won enough games that if the voters wanted to garner Frazier and MVP candidate like Cowens 73, 75, that wouldn't be an excuse.

Well in 70 & 71, Reed got the nod as top MVP candidate for the Knicks. That can be used against Frazier, but it's not like it's a mystery what happened there.

Second, if you really want to draw guys into tiers, well in '72-73 Frazier got 4 first place votes. In '73-74 Cowens only got 3. So Cowens getting less first place votes, despite being much closer to the best record than Frazier was. Nah, there's not evidence that Cowens was way more respected at this time. The Celtics just won a ton of games this year.

Neither guy was in the conversation that year. Cowens however did get a ton of points in 75 and 76 (300+) more than Frazier, ever, to go along with his 73 win. Frazier getting 4th in '70 doesn't mean much to me because that was a 3 man race with Reed, West, Kareem getting all the votes and Frazier being left with 4 1st place votes and 50 points (more or less what he matched in following years, despite lower rankings). Cowens was a 300point+ guy in 73, 75, and 76 indicating a much higher recognition peak

I was talking about '72-73 Frazier and '73-74 Cowens, not '73-74 for both. The point being that when we next saw Cowens have more normal regular season team success, he didn't do any better than Frazier, so it's kind of crazy to assert that '72-73 Cowens MVP edge wasn't due to his team winning almost 70 games.

Years are '73-74 are irrelevant for the point I'm making. Yes, in '74-75, after the Celtics had just won a title, and then finished tied for best record in the league with Hondo now very much past his prime, Cowens MVP standing improved. That can be used for Cowens over Frazier generally, but does not retroactively change what people thought of Cowens previously.

I regret adding a Frazier dig to that sentence.

Okay cool. I get carried away too.

[Doctor MJ]

I think the team success of Russell, Cowens, Walton considered together paints an interesting picture. Russell went 11 of 13, Walton looked like on his way to 3-6 easily, Cowens won 2 in a short 73-76 peak and had another 68 win season hampered by Havlicek's injury. All 3 don't have dominant stats, but crushed in team success. All led awesome offenses despite less than stellar scoring numbers. I think it's clear that at least pre 3pt line, team results indicates that probably the most valuable thing to have was a C who scores 16ppg+, has 16rpg+, with elite passing and fastbreaking starting skills, and who play hard defense and are amazing leaders. All of the teams with these guys killed it. Now I think Cowens is clearly worse than Russell or Walton (continuing a LOTR allusion I made earlier - Russell is Aragorn, Walton is the guy Orlando Bloom played, and Cowens is Gimley the dwarf), but still, maybe his impact shouldn't be underestimated with the love Russell and Walton get for those intangibles

pseudo edit - I forgot Wes Unseld who made 4 finals in the 70s, can kind of fit under that umbrella too

I think you should be really careful linking those 3.

Both Russell and Walton were consider the best defensive players in the game primarily through their stellar shotblocking. Cowens doesn't block shots.

Both Russell and Walton led their championship teams in assists. Cowens did not.

Russell & Walton's showed clear evidence of being quite a bit better than any other team in the league. Cowen's teams squeaked out 2 championships over the course of several years with a huge amount of controversy.

Walton's TS% was FAR higher than Cowens, and Cowens was only slightly higher than Russell's despite the fact that Russell played in an era where lower % didn't hurt you that much.

Also on the other side of things, the Russell-led offenses really weren't impressive statistically. Not saying he was doing a bad job of things. Their defense was out of this world - and Russell's ability to start the break allow such a focus on defense without the offense doing even worse, but it's not the same as running a really successful offense.

[Dr Positivity]

My take on IMO, the most difficult year in the project and the one I've found myself most disagreeing with my own posts and wishing I read more before talking, after looking at things over. I particularly regret the Kareem "EASILY" comment on page 1 without looking into the details of his rd. 1 collapse. That's going to look really bad by the end of this write-up.

My criteria comes down to which season gets a team closest to a title.

Kareem is by far the best RS player but for whatever reason is beyond awful in the playoffs. Combination of Thurmond's d, injury looks to be the case. The question is, how far does a Kareem who dominates the regular season but doesn't show up in game for the playoffs at all, get you to a title? If you're good enough to make it past the 1st round with a shoddy Kareem... or play someone bad enough, Kareem is the pick by far as he'd likely be fine after rd. 1 this year. Furthermore he's still boarding, playing league best defense, and getting opposing players in foul trouble, as well as opening up the game for others. So this is not a situation like Walton 78 where his season had almost no impact on helping the Blazers a title (IMO)

Cowens is an elite rebounder, a pretty good defender, scores 20ppg, and a 4apg+ C. He's good enough outside his stats that for voters to pick him for MVP over a prime Kareem on a 60 win team isn't seen as a joke. Cowens hefty MVP points in 75, 76 also prove this was not a fluke brought on by a 68 win season. I know I can build an elite team and title winner around 73 Cowens. Is it easier to build a title winner around Cowens than a Kareem who doesn't show up in Round 1? Depends if Kareem goes back to normal without the Thurmond variable, or if it's on him. Kareem has to be depended on to deliver against good d - so I'll take away the benefit of the doubt and punish him for that. I'll put Cowens ahead of Kareem which makes sense as the MVP winner, then seeing his competition shoot his case in the foot. Using my closest to a title concept, to take Kareem is all or nothing... if my team is good enough to make it past rd. 1 with him in crap mode, I'm golden. But that's way too tall a task. Cowens is the better pick. In the playoffs your'e better off with a steady A-/B+ for 4 rounds than a D in Rd. 1 and A+ the rest of the way, cause the PS is a game of elimination

Wilt puts up 13, 18, 4+ on a ridiculous 73%. Tough to get him over him not crushing a hobbling Reed, but otherwise excellent resume

Frazier and West have similar seasons - 20ppg, 7-9apg, 1st team d and took their teams to the finals. Frazier has younger legs, plays more games in the RS, and rebounds better. So I put Frazier ahead of West but they will follow each other on the list.

Tiny, Erving, Lanier - Statistically awesome, didn't make the playoffs. Note about Tiny, his 46+ mpg is really impressive. And actually per 36 he only takes 20.6 shots a game which is not chucker level. Still, I struggle with young players who put up a ton of stats that don't lead to winning. Do Frazier and West win more because they had better teams, or because their experience made them better players? Probably both, but I'll give the guys who won the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather go to war with this year's versions of Frazier/West than Tiny/Erving/Lanier, that's all I really need to know

Havlicek - Not with the injured shoulder

So I have Cowens ahead of Kareem, Frazier ahead of of West, Wilt somewhere in there. Those are my 5. If I had to choose one season to win a title without knowing anything else, which order? I take Wilt over Kareem. Still elite rebounding/d and if he's not assertive scoring in the finals, that's ok because he's only a 13ppg guy. Again, needing a team good enough to win with rd. 1 Kareem is too big a hole to get past. And after reading the links about about the Braess Paradox and etc. a couple weeks ago, I think players who score at an extremely high percentage in low doses have a very big, underrated impact on the game. And as much as it feels wrong to put Frazier and West who aren't close to Kareem as players skillset wise at this point, once again, I believe it's a safer bet to take them and not worry about rd. 1 (again, steady B+ over D then A+ analogy fits). So Frazier and West ahead of Kareem. What about those two against Wilt? I'll take Frazier/West if only because I like them more mentally than Wilt. That's enough of a tiebreaker. Kareem holds off Tiny and Erving at 5, his dominant RS play is enough when considering Tiny and Erving can't even guarantee a playoff team. I like Cowens over Frazier and West as an elite C with his anchoring of the team's rebounding, good defending, and underrated impact on a team's offense and a clear MVP caliber RS. Cowens over Wilt because of extra offense and again, I like him more mentally and leader of a team. The tiebreaker that made me choose Frazier/West over Wilt, is not true for Cowens. That's enough I guess.

1. Cowens
2. Frazier
3. West
4. Wilt
5. Kareem

This year is disgusting. Cowens at 1 + Frazier and a just before the morgue West and Wilt ahead of prime Kareem? I wish we could take half the entries from 75 and put them into this year.

[Doctor MJ]

Didn't the players/coaches/GMs votes for the MVP this year (and any year prior to the merger)?

Players voted through '79-80.

[Doctor MJ]

I have the same itch about Frazier in the top spot Sedale. Just hard for me to vote for a guy who was never in the MVP conversation throughout his career, was never a top 5 statisical guy, and who was as much the star on his team as Billups was on the Pistons. If the Celtics bounce NY in the ECF, Frazier does about as well as in 74, which is a handful of 5th place sneak-ons. How come Frazier is in contention for #1 but Jerry West hasn't even been mentioned once? West put up 23/9/4 with a 23 PER, made 1st team All-NBA over Frazier (+ finished higher in MVP voting despite 69 GP), was still a 1st team defensive guy, and led a 60 win team. Shouldn't that be pretty close to Frazier's resume?

I realize I didn't talk about this at all.

Why did West beat out Frazier for regular season accolades? Undoubtedly this had a ton to do with the fact that the Lakers had just won the title with arguably the greatest season in history, and we're looking a hell of a lot stronger than the Knicks this season. While contemporaries probably looked at the Celtics as the favorite, and the Lakers as the #2, the Lakers actually had the best SRS in the league - so I'm sure many thought the team was poised to push for a repeat.

You mention that West had the lead despite his missed time, but probably isn't a reflection of "West is so much better than Frazier that he's better even with the missed time" as much as it is that because of how well the Lakers had been doing many just ignored the missed time. Looking back at matters, Frazier played about 30% more minutes in the regular season and way more minutes in the post-season. Frazier also didn't have the luxury of a superstar teammate playing way WAY more minutes than him like West did with Wilt. West had the PER edge, but Frazier had the WS & WS/48 edge. And then of course there's the matter that West's Lakers were massive favorite to win the finals over Frazier's Knicks, and they got upset 4-1, which is basically a blow out.

Also getting into the Finals MVP for a minute: While Reed did rise up from the grave for the finals, he only played 150 minutes in the finals while Frazier played 230. This was a defensive series where the Knicks got killed on the glass (really could have used a big man playing more minutes), and won by holding the Lakers to a terrible 48% TS (a credit to the guy contributing big defense for big minutes). Reed won the finals MVP because he had a great clinching game, Frazier didn't totally kill him in box score stats over the series (and of course, maybe there was a general racist bias going on, I don't know about that stuff). It really seems quite crazy though to think that Reed really had more impact in that series than Frazier considering how little he played.

So yeah, Wilt over Frazier has a strong case, but not West over Frazier, this year.

[ElGee]

This year is pretty crazy, and I've had similar thoughts along the lines Mufasa is expressing here. I haven't put the treads to the track yet, so I don't know if it will be this messy!

Going to try and scoop some Si articles tonight or tomorrow afternoon. Before then, a quick note on pace estimation going forward (or backward?).

Pace Estimation pre-1974

The FG + FT*.44 coefficient used for TS% is a really good 1:1 pace estimator. So, for much of the last 20 years, there is a roughly a 1:1 ratio between that figure (FG+0.44*FT) per game and pace. Turnovers were a bit higher in the 70s so the number dips just below 1. (Based on playing style and turnover numbers from the 70s, my guess is somewhere between 0.96 and 0.98 is what we're looking at, on average, in the 60s.)

In terms of margin of error using an estimation like this, the highest turnover team on record is the 77 Nuggets, who played at a 111.2 pace. They turned it over 24.5 times per game, and using the FG+FT 1:1 ratio yields an estimate 5.2 possessions slower. On the other side, the 06 Pistons turned it over fewer than any team (11.6 per game) and the estimation would place them 5 possessions too fast. Of course, the 06 Pistons are out of our ballpark, as the lowest TO teams before 1980 were 13.8 (1975 ABA) 14.0 (1968 ABA) and in the NBA, 16.2 (76 Cleveland). The NBA liked turnovers then.

So, when we last leave team TO's in 1974, the league average is 20.8 TO/g (0.97:1 ratio using the estimation), with a league of high of 23.3 and a low of 17.8. If we used the league average (0.97:1) for every team in 1974, no team would be off by more than 3.6 possessions per game, with a mean error of 0.5 possessions/game (std = 1.64) and 9 teams within 1 possession of actual pace.

[andykeikei]

Can any one describe how Bob Love played, eg. any modern comparison? I could hardly find any playing footage of him. Looking at his stats and since he played with a SF Chet Walker, I assume he played as a PF. However he seemed to be a weak rebounder relative to his position.

Just in case you miss this question on the first page

[Dr Positivity]

I have the same itch about Frazier in the top spot Sedale. Just hard for me to vote for a guy who was never in the MVP conversation throughout his career, was never a top 5 statisical guy, and who was as much the star on his team as Billups was on the Pistons. If the Celtics bounce NY in the ECF, Frazier does about as well as in 74, which is a handful of 5th place sneak-ons. How come Frazier is in contention for #1 but Jerry West hasn't even been mentioned once? West put up 23/9/4 with a 23 PER, made 1st team All-NBA over Frazier (+ finished higher in MVP voting despite 69 GP), was still a 1st team defensive guy, and led a 60 win team. Shouldn't that be pretty close to Frazier's resume?

I realize I didn't talk about this at all.

Why did West beat out Frazier for regular season accolades? Undoubtedly this had a ton to do with the fact that the Lakers had just won the title with arguably the greatest season in history, and we're looking a hell of a lot stronger than the Knicks this season. While contemporaries probably looked at the Celtics as the favorite, and the Lakers as the #2, the Lakers actually had the best SRS in the league - so I'm sure many thought the team was poised to push for a repeat.

You mention that West had the lead despite his missed time, but probably isn't a reflection of "West is so much better than Frazier that he's better even with the missed time" as much as it is that because of how well the Lakers had been doing many just ignored the missed time. Looking back at matters, Frazier played about 30% more minutes in the regular season and way more minutes in the post-season. Frazier also didn't have the luxury of a superstar teammate playing way WAY more minutes than him like West did with Wilt. West had the PER edge, but Frazier had the WS & WS/48 edge. And then of course there's the matter that West's Lakers were massive favorite to win the finals over Frazier's Knicks, and they got upset 4-1, which is basically a blow out.

Also getting into the Finals MVP for a minute: While Reed did rise up from the grave for the finals, he only played 150 minutes in the finals while Frazier played 230. This was a defensive series where the Knicks got killed on the glass (really could have used a big man playing more minutes), and won by holding the Lakers to a terrible 48% TS (a credit to the guy contributing big defense for big minutes). Reed won the finals MVP because he had a great clinching game, Frazier didn't totally kill him in box score stats over the series (and of course, maybe there was a general racist bias going on, I don't know about that stuff). It really seems quite crazy though to think that Reed really had more impact in that series than Frazier considering how little he played.

So yeah, Wilt over Frazier has a strong case, but not West over Frazier, this year.

I think Frazier has an edge over West. More GP, big playoff performances, and I suspect with his age he was the better defender. My qualm is more the seasons are similar enough that there shouldn't be as big a gap as Frazier at #1/#2 across the board and West making no ballots. I think that represents too big a value on the Knicks winning the title and the Lakers not, when the latter was almost as good. But I have both pretty high - I think West is just getting a little underrated for what was still a top notch, just slightly past prime offensive season. Sort of Kobe 09-10 ish. And I don`t think his 1st team all-d was based on reputation, just cause in 74 he was still averaging 3 stls and 1 blk a game which is pretty crazy for a 35 year old guy

[ronnymac2]

Sadly, Pete Maravich picked the wrong year to have team success. This is too strong a year. He needs props though. 26/7 in the REG SEA for a 46 win team. He was top 10 in PER. He only lost to the powerful Celtics in the playoffs after averaging 26/7.

Also Willie Wise deserves recognition. He was the best wing defender in ABA history, able to guard wings to full-sized forwards. I forget what year, but he shut down George McGinnis in a playoff series. This year, he dropped 22/8/4 for a 55 win team, then dominated in the playoffs over 10 games with 25/8/4 on 50% shooting and 8.3 FTA. He could handle the ball pretty well for a swingman back then.

I know it looks like I always give these two joke HM's, but I really do think they are awesome and deserve mentions in these threads.


Cowens looks so Steve Nash-like. Value. To his own team. Value. Not better or best. Value. Doesn't take anything away from him, but...he's "only" a valuable player.

I can't wait until Wilt's buddy comes along in 69 so we can all see what value vs. who's better really is. Even that rivalry has a bunch of weird wrinkles from year to year that distort the picture from being a true representation of value vs. who's better. But it goes on for a decade, so it's good enough.


Hondo is out because of the injury. His good numbers in the playoffs don't do justice to his injury. In human terms, his performance was awe-inspiring. IIRC, the dude was playing with his left arm the whole time against the great Knicks. He couldn't use his right arm for anything really. Tremendous skill and courage. If I can't give him a vote, I need to give him this.

Also, I think we may have screwed Hondo with such little mention in 1974.


Cowens, Frazier, Erving, KAJ, Wilt, and West are on my radar. No to Mcadoo because he was a rookie. No to Barry because, well, something happened in the playoffs that made him not so great. Doesn't catch many tiebreakers anywhere else in a strong year. No to Oscar. He was good this year though.

Ohh, Archibald is in the running, too. Nobody else from the ABA will get in over my NBA contenders this year- only Dr. J.


Here's a little piece on Willie Wise. TrueLAFan taught me about him a while back for an all-time league and showed me this. Willie beat McGinnis's ass down in the 74 playoffs.

http://www.remembertheaba.com/ABAArticles/PattisonArticleWise.html