#24 Highest Peak of All Time (Moses '83 wins)

[SDChargers#1]

Vote: Moses Malone 1983

The reason I have 1983 Moses over 1982 Moses is playoffs playoffs playoffs. Moses was unstoppable in the postseason, and led his team on the great post season run at the time (only surpassed by the '01 Lakers).

As was mentioned earlier, most of Moses' supporting cast fell off during the playoffs, especially Dr. J who went ice cold scoring. Despite this the Sixers didn't miss a beat, and dismantled the Lakers, mostly behind Moses severely outplaying Kareem.

[ElGee]

Well I don't entirely follow you on "playoffs" when 82 Moses played 3 games against a much harder matchup for him. I feel like we've been down this road repeatedly in the project though...

One thing to note is that while 84 Moses clearly wasn't all "there" the way 83 Moses was, he still averaged 23-13 111 ORtg, down from 25-15 116 ORtg in 83. He missed 11 games and the team was 0 SRS...but just +2.7 with him all year. Erving didn't shoot well in the 83 PS, but I'm not seeing the team falling apart at all. Reminds me of the 03 Spurs in which people are looking at the final product and ignoring the distributions of each game.

G1 v NY Jones, Richardson, Toney Cheeks and Iavaroni combine to shoot 23-35. New York commits 21 TOV.

G2 v NY The Knicks lose due to a 9-point 3rd Q. Cheeks has 26-6-6 (61% TS). Erving 20-7 (8-20). Johnson 10-8 off the bench.

G3 v NY Erving 20-11-5 (9-19). Cheeks 24-7 (65% TS). Toney has a bad game in 19 min but Iavaroni and Johnson are hyper efficient, Edwards in double-figures off the bench.

G4 v NY Toney has 14-5 (7-14), Erving 18-7 (7-15) and Cheeks is contained. King goes off for New YOrk (35 pts) but Philly wins by 2.

*******
G1 v Mil An OT win. Toney has 22 (11-15). Cheeks 26-7-6 4 steals (64% TS). Moses only 14-12 in this game, Moncrief is held (by someone) to 7 pts on 1-9 shooting. Phi still wins.

G2 v Mil Erving a bad game (6 pts 5 reb), but Toney scores 20 (8-20) and Cheeks 15-4-4. Another 18 Mil turnovers.

G3 v Mil Erving a big qame -- 26-8-8 (10-16). M. Johnson 6-20 for 12 pts for Mil.

G4 v Mil Bucks win finally as Moses has another "down" game (17-12, 7-19 FG)

G5 v Mil Toney has 30 on 78% TS to go with 7 reb and 5 ast. Erving 24-10 on 10-19 shooting and 3 blocks.
********

G1 v LAL Toney 25 (9-18). Richardson 15 off the bench. Erving 20-10 (8-18).
G2 v LAL Cheeks 19-8 (8-16 FG), Toney 19 (7-18), Jones 14-5 (6-11). Erving and Jones block 5 shots and Philly has 10 steals.
G3 v LAL Erving 21-12 (8-16), Toney 21 (8-19), Jones 17-7. Magic Johnson was 3-12.
G4 v LAL Erving 21-5-4 (8-13). Toney 23-9 (60% TS) 8 TOV, Jones 13 more and Cheeks 20-7 (7-10 FG). They had another 9 steals.

Of course Moses matches up very well with Kareem and abused him on the glass.I know not a single Moses voter will back off 83, but at least this can be referenced for posterity.They only played 13 PS games. The bench was often excellent. The defense was excellent all around, especially forcing TOV. And there were spots where Cheeks was awesome, then Erving, then Toney...obviously the mark of a great team. And Moses wasn't guarding Squid, Marques, Bernard, Sparrow, Magic, etc.

[fatal9]

edit: elgee beat me to it

Moses was unstoppable in the postseason, and led his team on the great post season run at the time (only surpassed by the '01 Lakers).

As was mentioned earlier, most of Moses' supporting cast fell off during the playoffs, especially Dr. J who went ice cold scoring. Despite this the Sixers didn't miss a beat, and dismantled the Lakers, mostly behind Moses severely outplaying Kareem.

This is kind of a shocking recap of things, and I'm surprised people are buying it. The only series this would be true against would be against the Knicks. This was because Toney had a thigh injury that limited his minutes and caused him to miss game 2, and overall play poorly in the series (9 ppg on 41%), but after that he was back to normal and killed the Bucks (22 ppg on 53%). The Sixers got away with it because they were clearly better than the Knicks (who were only a 44-38 team). This is the series Moses truly dominated, 31/15 on 58% shooting, was consistent game to game.

Against the Bucks, I don't see how "help" was an issue. They won game 1 with Moses getting shut down by Lanier/Bucks team defense and had a 14/12 game on 5/14 shooting. Sixers won behind great games from Cheeks (26/6/7 on 12/18 shooting) and Toney (22/5 on 11/15 shooting). Doc was great in the first half but hurt his knee which also affected his game 2 performance. Game two was a defense fueled win, but this is one where Moses came through offensively. Game 3, Doc was probably the best player in the game (26/8 on 10/16 shooting) though Moses was solid as well (struggled early against Lanier but came on strong afterwards, 25/16 on 9/16 shooting). Game 4, Moses got shut down again with 17 pts on 7/19 shooting. This is the only game I haven't seen but seems like Toney was the only one who had a good scoring game here. In game 5, Doc had 24/10 on 10/19 shooting, Toney had 30/5/7 on 14 shots. How is that for help?

The guy was playing with three all-star perimeter players and had one or two of them taking over every game. And yet now we're seeing people point out that he didn't have that much help offensively. This is also ignoring the fact he was playing behind one of the greatest perimeter defense lineups ever. As someone who has seen most of the playoff run, this is a crazy statement.


The description of Lakers series is what really confuses me. You say despite Doc's "ice cold shooting" the Sixers didn't miss a beat and dismantled the Lakers mostly behind Moses. You do realize that Doc was arguably the best Sixers player in those finals right? But I feel like here he's almost being painted as a liability. The games are on youtube (I think) for you to verify what I'm saying. I guarantee anyone who thinks Moses was far and away the finals MVP did not watch the series.

Game 1 - This was Doc's game. Incredible all-around game by him. Contributed in every facet. Making plays, sparking fast breaks, dominating on defense, rebounding, scoring, that games deserves a highlight reel on youtube (particularly the second half). Moses was good, but Doc was amazing. It's clear who's identity this team is shaped after on both ends.

Game 2 - Moses is in foul trouble and doesn't play for most of the second half. He doesn't play for most of the fourth, and during "winning time", he was on the bench with his fifth foul. Philly not only maintains but extends the lead while he is out behind Doc and Cheeks' terrorizing defense. Commentators mentioning how "Lakers miss Kareem more than the Sixers miss Moses." Cheeks was the best overall player with Doc closely behind. Russell notes "Magic and Julius are the only two guys in this game who could go 1/10 from the floor and have a good game". Moses comes in with 2 minutes left and the game in hand and turns a "mediocre" 19/10 game into a "good" 24/12 game. He had no impact at all in the second half in getting the Sixers the win. None.

Game 3 - This was Moses' game. His best all around game from the entire playoff run that I've seen (though game 1 against the Knicks is right there too). Doc also had a good game, showed great poise in the third quarter was probably the best player until then, but Moses had an absolutely dominant fourth quarter.

Game 4 - Slow start for Moses but brought it later on. Moses was a BEAST on the boards but wasn't bringing much else for most of the game, and was struggling to convert shots. Doc closes out the game for the Sixers with 7 straight points for them in the last minute. Moses had a dominant rebounding game, but overall? Hard to say. Seems like Doc again had more impact on both ends (his D, particularly in the third q, was awesome, and great overall all-around game), and was the guy who closed it out for them.


This is actually something I'm curious about what other people think. I think in the entire story of Moses having a "perfect" year, Doc's finals performance gets a bit lost. I know I come off as a bit of a Moses hater because I'm always arguing against him but I will say I have him coming up right after K. Malone (between him or Dwight). It's not like I think he's chopped liver but I just haven't been presented with anything that would make me want to rank him any higher.

One thing that was special about Moses is that he can have HUGE performances that you need to win crucial games in the playoffs. He has these type of stretches over games, they come a bit randomly (like we see with Love), sometimes in the first quarter, sometimes in the second or sometimes in the fourth, where the ball starts bouncing his way and that combined with his already phenomenal offensive rebounding, turns him into a monster. When he gets into these grooves, he can absolutely tear apart your team. A players ability to "explode" for big games in the playoffs is very valuable, you need them to win in tough situations. Also given the needs of the Sixers team, Moses definitely had a large positive impact on the team but the thing is, a lot of centers could have came in and plugged the same holes to take that team over the top.

[Doctor MJ]

So at this point, I'm not really finding any of the cases for the major candidates that convincing, and the guy I keep thinking about instead if Howard.

Moses vs Howard. Really, why is it we'd think Moses was better? Howard can largely equal Moses offensive game with significantly greater defense can't he?

McGrady vs Howard. Kind of amazed it seems so clear that TMac's Magic peak is ahead of Howard's. It's not at all clear to me. I felt we got a significantly better sense of Howard's ability to lead a team to contention than we did with McGrady.

Malone vs Howard. I suppose in general I'm re-thinking Karl right now. The notion that Barkley & Malone, two contemporary power forwards, would be in consecutive spots raises red flags. To me Barkley's genius is much more salient than Malone's, and as luck would have it, we got some new RAPM data to play with going back ton '99-00, and Malone basically shows nothing for his last half decade of play. Yes some offensive impact, but defense? Nothing. The first year in question is literally the year after his 2nd MVP, and by old school metrics looks BETTER than his MVP year. WTF? I don't want to overreact to the data here, but suffice to say, I was expecting Malone would look significantly better than this. (And meanwhile Stockton keeps looking quite impressive.)

[lorak]

Game 1 - This was Doc's game. Incredible all-around game by him. Contributed in every facet. Making plays, sparking fast breaks, dominating on defense, rebounding, scoring, that games deserves a highlight reel on youtube (particularly the second half). Moses was good, but Doc was amazing. It's clear who's identity this team is shaped after on both ends.

I disagree. It was Moses whose 10 pts and 8 rbs in 2nd quarter allowed 76ers to keep up with brilliant LA's play (37 pts for Lakers in 2nd Q). And then in 2nd half he completely shut down Kareem, who didn't have even one rebound in 2nd half.

Game 2 - Moses is in foul trouble and doesn't play for most of the second half. He doesn't play for most of the fourth, and during "winning time", he was on the bench with his fifth foul.

C'monn fatal. 76ers were leading by 4 points with 8 minutes left in 4th quarter when Moses picked up his 5th foul and sit on the bench. He was replaced by "last man on the bench" - Cureton, who played surprisingly well during 5 and half minutes, but 76ers lead was still only 8 points when Moses came back with 2:30 remaining. Then he delivered clutch free throws (5) and sealed Phily win. It's similar to Jordan's situation during 1992 finals G6, when Bulls bench lead by Pippen gave them advantage. But nobody holds that against MJ like you 1983 G2 against Moses.

Game 4 - Slow start for Moses but brought it later on. Moses was a BEAST on the boards but wasn't bringing much else for most of the game,

His 15 pts and 16 rebs in 2nd half were big (probably the biggest) part of 76ers come back...

my vote: 1983 Moses

[lorak]

Malone vs Howard. I suppose in general I'm re-thinking Karl right now. The notion that Barkley & Malone, two contemporary power forwards, would be in consecutive spots raises red flags. To me Barkley's genius is much more salient than Malone's, and as luck would have it, we got some new RAPM data to play with going back ton '99-00, and Malone basically shows nothing for his last half decade of play. Yes some offensive impact, but defense? Nothing.

That's because Karl was very good man to man defender, but that kind of defense don't have much impact on overall team defense. What's matters, especially for big man, is his help D, and Karl was below average in that area and that's why in defensive RAPM he looks worse than his reputation suggest. People praise him even for his 2004 defense on Duncan, but when we look at real impact on team D in 2004, there's nothing impressive in Karl's case. The same in '00 - the one year after his MVP campaign and being all D 1st teamer...

The more closely I look at Karl the more I think he was closer to someone like Hayes (scorer similar to Karl, but much better defender) than Moses or Barkley.

[fatal9]

I disagree. It was Moses whose 10 pts and 8 rbs in 2nd quarter allowed 76ers to keep up with brilliant LA's play (37 pts for Lakers in 2nd Q). And then in 2nd half he completely shut down Kareem, who didn't have even one rebound in 2nd half.

10 points in the second quarter determined the game, especially when they were outscored 37-24 in that quarter? Doc had a brilliant all around game (20/10/9 + 5 blocks). Sixers explode in the second half with Doc dominating every facet of the game. He's playing amazing team defense, blocking/changing shots, sparking fastbreaks, scoring when they need him to, setting up teammates, grabbing rebounds in traffic. This was clearly his game.

Entire game can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9qtua040zA

People can judge for themselves who had more impact on the game, especially the second half (I don't even see how it's arguable, Moses was garbage in the second half outside of his solid post D on KAJ but Sixers also gave him good help). I'm guessing you just read the recap here: http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1983.htm, but it doesn't tell the entire story.

C'monn fatal. 76ers were leading by 4 points with 8 minutes left in 4th quarter when Moses picked up his 5th foul and sit on the bench. He was replaced by "last man on the bench" - Cureton, who played surprisingly well during 5 and half minutes, but 76ers lead was still only 8 points when Moses came back with 2:30 remaining. Then he delivered clutch free throws (5) and sealed Phily win. It's similar to Jordan's situation during 1992 finals G6, when Bulls bench lead by Pippen gave them advantage. But nobody holds that against MJ like you 1983 G2 against Moses.

Lakers were up 55-51 at halftime. Moses goes out with four fouls with four minutes left in the 3rd. Sixers defensive intensity picks up (Lakers half court offense also struggles with KAJ out) and they go from down 1 to up 4 without Malone. Moses comes back around the 10 minute mark of the fourth. Then Moses picks up his fifth foul with 8 minutes left. Sixers again extend lead from 4 to up 8 over 6 crucial minutes in the fourth behind the amazing defensive intensity of Cheeks/Cureton/Doc/Jones/Toney lineup. With around two minutes left, Moses comes back up 8, he grabs an offensive rebound, gets fouled, misses the second FT but Toney grabs the offensive rebound (which essentially ices the game). Moses then takes a shot, misses, Sixers get a stop, they are up 9 with a minute left and then Moses makes 4 FTs from that point on with the game in hand (remember teams weren't good at making threes back then). In a close game where Sixers were actually down going into the second half, they were +9 in the ~12ish minutes Moses missed. He might be their best player on the team but he barely made any impact in getting them this win.

How is this comparable to when Jordan came back (down 3 points) with 8 minutes left in the fourth quarter of game 6 and closed out the game?

His 15 pts and 16 rebs in 2nd half were big (probably the biggest) part of 76ers come back...

This I agree with. He didn't have a very good first half and was outplayed by Kareem but he had some stretches of absolute dominance in the second half. Was struggling to convert shots at times but like I mentioned initially, he was a beast on the boards (both offensive and defensive). Doc's all around impact (again) over the entire game however and clutch scoring to ice what was a really close game makes this comparison close. I have no problem if you think Moses was the best player in this game or in the series (or the season).

I did a break down of the games not to start up a "Dr. J = 1983 finals MVP" campaign but because we have people in here criticizing Dr. J (and rest of supporting cast's) performance in the playoffs which is completely inaccurate. It was in response to this:

"As was mentioned earlier, most of Moses' supporting cast fell off during the playoffs, especially Dr. J who went ice cold scoring. Despite this the Sixers didn't miss a beat, and dismantled the Lakers, mostly behind Moses severely outplaying Kareem."

[lorak]

Ok, with that point I definitely agree.

[bastillon]

regarding TMac. what do you think about his FGA/FTA ratio ? I think this is what seperates TMac from Kobe/Wade as a scorer and why he's getting overrated. TMac had everything, amazing shot making ability, flashy style, athleticism, ballhandling, just everything. but despite all of this talent he wasn't a very efficient scorer throughout his career because his FGA/FTA ratio was just bad. I think eFG% wise he's similar to the best scorers of the generation, if he was forcing more FTs, he'd be as efficient as they were. but he just settled for jumpshots time after time.

also what seems pretty suspect to me is his overall efficiency in the PS. in 01-08 TMac's playoff Ortg was only 108. while this is not bad by any stretch of imagination, it's not that good either (turned the ball over more in the playoffs, didn't force enough FTs). in 03 his Ortg was 110 in the postseason. against Prince he didn't seem to be efficient at all (probably some sub-90 Ortg from what I've seen). and again, I'm not nitpicking certain games, I'm just more interested in how TMac would be doing against top playoff defenses rather than what he was doing against freakin Michael Curry. I don't know maybe it's just me but I flat out feel disgusted watching Michael Curry play defense in that postseason, I'm a guy who just disrespects him as a player, I don't think he was an NBA caliber guy. so what would TMac be doing against top defenses ? I think he starts settling for too many jumpshots and doesn't force enough FTs. just that type of mentality. that's why people often said he folded under pressure. just bailed out defenses with easy defendable shots when the game was on the line.

for a point of comparison, Kobe in the postseason 08-10 had a 115 Ortg facing great many top defensive teams. Wade in 09-11 had a 113 Ortg again facing a lot of top defenses. on the other hand TMac didn't really play against strong defensive teams in his postseason career and his Ortg was clearly lower (and struggled mightily against Prince). that's why I just don't trust TMac as offensive anchor. he never proved himself as unstoppably efficient offensive player against high level teams. it's not like he was playing some juggernaut teams in the 1st Rd like KG. Ortg drop off can be expected to a degree when you're playing the best defenses in the league. but who was TMac facing ? Hornets, Pistons without a decent forward, a Mavs team that always struggled in terms of perimeter defense, that Jazz team which was always much better offensively ? not a top competition by any stretch of imagination. I feel like TMac's numbers would drop off considerably against Spurs/Kings/Pacers/Nets. in the playoffs his incredible shot making ability will work until he hits a mental block (and that happened not once), then he just settles for jumpshots bailing out the defenses and making little offensive impact. great player, even greater talent, just feels like there's a pretty big gap between him and Bryant/Wade offensively.

[C-izMe]

regarding TMac. what do you think about his FGA/FTA ratio ? I think this is what seperates TMac from Kobe/Wade as a scorer and why he's getting overrated. TMac had everything, amazing shot making ability, flashy style, athleticism, ballhandling, just everything. but despite all of this talent he wasn't a very efficient scorer throughout his career because his FGA/FTA ratio was just bad. I think eFG% wise he's similar to the best scorers of the generation, if he was forcing more FTs, he'd be as efficient as they were. but he just settled for jumpshots time after time.

also what seems pretty suspect to me is his overall efficiency in the PS. in 01-08 TMac's playoff Ortg was only 108. while this is not bad by any stretch of imagination, it's not that good either (turned the ball over more in the playoffs, didn't force enough FTs). in 03 his Ortg was 110 in the postseason. against Prince he didn't seem to be efficient at all (probably some sub-90 Ortg from what I've seen). and again, I'm not nitpicking certain games, I'm just more interested in how TMac would be doing against top playoff defenses rather than what he was doing against freakin Michael Curry. I don't know maybe it's just me but I flat out feel disgusted watching Michael Curry play defense in that postseason, I'm a guy who just disrespects him as a player, I don't think he was an NBA caliber guy. so what would TMac be doing against top defenses ? I think he starts settling for too many jumpshots and doesn't force enough FTs. just that type of mentality. that's why people often said he folded under pressure. just bailed out defenses with easy defendable shots when the game was on the line.

for a point of comparison, Kobe in the postseason 08-10 had a 115 Ortg facing great many top defensive teams. Wade in 09-11 had a 113 Ortg again facing a lot of top defenses. on the other hand TMac didn't really play against strong defensive teams in his postseason career and his Ortg was clearly lower (and struggled mightily against Prince). that's why I just don't trust TMac as offensive anchor. he never proved himself as unstoppably efficient offensive player against high level teams. it's not like he was playing some juggernaut teams in the 1st Rd like KG. Ortg drop off can be expected to a degree when you're playing the best defenses in the league. but who was TMac facing ? Hornets, Pistons without a decent forward, a Mavs team that always struggled in terms of perimeter defense, that Jazz team which was always much better offensively ? not a top competition by any stretch of imagination. I feel like TMac's numbers would drop off considerably against Spurs/Kings/Pacers/Nets. in the playoffs his incredible shot making ability will work until he hits a mental block (and that happened not once), then he just settles for jumpshots bailing out the defenses and making little offensive impact. great player, even greater talent, just feels like there's a pretty big gap between him and Bryant/Wade offensively.

That's 110% the rule changes. Before them from 84-04 NO GUARD AVERAGED 10 OR MORE FREETHROW ATTEMPTS A GAME WITHOUT TAKING AT LEAST 24 FGs A GAME. Expect TMac playing in 05 to increase his freethrows a ton.

[C-izMe]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... fta_per_mp

Here it is. Notice Kobe because he's the only SG that plateaued by 05. Per rule changes his career high in FTA was 8.7 (23.5 FGA). In 05 he averaged 10.1 (20.1 FGA). Pre rule changes he had a season averaging 20.0 FGA per game. Only 7.4 FTA.

[bastillon]

that's a fair point but TMac didn't exactly raise his FTA/FGA ratio. that's my point. even when rules made it easier for him to penetrate and get to the line, TMac didn't do it. which is exactly why he was so inefficient for a superstar in 05-08. he was still capable of being much more productive but his unwillingness to go to the paint and force contact was the reason why he wasn't. imo FTA/FGA rate is what seperates TMac from the best.

[therealbig3]

T-Mac was pretty much a different player, and much less effective, after 05. Even in 05, he started struggling with some injuries to his back and knees. Furthermore, as has been pointed out, in Houston, he actually was more tentative to attack and initiate contact because of his back injuries...this doesn't really have anything to do with 03 T-Mac though, because he attacked the rim constantly. In T-Mac's case, it's a little tough to glean much from his surrounding years, because it's true, his 03 season is a pretty clear outlier.

From 01-05, T-Mac had a 111 ORating, including going up against the Bucks (top 10 defense), the Pistons (top 4 defense), and the Mavs (top 9 defense).

And teammate quality matters here. Comparing Kobe from 08-10 to T-Mac from 01-05 should also include a comparison of supporting casts. That directly affects a player's ORating.

And in regular season matchups, T-Mac destroyed the Kings and Nets in 02 and 03 (when they were both elite defenses):

02 vs Kings: 32.5 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 4.0 apg, 57.5% TS

02 vs Nets: 28.0 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 5.0 apg, 51.3% TS

03 vs Kings: 38.5 ppg, 11.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, 56.7% TS

03 vs Nets: 31.0 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 6.8 apg, 55.3% TS

[ElGee]

So at this point, I'm not really finding any of the cases for the major candidates that convincing, and the guy I keep thinking about instead if Howard.

Moses vs Howard. Really, why is it we'd think Moses was better? Howard can largely equal Moses offensive game with significantly greater defense can't he?

McGrady vs Howard. Kind of amazed it seems so clear that TMac's Magic peak is ahead of Howard's. It's not at all clear to me. I felt we got a significantly better sense of Howard's ability to lead a team to contention than we did with McGrady.

Malone vs Howard. I suppose in general I'm re-thinking Karl right now. The notion that Barkley & Malone, two contemporary power forwards, would be in consecutive spots raises red flags. To me Barkley's genius is much more salient than Malone's, and as luck would have it, we got some new RAPM data to play with going back ton '99-00, and Malone basically shows nothing for his last half decade of play. Yes some offensive impact, but defense? Nothing. The first year in question is literally the year after his 2nd MVP, and by old school metrics looks BETTER than his MVP year. WTF? I don't want to overreact to the data here, but suffice to say, I was expecting Malone would look significantly better than this. (And meanwhile Stockton keeps looking quite impressive.)

You aren't alone on your Dwight Howard thoughts.

As for Karl, a few points:

(1) Just because they would be voted back to back doesn't mean the people votING have them back-to-back. I certainly don't.

(2) I thought the RAPM data was for 2001. (This link certainly is. For example, there is no Jeff Hornacek: http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/PBP/2000.html)

(3) That means Karl's RAPM in 01 was 2.7. This is his clearly the end of his prime (last all-nba team, last POM, shooting falls off dramatically as well as rebounding in following year.) Which means if RAPM is "accurate, in 01:"

Shaq
Duncan
Stockton
Marion
Dirk
Kobe
Ray
Robinson
A. Miller
McKie
B. Davis
The Wallaces
Carter
S. Williams
D. Anderson
Outlaw
PJ Brown
Kukoc
Webber
J. O'Neal
Mutombo
Iverson
Frencis
K. Thomas
McGrady
McDyess
Ward

we are all "better." Now I have no idea what the error is on this stat, although it has to be relevant looking at single-season APM error and looking at the movement of the stat based on 15-game PS updates. (eg To see a similar 60% increase in a number that 2012 LBJ saw, after 80 games at 20 ppg, it would take averaging 96 ppg in the next 15g to increase the scoring by 60%.) I assume then a small change bringing 01 Karl to the forefront would impress you instead of bringing you pause. How does the prior/non-prior difference play a role in this as well?

(4) Note that Kobe Bryant showed the exact same RAPM in 2011 (haven't done the STD check) as Karl in 01. Let's say he slowly tapered off after that and that was all the RAPM data we had on him...should we re-think his career/peak bc of such a season?

(5) Stockton. I find any +/- data useful, but I feel for some strange reason people have defaulted heavily to single-season RAPM as some sort of reference point, as if ridge-regression handles most of the many issues. But the big issue is Stockton.

How can I think that there isn't some co-variance that RAPM isn't "noticing" when Stockton is being considered significantly better than Malone at this point in their careers? Without delving into the lineup patterns to unearth something like this, the implication here is that the Jazz would be far better off with a team of:

Polynice
D. Marshall
Russell
Starks
Stockton

than

Polynice
K. Malone
Russell
Starks
Vaughn

This would be one of those WP predictions that is as unlikely as Charlotte winning 40 games. Anything's possible, I suppose. Of course just a quick glance at the minutes distribution of the Jazz team reveals 9-men over 16 mpg...with Karl really the only regular, which obviously opens up the door for some steady lineup pattern/subs that let RAPM "think" he's the one holding the team down. The entire 01 Jazz RAPM:

Stockton 5.6
Karl 2.7
Russell 2.0
D. Marshall 1.6
Manning 0.2
Polynice -0.2
Starks -0.5
Ostertag -0.7
Vaughn -3.4

RAPM "thinks" that Vaughn is pulling down lineup differentials while Stockton is inflating them. My guess is, without looking at opponent strength, that this has to do with Stockton being a part of the 10-best Jazz lineups (+12.9 per 48 total) while Vaughn is part of the 8-worst lineups (-16.9 per 48 total). Karl is on the floor for those 4-worst lineups (and 9 of the top-10), so solving for the Karl Malone variable is affected by this as well.

(6) Then there's the "Ginobili issue" of him playing 28, hand-picked perfect minutes to exert himself because he's 38. If it were Karl playing 28 mpg in this form with a crappy backup and Stockton asked to play 36 mpg with the team while Utah had better guards around him, what do you think the number would look like?

In summary, I'm really surprised to see you re-thinking Karl based on this data point since it didn't give me much pause. Perhaps you could expound...

I'll throw you something since you say you aren't impressed with any of the guys being discussed. The 98 Jazz were ~2 SRS team to start the year without John Stockton. They played a brutal schedule, and posted a +1.7 ORtg and -0.9 DRtg in those first 18 games. But they were also a veteran team, and as such ramped up as the season progressed (Stockton's return is a confound in that equation -- for reference the SRS over the next 20g was 5.2, over the following 20 8.4, and over the last 20+ 7.0 (with ORtg's around +11 for the second half of the year).

So a "non-warmed up" Jazz team of Eisley, Hornacek, Keefe, Karl and Foster looked like a 49-win team. I've been impressed by Barkley for a number of voting slots because I don't think many (any?) guys on the board left could take a Dawkins-Hawkins-Mahorn-Gminski team to ~54 wins...and that's pretty clearly a better team in my mind. Food for thought.

[SDChargers#1]

You say despite Doc's "ice cold shooting" the Sixers didn't miss a beat and dismantled the Lakers mostly behind Moses. You do realize that Doc was arguably the best Sixers player in those finals right

First I said, Doc was ice cold in the playoffs not the finals. Which he was. For the playoffs he had a sub 50% TS, which is pretty awful for a player of Dr. J's caliber.

And no he was not better than Malone in the Finals.

Dr. J averaged 19/8.5/5 (47% shooting). Pretty good.

Moses averaged 25.8/18/2 (56% shooting). Amazing.

Also, he held Jabaar well below his averages (Kareem averaged only 7.5 rebounds in that series). When ur center averages OVER 10 rebounds per game more than the opposing center, you are probably going to win.

There is absolutely zero argument for Dr. J being better in the playoff run or finals.

[Regulio]

Funny. For months I have been reading how Malone was a cornerstone of Utah, how his game didn't break without Stockton on the floor and how Stockton didn't have much impact and wasn't as good as some think. Now some data is calculated for 1 year and everyone starts saying wow look at Stockton he is great, and Karl doesn't have as much impact as we thought! And his impact should've been not that great in earlier years too!
I find it strange and funny, how some data changes the perception by 180 degrees

[SDChargers#1]

Funny. For months I have been reading how Malone was a cornerstone of Utah, how his game didn't break without Stockton on the floor and how Stockton didn't have much impact and wasn't as good as some think. Now some data is calculated for 1 year and everyone starts saying wow look at Stockton he is great, and Karl doesn't have as much impact as we thought! And his impact should've been not that great in earlier years too!
I find it strange and funny, how some data changes the perception by 180 degrees

It's simple. Folks tend to value RAPM too much on this site.

[fatal9]

regarding TMac. what do you think about his FGA/FTA ratio ? I think this is what seperates TMac from Kobe/Wade as a scorer and why he's getting overrated. TMac had everything, amazing shot making ability, flashy style, athleticism, ballhandling, just everything. but despite all of this talent he wasn't a very efficient scorer throughout his career because his FGA/FTA ratio was just bad. I think eFG% wise he's similar to the best scorers of the generation, if he was forcing more FTs, he'd be as efficient as they were. but he just settled for jumpshots time after time.

While it's a concern for his career, is it that much of a concern in 2003? I don't think he attacked the rim that season any less than Kobe did in his best year.

He had a FTA/FGA of .400 FTA to FGA in '03 which is significantly higher than any of his other seasons, higher than any of Kobe’s seasons from ’00-‘03, higher than any of Iverson’s seasons before the rule changes, bit lower than Pierce during the same time, waaay higher than Vince’s, quite comparable to Wade’s ’09 season (.44). His impressive FTA/FGA ratio is why he saw such a dramatic rise in his TS% compared to the surrounding years (+4.5 TS% above league average, higher than any of Kobe or Wade's seasons!). T-Mac is playing differently this year than any other (though same basic skillset), which is why it's such an outlier.

One thing I think keeps people from voting for T-Mac are the surrounding years. Why was he so much worse in ’04? For one thing, T-Mac was waaay more perimeter oriented. He wasn’t playing with the same motivation because of the team around him, he was lazy on both ends. On offense, he just threw up long jumpers, didn’t have the willingness to attack the rim like in ’03. You can notice this from watching handful of games from either season. You can also see it in the stats, three point attempts way up, FTA down, 28.4% shots at the rim in ’03 vs. 19.1% in ’04. He’s not breaking down the defense...he’s just a lazy jumpshooter. On defense, he doesn’t give a flying puck. Lack of motivation also means worse conditioning (’04 T-Mac’s second half stats fall off a cliff). This is down year and I don’t think it’s representative of the player that T-Mac was in ’03, it’s representative of his worst qualities, and a different mindset to how he played in 2003. And soon after injuries began mounting up. He was a lot better than in '02 because his jumper from 15+ feet went to another level and also the natural improvement/progress players see at his age (23/24) and experience (6th NBA season).

[colts18]

Saying Howard is just as good as Moses on offense is ridiculous. Not even close

[Dr Positivity]

I wouldn't trust those APM numbers just based on the fact that Karl was old. Means as much as judging Kobe's prime based on being 45th in RAPM in 2012 and like 30th in 2011. From 06-10 he was basically top 5-7 consistently and 4th in 2010. Kobe's raw stats don't reflect the fact that he doesn't attack the basket nearly as much and has fallen off defensively, and thus, isn't the same guy at all