#18 - GOAT peaks project (2019)

[cecilthesheep]

Few points:

1. I love that after a few threads of trying, Eballa (and to a much lesser extent Odinn and I) have been able to convince people to give a slightly weaker vote for Robinson... such that he will still win this round semi-comfortably.

2. Eballa (and others, including myself quoting FrogBros) have already made the case that Robinson’s playoff defence does not hold up against opposing bigs as a first option (last thread, I acknowledged he could still be adding value in team defence... but it would basically need to be a level of team defence that overcame every other top defender’s overall defence). That has largely been unaddressed in favour of acting as if the Rockets series is some aberration.

3. Yes, the defensive scheme was not favourable to Robinson. But he still failed, and again, it was relatively normal for that to be the case.

4. The notion that the Spurs had a decent team defensive rating in that Rockets series because of Robinson is pretty laughable. It almost sounds like one of those “face-to-fist style” fighting jokes. Are we really making excuses for him that being roasted by Hakeem while the rest of the Rockets are closely guarded becomes his primary value? What, he gets a boost for dying as as a sacrificial lamb?

5. Again, I have also quibbled with Eballa over the whole “1990 first option” issue, but when we have been detailing how he fails as a sole offensive force, having someone provide even similar offensive production is a major change, and that shows in Robinson’s relative performance. Unless you believe he actually peaked in 1990 or 1991, why should that reflect well on how he played as a first-option at his peak?

6. It has also been thoroughly detailed that the drop-off occurs against any decent defence. Citing negative or below-average defences which failed to stop him does not counter that point.

7. A specific recent point was that Robinson, regardless of everything, is still capable of leading a team to a championship. How? He won five series in his pre-injury years, one of which was as a rookie sharing offensive responsibility. He routinely lost to the lower seed either every year or every year but one. He could not handle the offensive load against any decent defence, which you tend to encounter as you progress in the playoffs. Furthermore, despite routinely playing cupcake defensive teams and rarely playing good ones, his overall playoff averages are still significantly and obviously depressed (losing about a quarter of value in WS/48 and BPM). The mainstay backup, his defence, has seen no real evidence that he could be a true lone defensive anchor against top (maybe not even middling) offensive talent; we know he can be awesome as a second option, but does that really correspond to peak play?
Even just leading a team to the Finals is difficult; asserting that Robinson could lead his team to victory in one, with basically no evidence suggesting he could apart from the fact of his mere presence in one conference finals series, does not correspond at all to the thorough information we have presented on his regular shortcomings in the postseason.

All good points here. On #3, I would agree with Mavericksfan that just because Hakeem put up amazing stats doesn't necessarily mean Robinson failed. The Rockets' offense still got slowed down. I think the individual stuff is more of a case of Hakeem being among the best one-on-one post scorers ever to play than Robinson being bad.

I agree with you about the scoring dropoff, I've explained in previous threads where it comes from, I just don't think it matters quite enough to drop him below the competition here.

And yeah, i'm rating his defensive impact really high. I think he's an all-time great team defender and a very good one-on-one defender. I don't think individual matchup stats really encapsulate the value a switchable, smart center like Robinson adds to a team's defense; I'm more comfortable using those for wing defenders who don't have the same kind of help/rim protection responsibilities. Let's look at opposing teams' offensive ratings in every playoff series Robinson played from his rookie year to his big injury and compare them to the same teams' RS offensive ratings:

1990 Nuggets (3 games): 108.0 RS, 105.2 series, -2.8
1990 Trail Blazers (7 games): 110.5 RS, 107.2 series, -3.3
1991 Warriors (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
1993 Trail Blazers (4 games): 108.3 RS, 105.1 series, -3.2
1993 Suns (6 games): 113.3 RS, 109.9 series, -3.4
1994 Jazz (4 games): 108.6 RS, 110.6 series, +2.0
1995 Nuggets (3 games): 109.1 RS, 103.1 series, -6.0
1995 Lakers (6 games): 109.1 RS, 97.9 series, -11.2 (!)
1995 Rockets (6 games): 109.7 RS, 110.6 series, +0.9 (although we've covered how they added Clyde)
1996 Suns (4 games): 110.3 RS, 109.3 series, -1.0
1996 Jazz (6 games): 113.3 RS, 114.1 series, +0.8

And the one year where he's hurt for the playoffs, this happens:
1992 Suns (3 games): 112.1 RS, 120.7 series, +8.6

It looks like a pretty consistent impact to me. If we average all those series, weighted by how many games each one took, Robinson's Spurs slowed their opponents' offenses in the playoffs by nearly 2.6 points per 100, with only one increase of more than 1 point and two complete slaughters in '95.

Generally I think the reason I'm rating Robinson higher than others is because I don't think one-on-one play means as much as it's hyped up to mean. Robinson didn't have a sustainable iso scoring game, and his one-on-one defense was merely very good rather than transcendent like his switchability and help instincts were. All the stuff he was great at is the hardest stuff to quantify, but I think it somewhat comes through in the above ORtg swings. I hate to be this person, but if you ask me, the easiest way to see it is going back and watching the games. Robinson's combination of mobility at the 5 with shot-blocking ability was totally unique.

[HHera187]

N.1 DAVID ROBINSON 1995
Great offensive regular season with elite efficiency (60TS%) and all time level defense en route to his MVP. He leads SA to the WCF offensively and defensively, his scoring decline was relevant, but still good numbers.

N.2 STEVE NASH 2005
Nash 2005 was one the best offensive season of all time. Hyper efficiency scoring, goat level playmaking, floor raiser par excellence. In PS his level was the same, the WCF VS SA was a clinic vs an historically good defense.

N.3 DAVID ROBINSON 1992
No playoffs in '92 for San Antonio, but his regular season was unbelievable, probably one of the best defensive regular of all time.


Sent from my CLT-L09 using RealGM mobile app

[liamliam1234]

Few points:
3. Yes, the defensive scheme was not favourable to Robinson. But he still failed, and again, it was relatively normal for that to be the case.

4. The notion that the Spurs had a decent team defensive rating in that Rockets series because of Robinson is pretty laughable. It almost sounds like one of those “face-to-fist style” fighting jokes. Are we really making excuses for him that being roasted by Hakeem while the rest of the Rockets are closely guarded becomes his primary value? What, he gets a boost for dying as as a sacrificial lamb?

7. A specific recent point was that Robinson, regardless of everything, is still capable of leading a team to a championship. How? He won five series in his pre-injury years, one of which was as a rookie sharing offensive responsibility. He routinely lost to the lower seed either every year or every year but one. He could not handle the offensive load against any decent defence, which you tend to encounter as you progress in the playoffs. Furthermore, despite routinely playing cupcake defensive teams and rarely playing good ones, his overall playoff averages are still significantly and obviously depressed (losing about a quarter of value in WS/48 and BPM). The mainstay backup, his defence, has seen no real evidence that he could be a true lone defensive anchor against top (maybe not even middling) offensive talent; we know he can be awesome as a second option, but does that really correspond to peak play?
Even just leading a team to the Finals is difficult; asserting that Robinson could lead his team to victory in one, with basically no evidence suggesting he could apart from the fact of his mere presence in one conference finals series, does not correspond at all to the thorough information we have presented on his regular shortcomings in the postseason.

Just wanted to touch on a few of these.

3. Did he really “fail” tho? I’ll say it till my face is blue. This is a team sport. Do you think Duncan failed in 05? Horford in 2011 vs Dwight? Ben Wallace in 04 vs Shaq? (Wanted to clarify I’m referring specifically to defense. He was clearly outplayed especially offensively)

Sometimes teams will allow a superstar to go 1 on 1 and put up crazy boxscore stats if it means their offense overall is worse. It happens.

4. Same as above. I’m interested in your opinions of those players defense performances.

7. You know what’s funny? You sound exactly like K.G. detractors prior to 2008. I think similar to KG , D-Rob would work best with another good scorer capable of being a closer(which we’ve seen work for him)

3 and 4: To an extent, yes. The point about Duncan’s ankle is pertinent, and it is almost certainly his worst series during his prime. Difference being that is a clear anomaly (never forget 2002-03 Duncan versus Shaq). Similar situation with Horford (although I am less familiar with the nuances there, and ultimately care a lot less). Wallace “failed” in a couple of games, but he also did well in other games, and his playoff pedigree generally speaks for itself beyond that. Also, in all three, the ostensible gap between the players is a lot larger than what we are discussing here; the fact they are the point of comparison reflects poorly on Robinson. Again, though, it is not just about the Rockets series. The point Eballa and I are trying to express is that (again, generally unlike the three examples you listed), this was not especially anomalous for Robinson (factoring in level of competition; obviously Hakeem dominated the most of any opposing centre).

7. As Eballa has covered, Garnett was not an under-performer to the same extent (or at least not in hindsight). And if Robinson lost his second-best player prior to facing Hakeem, I would probably sympathise with the offensive dip more (note: there is a difference between suffering from lost offensive support, like with 2004 Garnett, and only being laudably effective if you are functioning as a 1b or lower option, like with Robinson). In terms of legacy, Robinson did in fact receive a boost once playing next to other scoring options, but in his case he shared the defensive load (whereas Garnett was almost totally responsible for his), and his offensive load was a lot lower (whereas Garnett was 1a/1b to Pierce).

1990 Nuggets (3 games): 108.0 RS, 105.2 series, -2.8
1990 Trail Blazers (7 games): 110.5 RS, 107.2 series, -3.3
1991 Warriors (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
1993 Trail Blazers (4 games): 108.3 RS, 105.1 series, -3.2
1993 Suns (6 games): 113.3 RS, 109.9 series, -3.4
1994 Jazz (4 games): 108.6 RS, 110.6 series, +2.0
1995 Nuggets (3 games): 109.1 RS, 103.1 series, -6.0
1995 Lakers (6 games): 109.1 RS, 97.9 series, -11.2 (!)
1995 Rockets (6 games): 109.7 RS, 110.6 series, +0.9 (although we've covered how they added Clyde)
1996 Suns (4 games): 110.3 RS, 109.3 series, -1.0
1996 Jazz (6 games): 113.3 RS, 114.1 series, +0.8

And the one year where he's hurt for the playoffs, this happens:
1992 Suns (3 games): 112.1 RS, 120.7 series, +8.6

It looks like a pretty consistent impact to me. If we average all those series, weighted by how many games each one took, Robinson's Spurs slowed their opponents' offenses in the playoffs by nearly 2.6 points per 100, with only one increase of more than 1 point and two complete slaughters in '95.

Thanks, those are good statistics to provide. However, I do want to be clear that the contention is not that Robinson was outright bad on defence during his prime playoff runs. I also think it is important to remember that we are discussing him comparatively, not in isolation. How do those numbers compare with Ewing, Mourning, or Dikembe?

Finally...

2005 Steve Nash

Curse you, I was starting to be pretty sure I would end up being the first to vote for Nash. I do think you should consider 2007 instead, though. The impact metrics there are stronger, as is his superficial box score.

[Mavericksfan]

3 and 4: To an extent, yes. The point about Duncan’s ankle is pertinent, and it is almost certainly his worst series during his prime. Difference being that is a clear anomaly (never forget 2002-03 Duncan versus Shaq). Similar situation with Horford (although I am less familiar with the nuances there, and ultimately care a lot less). Wallace “failed” in a couple of games, but he also did well in other games, and his playoff pedigree generally speaks for itself beyond that. Also, in all three, the ostensible gap between the players is a lot larger than what we are discussing here; the fact they are the point of comparison reflects poorly on Robinson. Again, though, it is not just about the Rockets series. The point Eballa and I are trying to express is that (again, someone unlike the three examples you listed), this was not especially anomalous for Robinson (factoring in level of competition; obviously Hakeem dominated the most of any opposing centre).

7. As Eballa has covered, Garnett was not an under-performer to the same extent (or at least not in hindsight). And if Robinson lost his second-best player prior to facing Hakeem, I would probably sympathise with the offensive dip more (note: there is a difference between suffering from lost offensive support, like with 2004 Garnett, and only being laudably effective if you are functioning as a 1b or lower option, like with Robinson). In terms of legacy, Robinson did in fact receive a boost once playing next to other scoring options, but in his case he shared the defensive load (whereas Garnett was almost totally responsible for his), and his offensive load was a lot lower (whereas Garnett was 1a/1b to Pierce).

Hmm so I think we look at things differently. Spurs in 05 focused on taking away 3pt attempts from the Suns and were okay with Amare going wild. Suns 3PT attempts dropped from 25 per game to 15 per game in that series. A similar approach was taken by the Hawks against the Magic in 2011.

As far as pre 08 KG. He struggled regularly. His only good playoff runs before then were 98 and 03.

I think his playmaking is what creates the gap between them. KG is superior but I dont think the gap is the size some of you guys are arguing for.

[E-Balla]

I don't think we unfairly judge Robinson's career off of that series. I think we completely misjudge what happened in that series and how damaging it was for Rodman to essentially just quit on help defense. He played, at worst, fine. Not a player in the league who could have guarded Hakeem on an island like that.

I went through this in another thread and Hakeem wasn't on an island like that. He just beat Robinson so bad and so quickly they had no shot of doing anything to help. In game 4 I think it was I posted footage of each Hakeem bucket and the first thing I noticed was he made 17 halfcourt baskets on Drob only dribbling the ball 15 times. That's horrendous. Dr. Spaceman who is one of the biggest Robinson fans around here said it looked like Hakeem was practicing. Him getting killed is less important than the why, and the why isn't because it was single coverage, it's that he let Hakeem get to his spots with no resistance. I'd never crap on MKG for giving up 60 to Melo and LeBron almost back to back because they were trying hard to get free for buckets against him (for example). This is different.

I also don't think it was his best series ever, though. Look at what he did to the Lakers just one series before. And look at what he did in 1993 against the Suns. Or the 1990 Trail Blazers. Or the first-round beatdowns on the 1990 Nuggets and 1996 Suns. The embarrassing loss in '91 was also not his fault at all - we're talking about Robinson here, not his teammates, and he put up 25 points on 76% true shooting.

Competition matters. No one is judging superstars on what they do against the -0.0 SRS Lakers a round before they play the NBA champions. Like I said if I want to beat a 41 win team Robinson is my guy. If I want a ring he's out of sight, out of mind.

D-Rob was not a second option to Cummings. He came into the league at 24 ready to go and immediately led his team in points per game (while playing historically good defense). At most, they were co-first options, but I think that overstates Cummings' role a little bit.

Cummings took more shots in the regular season and postseason. Used more possessions too. How is Robinson the first option?

I count Robinson's best years as starting at his rookie season for sure. He wasn't immediately better than Ewing, no, but he was still great and absolutely not a second option, and any comprehensive evaluation of his playoff record has to include those years. You seem to be limiting the playoff sample to roughly 40 games which contain most of his worst moments and eliminate some of his best.

What do you call a player second on his team in shots, possessions, etc? Last I checked it was "second option".

And I'm limiting his playoff sample to when he was a first option playing tough teams because we're comparing him to Moses and not Draymond Green. They contain his worst moments and eliminate his best ONLY because he was bad. I used the same criteria for others and they shined, because they're good.

Part of this is that I think when we're judging peaks regular season has to matter a lot because playoff sample sizes become so small. I look at the best regular seasons a player puts together and then try to evaluate the playoffs in the context of how his game generally translated, who he played in the years in question, etc. I'll take the rest of his playoff career into account in the sense that it provides me more information about whether a bad series was a fluke or a pattern. So Robinson had an inexcusably bad series in '94, and two really good series and a middling one in '95. I don't really see that as a black mark against '94, more like no cherry on top but still a great year.

Well no because you're not completely taking things into context. All playoff teams aren't equal. Robinson had one bad series in 94 because he played a good team. He had 2 good series in 95 because he played 2 bad teams. You're just pretending all series are the same and the opponent doesn't matter. Again I don't care about how they play bad teams because everyone mentioned kills bad teams. It's not information that will separate you from the pack. It's not a fluke that Robinson always played bad against good teams, it's a flaw.

Because Robinson was given the impossible task of defending Hakeem one-on-one while everyone else stayed home ... that "poor shooting" was because the Spurs defense was trying to make Hakeem do everything, not because of luck. I hesitate to say it was the game plan, because Rodman was supposed to double and refused to do it, but surely you understand how this works when a team says "if this guy beats us, he beats us, but we're not giving up open 3s"? If the Rockets' team OR was lower than usual, something was working.

Go actually watch the games. This narrative is random, old, and tired. He was getting absolutely killed. Again Hakeem looked like he was in practice. This is tougher defense than he played.

[E-Balla]

I agree that there’s a clear flaw in his game that leads to his game not being at it’s usual level. But his baseline is much higher than others due to his top tier defensive impact. I believe he’d be more than capable of winning a ring as a hybrid 1st/2nd option like KG was in 08. He shared similar struggles to KG when in the role of major usage primary option.

Not at all because we can point to a few times KG stepped up to the plate. We can't point to any time Robinson has. Remember Odinn's post Robinson's best series (against opponents worth caring about) are clearly way worse than the best series (against opponents worth caring about) of anyone else on the list or in the conversation. That includes KG who has series like 99 and 01 vs San Antonio which are way better than anything we've seen from Robinson.

As a defense isnt it your job to slow down the opposing team? I believe you place too much emphasis on 1 on 1 matchups when it’s a game of 5 on 5. Amare went crazy against Duncan in 05 but the Spurs held the Suns slightly below their normal ORTG.

As a defense, sure, the Spurs played well. That doesn't mean Robinson did. Again it's a 5 on 5 game, why give credit to the one guy getting torched and not the 4 other guys locking down their men?

1. I see where you’re coming from. I interpreted this project differently. I thought this was a project ranking peak seasons from players vs peak skillsets. I look at what they did that season and rank them from there.

I am ranking peak seasons too but I understand the luck and variance of seasons. I'm not giving someone credit for not getting exposed only because they lost too early to get exposed or they played a good matchup. The way I'm going about this is if I wanted to win a ring, which of these seasons and players do I want leading, or down the line being a part of, my squad the most.

Turnovers come from passing /ball handing in general as well not just scoring attempts.

Yes but it's not like Terry Cummings had a lot more assists and like I said he had more TSA too.

I agree with this but basketball is a team sport. I dont think the only way to win is by having an unstoppable playoff scorer as your first option. I think D-Rob’s defensive impact and skillset allows him to fit on a myriad of championship caliber team as the best player.

It isn't the only way, but it's the way that requires less help. If I think Robinson can win me a ring with a great squad but Moses can win me a ring with a mediocre and great squad, why would I choose Robinson? Why choose the player that needs MORE help to get a ring when we're talking about which player is the greatest?

[E-Balla]

3 and 4: To an extent, yes. The point about Duncan’s ankle is pertinent, and it is almost certainly his worst series during his prime. Difference being that is a clear anomaly (never forget 2002-03 Duncan versus Shaq). Similar situation with Horford (although I am less familiar with the nuances there, and ultimately care a lot less). Wallace “failed” in a couple of games, but he also did well in other games, and his playoff pedigree generally speaks for itself beyond that. Also, in all three, the ostensible gap between the players is a lot larger than what we are discussing here; the fact they are the point of comparison reflects poorly on Robinson. Again, though, it is not just about the Rockets series. The point Eballa and I are trying to express is that (again, someone unlike the three examples you listed), this was not especially anomalous for Robinson (factoring in level of competition; obviously Hakeem dominated the most of any opposing centre).

7. As Eballa has covered, Garnett was not an under-performer to the same extent (or at least not in hindsight). And if Robinson lost his second-best player prior to facing Hakeem, I would probably sympathise with the offensive dip more (note: there is a difference between suffering from lost offensive support, like with 2004 Garnett, and only being laudably effective if you are functioning as a 1b or lower option, like with Robinson). In terms of legacy, Robinson did in fact receive a boost once playing next to other scoring options, but in his case he shared the defensive load (whereas Garnett was almost totally responsible for his), and his offensive load was a lot lower (whereas Garnett was 1a/1b to Pierce).

Hmm so I think we look at things differently. Spurs in 05 focused on taking away 3pt attempts from the Suns and were okay with Amare going wild. Suns 3PT attempts dropped from 25 per game to 15 per game in that series. A similar approach was taken by the Hawks against the Magic in 2011.

As far as pre 08 KG. He struggled regularly. His only good playoff runs before then were 98 and 03.

I think his playmaking is what creates the gap between them. KG is superior but I dont think the gap is the size some of you guys are arguing for.

I watched the Magic Hawks series live going to 2 of the 3 games in Atlanta and Dwight averaged 5.5 TOVs a game and after exploding in games 1 and 2 (where he averaged 39.5 ppg and 7.5 topg) he averaged 20.8 ppg and 4.5 topg. Horford got killed, but he put up a fight and played good defense. Robinson didn't.

This isn't even the first game of this series I've analyzed this week but:

Watch on YouTube

1. I see a lot of doubles when they have the time to get there. Again I don't get this narrative that he was on an island at all. Hakeem didn't average the most apg he ever had in a series outside of the 95 Finals (where his shooters went off) because they weren't doubling him.

2. 18 dribbles on 11 buckets against Robinson (excluding the PNR plays). He looks like a damn practice cone not once does he check Hakeem or throw his body into him. It's like he was scared to touch him. You can watch the whole series and you'll see the same, Hakeem is just walking wherever he wants and doing whatever he wants. At one point the announcer mentions how Hakeem is getting any shot he wants to. No one can watch this and tell me it was in Bob Hill's defensive plan for David Robinson to emulate a 7 foot tall traffic cone for 6 games.

[DatAsh]

Sorry for my lack of participation. I've been away on business travel, and I will be for the next couple weeks, but I'll do my best to post from whatever hotel I'm in.

These are my picks for now, in case I don't get another chance. If I vote again, please disregard this vote.

1. 2015 Paul - Lead the Clippers to second best SRS. Arguably the best defensive PG ever, and up there with some of the best offensive players ever, maybe a slight step down. Top tier impact metrics, consistently. Arguably the best impact player after Lebron and KG, and that includes guys like Duncan and Shaq. I actually thought he was a bit better in 2014, but oh well. On a +/- scale (not elgees total SRS scale), I see peak Chris as a +5-6 offense, +1.5-2.5 defense player. I feel like a lot of people see 2008 as his peak, but I see that more as a 2009 Lebron statistical peak, but not actually his best in terms of championship odds.

2. 95 Drob - His offensive value really does drop off a cliff in the playoffs, but he's second to only Bill Russell in the strength of playoff defenses he's led, and I think you can argue him reasonably as a top 2-5 defender of all time. I think it's hard to build a championship squad with him as your first option, though still possible, but that doesn't really disqualify him for me, as the same thing could arguably be said for Russell. Looking at team defense strength, it's obvious that his defense isn't Russell level, but I don't think you can definitively say that anyone other than Russell was a better defender. I personally have KG, Mutombo, and Hakeem over him as defenders, but I can easily see valid argument for Robinson over them. Given his playoff struggles, I see Robinson as a +1-2 offense, +5-6 defense player.

3. 94 Drob - essentially the same as 95 Drob, I just had to pick one.

If my 3rd place Drob vote is the difference between first and second for him, please switch my 2nd and 3rd votes, as I really see no difference between the two.

[cecilthesheep]

I don't think we unfairly judge Robinson's career off of that series. I think we completely misjudge what happened in that series and how damaging it was for Rodman to essentially just quit on help defense. He played, at worst, fine. Not a player in the league who could have guarded Hakeem on an island like that.

I went through this in another thread and Hakeem wasn't on an island like that. He just beat Robinson so bad and so quickly they had no shot of doing anything to help. In game 4 I think it was I posted footage of each Hakeem bucket and the first thing I noticed was he made 17 halfcourt baskets on Drob only dribbling the ball 15 times. That's horrendous. Dr. Spaceman who is one of the biggest Robinson fans around here said it looked like Hakeem was practicing. Him getting killed is less important than the why, and the why isn't because it was single coverage, it's that he let Hakeem get to his spots with no resistance. I'd never crap on MKG for giving up 60 to Melo and LeBron almost back to back because they were trying hard to get free for buckets against him (for example). This is different.

I also don't think it was his best series ever, though. Look at what he did to the Lakers just one series before. And look at what he did in 1993 against the Suns. Or the 1990 Trail Blazers. Or the first-round beatdowns on the 1990 Nuggets and 1996 Suns. The embarrassing loss in '91 was also not his fault at all - we're talking about Robinson here, not his teammates, and he put up 25 points on 76% true shooting.

Competition matters. No one is judging superstars on what they do against the -0.0 SRS Lakers a round before they play the NBA champions. Like I said if I want to beat a 41 win team Robinson is my guy. If I want a ring he's out of sight, out of mind.

D-Rob was not a second option to Cummings. He came into the league at 24 ready to go and immediately led his team in points per game (while playing historically good defense). At most, they were co-first options, but I think that overstates Cummings' role a little bit.

Cummings took more shots in the regular season and postseason. Used more possessions too. How is Robinson the first option?

I count Robinson's best years as starting at his rookie season for sure. He wasn't immediately better than Ewing, no, but he was still great and absolutely not a second option, and any comprehensive evaluation of his playoff record has to include those years. You seem to be limiting the playoff sample to roughly 40 games which contain most of his worst moments and eliminate some of his best.

What do you call a player second on his team in shots, possessions, etc? Last I checked it was "second option".

And I'm limiting his playoff sample to when he was a first option playing tough teams because we're comparing him to Moses and not Draymond Green. They contain his worst moments and eliminate his best ONLY because he was bad. I used the same criteria for others and they shined, because they're good.

Part of this is that I think when we're judging peaks regular season has to matter a lot because playoff sample sizes become so small. I look at the best regular seasons a player puts together and then try to evaluate the playoffs in the context of how his game generally translated, who he played in the years in question, etc. I'll take the rest of his playoff career into account in the sense that it provides me more information about whether a bad series was a fluke or a pattern. So Robinson had an inexcusably bad series in '94, and two really good series and a middling one in '95. I don't really see that as a black mark against '94, more like no cherry on top but still a great year.

Well no because you're not completely taking things into context. All playoff teams aren't equal. Robinson had one bad series in 94 because he played a good team. He had 2 good series in 95 because he played 2 bad teams. You're just pretending all series are the same and the opponent doesn't matter. Again I don't care about how they play bad teams because everyone mentioned kills bad teams. It's not information that will separate you from the pack. It's not a fluke that Robinson always played bad against good teams, it's a flaw.

Because Robinson was given the impossible task of defending Hakeem one-on-one while everyone else stayed home ... that "poor shooting" was because the Spurs defense was trying to make Hakeem do everything, not because of luck. I hesitate to say it was the game plan, because Rodman was supposed to double and refused to do it, but surely you understand how this works when a team says "if this guy beats us, he beats us, but we're not giving up open 3s"? If the Rockets' team OR was lower than usual, something was working.

Go actually watch the games. This narrative is random, old, and tired. He was getting absolutely killed. Again Hakeem looked like he was in practice. This is tougher defense than he played.

Yeahhh, I've watched that series plenty and I don't see what you're saying at all, and I'm not the only person in these threads who disagrees. Just not seeing the same stuff here. To be clear, I'm not disagreeing that Robinson was worse in the playoffs and against tough competition, I just don't think the ways in which he was worse matter as much as the ways in which he stayed good.

Also, none of this is supposed to be a "narrative" or "random". This is what I see from the game film. And there is, anyway, certainly no significant narrative around this series about how Robinson actually played well. The "narrative" is 100% what you are arguing, which is that Robinson got torched, but I'm not telling you how you're sliding into some tired narrative. I'm giving you credit for actually believing that and having reasoning to back it up. Please extend me the same courtesy.

[cecilthesheep]

I watched the Magic Hawks series live going to 2 of the 3 games in Atlanta and Dwight averaged 5.5 TOVs a game and after exploding in games 1 and 2 (where he averaged 39.5 ppg and 7.5 topg) he averaged 20.8 ppg and 4.5 topg. Horford got killed, but he put up a fight and played good defense. Robinson didn't.

This isn't even the first game of this series I've analyzed this week but:

Watch on YouTube

1. I see a lot of doubles when they have the time to get there. Again I don't get this narrative that he was on an island at all. Hakeem didn't average the most apg he ever had in a series outside of the 95 Finals (where his shooters went off) because they weren't doubling him.

2. 18 dribbles on 11 buckets against Robinson (excluding the PNR plays). He looks like a damn practice cone not once does he check Hakeem or throw his body into him. It's like he was scared to touch him. You can watch the whole series and you'll see the same, Hakeem is just walking wherever he wants and doing whatever he wants. At one point the announcer mentions how Hakeem is getting any shot he wants to. No one can watch this and tell me it was in Bob Hill's defensive plan for David Robinson to emulate a 7 foot tall traffic cone for 6 games.

Most of what I'm seeing this video is a guard trying to come in and go for a steal, usually far too late to affect the move at all. There were two or three real hard doubles.

[cecilthesheep]

1990 Nuggets (3 games): 108.0 RS, 105.2 series, -2.8
1990 Trail Blazers (7 games): 110.5 RS, 107.2 series, -3.3
1991 Warriors (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
1993 Trail Blazers (4 games): 108.3 RS, 105.1 series, -3.2
1993 Suns (6 games): 113.3 RS, 109.9 series, -3.4
1994 Jazz (4 games): 108.6 RS, 110.6 series, +2.0
1995 Nuggets (3 games): 109.1 RS, 103.1 series, -6.0
1995 Lakers (6 games): 109.1 RS, 97.9 series, -11.2 (!)
1995 Rockets (6 games): 109.7 RS, 110.6 series, +0.9 (although we've covered how they added Clyde)
1996 Suns (4 games): 110.3 RS, 109.3 series, -1.0
1996 Jazz (6 games): 113.3 RS, 114.1 series, +0.8

And the one year where he's hurt for the playoffs, this happens:
1992 Suns (3 games): 112.1 RS, 120.7 series, +8.6

It looks like a pretty consistent impact to me. If we average all those series, weighted by how many games each one took, Robinson's Spurs slowed their opponents' offenses in the playoffs by nearly 2.6 points per 100, with only one increase of more than 1 point and two complete slaughters in '95.

Thanks, those are good statistics to provide. However, I do want to be clear that the contention is not that Robinson was outright bad on defence during his prime playoff runs. I also think it is important to remember that we are discussing him comparatively, not in isolation. How do those numbers compare with Ewing, Mourning, or Dikembe?

Dikembe at his offensive peak was nothing close to even D-Rob's bad offensive moments imo; his defense was undeniably on par with anyone's, but I don't think he merits this conversation quite yet. Here's Ewing from his age 24 to 30 seasons:

'88 Celtics (4 games): 115.4 RS, 117.3 series, +1.9
'89 76ers (3 games): 113.0 RS, 107.5 series, -5.5
'89 Bulls (6 games): 109.1 RS, 115.8 series, +6.7
'90 Celtics (5 games): 112.0 RS, 119.3 series, +7.3
'90 Pistons (5 games): 109.9 RS, 114.5 series, +4.6
'91 Bulls (3 games): 114.6 RS, 116.1 series, +1.5
'92 Pistons (5 games): 107.5 RS, 97.6 series, -9.9
'92 Bulls (7 games): 115.5 RS, 111.2 series, -4.3
'93 Pacers (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
'93 Hornets (5 games): 109.5 RS, 100.5 series, -9.0
'93 Bulls (6 games): 112.9 RS, 112.4 series, -0.5

Overall weighted average: -0.6, a fraction of Robinson's. Now, I bet this probably gets a lot better if you extend through Ewing's remaining All-Star years, like quite a bit better. I'd do that, but frankly the amount of pages I have to click through to get these stats is wearing me down. However I also think it's important to note that the Knicks had other defensive impact players like Starks, Oakley, etc. What great defenders did the Spurs have but Robinson? Was one year of old Rodman the best it got?

For Mourning, I just took his first seven playoff years, as his big injury came at age 30:

'93 Celtics (4 games): 108.7 RS, 108.7 series, 0.0
'93 Knicks (5 games): 106.1 RS, 104.9 series, -1.2
'95 Bulls (4 games): 109.5 RS, 112.2 series, +2.7
'96 Bulls (3 games): 115.2 RS, 119.2 series, +4.0
'97 Magic (5 games): 105.6 RS, 100.2 series, -4.4
'97 Knicks (7 games): 104.4 RS, 97.7 series, -6.7
'97 Bulls (5 games): 114.4 RS, 104.0 series, -10.4 (wow)
'98 Knicks (5 games): 103.0 RS, 105.3 series, +2.2
'99 Knicks (5 games): 98.6 RS, 103.4 series, +4.8
'00 Pistons (3 games): 107.3 RS, 89.2 series, -18.1 (ok, WOW)
'00 Knicks (7 games): 102.5 RS, 97.9 series, -4.6

Average, -2.9. Very very good. I'm not much of a believer in his offense even compared to Robinson's, but maybe I should be thinking about him more.

[E-Balla]

I watched the Magic Hawks series live going to 2 of the 3 games in Atlanta and Dwight averaged 5.5 TOVs a game and after exploding in games 1 and 2 (where he averaged 39.5 ppg and 7.5 topg) he averaged 20.8 ppg and 4.5 topg. Horford got killed, but he put up a fight and played good defense. Robinson didn't.

This isn't even the first game of this series I've analyzed this week but:

Watch on YouTube

1. I see a lot of doubles when they have the time to get there. Again I don't get this narrative that he was on an island at all. Hakeem didn't average the most apg he ever had in a series outside of the 95 Finals (where his shooters went off) because they weren't doubling him.

2. 18 dribbles on 11 buckets against Robinson (excluding the PNR plays). He looks like a damn practice cone not once does he check Hakeem or throw his body into him. It's like he was scared to touch him. You can watch the whole series and you'll see the same, Hakeem is just walking wherever he wants and doing whatever he wants. At one point the announcer mentions how Hakeem is getting any shot he wants to. No one can watch this and tell me it was in Bob Hill's defensive plan for David Robinson to emulate a 7 foot tall traffic cone for 6 games.

Most of what I'm seeing this video is a guard trying to come in and go for a steal, usually far too late to affect the move at all. There were two or three real hard doubles.

They're too late because Hakeem has him beat before he ever even touches the ball. If a player only has to dribble once to score how is anyone supposed to help?

He gets into his moves effortlessly. To affect the move Robinson needs to put up a fight against Hakeem. Check him, body him, and give his teammates time to get in there and confuse Hakeem. If Hakeem is going straight into his moves every touch (most of those buckets are 1 or 0 dribbles) they can't help.

[E-Balla]

1990 Nuggets (3 games): 108.0 RS, 105.2 series, -2.8
1990 Trail Blazers (7 games): 110.5 RS, 107.2 series, -3.3
1991 Warriors (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
1993 Trail Blazers (4 games): 108.3 RS, 105.1 series, -3.2
1993 Suns (6 games): 113.3 RS, 109.9 series, -3.4
1994 Jazz (4 games): 108.6 RS, 110.6 series, +2.0
1995 Nuggets (3 games): 109.1 RS, 103.1 series, -6.0
1995 Lakers (6 games): 109.1 RS, 97.9 series, -11.2 (!)
1995 Rockets (6 games): 109.7 RS, 110.6 series, +0.9 (although we've covered how they added Clyde)
1996 Suns (4 games): 110.3 RS, 109.3 series, -1.0
1996 Jazz (6 games): 113.3 RS, 114.1 series, +0.8

And the one year where he's hurt for the playoffs, this happens:
1992 Suns (3 games): 112.1 RS, 120.7 series, +8.6

It looks like a pretty consistent impact to me. If we average all those series, weighted by how many games each one took, Robinson's Spurs slowed their opponents' offenses in the playoffs by nearly 2.6 points per 100, with only one increase of more than 1 point and two complete slaughters in '95.

Thanks, those are good statistics to provide. However, I do want to be clear that the contention is not that Robinson was outright bad on defence during his prime playoff runs. I also think it is important to remember that we are discussing him comparatively, not in isolation. How do those numbers compare with Ewing, Mourning, or Dikembe?

Dikembe at his offensive peak was nothing close to even D-Rob's bad offensive moments imo; his defense was undeniably on par with anyone's, but I don't think he merits this conversation quite yet. Here's Ewing from his age 24 to 30 seasons:

'88 Celtics (4 games): 115.4 RS, 117.3 series, +1.9
'89 76ers (3 games): 113.0 RS, 107.5 series, -5.5
'89 Bulls (6 games): 109.1 RS, 115.8 series, +6.7
'90 Celtics (5 games): 112.0 RS, 119.3 series, +7.3
'90 Pistons (5 games): 109.9 RS, 114.5 series, +4.6
'91 Bulls (3 games): 114.6 RS, 116.1 series, +1.5
'92 Pistons (5 games): 107.5 RS, 97.6 series, -9.9
'92 Bulls (7 games): 115.5 RS, 111.2 series, -4.3
'93 Pacers (4 games): 111.9 RS, 111.7 series, -0.2
'93 Hornets (5 games): 109.5 RS, 100.5 series, -9.0
'93 Bulls (6 games): 112.9 RS, 112.4 series, -0.5

Overall weighted average: -0.6, a fraction of Robinson's. Now, I bet this probably gets a lot better if you extend through Ewing's remaining All-Star years, like quite a bit better. I'd do that, but frankly the amount of pages I have to click through to get these stats is wearing me down. However I also think it's important to note that the Knicks had other defensive impact players like Starks, Oakley, etc. What great defenders did the Spurs have but Robinson? Was one year of old Rodman the best it got?

For Mourning, I just took his first seven playoff years, as his big injury came at age 30:

'93 Celtics (4 games): 108.7 RS, 108.7 series, 0.0
'93 Knicks (5 games): 106.1 RS, 104.9 series, -1.2
'95 Bulls (4 games): 109.5 RS, 112.2 series, +2.7
'96 Bulls (3 games): 115.2 RS, 119.2 series, +4.0
'97 Magic (5 games): 105.6 RS, 100.2 series, -4.4
'97 Knicks (7 games): 104.4 RS, 97.7 series, -6.7
'97 Bulls (5 games): 114.4 RS, 104.0 series, -10.4 (wow)
'98 Knicks (5 games): 103.0 RS, 105.3 series, +2.2
'99 Knicks (5 games): 98.6 RS, 103.4 series, +4.8
'00 Pistons (3 games): 107.3 RS, 89.2 series, -18.1 (ok, WOW)
'00 Knicks (7 games): 102.5 RS, 97.9 series, -4.6

Average, -2.9. Very very good. I'm not much of a believer in his offense even compared to Robinson's, but maybe I should be thinking about him more.

Why not? At his best from 98 to 00 Zo averaged 21.1 ppg on 55.3 TS% in the postseason while playing the -4.7 98 Knicks, -4.7 99 Knicks, and the -3.2 00 Knicks. Overall the combined DRTG of his opponents in the playoffs that year was under a 101. That's very impressive offensive production.

[Mavericksfan]

Not at all because we can point to a few times KG stepped up to the plate. We can't point to any time Robinson has. Remember Odinn's post Robinson's best series (against opponents worth caring about) are clearly way worse than the best series (against opponents worth caring about) of anyone else on the list or in the conversation. That includes KG who has series like 99 and 01 vs San Antonio which are way better than anything we've seen from Robinson.

Maybe I’m missing something but how are either series seen as KG stepping up? He already had poor efficiency in 99, his playmaking numbers dropped a bit and his team’s offense fell off of a cliff. In 2001, his numbers do hold up a lot better their offense once again falls off of a cliff.

As a defense, sure, the Spurs played well. That doesn't mean Robinson did. Again it's a 5 on 5 game, why give credit to the one guy getting torched and not the 4 other guys locking down their men?

They both get credit. Modern nba basketball isnt just a bunch of guys taking turns isoing each other. By thay point defenses utilized help defense schemes and the Spurs was designed around Robinzon’s mobility and rim protection.

I am ranking peak seasons too but I understand the luck and variance of seasons. I'm not giving someone credit for not getting exposed only because they lost too early to get exposed or they played a good matchup. The way I'm going about this is if I wanted to win a ring, which of these seasons and players do I want leading, or down the line being a part of, my squad the most.

Yeah I get that. I think winning a ring in general involves a ton of luck + variance. Sometimes shots fall, sometimes a ball bounces your way. But I do recognizd other traits are a product of a weakness be it mental in terms of skillset. I look more at their performance that season(as a whole not just against the best playoff teams) and judge them within the context of their success and failures.

Yes but it's not like Terry Cummings had a lot more assists and like I said he had more TSA too.

I must’ve misunderstood you then. I thought we were talking about 04 KG and 95 Robinson.

It isn't the only way, but it's the way that requires less help. If I think Robinson can win me a ring with a great squad but Moses can win me a ring with a mediocre and great squad, why would I choose Robinson? Why choose the player that needs MORE help to get a ring when we're talking about which player is the greatest?

[/quote]

I think there are only maybe 5-8 players that can win a ring with a medioce cast. Even Moses only did it when going to an already stacked team. I think everyone we’re arguing for all need a lot of help. Dirk in 2011 is the exception but his regular season was pedestrian compared to a lot of these guys.

As far as your video response I’d rather watch at least an entire quarter of one of the games instead of Hakeem’s highlights. It looks like they waited for Hakeem to attack before doubling but he was too quick. So if you’re interested we can pick any quarter if that series and analysis D-Rob’s defense

[Mavericksfan]

And I just wanted to say you guys do make some compelling arguments against D-Rob

I have him a lot lower than I used to. My main issue is I think KG has a lot of the same flaws(not quite to the same extent) and I dont think there should quite as big of a gap at their peaks

[E-Balla]

Maybe I’m missing something but how are either series seen as KG stepping up? He already had poor efficiency in 99, his playmaking numbers dropped a bit and his team’s offense fell off of a cliff. In 2001, his numbers do hold up a lot better their offense once again falls off of a cliff.

Well you have to remember the defensive strength of the 99-03 Spurs.

In 99 San Antonio had a 95 DRTG and their opponents had a 46.4 TS%. In that context Minny's 95.2 ORTG was better than their regular season offense and averaging 21.8 ppg and 3.8 apg on 48.8 TS% with a 100 ORTG is pretty good.

In 01 their offense did fall off a cliff but KG, against a defense with a 98.0 DRTG, averaged 21 ppg and 4.3 apg on 56.9 TS% with a whopping 120 ORTG.

They both get credit. Modern nba basketball isnt just a bunch of guys taking turns isoing each other. By thay point defenses utilized help defense schemes and the Spurs was designed around Robinzon’s mobility and rim protection.

You can rewatch those games and Robinson's defenses isn't bad when helping but he was getting roasted 1 on 1 and his PNR coverage is horrendous (sidebar: it's strange to me people act like his PNR coverage was so great I think Hakeem and young Ewing cover them better). I'm not giving him credit for being on the court, he had to actually perform and he was bleeding points. Sure their defense was ok, but they could've been way better if Robinson held up like his teammates did.

Yeah I get that. I think winning a ring in general involves a ton of luck + variance. Sometimes shots fall, sometimes a ball bounces your way. But I do recognizd other traits are a product of a weakness be it mental in terms of skillset. I look more at their performance that season(as a whole not just against the best playoff teams) and judge them within the context of their success and failures.

This could very well explain the gap here in how we see this season.

I must’ve misunderstood you then. I thought we were talking about 04 KG and 95 Robinson.

Ah ok. I was slightly confused there for a second.

I think there are only maybe 5-8 players that can win a ring with a medioce cast. Even Moses only did it when going to an already stacked team. I think everyone we’re arguing for all need a lot of help. Dirk in 2011 is the exception but his regular season was pedestrian compared to a lot of these guys.

As far as your video response I’d rather watch at least an entire quarter of one of the games instead of Hakeem’s highlights. It looks like they waited for Hakeem to attack before doubling but he was too quick. So if you’re interested we can pick any quarter if that series and analysis D-Rob’s defense

Might take you up on that offer this morning, I'm supposed to be cleaning but I'm procrastinating.

[E-Balla]

Watch on YouTube

1st quarter:

Possession 1 - Hakeem runs straight to the middle of the lane, is barely touched by Robinson so he established great position. Makes an easy fadeaway. Horrible defense from Robinson.

Possession 2 - Hakeem again runs straight down the court to the left block untouched. Posts Robinson, one dribble, Robinson fouls him on the fadeaway. Notable because like I said Robinson was so bad a hard double from VDN couldn't get there in time. Horrible defense from Robinson.

Possession 3 - Hakeem covers, then runs to the left block uncontested again. Takes one dribble, fades, and misses the uncontested jumper. Again, bad defense from Robinson.

Possession 4 - Finally fights Hakeem and plays tough defense allowing the double to come forcing Hakeem to give it to Kenny who takes a bad shot on the dribble penetration clearly not wanting to try DRob. Good defense.

Possession 5 - Fouls Hakeem while reaching after his OREB. Gets lucky because they call it on Elliot. Makes up for it by stopping his drive from the 3 point line. Good defense.

Possession 6 - Let's Hakeem best him down the court. Gets lucky the pass to him went haywire. Horrible defense.

Not in play possession 7.

Possession 8 - Hakeem gets to his spot and dream shakes him. Defense wasn't good but no one on earth could defend that so it's a wash.

Possession 9 - Fights Hakeem in positioning but gets beat for the open jumper. Wash.

Possession 10 - Loses Hakeem ball watching on the perimeter and gives up an open jumper Hakeem misses. Bad defense.

Possession 11 - Wash.

Possession 12 - Meh. Not really in this play much. Wash.

Possession 13 - Contests the post, double had time to come. Hakeem gets him with up and under on repost. Wash.

Possession 14 - Let's Hakeem waltz to his spot and get off an uncontested fadeaway. Horrible defense.

Possession 15 - Hakeem literally walks down the whole court to his spot leaving the defense scrambling to cover for him leading to an open 3 from Horry. Horrible defense.

Not really in play possession 16.

Possession 17 - Helps on Drexler on fastbreak. Good but easy play.

Possession 18 - Has to leave Hakeem open to help on Kenny's drive. Good defense.

Possession 19 - Let's Hakeem get to his spot and drive to the middle of the lane forcing the defense to collapse. All 5 defenders are within 2 feet of Hakeem when he kicked it out to Horry who was wide open. Bad defense.

Possession 20 - Not hustling down court at all on the fast break. Clearly tired. Bad defense.

Possession 21 - Let's Hakeem get to his spot and does a pretty bad attempt at contesting, but Hakeem makes a nice hook. Bad defense.

Possession 22 - Hakeem gets to his spot for an uncontested fadeaway. Bad defense.

That's 22 possessions in the first and half of those possessions Robinson plays bad defense. A few of them are honestly embarrassing for someone so talented. Even if you don't totally agree with my assessment of these plays you gotta admit his defense was below average.

[DatAsh]

E-Balla, how do you rate Robinson's playoff defense? Elgee has Robinson as leading the second best playoff defenses, above Hakeem, Duncan, Ewing, ect.

I find myself very convinced by your Robinson arguments when it comes to offense. Without the offensive struggles against good defenses that I think you've done a great job of showing, I'd could see Robinson's peak as high as top 5. That said, given that were at #18 now, I'm starting to think Robinson's defense is good enough to get him in on that alone, even if his offense is only +1 or so.

[DatAsh]

And I just wanted to say you guys do make some compelling arguments against D-Rob

I have him a lot lower than I used to. My main issue is I think KG has a lot of the same flaws(not quite to the same extent) and I dont think there should quite as big of a gap at their peaks

From my perspective, KG's offense didn't struggle quite as much against good defenses. KG goes from like +4-4.5 to +2.5-3.5. Robinson's offense goes from like +5-5.5 to +1-2. I also have KG as the slightly better defender, though that's very, very close.

[yellowknifer]

Bob Mcadoo had a very impressive peak. Gets ignored often because it was relatively short and he piled up some injuries.