RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #12 (Larry Bird)

[iggymcfrack]

One thing I’m noticing while trying to pick nits between Oscar, Bird, and West is that Oscar seemed to have a large edge in health. While Oscar and West both spent 14 seasons in the league and Bird was there for 13, these are the numbers of minutes they played:

Oscar 43,886
West 36,571
Bird 34,443

Oscar played at least 64 games in every season while West played less than that in 4 seasons and Bird played less than that 3 times. West was unavailable for the playoffs twice while Bird missed an entire season. If everything else is close to equal, that could be another edge for Oscar.

[70sFan]

One thing I’m noticing while trying to pick nits between Oscar, Bird, and West is that Oscar seemed to have a large edge in health. While Oscar and West both spent 14 seasons in the league and Bird was there for 13, these are the numbers of minutes they played:

Oscar 43,886
West 36,571
Bird 34,443

Oscar played at least 64 games in every season while West played less than that in 4 seasons and Bird played less than that 3 times. West was unavailable for the playoffs twice while Bird missed an entire season. If everything else is close to equal, that could be another edge for Oscar.

I think that's the main reason to put Oscar ahead of both all-time.

[eminence]

Health gap is the main reason I choose Oscar over West, for sure.

[iggymcfrack]

Or maybe Durant needed to for once translate that “unguardable” skillset into the postseason outside of some laughably stacked offensive roster.

However, for what it is worth, I may end up taking Durant over Robinson too. He certainly has a longevity edge by now, and Robinson does not get any breaks from me for missing time because of navy commitments.

EDIT: To be clear on the last point, I am more interested in postseasons here, so Durant being a top player on twelve postseason teams now is worth more to me than Robinson being a top player on ten postseason teams, a role-player on two more, and an absent regular season driver on one more (1992). Not by a lot, but in terms of meaningful longevity, that is more what I check first.

Robinson in the 2002 and 2003 playoffs > Durant in 2010 and 2022. Both players really have 10 high level postseasons and 2 poor ones, but Robinson was at least a meaningful contributor to a champion in ‘03 with some big games while KD’s 2 bad years have little to no redeeming value. Here they are ranked by BPM:

2003 Robinson 3.6
2010 Durant 2.1
2002 Robinson 1.2
2022 Durant -2.9

Robinson was on the court for half the game in that period. He missed almost the entire first round in 2002. To be blunt, no, I do not care that there is some formula that thinks he was really awesome in those 24 minutes a game and that Durant would have been better staying on the bench in 2022.

It is not nothing. I would call that a bigger contribution than 1998 Kobe. Being in the postseason is worth more than not being in the postseason, and 24 minutes of Robinson is worth more historically than a lot of roleplayer starters, just as it was for 1986 Walton. But we are talking about a guy who played as much for his team as Malik Rose did. Parse that for what it is.

I mean I’m fine if you just wanna call all those postseasons zeros or put them on the same low level, but giving Durant the edge specifically because you’re acting like 2 terrible postseasons he had are an upgrade to Robinson being a key piece on a champion just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. That 2022 series KD had against Boston is still fresh on my mind and KD was abominably, unspeakably bad. He looked like a tall child getting picked on by shorter grown men. I don’t see how he gets any credit there whatsoever.

[70sFan]

Robinson in the 2002 and 2003 playoffs > Durant in 2010 and 2022. Both players really have 10 high level postseasons and 2 poor ones, but Robinson was at least a meaningful contributor to a champion in ‘03 with some big games while KD’s 2 bad years have little to no redeeming value. Here they are ranked by BPM:

2003 Robinson 3.6
2010 Durant 2.1
2002 Robinson 1.2
2022 Durant -2.9

Robinson was on the court for half the game in that period. He missed almost the entire first round in 2002. To be blunt, no, I do not care that there is some formula that thinks he was really awesome in those 24 minutes a game and that Durant would have been better staying on the bench in 2022.

It is not nothing. I would call that a bigger contribution than 1998 Kobe. Being in the postseason is worth more than not being in the postseason, and 24 minutes of Robinson is worth more historically than a lot of roleplayer starters, just as it was for 1986 Walton. But we are talking about a guy who played as much for his team as Malik Rose did. Parse that for what it is.

I mean I’m fine if you just wanna call all those postseasons zeros or put them on the same low level, but giving Durant the edge specifically because you’re acting like 2 terrible postseasons he had are an upgrade to Robinson being a key piece on a champion just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. That 2022 series KD had against Boston is still fresh on my mind and KD was abominably, unspeakably bad. He looked like a tall child getting picked on by shorter grown men. I don’t see how he gets any credit there whatsoever.

I mean, we literally have similar examples of peak Robinson struggling to the similar degree against weaker defensive teams than 2022 Celtics. We have seen Robinson struggling a lot against the Suns in 2000.

Why should we expect that 2003 Robinson would do any better in Durant's situation? I get that KD played badly and should be blamed for that, but we can't compare his role to Robinson who was little else than a nice roleplayer in 2003, playing basically half the time Durant did in 2022 playoffs.

No, 2003, Robinson wasn't a more valuable player than 2022 Durant, unless you have a talented team with well built starting 5 - and even then there are many scenarios in which Durant would be more valuable.

[iggymcfrack]

Robinson was on the court for half the game in that period. He missed almost the entire first round in 2002. To be blunt, no, I do not care that there is some formula that thinks he was really awesome in those 24 minutes a game and that Durant would have been better staying on the bench in 2022.

It is not nothing. I would call that a bigger contribution than 1998 Kobe. Being in the postseason is worth more than not being in the postseason, and 24 minutes of Robinson is worth more historically than a lot of roleplayer starters, just as it was for 1986 Walton. But we are talking about a guy who played as much for his team as Malik Rose did. Parse that for what it is.

I mean I’m fine if you just wanna call all those postseasons zeros or put them on the same low level, but giving Durant the edge specifically because you’re acting like 2 terrible postseasons he had are an upgrade to Robinson being a key piece on a champion just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. That 2022 series KD had against Boston is still fresh on my mind and KD was abominably, unspeakably bad. He looked like a tall child getting picked on by shorter grown men. I don’t see how he gets any credit there whatsoever.

I mean, we literally have similar examples of peak Robinson struggling to the similar degree against weaker defensive teams than 2022 Celtics. We have seen Robinson struggling a lot against the Suns in 2000.

Why should we expect that 2003 Robinson would do any better in Durant's situation? I get that KD played badly and should be blamed for that, but we can't compare his role to Robinson who was little else than a nice roleplayer in 2003, playing basically half the time Durant did in 2022 playoffs.

No, 2003, Robinson wasn't a more valuable player than 2022 Durant, unless you have a talented team with well built starting 5 - and even then there are many scenarios in which Durant would be more valuable.

Regardless of whether he was more valuable on different hypothetical teams, AEnigma said he was looking specifically at the playoffs and that KD was a top player on 12 postseason teams while Robinson was only a top player on 10 postseason teams. Robinson played 24 MPG in 2003 and had at least a strong case as the second most valuable player on a champion. Durant had a strong case as being the worst player on the floor for either team in that Boston series. How does that count as 1 point for KD and 0 for Robinson.

Also, sure Robinson’s had series where he struggled as a scorer, but that’s the thing about being an all-time great defender. Even if you struggle to score the ball, you can still have a major impact in other ways. Russell struggled scoring the ball in playoff series in lots of years where we’d still consider him player of the year. KD’s a pure scorer. He’s a decent enough defender but he’s usually hidden on a weaker player so he can rest. His passing and playmaking are subpar to begin with and they were nonexistent when he was afraid to take a dribble against the suffocating Celtics defense. When he gets shut down offensively, he’s a zero. A nothing. Sometimes even a negative.

[One_and_Done]

One thing I’m noticing while trying to pick nits between Oscar, Bird, and West is that Oscar seemed to have a large edge in health. While Oscar and West both spent 14 seasons in the league and Bird was there for 13, these are the numbers of minutes they played:

Oscar 43,886
West 36,571
Bird 34,443

Oscar played at least 64 games in every season while West played less than that in 4 seasons and Bird played less than that 3 times. West was unavailable for the playoffs twice while Bird missed an entire season. If everything else is close to equal, that could be another edge for Oscar.

Yeh but the eras they played in are completely different.

[AEnigma]

as for oscar, I tend to think we probably slightly overrate oscar and west's efficiency numbers like TS Add because they just played in such an inefficient era that they basically have a first mover advantage on being guys who first had something like modern efficiency. i'm not sure they're really standing out like this in the 80's or later.

and just finally, with russell and wilt and mikan and west, i feel like i'm reaching my limit on guys who had careers that basically ended in the first 25 years of the league. that's only 1/3 of the league history, in an era where there often only 8 or 9 teams. the talent pool was significantly shallower on an absolute basis and we're talking much less than 1/3 of the total team-seasons played during that era. so if oscar gets in in the top 15 or 17, then we're using up 1/3 of the slots on way less than 1/3 of the talent pool and team-seasons.

I am sympathetic to most of this and think balancing these sentiments is the trickiest part of trying to adhere to era relative accomplishments.

I disagree more here:

i'm just not very high on him. yes, great TS Add, yes a bunch of #1 offenses, but his last dominant regular season seems to be at age 29 or maybe age 30 if you want to include one more 300 TS Add season. but his playoffs numbers have never blown me away and his last dominant playoffs is at age 28. so i'm not seeing a ton of longevity. also, for a guy who had the misfortune of playing on untalented teams, he didn't take advantage of the few chances he got, going 1-2 as an SRS favorite before kareem, with all 3 of them being at least +2 favorites. his only win was as a +8 favorite.

Eminence is right that the 1965 76ers are hardly a real upset in any meaningful sense.

But this is a good opportunity to press back on a nomination I felt occurred too early:

Since the argument is West vs Oscar, I guess we are lucky in that they played against each other.
https://stathead.com/tiny/jtzzZ
87 games -
Oscar 28.5 to West 27.7
For games with stat totals
West: 53.5%TS/5.8 reb/7.0 asst
Oscar: 53.7%TS/7.2 reb/9.6 asst
So Oscar outscored West with better TS%, outrebounded him and has a lot more assists. Head-to-head 87 games.
Oscar played 20% more RS minutes than West, due to West playing 118 less games- so Oscar winds up with 189.1 winshares versus West's 162.6

West is lauded for his superior post season play. In 14 years, he only had one win against a team with a better record: 2 wins less than the 1970 Hawks,
in a season where Wilt only played 12 games. So he really never beat a better team in the playoffs. Mostly they were able to make the finals because he had a better team the the Royals, and he played in the conference opposite Boston.

Oscar’s best win without Kareem was in 1963 against the 3.8 SRS Syracuse Nationals (2nd in the league), coached by Alex Hannum. He was a 2.5 SRS underdog, with a six win disparity actual and expected.

West’s best win without Wilt was also in 1963, against the 1.4 SRS Hawks. The Lakers were 1.3 SRS favourites. I reiterate, West’s best win without Wilt was against a 1.4 SRS team. And even in those first two years with Wilt, the best team they beat were the 2.1 SRS Hawks in 1969.

Against Bill Russell in the postseason, these are their respective averages:
Oscar — 31.4/10.2/7.5 on 54.09% efficiency, 35.3% win rate (34.9% win rate if including the two series losses to Wilt’s 76ers)
West — 33/5.7/4.9 on 55.15% efficiency, 36.8% win rate

Not that you necessarily care too much about “longevity,” but Oscar for his career played an extra five thousand minutes. Relatedly, for as much is made of Oscar missing the playoffs in the eastern conference for four years of his career, West of course was also injured and unable to contribute at all to his team’s postseason hopes in 1967, 1971, and 1974 (Oscar did miss the end of the 1972 conference finals, but you know, he at least stayed healthy enough need to reach that point).

I could see West if he had some Hakeem-esque tendency to defeat superior teams, but he did not; if anything, Oscar is the one with the best upset / individual win — but I will admit by your standards, Oscar also has the worst loss (1962 Pistons), so maybe that evens out. I could have an easier time seeing West if he looked like the more impactful player, but he does not. I could have an easier time seeing West if he looked demonstrably more “productive”, but to me at least he does not when adjusting for the fact Oscar immediately was confronted with the best teams while West tended to avoid them best teams until the Finals, where he also lost (if he beat the teams that beat Oscar, the conversation has a lot more room to shift). And on that note, I could have an easier time seeing West if he had won more, or more clearly won as a leader, but he did not.

None of that is me really “hating” on West, and I can kind-of see the writing on the wall for that collective vote at #14 or whatever, but a lot of the reasoning given to excuse those absent postseasons and lesser time played to me reads as perceiving a meaningful playoff advantage where I do not see any.

[ZeppelinPage]

Vote: Jerry West
Nomination: Moses Malone

I was considering a few different players here, both older and modern. I value rebounding highly and what Moses was able to do in the playoffs. Few were able to haul down offensive rebounds like Moses. I can see arguments for other players but his performances and how he was able to impact the game places him above the competition for me. Now, onto West:

Rk2023's Post on Jerry West

Total Career Minutes Among Players Inducted or Nominated:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 66,297
LeBron James: 65,747
Kobe Bryant: 57,278
Tim Duncan: 56,738
Kevin Garnett: 55,701
Wilt Chamberlain: 55,418
Shaquille O'Neal: 50,016
Hakeem Olajuwon: 49,971
Michael Jordan: 48,485
Bill Russell: 48,223
Jerry West: 42,892
Larry Bird: 41,329
Magic Johnson: 40,783
Stephen Curry: 35,794
George Mikan: 9,850

As much as West was injured during the regular season, he was routinely making the Finals and those minutes add up. So, considering the fact that Magic's and Steph's careers were enough to place them in the top 11, did West play enough to warrant voting him in here? While durability is something often harped on with West, I believe he still played enough minutes (especially in the playoffs) to keep that from being a problem.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone here is knowledgeable enough to know just how good West was on offense during his time. His TS+ numbers on such a high volume are among the greatest ever. He was a fantastic all-around player that could drive or utilize his lighting fast pull-up to catch defenders off-guard.

What I did want to bring to light was Jerry West's defensive ability. Earlier I saw someone mention something along the lines of "West was a good defender but nothing spectacular" so I did want to go into a little more detail about what coaches, players, and writers of the time thought about West's defense. This is important because, while there is a good amount of footage on West out there, nobody watched West more than these contemporary sources. Afterwards, I wanted to show more of what West can do on film.

"I don't even like to talk about myself but I think I would have set a steal record that no one would have ever come close to--no one."
-- Jerry West on Point Forward with Andre Igoudala and Evan Turner

"I think the best player that I had play defense against me was Jerry West."
-- Sam Jones in a 2011 ESPN interview

Jerry West was around 6'5" in shoes. He's spoken about his athletic abilities before, but he was quite a standout in his era and would hold up even today. He was quick, long (around a 6'9" wingspan), and could jump higher than most players.

Through my research I've found what seems like countless mentions of Jerry West's defense. His stealing and blocking ability was frequently mentioned:

"Certainly, he blocks more shots than any other guard ever and more than most centers. Then, too, he breaks up a lot of plays."
-- Bill Sharman in 1965, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"Jerry is a superstar on offense who can be just as valuable on defense and you can't find too many of those around . . . He blocks more shots than any other guard."
-- Warriors Coach Bill Sharman in 1967, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"At his position, nobody does as good an all-around job. Bill Russell is 6-10, so he is big enough to plug up the middle, but West deflects more passes and blocks a lot of shots."
-- Fred Schaus in 1967

Spoiler:

"...I lost count of all his steals and blocked shots."
--Basketball column by John Hall following 1968 Western Conference Finals

Spoiler:

"Sure, Jerry gets a lot of steals, but people often overlook how many times he touches the ball on defense during the game. He has the quickest hands of any player I've ever seen."
-- Hot Rod Hundley on West in 1969

Spoiler:

"[Jerry West] merely leads the NBA in assists and the world in steals, deflected passes and broken dribbles."
-- 1970

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 7 steals in the 3rd quarter against the Sonics:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 9 steals and a "few" blocks:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 10 steals in three quarters:

Spoiler:

Jerry West records 12 steals against the Phoenix Suns in the 1970 playoffs:

Spoiler:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Praise of West's general defensive abilities was also common:

"Right close by his offensive prowess was his defensive ability, and to me, Jerry West was the most underrated defensive player in that era."
-- Red Auerbach

"West is the greatest superstar in the league at both ends of the court."
-- Warriors Coach Bill Sharman in 1968, years before he coached West

Spoiler:

"I've often said he's the best defensive guard EVER to play the game . . . I know he has two or three times more blocked shots than any guard who lived."
-- Lakers coach Bill Sharman in 1973

Spoiler:

"He is the best defensive guard in the league."
-- Chicago Bulls coach Johnny Kerr in 1968

Spoiler:

"It's the best defensive job done on me this year -- or any year for that matter."
-- Hall of Famer Lou Hudson after 1970 Western Conference Finals where Jerry West held him to 16.3 PPG on a 29 FG%

Spoiler:

"Jerry's defense is what they miss the most when he's not there . . . West gives more defensive effort when the other team has the ball than any other of the big offensive stars in the entire NBA."
--Cincinnati Royals player on West in 1964

Spoiler:

This is all just a snippet of many more mentions regarding West's defense that I have found, far too many to list here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's take a look at the film and see if it supports what contemporary accounts are telling us.

West has described "seeing the game in slow motion" and thinking about the game in "angles" as a key reason for his impactful defense. His long arms and quick hands could find these angles and poke the ball free. This, combined with his leaping ability, led to plays like this:

West Steal to Win Game 3 of 1962 Finals:

Spoiler:

West 3 Blocks vs Warriors - 1964:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

West 2-on-1 Transition Block into Steal (Lakers Coach Fred Schaus Commentating) - 1965:

Spoiler:

West Back-to-Back Steals at End of Game 7 of the 1966 Finals:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

West Steal and Block vs 76ers - 1969:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

West Pressuring and Deflecting - 1969 Western Conference Finals:

Spoiler:

West Blocks Sam Jones Twice and Steals Pass - Game 1 of 1969 Finals:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

West Disrupts Celtics in Transition for Steal and Reads Pass for Steal - Game 4 of 1969 Finals:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

West Uses Length to Strip Connie Hawkins - Game 7 of 1970 Western Division Semifinals:

Spoiler:

West Pokes Ball Away for Steal - 1970:

Spoiler:

West's threat level on defense could help negate the transition game of teams like the Celtics. In Game 7 of the 1962 NBA Finals, Jerry West falls back off missed shots to ensure he's there to disrupt the Celtics' fast break. Not only does he block this Sam Jones drive:

Spoiler:

But his presence alone was making it more difficult to pass or get open looks:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Much like the written sources, this is but a tiny glimpse of West's defense, but he consistently displays this high-impact defense that is mentioned from people of the time period. I believe West is one of the greatest defenders of his era, and among the greatest stealers and off-ball defenders to ever play the game.

[AEnigma]

I mean I’m fine if you just wanna call all those postseasons zeros or put them on the same low level, but giving Durant the edge specifically because you’re acting like 2 terrible postseasons he had are an upgrade to Robinson being a key piece on a champion just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. That 2022 series KD had against Boston is still fresh on my mind and KD was abominably, unspeakably bad. He looked like a tall child getting picked on by shorter grown men. I don’t see how he gets any credit there whatsoever.

I mean, we literally have similar examples of peak Robinson struggling to the similar degree against weaker defensive teams than 2022 Celtics. We have seen Robinson struggling a lot against the Suns in 2000.

Why should we expect that 2003 Robinson would do any better in Durant's situation? I get that KD played badly and should be blamed for that, but we can't compare his role to Robinson who was little else than a nice roleplayer in 2003, playing basically half the time Durant did in 2022 playoffs.

No, 2003, Robinson wasn't a more valuable player than 2022 Durant, unless you have a talented team with well built starting 5 - and even then there are many scenarios in which Durant would be more valuable.

Regardless of whether he was more valuable on different hypothetical teams, AEnigma said he was looking specifically at the playoffs and that KD was a top player on 12 postseason teams while Robinson was only a top player on 10 postseason teams. Robinson played 24 MPG in 2003 and had at least a strong case as the second most valuable player on a champion. Durant had a strong case as being the worst player on the floor for either team in that Boston series. How does that count as 1 point for KD and 0 for Robinson.

Also, sure Robinson’s had series where he struggled as a scorer, but that’s the thing about being an all-time great defender. Even if you struggle to score the ball, you can still have a major impact in other ways. Russell struggled scoring the ball in playoff series in lots of years where we’d still consider him player of the year. KD’s a pure scorer. He’s a decent enough defender but he’s usually hidden on a weaker player so he can rest. His passing and playmaking are subpar to begin with and they were nonexistent when he was afraid to take a dribble against the suffocating Celtics defense. When he gets shut down offensively, he’s a zero. A nothing. Sometimes even a negative.

I am pretty far from a Durant fan, but if you think he was “a zero or even a negative” against the Celtics, then we have deeply, deeply, deeply different interpretations of what would have happened if Durant were not there at all. Reminds me of people who try to argue the Heat would have won the 2011 Finals if Lebron had been benched for the last three or four games or otherwise replaced with some random roleplayer.

[HeartBreakKid]

I'm having a hard time buying Bird was better than Robertson and West at this point. They both seem like more efficient scorers, and depending on who we are talking about they have anchored better more elite offenses, kill Bird on defense, better playmakers by quite some bit.

They were bigger outliers from other perimeter players than Bird was I think as well. They did not collect the rings or the fame but they played in a less commercial era with less stacked teams (mainly an argument for Oscar).

Bird did not really play longer than them either. So even West's injury disadvantages are mitigated some bit.

Were West and Oscar clearly better playmakers than Bird? I thought the whole strength of Bird was supposed to be that he made elite difficult passes that other guys couldn’t match that led to easy buckets.

We only have AST% for part of Robertson and West’s regular season careers, but we have them for their entire playoff careers so let’s look at that. We come up with Robertson at 29.5, West at 24.5, and Bird at 23.8. Considering that Bird was supposed to be an all-time passer for his position and that West and Oscar spent a lot of time at PG where they were going to get easy assists, I think the only thing we can be confident on is that West was probably the weakest passer/playmaker of the three.

I’m still kinda leaning toward picking West or Oscar here, largely because of their much better ability at getting to the free throw line and their WOWY numbers, but I think all three have very good cases and I’m still a long ways from being decided.

Oscar was for sure. He wasn't anchoring the best offenses season after season for nothing. Great handles for his time and a control of the game in general.

Bird is a better passer than West is. West still plays point and initiates the offense though.


I just don't really see Bird/Bryant's argument over West/Robertson outside of winning more rings and playing in a more publicized era. The latter just seem like better players to me.

If I am really going to war in the post season am I going to take Bryant/Bird over West, who has a large sample size of scoring more and on better efficiency (more or less) than them? He kills them both on defense. He can play both on and off ball very well, so he is positional just as versatile as them at the very least.

[One_and_Done]

It's such a weird argument that Dirk had less help than say KD. I mean it's true, but it's also true he faced easier teams for most of his playoff prime. KD wishes he could have played the 2006 Heat over the 2012 version, or the 73 win Warriors, or even Giannis Bucks.

Dirk is right around here for me too, but relative to who they faced Dirk can't cry poverty of support casts against most guys. Cuban was very early in spending a tonne of money to put talent around Dirk.

[HeartBreakKid]

I suppose another way of looking at it is Bird/Bryant just strike me as players who had faux GOAT arguments which give the impression they are better than Big O and West (though, Oscar Robertson also had a faux GOAT argument, just those people are not around to argue those type of things on the internet).

[Owly]

Or maybe Durant needed to for once translate that “unguardable” skillset into the postseason outside of some laughably stacked offensive roster.

However, for what it is worth, I may end up taking Durant over Robinson too. He certainly has a longevity edge by now, and Robinson does not get any breaks from me for missing time because of navy commitments.

EDIT: To be clear on the last point, I am more interested in postseasons here, so Durant being a top player on twelve postseason teams now is worth more to me than Robinson being a top player on ten postseason teams, a role-player on two more, and an absent regular season driver on one more (1992). Not by a lot, but in terms of meaningful longevity, that is more what I check first.

It depends on how one does this but Robinson's "playoff" absence being an absence from participating in the playoffs rather than an absence from some playoff games was conditional an teammate performance. A stronger team (perhaps with and without Robinson, securing a better seed and matchup as well as doing better without him) might have seen him available for circa mid-second round. It's reported as a six-week absence and ("the first two weeks of the playoffs") in the Deseret News.

Fwiw, it also says the injury was "originally sustained" versus the Hornets on March 16th but his minutes remained the same but his minutes load in the next three games remained above his season average. It's easy to second guess with knowledge of what did happen and we don't know internal communications but one can't help but think allowing him to recover sooner and thereby also less likely to re-aggravate it could have allowed everyone a better outcome.

*Similarly (in terms of potential availability, but with better management of their long-term interests), projected recovery times suggested Robinson could have returned for not just the playoffs but, iirc a fair chunk of regular season in '97. The human body is complex but team circumstance may be at play as much as "longevity".

Conversely Durant has been available for the past three playoffs because his teams have managed to keep themselves above water (or not too far below) in his absence (obviously the trade complicates this in the third year) and whilst playoff availability should be the team's priority, extended absences (barring trades) would (and generally did) lead to a difficult route and made deep runs and titles (and opportunities to prove his health) less likely. Back to the Warriors he missed 2 first round games and played 20 minutes in a third, but it didn't matter and a sweep bought more rest time in '17, whilst a '19 injury proved costly.

Playoff availability is a complex matter, given inconsistent contexts, opportunities etc.

[Owly]

I suppose another way of looking at it is Bird/Bryant just strike me as players who had faux GOAT arguments which give the impression they are better than Big O and West (though, Oscar Robertson also had a faux GOAT argument, just those people are not around to argue those type of things on the internet).

A couple of authors did list Robertson first back in the 90s, for what it's worth.

[HeartBreakKid]

I suppose another way of looking at it is Bird/Bryant just strike me as players who had faux GOAT arguments which give the impression they are better than Big O and West (though, Oscar Robertson also had a faux GOAT argument, just those people are not around to argue those type of things on the internet).

A couple of authors did list Robertson first back in the 90s, for what it's worth.

Yeah, that was a long time ago now though!

[trelos6]

Ignoring the typo for KD for now,
I have Bird as the clear best player on the board.

12. Larry Bird
13. Jerry West

Nomination: D Rob

Nomination: KD

What Bird seasons do you see as MVP level?

80-87 inclusive. 88 weak MVP.

[AEnigma]

Or maybe Durant needed to for once translate that “unguardable” skillset into the postseason outside of some laughably stacked offensive roster.

However, for what it is worth, I may end up taking Durant over Robinson too. He certainly has a longevity edge by now, and Robinson does not get any breaks from me for missing time because of navy commitments.

EDIT: To be clear on the last point, I am more interested in postseasons here, so Durant being a top player on twelve postseason teams now is worth more to me than Robinson being a top player on ten postseason teams, a role-player on two more, and an absent regular season driver on one more (1992). Not by a lot, but in terms of meaningful longevity, that is more what I check first.

It depends on how one does this but Robinson's "playoff" absence being an absence from participating in the playoffs rather than an absence from some playoff games was conditional an teammate performance. A stronger team (perhaps with and without Robinson, securing a better seed and matchup as well as doing better without him) might have seen him available for circa mid-second round. It's reported as a six-week absence and ("the first two weeks of the playoffs") in the Deseret News.

Fwiw, it also says the injury was "originally sustained" versus the Hornets on March 16th but his minutes remained the same but his minutes load in the next three games remained above his season average. It's easy to second guess with knowledge of what did happen and we don't know internal communications but one can't help but think allowing him to recover sooner and thereby also less likely to re-aggravate it could have allowed everyone a better outcome.

*Similarly (in terms of potential availability, but with better management of their long-term interests), projected recovery times suggested Robinson could have returned for not just the playoffs but, iirc a fair chunk of regular season in '97. The human body is complex but team circumstance may be at play as much as "longevity".

Conversely Durant has been available for the past three playoffs because his teams have managed to keep themselves above water (or not too far below) in his absence (obviously the trade complicates this in the third year) and whilst playoff availability should be the team's priority, extended absences (barring trades) would (and generally did) lead to a difficult route and made deep runs and titles (and opportunities to prove his health) less likely. Back to the Warriors he missed 2 first round games and played 20 minutes in a third, but it didn't matter and a sweep bought more rest time in '17, whilst a '19 injury proved costly.

Playoff availability is a complex matter, given inconsistent contexts, opportunities etc.

That is mostly fair but the 1997 absence directly produced a superior teammate, so no, I will not credit him for that.

Regarding seasons like 1992 versus seasons like 2019, 2021, and 2023, I think team context is fair to point out, but it is not a replacement for what actually happened either. I could take the stance that on a worse team Curry could have been a no value added first round exit in 2016 and 2018, while Durant could have suffered a valiant conference semifinals sweep in 2019. As it is, each in aggregate has missed 2+ series, but Curry is the one who had two finals and conference finals to add to his résumé, and Durant was not. So it goes. 2017/21 Kawhi gets credit for a strong ten-game run sufficient to bring his team to the conference finals, but nothing else. 2021-23 Durant gets credit for playing in the postseason, but he does not receive much credit for his role in getting his team there the way 1992 Robinson does.

We all have different ways to balance regular season versus postseason production, and I tend to lean harder on postseason production. If I were more confident in Robinson’s status as a postseason driver, I would probably see more value in those ten postseasons for which he did play higher minutes… but I am not. If I were harsher on regular season absences, I could qualify 2021 and 2023 as empty Durant seasons on par with 2015 — perhaps outright lesser than 2002/03 Robinson, who played more total regular season minutes than 2022/23 Durant… but I am not.

Again, I am not high enough on Durant’s overall play to make much of any committed push for him over Robinson, but I would rather have his career, and I do think he tended to shine more in the postseason (for all his own failings there).

[One_and_Done]

Ignoring the typo for KD for now,
I have Bird as the clear best player on the board.

12. Larry Bird
13. Jerry West

Nomination: D Rob

Nomination: KD

I think you need to post your reasons with the voting post.

[f4p]

as for oscar, I tend to think we probably slightly overrate oscar and west's efficiency numbers like TS Add because they just played in such an inefficient era that they basically have a first mover advantage on being guys who first had something like modern efficiency. i'm not sure they're really standing out like this in the 80's or later.

and just finally, with russell and wilt and mikan and west, i feel like i'm reaching my limit on guys who had careers that basically ended in the first 25 years of the league. that's only 1/3 of the league history, in an era where there often only 8 or 9 teams. the talent pool was significantly shallower on an absolute basis and we're talking much less than 1/3 of the total team-seasons played during that era. so if oscar gets in in the top 15 or 17, then we're using up 1/3 of the slots on way less than 1/3 of the talent pool and team-seasons.

I am sympathetic to most of this and think balancing these sentiments is the trickiest part of trying to adhere to era relative accomplishments.

I disagree more here:

i'm just not very high on him. yes, great TS Add, yes a bunch of #1 offenses, but his last dominant regular season seems to be at age 29 or maybe age 30 if you want to include one more 300 TS Add season. but his playoffs numbers have never blown me away and his last dominant playoffs is at age 28. so i'm not seeing a ton of longevity. also, for a guy who had the misfortune of playing on untalented teams, he didn't take advantage of the few chances he got, going 1-2 as an SRS favorite before kareem, with all 3 of them being at least +2 favorites. his only win was as a +8 favorite.

Eminence is right that the 1965 76ers are hardly a real upset in any meaningful sense.

i won't dispute that.

But this is a good opportunity to press back on a nomination I felt occurred too early:

Since the argument is West vs Oscar, I guess we are lucky in that they played against each other.
https://stathead.com/tiny/jtzzZ
87 games -
Oscar 28.5 to West 27.7
For games with stat totals
West: 53.5%TS/5.8 reb/7.0 asst
Oscar: 53.7%TS/7.2 reb/9.6 asst
So Oscar outscored West with better TS%, outrebounded him and has a lot more assists. Head-to-head 87 games.
Oscar played 20% more RS minutes than West, due to West playing 118 less games- so Oscar winds up with 189.1 winshares versus West's 162.6

West is lauded for his superior post season play. In 14 years, he only had one win against a team with a better record: 2 wins less than the 1970 Hawks,
in a season where Wilt only played 12 games. So he really never beat a better team in the playoffs. Mostly they were able to make the finals because he had a better team the the Royals, and he played in the conference opposite Boston.

Oscar’s best win without Kareem was in 1963 against the 3.8 SRS Syracuse Nationals (2nd in the league), coached by Alex Hannum. He was a 2.5 SRS underdog, with a six win disparity actual and expected.

West’s best win without Wilt was also in 1963, against the 1.4 SRS Hawks. The Lakers were 1.3 SRS favourites. I reiterate, West’s best win without Wilt was against a 1.4 SRS team. And even in those first two years with Wilt, the best team they beat were the 2.1 SRS Hawks in 1969.

Against Bill Russell in the postseason, these are their respective averages:
Oscar — 31.4/10.2/7.5 on 54.09% efficiency, 35.3% win rate (34.9% win rate if including the two series losses to Wilt’s 76ers)
West — 33/5.7/4.9 on 55.15% efficiency, 36.8% win rate

Not that you necessarily care too much about “longevity,” but Oscar for his career played an extra five thousand minutes. Relatedly, for as much is made of Oscar missing the playoffs in the eastern conference for four years of his career, West of course was also injured and unable to contribute at all to his team’s postseason hopes in 1967, 1971, and 1974 (Oscar did miss the end of the 1972 conference finals, but you know, he at least stayed healthy enough need to reach that point).

I could see West if he had some Hakeem-esque tendency to defeat superior teams, but he did not; if anything, Oscar is the one with the best upset / individual win — but I will admit by your standards, Oscar also has the worst loss (1962 Pistons), so maybe that evens out.

so they both definitely have complicated underdog/favorite resumes.

jerry west literally doesn't have an underdog series win by SRS, going 0-10. oscar does have the 1 early series upset, but that remains it for the rest of his career, not even picking one up with kareem (though they were basically always the favorite). west does manage to be a fairly impressive 16-2 as a favorite, with the only losses on fairly pedestrian -1.1 (1968 finals) and -2.1 (1973 finals). pre-kareem, oscar at best is 1-1 if we don't count the 76ers and his loss is slightly worse at -3.0. but then he plays with kareem and, as mentioned in the earlier kareem thread, racks up two +4 losses in 1973 and 1974. maybe he's too old to count it in 1974 and really 1973 seems to just be kareem playing awful, but it brings him to a very disappointing 7-4 as a favorite (7-3 without the sixers), and those 7 wins are by an astounding average advantage of +8.8, so basically just gimmes. which brings his career to an average series win as a +7.4 favorite and average loss as only a -0.7 underdog, but i guess some of this can be blamed on kareem.

on actual vs expected titles, oscar literally finishes 103rd out of 103 on a delta of -1.53, but west isn't far behind at 100th out of 103 on a delta of -1.33. also impressive that they managed to finish so badly while actually winning a title. all of west's negative is basically just facing russell (he's even after 1969) while oscar has no real expected titles to speak of until he gets to kareem, but then he and kareem go to work racking up negative delta, somehow getting a -1.3 in only 4 years despite actually winning one! but i suppose kareem should get more of the blame as it was his team.

west to my numbers is definitely more resilient individually. they are somewhat close in my little calculation with west at 6th and oscar at 12th, but almost all of this is 1972 west dragging everything down (a horrible -0.905). from 1961 to 1969, west's average of +0.447 would put him just barely behind kawhi for 1st so he was extremely resilient for all of the 60's. meanwhile, oscar before kareem is right around 0 so basically average and gets a lot of his positive value from 1973, a single round playoffs where his team lost as a heavy favorite.

also, oscar could have potentially punished west's underperformance in the 1972 playoffs, but oscar had an even worse series in the lakers/bucks matchup.

throw in my new appreciation for west's defense and i suppose i have to give this battle to west. though at this point, i still have to vote for kobe, then bird, then mikan.