Retro Player of the Year 1969-70 UPDATE — Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

[Owly]

True though there is larger context at play there. Kareem punched his teammate in a fight ...

Could you expand on this please. Thanks.

Was not a teammate.

Who was it?

[OhayoKD]

Could you expand on this please. Thanks.

Was not a teammate.

Who was it?

An inanimate object:
https://www.si.com/vault/1974/10/28/615128/off-on-the-wrong-foot

Edit: si link is borked so I guess I'll just use wikipedia:

Robertson, who became a free agent in the offseason, retired in September 1974 after he was unable to agree on a contract with the Bucks.[83][84] On October 3, Abdul-Jabbar privately requested a trade to the New York Knicks, with his second choice being the Washington Bullets (now the Wizards) and his third, the Los Angeles Lakers.[85] He had never spoken negatively of the city of Milwaukee or its fans, but he said that being in the Midwest did not fit his cultural needs.[85][86][87] Two days later in a pre-season game before the 1974–75 season against the Celtics in Buffalo, New York, Abdul-Jabbar caught a fingernail in his left eye from Don Nelson and suffered a corneal abrasion; this angered him enough to punch the backboard stanchion, breaking two bones in his right hand.[85][88][89] He missed the first 16 games of the season, during which the Bucks were 3–13, and returned in late November wearing protective goggles.[89] On March 13, 1975, sportscaster Marv Albert reported that Abdul-Jabbar requested a trade to either New York or Los Angeles, preferably to the Knicks.[85][90] The following day after a loss in Milwaukee to the Lakers, Abdul-Jabbar confirmed to reporters his desire to play in another city.[91] He averaged 30.0 points during the season, but Milwaukee finished in last place in the division at 38–44.[92]

[eminence]

Does Kareem's 71 have a strong argument vs Kareem's 72?. Bucks with Oscar and Kareem post a higher SRS in 72 than 71 despite all of Oscar's numbers going down across the board and incidentally Kareem's numbers go up almost across the board (0.07 fg% drop 0.01 ft% drop) and then with Oscar on one-leg(and his numbers accordingly plummeting) Bucks out-score an all-time calibre team.

I wouldn't be bothered by anyone picking '72 (or a couple other seasons), perhaps I should've used 'arguable' in place of strong. '71 is my personal pick.

Stats for '71/'72 look marginally different for what I'm looking for, I've generally found that going above 36 minutes (for extended samples) doesn't correlate well with increased overall impact to match the box-score increases that naturally come from playing more minutes.

On a personal play level I find it tough to differentiate '71/'72 and then '71 has a clear team accomplishment angle (though obviously lesser competition - shoutout to Sharman).

[One_and_Done]

Anyone who thinks Oscar was the reason for the Bucks getting good can only get there by ignoring everything that happened from 69 to 74, and ignoring every other bit of context in 75 other than Oscar leaving.

Kareem takes 27 win Bucks to 56 wins.

In year 2 the Bucks improve to 66 wins, but Kareem got better which is most of the reason for that.

From 71-74 the Bucks play at better than a 60 win pace in the 38 games Oscar misses, so clearly they could play like a 60 win team without Oscar; that's only 4 more wins than rookie Kareem took them to, and rookies get better after yr 1.

75 is a write off; Kareem broke his hand, but more importantly he demanded a trade and clearly stopped caring. Back then players signed what were borderline slave contracts; you couldn't leave your team unless they let you, which meant if the Bucks kept winning 60 games every year there was no reason to trade Kareem. Clearly Kareem was starting to phone it in to force their hand.

[OhayoKD]

Does Kareem's 71 have a strong argument vs Kareem's 72?. Bucks with Oscar and Kareem post a higher SRS in 72 than 71 despite all of Oscar's numbers going down across the board and incidentally Kareem's numbers go up almost across the board (0.07 fg% drop 0.01 ft% drop) and then with Oscar on one-leg(and his numbers accordingly plummeting) Bucks out-score an all-time calibre team.

I wouldn't be bothered by anyone picking '72 (or a couple other seasons), perhaps I should've used 'arguable' in place of strong. '71 is my personal pick.

Stats for '71/'72 look marginally different for what I'm looking for, I've generally found that going above 36 minutes (for extended samples) doesn't correlate well with increased overall impact to match the box-score increases that naturally come from playing more minutes.

On a personal play level I find it tough to differentiate '71/'72 and then '71 has a clear team accomplishment angle (though obviously lesser competition - shoutout to Sharman).

I mean to me the most compelling thing is the Bucks success without and even with a diminished Oscar(and a further diminshed one in the playoffs) but I guess it's not inconcievable 71 Kareem could have done that too.

[AEnigma]

Anyone who thinks Oscar was the reason for the Bucks getting good can only get there by ignoring everything that happened from 69 to 74, and ignoring every other bit of context in 75 other than Oscar leaving.

Kareem takes 27 win Bucks to 56 wins.

In year 2 the Bucks improve to 66 wins, but Kareem got better which is most of the reason for that.

From 71-74 the Bucks play at better than a 60 win pace in the 38 games Oscar misses, so clearly they could play like a 60 win team without Oscar; that's only 4 more wins than rookie Kareem took them to, and rookies get better after yr 1.

75 is a write off; Kareem broke his hand, but more importantly he demanded a trade and clearly stopped caring. Back then players signed what were borderline slave contracts; you couldn't leave your team unless they let you, which meant if the Bucks kept winning 60 games every year there was no reason to trade Kareem. Clearly Kareem was starting to phone it in to force their hand.

Bucks Oscar was 7-0 without Kareem.

[OhayoKD]

Anyone who thinks Oscar was the reason for the Bucks getting good can only get there by ignoring everything that happened from 69 to 74, and ignoring every other bit of context in 75 other than Oscar leaving.

Kareem takes 27 win Bucks to 56 wins.

In year 2 the Bucks improve to 66 wins, but Kareem got better which is most of the reason for that.

From 71-74 the Bucks play at better than a 60 win pace in the 38 games Oscar misses, so clearly they could play like a 60 win team without Oscar; that's only 4 more wins than rookie Kareem took them to, and rookies get better after yr 1.

75 is a write off; Kareem broke his hand, but more importantly he demanded a trade and clearly stopped caring. Back then players signed what were borderline slave contracts; you couldn't leave your team unless they let you, which meant if the Bucks kept winning 60 games every year there was no reason to trade Kareem. Clearly Kareem was starting to phone it in to force their hand.

Bucks Oscar was 7-0 without Kareem.

71-74 Bucks 1-0 without Oscar and Kareem

[One_and_Done]

Anyone who thinks Oscar was the reason for the Bucks getting good can only get there by ignoring everything that happened from 69 to 74, and ignoring every other bit of context in 75 other than Oscar leaving.

Kareem takes 27 win Bucks to 56 wins.

In year 2 the Bucks improve to 66 wins, but Kareem got better which is most of the reason for that.

From 71-74 the Bucks play at better than a 60 win pace in the 38 games Oscar misses, so clearly they could play like a 60 win team without Oscar; that's only 4 more wins than rookie Kareem took them to, and rookies get better after yr 1.

75 is a write off; Kareem broke his hand, but more importantly he demanded a trade and clearly stopped caring. Back then players signed what were borderline slave contracts; you couldn't leave your team unless they let you, which meant if the Bucks kept winning 60 games every year there was no reason to trade Kareem. Clearly Kareem was starting to phone it in to force their hand.

Bucks Oscar was 7-0 without Kareem.

7 games, spread over multiple seasons, is less compelling that the other evidence I noted above. Kareem had them at 56 wins as a rookie.

Nobody is saying Oscar didn't help, but by far the biggest driver of success was clearly Kareem. If Oscar could turn a bad team into a 60 win contender it would have been nice if the younger and better version had managed it in Cincinnati.

[OhayoKD]

Anyone who thinks Oscar was the reason for the Bucks getting good can only get there by ignoring everything that happened from 69 to 74, and ignoring every other bit of context in 75 other than Oscar leaving.

Kareem takes 27 win Bucks to 56 wins.

In year 2 the Bucks improve to 66 wins, but Kareem got better which is most of the reason for that.

From 71-74 the Bucks play at better than a 60 win pace in the 38 games Oscar misses, so clearly they could play like a 60 win team without Oscar; that's only 4 more wins than rookie Kareem took them to, and rookies get better after yr 1.

75 is a write off; Kareem broke his hand, but more importantly he demanded a trade and clearly stopped caring. Back then players signed what were borderline slave contracts; you couldn't leave your team unless they let you, which meant if the Bucks kept winning 60 games every year there was no reason to trade Kareem. Clearly Kareem was starting to phone it in to force their hand.

Bucks Oscar was 7-0 without Kareem.

7 games, spread over multiple seasons, is less compelling that the other evidence I noted above. Kareem had them at 56 wins as a rookie.

Nobody is saying Oscar didn't help, but by far the biggest driver of success was clearly Kareem. If Oscar could turn a bad team into a 60 win contender it would have been nice if the younger and better version had managed it in Cincinnati.

In fairness the claim is more that he could turn a contender into an all-time great team which doesn't necessarily track with the Milwaukee data(though that comes from an older and worse version) but certainly seems plausible for the younger and better version from Cincinatti.

[trex_8063]

In 1972 the Bucks went 12-5 (57-win pace) without Oscar posting a 62-win pace if you go by SRS. In 1973 they went 7-2 (63-win pace), and in 1974 they went 9-3 (61-win pace).

So in the 3 years that would quaify for your criteria in Milwaukee, the Bucks were excellent without what should be a better version of Oscar than the one you're attributing a 17-win drop-off too. Don't think what Oscar was doing in 65 is all that relevant to what he was in his early-mid 30's scoring a little more than half as much and averaging alot less minutes.


I don't think those 3 years, which I'm honestly confused why you didn't include, paint the picture of a top 5 player granted Oscar was most probably better in 1971.

I don't know why I stopped either. And actually you're a little off on '72, though it still rates Oscar favourably: he missed 18 games and they were 13-5 without him (pace for 59.2 wins). But they were 50-14 with him (pace for 64.1 wins, and on pace for about 67 going by SRS); so even in '72 [no doubt lesser player than he'd been two years earlier], he's adding ~5 wins to an already outstanding team (it being harder [for most] to raise the ceiling by a significant amount than it is the floor).
Not to mention PG was arguably the position the '72 Bucks were deepest at, especially in February when Oscar missed most of his time: they had Wali Jones back at that point, and otherwise could plug Lucius Allen in more at primary PG (and McGlocklin get a little more SG) [and indeed that's where we see all of their playing time shoot up a bit].

Fair point on '73 and '74.

[B-Mitch 30]

One question I've had about Kareem's career is how coachable he was considered at the time and in retrospect. My own impression was that despite not being a social butterfly, he was a team player, but I've also heard him called selflish and aloof. What does everyone else's reading on the topic suggest?

[Djoker]

VOTING POST

POY

1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 2nd Team All-NBA and 2nd Team All-Defense. Led a huge turnaround as a rookie, improving the team by 29 wins and 9.32 SRS with his arrival. The Bucks finished with the #2 best record and SRS. Started the season ok and then really turned it on in the second half of the year and had a crazy dominant postseason in which he looked like the best player in the world bar none. With Reed getting hurt in the Finals and West having a poor finish to the Finals, I don't see myself putting Kareem anywhere below #1 given his two-way impact. Finished 3rd but probably should have been MVP. Detailed analysis in spoilers.

Spoiler:

Kareem's rookie season is a tale of two halves.

First 41 games: 26.3/14.9/4.2 on 51.3 %TS (+0.2 rTS) - 27-14 record

Definitely some growing pains to start off. Even the great Kareem needed some time to adjust to the NBA. It didn't help that he played a few games against Wilt and Nate during the first half of the season as well before the two were forced out by injuries.

Last 41 games: 31.3/14.1/4.0 on 59.1 %TS (+8.0 rTS) -- 29-12 record

The second half of the season was just monstrous from Kareem as he put it into high gear and almost matched his second season output. As eminence said, even young Kareem was very active on defense too thanks to his fine motor and he had great length to contest and block shots. By the time the season ended, I think he already made a case for himself as potentially the best player in the world. But by the time the playoffs ended, he put himself in the driver's seat IMO. In fact, I also believe that Kareem is the greatest rookie in NBA history for the turnaround he orchestrated on the Bucks from the season prior and just how NBA ready he was. It took him half a rookie season to enter his prime!

EDSF vs. Sixers: 36.2/15.8/3.4 on 63.1 %TS (+12.4 rTS) -- 4-1

Huge 1st round series in which he didn't have a single bad game. Sixers had 3.32 SRS which was the third highest in the league so they were a solid opponent and they offered little resistance.

EDF vs. Knicks: 34.2/17.8/4.8 on 58.5 %TS (+8.8 rTS) -- 1-4

In a battle against by far the best team in the league with an 8.42 SRS, Kareem was again transcendent and outplayed peak league MVP Willis Reed who himself had a very good offensive series with 27.8/12.2/3.0 on 55.7 %TS (+6.9 rTS). Of course the Bucks lost the series but they were badly outgunned.

2. Jerry West - 1st Team All-NBA and 1st Team All-Defense. 2nd in MVP voting. This was peak West and he was a hell of an all-around player and probably the best overall offensive player in the game. He kept the Lakers afloat while Wilt missed almost the entire season and Baylor missed a big chunk. Averaged 31.2/4.6/7.5 on 57.2 %TS (+6.1 rTS) in the RS then 31.2/3.7/8.4 on 55.0 %TS (+3.6 rTS) in the PS. However when Reed went down in Game 5 of the Finals, it was a prime opportunity for the Lakers to take the series and West didn't deliver down the stretch. He was poor in both Game 5 and Game 7 as the Knicks took the series. And even in Game 6 where LA won and West had a good outing, it was Wilt who put the Lakers on his back. As good as West was all year, he needed to dominate down the stretch of the Finals to get #1 for this year and he didn't.

3. Willis Reed

4. Walt Frazier

Both Knicks were 1st Team All-NBA and 1st Team All-Defense. Reed was MVP. Co-captained the best team in the NBA. Choosing whether to put Reed or Frazier ahead is quite difficult. On one hand, Reed was a little bit more impactful but on the other hand, Frazier was healthy throughout while Reed went down early in Game 5 of the Finals and gave his team little from that point onwards except maybe some inspiration when he hobbled onto the court in Game 7. It's really a coin toss but I'll reward Reed. Tiebreaker goes to bigs in this era simply because of larger defensive impact although from the footage I've seen, Frazier looks devastating on D and Reed wasn't a behemoth down low like a Wilt or Thurmond so it's close. Frazier just had a huge Game 7 too to take the Knicks to the promised land and it should not be overlooked just how dominant he was. (No he didn't have 19 assists; more like 9 but still a crazy game...). Frazier was better in the ECSF against the Bullets and Reed led the way in the EDF against the Bucks.

Reed RS: 21.7/13.9/2.0 on 55.2 %TS (+4.1 rTS)
Reed PS: 23.7/13.8/2.8 on 50.7 %TS (+0.7 rTS)

Frazier RS: 20.9/6.0/8.2 on 57.5 %TS (+6.4 rTS)
Frazier PS: 16.0/7.8/8.2 on 53.1 %TS(+3.1 rTS)

5. Billy Cunningham - 1st Team All-NBA and 5th in MVP voting. Led the Sixers to the #3 SRS in the league. Terrific all-around performer. Averaged 26.1/13.6/4.3 on 52.4 %TS (+1.3 rTS) in the RS then 29.2/10.4/4.0 on 52.6 %TS (+3.8 rTS). The Bucks had the lowest TS% allowed so Billy's relative efficiency was quite good and while they lost to the Bucks, Cunningham had a great performance.

OPOY

1. Jerry West - Playmaking edge puts him slightly above Kareem.

2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - Historically great PS scoring. Dominant force.

3. Oscar Robertson - Had a down year but still a terrific blend of scoring and playmaking.

DPOY

1. Dave DeBusschere

2. Willis Reed

3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - Excellent rim protector and shot-blocker. Bucks are #1 in TS% allowed.

Weird DPOY voting year with Russell retired and Wilt/Thurmond inadmissible due to injury. DeBusschere and Reed both carried the dominant Knicks defense so they got by top two spots. Unseld I think doesn't match Kareem because he's so undersized that he cant offer much rim protection.

[Djoker]

One question I've had about Kareem's career is how coachable he was considered at the time and in retrospect. My own impression was that despite not being a social butterfly, he was a team player, but I've also heard him called selfless and aloof. What does everyone else's reading on the topic suggest?

Kareem was rude and aloof to journalists but always a team player and a high IQ guy. That's my impression anyways.

[penbeast0]

From what I've read, Kareem felt very isolated from both his city and a number of Christian players on his own team and others after converting to Islam. The Milwaukee fans were not always accepting of an African-American Muslim player. Then the horrific murders of Muslims in a house he owned pushed him further down this road and he had a difficult time trusting anyone outside of his inner circle. It's certainly understandable but yes, he had issues with being aloof in the locker room and distrust of his teammates, coaches, and management whether they were his fault or the fault of intolerant Christians or whites who didn't fully understand what he was going through.

[Dr Positivity]

He is probably somewhere in the middle like how a guy like AD in modern has fine intangibles but is not really Duncan either (obviously Kareem's personality is a little different than AD as more moody/intellectual but that's the best I can do). The Bucks in 71 seem like one of the most bored champions and acknowledging that they were just doing what they expected to, the opposite of a 77 Blazermania type of team, I wonder if it contributed to not repeating, I think Magic/Kareem is a better balance of personalities than Oscar/Kareem.

[One_and_Done]

Magic and Kareem also had alot of help.

[falcolombardi]

He is probably somewhere in the middle like how a guy like AD in modern has fine intangibles but is not really Duncan either (obviously Kareem's personality is a little different than AD as more moody/intellectual but that's the best I can do). The Bucks in 71 seem like one of the most bored champions and acknowledging that they were just doing what they expected to, the opposite of a 77 Blazermania type of team, I wonder if it contributed to not repeating, I think Magic/Kareem is a better balance of personalities than Oscar/Kareem.

Having a injury recovering oscar and facing a lakers team that won 33 in a row at a point may have been a bigger part of it

[IlikeSHAIguys]

1 - Kareem

Didn't really know where I was going to go with this but reading all this kind of sold me on Kareem. Puts up great numbers and his team gets alot better and then his numbers go up in the playoffs against the best team? It would be a certified falsehood to act like I know much about 70's defenders but looks like people agree he is a really good defender already and that defence does go from bad to good.

Just gonna jump on the bandwagon. Being the best in the league as a rookie is pretty cool.

2 - Reed

Last thread I voted two guys who only really defend 1 and 2 so I think I'm okay voting another guy who mostly defends and also won MVP and FMVP #2.

3 - Jerry West

Shout out to keeping it going without Wilt and being really close to winning. I dont see how to have him lower tbh.

4 - Wes Unseld

So everyone is low on him but for my small brain its hard to leave out a guy who wins MVP and then puts up better stats the next year and then almost kicks out the best team early. Maybe he shouldnt have been last years MVP but I think it would be mean to not let him be top 5.

5 - Frazier

20/8/8 is pretty neat and so is being the 2nd best player on the ring winner.

Defensive Player of the Year

1 - Reed
2 - Thurmond
3 - Wilt

Offensive Player of the Year

1- West
2 - Kareem
3 - Oscar

[One_and_Done]

1 - Kareem

Didn't really know where I was going to go with this but reading all this kind of sold me on Kareem. Puts up great numbers and his team gets alot better and then his numbers go up in the playoffs against the best team? It would be a certified falsehood to act like I know much about 70's defenders but looks like people agree he is a really good defender already and that defence does go from bad to good.

Just gonna jump on the bandwagon. Being the best in the league as a rookie is pretty cool.

2 - Reed

Last thread I voted two guys who only really defend 1 and 2 so I think I'm okay voting another guy who mostly defends and also won MVP and FMVP #2.

3 - Jerry West

Shout out to keeping it going without Wilt and being really close to winning. I dont see how to have him lower tbh.

4 - Wes Unseld

So everyone is low on him but for my small brain its hard to leave out a guy who wins MVP and then puts up better stats the next year and then almost kicks out the best team early. Maybe he shouldnt have been last years MVP but I think it would be mean to not let him be top 5.

5 - Frazier

20/8/8 is pretty neat and so is being the 2nd best player on the ring winner.

Defensive Player of the Year

1 - Reed
2 - Thurmond
3 - Wilt

Offensive Player of the Year

1- West
2 - Kareem
3 - Oscar

As I noted on pages 1, Frazier was clearly more valuable than Reed. Reed's MVP was a travesty.

[Dr Positivity]

As I noted on pages 1, Frazier was clearly more valuable than Reed. Reed's MVP was a travesty.

It’s not that clear. Reed plays more important defensive position and I like that he has floor spacing impact. He also seems to translate to playoff scoring well. Their solid play in 72 is affected by Monroe and Lucas stretch C look, and they’re clearly better in 73 even with diminished Reed. Frazier doesn’t take him anywhere after Reed/DeBusschere just like Reed didn’t before Frazier/DeBusschere. DeBusschere is really the secret sauce.