Retro POY '93-94 (Voting Complete)

[ElGee]

I haven't had much time, but I'd like to make a quick comment regarding the Pippen/Kukoc incident. This is covered in some detail in David Halberstram's "Playing For Keeps," but I'll summarize my understanding of it.

This wasn't symptomatic of some regular problem of insubordination or poor leadership. It was a terrible lapse in judgment in the heat of the moment based on Pippen's understanding of his place in the franchise. He was the guy who, during the MJ years, was seen as a terrific leader on the team and the man players 3 through 12 could talk to and relate to and stay connected, so to speak. Jordan was famously demanding and fierce with other players and Pippen was there for them as an outlet and a guide. Pippen took great responsibility and pride shouldering the load as the leader when Jordan left, and felt that the culmination of those events dictated that he would take the shot, make or miss, just as MIchael would have. And of course, there was the lingering taste of the migraine came from Detroit, which always seemed to hang over him according to Halberstram. All of this came to a boil in a matter of 30 seconds when Pip was basically shocked Phil drew up the play for a foreign rookie who he may not have gelled with in the first place.

Pippen came out and dominated the next game. In MSG in G5, the Knicks jumped out to a 15-4 run. Only Pippen answered with play after play - he knocked down back to back 3s and scored 12 points to spark a 15-3 counter-run, setting up 5 open scoring opportunities for teammates in the run. It was that type of leadership -- basically running a club, anchoring a defense and providing a veteran presence -- that seemed to be present year-round.

For the purposes of this project, I'm not sure how that incident could be held against Pippen. It certainly didn't affect his play or his team.

[Sedale Threatt]

Don't mean to ruin anyone's day, but I don't have time for an in-depth explanation.

1. Dream. Obvious.
2. Robinson. Still had a great season, standard PS flameout aside.
3. Shaq. Still had great season, PS flameout aside.
4. Malone. Wanted to put him higher, but didn't feel I could.
5. Pippen. Probably should go Ewing here, but Scottie was one of my favorites.

Probably a couple of questionable/inconsistent decisions in there, but it seems fair on five hours of sleep.

[ElGee]

My 1994 POY Ballot:

1. Hakeem Olajuwon
2. David Robinson
3. Patrick Ewing
4. Scottie Pippen
5. Karl Malone

Dream is easy.

Robinson again ran into a bad matchup for him, but this was really the year he exploded in a lot of areas and I feel pretty comfortable winning big with him in most settings. Unlike past years, I didn't feel the others behind him were good enough to jump Robinson for some of his shortcomings that you get in the playoffs/against certain opponents.

Ewing and Pippen were neck and neck in 1995 for me. Ewing gets the nod here based on a slightly better playoff run (until he hit the Olajuwon/Thorpe combo). I was never big on Ewing at the time, but his defense is fantastic (and underrated) and he's clearly the primary offensive option for the Knicks, creating a lot of his own stuff and providing timely baskets, even if they were jumpers. He had some of those signature games throughout the playoffs that just basically scream of HOF dominance. 18-17-6 in G7 v Chicago (all 18 in second half). 24-22-7 5 blocks in G7 v Indiana. 25-12 8 blocks in G5 to take a 3-2 FInals lead.

This was close enough for me that Pippen making 5 more 3s in the Knicks series, or Ewing not having his 2 game 7's he had probably would have changed it. In fact, I think if Scottie were about 3-5% better offensively Chicago would have been pushing Houston in the Finals. That, or Hugh Hollins having a better contact lens prescription. (The Bulls took 4 out of 5 from Indiana in the regular season.)

I think I've explained over the last few POYs why I think so highly of Pippen around this time. On this team he was basically the point guard, orchestrating and creating a lot of offense for others while continuing his typical defense. Grant got a lot of his looks off of Pippen breaking down the defense and I don't think it's a coincidence Armstrong had a career year either. The only other Bull who could really get his own and create was rookie Toni Kukoc.

This was the height of the perimeter contact dominance and to me that makes his offensive numbers more impressive. He's guarding point guards against the Knicks and grabbing 16 rebounds in a game -- just one of the great all-around seasons in league history. The solidifier for me was Chicago's ORtg was 103.6 without Pippen and about 3 points better with him (they were also ~2 points better defensively). With Myers, Grant and Armstrong in the starting lineup with Pippen, Chicago went 43-12! (64 win pace). Pippen never attempted more than 27 shots in a regulation game and never scored fewer than 13 points in a game -- all-around consistence that contributed to their 64-win pace when intact.

I mentioned a while back I only really "penalize" heavily in the playoffs if it's a rookie situation where they just have never experienced the playoffs and that seems to be the issue. This was Shaq's first trip to the postseason, and I thought it was telling that his numbers dipped so heavily and a team I thought had a good chance to win the series was simply rolled through. And it wasn't a matchup thing, because Shaq averaged 38-11 on 66% shooting vs. Indiana that season.

After reading more posts, I agree I'd rather go with Karl Malone here than Shaq - it was a good showing in the playoffs by Malone and at the time I think I'd be more comfortable with Malone than a green O'Neal.

[tha_rock220]

1. Hakeem
2. Robinson
3. Barkley
4. Shaq
5. Malone

[lorak]

1. Hakeem
2. Robinson
3. Shaq
4. Ewing
5. Pippen

[ElGee]

1. Hakeem
2. Robinson
3. Barkley
4. Shaq
5. Malone

Why Barkley at 3? This was one of his worst seasons (significant decline statistically) and he missed 17 games (Pho 8-9).

[semi-sentient]

I think from looking at all these rankings it's pretty clear that positions 3-5 are anything but easy rank. Votes are pretty much all over the place... heh.

[Optimism Prime]

What is argument for Shaq above Robinson?
Because Robinson had better RS and they both had very similar post season so it's unreasonable to put Shaq higher.

I have Shaq over Robinson, mainly because the problems I have with Shaq, which I may go into later, are still less of a problem for me than Robinson's problem this year.

2. Shaq. Personally, I thought this was a good year for Shaq’s..better than 95, the best for the next five or six years best years. The Magic were a really lopsided team; little rebounding or defense. Shaq and Penny were analogous to West/Baylor on the Lakers teams of the 60s (except the Laker teams were even more off kilter). Shaq hadn’t quite moved into Big Ego mode, and he was more of a leader than he would be at any time until the late 90s/earlu 00s. But he also got bounced by Rik Smits, who always gave the young Shaq problems.
3. Drob. You either think that Drob led a team of misfits that didn’t fit well together, or you think he folded. I thought the Spurs were pretty well constructed…Drob and Rodman on the inside, Ellis, Anderson and Del Negro on the wings. I understand that Rodman was a disruptive force, but part of being a leader is to deal with that. Robinson was worse than Shaq at that.

HM: Pippen, Payton (wasn’t his fault that Shawn Kemp folded up like a wet tortilla in the postseason).

I could easily change #2 and #3, as well as #4 and #5, or move one of the HMs up. That type of year for me.

That pretty much sums it up. This was the year that Shaq was less selfish than Robinson. Keep in mind--the Admiral went out and scored 71 in the last game of the season so he could have the scoring title.

The difference between the two, for me at least, is this: You can't trust Shaq to make free throws in big games, but you can't depend on Robinson in big games. ronnymac2--was that kind of what you were getting at with your problems with Shaq/DRob?

[kaima]

Still, his regular season performance on offense was good enough to land him No. 5 over a down season from Karl Malone.

Thing about Malone's down season is that he was still plainly top 5 (fifth in PER, fourth in WS, fifth in PPG) in the regular season, and arguably the second best player in the post-season. He also again demonstrated his underrated post-defense, which stats aren't generally picking up.

Hakeem is obvious. But everybody else ranked had a worse post-season than Malone, with two of the four having horrendous matchup failures to end the season (Ewing, Robinson), and one showing his lack of playoff experience (did Smits bother Shaq? Yes, but it's very difficult to say that Shaq "lost" the matchup).

[semi-sentient]

1. Hakeem
2. Robinson
3. Barkley
4. Shaq
5. Malone

Why Barkley at 3? This was one of his worst seasons (significant decline statistically) and he missed 17 games (Pho 8-9).

I can only assume it's for what he did in the post-season, as he did have the best overall numbers. Still, missing 17 games (and having a poor RS) in a year this strong while not being much of a defender... #3 deserves an explanation.

Another argument that can be used in his defense is that the Suns won something like 75% of their games with Barkley in the lineup, which is pretty impressive. There may be more to it than that as KJ and Ceballos also missed a ton of games, so more exploration would be needed. Doubt it matters though. He's still not in my top 5.

...

BTW, for those ranking Shaq over Robinson based on similar RS numbers, what about defense? I just don't think he had anywhere near the impact of Robinson on that end of the floor.

[kaima]

1) Dream
2) Mail
3) Ewing
4) Shaq
5) D-Rob

HM: Pippen; think he should be alone, because I wanted to rank him. I'd have more confidence in Pip for a post-season than Robinson, but that regular season had to be considered and got him over the hump.

Shaq and Robinson are dead-even. Shaq played down, arguably, because of lack of experience. D-Rob played badly because of lacking fundamentals. When you're putting up a post-season that's the same as a first-time playoff C, I think the relative rook gets the nod. Shaq didn't lose his matchup, measurably, altogether. Robinson did. Although I'll admit that there's a big difference between Malone and Smits. But even if that evens things out, again, what does it say that Robinson played like a playoff neophyte?

Ewing was awesome defensively. Played very well until the Finals. But Hakeem took him apart.

Malone? Top 5 player as usual, stepped it up in the playoffs and carried Utah through two opponents before succumbing to the Rockets, where he again played Hakeem pretty close (26 and 12.6 for Malone versus 27.8 and 10.2 for Hakeem).

Hakeem doesn't get much talk. What's there to say? So awesome that people don't bother to explain.

I've got a much longer post that tries to analyze key matchups from a team and/or player standpoint, but I don't have the time to finish it right now. Hopefully I will at some point, but **** and RL happen. Sometimes as one.

[lorak]

This was the year that Shaq was less selfish than Robinson. Keep in mind--the Admiral went out and scored 71 in the last game of the season so he could have the scoring title.

Shaq was less selfish? How is that possible?
Robinson averaged 4.8 AST, Shaq only 2.4. Of course assist don’t tell whole story, but how you explain “Robinson was more selfish”?

71 points game says nothing about selfish, because his partners wants him to do that (Robinson himself didn’t want to do that) Besides, in that game he ALSO had 5 assists…

I also don’t agree with what TLAF wrote about Spurs and Magic teams in 1994. San Antonio had no point guard, while Orlando had young Penny and experienced Rivers. Swingmans were even: Anderson/Scott vs Ellis/Anderson. The only Spurs advantage (except C of course) was PF position, but that’s all and of course Rodman was useless on offense.

The difference between the two, for me at least, is this: You can't trust Shaq to make free throws in big games, but you can't depend on Robinson in big games.

Any examples in 1994? Because in PS (I assume that every game in playoffs is a big game) they played similarly bad.

[drza]

As has been the case for most of the 90s so far, I'm relegated to reading the thread, reminiscing, and checking out the stats. I'm pretty bummed that I'm missing out on these discussions, because I think Kaima and I could have had some fun. Alas, I guess we'll have to save it for either another year or another thread.

1) Dream
2) Robinson
3) Pippen
4) Shaq
5) Ewing

HM: Malone. Could have flip-flopped with Ewing, but went with defense over offense here.

[kaima]

This was the year that Shaq was less selfish than Robinson. Keep in mind--the Admiral went out and scored 71 in the last game of the season so he could have the scoring title.

Shaq was less selfish? How is that possible?
Robinson averaged 4.8 AST, Shaq only 2.4. Of course assist don’t tell whole story, but how you explain “Robinson was more selfish”?

71 points game says nothing about selfish, because his partners wants him to do that (Robinson himself didn’t want to do that)

How typical is this? Robinson, whether it's a post-season matchup beatdown or a classless stat-stuffing game, is not to blame. He's never to blame for his own actions.

If that's truly the case, then it speaks to the fact that Robinson was never an alpha-male (which is a question again as to how great he was by season). Nobody told Jordan, Hakeem or Malone do anything. But Robinson "had" to go for 71, therein giving him the scoring title, not for himself but for the 'team'.

On the other side of that, I'm always amazed by how much **** Shaq takes for supposedly being irresponsible. Shaq may not have kept himself in shape, but he did make sure he had all the tools in his prime to be the greatest C in the league. Robinson didn't.

The fact that Shaq never scored 71, ironically, is actually a positive in his column. At least when looking at what Robinson's 71 meant, how it came about and what it was about.

The 71 point game is a real contrast between seasons. A week or two later David would be struggling to score 20 against Malone's defense.

[semi-sentient]

Ugh. I remember thinking how lame that 71-point game was, especially since the only purpose was to steal the scoring title from Shaq. I know that pissed Shaq off, and it's probably why he would talk a massive amount of isht about D-Rob when he would come to town in later years, especially with the Lakers (I lived in SA when he was with LA). They always interviewed him on the local radio stations when he was in town, and he'd call him a pansy, stick man, and other such names. Heh.

[Silver Bullet]

Once again - I don't get the Hakeem love.

D-Rob had a historic, once in a decade type season.

1. Hakeem
2. Robinson
3. Shaq
4. Scottie Pippen
5. Karl Malone

HM: Patrick Ewing

[JordansBulls]

Once again - I don't get the Hakeem love.

D-Rob had a historic, once in a decade type season.

1. David Robinson
2. Shaquille O Neal
3. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Scottie Pippen
5. Karl Malone

HM: Patrick Ewing

I don't see how Hakeem could not be a unamnimous #1 here. He won League MVP, DPOY and Finals MVP.

And I don't see how you could put Shaq #2 when he lost in round 1 with HCA.

[lorak]

Guys, when Gervin and Thompson scored like crazy on last day of season it was “good”, but when Robinson did it it’s “bad”? Or when great Larry Bird scored 60, when he was fighting for his 60 to last seconds despite game was already over, we are talking about is as something “good”. But whatever Robinson has done it’s “bad”? It shows that he was selfish? Rally?

[kaima]

Once again - I don't get the Hakeem love.

Could you explain why? Are you giving the post-season any value whatsoever?

Olajuwon was the best player throughout the season. What you say below is what Olajuwon did: MVP, DPOY, Finals MVP on 27 and 11.9 in the regular season and, then, 28.9 and 11 in the playoffs.

He had a PER of 27.3 in the regular season. In the playoffs it was 27.7.

David, meanwhile, went from a regular season of 29.8 and 10.7 to 20 and 10. Malone, a POWER FORWARD, took ten points off his ppg average with his defense. While scoring over 29 against D-Rob+Wormy.

His PER went from 30.7 to 22.0.

You can say that this was a very small sample versus what was seen in the regular season but, not only was it typical for D-Rob at his peak in the playoffs, it's also the very point of the playoffs for the play to be condensed and more intense. Under these circumstances, peak Hakeem excelled. David Robinson was a deckchair on the Titanic.

David Robinson played few playoff games because he played so badly in them against another post star. Same old, same old.

When this happens again and again, questions have to be raised by the fair-minded as to what this says about Robinson's relative value and post ability.

D-Rob had a historic, once in a decade type season.

Let's say you're right.

Doesn't that make the post-season breakdown all the more stunning? Doesn't D-Rob's playoff play versus his regular season play then, and especially in your context and stratum, tell us that there was something very wrong with his game?

By playing so awesome in the regular season, and so bad in the post-season, I would logically asseverate and extrapolate that this magnifies the significance of the post-season. It has to mean a lot, just when you look at the ridiculous dichotomy.

I'm speechless on what you did to Olajuwon. Just...come on.

I think a lot more explanation is required for that vote to fly.

[kaima]

Guys, when Gervin and Thompson scored like crazy on last day of season it was “good”, but when Robinson did it it’s “bad”? Or when great Larry Bird scored 60, when he was fighting for his 60 to last seconds despite game was already over, we are talking about is as something “good”. But whatever Robinson has done it’s “bad”? It shows that he was selfish? Rally?

Robinson obviously thought so, by your own recollection, since he tried to foist the cause that led to such effect off on his teammates.

It's one thing to do something like that. My point is, that Robinson wasn't enough of an alpha-male to own his actions and choices.