Peaks project: #3

urnoggin · Post #61 » by **urnoggin** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 2:15 am

1st ballot: 2009 LeBron James
Arguably the GOAT regular season and even postseason statistically. All advanced stats point to 09’ LeBron as having the greatest impact ever on an elite team with a weak supporting cast. Led this team to a higher SRS than the 2013 Heat, while also having a much worse group of teammates (obviously no Bosh and Wade). Had an amazing playoffs and even though the Cavs lost to the Magic, he did everything you could ask from him in that series and his team’s weaknesses were exposed. Was also at his peak as a defender and an athlete in 2009 as opposed to having a more polished offensive game in 2013.

2nd ballot: 1967 Wilt Chamberlain
Unique season from Wilt where he started to play team-oriented ball under Hannum and made a considerably larger impact than when he was putting up those hugely but largely empty numbers (e.g. 50 and 25 in 62’). Had a great team around him which he lead to a championship. Played extremely well in the playoffs especially vs the Celtics where he completely outplayed Russell and was finally able to overcome them in a playoff series. Sometimes gets knocked for being the 5th leading scorer on his team in the finals but he still played very well all-around and his team came out on top so it shouldn’t take too much away from this season.

3rd ballot: 1994 Hakeem Olajuwon
Amazing season from Hakeem where he won DPOY, MVP, and Finals MVP. Advanced stats and impact data favors other players such as Robinson and Garnett but this season was truly amazing with how Hakeem led his team through the postseason without another star. Was still in his defensive prime and was really skilled in the post where he commanded constant double teams that opened up 3 pointers and open shots for his teammates. He arguably had a better RS in 93’ but this playoff run pushes his 94’ season over the top.

Post #62 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:30 am

The arguments for Olajuwon over Robinson in '95 appear to boil down to two main points: 1) importance of playoffs vs. rs, and 2) head-to-head’s (spotlight on the ‘95 WCF). I’d like to touch on both of these.

In the regular season, Robinson was clearly better (by any and all measures, sometimes not overly close). Hakeem's supporters, faced with this argument, reply but what about the playoffs? ("the season that matters"). In this camp, that portion of the season (15 to 22 games) outweighs the value of the 82 games that came previously......and apparently by such a margin that a few are not even willing to acknowledge the validity of making the comparison in the first place, but rather take on an air "Hakeem, no contest".
Well, the regular season (sample size and all) matters too, imho; but I suspect we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

I look at the supporting casts in '95, and I think it's pretty close to a wash:
Robinson had Sean Elliott, an oft-injured (or in jail) 33-year-old Dennis Rodman, Avery Johnson, Vinnie Del Negro, Chuck Person, JR Reid, and 33-year-old versions of Doc Rivers and Terry Cummings.
Hakeem had a half-season (including "the season that matters") of 32-year-old Clyde Drexler, Robert Horry, Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Mario Elie, Sam Cassell, Pete Chilcutt, and Vernon Maxwell and Carl Herrera (though these latter two would miss the playoffs; but between Clyde, Kenny, Mario, and Sam.....they were still reasonably deep in the backcourt, fwiw).

I'm not seeing a clear advantage in either direction as far as supporting casts go. So why did the Spurs have a so much more impressive rs? imo, it's in no small part due to Robinson being the superior player thru the rs (well deserving of his MVP).

Sliding transition into the H2H debate…...
In their playoff match-up, Rodman was picking the perfect time (for the Rockets) to go into full-on toxic/team cancer mode. I don't want to go so far as to say it's his fault the Spurs lost; but I certainly am curious what the outcome may have been if he hadn't picked this particular time to self-destruct. And further I think it's interesting how much criticism Robinson absorbs from the sports world at large over this series, and yet we rarely (at least outside of this forum) hear Rodman take criticism for it. Certainly doesn't seem fair, anyway.

As to the series itself, going game by game, I think the “Hakeem destroyed Robinson” (as is the usual narrative-->right there in the title of the video that sparked a lot of this debate) gets overblown. Bear in mind as we go thru this, that the Spurs game plan was to let Hakeem get his.

Game 1
Hakeem - 27 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 5 blk, 5 turnovers, 53.3% TS, 99 ORtg/93 DRtg (+6)
David - 21 pts, 9 reb, 2 ast, 0 stl, 2 blk, 7 turnovers, 43.7% TS, 83 ORtg/101 DRtg (-18)

Rockets win by 1 pt on a game winner by "wide open" (as described in the article) Horry (guess who was guarding him and left him completely alone).
Overall: clear sizable edge to Hakeem in this game

Game 2
Hakeem - 41 pts, 16 reb, 4 ast, 3 stl, 2 blk, 4 turnovers, 60.9% TS, 115 ORtg/93 DRtg (+22)
David - 32 pts, 12 reb (6 offensive), 2 ast, 0 stl, 1 blk, 5 turnovers, 66.2% TS, 121 ORtg/120 DRtg (+1)

Rockets win by 10 pts. I'd like to point out that Clyde went for 23/5/6/2/2 with 2 tov @ 63.2% TS; Horry had 21 pts on 70.0% TS with 6 rebs and 0 turnovers. There weren't any bright spots in the performances from DRob's supporting cast. Lack of steals/blocks likely gives a bit of a false impression wrt to Robinson’s defense (as far as individual DRtg is concerned).
Overall: small (or perhaps small-to-moderate) edge to Hakeem

Game 3
Hakeem - 43 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 0 stl, 5 blk, 2 tov, 63.7% TS, 127 ORtg/122 DRtg (+5)
David - 29 pts, 9 reb, 4 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk, 1 tov, 76.5% TS, 160 ORtg/112 DRtg (+48)

Spurs win by 5 pts. Robinson gets good games from Johnson, Elliot, and Del Negro. Hakeem got a fairly good game from Clyde, "decent" games from Horry and Smith.
Overall: despite the huge discrepancy in ORtg/DRtg, I’d give just the tiniest edge to Robinson

Game 4
Hakeem - 20 pts, 14 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 5 tov, 39.5% TS, 76 ORtg/105 DRtg (-29)
David - 20 pts, 16 reb, 3 ast, 0 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 49.0% TS, 125 ORtg/83 DRtg (+42)

Spurs win by 22 pts.
Overall: somewhat large edge to Robinson
****At this stage one should be able to see Dr Spaceman’s point about how almost no one other than Robinson has had such a relatively large portion of his career narrative defined by a mere two games. Because at the 4-game mark, the series is tied and they’ve played each other pretty even: Hakeem getting the better of Robinson in two, Robinson getting the better of Olajuwon in two; I would say the margin by which Olajuwon outplayed him in his two games exceeded the margin by which Robinson outplayed Hakeem in the other two…….nonetheless, it’s pretty clear no one is “destroying” the other at this point in the series.****
But then the last two games happened…...

Game 5
Hakeem - 42 pts, 9 reb, 8 ast, 1 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 63.5% TS, 124 ORtg/96 DRtg (+28)
David - 22 pts, 12 reb, 0 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 56.7% TS, 89 ORtg/116 DRtg (-27)

Rockets win by 21. Avery Johnson had a great game, and Terry Cummings was dynamite in his 9 minutes. The rest of Robinson’s supporting cast sort of went MIA to some degree. Hakeem got monster games out of Sam Cassell and Robert Horry, though no one else in his supporting cast was special.
Overall: large edge to Hakeem.

Game 6
Hakeem - 39 pts, 17 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 6 tov, 68.4% TS, 119 ORtg/98 DRtg (+21)
David - 19 pts, 10 reb, 5 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk, 6 tov, 42.6% TS, 82 ORtg/105 DRtg (-23)

Rockets win by 5.
Overall: large edge to Hakeem.

So there we have it. No doubt Hakeem outplayed Robinson more often than the other way around; no doubt Hakeem had the better series overall (probably by a fair margin). But most of that gap is created by the last two games.

And fwiw, if we’re going to base a large portion of our decision in the “DRob vs. Dream in ‘95 debate” on H2H’s…...it’s maybe worth noting that they met six times in the regular season, too. Shall we scrutinize what happened then?

1st meeting
Hakeem - 20 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 40.2% TS, 79 ORtg/103 DRtg (-24)
David - 18 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 2 stl, 2 blk, 1 tov, 67.6% TS, 138 ORtg/94 DRtg (+44)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: moderate-to-large edge to Robinson

2nd meeting
Hakeem - 19 pts, 10 reb, 0 ast, 2 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 45.8% TS, 82 ORtg/91 DRtg (-9)
David - 18 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 48.0% TS, 89 ORtg/96 DRtg (-7)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: marginal edge to Robinson

3rd meeting
Hakeem - 47 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 61.7% TS, 105 ORtg/101 DRtg (+4)
David - 23 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 5 stl, 0 blk, 3 tov, 45.3% TS, 92 ORtg/99 DRtg (-7)
Result: Rockets win
Verdict: edge to Olajuwon

4th meeting
Hakeem - 36 pts, 14 reb, 2 ast, 3 stl, 4 blk, 6 tov, 49.1% TS, 98 ORtg/106 DRtg (-8)
David - 25 pts, 9 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 6 blk, 3 tov, 55.5% TS, 113 ORtg/103 DRtg (+10)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: nearly a wash; perhaps marginal edge to Robinson

5th meeting
Hakeem - 30 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 0 stl, 3 blk, 3 tov, 48.1% TS, 100 ORtg/112 DRtg (-12)
David - 18 pts, 11 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 2 blk, 9 tov, 37.9% TS, 74 ORtg/102 DRtg (-28)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: large edge to Olajuwon

6th meeting
Hakeem - 25 pts, 6 reb, 3 ast, 0 stl, 2 blk, 4 tov, 47.7% TS, 94 ORtg/136 DRtg (-42)
David - 31 pts, 11 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 3 blk, 2 tov, 68.8% TS, 148 ORtg/105 DRtg (+43)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: MASSIVE edge to Robinson

So in 6 meetings, Robinson had the better game in 3-4 of them (vs. only 2 for Olajuwon).
Overall statlines in these six games:
Hakeem - 29.5 pts, 9.7 reb, 2.8 ast, 1.3 stl, 3.5 blk, 4.5 tov, 49.8% TS
106.2 ORtg/108.2 DRtg (-2)
David - 22.2 pts, 10.3 reb, 3.3 ast, 2.2 stl, 2.8 blk, 3.7 tov, 52.7% TS
109 ORtg/99.8 DRtg (+9.2)
Spurs win rs series 5-1.

Anyway, that’s my take on it all. Dr Spaceman, you’ve done an awful lot toward up-grading my opinion on Robinson. I had him as either my 8th or 9th rated peak going into this. After all this discussion, I can’t see my putting him any lower than 7th (and maybe 6th). I can see an argument for as high as 4th, but I can’t yet put him in my top 5. Maybe I will someday, but change happens slowly.

For now, I’m sticking with my prior established picks:

1st ballot: Lebron James ‘13
An utterly dominant offensive force (in both rs and playoffs) with a statistical profile that speaks for itself. ‘09 shapes out marginally better statistically (and I have been waffling), but I’m still impressed at his ability to put up such impressive numbers while playing alongside Wade and Bosh (as opposed to Ilguaskas and Mo Williams). With his improved outside shot and post-game, I feel he’s less “containable” overall, too.
At any rate, with Shaq and Jordan already voted in, there simply isn’t anyone else as “statistically qualified” in the post-merger league for this spot.

2nd ballot: Wilt Chamberlain ‘64
Per 100 possession: 33.3 pts, 20.2 reb, 4.6 ast @ +5.22% rTS in 46+ mpg, while anchoring the #2 defense in the league…..for a team that made it to the finals.
A fantastic volume scorer, who rebounded better than anyone (save perhaps Russell), while also distributing and playing good D. It’s a slim cut between him and Kareem, but I’ll give him the edge.

3rd ballot: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar ‘72
Per 100 possession: 34.0 pts, 16.2 reb, 4.5 ast @ +9.83% rTS in 44.2 mpg, while anchoring the #1 defense in the league that year. 29.9 PER, .340 WS/48 (the highest rs mark of all-time).
‘72 Kareem sometimes takes flack for not showing up in the playoffs…...if 28.7 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 5.1 apg is not showing up, I’m feeling pretty blessed to have this guy. His playoff PER and WS/48 were “only” 22.4 and .147, respectively (on a massive 46.4 mpg) because his shooting efficiency was down to 46.2% TS. idk if it’s perhaps a touch of coaching flaw to not try SOMETHING different, other than dump to Kareem just about every play.
I’d also like to point out that he faced Nate Thurmond (arguably the GOAT low-post defender) in the first round, then Wilt Chamberlain in the 2nd round…...so there’s additional reason why his playoff numbers were down that year. And they did take the ‘72 Lakers (a team that comes up in GOAT team discussions) to six games, too.

drza · Post #63 » by **drza** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:56 am

David Robinson vs Hakeem Olajuwon

OK, let's have some fun. This has come up a few times already this thread, so let's look at Hakeem and Robinson, and see if anything new shakes out. This will be long, as I'm literally just going to free-type while watching the Patriots/Steelers game, and I'm going to keep reviewing/stating evidence until some conclusions can be reached. (ETA: I see TRex snuck his post in just before mine. I'll have to check out what he had to say...)

1) Why do people think that Olajuwon is better than Robinson? It starts with that 1995 H2H match-up. Robinson played pretty well in a vacuum (something like 24/12), but Olajuwon went nuts and, more damningly, was visibly taking Robinson 1-on-1 repeatedly. The impression from watching that series, live action, was that Olajuwon was straight punishing Robinson for winning the MVP that season. I went into that series as a David Robinson fan, but I had no choice but to admit that Olajuwon appeared to be WAY better over that playoff series.

I entered the RPoY project a few years ago thinking that further review would make Robinson look better because I thought it was primarily that one series that controlled the narrative. But while that series did leave a strong impression, further investigation does suggest a clear difference between Olajuwon and Robinson...primarily, playoffs scoring. Over their careers, Olajuwon pretty consistently raised his scoring volume and efficiency in the postseason, several times as part of memorable playoffs runs. Robinson...didn't.

2) Why do people think that Robinson is better than Olajuwon? It's become passe' here to focus on the regular season in comps, but it can't be ignored...Robinson was doing some ridiculous things in the regular season, and having an absurd impact. By every boxscore stat that we have, Robinson looks like arguably the best player of his generation and one of the best of all-time. And now we have some +/- data from the 90s, and Robinson's on/off +/- scores from the 94 and 95 seasons are some of the highest that we have on record. Over the past 20 or so seasons, only peak LeBron and peak KG have better on/off +/- scores than peak Robinson...and the margin isn't large. Olajuwon's +/- scores in those seasons are very good, but they aren't as good as Robinson's. So in both the boxscore and the +/- stats, peak Admiral measures out to be a solidly better player than Olajuwon.

So the argument can be made (and has been, in this thread) that Robinson was carrying a heavier load than anyone else in the 90s (including Olajuwon), and that it was only Robinson's megatron impact that allowed those Spurs teams to be playoffs worthy, let alone contenders. Can you penalize Robinson for not scoring the way we'd like in the (much shorter) postseason, when the only reason his teams were making it that far in the first place were because of him? If the roles were reversed, do we know that Olajuwon would have done any better on those Spurs teams that Robinson was able to?

3) Why Robinson's playoff scoring performance shouldn't matter so much: There has been a reasonable body of research suggesting that low-post scoring is not the primary way that bigs can best contribute to improving championship odds. That outside of a few exceptions, running an offense through a low-post player is not the optimal way to run a championship offense. That ideally you want your big to be a dominant defender. You also want him to be a good scorer, but that this is secondary. And you want him to be good at the non-scoring aspects of offense as well (passing, pick-setting, etc.). In fact, I've made the argument before that a player's ability to provide "help offense" (a catch phrase for the combination of defense-warping, offense-initiation, spacing, passing, pick-setting, offensive rebounding, etc.) can often be more important in a given short period than individual scoring. (Here's the first post that I can remember introducing that "help offense" concept, in a comparison between Hakeem Olajuwon (known as a postseason scoring assassin) and Larry Bird (who, in his early seasons, often had poor scoring postseasons):

Spoiler:

So if one can demonstrate that Robinson was a notably better defensive player than Olajuwon in the postseason, and that Robinson was also as good or better at the non-scoring aspects of offense as Olajuwon in the postseason, then perhaps this could mitigate some of the clear iso-scoring advantages that Olajuwon was able to take advantage of in the postseason.

4) Robinson's problem...evidence suggests Robinson struggles at the non-scoring aspects of postseason play as well. With all of that said, further examination of the Spurs' postseason performances near his peak doesn't give any indication that he was dominating on defense NOR that he was playing outstanding "help offense". Let's look at a few things:

Robinson's defense. Obviously, in his peak year of 1995, playing 1-on-1 defense against Olajuwon, Robinson got TOASTED. There's no real getting around that. Even if the Rockets' playing more help defense on Robinson may have slowed him down, that doesn't explain why he couldn't remotely do anything to slow Olajuwon at the other end. But let's move beyond that series. In both 94 and 96 the Spurs faced another team with a dominant big, the Karl Malone-led Jazz. Here's Malone's scoring numbers:

Code: Select all

   PPG   TS%   
1994   29,3   56,1   
1996   25,0   49,3

(Numbers quoted from old post by David Stern/Lorak). These numbers were posted as part of a conversation on Robinson's defense, and Lorak suggested that in '94 Malone was primarily covered by Rodman whereas in 96 Robinson covered him more 1-on-1. If this is true it could suggest that Robinson's 1-on-1 defense outside of that Hakeem series was solid. But 1-on-1 defense isn't the most important aspect of big man defense...the most important part is being the anchor, heavily influencing the team defense. Robinson is heavily credited with the Spurs' strong (regular season) team defenses during his prime, so it would be expected that he should maintain that in the postseason. Unfortunately we don't have any kind of +/- playoffs data for peak Robinson, but we can look at how the team defense performed. Here's another quote from Lorak, breaking down the Spurs' defensive performances in the playoffs:

lorak wrote:
drza wrote:However, therealbig3 responds by pointing out that in each of 94, 95 and 96 Robinson's teams gave up way worse numbers than their defensive expectation. I thought this was interesting, because it's the other side of the coin from the approach that acrossthecourt seemed to take earlier in the thread. He took the approach that, on average, opposing offenses scored about what they were expected to against the Spurs. I don't know the methodology he used, but seemingly it's based on their in-season ORTG, home court advantage, playoff conditions, etc.

But if the opponent is scoring about what they'd be expected to based on their ORTGs, but the Spurs (at least in those 3 peak years) were giving up a lot more points than their defense would be expected to based on their DRTGs...isn't that an indication that the defense is underperforming?

In other words, if both the offense and the defense played well the expectation would be that they'd split the difference between what the offense usually produces and what the defense usually gives up, right? But if the offense is hitting their marks and the defense is way off from theirs, it seems to me that the defense isn't doing what their supposed to.

If we want to know if defense in playoffs performed under/over expectations, then we have to compare playoff series drtg to expected drtg (where exp drtg = (team RS drtg+opp RS ortg)/2).

Results for Spurs with Robinson (negative value is good):

Code: Select all
YEAR OPP DRTG 1995 LAL -9,3 1995 DEN -4,2 1993 PTB -2,5 1990 PTB -2,1 1993 PHO -0,1 1990 DEN 1,1 1996 PHO 2,4 1995 HOU 3,0 1994 UTA 4,0 1991 GSW 4,1 1996 UTA 5,7

So 11 playoffs series, 4 times Spurs defense performed better than expected, 1 time basically at expectation level (1993) and 6 times worse than expectations. Doesn't look good for Robinson. Of course we should look closely at each series (for example I wouldn't blame DRob for 1991 as it was great coaching job by Nelson, who outcoached Larry Brown), but pattern seems rather clear.

Cliff notes: out of 11 playoff series pre-97 injury, the Spurs tended to under-perform defensively more times than not. More damaging here, in the peak years (94 - 96), the Spurs underperformed defensively in 4 of the 6 series...including all three elimination series against Olajuwon's Rockets and Malone's Jazz. And in the Rockets case in particular we know that Robinson struggled in 1-on-1 defense in a similar fashion to the team defense's struggles. Taken as a whole, it seems to me that Robinson's defensive performance in the postseason at his peak is not notably better than his scoring performance in the postseason.

As far as "help offense", there's no way to directly measure it for Robinson. But one obvious place to start is assists and turnovers. Those aren't perfect stats, but they do tell us something. From 94 - 96 Robinson had a negative assist/TO ratio (4.1 ast vs 4.3 TOs/100 possessions), compared to Olajuwon's 5.5 ast vs 4.3 asts/100 possessions from 93 - 95. Plus, just from watching, we KNOW that those Rockets teams were built on the Hakeem + 4 shooters theme that required that Dream warp the defense and then make good passes out to shooters. The other box score stat we can look at is offensive boards, where Robinson does have an advantage (5.2 O rebs vs 3.3 per 100 poss).

The evidence is thinner but...again, nothing to suggest that Robinson's peak "help offense" was any better than Hakeem's. And perhaps a bit of evidence that Hakeem's was in fact better.

Put it all together: Hakeem shouldn't be considered better than Robinson just because of that one series. Robinson pretty convincingly did more in the regular season than Hakeem to help his team win. And if Robinson were able to demonstrate clear defensive and/or "help offense" advantages over Hakeem, I could be convinced that their postseason impact might be closer than the composite box scores and perception suggests. But the problem is, deeper looks into their postseason performances at their peaks don't show any kind of relative defensive or "help offense" domination...which forces me to conclude that at their peaks, Olajuwon was just a better all-around postseason performer than Robinson. This is a stronger statement than I would have made before I started this post (and I welcome rebuttals that might change my mind...Spaceman I'm looking at you).

But based on this post, to me it is looking more clearly like Robinson's regular season advantages vs Olajuwon's playoff advantages. Which season is more important, if the differences in both directions are seemingly clear?

Jim Naismith · Post #64 » by **Jim Naismith** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:08 am

drza wrote:Over their careers, Olajuwon pretty consistently raised his scoring volume and efficiency in the postseason, several times as part of memorable playoffs runs. Robinson...didn't.

See this link for players who raised their game the most for the playoffs:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?712733-dropoffs-in-WS-48-from-regular-season-to-playoffs

Across different metrics, Hakeem is consistently near the top and David is consistently near the bottom.

Post #65 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:08 am

Thru post #63:

Lebron James - 36 pts
Wilt Chamberlain - 20 pts
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 14 pts
Hakeem Olajuwon - 8 pts
David Robinson - 3 pts
Tim Duncan - 2 pts

I'm going to try to call a winner and start the #4 thread tomorrow morning, fyi. So everybody get their ballots in within the next 9-10 hours.

yoyoboy · Post #66 » by **yoyoboy** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 6:18 am

1st Ballot Selection: LeBron James (2008-09) - Third time voting him first. I'm just going to copy and paste my explanation from the last thread and put it in spoilers below, as it's a little lengthy.

Spoiler:

2nd Ballot Selection: Wilt Chamberlain (1966-67) - Wilt finally got a ring, and in large part it was because he finally learned to play as part of a team, rather than focusing on how many points he scored. He still managed to put up fairly gaudy numbers in the regular season (24 ppg / 24 rpg / 8 apg / 64% TS), but what's amazing is that he continued to carry that unselfish mindset into the postseason, where he averaged 9.0 apg (as a center!) while putting up near 22 ppg on the highest postseason FG% of his career: 57.9%. I believe this version of Wilt was just as dominant defensively as he had always been, and he was still the same Wilt who could drop 50 on you if he wanted. But he decided to sacrifice his gaudy scoring numbers, so that he could focus on helping his team win, and I this change in mindset is the difference between earlier Wilt and 1967 Wilt. It's easy to look at his numbers in 1962 and assume that was peak Wilt, but did he really decline as an athlete or as offensive threat? I believe not.

3rd Ballot Selection: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1976-77) - Kareem's situation reminds me a lot of LeBron's 2008-09 season, in that he carried a subpar team to the best record in the league while putting up amazing numbers. Then, in the playoffs, he carried that team as far as he could take them, putting up crazy stats, but ultimately failing to get to the promised land, as the lack of talent around him finally came around to haunt him. While it is true that his Lakers lost in the second round to Walton's Blazers - in fact, they didn't just lose; they got swept. However, that Blazers team was simply much better and despite Kareem's amazing performance, he was severely outmatched. In the postseason, Kareem posted the 2nd highest BPM of all time (behind LeBron), the fourth highest WS/48 of all time (behind LeBron, Mikan, and Jordan), and the third highest PER of all time (behind LeBron and Mikan). In the series against the Blazers, Kareem put up the following statlines:

Game 1- 30 points, 10 rebounds, 5 assists, 0 blocks, 11/19 FG, 8/9 FT
Game 2- 40 points, 17 rebounds, 1 assist, 3 blocks, 17/23 FG, 6/9 FT
Game 3- 21 points, 20 rebounds, 7 assists, 8 blocks, 5/12 FG, 11/13 FT
Game 4- 30 points, 17 rebounds, 2 assists, 4 blocks, 12/20 FG, 6/9 FT

And this is against a prime Bill Walton! Keep in mind, Kareem already had absolutely no one around him, yet he was put at even further of a disadvantage as Kermit Washington, the team's only other decent rebounder besides Kareem, missed the entire playoffs. And Lucius Allen, the team's 3rd leading scorer, was injured throughout the playoffs and missed 2 games against the Blazers. Meanwhile, guys on the Blazers, specifically Maurice Lucas and Lionel Hollins, stepped up. They, along with Walton, as well as the rest of the Blazers squad, were just too much for the Laker's one man army: Kareem. But I don't think that should detract too much from just how spectacular Kareem was that season on an individual level. Besides just going off his numbers and the context in which he achieved what he did, I also believe his offensive skillset was at its best at this time. He no longer seemed to go straight to trying a skyhook or a dunk on every offensive possession. Kareem developed a turnaround jumper, a faceup game, and overall had just become more refined as a player.

SideshowBob · Post #67 » by **SideshowBob** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 6:38 am

Ballot

1. Shaq 2000 +8.00

2. Jordan 1991 +8.00

3. James 2013 +8.00 (+5.75/+2.25)

4. Bird 86 +7.25 (+6.75/+0.50)

5. Hakeem 93 +7.25 (+4.25/+3.00)

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

theonlyclutch wrote:
SideshowBob wrote:Elgee on Bird/Magic in the 2012 Peaks Project

Spoiler:
ElGee wrote:Bird and Magic: I encountered a Larry Bird stat recently that floored me a bit. In 1988 (considered to be the end of Bird's prime, or slightly after his peak), the Celtics offensive rating with Kevin McHale in the lineup was...

117.1 (+9.4 to league).

Those would both be records for a full season (McHale played in 64 games). The highest team rating on record for a season is 115.6. (87 Lakers) The greatest distance from league average is +9.2 (04 Dal). The 87 Lakers were +7.3 FTR, and their team was a beacon of health all year.

Of course, most people consider 86 Bird's peak -- not sure how much they differentiate on offense but defensively he was a better team defender still. Well, McHale missed 17 games that year as well and the Celtics were a 110 (+3.1) offense during that time...and a +9.6 SRS team. Scott Wedman replaced McHale in the starting lineup and they just slid Bird to PF. What did Bird do there?

Averaged 27-12-8 57.4% TS 3.1 TOV 7.8 FTA/g 2.1 stls and 0.8 blks in those games. Ho hum stuff.

Now, you can see where the 87 Lakers offense parks itself in the playoffs: http://www.backpicks.com/2011/12/19/the-best-playoff-offenses-since-1980/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Right near the top of the 3-pt era at +10.5. For comparison, the 86 Celtics were +8.2 and the 85 Celtics were +8.5.

In short, I believe these to be the best passers AND two best offensive players in NBA history.

Bird is perhaps the highest portable offensive player there is: he's a GOAT-level off-the-ball player, not in the Reggie Miller mold, but ITO of movement and position through the post and out onto the wing for spacing. He's a ridiculously good rebounder because of this. He's a GOAT-level outlet passer if you want to run. He's a GOAT-level trailer in semi-transition. He's a great post player. He's great off picks. His passing is freakish. He can clearly flourish at either forward position. At his peak, he's still giving you quality defense with positioning and defensive rebounding (it wanes as his body wears down IMO).

For Magic, you give him the keys to the car and get out of the way. Although early Magic's career demonstrates how powerful his GOAT-level passing can be even when Norm Nixon was still handling the ball more. Peak Magic -- unarguably 1987 -- developed his shot so well that he was a major treat to score from the outside and from the line. People have a misconception that Magic was a transition-only offensive threat ("Showtime"), but he was deadly in the halfcourt because of his use of screens and mismatches against smaller players. He is virtually un-guardable, calls his own number efficiently and like Bird, it seems as if he can drop into any system and help "run" the offense.

Mostly due to shot selection, I consider Magic's offensive peak to slightly higher than Bird's. The defensive difference (Magic is a minor liability) makes the peaks very hard for to distinguish. I'll be looking for arguments to help me decide one way or another (do people have these peaks clearly separated in their minds??)

There's a Gideon post I'm recalling as well, haven't quite found it yet.

I don't mean to disparage your post, but I have trouble with Bird that high up.

What separates his peak seasons from what Curry just did last season?

Even ignoring boxscores (where Curry has the advantage), Curry had the Warriors operating as a stronger team than any of Birds Celtics, in particular, the offenses were quite similar despite Curry playing less than 33 minutes per game in the RS, and the relative absence of offensive talent of the Warriors in comparison to the Celtics. There's good evidence that Currys presence forces opponents into more compromising situations on D than Birds presence as well..

No worries. FWIW, I'm pretty darn high on Curry's offense, so I don't know that there's a great degree of disagreement. I've actually had a difficult time rating his 15 season. As you can see above, I've got Bird's offense at +6.75 (this is the best I see anyone outside of peak Magic) and I've considered as high as 6.25 for Curry (which is almost Nash/Jordan/Lebron territory). Bird's advantage (albeit not huge) stems from just being able to do a bit more, and some of that is the nature of his position (better offensive rebounding, better back-to-basket game high/mid/low which enables a greater diversity of movement/positioning within an offense) and better interior passing to boot, superior outlet passing/transition initiation (though Curry's SOO deadly with that pull-up on the break/semi-transition).

I do believe Bird has a clear defensive advantage. Neither player is exceptional, Curry seems break-evenish IMO, while Bird's presence on the defensive glass, solid rotations/team discipline and instincts make him a small positive. That gives Bird a clear peak advantage over Curry IMO, but I definitely get where you're coming from.

With regards to the team performance, while the Warriors did perform at a higher level overall, I think it needs to be made very clear that they were a relatively well balanced two-way team (+6.0 Offense/-4.2 Defense). In the 2015 POY threads I took a deeper look at their schedule adjusted offensive performance when accounting for the health of their top guys and even then, they were never quite hitting the kind of heights that Elgee was trying to demonstrate above. With all that in mind, I also want to make clear that I don't like simple results-oriented analysis either. I will account for team performance/record/stats as well as the box-score and impact stats as much as I can, but none will ever make or break a case for me.

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

With regards to the ballot, I've got Wilt up next also at +7.25

I'm going to try and nip the DRob situation in the bud in the next thread. Also want to touch on Kareem a bit; I've never been convinced that his offense/defense peaked at the same time and without that, I don't really regard his peak nearly as high as it seems the consensus does. Strictly IMO, I think that if Kareem's really being considered this high for peak, he should be championed for the clear-cut GOAT -- its not just the longevity, but he's got a **** of seasons that are at a similar level to whatever his peak is considered to be, and those would be far more numerous near-GOAT level seasons for him than maybe any other player.

Dr Spaceman · Post #68 » by **Dr Spaceman** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 11:22 am

1. LeBron James 09/13 - I'm perfectly ambivalent as to which year we choose. Just vote him in. He deserves this spot.
2. David Robinson 1995
4. Kevin Garnett - I cast this as a tentative ballot, fully expecting to absorb the pro-Kareem and pro-Wilt posts that will crop up in thread 4 as well as drza's pro-KG arguments which I'm looking forward to.

E-Balla · Post #69 » by **E-Balla** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 11:25 am

trex_8063 wrote:The arguments for Olajuwon over Robinson in '95 appear to boil down to two main points: 1) importance of playoffs vs. rs, and 2) head-to-head’s (spotlight on the ‘95 WCF). I’d like to touch on both of these.

In the regular season, Robinson was clearly better (by any and all measures, sometimes not overly close). Hakeem's supporters, faced with this argument, reply but what about the playoffs? ("the season that matters"). In this camp, that portion of the season (15 to 22 games) outweighs the value of the 82 games that came previously......and apparently by such a margin that a few are not even willing to acknowledge the validity of making the comparison in the first place, but rather take on an air "Hakeem, no contest".
Well, the regular season (sample size and all) matters too, imho; but I suspect we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

I look at the supporting casts in '95, and I think it's pretty close to a wash:
Robinson had Sean Elliott, an oft-injured (or in jail) 33-year-old Dennis Rodman, Avery Johnson, Vinnie Del Negro, Chuck Person, JR Reid, and 33-year-old versions of Doc Rivers and Terry Cummings.
Hakeem had a half-season (including "the season that matters") of 32-year-old Clyde Drexler, Robert Horry, Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Mario Elie, Sam Cassell, Pete Chilcutt, and Vernon Maxwell and Carl Herrera (though these latter two would miss the playoffs; but between Clyde, Kenny, Mario, and Sam.....they were still reasonably deep in the backcourt, fwiw).

I'm not seeing a clear advantage in either direction as far as supporting casts go. So why did the Spurs have a so much more impressive rs? imo, it's in no small part due to Robinson being the superior player thru the rs (well deserving of his MVP).

Sliding transition into the H2H debate…...
In their playoff match-up, Rodman was picking the perfect time (for the Rockets) to go into full-on toxic/team cancer mode. I don't want to go so far as to say it's his fault the Spurs lost; but I certainly am curious what the outcome may have been if he hadn't picked this particular time to self-destruct. And further I think it's interesting how much criticism Robinson absorbs from the sports world at large over this series, and yet we rarely (at least outside of this forum) hear Rodman take criticism for it. Certainly doesn't seem fair, anyway.

As to the series itself, going game by game, I think the “Hakeem destroyed Robinson” (as is the usual narrative-->right there in the title of the video that sparked a lot of this debate) gets overblown. Bear in mind as we go thru this, that the Spurs game plan was to let Hakeem get his.

Game 1
Hakeem - 27 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 5 blk, 5 turnovers, 53.3% TS, 99 ORtg/93 DRtg (+6)
David - 21 pts, 9 reb, 2 ast, 0 stl, 2 blk, 7 turnovers, 43.7% TS, 83 ORtg/101 DRtg (-18)

Rockets win by 1 pt on a game winner by "wide open" (as described in the article) Horry (guess who was guarding him and left him completely alone).
Overall: clear sizable edge to Hakeem in this game

Game 2
Hakeem - 41 pts, 16 reb, 4 ast, 3 stl, 2 blk, 4 turnovers, 60.9% TS, 115 ORtg/93 DRtg (+22)
David - 32 pts, 12 reb (6 offensive), 2 ast, 0 stl, 1 blk, 5 turnovers, 66.2% TS, 121 ORtg/120 DRtg (+1)

Rockets win by 10 pts. I'd like to point out that Clyde went for 23/5/6/2/2 with 2 tov @ 63.2% TS; Horry had 21 pts on 70.0% TS with 6 rebs and 0 turnovers. There weren't any bright spots in the performances from DRob's supporting cast. Lack of steals/blocks likely gives a bit of a false impression wrt to Robinson’s defense (as far as individual DRtg is concerned).
Overall: small (or perhaps small-to-moderate) edge to Hakeem

Game 3
Hakeem - 43 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 0 stl, 5 blk, 2 tov, 63.7% TS, 127 ORtg/122 DRtg (+5)
David - 29 pts, 9 reb, 4 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk, 1 tov, 76.5% TS, 160 ORtg/112 DRtg (+48)

Spurs win by 5 pts. Robinson gets good games from Johnson, Elliot, and Del Negro. Hakeem got a fairly good game from Clyde, "decent" games from Horry and Smith.
Overall: despite the huge discrepancy in ORtg/DRtg, I’d give just the tiniest edge to Robinson

I'm sorry but I've watched this game and Hakeem dominated David. I'd say the only reason the game was close was because they got 40+ out of Hakeem and its not just me saying that those earlier posted articles alluded to the same (something like Hakeem is doing it on his own and the Spurs have an offense by committee - Avery Johnson was especially good in this game and Sean Elliot was very solid too). I don't see many agreeing that 10-15 for 29 is better than 19-32 in a 43 point performance when your team around you is playing worse.

And IDK how game 1 is a small edge but game 2 a large edge when he outscored and rebounded DR by more in game 2. I mean its 41/16 vs 32/12.

Game 4
Hakeem - 20 pts, 14 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 5 tov, 39.5% TS, 76 ORtg/105 DRtg (-29)
David - 20 pts, 16 reb, 3 ast, 0 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 49.0% TS, 125 ORtg/83 DRtg (+42)

Spurs win by 22 pts.
Overall: somewhat large edge to Robinson
****At this stage one should be able to see Dr Spaceman’s point about how almost no one other than Robinson has had such a relatively large portion of his career narrative defined by a mere two games. Because at the 4-game mark, the series is tied and they’ve played each other pretty even: Hakeem getting the better of Robinson in two, Robinson getting the better of Olajuwon in two; I would say the margin by which Olajuwon outplayed him in his two games exceeded the margin by which Robinson outplayed Hakeem in the other two…….nonetheless, it’s pretty clear no one is “destroying” the other at this point in the series.****
But then the last two games happened…...

Game 5
Hakeem - 42 pts, 9 reb, 8 ast, 1 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 63.5% TS, 124 ORtg/96 DRtg (+28)
David - 22 pts, 12 reb, 0 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 56.7% TS, 89 ORtg/116 DRtg (-27)

Rockets win by 21. Avery Johnson had a great game, and Terry Cummings was dynamite in his 9 minutes. The rest of Robinson’s supporting cast sort of went MIA to some degree. Hakeem got monster games out of Sam Cassell and Robert Horry, though no one else in his supporting cast was special.
Overall: large edge to Hakeem.

Game 6
Hakeem - 39 pts, 17 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 6 tov, 68.4% TS, 119 ORtg/98 DRtg (+21)
David - 19 pts, 10 reb, 5 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk, 6 tov, 42.6% TS, 82 ORtg/105 DRtg (-23)

Rockets win by 5.
Overall: large edge to Hakeem.

So there we have it. No doubt Hakeem outplayed Robinson more often than the other way around; no doubt Hakeem had the better series overall (probably by a fair margin). But most of that gap is created by the last two games.

And fwiw, if we’re going to base a large portion of our decision in the “DRob vs. Dream in ‘95 debate” on H2H’s…...it’s maybe worth noting that they met six times in the regular season, too. Shall we scrutinize what happened then?

1st meeting
Hakeem - 20 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 40.2% TS, 79 ORtg/103 DRtg (-24)
David - 18 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 2 stl, 2 blk, 1 tov, 67.6% TS, 138 ORtg/94 DRtg (+44)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: moderate-to-large edge to Robinson

2nd meeting
Hakeem - 19 pts, 10 reb, 0 ast, 2 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 45.8% TS, 82 ORtg/91 DRtg (-9)
David - 18 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 48.0% TS, 89 ORtg/96 DRtg (-7)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: marginal edge to Robinson

3rd meeting
Hakeem - 47 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 61.7% TS, 105 ORtg/101 DRtg (+4)
David - 23 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 5 stl, 0 blk, 3 tov, 45.3% TS, 92 ORtg/99 DRtg (-7)
Result: Rockets win
Verdict: edge to Olajuwon

4th meeting
Hakeem - 36 pts, 14 reb, 2 ast, 3 stl, 4 blk, 6 tov, 49.1% TS, 98 ORtg/106 DRtg (-8)
David - 25 pts, 9 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 6 blk, 3 tov, 55.5% TS, 113 ORtg/103 DRtg (+10)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: nearly a wash; perhaps marginal edge to Robinson

How does Robinson take the edge here? I get that he won but Rodman had 11/22 (5/6), Avery 17/11 (111 ORTG), Elliot 26/4/3 (10-15), and VDN 22/6 (136 ORTG). Hakeem had Horry and Cassell (combined 13-17 for 38 points) but outside of that not much. Yeah he wasn't too efficient but it looked like he had to shoot more.

I didn't disagree with much else in your post but I have to ask if you really feel comfortable putting that series in the fluke category knowing how Hakeem has historically performed in the playoffs (even against great Cs) and how Robinson has historically performed in the playoffs (against not bad or average defenses and offenses). To me in Robinson I see a guy that clearly took a step backwards both offensively and defensively in the postseason.

Joao Saraiva · Post #70 » by **Joao Saraiva** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 11:43 am

1. LeBron James 2009
I had a tough time picking it over James in 2012, and I have picked 2012 in the past. Anyway:
RS: 28.4 PPG 7.6 RPG 7.2 APG 1.7 SPG 1.1 BPG 3 TOPG 31.7 PER 59.1ts% and 31.8 WS/48. 66 wins in the regular season with a cast composed by old big Z, old Ben Wallace, Delonte West (average SG at best) and Mo Williams (Just see where Mo's career has gone after leaving Cle). I have to be impressed with that record. LeBron had arguably the quickest 1st step EVER, and he scored in the paint with a better % than Shaq at his peak. How insane is that? He was also #2 at DPOY, and it was well deserved.

Playoffs: 35.3 PPG 9.1 RPG 7.3 APG 1.6 SPG 0.9 BPG 2.7 TOPG 37.4 PER 61.8 ts% abd 39.9 WS/48. He was playing at GOAT level. His driving was superb, he was hitting huge shots, 3 pointers from half court, fade away 3s in the clutch and having some of his most amazing performances ever. Games 1 and 5 against Orlando were insane, and he also had a great great one vs Atlanta. He was eliminated against Orlando averaging 38.5 PPG 8.3 RPG 8.0 APG 1.2 SPG and 1.2 BPG at 59.1ts%. And that was against a team with DPOY Dwight, defending the paint. Volume/efficiency scoring is truly amazing.

I think it also can be challanged by 2012 LeBron. Game 4 vs Indiana, game 6 vs Boston and great finals where LeBron couldn't get his shot outside the paint going and still scored great volume on good efficiency. MVP, Finals MVP and another #2 at DPOY. Still I had to go with 09. That just shows you how great 09 was.

2. Hakeem Olajuwon 1994
RS: 27.3 PPG 11.9 RPG 3.6 APG 1.6 SPG 3.7 BPG 3.4 TOPG 25.3 PER 56.5ts% 21 WS/48.
58 wins for Houston in the regular season. Onyle behind the Sonics who had a great team. Hakeem won MVP and DPOY and it was well deserved. Great impact on both sides of the court, leading a team with no 2nd star (despite having a good cast) to that great record. He was scoring, blocking, rebounding, assisting, stealing and living up to his legendary reputation, both on offense and specially on D.

Playoffs: 28.9 PPG 11.0 RPG 4.3 APG 1.7 SPG 4.0 BPG 3.6 TOPG 27.7 PER 56.8 ts% 20.8 WS/48.
Jordan had Pippen. LeBron had Bosh/Wade. Shaq had Kobe Bryant. Hakeem had Kenny Smith, Maxwell, Otis, Horry and Sam Cassel. It's a great cast don't get me wrong, but he won without a 2nd great player like those guys had. And despite being great on offense, the most interesting thing to look at is his D. Karl Malone in the WCF scored 26 PPG but at 50.5ts%. Barkley scored 23.4 PPG at 53.2ts% in the 2nd round vs Houston, and Ewing scored 18.9 at 39%ts in the NBA finals! Those numbers will indeed show the kind of impact Hakeem had on D.

Also he won MVP, DPOY and finals MVP in the same season. That's a very restrict club: only Hakeem has done that.

3. Magic Johnson 1987
RS: 23.9 PPG 12.2 APG 6.3 RPG 1.7 SPG 0.5 BPG 3.8 TOPG 27 PER 60.2ts% 26.3 WS/48.
In the regular season the Lakers won 65 games. It wasn't only Magic, they had a great team. Still Magic was the best player on that team, and the greats that played with him profited from his great leadership and amazing passing skills. He was scoring good volume, on great efficiency, and his playmaking was at the level that few ever reached (maybe Stockton?). He won the MVP award this season.

Playoffs: 21.8 PPG 12.2 APG 7.7 RPG 1.7 SPG 0.4 BPG 2.8 TOPG 26.2 PER 60.7ts% 26.5 WS/48.
Lakers just destroyed their oponents in the West. So Magic scored less points than he could have. But let's see his finals performances:
26.2 PPG 13 APG 8 RPG 2.3 SPG 0.3 BPG on 59%ts. He had 2 TOPG. So his assist/TO ratio is not comparable to any other player I've ever seen playing in the finals. He outscored Bird, with more efficiency, he had a ton more assists, and was only 2 RPG behind him and turned the ball much less. He even had more steals than Bird! What a great display to end a great season. Magic ended up winning the finals MVP, obviously.

drza · Post #71 » by **drza** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 1:14 pm

Jim Naismith wrote:
drza wrote:Over their careers, Olajuwon pretty consistently raised his scoring volume and efficiency in the postseason, several times as part of memorable playoffs runs. Robinson...didn't.

See this link for players who raised their game the most for the playoffs:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?712733-dropoffs-in-WS-48-from-regular-season-to-playoffs

Across different metrics, Hakeem is consistently near the top and David is consistently near the bottom.

Thanks for the link. Though to be fair, though, those metrics aren't really so different. PER, TS%, WS and ORating all depend HEAVILY upon scoring efficiency/volume. From those rankings I would only be able to infer that Hakeem's scoring efficiency/volume were better than Robinson's, but not that his entire "game" was raised more. That's part of why I looked into things like defense (as well as I could), passing/taking care of the ball, and (to some extent) rebounding as those are other areas of the game that are either completely ignored or (at best) only tangentially covered in the box score composite stats.

Post #72 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 1:17 pm

Thru post #70:

Lebron James - 48
Wilt Chamberlain - 22
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 15
Hakeem Olajuwon - 11
David Robinson - 5
Tim Duncan - 2
Larry Bird - 2
Bill Russell - 1
Kevin Garnett - 1
Magic Johnson - 1

Calling it for Lebron, but we can still continue some of the debate. Will initiate #4 thread immediately, but will also have to initiate a secondary thread for purpose of determining consensus on Lebron's peak year (was a pretty even split between '09 and '13).

Post #73 » by **Quotatious** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 1:36 pm

I'm not quite sure why, but even though Spaceman makes a really good case for Robinson (and I can see the argument for Garnett, as well), I just can't bring myself to put them over Olajuwon and Duncan. I think the playoff edge in Tim's/Hakeem's favor is more important than the regular season edge in David's/Kevin's favor. In the #1 thread, Spaceman argued that we tend to view the gaps in terms of boxscore production as much more important than they really are, and I can easily buy that argument when it applies to the regular season (like, for instance, I would argue that '09 Wade was clearly better than any version of Kobe in the RS - but still, that "clear gap" wouldn't translate to more than 2 or 3 extra wins if you replaced Bryant with Wade, assuming they would play the exact same number of games, so it's really not a significant gap).

However, I think the gap in terms of production becomes clearly more important in the playoffs, because every game is so much more important in the postseason, especially in conference finals/NBA finals (often also in conference semifinals, but even in the first round, if two great teams meet - like for example it was the case in last season's playoffs when the Clippers and Spurs met in round one). And, Hakeem/Tim had better boxscore production and likely also higher impact in the playoffs than David/Kevin.

Besides, let's not act like for example RAPM wouldn't love Duncan as much as Garnett or Robinson - we know for sure that it really loves Duncan - he led the league in single year RAPM in '03, at +6.1, which is prime LeBron territory, and he also had +14.3 on/off court net rating, which is elite.

Perhaps I'm not as open-minded as I thought I was, but I'd still lean towards Olajuwon/Duncan over Robinson/Garnett.

Joao Saraiva · Post #74 » by **Joao Saraiva** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:37 pm

OP you should put the ones that are already in so that we don't forget that. Now it's only two players but when the list gets to 15-20 it will be good to have it on the 1st post.

Joao Saraiva · Post #75 » by **Joao Saraiva** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:38 pm

I avoided voting for Wilt or Kareem because I didn't see their peaks. Considering that, am I too high on Magic? Do you guys think it's too much to have him in my top 5?

I'm confident enough with LeBron and Hakeem. I'll try to watch some Kareem 77 some more to try to judge him properly.

The-Power · Post #76 » by **The-Power** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 5:17 pm

Joao Saraiva wrote:Considering that, am I too high on Magic? Do you guys think it's too much to have him in my top 5?

I would say no. Magic was able to lead elite offenses and he took his scoring game to another level in '87. The jump shot he added helped him a lot, although he was granted it every time by opposing teams. His '87 campaign was simply incredible. I also believe his defense, while not being good, wasn't that bad for his teams due to the way the game was played back then - not much PnR offense, little spacing to allow drives right to the rim, crowded paints. This somewhat masks his deficiencies which would be exploited in today's league and augments his qualities on that end (mainly physical presence and length).

And I recently wrote a post in a topic about Curry's defense but it's more or less applicable to Magic as well: his elite offense, supposed to make his teammates better, allows you to have inferior talent while still having a good defense. Not saying this is necessarily true for the '87 Lakers, for instance, but the general idea should be clear. If you make your teammates better than they actually are offensively, your team is able to focus more on good defensive players. Looking at it that way, it is defensive impact team-wise without doing anything for the team-defense on the court in the first place - because such a player influences the team-construction and allows other players to focus more on defense, go all-out on that end. One reason why I don't believe that one can simply add up individual capabilities on both ends and take the result at face value.

SactoKingsFan · Post #77 » by **SactoKingsFan** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 5:20 pm

Joao Saraiva wrote:OP you should put the ones that are already in so that we don't forget that. Now it's only two players but when the list gets to 15-20 it will be good to have it on the 1st post.

The updated list is in the first post of project interest and metathinking thread.

Post #78 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 6:53 pm

E-Balla wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:As to the series itself, going game by game, I think the “Hakeem destroyed Robinson” (as is the usual narrative-->right there in the title of the video that sparked a lot of this debate) gets overblown. Bear in mind as we go thru this, that the Spurs game plan was to let Hakeem get his.

Game 1
Hakeem - 27 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 1 stl, 5 blk, 5 turnovers, 53.3% TS, 99 ORtg/93 DRtg (+6)
David - 21 pts, 9 reb, 2 ast, 0 stl, 2 blk, 7 turnovers, 43.7% TS, 83 ORtg/101 DRtg (-18)

Rockets win by 1 pt on a game winner by "wide open" (as described in the article) Horry (guess who was guarding him and left him completely alone).
Overall: clear sizable edge to Hakeem in this game

Game 2
Hakeem - 41 pts, 16 reb, 4 ast, 3 stl, 2 blk, 4 turnovers, 60.9% TS, 115 ORtg/93 DRtg (+22)
David - 32 pts, 12 reb (6 offensive), 2 ast, 0 stl, 1 blk, 5 turnovers, 66.2% TS, 121 ORtg/120 DRtg (+1)

Rockets win by 10 pts. I'd like to point out that Clyde went for 23/5/6/2/2 with 2 tov @ 63.2% TS; Horry had 21 pts on 70.0% TS with 6 rebs and 0 turnovers. There weren't any bright spots in the performances from DRob's supporting cast. Lack of steals/blocks likely gives a bit of a false impression wrt to Robinson’s defense (as far as individual DRtg is concerned).
Overall: small (or perhaps small-to-moderate) edge to Hakeem

Game 3
Hakeem - 43 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 0 stl, 5 blk, 2 tov, 63.7% TS, 127 ORtg/122 DRtg (+5)
David - 29 pts, 9 reb, 4 ast, 4 stl, 1 blk, 1 tov, 76.5% TS, 160 ORtg/112 DRtg (+48)

Spurs win by 5 pts. Robinson gets good games from Johnson, Elliot, and Del Negro. Hakeem got a fairly good game from Clyde, "decent" games from Horry and Smith.
Overall: despite the huge discrepancy in ORtg/DRtg, I’d give just the tiniest edge to Robinson

I'm sorry but I've watched this game and Hakeem dominated David. I'd say the only reason the game was close was because they got 40+ out of Hakeem and its not just me saying that those earlier posted articles alluded to the same (something like Hakeem is doing it on his own and the Spurs have an offense by committee - Avery Johnson was especially good in this game and Sean Elliot was very solid too). I don't see many agreeing that 10-15 for 29 is better than 19-32 in a 43 point performance when your team around you is playing worse.

Here's how I see the statistical comparison in this game:
Both had 4 ast, so let's just wipe that off as even. Stl + Blk =5 for both of them, however many (in a vacuum, myself included) consider steals to be of marginally more value than a block (because a steal guarantees the opponent lost possession, while a block does not); and Robinson outdid him 4-0 in steals.
Otherwise Olajuwon was +14 in points and +2 in rebounds.......but he was also +1 in turnovers and (although excellent) was nearly 13% behind in shooting efficiency. Those things at least come close to balancing out, imo.
Bear in mind that I'm the one who was perhaps more vocal than anyone in cautioning this forum about efficiency-centric thinking.....but still, 13% is nothing to sneeze at.
And one can't pass off Robinson's efficiency as his best Tyson Chandler impersonation. It's not like he had 76.5% TS on 12 pts.....he scored 29. And though he had many fewer attempts than Hakeem, he did get 9 FTA (to 4 for Hakeem). And where rebounds are concerned, it perhaps bears worth considering that he's playing next to a rebounder of Rodman's stature.

At any rate, I was about to call this game a wash overall; it was only the massive discrepancy in ORtg/DRtg that persuaded me to give "the tiniest of edges" to Robinson. I'm comfortable calling it a wash, too. Based on scrutiny of the above, I'm not comfortable giving Hakeem any sort of solid edge (and it's certainly not at all suggestive that Hakeem "dominated" Robinson). I haven't watched the game (since it was played 20 years ago); I'll try to get around to it to have an "eye-test" to go with this.

E-Balla wrote:And IDK how game 1 is a small edge but game 2 a large edge when he outscored and rebounded DR by more in game 2. I mean its 41/16 vs 32/12.

I can't tell exactly what you're advocating for above. The portion of the statement in blue appears to be suggesting that game 2 should NOT be called a "large" edge; but then the latter mauve colored portion suggests that it should.
At any rate, some of the confusion might be stemming from a misread: I didn't call game 1 a "small" edge. If you read again, you'll see I said "clear sizable edge" to Hakeem. And I didn't call game 2 a large edge, either; I called it small (or small-to-moderate) sized edge to Hakeem.

Why we might not be seeing eye-to-eye on some of these games probably has its roots in what we're looking at. I get the feeling you favor the raw volume stats (mainly scoring and rebounding totals) over the broad picture.
In game 2, yes Hakeem outscored him by +9 and outrebounded him by +4. He also was +2 in ast, had more of the tangible (stl/blk) defensive stats, and was -1 on turnovers. otoh, he was 5.3% worse on his shooting efficiency, and further I'd hinted that Robinson's high DRtg in that game probably belays a larger defensive impact (the inherent flaw in individual DRtg is it's reliance on DReb/Stl/Blk stats). Nonetheless, I still called it "small or small-to-moderate" edge (probably closer to moderate, upon reflection) for Hakeem.

Why did I think the gap was even bigger in game 1 (after all, he was only +6 in scoring and -1 in rebounding)? Simple: look beyond the most basic (scoring and rebounding) totals: he was also +3 in ast, +1 in stl, +3 in blk, -2 in turnovers, and nearly 10% better in shooting efficiency.

E-Balla wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:And fwiw, if we’re going to base a large portion of our decision in the “DRob vs. Dream in ‘95 debate” on H2H’s…...it’s maybe worth noting that they met six times in the regular season, too. Shall we scrutinize what happened then?

1st meeting
Hakeem - 20 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 40.2% TS, 79 ORtg/103 DRtg (-24)
David - 18 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 2 stl, 2 blk, 1 tov, 67.6% TS, 138 ORtg/94 DRtg (+44)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: moderate-to-large edge to Robinson

2nd meeting
Hakeem - 19 pts, 10 reb, 0 ast, 2 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 45.8% TS, 82 ORtg/91 DRtg (-9)
David - 18 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 48.0% TS, 89 ORtg/96 DRtg (-7)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: marginal edge to Robinson

3rd meeting
Hakeem - 47 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 61.7% TS, 105 ORtg/101 DRtg (+4)
David - 23 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 5 stl, 0 blk, 3 tov, 45.3% TS, 92 ORtg/99 DRtg (-7)
Result: Rockets win
Verdict: edge to Olajuwon

4th meeting
Hakeem - 36 pts, 14 reb, 2 ast, 3 stl, 4 blk, 6 tov, 49.1% TS, 98 ORtg/106 DRtg (-8)
David - 25 pts, 9 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 6 blk, 3 tov, 55.5% TS, 113 ORtg/103 DRtg (+10)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: nearly a wash; perhaps marginal edge to Robinson

How does Robinson take the edge here? I get that he won but Rodman had 11/22 (5/6), Avery 17/11 (111 ORTG), Elliot 26/4/3 (10-15), and VDN 22/6 (136 ORTG). Hakeem had Horry and Cassell (combined 13-17 for 38 points) but outside of that not much. Yeah he wasn't too efficient but it looked like he had to shoot more.

First off, I didn't definitively declare an edge for Robinson. I implied basically a wash; "perhaps" a "marginal" edge to Robinson.
As to why I came to that conclusion:
Robinson is -11 in pts, -1 in steals, -5 in rebounds (though you noted Rodman's vacuum effect for rebounds in this game). But then he's +1 in assists, +2 in blocks, -3 in turnovers, and nearly 6.5% better in shooting efficiency. These latter four categories pretty well brings things even to my eye.

E-Balla wrote:I didn't disagree with much else in your post but I have to ask if you really feel comfortable putting that series in the fluke category knowing how Hakeem has historically performed in the playoffs (even against great Cs) and how Robinson has historically performed in the playoffs (against not bad or average defenses and offenses). To me in Robinson I see a guy that clearly took a step backwards both offensively and defensively in the postseason.

Now I didn't necessarily declare the WCF a "fluke". I merely pointed out that: 1) prior to the last two games, Robinson hadn't actually been drastically outplayed in the series as a whole, and 2) the Spurs had some internal distraction (Rodman's meltdown) that was eroding some of their team chemistry and focus; and that 3) if we're going to base such a large degree of this comparison on how they played head-to-head, why are we not considering the OTHER six games they played (in the rs), where it was mostly Robinson who got the better of Hakeem?

And fwiw, I don't like using H2H as a primary means; it's not like they're facing each other every night. Seems to me the greater point is how they are against the entire field of competition. And against the majority of that field, it's Robinson who played better that year (at least in the rs; I don't deny Robinson had his struggles in the post-season, I just don't have this "it's the only part of the season that matters" philosophy).

JordansBulls · Post #79 » by **JordansBulls** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 8:50 pm

So which year was it for Lebron?

E-Balla · Post #80 » by **E-Balla** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 8:51 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
E-Balla wrote:I'm sorry but I've watched this game and Hakeem dominated David. I'd say the only reason the game was close was because they got 40+ out of Hakeem and its not just me saying that those earlier posted articles alluded to the same (something like Hakeem is doing it on his own and the Spurs have an offense by committee - Avery Johnson was especially good in this game and Sean Elliot was very solid too). I don't see many agreeing that 10-15 for 29 is better than 19-32 in a 43 point performance when your team around you is playing worse.

Here's how I see the statistical comparison in this game:
Both had 4 ast, so let's just wipe that off as even. Stl + Blk =5 for both of them, however many (in a vacuum, myself included) consider steals to be of marginally more value than a block (because a steal guarantees the opponent lost possession, while a block does not); and Robinson outdid him 4-0 in steals.
Otherwise Olajuwon was +14 in points and +2 in rebounds.......but he was also +1 in turnovers and (although excellent) was nearly 13% behind in shooting efficiency. Those things at least come close to balancing out, imo.
Bear in mind that I'm the one who was perhaps more vocal than anyone in cautioning this forum about efficiency-centric thinking.....but still, 13% is nothing to sneeze at.
And one can't pass off Robinson's efficiency as his best Tyson Chandler impersonation. It's not like he had 76.5% TS on 12 pts.....he scored 29. And though he had many fewer attempts than Hakeem, he did get 9 FTA (to 4 for Hakeem). And where rebounds are concerned, it perhaps bears worth considering that he's playing next to a rebounder of Rodman's stature.

At any rate, I was about to call this game a wash overall; it was only the massive discrepancy in ORtg/DRtg that persuaded me to give "the tiniest of edges" to Robinson. I'm comfortable calling it a wash, too. Based on scrutiny of the above, I'm not comfortable giving Hakeem any sort of solid edge (and it's certainly not at all suggestive that Hakeem "dominated" Robinson). I haven't watched the game (since it was played 20 years ago); I'll try to get around to it to have an "eye-test" to go with this.

This might come from watching the game and I could be wrong. You know how they'll say a player got a "quiet" 30. That's kind of the performance DR had. He wasn't really imposing his will on the game offensively and he seemed to be another part of the committee San Antonio had (I watched the series last year though so it's possible I'm thinking of another game but according to the old news articles I might not be).

E-Balla wrote:And IDK how game 1 is a small edge but game 2 a large edge when he outscored and rebounded DR by more in game 2. I mean its 41/16 vs 32/12.

I can't tell exactly what you're advocating for above. The portion of the statement in blue appears to be suggesting that game 2 should NOT be called a "large" edge; but then the latter mauve colored portion suggests that it should.
At any rate, some of the confusion might be stemming from a misread: I didn't call game 1 a "small" edge. If you read again, you'll see I said "clear sizable edge" to Hakeem. And I didn't call game 2 a large edge, either; I called it small (or small-to-moderate) sized edge to Hakeem.

It just threw me off is all. I think Hakeem had a small gap both games.

Why we might not be seeing eye-to-eye on some of these games probably has its roots in what we're looking at. I get the feeling you favor the raw volume stats (mainly scoring and rebounding totals) over the broad picture.
In game 2, yes Hakeem outscored him by +9 and outrebounded him by +4. He also was +2 in ast, had more of the tangible (stl/blk) defensive stats, and was -1 on turnovers. otoh, he was 5.3% worse on his shooting efficiency, and further I'd hinted that Robinson's high DRtg in that game probably belays a larger defensive impact (the inherent flaw in individual DRtg is it's reliance on DReb/Stl/Blk stats). Nonetheless, I still called it "small or small-to-moderate" edge (probably closer to moderate, upon reflection) for Hakeem.

Why did I think the gap was even bigger in game 1 (after all, he was only +6 in scoring and -1 in rebounding)? Simple: look beyond the most basic (scoring and rebounding) totals: he was also +3 in ast, +1 in stl, +3 in blk, -2 in turnovers, and nearly 10% better in shooting efficiency.

Well in the big picture I get efficiency helps a lot but sometimes you need someone to take over and Houston needed that. Also I hate DRTG and think its completely useless so that might have something to do with it.

E-Balla wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:And fwiw, if we’re going to base a large portion of our decision in the “DRob vs. Dream in ‘95 debate” on H2H’s…...it’s maybe worth noting that they met six times in the regular season, too. Shall we scrutinize what happened then?

1st meeting
Hakeem - 20 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 5 blk, 3 tov, 40.2% TS, 79 ORtg/103 DRtg (-24)
David - 18 pts, 11 reb, 4 ast, 2 stl, 2 blk, 1 tov, 67.6% TS, 138 ORtg/94 DRtg (+44)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: moderate-to-large edge to Robinson

2nd meeting
Hakeem - 19 pts, 10 reb, 0 ast, 2 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 45.8% TS, 82 ORtg/91 DRtg (-9)
David - 18 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 4 blk, 4 tov, 48.0% TS, 89 ORtg/96 DRtg (-7)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: marginal edge to Robinson

3rd meeting
Hakeem - 47 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 1 stl, 3 blk, 7 tov, 61.7% TS, 105 ORtg/101 DRtg (+4)
David - 23 pts, 10 reb, 4 ast, 5 stl, 0 blk, 3 tov, 45.3% TS, 92 ORtg/99 DRtg (-7)
Result: Rockets win
Verdict: edge to Olajuwon

4th meeting
Hakeem - 36 pts, 14 reb, 2 ast, 3 stl, 4 blk, 6 tov, 49.1% TS, 98 ORtg/106 DRtg (-8)
David - 25 pts, 9 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl, 6 blk, 3 tov, 55.5% TS, 113 ORtg/103 DRtg (+10)
Result: Spurs win
Verdict: nearly a wash; perhaps marginal edge to Robinson

How does Robinson take the edge here? I get that he won but Rodman had 11/22 (5/6), Avery 17/11 (111 ORTG), Elliot 26/4/3 (10-15), and VDN 22/6 (136 ORTG). Hakeem had Horry and Cassell (combined 13-17 for 38 points) but outside of that not much. Yeah he wasn't too efficient but it looked like he had to shoot more.

First off, I didn't definitively declare an edge for Robinson. I implied basically a wash; "perhaps" a "marginal" edge to Robinson.
As to why I came to that conclusion:
Robinson is -11 in pts, -1 in steals, -5 in rebounds (though you noted Rodman's vacuum effect for rebounds in this game). But then he's +1 in assists, +2 in blocks, -3 in turnovers, and nearly 6.5% better in shooting efficiency. These latter four categories pretty well brings things even to my eye.

Yeah looking at that again I can see why you'd call it a wash but looking at how each of their teams performed and how close the game was anyway I'm inclined to say Hakeem was a little better as the two players that showed up with Hakeem are both heavily reliant in Hakeem most of the time. Then again I've probably never seen that exact game so IDK.

E-Balla wrote:I didn't disagree with much else in your post but I have to ask if you really feel comfortable putting that series in the fluke category knowing how Hakeem has historically performed in the playoffs (even against great Cs) and how Robinson has historically performed in the playoffs (against not bad or average defenses and offenses). To me in Robinson I see a guy that clearly took a step backwards both offensively and defensively in the postseason.

Now I didn't necessarily declare the WCF a "fluke". I merely pointed out that: 1) prior to the last two games, Robinson hadn't actually been drastically outplayed in the series as a whole, and 2) the Spurs had some internal distraction (Rodman's meltdown) that was eroding some of their team chemistry and focus; and that 3) if we're going to base such a large degree of this comparison on how they played head-to-head, why are we not considering the OTHER six games they played (in the rs), where it was mostly Robinson who got the better of Hakeem?

And fwiw, I don't like using H2H as a primary means; it's not like they're facing each other every night. Seems to me the greater point is how they are against the entire field of competition. And against the majority of that field, it's Robinson who played better that year (at least in the rs; I don't deny Robinson had his struggles in the post-season, I just don't have this "it's the only part of the season that matters" philosophy).

Well DR wasn't getting outplayed that much in games 1-4 (but he was still getting outplayed) and neither was San Antonio (2-2) but Hakeem still dominated the series as a whole when he outplayed DR 4-2 games and possibly another one.

And I get the want to include the regular season play but when the book on Hakeem is that he was a postseason guy and the book on David is that he wasn't I think the postseason performance matters more. These are career trends with both guys not just one year anomalies so it makes sense that this would be seen as a nail in DR's coffin.

I get not liking H2H too but in the 90s NBA as a C you needed to be able to win H2H matchups with some of the GOAT Cs to get a ring (which is the ultimate goal for all teams). If you can't do that IDK how you can call yourself the best.