Retro POY '92-93 (Voting Complete)

[sp6r=underrated]

I don't know how MJ fans are voting for him at number 1.

I can accept "MJ may not be the unanimous #1 in '92-93". I can even accept "I have another player above MJ, although I understand I have a very fringe opinion." But you "don't know how" someone who played 78 games, won the championship, won the Finals MVP, made 1st-team All-NBA and All-Defense, and led the league in PPG, SPG, PER, WS, WS/48, playoff PER, playoff WS/48, and playoff WS/g--and above all, has earned the benefit of the doubt for being able to improve his game when it mattered, as he did so in decisive fashion this year--deserves to be at #1?

Just because another player was able to lead a less talented looking team to slightly fewer wins (much lower SRS) and 2nd round elimination? Reality check.

C'mon the real gem that warranted a response was

This is absolute peak Hakeem we're comparing him to. if MJ was at his best here, this would be a very competitive matchup to discus

[ronnymac2]

I don't have a huge problem with Bastillion voting Olajuwon over Jordan. I disagree, but it could be argued. I just don't like the argument (basically, bashing Jordan and comparing him to 91 MJ). And Barkley should NOT be above MJ for POY. Maybe MVP. Not POY.


Karl Malone didn't receive too much help in a series his team shouldn't have won anyway. I see nothing from John Stockton that makes me believe he is a reliable number two in the playoffs, aside from gm 5 (and all the little men have good games for SEA that game, too...including GP). After game 1, it seems Malone made Kemp his bitch.

Robinson played well against Portland, especially in the final two games. They don't want to go back to Portland for gm 5, so Robinson finishes them with a near quad-double. It is rare that I am impressed by Robinson in a playoff series, but I am here. He also played farely well against PHX. Not impressed by his gm 6, and I think when looking at each game's boxscore, Barkley outplayed him, but Robinson didn't play badly. Barkley only outplayed him because he's the superior player, not because Robinson was weak.

Then, there is Patrick. He inhaled defensive rebounds at an insane rate this year. This is with Oakley and Mason around, not Hedo and Rashard. Played great defense. In the playoffs, he was very good through the first two rounds. He outplayed Smits (though Smits played pretty well, outside of the clinching game) and taught rookie ZO how it's done. Then he played really well against Chicago's very good defense. He played great in the important games as an individual.

I'm leaning towards putting Malone fourth and Ewing fifth right now. Robinson didn't have those insane numbers in the regular season this year, which indicates to me that he was still learning what he could do as a player. If Robinson can't put up his crazy numbers, then I'd prefer Ewing's experience in big games and mental edge. Ewing also performed pretty well in the playoffs this year against very good competition. Ewing is actually close to fourth, but I think the Mailman was a better player at this point. I'm not voting yet because I want to see if arguments change my mind.

[Dr Positivity]

I fully expected bastillion to put Hakeem at 1 and I don't have a huge issue with it

However to talk about it as not even competitive and almost putting Ewing over Jordan is Also have to love the contradictory logic. Entire competition so far bastillion says playoffs, playoffs, playoffs and Hakeem's RS in 95 and 96 doesn't matter at all. Then this year comes and the entire argument is based on Jordan's RS! Where he "only" won 57 games

[Gongxi]

You have to love shifting goalposts.

[Sedale Threatt]

I have been waiting for bastillon's patented Hakeem press. I'm actually surprised it took this long.

[shawngoat23]

I'm not necessarily having trouble with him choosing his favorite player (Hakeem), although that makes me raise my eyebrows. It's him acting indignant that anyone would choose Michael Jordan this year, and calling those voters out for being homers.

[Gongxi]

My problem is the intellectual dishonesty. You can tell he came into the season thinking "How can I justify Hakeem at #1?" instead of having a process, a standard, and applying it to the season as logically and unemotionally as he could. As Mufasa pointed out, his reasoning is completely opposite of what it was in 93-94 and 94-95.

He came into these years having Olajuwon at #1 and then went about finding reasons to make it fit. That's the wrong way to approach this. It's pathetic.

[Sedale Threatt]

I'm not necessarily having trouble with him choosing his favorite player (Hakeem)...

I do. Magic's my favorite, and I'm not going to bend over backwards to come up with flimsy arguments in order to pick him No. 1 when he doesn't deserve it. That's not what this should be about. And to be fair, he's only about the fourth or fifth guy who's done this. We've had bandwagons for Kobe, Dirk, KG, Robinson, and now this. Am I missing anyone?

[sp6r=underrated]

My problem is the intellectual dishonesty. You can tell he came into the season thinking "How can I justify Hakeem at #1?" instead of having a process, a standard, and applying it to the season as logically and unemotionally as he could. As Mufasa pointed out, his reasoning is completely opposite of what it was in 93-94 and 94-95.

He came into these years having Olajuwon at #1 and then went about finding reasons to make it fit. That's the wrong way to approach this. It's pathetic.

I'm not sure if I agree with your general argument that every voter should have a process and standard they follow each year. The circumstances in every season are different which potentially require different methods of evaluation, so applying a slightly different standard for each season doesn't really bother me. Inevitably there will be times when a voter feels it is necessary to just look at the totality of the circumstances.

[tkb]

I'm going:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Charles Barkley
3. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Patrick Ewing
5. David Robinson

[sp6r=underrated]

I'm not necessarily having trouble with him choosing his favorite player (Hakeem)...

I do. Magic's my favorite, and I'm not going to bend over backwards to come up with flimsy arguments in order to pick him No. 1 when he doesn't deserve it. That's not what this should be about. And to be fair, he's only about the fourth or fifth guy who's done this. We've had bandwagons for Kobe, Dirk, KG, Robinson, and now this. Am I missing anyone?

I think what ShawnGoat was getting at (I could be wrong) is that Hakeem is Bastillon's very favorite player because he thinks so highly of Hakeem's gifts and abilities. He holds an outlier opinion on how good of a player Hakeem is. I don't think his vote here is a case of intellectual dishonesty, rather the case of someone who conducted rigorous analysis of a subject and just reached the wrong conclusion.

[sp6r=underrated]

I have my top 4 set at this point (MJ, Hakeem, CB, Ewing) still struggling on who will get my 5th vote.

[Gongxi]

My problem is the intellectual dishonesty. You can tell he came into the season thinking "How can I justify Hakeem at #1?" instead of having a process, a standard, and applying it to the season as logically and unemotionally as he could. As Mufasa pointed out, his reasoning is completely opposite of what it was in 93-94 and 94-95.

He came into these years having Olajuwon at #1 and then went about finding reasons to make it fit. That's the wrong way to approach this. It's pathetic.

I'm not sure if I agree with your general argument that every voter should have a process and standard they follow each year. The circumstances in every season are different which potentially require different methods of evaluation, so applying a slightly different standard for each season doesn't really bother me. Inevitably there will be times when a voter feels it is necessary to just look at the totality of the circumstances.

Of course things will be different from season to season, but I think having an objective system in which to operate is a lot better than just randomly making up your criteria from year to year, with no regard for consistency. Hey, this year I'll use this as a standard but next year I'll switch it up just for a change of pace! Oh hey! Randomly my favorite player came out on top both years, with different criteria! Haha, this fun!

That's not good. That's bad.

[Sedale Threatt]

I think what ShawnGoat was getting at (I could be wrong) is that Hakeem is Bastillon's very favorite player because he thinks so highly of Hakeem's gifts and abilities. He holds an outlier opinion on how good of a player Hakeem is. I don't think his vote here is a case of intellectual dishonesty, rather the case of someone who conducted rigorous analysis of a subject and just reached the wrong conclusion.

I disagree. But even if it was harmless, isn't it pretty much the same thing?

Like I said, Magic is my very favorite player because I also think so highly of his gifts and abilities, but I'm not going to manipulate stats to try to argue he was better than Jordan or Bird in years he wasn't.

The crux of his argument seems to be that Jordan should get marked down -- not just one spot, but two, to THIRD (!?!?!?!) -- because the Bulls only finished two games better than the Rockets. Which is like knocking Giselle Bundchen because she's got a freckle on her ass.

It just gets old reading these type of arguments. But like I said, I knew it was coming. I'm just surprised it didn't happen sooner.

[sp6r=underrated]

My problem is the intellectual dishonesty. You can tell he came into the season thinking "How can I justify Hakeem at #1?" instead of having a process, a standard, and applying it to the season as logically and unemotionally as he could. As Mufasa pointed out, his reasoning is completely opposite of what it was in 93-94 and 94-95.

He came into these years having Olajuwon at #1 and then went about finding reasons to make it fit. That's the wrong way to approach this. It's pathetic.

I'm not sure if I agree with your general argument that every voter should have a process and standard they follow each year. The circumstances in every season are different which potentially require different methods of evaluation, so applying a slightly different standard for each season doesn't really bother me. Inevitably there will be times when a voter feels it is necessary to just look at the totality of the circumstances.

Of course things will be different from season to season, but I think having an objective system in which to operate is a lot better than just randomly making up your criteria from year to year, with no regard for consistency. Hey, this year I'll use this as a standard but next year I'll switch it up just for a change of pace! Oh hey! Randomly my favorite player came out on top both years, with different criteria! Haha, this fun!

That's not good. That's bad.

But sometimes being overly rigid with applying a system leads to awful votes. Example: 95 Robinson over Hakeem due to RS production. I showed in one of the early threads that even if you weigh PS games 2 times as much Robinson still enjoyed a significant lead in some of the statistical categories that carried a lot of weight here. Thankfully most people just voted for Hakeem, but rigidly applying that formula does support voting for DR. Occasional deviations from voting patterns are fine as long as you explain the reason behind the deviation.

[lorak]

I'm not necessarily having trouble with him choosing his favorite player (Hakeem)...

I do. Magic's my favorite, and I'm not going to bend over backwards to come up with flimsy arguments in order to pick him No. 1 when he doesn't deserve it. That's not what this should be about. And to be fair, he's only about the fourth or fifth guy who's done this. We've had bandwagons for Kobe, Dirk, KG, Robinson, and now this. Am I missing anyone?

I’m one of these guys? Do you think the way I ranked Robinson was wrong?

[Sedale Threatt]

Nothing personal, but I thought your arguments were terrible, probably as a result of bias.

[Gongxi]

I'm not sure if I agree with your general argument that every voter should have a process and standard they follow each year. The circumstances in every season are different which potentially require different methods of evaluation, so applying a slightly different standard for each season doesn't really bother me. Inevitably there will be times when a voter feels it is necessary to just look at the totality of the circumstances.

Of course things will be different from season to season, but I think having an objective system in which to operate is a lot better than just randomly making up your criteria from year to year, with no regard for consistency. Hey, this year I'll use this as a standard but next year I'll switch it up just for a change of pace! Oh hey! Randomly my favorite player came out on top both years, with different criteria! Haha, this fun!

That's not good. That's bad.

But sometimes being overly rigid with applying a system leads to awful votes. Example: 95 Robinson over Hakeem due to RS production. I showed in one of the early threads that even if you weigh PS games 2 times as much Robinson still enjoyed a significant lead in some of the statistical categories that carried a lot of weight here. Thankfully most people just voted for Hakeem, but rigidly applying that formula does support voting for DR. Occasional deviations from voting patterns are fine as long as you explain the reason behind the deviation.

You don't have to be overly rigid, but you really, really, really should start with...something. bastillon's argument in this thread could easily be an argument for Shaq in the 94-95 thread. Or vice versa. But it's not, because he blatantly changed his entire standard to coincidentally place his favorite player atop both seasons.

I mean, whatever, it's his vote, he can be a chump with it if he wants. But we should note that and ridicule him for it.

[sp6r=underrated]

I think what ShawnGoat was getting at (I could be wrong) is that Hakeem is Bastillon's very favorite player because he thinks so highly of Hakeem's gifts and abilities. He holds an outlier opinion on how good of a player Hakeem is. I don't think his vote here is a case of intellectual dishonesty, rather the case of someone who conducted rigorous analysis of a subject and just reached the wrong conclusion.

I disagree. But even if it was harmless, isn't it pretty much the same thing?

Like I said, Magic is my very favorite player because I also think so highly of his gifts and abilities, but I'm not going to manipulate stats to try to argue he was better than Jordan or Bird in years he wasn't.

The crux of his argument seems to be that Jordan should get marked down -- not just one spot, but two, to THIRD (!?!?!?!) -- because the Bulls only finished two games better than the Rockets. Which is like knocking Giselle Bundchen because she's got a freckle on her ass.

It just gets old reading these type of arguments. But like I said, I knew it was coming. I'm just surprised it didn't happen sooner.

End outcome wise it is the same thing, but motivation does matter. Someone who steals a loaf of bread to eat is different than someone who pickpockets a wallet to buy knick tickets. I also think we do have the right to just reach the wrong conclusion provided you explained yourself, which to his credit he did.

I do think placing MJ 4th is and not really defensible.

Finally, the Hakeem push did happen earlier when he voted Hakeem 2nd in 96.

[JordansBulls]

Again, how can he justify Hakeem #1 in 1995 when the Rockets went from 58 wins to 47 wins and didn't even have the best numbers in the league? At least in 1993 MJ had the best overall numbers in the league in production. Also the same would apply to Shaq from 2000 to 2001 who won 67 games and then 56 games.