Peaks project update: #12

[FrogBros4Life]

Long post incoming....this discussion has piqued my interest and I wanted to chime in with a few things...

The point of our discussion was E-balla claiming it was never even made to be applied to older generations.

The context that it was used for in the original discussion was Ewing vs D-rob. Two players from a similar era yet it was still dismissed.

I don’t think any stat can be applied directly across eras due to how much the sport has changed over the years. Everything requires context.

Agree with the bolded. This discussion has devolved into something else entirely though. The validity of BPM and WS as it was presented in this thread really has no bearing on the original point that was made. E-Balla made a very specific claim: Ewing performed better offensively in the playoffs against higher quality defenses throughout their entire primes. E-Balla presented enough evidence to at least support this claim on the ground level. LiamLiam's retort to this was to disagree with the idea in general because it somehow didn't pass his sniff test, and proceeded to throw out BPM and Winshare #'s for 2 single, different seasons for each player (90 Ewing and 95 Robinson).

How is citing regular season BPM and Winshares any type of refutation that Ewing played better against tougher defenses in the playoffs over the course of their entire respective primes? How is citing playoff BPM and Winshares for 2 single, different playoff runs a refutation that Ewing played better against tougher defenses in the playoffs over the course of their entire respective primes? It's not.

You’re asked for further context and you refuse because it’s “spoonfeeding” and the other guy is “lazy” for not looking it up. Yet you expects others to break down their reasoning for using every single metric?

He has said multiple times that the specific data you may be insisting on that would actually provide further clarification does not exist. Since he has at least already presented SOME evidence (as opposed to none), at what point does the burden of proof shift to the party disagreeing to refute the evidence that WAS presented? If you want to simply disagree with the evidence he provided, that's fair. But it seems a bit unrealistic to clamor about for additional, custom requested pieces of data to satisfy whatever qualms you have about the claim being made. I'm not going to give PBP data for every single playoff game that they took the court, but I will provide some further evidence below that I think is pertinent to this argument. Most, if not all of this, will be in response to specific points already raised by you guys previously in this discussion.

Robinson blows Ewing away https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Patrick+Ewing&player_id1_select=Patrick+Ewing&player_id1=ewingpa01&y1=1990&player_id2_hint=David+Robinson&player_id2_select=David+Robinson&player_id2=robinda01&y2=1995 in Win Shares, BPM... And that carries over to the postseason, despite his dips.

Again.....the original claim made was that Ewing performed better than Robinson did against tough playoff defenses across their entire primes. How is comparing Ewing's regular season BPM and WS in 1990 to Robinson's BPM and WS in 1995 any kind of evidence against this? Or even playoff BPM and WS for these two different seasons for that matter?

I get that Robinson is a fan favorite advanced stat darling around these parts, and in this case it appears that LiamLiam was flipping a very specific claim into some sort of perceived indictment against Robinson's total body of work despite the fact that E-balla in his original post conceded that he thought Robinson had the better overall career considering what he accomplished next to Duncan.

But even if you want to look at the playoff only #'s for the 2 seasons cited (90 Ewing and 95 Robinson) we can gather more information from looking at the entire picture here instead of reducing everything down to the concept that BPM and WS > *.

=====================

90 Ewing Playoffs Per Game: 29.4 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 3.1 ast, 1.3 stl, 2 blks, 2.7 TO, 58%TS

95 Robinson Playofffs Per Game: 25.3ppg, 12.1 rpg, 3.1 ast, 1.5 stl, 2.6 blks, 3.7 TO 54%TS

=======================

90 Ewing Playoffs Per36: 26.8ppg, 9.6 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.2 stl, 1.8 blks, 2.5 TO, 58%TS

95 Robinson Playoffs Per36: 22ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.7apg, 1.3 stl, 2.3 blks, 3.2 TO, 54%TS

========================

90 Ewing Playoffs Per100: 37.5ppg, 13.4 rpg, 4apg, 1.7 stl, 2.6 blks, 3.4 TO, 58%TS

95 Robinson Playofffs Per100: 32.6ppg, 15.6 rpg, 4apg, 1.9 stl, 3.4 blks, 4.8 TO, 54%TS

===========================

Whether you look at per game, per36 or per100, Ewing appears to have a clear edge in production offensively regardless of what BPM and WS yield as outputs. This falls in line with E-Balla's original claim even before we take into account that Ewing played against better defenses at a slower pace. In 90, Ewing played the Celtics who were 12th in DRTG, and the Pistons who were 2nd in DRTG (1st in playoff DRTG). In 95, Robinson played the Nuggets who were 14th in DRTG, the Lakers who were 16th in DRTG, and the Rockets who were 12th. In 90, The Celtics were 13th in Pace and the Pistons were 26th (2nd to last). In the playoffs the Celtics were 3rd in pace and the Pistons 15th. In the 95 regular season, the Nuggets were 20th in pace, but the Rockets were 10th and the Lakers were 4th. In the playoffs, Denver was 4th in pace, the Lakers were 8th and Houston was 2nd. The pace here clearly favors Robinson, even before we consider that in 95 Robinson played 15 postseason games to 10 for Ewing in 1990.

Robinson did have a slight edge in overall REB% (16.6 to 15.7), but Ewing had the edge in DEFREB% (26% to 22%), and with the increase in pace of play in Robinson's favor, it makes the slight rebounding edge for Robinson less impactful.

But even then, his offence that year was a massive outlier for his career. So he has one freak season where he starts to outproduce Robinson solely at the weaker facet of both of their games, and suddenly he is a better peak player? Come on.

But I can use 1991 if you prefer. I can use most years of Robinson’s prime, in fact, because unlike Ewing he had more than one good offensive season – and somehow he managed to have those seasons without sacrificing his defensive aptitude to do it.

Over their entire primes, Ewing's overall playoff PPG increased from his regular season average 3 times. Robinson's overall playoff PPG increased from his regular season average once. Over their entire primes, Ewing's overall playoff APG increased from his regular season average 6 times. Robinson's overall playoff APG increased from his regular season average 4 times. Over the course of their entire primes Robinson's turnovers increased in the playoffs from his regular season average 4 times. Over the course of their entire primes Ewing's turnovers increased in the playoffs from his regular season average just twice (one of which was a 0.1 increase). And this is against ALL defenses....not just good ones, and we know that Ewing played in the harder of the two conferences during his time and routinely played more difficult defenses than Robinson did (again, as E-balla pointed out, Robinson never played an elite defense). With all of these factors, it's not a stretch at all to say that Ewing was a more resilient #1 option on offense in the playoffs, especially when you consider his raw stats will be somewhat deflated due to the slower pace at which his teams played. As for sacrificing his defense, I agree that 1990 was not Ewing's best defensive year, but over the course of their entire primes (as was how the original argument was framed), Ewing did this while managing to lead a defense that was top 5 in the league for about 8 straight years, 2 of which were among the best of all time.

It was not at the level of Ewing. Ewing had all of one year where he could offensively claim to be on par with Robinson; in every other year, he is offensively blown out of the water. .

Actually, between 90-98, the relative difference in playoff points per 100 compared to actual playoff ppg favors Ewing in all but 2 seasons.

There is no adjustment for minutes or possessions, no actual comparison of their respective defences... Just an indication that, in what was apparently a very small sample size for Robinson, Ewing had the most marginal of superficial box score advantages in a highly specific context.

When we adjusted for minutes AND possessions in 90 Ewing vs 95 Robinson (evidence you provided), we see that Ewing still appears to come out ahead on the offensive end any way you slice it. And again, when adjusting for pace for every year from 1990-1998, Ewing has better relative scoring numbers when comparing per100 possessions to actual playoff ppg (because Ewing was playing at a slower tempo than Robinson) in all but 2 seasons.


A few other things stood out to me while reading this discussion. Mainly...

DRob was often doubled while teams rarely needed to double Ewing.

This is just not true. If anything Ewing may have been double teamed more.

Give me Robinson’s offensive performance against Hakeem over Ewing’s any day.

This is more than likely a fair statement, but just to add some perspective I will say this as matter of factly as possible:

Robinson against Hakeem in 95 scored ~5 more ppg than Ewing against Hakeem in 94, and Robinson did so on better efficiency (because Ewing was double teamed with regularity). To score those extra 5 points however, the Spurs/Rockets series was at a faster pace and Robinson attempted FIFTY free throws more (in a 6 game series) than Ewing did (in a 7 game series).

In 1995 Oljauwon averaged 27.8 ppg in the regular season, 33ppg in the playoffs and 35.3 pgg against the Spurs (Olajuwon was +2.3 ppg better against the Spurs than the postseason as a whole, and a whopping +7.5 ppg better against the Spurs than his regular season average). Robinson averaged 27.6 ppg for the regular season, 25.3 for the playoffs, and 23.8 ppg vs. the Rockets. (Robinson was -2.3ppg for the playoffs compared to his regular season, and -3.8ppg against the Rocket compared to his regular season). In 94, Olajuwon averaged 27.3 ppg in the regular season, 28.9 ppg in the playoffs, but only 26.9 vs the Knicks. (Ewing held Olajuwon not only below his regular season scoring average, but his scoring average for the playoffs that year as well). And while the Rockets routinely double teamed Ewing, The Knicks pretty much opted for single coverage against Olajuwon more than they doubled him. Ewing certainly got outplayed by Olajuwon, but Olajuwon ran Robinson out of the gym, dropping at least 39 (!) points on him in 4 of the 6 games.

In terms of overall play, Ewing out-rebounded Robinson (and Hakeem, in either series), had a better assist to turnover ratio than Robinson, and had more blocks by a significant margin (steals were roughly even). Ewing set a Finals record for both most blocks in a game and most blocks in a 7 game series. Ewing had more blocks through 2 and a half games in 94 than Robinson did all series in 95. Ewing's DRTG in the NY/HOU series was a 95 while Robinson's DRTG in the Rockets/Spurs series was a 107.

So...Robinson scored 5 more ppg on FIFTY more free throw attempts, but Ewing probably played him better overall, and the Knicks certainly gave the Rockets a much tougher series.

But the numbers do not clearly show that because you could not be bothered to provide all the context. I have no idea what series are being selected for Robinson, or how many. I have no idea if pace is a factor.

I agree, E-balla could have been more precise in listing the actual series played for both. However, there was a thread not too long ago by 70sFan (I think?) that went into more detail about multiple players, Ewing and Robinson included, and how they both played against good, bad, mediocre and elite defenses. It may have more information about this topic that you may find useful in explaining his position. As for pace, as a general rule of thumb, pace will favor the west coast teams of the 90's more so than the east coast teams. There are exceptions of course, but adjusting for pace is more often than not going to close the gap between Ewing and Robinson, not widen it.

It is not clear and comparable if there is an empty void of context. You play who is in front of you. And if Robinson performed poorly in, what, two series against top five defences, yeah, that is a knock on him, but it is also not worth extrapolating to his entire career. Outside of 1990, how often did Ewing mimic Robinson’s offence?

Again, Ewing's playoff PPG, APG and TO economy all increased from the regular season to the postseason with more frequency than so for Robinson over the course of their careers. If you are talking strictly regular season numbers, sure, Robinson was more productive on offensive, but he played the majority of his career at a faster pace of play with a style that didn't revolve around pounding the the air out of the ball for the first 20 seconds of the shot clock with a bunch of bricklayers around him. Up until Ewing's wrist injury in 98, Robinson and Ewing both accounted for about 25% of their teams total PPG in any given season, with Ewing actually ahead some years. In the regular season only, Ewing had better per100 scoring numbers than Robinson in 90, 91, 92 and 93. Robinson was ahead in 94, 95 and 96. Robinson was better in 97 but only played 6 games. Robinson was .1 better in 98, and Ewing was .9 better in 99.

He was not playing top five defences every season, so he certainly had enough opportunity (at least more opportunity than Robinson had against top defences).

Here is a rough breakdown of defenses Ewing faced every year in the playoffs from 90-00:

89-90: Detroit (2nd best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 1st in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 1st in DRTG, 2nd in TO forced)

90-91: Chicago (7th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 2nd in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 1st in DRTG, 5th in TO forced)

91-92 Detroit (6th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 1st in Opponent FG%, 2nd in Opponent PPG, 3rd in DRTG, 8th in TO forced)

91-92 Chicago (4th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 2nd in Opponent FG%, 6th in Opponent PPG, 2nd in DRTG, 6th in TO forced)

92-93 Charlotte (5th in playoff DRTG and 2nd in TO forced despite not ranking out well in either Opponent PPG or Opponent FG%)

92-93 Chicago (7th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 10th in Opponent FG%, 4th in Opponent PPG, 10th in DRTG, 5th in TO forced)

93-94 New Jersey (10th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 6th in Opponent FG%, 6th in Opponent PPG, 5th in DRTG, 4th in TO forced)

93-94 Chicago (6th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 9th in Opponent FG%, 4th in Opponent PPG, 9th in DRTG, 6th in TO forced)

93-94 Indiana (8th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 4th in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 1st in DRTG, 2nd in TO forced)

93-94 Houston (2nd best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 1st in Opponent FG%, 7th in Opponent PPG, 6th in DRTG)

94-95 Cleveland (3rd best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 2nd in Opponent PPG, 4th in DRTG, 1st in TO forced)

94-95 Indiana (6th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 10th in Opponent FG%, 8th in Opponent PPG, 8th in DRTG, 8th in TO forced)

95-96 Chicago (1st best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 5th in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 1st in DRTG, 1st in TO forced)

96-97 Miami (1st best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 1st in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 1st in DRTG, 8th in TO forced)

97-98 Indiana (5th best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 5th in Opponent FG%, 7th in Opponent PPG, 8th in DRTG, 1st in TO forced)

98-99 Miami (8th best defense in the regular season, Alonzo Mourning DPOY) (Playoffs: 8th in Opponent FG%, 5th in Opponent PPG)

98-99 Atlanta (2nd best defense in the regular season) (Playoffs: 3rd in Opponent PPG, 4th in DRTG)

99-00 Miami (7th best defense in the regular season, Alonzo Mourning DPOY) (Playoffs: 3rd in Opponent FG%, 1st in Opponent PPG, 2nd in DRTG)

So, yes, he literally was facing top 5ish defenses in the playoffs almost every year. Certainly better than what Robinson was facing year in and year out in the Western Conference playoffs.

On DRob vs Ewing - the arguments are quite laughable regarding team defenses. When each player is a first option, playing the ball through them and being defended m2m, the team defense of the opposition isn't that important so much as how often they help. DRob was often doubled while teams rarely needed to double Ewing.

In 95, DRob's peak season, he was defended by …peak Hakeem, peak Mutombo, prime Divac and in 96 he was defended by Karl Malone (who had to take DRob quite a bit) and Felton Spencer.

In 90, Ewin'g peak, he dominated against 36 year old Robert Parish and had a bad series with 1 good game and 1 empty stats game while getting blown out against the bad boy pistons...defended by Laimbeer.

DRob's competition at Center was so much higher, the comparison is absurd. Even in 1990, DRob held his own as a rookie head to head. In 95, DRob was blowing Ewing out of the water.

I already addressed the claim about Ewing not getting double teamed, but I'll provide some extra "context" to the rest of this quote....

As for Ewing having a "bad" series against the Pistons, he averaged 27, 10reb and 2ast with 2 blocks on 56%TS on a much better turnover economy than his regular season averages that year. He also had the highest GMscore of any player on either team that series. And this again, was against a historically great defensive team, who were the defending champs en route to a repeat. I wouldn't say Ewing had a bad series so much as he simply lost to a better team.

As for man defense outweighing team defense...

It was claimed in 90 that Ewing dominated a washed up 36 year old Robert Parish and an (implied to be) defensively deficient Bill Laimbeer. Laimbeer had a playoff DRTG of 96 and a DBPM of 4.9 (both better than his regular season DRTG and DBPM). Parish meanwhile, while not necessarily "impressive" by any defensive metrics, still had the best postseason DRTG on his team (116) and was the only player on the roster with a positive DBPM in the playoffs. Kevin McHale also spent time guarding Ewing this series and he was 2nd team All Defense this season.

In 95 Robinson was guarded primarily by Mutombo, Divac/Elden Campbell and Olajuwon. Mutombo, while the DPOY only had a regular season DRTG of 103 (worse than Laimbeer) and a DBPM of 4.4. In the playoffs, Mutombo's DRTG was 117 (!) and his DBPM was 1.7. So Mutombo's playoff DRTG and DBPM were both SIGNIFICANTLY worse than Laimbeer, and his playoff DRTG was worse than "36 year old washed up Robert Parish" as well.

Seeing that Mutombo's defensive metrics were not only bad in a vacuum, but also much worse than his regular season marks, you would think that Robinson dragged him all over the court. But Robinson's averages that series? 19ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2 steals and 1.3 blocks on 43% FG. I wouldn't exactly call this blowing anybody out of the water.

Against the Lakers, Divac and Elden Campbell both had playoff DRTG's of 106, and DBPMs of 3.4 and 4.1 respectively. Both still inferior to Laimbeer. Robinson spanked the Lakers front court (as he should have), but the Lakers were not a great defensive team and actually had an expected W-L this year that was BELOW .500 (40-42). So again, Robinson was feasting on a not great team, that also lacked great individual post defenders to offset that by virtue of man to man coverage on Robinson. Good for Robinson, but this is what E-balla was talking about with Robinson beating up on "cupcake teams".


Against the Rockets, Houston as a team was 5th in playoff points allowed and 9th in team DRTG. Hakeem's regular season DRTG (100) and DBPM (4.0) were both better than his playoff DRTG (108) and DBPM (3.7). Yet, in the postseason he still held Robinson below his season averages in Points, Assists, and TS% with Robinson playing almost 4 more minutes per game in this series compared to his regular season allotment. Robinson also committed almost 2 more turnovers per game while seeing a reduction in USG.

So the Pistons in 90 were better as a defensive unit as a team than any squad Robinson played in the playoffs in 95. And Laimbeer had better individual defensive impact stats than any player who guarded Robinson that postseason. And Ewing still outplayed Robinson from a box score standpoint, while also playing at a much slower pace (Detroit played at the 2nd slowest pace of any playoff team in 90....15th out of 16, Boston was 3rd out of 16). In 95, the slowest paced team the Spurs played were the Lakers who were 8th out of 16. Denver was 4th and Houston was 2nd.

And this is before we even take into account that Robinson's supposedly superior postseason run of 95 came against 3 sub-50 win teams. Granted, the 95 Rockets were much better than their 47-35 record indicated. But both the Nuggets and the Lakers that year were inferior to either the 90 Celtics (52 wins) or the 90 Pistons (59 wins). Ewing and the Knicks came back from an 0-2 deficit to beat the Celtics in an elimination game on the road. The Spurs had homecourt advantage against the Rockets, dropped both of the first 2 games in San Antonio, and lost the series in 6.

I'm not sure you can paint Robinson's 95 playoff run as better than Ewing's 90 run in any way other than trying to boil everything down to BPM or WS and then saying "See! This magic number says Robinson was better so it must be true". Absent of context, those numbers do not tell the entire story.


And this STILL does not explain why Robinson's 95 playoffs vs. Ewing's 90 playoffs was even brought up in the first place in an attempt to debunk the entirely different claim that over the course of their entire primes, Ewing played better than Robinson did against upper tier defenses. It was a silly thing to use as a counterpoint, but even in doing so, upon close examination, we can see that even in those individual years Ewing played as well or better against good defenses as Robinson did against bad and mediocre ones. And that is irrespective of whether you are defining a defense as being good based on the team's overall defense ranking or the individual man defenders that were guarding each player (in so far as we can quantify such things).

Also FWIW in comparing them as franchise players...Ewing lost a series as a higher seed 3 times (twice against Jordan). Robinson lost a series as a higher seed 5 times. Ewing won a series as a lower seed 6 times. Robinson won a series as a lower seed ZERO times. Ewing also has a better record in game 7's (and game 5's when the first round was best 2 out of 3), and close out games in general. None of that proves anything definitively of course, but it's an additional point to ponder when thinking about them in terms of "leaders" on teams that were expected to contend for championships.

Basketball is not played in an excel spreadsheet and BPM and WS are not magic numbers that somehow refute claims where other pieces of evidence might lead us to a different conclusion. If any of you want to nitpick any of this additional context, feel free (I personally am not a fan of using DBPM for example), but at least now some more "context" has been provided.

[liamliam1234]

^ This is an excellent post and is basically everything (and more!) that I wanted out of E-balla.

I will try to have a response at some point (incredible work, but obviously a long post will require something of a long reply). But briefly, I do want to clarify that the topic of the discussion varied (which is predominately my fault/responsibility) beyond primary point of the original post. Not every part of every post I made was about their relative offences or their extended offensive primes, and specifically the 1990/1995 comparisons were me honing in on the claim that 1990 Ewing was the overall peak of both.

Thank you for doing all that work, especially when it was not even your point originally.

[euroleague]

On DRob vs Ewing - the arguments are quite laughable regarding team defenses. When each player is a first option, playing the ball through them and being defended m2m, the team defense of the opposition isn't that important so much as how often they help. DRob was often doubled while teams rarely needed to double Ewing.

In 95, DRob's peak season, he was defended by …peak Hakeem, peak Mutombo, prime Divac and in 96 he was defended by Karl Malone (who had to take DRob quite a bit) and Felton Spencer.

In 90, Ewin'g peak, he dominated against 36 year old Robert Parish and had a bad series with 1 good game and 1 empty stats game while getting blown out against the bad boy pistons...defended by Laimbeer.

DRob's competition at Center was so much higher, the comparison is absurd. Even in 1990, DRob held his own as a rookie head to head. In 95, DRob was blowing Ewing out of the water.

I already addressed the claim about Ewing not getting double teamed, but I'll provide some extra "context" to the rest of this quote....

As for Ewing having a "bad" series against the Pistons, he averaged 27, 10reb and 2ast with 2 blocks on 56%TS on a much better turnover economy than his regular season averages that year. He also had the highest GMscore of any player on either team that series. And this again, was against a historically great defensive team, who were the defending champs en route to a repeat. I wouldn't say Ewing had a bad series so much as he simply lost to a better team.

As for man defense outweighing team defense...

It was claimed in 90 that Ewing dominated a washed up 36 year old Robert Parish and an (implied to be) defensively deficient Bill Laimbeer. Laimbeer had a playoff DRTG of 96 and a DBPM of 4.9 (both better than his regular season DRTG and DBPM). Parish meanwhile, while not necessarily "impressive" by any defensive metrics, still had the best postseason DRTG on his team (116) and was the only player on the roster with a positive DBPM in the playoffs. Kevin McHale also spent time guarding Ewing this series and he was 2nd team All Defense this season.

In 95 Robinson was guarded primarily by Mutombo, Divac/Elden Campbell and Olajuwon. Mutombo, while the DPOY only had a regular season DRTG of 103 (worse than Laimbeer) and a DBPM of 4.4. In the playoffs, Mutombo's DRTG was 117 (!) and his DBPM was 1.7. So Mutombo's playoff DRTG and DBPM were both SIGNIFICANTLY worse than Laimbeer, and his playoff DRTG was worse than "36 year old washed up Robert Parish" as well.

Seeing that Mutombo's defensive metrics were not only bad in a vacuum, but also much worse than his regular season marks, you would think that Robinson dragged him all over the court. But Robinson's averages that series? 19ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2 steals and 1.3 blocks on 43% FG. I wouldn't exactly call this blowing anybody out of the water.

Against the Lakers, Divac and Elden Campbell both had playoff DRTG's of 106, and DBPMs of 3.4 and 4.1 respectively. Both still inferior to Laimbeer. Robinson spanked the Lakers front court (as he should have), but the Lakers were not a great defensive team and actually had an expected W-L this year that was BELOW .500 (40-42). So again, Robinson was feasting on a not great team, that also lacked great individual post defenders to offset that by virtue of man to man coverage on Robinson. Good for Robinson, but this is what E-balla was talking about with Robinson beating up on "cupcake teams".


Against the Rockets, Houston as a team was 5th in playoff points allowed and 9th in team DRTG. Hakeem's regular season DRTG (100) and DBPM (4.0) were both better than his playoff DRTG (108) and DBPM (3.7). Yet, in the postseason he still held Robinson below his season averages in Points, Assists, and TS% with Robinson playing almost 4 more minutes per game in this series compared to his regular season allotment. Robinson also committed almost 2 more turnovers per game while seeing a reduction in USG.

So the Pistons in 90 were better as a defensive unit as a team than any squad Robinson played in the playoffs in 95. And Laimbeer had better individual defensive impact stats than any player who guarded Robinson that postseason. And Ewing still outplayed Robinson from a box score standpoint, while also playing at a much slower pace (Detroit played at the 2nd slowest pace of any playoff team in 90....15th out of 16, Boston was 3rd out of 16). In 95, the slowest paced team the Spurs played were the Lakers who were 8th out of 16. Denver was 4th and Houston was 2nd.

And this is before we even take into account that Robinson's supposedly superior postseason run of 95 came against 3 sub-50 win teams. Granted, the 95 Rockets were much better than their 47-35 record indicated. But both the Nuggets and the Lakers that year were inferior to either the 90 Celtics (52 wins) or the 90 Pistons (59 wins). Ewing and the Knicks came back from an 0-2 deficit to beat the Celtics in an elimination game on the road. The Spurs had homecourt advantage against the Rockets, dropped both of the first 2 games in San Antonio, and lost the series in 6.

I'm not sure you can paint Robinson's 95 playoff run as better than Ewing's 90 run in any way other than trying to boil everything down to BPM or WS and then saying "See! This magic number says Robinson was better so it must be true". Absent of context, those numbers do not tell the entire story.


And this STILL does not explain why Robinson's 95 playoffs vs. Ewing's 90 playoffs was even brought up in the first place in an attempt to debunk the entirely different claim that over the course of their entire primes, Ewing played better than Robinson did against upper tier defenses. It was a silly thing to use as a counterpoint, but even in doing so, upon close examination, we can see that even in those individual years Ewing played as well or better against good defenses as Robinson did against bad and mediocre ones. And that is irrespective of whether you are defining a defense as being good based on the team's overall defense ranking or the individual man defenders that were guarding each player (in so far as we can quantify such things).

Also FWIW in comparing them as franchise players...Ewing lost a series as a higher seed 3 times. Robinson lost a series as a higher seed 5 times. Ewing won a series as a lower seed 6 times. Robinson won a series as a lower seed ZERO times. Ewing also has a better record in game 7's (and game 5's when the first round was best 2 out of 3), and close out games in general. None of that proves anything definitively of course, but it's an additional point to ponder when thinking about them in terms of "leaders" on teams that were expected to contend for championships.

Basketball is not played in an excel spreadsheet and BPM and WS are not magic numbers that somehow refute claims where other pieces of evidence might lead us to a different conclusion. If any of you want to nitpick any of this additional context, feel free (I personally am not a fan of using DBPM for example), but at least now some more "context" has been provided.

Appreciate the long response. A few points:

1. DRTG isn't an indicator that shows individual impact. DRTG takes box score stats, takes team DRTG, and attempts to pass out credit for team defense using defensive box score metrics. That's why Steph Curry dominates in DRTG so often - he racks up steals on an elite defensive team. While Klay is rated poorly. Individual DRTG doesn't show Laimbeer was an elite defender compared to Mutombo, just that his team was elite (which is true). Mutombo's team may have been poor defensively, but he was an elite defender dedicated to stopping DRob. Laimbeer was a brutal and sometimes called 'dirty' help defender. He wasn't a top-notch m2m defender.

Furthermore, McHale was a PF and Parish was more laughable than the Lakers.

2. I wasn't talking about Ewing vs Robinson's man defense - I was talking about their opposition's. Ewing scored around the same amount per 100, but he did it far less efficiently and on far more shots. In 94 he took 19FGA to score 24.5 ppg. DRob shot 20.7 to score 29.8. 5ppg more from +1.5 FGA...

Many of the stats you listed are picked very carefully to support Ewing over DRob.

[FrogBros4Life]

^ This is an excellent post and is basically everything (and more!) that I wanted out of E-balla.

I will try to have a response at some point (incredible work, but obviously a long post will require something of a long reply). But briefly, I do want to clarify that the topic of the discussion varied (which is predominately my fault/responsibility) beyond primary point of the original post. Not every part of every post I made was about their relative offences or their extended offensive primes, and specifically the 1990/1995 comparisons were me honing in on the claim that 1990 Ewing was the overall peak of both.

Thank you for doing all that work, especially when it was not even your point originally.

Thanks, man. I have appreciated reading your posts thus far and look forward to your reply.

[FrogBros4Life]

Appreciate the long response. A few points:

1. DRTG isn't an indicator that shows individual impact. DRTG takes box score stats, takes team DRTG, and attempts to pass out credit for team defense using defensive box score metrics. That's why Steph Curry dominates in DRTG so often - he racks up steals on an elite defensive team. While Klay is rated poorly. Individual DRTG doesn't show Laimbeer was an elite defender compared to Mutombo, just that his team was elite (which is true). Mutombo's team may have been poor defensively, but he was an elite defender dedicated to stopping DRob. Laimbeer was a brutal and sometimes called 'dirty' help defender. He wasn't a top-notch m2m defender.

Furthermore, McHale was a PF and Parish was more laughable than the Lakers.

2. I wasn't talking about Ewing vs Robinson's man defense - I was talking about their opposition's. Ewing scored around the same amount per 100, but he did it far less efficiently and on far more shots. In 94 he took 19FGA to score 24.5 ppg. DRob shot 20.7 to score 29.8. 5ppg more from +1.5 FGA...

Many of the stats you listed are picked very carefully to support Ewing over DRob.

Yea, I get that DRTG isn't perfect, but we have limited defensive stats compared to ones that capture offense so outside of block and steal totals for that era, it's not like I have a bevy of other ways to provide the "context" that everyone was seeking. I would obviously agree that Mutombo was a better defender than Laimbeer, but I think you may be underselling Laimbeer a bit as an individual defender. This may be because of how lax the rules were in his heyday, but that's not something I can personally account for in my analysis when dealing with a series Ewing played against him in that very era of more physicality. The Bad Boy pistons were one of the best defensive teams ever and Laimbeer ranks out as the most "valuable" (if you disagree with the word impactful here) of their players on the defensive side of the ball. His DBPM was second on the team behind John Salley (but Laimbeer played 10 more mpg), and Laimbeer also led the team in DWS, DRTG and VORP in the regular season. He led the team in DBPM, DRTG and DWS in the playoffs while placing 2nd in VORP. Again though,....this is just what the stats we have available to us are telling us. If someone wanted to make the case that Rodman or Dumars was the most important defender on those Piston teams, I wouldn't automatically disagree, as I understand that some things just are not picked up properly by stat sheets.

Yea....I gathered you were talking about their opposition's defense. That's why I posted the DRTG and DBPM of the players who were primarily guarding both Ewing and Robinson. Unless I'm (still?) misinterpreting your statement here as well. If so, my bad.

Yeah, McHale was a PF but he spent some time guarding Ewing in that series. I believe all 5 games are on youtube.

As for the points disparity in 94....yes, on the surface it looks like Robinson was A LOT more efficient. But again....free throws. Robinson took almost 12 free throws a game that season compared to 7 for Ewing. He's taking 1.5 more FGA and FIVE extra free throws a game. Robinson was only 1 percentage point better in raw FG% that season.

As far as any stats I listed for Ewing, I tried to only respond to points that were already brought up by other posters (re: adjusting for minutes, adjusting for possessions, accounting for defense). I don't recall listing any stats in support of him that weren't already being discussed, but if so, I'd be happy to hear your opinion.

[Mavericksfan]

Fantastic and well thought out reply. Love your username btw lol

Agree with the bolded. This discussion has devolved into something else entirely though. The validity of BPM and WS as it was presented in this thread really has no bearing on the original point that was made. E-Balla made a very specific claim: Ewing performed better offensively in the playoffs against higher quality defenses throughout their entire primes. E-Balla presented enough evidence to at least support this claim on the ground level. LiamLiam's retort to this was to disagree with the idea in general because it somehow didn't pass his sniff test, and proceeded to throw out BPM and Winshare #'s for 2 single, different seasons for each player (90 Ewing and 95 Robinson).

How is citing regular season BPM and Winshares any type of refutation that Ewing played better against tougher defenses in the playoffs over the course of their entire respective primes? How is citing playoff BPM and Winshares for 2 single, different playoff runs a refutation that Ewing played better against tougher defenses in the playoffs over the course of their entire respective primes? It's not.

I’m not sure if you caught the entire discussion but it revolved around more than those specific series. Liamliam made a point to argue Robinson was superior outside of that sample and that cherry picking a small sample size didn’t paint a clear picture of either guy’s talent. He requested data showing overall average defenses played and the player’s performances against them. He even requested to know where the data was from and which specific series so he could gather more information like pace. I think that’s fair. E-balla completely scoffed at the idea of providing any further context. I’m not really invested in the overall argument either way since I believe both brought up valid points.

I think their discussion broke down a bit when E-balla refused to acknowledge BPM/WS as valid metrics because they didnt support his argument. I found it absurd when he kept requesting liamliam to explain why he’s using those metrics yet refused to clarify any questions liamliam had.

Here’s the quotes I’m referring to:

I'm arguing against the statement that Robinson's offense is the level of regular season Ewing, which was something said to imply his offense was better than Ewing's in the postseason.

E-balla admitting his argument is also that Ewing’s regular season offense was superior. So I think utilizing regular season metrics are fair game at this point.

Personally, I don't give a **** about WS, BPM, or PER. Go look at any case I've made for a player in this project so far and search for a mention of BPM, WS, or PER. You won't see it outside of maybe once when I used it to illustrate how much Kareem's boxscore lapped the competition. My eyes do a better job compiling boxscores into an idea of how good a player played statistically than any of those numbers which are only useful is very specific contexts to portray very specific things.

Blatantly dismissing metrics because of his “eyes do a better job” lol.

He has said multiple times that the specific data you may be insisting on that would actually provide further clarification does not exist. Since he has at least already presented SOME evidence (as opposed to none), at what point does the burden of proof shift to the party disagreeing to refute the evidence that WAS presented? If you want to simply disagree with the evidence he provided, that's fair. But it seems a bit unrealistic to clamor about for additional, custom requested pieces of data to satisfy whatever qualms you have about the claim being made. I'm not going to give PBP data for every single playoff game that they took the court, but I will provide some further evidence below that I think is pertinent to this argument. Most, if not all of this, will be in response to specific points already raised by you guys previously in this discussion.

I’m not sure if requesting to know the source of the data qualifies as shifting burden of proof. What’s to stop any/everyone from making up random stats and then forcing the other party to do the math to refute it? Liamliam1234 requested sources and wanted to know specifically which teams/series the stats applied to.

You did a fantastic job of actually presenting further context which does confirm E-balla’s original claim about their peak playoff performances.

Basketball is not played in an excel spreadsheet and BPM and WS are not magic numbers that somehow refute claims where other pieces of evidence might lead us to a different conclusion. If any of you want to nitpick any of this additional context, feel free (I personally am not a fan of using DBPM for example), but at least now some more "context" has been provided.

Agreed with this as well. I dont think any one or two metrics trump others. I believe we should be utilizing all of the available information and drawing conclusions from there. I’m just not a fan of disregarding another person’s evidence if it goes against your argument instead of the debate focusing on why you believe your evidence supports your argument more than the oppositions.

Once again a fantastic overall post and tbh has convinced me to drop D-rob even further. Also has me questioning peak KG more since I know they have a lot of the same career issues.

[penbeast0]

...
As for the points disparity in 94....yes, on the surface it looks like Robinson was A LOT more efficient. But again....free throws. Robinson took almost 12 free throws a game that season compared to 7 for Ewing. He's taking 1.5 more FGA and FIVE extra free throws a game. Robinson was only 1 percentage point better in raw FG% that season....

Not sure what you are trying to get at with this statement.

At the risk of being Captain Obvious here, free throws are a part of efficiency. Efficiency tries to measure how much scoring is generated per shot. Obviously drawing FTs and making them is one of the key determinants in how efficient you are scoring, just like adding more weight to a made 3 pointer than a made 2 pointer. TS% adds a less than perfect extra step to try to account for the fact that the NBA doesn't count a missed shot when you are fouled in your shot attempts but it's clearly a lot more accurate measure of points scored per shot attempt than raw FG%.

[freethedevil]

Their boxscore stats are great, their BPM is great, their PER is great. Anyone looking at their boxscore numbers could tell you those things already, what's the value in having BPM specifically tell you those things?
.

The value is bpm's weighting isn't entirely arbitrary like, say, per. It uses how well the box #'s correlate with rapm which itself comes from game score. So while far from ideal, it correlates better with winning. And you don't have to take my word for that, this kind of thing's already been tested. BPm does a better job predicting team success than per and is more stable as players leave and go indicating it's less circumstance sensitive.

On the other hand, # of assists usually have little to no correlation with the quality of an offense and ppg is far less stable than even per.

[Morb]

Robinson was choker in playoffs, like Harden, Drexler and Karl Malone. 22.6 PER, 25 ppg, 53.6% TS vs DRtg 108.2/109.4/107.4 - it's your ATG season? What? I would pick his 1996 season.

[freethedevil]

1. 2017 Curry, atg playoff stats, upped his playoff impact despite playing with a high volume scorer and was the centerpiece for the GOAT team and at full health.
2. 1966 Jerry West. Had a seismic impact on the most effeicent offense in the league. His 1968 season could have been my #1 vote if he was healthy but alas, he was not.
3. Oscar Robertson 1964- Strong impact and his hyper efficiency buoyed the league's best offense.

[Morb]

.

1. T-Mac 2003 - GOAT Offensive Game, great body, versality, handles, good series vs DRtg 99.9 (-3.7).
2. Wade 2009 - great motor, rim attack, assists, good series vs DRtg 107.6 (-0.7).
3. McAdoo 1975 - Scoring Machine, shooting 6'10, rebounds, historically great series vs DRtg 91.3 (-6.4). Wow.
http://bkref.com/tiny/Es4q0

[Samurai]

The fighting in this thread is going overboard lol.

It's not a laughing (lol) matter to me - it is the reason I have elected to stop posting on this thread.

[JoeMalburg]

First Vote: 1976 Julius Erving - It can't be overstated how great Doctor J was during this season. It's one of the few seasons in the 70's there is a legitimate rival to Kareem for the #1 spot. I give Dr. J the edge for the season. He is the league MVP, the playoff MVP and his team wins the title. But it's not like he has the best team. The second and third best players from his 1974 Championship Nets (Larry Kennon & Billy Paultz) are now on the Spurs along with George Gervin and peak James Silas. The defending Champion Kentucky Colonels have Artis Gilmore, Louie Dampier, Caldwell Jones and Maurice Lucas and the Nuggets are loaded with David Thompson, Bobby Jones, Ralph Simpson and Dan Issel. Ervings bets teammates are Brian Taylor and Super John Williamson who you've probably never heard of unless you have read about the ABA extensively. 35/13/5/2/2 on .610 ts% in the playoffs against the Spurs and Nuggets with NBA quality starting lineups. It's basically 2019 Kawhi's postseason on steroids.


Second vote: 1964 Oscar Robertson - The best season of the 1960's by a non-center. Oscar leads the NBA's top offense and gives the Celtics one of their few regular season Eastern Division rivals prior to Wilt joining the 76ers. A picture of efficiency and control on offense. The little film available shows a player who can get whatever he wants, whenever he wants. It's like the NBA is made up of Wilt, Russell, the Big O and Oscar's 87 children who he just backs down in the driveway and shoots over at will. I am fine with 1963 or 1962 or 1965 as well, but why not take the year where he won the MVP?


Third vote: 1983 Moses Malone
Settled on this one because of how much pressure was on him to deliver and how emphatically he did. 25/15 on a loaded team when he was previously accustomed to having a much greater work load and player games with much lower stakes. The best defensive season of his career, buying into the Sixers system and making everyone better. 69 out of 75 first place votes for MVP and it's his second consecutive award signaling a level of sustained dominance over two years and almost 200 games that is capped off by his Finals MVP.

[trex_8063]

I'm arguing against the statement that Robinson's offense is the level of regular season Ewing, which was something said to imply his offense was better than Ewing's in the postseason.

I haven't had the time to follow this discussion [argument?] completely, but I'm not sure this statement isn't referring to something I had said in the last thread (though if so, there is something inferred that is NOT something I'd intended to imply [in general, I don't try to imply much here.....I'm pretty literal on a text-based forum; if I do intend to imply something, I usually make it obvious {emoji something or other}]).

To summarize what I had said: I'd noted that during the rs David Robinson "in his best years"-----which is a vague time-line, but fwiw I didn't intend that to encompass a 9-year swath of time, including his return from back injury and broken foot at age 32----was arguably the best defensive player in the league while simultaneously averaging 25-29 ppg on good efficiency as the clear anchor of good offenses. I then noted that [implicit (I thought) was that we were still referring to "his best years"....a time-frame I admittedly did a horrid job of defining, though in a peaks project I assumed it would be taken for granted that I was talking about a time-frame decidedly less than a decade] in the playoffs his defense largely sustained, but that his offense fell off to a point that was still "pretty good". Specifically: to a level that was roughly similar to what Patrick Ewing was averaging in the rs from '92-'96 (here I did a GREAT job of specifying the time-frame, as I actually did cite those years).

If I may better define what I was referring to when referring to Robinson's "best years", I was sort of referring to the exact same years, which makes this statement pretty much 100% true.....

'92-'96 Patrick Ewing (rs): 23.8 ppg @ 54.6% TS, 2.4 orpg, 2.2 apg, 3.1 topg, 106 ORtg.
'93-'96 David Robinson (playoffs): 23.8 ppg @ 53.6%, 3.5 orpg, 3.2 apg, 2.9 topg, 110 ORtg.

Overall, if anything I'd say a marginal edge to Robinson.
And though I didn't do the math ('cause it's a lot of games), I'd assume [because it's rs] that the average defense Ewing was facing in this sample was more or less average.
The average defense Robinson faced in this sample was a -0.67 rDRTG.


I didn't mean to imply anything else. I was merely saying that if Robinson was "bad" (or similar adjective) offensively in the playoffs in the vicinity of his peak, then Patrick Ewing was basically a "bad" offensive player more often than not thru most of his [rs] prime.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Brief reasons for my selections:

95 D Rob - His impact on winning, next to LeBron, is more demonstrable than any other player in NBA history. I posted in a recent thread about the Spurs record pre-D Rob compared to with D Rob, and then the year he got injured compared to the years before and after. It’s just too much to ignore, plus his playoff decline is overstated.

16 Curry - Deserves to be in discussion for the best offensive season of all time. Unbelievable efficiency for a high volume scorer, and yes gravity is a real thing. He was the great facilitator for that 73 win team, which wasn’t nulled by LeBron’s playoff heroics. Maybe if they lost in like the 2nd round, but this was a team that went 7 in the Finals.

76 Dr J - Another case of impressive efficiency for a guy who led the league in scoring. Yes, it was ABA, but that’s something else I feel gets wrongly undermined. Along with elite perimeter defense and high level play making, the Dr brought the whole package.

[trex_8063]

1st ballot - '95 David Robinson
The near-reality as I see is that David Robinson was asked [by the Spurs] to be Bill Russell on defense and simultaneously be Shaquille O'Neal on offense.......and he kinda takes some flack for not being up to the task [primarily in the playoffs]. But realistically, if he'd been consistently capable of maintaining his rs standard of offensive performance and efficiency during the playoffs, we'd have been discussing him in the top 3 positions of this project. So I don't think it's off base to give him some consideration now around #12. This version of Robinson anchored a -2.9 rDRTG (5th/27) with a principle cast [in descending order of minutes played] of Avery Johnson (scrappy and energetic, but seriously undersized even for a PG; mediocre defender overall), Sean Elliott (mediocre defender), Vinny Del Negro (probably slightly weak defensively, iirc), Chuck Person (a pinch past prime, never a good defender anyway), Dennis Rodman (erratic defensively [awful in the Houston series, fwiw], and missed 33 games), and JR Reid, Terry Cummings, post-prime Doc Rivers (Rivers probably the only one of those three I'd say was passable good defensively [edit: +/- maybe Cummings]).
This version of Robinson simultaneously anchored a +3.4 rORTG (5th/27) with the aforementioned cast; they won 62 games (+5.90 SRS) overall. Made it to the WCF where Dennis Rodman had a total [and very public] meltdown, and the Spurs lost the series to Houston (with Hakeem in God-mode) in six games (outscored by a grand total of 10 pts in the entire series). Typically stated as Hakeem owning DRob and making him a helpless play-thing, though it's rarely acknowledged that Hakeem [because of how their offense and roster was structured] largely enjoyed single coverage (by Robinson), while Robinson was largely guarded by Olajuwon + 1-2 friends.
It's rarely acknowledged that DRob's cast [which had shot 37.5% from beyond the arc in the rs] somewhat crapped the bed shooting just 31.9% in this series (and did I mention they were only outscored by 10 points total in the entire series?); and again Rodman's meltdown and poor play is rarely given light of day in the construction of the usual narrative.
jsia, I think he deserves a look around now.


2nd ballot - '16 Stephen Curry
Arguably the GOAT offensive rs. Though his style of play is heavily reliant on the existence of a 3pt line, that's still awfully damn impressive. Playoff slump is noted, though as should be apparent from discussions pertaining to other players, I am decidedly NOT a playoff > rs person in my evaluations. And at any rate we're still talking about a guy that averaged >25 ppg on decent efficiency in the playoffs.


3rd ballot - '77 Bill Walton
Just a marvelous two-way player. Tremendous defensive presence, maybe the 2nd-best outlet passer of all-time and definitely one of the better half-court passing big-men too. Fair/decent scorer to boot. My gut is he's extremely portable, able to mesh easily with just about any cast due to his defense, passing, and unselfish style of play. If there's a ding on this season, it's his health [often limited minutes as result] and the 17 missed games.

[Clyde Frazier]

Ballot #1 - 76 Dr. J
Ballot #2 - 64 Oscar
Ballot #3 - 16 Curry

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

Ballot #1 - 76 Dr. J

Watch on YouTube

I get it. It's a 5 minute clip, but I still think you can tell just how talented this guy was that year. An unstoppable offensive force leading his team to the championship. Nets also ranked 1st in defense that season.

For those who doubt the ABA, check out his per 100 #s in 76 vs. 80:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ervinju01.html#per_poss::none

They’re nearly identical including efficiency. This is when he was given a bigger role in the offense after Cunningham came aboard as coach.

It’s possible his ball handling is being underrated here due aesthetics. He kinda slapped the ball down as he dribbled, especially on the fast break. Similar to the way Barkley dribbled in his Sixers days. While it may have looked a little sloppy, I think it was just as effective given his big hands and long strides once he went to make his moves.

Also, his ability to get off shots at the rim in tight spaces was pretty incredible. This also had a lot to do with his body control.

The below footage is from 74, but it's pretty similar to the way he was playing in 76.

Watch on YouTube

Ballot #2 - 64 Oscar

Oscar's 64 season was very impressive on a number of levels:

RS: 31.4 PPG, 9.9 RPG, 11 APG, 48.3% FG, 85.3% FT (league leading on 11.9 FTAs per game), 57.6% TS (+9.1% vs. league avg), .278 WS/48

PS: 29.3 PPG, 8.9 RPG, 8.4 APG, 45.5% FG, 85.8% FT (12.7 FTAs per game), 56.8% TS, .245 WS/48

The royals ranked 2nd in SRS that season, losing in the playoffs to the #1 ranked SRS and eventual champion celtics. While his raw averages can certainly be attributed to the fast paced play during that era, his overall efficiency and ability to get to the line at will is pretty staggering.

Oscar's playoff #s do drop slightly across the board, but there's nothing there to suggest that he struggled. His best teammate Jerry Lucas had a serious drop off in scoring and efficiency come playoff time (17.7 PPG on 57.8% TS in RS vs. 12.2 PPG on 43.8% TS in PS). That very well could've been the difference in the series.

63-64 was his 4th season, so the below footage should be able to capture his style of play at the time:

Watch on YouTube

[Yeah... I could do without the music]

What stands out to me is his precision when he makes his moves as well as his strength when he gets inside. Reminds me of west, too, although he wasn't quite as powerful.

Oscar would win also win MVP that season in dominating fashion. Via NY Times:

Oscar Robertson, the Cincin­nati Royals' talented back‐court man, yesterday was voted the President's Trophy, the Na­tional Basketball Association's most valuable player award, by the biggest margin on record.

The voting is by N.B.A. play­ers, with the restriction that they cannot vote for members of their own teams. Robertson received 60 of a possible 85 first‐place votes. In the point scoring on a 5, 3, 1 basis, Robertson received a total of 362 points, a record.

Wilt Chamberlain of San Francisco, who won the trophy as a rookie in 1960, placed see­ond in the voting with 19 first­place votes and 215 points. Bill Russell of Boston, the winner for the last three years, was third with 11 firsts and 167 points.

64 slightly edges out 63 to me overall due to a better individual regular season and team performance.

Ballot #3 - 16 Curry

Arguably the greatest offensive regular season ever, or at least in the modern era, say since 1980? The finals "collapse" doesn't kill the season for me. It literally came down to the last minute to decide the championship. This wasn't a 4-1 trouncing or something ala pistons lakers in 04. I have to take a closer look at 2017 because it's certainly close, but that 2016 season was a sight to see. Appointment television every night and curry was the center of it. It was special.

[E-Balla]

I’m not sure if you caught the entire discussion but it revolved around more than those specific series. Liamliam made a point to argue Robinson was superior outside of that sample and that cherry picking a small sample size didn’t paint a clear picture of either guy’s talent.

... The sample consisting of their whole primes you mean? That wasn't a large enough sample...

He requested data showing overall average defenses played and the player’s performances against them. He even requested to know where the data was from and which specific series so he could gather more information like pace. I think that’s fair.

To the first sentence I already regularized their opponents into ranges, for the second I qualified which defenses I was considering good and average by stating their relative defensive ratings. If he wanted to gather information basketball-reference is right there and he already knows the criteria being used. I'm not one for the gish gallop.

E-balla completely scoffed at the idea of providing any further context.

No I scoffed at the idea of gathering non existent data, and responding to gish gallop. He clearly didn't read my posts, why gather more statistics for him to write off and ignore?

I think their discussion broke down a bit when E-balla refused to acknowledge BPM/WS as valid metrics because they didnt support his argument.

Find (literally) one example of me using those statistics as the base of a supporting argument or even as a supporting argument. I've literally never looked at anyone's WS or BPM when evaluating their seasons, I've made zero mentions of either stat, they're both useless as far as I'm concerned because like I said they're excuses to avoid context.

I found it absurd when he kept requesting liamliam to explain why he’s using those metrics yet refused to clarify any questions liamliam had.

"I didn't read your post because they didn't include non existent statistics" isn't a clarifying question. This next part is the top tier BS though.

Here’s the quotes I’m referring to:

I'm arguing against the statement that Robinson's offense is the level of regular season Ewing, which was something said to imply his offense was better than Ewing's in the postseason.

E-balla admitting his argument is also that Ewing’s regular season offense was superior. So I think utilizing regular season metrics are fair game at this point.

Umm... No? That's literally not what that says. Like how do you read a sentence clearly saying "which was something said to imply his offense was better than Ewing's in the postseason,” at the end and think I'm discussing regular season anything?

Personally, I don't give a **** about WS, BPM, or PER. Go look at any case I've made for a player in this project so far and search for a mention of BPM, WS, or PER. You won't see it outside of maybe once when I used it to illustrate how much Kareem's boxscore lapped the competition. My eyes do a better job compiling boxscores into an idea of how good a player played statistically than any of those numbers which are only useful is very specific contexts to portray very specific things.

Blatantly dismissing metrics because of his “eyes do a better job” lol.

"Metrics". I'll come up with a number called super player rating made by averaging their place on each NBA leaderboard. That's now "metrics" worth discussing no matter how worthless?

He has said multiple times that the specific data you may be insisting on that would actually provide further clarification does not exist. Since he has at least already presented SOME evidence (as opposed to none), at what point does the burden of proof shift to the party disagreeing to refute the evidence that WAS presented? If you want to simply disagree with the evidence he provided, that's fair. But it seems a bit unrealistic to clamor about for additional, custom requested pieces of data to satisfy whatever qualms you have about the claim being made. I'm not going to give PBP data for every single playoff game that they took the court, but I will provide some further evidence below that I think is pertinent to this argument. Most, if not all of this, will be in response to specific points already raised by you guys previously in this discussion.

I’m not sure if requesting to know the source of the data qualifies as shifting burden of proof.

Find one post prior to this where anyone mentioned needing a source?

What’s to stop any/everyone from making up random stats and then forcing the other party to do the math to refute it? Liamliam1234 requested sources and wanted to know specifically which teams/series the stats applied to.

You did a fantastic job of actually presenting further context which does confirm E-balla’s original claim about their peak playoff performances.

Nah he has a patience for bull.

He literally posted what I posted, told y'all you were being irrational, and the response was, "he said what E-Balla didn't." No he just did what I told y'all to do and went to basketball-reference for literally 2 seconds before making his opinion on something. If you can't be bothered to even read my post or visit basketball-reference before responding, don't. If you need clarification, ask. Beyond that it's obvious he wasn't even attempting to understand the argument from the jump and you clearly jumped in pissed off over the Curry stuff and didn't even understand what was even being discussed before you jumped in.

[LA Bird]

Final totals as at the deadline are:

1) 76 Dr J = 27.5 points
2) 77 Walton = 19.0 points
3) 64 Oscar = 16.5 points
4) 16 Curry = 10.5 points
T5) 63 Oscar = 9.5 points
T5) 17 Curry = 9.5 points

76 Dr J wins.

Spoiler:

Gregoire and Narigo's votes weren't counted due to lack of reasoning for all 3 picks.
trex_8063 and Clyde Frazier's votes weren't counted because they came after the deadline.

[E-Balla]

Their boxscore stats are great, their BPM is great, their PER is great. Anyone looking at their boxscore numbers could tell you those things already, what's the value in having BPM specifically tell you those things?
.

The value is bpm's weighting isn't entirely arbitrary like, say, per. It uses how well the box #'s correlate with rapm which itself comes from game score. So while far from ideal, it correlates better with winning. And you don't have to take my word for that, this kind of thing's already been tested. BPm does a better job predicting team success than per and is more stable as players leave and go indicating it's less circumstance sensitive.

On the other hand, # of assists usually have little to no correlation with the quality of an offense and ppg is far less stable than even per.

Again but what can be said for having a high BPM? What does it tell you about a player? How does it provide more and not considerably less context than using the boxscore yourself? Because some numbers correlate with winning? According to BPM Lamarcus is a worse offensive player than Corey Maggette. Any single stat claiming to be a ranking system of players is just nonsense.

High PPG with high efficiency tells me the player is a great scorer does it not? A high BPM tells me... What exactly?