RealGM

This thread was inspired by 70's Fan and his thread, here:

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1836300

I wanted to find out which ATG Players faced the best teams in the Playoffs, so I looked at the Net Rating of opposing teams (for every series) for each player, and ran the numbers using this criteria, which 70s Fan used, but for overall opponent production, (not just defense, this time):

Lower -2.0 Net Rating: Bad Team
From -2.0 to +1.9 Net Rating: Average Team
From +2.0 to +3.9 Net Rating: Good Team
From +4.0 to +6.0 Net Rating: Elite Team
Above +7.0 Net Rating: All-Time Great Team

I started with a few ATG Centers, and I'm just getting started, but here are some results:

Wilt Chamberlain:

Regular Season: 45.8 MPG, 30.1 PPG, 22.9 RBS, 4.4 AST, .540 FG% (+5.5 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (0% of playoff games): -----
Against Average Teams: (30.6% of playoff games): 47.9 MPG, 27.2 PPG, 26.9 RBS, 5.9 AST (+5.2 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (23.1% of playoff games): 46.6 MPG, 27.2 PPG, 21.2 RBS, 3.2 AST (+5.2 tTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (31.2% of playoff games): 47 MPG, 18.1 PPG, 23.3 RBS, 4.2 AST (+1.6 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (15% of playoff games): 47.4 MPG, 35.4 PPG, 25.3 RBS, 2.5 AST, (+4.0 rTS%)

Bill Russell:

(Regular Season): 42.3 MPG, 15.1 PPG, 22.5 RBS, 4.3 AST, .440 FG%, (-0.8 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (3.6% of playoff games): 47.8 MPG, 20.0 PPG, 26.0 RBS, 5.3 AST (+3.6 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (44.2% of playoff games): 46 MPG, 15.2 PPG, 23.5 RBS, 5.4 AST (-1.3 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (26% of playoff games): 42 MPG, 15.6 PPG, 25.9 RBS, 2.9 AST (-1.2 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (21.8% of playoff games): 47.2 MPG, 19.8 PPG, 27.7 RBS, 4.7 AST (+1.3 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (4.2% of playoff games): 48 MPG, 9.1 PPG, 21.1 RBS, 5.1 AST (-4.5 rTS%)

Kareem Abdul-Jabaar:

Regular Season: 36.8 MPG, 24.6 PPG, 11.2 RBS, 3.6 AST, .559 FG%, (+6.8 tTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (5.8% of playoff games): 42.6 MPG, 30.2 PPG, 13.9 RBS, 3.6 AST, (+4.4 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (26.6% of playoff games): 44.8 MPG, 29.7 PPG, 15.8 RBS, 4.1 AST (+8.1 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (40.4% of playoff games): 29.9 MPG, 18.4 PPG, 6.1 RBS, 2.5 AST, (+2.2 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (18.8% of playoff games): 36.6 MPG, 23.4 PPG, 8.2 RBS, 3.3 AST, (+6.9 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (8.3% of playoff games): 42.2 MPG, 30.8 PPG, 16.6 RBS, 3.3 AST, (+2.5 tTS%)

LeBron James:

Regular Season: 38.2 MPG, 27.1 PPG, 7.4 RBS, 7.4 AST, .505 FG%, (+4.4 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (0% of playoff games): ---
Against Average Teams: (33.4% of playoff games): 42.3 MPG, 27.8 PPG, 8.7 RBS, 6.4 AST, (+5.4 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (23.7% of playoff games): 39.4 MPG, 30.7 PPG, 9.4 RBS, 8.6 AST, (+8.1 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (22.6% of playoff games): 40.1 MPG, 28.0 PPG, 9.3 RBS, 7.1 AST, (+3.8 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (21% of playoff games): 43.5 MPG, 28.5 PPG, 8.4 RBS, 7.2 AST, (+1.4 tTS%)

Michael Jordan:

Regular Season: 38.3 MPG, 30.1 PPG, 6.2 RBS, 5.3 AST, .497 FG% (+3.7 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (3.9% of playoff games): 43.1 MPG, 31.3 PPG, 5.7 RBS, 4.3 AST, (-0.6 tTS%)
Against Average Teams: (20.1% of playoff games): 40.1 MPG, 35.0 PPG, 7 RBS, 7.5 AST, (+6.6 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (15% of playoff games): 41.9 MPG, 32.7 PPG, 5.5 RBS, 3.9 AST, (+1.4 tTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (40.2% of playoff games): 41.0 MPG, 32.4 PPG, 6.3 RBS, 5 AST, (+2.6 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (20.7% of playoff games): 42.8 MPG, 35.8 PPG, 6.8 RBS, 6.6 AST, (+4.5 rTS%)

Larry Bird:

Regular Season: 38.4 MPG, 24.3 PPG, 10.0 RBS, 6.3 AST, .496 FG%, (+2.8 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (8.5% of playoff games): 41.3 MPG, 27.9 PPG, 9.4 RBS, 6.0 AST, (0.5 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (28.6% of playoff games): 41.3 MPG, 22.0 PPG, 11.9 RBS, 6.2 AST (+0 tTS%)
Against Good Teams: (25.6% of playoff games): 40.5 MPG, 21.0 PPG, 8.0 RBS, 6.7 AST (-2.1 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (25% of playoff games): 43.2 MPG, 26.5 PPG, 9.5 RBS, 7.7 AST (+6.0 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (12.2% of playoff games): 42.9 MPG, 23.2 PPG, 12.0 RBS, 5.4 AST, (+2.6 rTS%)

Magic Johnson:

Regular Season: 26.7 MPG, 19.5 PPG, 11.2 AST, .520 FG%, (+6.7 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (8.4% of playoff games): 36.9 MPG, 17.6 PPG, 7.3 RBS, 15.5 AST, (+4.3 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (27.8% of playoff games): 39.9 MPG, 18.0 PPG, 8.3 RBS, 12.2 AST (+0.0 tTS%)
Against Good Teams: (24.6% of playoff games): 39.6 MPG, 20.6. PPG, 6.9 RBS, 11.7 AST (+5.5 tTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (29.3% of playoff games): 38.3 MPG, 20.7 PPG, 6.7 RBS, 13.3 AST (+6.4 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (9.9% of playoff games): 41.4 MPG, 17.9 PPG, 8.9 RBS, 11.3 AST, (+3.4 tTS%)

Steph Curry:

Regular Season: 34.3 MPG, 24.3 PPG, 4.6 RBS, .473 FG% (+7.5 tTS%)

Against Bad Teams: ---
Against Average Teams: (30.4% of playoff games): 33.5 MPG, 26.0 PPG, 5.2 RBS, 5.9 AST (+13.7 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (16.5% of playoff games): 34.4 MPG, 29.1 PPG, 5.3 RBS, 5.8 AST, (+6.9 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (33% of playoff games): 39.5 MPG, 26.8 PPG, 6.2 RBS, 5.9 AST, (+8.6 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (20% of all playoff games): 37.9 MPG, 25.9 PPG, 4.1 RBS, 8 AST, (+9.4 tTS%)

Tim Duncan:

Regular Season: 34.0 MPG, 19.0 PTS, 10.8 RBS, 3.0 AST, (+2.0 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (2.4% of playoff games): 20.2 MPG, 5.8 PPG, 6.3 RBS, 2.0 AST, (14.4 tTS%)
Against Average Teams: (19.1% of playoff games): 37.7 MPG, 19.7 PPG, 11.1 RBS, 3.2 AST (+2.3 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (28.3% of playoff games): 37 MPG, 22.2 MPG, 10.2 RBS, 3.3 AST, (+4.7 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (34.7% of playoff games): 37.6 MPG, 20.0 PPG, 11.9 RBS, 3.0 AST (+0.2 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (15.5% of games): 38.5 MPG, 21.8 PPG, 12.5 RBS, 2.9 AST, (+0.9 rTS%)

Jerry West

Regular Season: 39.2 MPG, 27.0 PTS, 5.8 RBS, 6.7 AST (+5.5 tTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (3.3% of playoff games): 40.8 MPG, 28.4 PPG, 4.2 RBS, 5.6 AST, (+8.3 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (40.5% of playoff games): 42.2 MPG, 30.8 PPG, 5.9 RBS, 6.3 AST, (+7.7 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (20.3% of playoff games): 33.5 MPG, 20.9 PPG, 4.9 RBS, 6.5 AST, (3.1 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (19.6% of playoff games): 42.0 MPG, 31.3 PPG, 5.3 RBS, 5.0 AST (+4.4 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (16.3% of playoff games): 37.3 MPG, 23.3 PPG, 4.2 RBS, 5.9 AST, (-2.9 rTS%)

Kobe Bryant

Regular Season: 36.1 MPG, 25.0 PPG, 5.2 RBS, 4.7 AST, .447 FG%, (1.8 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (0% of playoff games): -----
Against Average Teams: (7.7% of playoff games): 35.0 MPG, 19.4 PPG, 4.1 RBS, 4.3 AST, (+0.0 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (20.5% of playoff games): 40.5 MPG, 28.0 PPG, 5.5 RBS, 5.2 AST, (+1.5 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (40.9% of playoff games): 39.6 MPG, 25.9 PPG, 5.0 RBS, 4.6 AST, (+2.6 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (30.9% of playoff games): 36.4 MPG, 22.9 RBS, 4.8 AST, 4.4 RBS, (+2.1 rTS%)

Hakeem Olajuwon

Regular Season: 35.7 MPG, 21.8 PPG, 11.1 RBS, 2.5 AST, .512 FG%, (+2.1 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (2% of playoff games): 34 MPG, 20.0 PPG, 11.3 RBS, 1.0 AST, (+0.9 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (17.2% of playoff games): 39.0 MPG, 25.6 PPG, 12.8 RBS, 2.7 AST, (+4.5 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (14.5% of playoff games): 33.5 MPG, 21.1 PPG, 8.9 RBS, 2.6 AST, (+4.2 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (22.8% of playoff games): 41.7 MPG, 30.9 PPG, 11.8 RBS, 3.8 AST, (+4.3 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (43.5% of playoff games): 41.6 MPG, 25.1 PPG, 11.1 RBS, 3.3 AST, (+1.9 rTS%)

Karl Malone

Regular Season: 27.3 MPG, 25.0 PPG, 10.1 RBS, 2.6 AST, .516 FG%, (+4.3 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (4% of playoff games): 40.5 MPG, 25.4 PPG, 10.5 RBS, 1.6 AST, (-2.5 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (19% of playoff games): 40.6 MPG, 26.3 PPG, 11.2 RBS, 2.4 AST, (+3.5 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (5.2% of playoff games): 41.1 MPG, 28.9 PPG, 11.5 RBS, 3.4 AST, (-1.4 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (43.5% of playoff games): 40.7 MPG, 23.3 PPG, 10.4 RBS, 3.2 AST, (-2.4 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (25.4% of playoff games): 41.3 MPG, 25.2 PPG, 10.7 RBS, 3.7 AST, (0.2 rTS%)

Kevin Garnett

Regular Season: 34.5 MPG, 17.8 PPG, 10.9 RBS, 3.7 AST, .497 FG%, (+1.4 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (0% of playoff games): ---
Against Average Teams: (16% of playoff games): 37.8 MPG, 20.5 PPG, 11.5 RBS, 4.4 AST, (+1.0 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (16.7% of playoff games): 34.4 MPG, 17.5 PPG, 10.1 RBS, 2.6 AST, (+4.6 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (35.4% of playoff games): 37.3 MPG, 17.9 PPG, 11.6 RBS, 3.1 AST, (+0 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (31.9% of playoff games): 38.5 MPG, 18.0 PPG, 10.4 RBS, 3.7 AST, (-3 rTS%)

Shaquille O'Neal

Regular Season: 34.7 MPG, 23.7 PPG, 10.9 RBS, 2.5 AST, (+5.4 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (1.9% of playoff games): 35.5 MPG, 22.5 PPG, 13.5 RBS, 1.0 AST, (+2.4 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (16.7% of playoff games): 33.2 MPG, 19.6 PPG, 9.3 RBS, 2.6 AST, (+2.1 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (13% of playoff games): 41.0 MPG, 26.1 PPG, 12.4 RBS, 4.1 AST, (+2.5 tTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (43.5% of playoff games): 38.0 MPG, 25.5 PPG, 12.2 RBS, 2.6 AST, (+4.5 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (25.0% of playoff games): 36.3 MPG, 24.0 PPG, 10.8 RBS, 2.2 AST, (+2.5 rTS%)]

Oscar Robertson

Regular Season: 42.2 MPG, 25.7 PPG, 7.5 RBS, 9.5 AST (+7.0 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (5.8% of playoff games): 47.2 MPG, 30.4 PPG, 8.2 RBS, 11.2 AST, (+18.1 rTS%)
Against Average Teams: (32.6% of playoff games): 42.1 MPG, 22.8 PPG, 6.3 RBS, 9.4 AST, (+5.9 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (31.4% of playoff games): 43.5 MPG, 18.9 PPG, 5.8 RBS, 8.8 AST, (+4.3 rTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (19.8% of playoff games): 46.2 MPG, 31.1 PPG, 9.9 RBS, 7.3 AST, (+4.5 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (11.6% of playoff games): 37.4 MPG, 16.9 PPG, 4.7 RBS, 8.5 AST, (+2.2 rTS%)

Wow, this must take a lot of time, so kudos for the good idea and effort!

I'd like to see these players, please and thank you!

1) Jordan
2) Lebron
3) Bird
4) Magic
5) Kobe
6) Duncan
7) Hakeem
8) Shaq
9) Wade
10) Curry
11) Durant

I have two thoughts to add:

The 1st thought is that players are the best judge of quality of opposition, since they not only how great the stars are or which star is better than another star... but also know the quality of the "other" players on their team vs the quality of the "other" players on the opposing team. I feel that we should never be too quick to fully dismiss player's opinions because of this. Dismissing it partially depending on the player and what they are saying is fine, of course, since many are prone to saying things out of loyalty or to get attention.

The 2nd thought (although it's probably better saved for another thread)... not only the quality of the opposition but the quality of one's own full roster will impact some types of production. For example: here are some images I came across recently that can be one way to gauge a roster's strength.

The first image explains what the Team Simple Rating System (SRS) score is and why it is important. This stat is calculated prior to the start of a season and is used to indicate the expected success a team will have in the playoffs, with a high correlation between high SRS scores and winning the title.



The 2nd image shows the SRS rating of all teams who won the NBA title from 1997 to 2021. Note that Tim Duncan's Spurs were 1st in the league for 4 of the 5 years they won a title and were 3rd for the other one (2003). This score would thus imply that the Spurs won titles in years that they were expected to and should have won... but couldn't win titles by elevating themselves in other years, except in 2003. Their SRS rating was 1st in a lot of other years too yet they never went back-to-back like Jordan's Bulls, who probably also had the #1 SRS rating in a lot of years prior to 1997. This also makes sense from another perspective, i.e., Tim Duncan was a great player; consistent, intelligent, skilled and fundamentally sound... someone you could anchor an offense and defense around... but his star was a little less bright than others who were more talented than him (like MJ, Kobe, Bird, Magic, Hakeem) or who were more physically dominant than he was (like Shaq, Lebron, Wilt).

Can a moderator please change the title to:

"NBA Superstars Playoffs Production Based On Quality Of Opposition".

Thanks so much!

ty 4191 wrote:For one, this, to me, confirms what I always intuitively felt/thought about Wilt/Kareem/Russell's playoffs competition.

(And, frankly, it's a blowout.)

I'd like to hear your thoughts on that. What do you mean when you say it confirms what you intuitively felt and it's a blow-out? It seems to me that Wilt played against better teams more often and his production against better teams was better than Kareem's, whose production was better than Russell's. Am I on the right track or gone off it?

If I may make a suggestion, since you're putting in the effort to get all these numbers, perhaps, it would be fitting if you could put a little summary of what the numbers for each player mean to you, or how they compare to each other according to the system you are using.

ty 4191 wrote:Can a moderator please change the title to:

"NBA Superstars Playoffs Production Based On Quality Of Opposition".

Thanks so much!

OP can do that be changing the title of the first post.

I'm glad you made these calculations, it requires quite a lot of work (I know it from my own experience).

I don't think comparing numbers from 13 or 14 years careers to 20 years career is fair though. Kareem played majority of his postseason games after 1982, when he was no longer close to his prime. Look at the difference between Kareem before and after 1983:

1970-83 Kareem: 126 games, 29/14/4/3
1983-89 Kareem: 111 games, 19/7/3/2

Russell's numbers look worse only because he didn't have to face himself and Wilt did. I wouldn't use that to suggest Wilt was a better playoff performer than Russell. Especially when Russell's 11 rings are about the best possible proof for just how great a playoff performer he was.

There is a danger in judging players based on competition when nobody can control who they play. If you are beating every team in front of you, you shouldn't be penalized by what you perceive as lessor quality opposition. There is exactly zero those players and teams can do about that. And especially back in a league of 8 teams they are a significant reason why their competition looks worse.

LAL1947 wrote:Wow, this must take a lot of time, so kudos for the good idea and effort!

I'd like to see these players, please and thank you!

1) Jordan
2) Lebron
3) Bird
4) Magic
5) Kobe
6) Duncan
7) Hakeem
8) Shaq
9) Wade

I have two thoughts to add:

The 1st thought is that players are the best judge of quality of opposition, since they not only how great the stars are or which star is better than another star... but also know the quality of the "other" players on their team vs the quality of the "other" players on the opposing team. I feel that we should never be too quick to fully dismiss player's opinions because of this. Dismissing it partially depending on the player and what they are saying is fine, of course, since many are prone to saying things out of loyalty or to get attention.

The 2nd thought (although it's probably better saved for another thread)... not only the quality of the opposition but the quality of one's own full roster will impact some types of production. For example: here are some images I came across recently that can be one way to gauge a roster's strength.

The first image explains what the Team Simple Rating System (SRS) score is and why it is important. This stat is calculated prior to the start of a season and is used to indicate the expected success a team will have in the playoffs, with a high correlation between high SRS scores and winning the title.



The 2nd image shows the SRS rating of all teams who won the NBA title from 1997 to 2021. Note that Tim Duncan's Spurs were 1st in the league for 4 of the 5 years they won a title and were 3rd for the other one (2003). This score would thus imply that the Spurs won titles in years that they were expected to and should have won... but couldn't win titles by elevating themselves in other years, except in 2003. Their SRS rating was 1st in a lot of other years too yet they never went back-to-back like Jordan's Bulls, who probably also had the #1 SRS rating in a lot of years prior to 1997. This also makes sense from another perspective, i.e., Tim Duncan was a great player; consistent, intelligent and fundamentally sound... but his star wasn't as as bright as others who were more technically gifted than him (like MJ, Kobe) or who were more physically dominant than he was (like Shaq, Lebron, Wilt).

Disregarding some of the other stuff ... I don't think you understand SRS.

It isn't calculated prior to the start of the season. And isn't particularly used "to indicate the expected success a team will have in the playoffs" though it's better (because of using better data) at that than just W% leader. This leads to problems later though I would note even if SRS was somehow different than what it is the players themselves would be baked into the data so I don't understand any idea that a player would be better for their team winning from lower rankings ... surely if this is supposed to be a good measure of teams this would simply indicate more winning from below would indicate (the team) was lucky.

Also your source has a typo. A better source in general (not because of the typo, though not super reassuring) is Basketball-Reference.

70sFan wrote:I'm glad you made these calculations, it requires quite a lot of work (I know it from my own experience).

I don't think comparing numbers from 13 or 14 years careers to 20 years career is fair though. Kareem played majority of his postseason games after 1982, when he was no longer close to his prime. Look at the difference between Kareem before and after 1983:

1970-83 Kareem: 126 games, 29/14/4/3
1983-89 Kareem: 111 games, 19/7/3/2

Kareem gets full statistical credit for playing 19 years, and won Championships after Wilt was retired. 1984-1989 counts.

We have to look at the complete picture for both.

ty 4191 wrote:

70sFan wrote:I'm glad you made these calculations, it requires quite a lot of work (I know it from my own experience).

I don't think comparing numbers from 13 or 14 years careers to 20 years career is fair though. Kareem played majority of his postseason games after 1982, when he was no longer close to his prime. Look at the difference between Kareem before and after 1983:

1970-83 Kareem: 126 games, 29/14/4/3
1983-89 Kareem: 111 games, 19/7/3/2

Kareem gets full statistical credit for playing 19 years, and won Championships after Wilt was retired. 1984-1989 counts.

We have to look at the complete picture for both.

Good point. He also gets credit for 3 titles won post-1983... 1984-85, 1986-87, 1987-88.

Michael Jordan:

(Regular Season): 38.3 MPG, 30.1 PPG, 6.2 RBS, 5.3 AST, .497 FG% (+3.7 rTS%)

Against Bad Teams: (3.9% of playoff games): 43.1 MPG, 31.3 PPG, 5.7 RBS, 4.3 AST, (-0.6 tTS%)
Against Average Teams: (20.1% of playoff games): 40.1 MPG, 35.0 PPG, 7 RBS, 7.5 AST, (+6.6 rTS%)
Against Good Teams: (15% of playoff games): 41.9 MPG, 32.7 PPG, 5.5 RBS, 3.9 AST, (+1.4 tTS%)
Against Elite Teams: (40.2% of playoff games): 41.0 MPG, 32.4 PPG, 6.3 RBS, 5 AST, (+2.6 rTS%)
Against All Time Great Teams: (20.7% of playoff games): 42.8 MPG, 35.8 PPG, 6.8 RBS, 6.6 AST, (+4.5 rTS%)

Jordan. Wow. Just, wow.

Thoughts, everyone?

(How much of this is due to the league expanding by 6 teams in the 90's, if any?)

wouldbt it be better to base it on opposite team defense rather than their overall net rating?

the 2005 suns would be elite competition but not exactly a tough defense

a elite team may be 2005 suns or 2004 pistons and one is a lot tougher than the other offensive performance wise

LAL1947 wrote:

ty 4191 wrote:For one, this, to me, confirms what I always intuitively felt/thought about Wilt/Kareem/Russell's playoffs competition.

(And, frankly, it's a blowout.)

I'd like to hear your thoughts on that. What do you mean when you say it confirms what you intuitively felt and it's a blow-out? It seems to me that Wilt played against better teams more often and his production against better teams was better than Kareem's, whose production was better than Russell's. Am I on the right track or gone off it?

If I may make a suggestion, since you're putting in the effort to get all these numbers, perhaps, it would be fitting if you could put a little summary of what the numbers for each player mean to you, or how they compare to each other according to the system you are using.

What I mean is- yes- to your point...Wilt clearly played against much better teams in the playoffs than both Kareem and Russell. I always intuitively knew it, but I dedicated many, many hours to finally proving it, here. Hopefully all the ongoing talk about Wilt's "dropoff" in the playoffs is now explained, much better than I've ever seen it explained.

That's my initial thought.

Kareem played all his games against ATG competition in 1970 and 1971. He "only" played against Elite teams from 1982-1984.

I was always underwhelmed by Kareem's strength of competition. It wasn't just that the ABA had 30% of the all star level players by 1976, it was that I believed the teams he faced in the playoff were probably less impressive than, say, Wilt, who faced All Time Great Teams 5 different Series in 2 only years in his prime. He also faced Elite Teams from 68'-71' a TON.

falcolombardi wrote:wouldbt it be better to base it on opposite team defense rather than their overall net rating?

We already ran that project; I think this is more comprehensive:

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1836300

viewtopic.php?p=96381090#p96381090

viewtopic.php?p=96390411#p96390411

viewtopic.php?p=96594294#p96594294

Wilt vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
45% of total playoff games played
47.2 MPG
25.0 PPG
26.6 RBG
3.5 AST/G
rTS%: +3.8%

Lebron vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
22.1% of total playoff games played
42.3 MPG
26.3 PGG
7.8 RBG
rTS%: -1.3%

Kareem vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
13.9% of total playoff games played
42.1 MPG
29.4 PPG
14.2 RBG
3.8 AST/G
rTS%: +4.8%

viewtopic.php?p=97125417#p97125417

falcolombardi wrote:wouldbt it be better to base it on opposite team defense rather than their overall net rating?

the 2005 suns would be elite competition but not exactly a tough defense

a elite team may be 2005 suns or 2004 pistons and one is a lot tougher than the other offensive performance wise

It's a good question. Just wondering out aloud here... players have to work on defense too, i.e., to stop the opposing team's offense. So could it be that looking at the overall net rating gives us a more holistic picture than looking purely at opposite team's defense?

Quoted the wrong person here: deleted.

LAL1947 wrote:

falcolombardi wrote:wouldbt it be better to base it on opposite team defense rather than their overall net rating?

the 2005 suns would be elite competition but not exactly a tough defense

a elite team may be 2005 suns or 2004 pistons and one is a lot tougher than the other offensive performance wise

It's a good question. Just wondering out aloud here... players have to have to work on defense too, i.e., to stop the opposing team's offense. So could it be that looking at the overall net rating gives us a more holistic picture than looking purely at opposite team's defense?

Hopefully. Yes.

I think I'm going to post all this on the General Board, since there's seemingly little to no interest here, and, it took so many hours of work to put together.

ty 4191 wrote:I think I'm going to post all this on the General Board, since there's seemingly little to no interest here, and, it took so many hours of work to put together.

I'm sincerely sorry that there's seemingly no interest in this work you're doing from the stalwarts who run this section. Appears they're not interested in things that clearly disprove their narrative. For what it's worth, I very much appreciate the effort and look forward to seeing what you find for any remaining players that you perform this exercise on.

LAL1947 wrote:

ty 4191 wrote:I think I'm going to post all this on the General Board, since there's seemingly little to no interest here, and, it took so many hours of work to put together.

I'm sincerely sorry that there's seemingly no interest in this work you're doing from the stalwarts who run this section. Appears they're not interested in things that clearly disprove their narrative. For what it's worth, I very much appreciate the effort and look forward to seeing what you find for any remaining players that you perform this exercise on.

It's been up less than 24 hour and he got half a dozen board regs to weigh in on his topic many of them quite complementary. Not sure the point of you attempting to suggest people don't like his work because it disproves a narrative. Especially when you look at the posters who did respond and I can assure you there is a not a common narrative these posters are trying to sell....

OP should share his work with others if he's proud of his work, but if he's sharing with others only wanting everyone to reach the same conclusions he did, well he's missing the entire point of message boards.