RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #16 (George Mikan)

Post #1 » by **Doctor MJ** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 2:21 pm

Our system is now as follows:

1. We have a pool of Nominees you are to choose from for your Induction (main) vote to decide who next gets on the List. Choose your top vote, and if you'd like to, a second vote which will be used for runoff purposes if needed.

2. Nomination vote now works the same way.

3. You must include reasoning for each of your votes, though you may re-use your old words in a new post.

4. Post as much as they want, but when you do your official Vote make it really clear to me at the top of that post that that post is your Vote. And if you decide to change your vote before the votes are tallied, please edit that same Vote post.

5. Anyone may post thoughts, but please only make a Vote post if you're on the Voter list. If you'd like to be added to the project, please ask in the General Thread for the project. Note that you will not be added immediately to the project now. If you express an interest during the #2 thread, for example, the earliest you'll be added to the Voter list is for the #3.

5. I'll tally the votes when I wake up the morning after the Deadline (I don't care if you change things after the official Deadline, but once I tally, it's over). For this specific Vote, if people ask before the Deadline, I'll extend it.

Here's the list of the Voter Pool as it stands right now (and if I forgot anyone I approved, do let me know):

Spoiler:

Alright, the Nominees for you to choose among for the next slot on the list (in alphabetical order):

Kevin Durant

George Mikan

Dirk Nowitzki

Karl Malone

David Robinson

Post #2 » by **cupcakesnake** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 3:40 pm

Vote: George Mikan
Alternate: David Robinson
Nominate: Dr. J

I'd like to get the last era dominator off the board. Mikan is very difficult to compare to anyone else in this range, considering we're unlikely to get to another 50s guy soon. Bob Pettit has no real overlap with Mikan, so Dolph Schayes is probably the next guy to get discussed from that era. I value how players performed relative to their peers a whole lot more than the theoretical "how would this guy do in the modern game" (which I still consider to some extent but as a minor criteria). I can't pretend I'm valuing that if I don't start voting Mikan at some point, considering he's arguably the most dominant in his era either. I do have a gradual sliding scale though, as the NBA improves in quality and sheer number of players over time. Being the best of 500 players is more impressive than being the best of 200. That being said, there's no such thing as Mikan level dominance anymore.

But I can totally see cases for a few more less antiquated players coming off the board before Mikan. David Robinson, Dr. J, and Dirk are all obvious candidates. If someone is huge on peaks, there's a bunch more with reasonable cases. I don't think it's lunacy for Mikan to fall a bit lower, I just need to vote him in this range for my personal criteria to have any consistency!

For David Robinson, he's the best mega defensive anchor with all-star level offense left (I don't have Giannis or Anthony Davis up here quite yet, and then there's a drop off to guys like Ewing or Gilmore). It's arguably the most valuable type of player in basketball. It's the most scalable and these guys often have greater longevity than their scoring-ccentric brethren. We watched David Robinson lose almost all his offensive value late in his career, and STILL be able to make massive contributions to championship runs on that defense alone.

I thought long and hard about Chris Paul for the nomination. I honestly think had we done this survey in 2021 (after Phoenix went to the finals), Chris Paul might have cracked the top 15. But as much as he's added to his legacy with some deep playoff runs in his late 30s, he's also added to his legacy of breaking down in the playoffs. It's sort of unfair to punish a guy for that at this age, but it's hard not to attach it to all his prior playoff injury moments. I couldn't quite talk myself into putting Paul, Giannis, or Joker into the nomination pool ahead of Doctor J. Give Giannis and Joker a few more years.

AEnigma · Post #3 » by **AEnigma** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 3:52 pm

VOTE: Dirk Nowitzki
Alternate: George Mikan
Although I find Dirk’s skillset somewhat limiting compared to Duncan and Garnett, his impact in his time never lagged all that far behind those two. Brought often middling teams to the playoffs consistently, and of course won a title as the team’s engine. Also got the better of those two primary positional rivals the few times they met in the postseason. He is very securely top fifteen for me, and his only real blemish (outside of a perhaps era-advantaged skillset) is some paltry playoff “impact” outside of his 2006-11 prime. Still, I have more confidence in that prime stretch leading a title team than I do the other contenders for this spot.

And on that note, I suppose I will turn to David Robinson.

ElGee wrote:TrueLAFan made a point about David Robinson's defensive impact in the playoffs. Indeed, there seems to be some validity to that, if we believe that Robinson has a major influence on their defense as the anchor.

Here are the Spurs DRtg in his 93-96 stretch compared with regular season performance. The opponents ORtg is weighted by games played vs. team (eg a 6 game series counts twice as much as a 3 game series).

1996 111.5 ( 8.0 vs. regular season) 4.7 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 112.1
1995 103.1 (-2.3 vs. regular season) -7.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 109.3
1994 110.3 ( 5.7 vs. regular season) 5.3 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 108.6
1993 107.0 ( 0.2 vs. regular season) -0.9 relative to league average. Weighted opp avg. 111.3

So it seems there is something to what TrueLAFan is saying. Perhaps with the exception of 1995's first 2 rounds...but we know what happened after that.

My general problem with Robinson, like everyone else, is his playoff performances. It's not that I viewed him as some sort of choker, just that he faired much better much better in a regular season style and against weaker competition. Which isn't too damning (we shouldn't overstate the unfortunate fact that he ran into Malone and Hakeem at the worst time). His regular seasons still count. I just know what type of contribution I'm getting toward a championship (he's a little too subject to certain styles and matchups, and when he runs into them there's a larger drop off then we see from other stars.)

1993 struggled against Duckworth/Williams vs. Portland. Then a better series against Phoenix (but a bad game 7).
1994 ran into Utah. Struggled.
1995 He DESTROYED LA (Dviac and Campbell) a round before playing Hakeem.
1996 great against Phoenix. Then Utah again...

That's something that I'll take into account, in general, for all of his prime seasons.

therealbig3 wrote:Here's the Spurs' DRating under Robinson in the playoffs:

91: 4-game series against the Warriors, who had a 111.9 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 111.7 (-0.2).

93: 4-game series against the Blazers, who had a 108.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 107.7 (-0.6).

6-game series against the Suns, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.9 (-3.4).

94: 4-game series against the Jazz, who had a 108.6 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 2.0).

95: 3-game series against the Nuggets, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 103.1 (-6.0).

6-game series against the Lakers, who had a 109.1 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 101.3 (-7.8).

6-game series against the Rockets, who had a 109.7 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 110.6 ( 0.9).

96: 4-game series against the Suns, who had a 110.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 109.3 (-1.0).

6-games series against the Jazz, who had a 113.3 ORating in the regular season, and the Spurs held them to 114.1 ( 0.8).

As you can see, although the Spurs had some nice defensive series (a couple in 95, and one in 93), they had mostly mediocre defensive series, in which they allowed opposing teams to either score their averages against them, or even do better offensively. An elite defensive team like the Spurs shouldn't allow that...in general, they should hold their opponents to well under their averages.

[...]

So, with the Spurs, you have an elite defensive team dropping to above average levels. And considering how guys like Barkley, Malone, and especially Hakeem had some great series against D-Rob and the Spurs, I think you can conclude that Robinson as the defensive anchor got worse defensively in the playoffs, by quite a bit.

kaima wrote:There has been talk of Robinson lacking help and being swarmed in [the Rockets] series, and I'd have more sympathy if film and stats didn't point to outcome being tilted by Robinson's lacking skillsets on, get this, both sides of the court.

On offense, Robinson was trying to play against a collapsing defense with, far too often, faceup drives that either left him with a shot he was incapable of making or a bad pass that was a likely turnover. He had no back to the basket game which, against a defense that's by definition and design paint-oriented, made it the wrong answer to a remedial math question. A real post player, even with a swarming defense coming at or for him, can find a way to make reads and create some positive result in individual or team counterpoint; Robinson spent the series panicked, because his athleticism could not solve the problem.

He'd go into the post, receive a pass, and pass it back out almost immediately. Why? Because nothing easy would come, and he had no post game to work with.

His jumper was fundamentally shaky. He had no real go-to moves. He wasn't good at all at battling for position, ala Shaq or Karl, and then making an explosive move from the low post to the rim. He was mediocre at sealing his man and receiving a lob. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

And, as nail (in the coffin, through the heart) or lynchpin to all this, he was a lacking passer. With the defense in a collapse mode, you would think that Robinson's assist numbers would be decent, yet he produced at the worst rate of any of Olajuwon's post opponents with a 2.6 average. But that's only half the story, as he averaged 6.25 turnovers over the 4 losses.

The two games the Spurs won, he averaged one turnover. His assist/TO ratio in the four losses was a 0.42. By comparison, Malone averaged a 1.36 on A/TO ratio, Barkley a 1.15, Olajuwon (in the SA series, in this case) a 1.19 and Shaq a 1.19.

So we've got another key stat as to W/Ls, and it's centered, appropriately, on Robinson.

Now, a mediocre or even bad passing big man could be defensible if he had fundamental talent for any real type of post play. Unfortunately, this is a non-starter for Robinson.

Meaning that another star, having a ridiculously bad series passing the ball, could a find a way to create offense for his team that doesn't lead directly back to his statline; rotational feeds, where it's passed out of the post and moved around would be an easy example. But because of Robinson's other limitations, this type of offensive creation is not likely to be there.

All this, and I haven't mentioned the most staggering ratio in the series yet. 11.5. The difference in scoring average. How did this happen?

Well, it would be reasonable enough to expect that this was a result of Robinson's lacking offensive aresenal.

But that's only part, maybe half, the story. A ratio within a ratio, i.e. offense+(-?)defense.

Shocking as it may seem, a frontcourt with Dennis Rodman and David Robinson gave up the most points in the playoffs to Olajuwon. This is in comparison to a Utah frontcourt with Karl Malone and a non-NBA Center, Charles Barkley and Joe Kleine, and Shaq plus Horace Grant.

How can this be? I think it falls within the same paradigm as Robinson's offensive flaws: a mix of mental frailty and lack of fundamentals.

For all the hype about Robinson's defense, Olajuwon did whatever he wanted in this series. He didn't have it as easy against Barkley/Klein/AC, Shaq or Malone+a-guy-from-the-local-Y.

If Robinson's defense is not overhyped, then there has to be a dichotomy here. Either between regular season worth and playoff failure, or man to man post defense as opposed to being the Center in a team scheme.

Robinson was wonderful at rim protection, which was mostly timing and innate physical gifts. But positional defense requires a lot more. It's a game of chess, and Robinson was playing checkers against Bobby Fischer in the post. He wasn't good at countering Olajuwon's footwork (and considering the hype about his defense, isn't that another negative?), he often let him set up too deep, and he would give Olajuwon way too much room, as a last defense (bomb shelter D), on his 15 foot jumper.

If Robinson deserves praise for his award-laden regular season, then the matchup game means he should be excoriated, rather than exhonerated, for his post-season play.

Second year in a row, and again at his absolute peak, he allows himself to be dominated on both ends. In 94, against Malone, the ratio was 9. This time it's over 11.

Dreadful. Disgusting.

drza wrote:Call for David Robinson supporters to address
E-Balla wrote:Also you mention his faceup game being deadly? Couldn't be further from the truth. It was useful in the regular season but in a 7 game series against great defenders its not trustworthy. His performances against good defenses in the playoffs are historically disappointing outside of his rookie season.

From 93-96 he played 8 series. He played good defenses 3 times (Portland in 93, Utah in 94 and 96). Outside of that he also played 2 ATG Cs (Hakeem and Mutombo in 95) and here's how he performed:

vs Portland 93 (4th ranked defense): 19.3 ppg, 2.3 orpg, 4.8 apg, 2.0 topg, 48.7 TS%, 107 ORTG. This 4 game series included a 6/20 performance and a 4/11 performance in games 1 and 2.

vs Utah 94 (7th ranked defense): 20 ppg, 3.3 orpg, 3.5 apg, 2.3 topg, 47.1 TS%, 104 ORTG. Again they lost in 4. This time lost games 2 and 3 (in a best to 3) with Robinson shooting 10-35 for 28 points in those games combined.

vs Denver 95 (with Deke): 19 ppg, 1.7 orpg, 3.3 apg, 2.0 topg, 49.3 TS%, 105 ORTG. They swept but he did struggle against Deke and they won mostly due to the offense which was flourishing despite bad performances from Robinson.

vs Houston 95 (with Hakeem) has been a topic of conversation for a minute now so I won't list the numbers totally (23.8 ppg for DR). I'd just like to mention again that he shot under 40% 3 games in this series and had under a 90 ORTG in all 3 games.

vs Utah 96 (8th ranked defense): 19.3 ppg, 3.7 orpg, 2.0 apg, 2.3 topg, 52.6 TS%, 107 ORTG. Looks better than the rest on paper but he had under a 50 TS% in 4 games and the other 2 games were blowout losses (73 TS% in a game 1 20 point loss and 74 TS% in only 24 minutes of a game 4 15 point loss). Honestly outside of games 1 and 2 he was flat out bad.

I don't think a player like him can really be relied on in the postseason offensively. Now defensively there's another issue: in series where he disappointed offensively (is the 5 above) more often than not his team also underperformed defensively. In 93 they held Portland better than expected (-2.5) but Clyde missed game 1 (Portland's worst offensive performance of the series with a 95.0 ORTG). Take out that game and San Antonio performed worse than expected defensively. San Antonio also performed well against Denver (-4.2) but they were led by rookie Jalen Rose offensively by the time the playoffs came.

In 95 Houston performed better than expected (+3.0) mainly because of Hakeem's play and Utah killed them in 94 and 96 with the PNR (+4.0 in 94 and +5.7 in 96). TBH I'm not sure if I trust his defense to stand when he's taken out of the game offensively. I want to say its a small sample but 23 games is a pretty large postseason sample for Robinson to look so unspectacular in during his "peak" years.

This, in a nutshell, is the type of post that always puts me back on my heels in these projects. I come into each one thinking that Robinson has a case to move up a level, but every time someone puts a post like this together that I can't ignore.

I wanted to blame Robinson's slide in the rankings to perception (e.g. based off the Hakeem series) that isn't fair...then in the RPoY Kaima just point-by-point hammered home that Malone in 94 and 96 was outplaying Robinson just as badly as Hakeem did...and I couldn't argue it.

By the time we got to the top-100 projects I was ready to argue for Robinson again, but this time guys like ElGee and Doc Mustafa and others had a narrative that worked about how Robinson's face-up offensive style didn't work in the postseason, and some suggested that his playoff defense was also shaky by looking at things like opponent's performance vs. expectation, and...it was difficult for me to argue against it.

Now, in this project, Dr. Spaceman has pushed the envelope. He's had several people voting for Robinson for several threads now, and he's got Robinson on everyone's radar. But again, I run into a post like this and...it's hard for me to argue. So I need someone else to do it for me.

The situation

1) The offense. I'm one of the most outspoken people around about how we can over-emphasize a player's scoring efficiency in trying to evaluate his level. Thus, I'm more than open to the idea that a player can be having just as large an impact, if not larger, in the postseason even if his TS% drops a few points. However, in these examples (which apparently contain both his most difficult defenses as well as the teams that eliminated his squads over his peak seasons) not only is Robinson's TS% down a few points...based on the numbers that E balla posted (plus me guestimating that Robinson averaged 23.8 pts on about 55% TS against Hakeem), counting each series equally (e.g. not going per-game or shot-for-shot for true averages, just ball-parking it) Robinson is around 20 points on about 51% TS over those 5 series. That's down like 6 points and 8% TS points from his regular season averages over that stretch. That's a huge drop-off in both scoring volume and scoring efficiency.

So, what I need from a Robinson supporter (or even just an interested an energetic bystander who has insight and is willing to build the case, is an explanation that makes sense. Does a) Robinson's offense have a larger non-boxscore impact than I was previously crediting him for that would allow him to maintain offensive impact in the face of such a large drop-off in both scoring volume and efficiency? Was he drawing so much defensive attention in these match-ups that he was able to warp the defense to a larger than normal degree and set-up his teammates with much easier shots? Was he distracting the opposing interior defenders to the degree that their help defense suffered, thus allowing his teammates to thrive? Something. Just some logical, reasonable explanation besides "the regular season counts too". I know the regular season counts, and I know that in bad situations playoff boxscores can be misleading but...whenever someone really goes in depth on Robinson's playoffs, it doesn't seem misleading or flukish. It seems more like something that could be a significant impediment to his ability to lead teams to a title, at least on the level of the other guys with top-10 type peaks like Russell, Magic, Bird or Walton. So I'd love it if someone could break it down for me and help me believe that it isn't the impediment that, on first blush, it might seem to be.

2) The defense. The main argument for Robinson's offensive struggles not being so damning, for me, is that even with just solid offense you'd still be getting one of the best defenders of all time with him. I've seen the question of Robinson's team defensive efforts in the playoffs raised, including in this project, but Spaceman and others have raised enough doubts about the methodology and that the questionable series might average out with the better-than-expected series to not matter so much. But again, here, E-balla is specifically arguing that it is the series in which Robinson is struggling offensively that the team's defense underperforms. And he makes the case that 4 of these 5 series (if you correct for Drexler's 1 game absence) match up with 4 of the series where Robinson's team defenses under-achieved expectation. And again, the 4 series that he amplifies as the team's defense struggling include: all three series that Robinson's teams were eliminated in his 3 peak 94 - 96 seasons, each of which marked a match-up with another ATG big, each of which also corresponded to lower than usual offensive output.

Again, it's one thing for me to forgive a few points of TS%, especially in cases when closer examination of the situation reveals other ways in which the player is making their impact. But if the case is made, as Robinson's critics have made it in every big project we've done on this board since 2011, that Robinson's game SPECIFICALLY ...on offense (but perhaps, apparently on defense too)...that his game has SPECIFIC weaknesses that translated to the playoffs and directly prevented him from being successful against teams of similar caliber to his own, which then translated directly into his lack of team success at his peak...then that's a much stronger case that, to me, should be addressed and put into perspective.

FrogBros4Life wrote:Long post incoming....this discussion has piqued my interest and I wanted to chime in with a few things...

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.

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

When we adjusted for minutes AND possessions in 90 Ewing vs 95 Robinson, 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.

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.

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.

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 3 out of 5), 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.

Here are Robinson's pre-Duncan numbers again:

Robinson
==================

89-90 Nuggets (Reg Season oRTG = 108) 14th in league (Series oRTG = 105.2) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -2.8

89-90 Blazers (Reg Season oRTG = 110.5) 9th in league (Series oRTG = 107.2) = 7 games (lost series) Diff = -3.3

90-91 Warriors (Reg Season oRTG = 111.9) 6th in league (Series oRTG = 111.7) = 4 games (lost series) Diff = -0.2

*92-93 Blazers (Reg Season oRTG = 108.3) 14th in league (Series oRTG = 105.1) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -3.2

* (if we exclude game 1 where Drexler did not play then (Series oRTG = 108.5 in games 2-4) Diff = +0.2

92-93 Suns (Reg Season oRTG = 113.3) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 109.9) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = -3.4

93-94 Jazz (Reg Season oRTG = 108.6) 7th in league (Series oRTG = 110.6) = 4 games (lost series) Diff = +2

94-95 Nuggets (Reg Season oRTG = 109.1) 11th in league (Series oRTG = 103.1) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -6

94-95 Lakers (Reg Season oRTG = 109.1) 12th in league (Series oRTG = 97.9) = 6 games (won series) Diff = -11.2

94-95 Rockets (Reg Season oRTG = 109.7) 7th in league (Series oRTG = 110.6) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = +0.9

95-96 Suns (Reg season oRTG = 110.3) 8th in league (Series oRTG = 109.3) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -1

95-96 Jazz (Reg Season oRTG = 113.3) 2nd in league (Series oRTG = 114.1) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = +0.8

Avg oRTG faced: 110.2
Avg oRTG rank faced: 8.3

Avg oRTG diff = -2.57
Avg oRTG diff (adjusted for Drexler missing game 1 of the 93 Portland series) = -2.36

Faced the #1 oRTG in the league: one time

Lost all 3 series where his opponent's oRTG for their playoff series increased from their regular season oRTG

Now here's Patrick.....

Ewing
==========
87-88: Celtics (Reg Season oRTG = 115.4), 1st in league (Series oRTG = 117.3) = 4 games (lost series) Diff = +1.9

88-89: Sixers (Reg Season oRTG = 113.1), 3rd in league (Series oRTG = 107.5) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -5.6

88-89: Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 109.1), 12th in league (Series oRTG = 115.8) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = +6.7

89-90: Celtics (Reg Season oRTG = 112), 6th in league (Series oRTG = 119.3) = 5 games (won series) Diff = +7.3

89-90: Pistons (Reg Season oRTG = 109.9) 11th in league (Series oRTG = 114.5) = 5 games (lost series) Diff = +4.6

90-91: Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 114.6) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 116.1) = 3 games (lost series) Diff = +1.5

91-92: Pistons (Reg Season oRTG = 107.5) 15th in league (Series oRTG = 97.6) = 5 games (won series) Diff = -9.9

91-92 Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 115.5) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 111.2) = 7 games (lost series) Diff = -4.3

92-93 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 111.9) 5th in league (Series oRTG = 111.7) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -0.2

92-93 Hornets (Reg Season oRTG = 109.5) 9th in league (Series oRTG = 100.5) = 5 games (won series) Diff = -9

92-93 Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 112.9) 2nd in league (Series oRTG = 112.4) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = -0.5

93-94 Nets (Reg Season oRTG = 107.2) 13th in league (Series oRTG = 95.9) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -11.3

93-94 Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 106.1) 14th in league (Series oRTG = 106.7) = 7 games (won series) Diff = +0.6

93-94 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 107.8) 11th in league (Series oRTG = 100.1) = 7 games (won series) Diff = -7.7

93-94 Rockets (Reg Season oRTG = 105.9) 15th in league (Series oRTG = 100.1) = 7 games (lost series) Diff = -5.8

94-95 Cavs (Reg Season oRTG = 105.3) 22nd in league (Series oRTG = 97.6) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -7.7

94-95 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 109.6) 8th in league (Series oRTG = 106.9) = 7 games (lost series) Diff = -2.7

95-96 Cavs (Reg Season oRTG = 109.9) 10th in league (Series oRTG = 99.9) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -10

95-96 Bulls (Reg Season oRTG = 115.2) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 105.2) = 5 games (lost series) Diff = -10

96-97 Hornets (Reg Season oRTG = 110.9) 4th in league (Series oRTG = 110.4) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -0.5

96-97 Heat (Reg Season oRTG = 106.8) 12th in league (Series oRTG = 99.2) = 7 games (lost series) Diff = -7.6

97-98 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 108.4) 4th in league (Series oRTG = 106.5) = 5 games (lost series) Diff = -1.9

98-99 Heat (Reg Season oRTG = 104.7) 9th in league (Series oRTG = 98.4) = 5 games (won series) Diff = -6.3

98-99 Hawks (Reg Season oRTG = 100.5) 19th in league (Series oRTG = 89.3) = 4 games (won series) Diff = -11.2

*98-99 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 108.7) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 106.15) = 2 games (of 6) (won series) Diff = -2.6

*Ewing played in games 1 and 2 of this series, before injuring himself at the end of game 2 and missing the rest of the playoffs. The series oRTG here is for the 2 games in which he played.

99-00 Raptors (Reg Season oRTG = 104.7) 15th in league (Series oRTG = 98.1) = 3 games (won series) Diff = -6.6

99-00 Heat (Reg Season oRTG = 104.5) 17th in league (Series oRTG = 96.9) = 7 games (won series) Diff = -7.6

99-00 Pacers (Reg Season oRTG = 108.5) 1st in league (Series oRTG = 109.5) = 6 games (lost series) Diff = +1

Avg oRTG faced: 109.2
Avg oRTG rank faced: 8.6

Avg oRTG diff: -3.68

Faced #1 regular season oRTG: six times

Won 2 series where his playoff opponent's oRTG for their series increased from the regular season

So we see that despite Ewing's entire Knick playoff record, and Robinson's entire pre-Duncan playoff record has them facing about the same strength of offensive opponent on average, by both actual oRTG (110.2 to 109.2) and oRTG rank relative to the league (8.6 to 8.3, or, both roughly faced the 8th best oRTG on average), Ewing comes out more than a full point better in oRTG point differential (-3.68 to -2.57), and if we use the adjusted difference that accounts for Drexler missing part of the 93 series, it's (-3.68 to -2.36).

Ewing's average playoff oRTG differential [of] -3.68 is outright better than both Robinson (adjusted or unadjusted) and Mourning's. And if we just look at the playoff point differentials for Ewing during the Riley/Van Gundy years it becomes much more pronounced, but we don't have to only look at the Riley/Van Gundy years. Ewing still comes out ahead even when we include the Stu Jackson, Rick Pitino, and John MacLeod years (by a comfortable margin).

Furthermore, Robinson's best point differential in any given series was the 95 Lakers at -11.2. Ewing's best mark of -11.3 (against the Nets in 94) not only beats this, but he has another differential equal to Robinson's best, of -11.2 vs. the Hawks in 99 (with none of the same teammates!). In fact, after the Lakers series in 95, Robinson's next best single season oRTG point differential was a -6, against the Nuggets that same year. Ewing has TWELVE (!!!!) single series that are better than Robinson's second best of -6, six of which are -9 or better. Also, Robinson's Spurs held the league best oRTG Phoenix Suns to a -3.6 in their 93 playoff series. Impressive for sure. Now let's note that Ewing's Knicks held the league best oRTG Chicago Bulls to a -4.3 in their 1992 playoff series, and the league best oRTG 72 win 1996 Chicago Bulls to a -10 in their 1996 playoff series.

Of course, Robinson starts to look better as a playoff defender once Duncan arrives, but Ewing never had the luxury of playing with another top 10 player so it's only fair that we look at their results when both Ewing and Robinson were the most important players on their teams. So the idea that Robinson was vastly superior as a playoff defensive anchor to Ewing just doesn't seem to hold water. And, if you've been reading the previous threads regarding Robinson and his pre-Duncan playoff foibles, you'll remember that Ewing was going up against much better playoff defenses on a yearly basis than Drob, and still performing better offensively. So....Robinson's offense suffered more against easier defenses.....Robinson's defense (in the context that you have presented: regular season to playoff oRTG differentials) is worse despite them both playing relatively equal offensive units....so what exactly is the argument for pre-Duncan Robinson being a better playoff performer (or even a better player period) than Ewing agian?
Oh, that's right....
cecilthesheep wrote:However I also think it's important to note that the Knicks had other defensive impact players like Starks, Oakley, etc. What great defenders did the Spurs have but Robinson? Was one year of old Rodman the best it got?

As usual, people want to assign the lion's share of that defensive impact to the schemes and style of play, to his coaches, and/or his teammates instead of giving it to, you know, the only single person (player or coach) who was there for every one of these seasons.

FWIW, Rodman was 1st team All D in 95 and 2nd team All D in 94 (also for the Spurs). Starks was 2nd team all D in 94. Oakley was 1st team all D in 94 and 2nd team all D in 98. It wasn't like either Ewing or Robinson had a roster overflowing with perennial All D selections as teammates. Starks had a positive DBPM once his entire career....a 0.2 in 93-94. Robinson had SIX teammates playing at least 15mpg with a DBPM greater than that in the 1991 season alone. He had four teammates playing at least 14 mpg per game in 1995 with a DBPM above Starks career high. Oakley and Mason were legitimately great defensive players, and while Starks was good he certainly wasn't Bruce Bowen. Ewing did have more defensive minded teammates over the course of both of their careers, Robinson had more offensive help to balance that out.

As for Oakley and Mason...Mason was no longer a Knick by 96-97 and Oakley was traded in 98-99. Ewing's avg playoff oRTG differential after Mason was traded: -4.83 (!!!), and Ewing's avg playoff oRTG differential after Oakley was traded: -5.5 (!!!!)..... but yea, let's give all that credit to Starks, Oakley and Mason.

And on the topic of credit and blame....if we are going to place all of the blame on Rodman for the Spurs losing to the Rockets in 95, are we also going to give him any of the credit for that -11.2 differential vs the Lakers or the -6 differential vs the Nuggets that same postseason where he played well in both of those series?

70sFan wrote:Hi, I've been collecting stats for a while and I decided to make this post here. I separated some superstars offensive production in playoffs based on defense (RS ORtg) faced. Here are my (random) criteria:

Over +2.0 rDRtg - Bad Defense
From +2.0 to -2.0 rDRtg - Average Defense
From -2.0 to -4.0 rDRtg - Good Defense
From -4.0 to -7.0 rDRtg - Elite Defense
Below -7.0 rDRtg - All-Time Great Defense

David Robinson (1990-98):

RS: 37.4 mpg, 11.6 rpg,3.0 apg, 2.9 tov, 25.1 ppg on 52.4% FG, 74.5% FT and 59.1% TS (+5.61% rTS)
Against Bad Defenses (12.90% of playoffs games): 38.8 mpg, 12.7 rpg, 2.5 apg, 3.1 tov, 27.9 ppg on 60.6% FG, 85.1% FT and 67.8% TS (13.96% rTS)
Against Average Defenses (56.54% of playoffs games): 39.4 mpg, 11.6 rpg, 2.8 apg, 3.1 tov, 23.6 ppg on 46.4% FG, 71.8% FT, 53.8% TS (-0.04% rTS)
Against Good Defenses (30.65% of playoffs games): 39.4 mpg, 12.8 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2.4 tov, 21.0 ppg on 45.9% FG, 64.8% FT and 51.7% TS (-1.54% rTS)
Against Elite Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --
Against All-Time Great Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --

Patrick Ewing (1988-97):

RS: 36.8 mpg, 10.6 rpg, 2.2 apg, 3.3 tov, 24.0 ppg on 51.6% FG, 74.8% FT and 56.4% TS (+2.73% rTS)
Against Bad Defenses (9.43% of playoffs games): 38.2 mpg, 10.0 rpg, 1.5 apg, 2.8 tov, 20.9 ppg on 52.6% FG, 54.4% FT and 53.5% TS (-0.11% rTS)
Against Average Defenses (31.13% of playoffs games): 39.9 mpg, 11.0 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.7 tov, 24.2 ppg on 50.6% FG, 69.8% FT, 54.6% TS (+0.98% rTS)
Against Good Defenses (37.74% of playoffs games): 39.1 mpg, 10.7 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.8 tov, 21.2 ppg on 47.9% FG, 74.5% FT and 53.4% TS (+0.06% rTS)
Against Elite Defenses (21.70% of playoffs games): 40.7 mpg, 11.3 rpg, 1.7 apg, 3.0 tov, 22.9 ppg on 43.7% FG, 80.0% FT and 49.0% TS (-4.48% rTS)
Against All-Time Great Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --

Odinn21 wrote:I remember running some numbers about how well Nash's offense and Ewing's defense translated to postseason performances as Rtg numbers. (They were pretty much on par with each other)
When I did that, I was also curious about Robinson's defense and even though right now I don't have the numbers (I don't keep worksheets), I remember the defenses Robinson led were not on par with Ewing's led defense numbers. But I didn't take it as a direct knock on Robinson. Rather, it made me move Ewing up on my goat defenders list. Though, that situation created a direct gap between Robinson and Olajuwon/Duncan.
Also, it's worth noting that Robinson did not [consistently] have a coach like Pat Riley to dictate such effective defense. So, Ewing's numbers did not make up for the entire gap between him and Robinson.

[I decided to run the numbers again to see if I'm mistaken but I guess not. This part is like an edit in advance.
Ran the numbers again to see how well Robinson led teams performed on defense in the playoffs.
From 1990 to 1996, it was -2.6 rDRtg for the Spurs.
(The best; -11.2 rDRtg against the Lakers in '95, the worst +2.0 against the Jazz in '94.)
Not that great. It's good. But not particularly great or historically great.]

The code in the spoiler has the numbers I ran if someone is curious about it;
Spoiler:
Code: Select all
Opponent / Opponent's ORtg in regular season / ORtg against the Spurs / difference / # of minutes played DEN / 108.0 / 105.2 / -2.8 / 720 POR / 110.5 / 107.2 / -3.3 / 1755 GSW / 111.9 / 111.7 / -0.2 / 960 POR / 108.3 / 105.1 / -3.2 / 985 PHO / 113.3 / 109.9 / -3.4 / 1440 UTA / 108.6 / 110.6 / +2.0 / 960 DEN / 109.1 / 103.1 / -6.0 / 720 LAL / 109.1 / 97.9 / -11.2 / 1490 HOU / 109.7 / 110.6 / +0.9 / 1440 PHO / 110.3 / 109.3 / -1.0 / 960 UTA / 113.3 / 114.1 / +0.8 / 1440

Defense is half of the game. Sure. I don't deny anything about that. But Robinson was not Russell. Robinson's defense yielded goat level defensive results in playoffs when he did not have to carry his team's scoring / offense.

AEnigma wrote:This is what gets me about Robinson. It does not matter whether his offensive game is consistently mitigated in the playoffs in basically any situation other than against outright bad defences lacking any real post presence (and that despite his supposedly great passing, he somehow also has no real ability to create for others when doubled either). It does not matter that defensively — his calling card — he has terrible matchups with any modern-looking offence from his own era more akin of what we see from Shaq than of any other top tier defender (but oh yeah his modern translation would be great). It does not matter that his “postseason data giant” era only came about by primarily sharing on-court minutes with our #6 peak and then getting the easier matchups when they were staggered. His team relied on him and in the regular season that worked pretty well and that makes him amazing, but then in the postseason, hey, almost no one can be relied on like that in the postseason, stop being unfair.

Like, this is the Rudy Gobert argument with extra offensive production. Gobert goes from being by the numbers a consistent top five ”value” guy to being nowhere close to that in the postseason, but no one one actually argues he should be above lower regular season “value” players like Luka just because oh it is unfair to expect him to maintain in the postseason when his team relies on him that much. What if we gave Gobert the scoring ability of Demar Derozan? Is he a top two or three player now? Or is he still ultimately a player whose productive regular season offence cannot be trusted in the playoffs and whose elite regular season defence can be mitigated more than lesser value regular season defenders like Draymond or Giannis?

Here I will add on to that postseason analysis by looking at the teams who played more than just Robinson’s Spurs. Overall, nothing damning, but when people try to brush off the historic offensive decline because of his defence, I personally would like to see a bit more.

[All numbers are BRef estimates; if someone prefers to use the estimates on Thinking Basketball, feel free. For the Suns series, we have the option to draw from more correct sources, but would prefer to stay consistent.]

1990 Trail Blazers:
Versus Mavericks (107.2 dRtg) = 113.3 oRtg
Versus Spurs (104.2 dRtg) = 107.2 oRtg
Versus Suns (106.2 dRtg) = 103.6 oRtg
Versus Pistons (103.5 dRtg) = 104.2 oRtg

1991 Warriors:
Versus Spurs (103.3 dRtg) = 111.7 oRtg
Versus Lakers (105 dRtg) = 114.2 oRtg

1993 Suns:
Versus Lakers (108.9 dRtg) = 107.8 oRtg
Versus Spurs (106.8 dRtg) = 109.9 oRtg
Versus Sonics (104.9 dRtg) = 115.8 oRtg
Versus Bulls (106.1 dRtg) = 113 oRtg

1994 Jazz:
Versus Spurs (104.6 dRtg) = 110.6 oRtg
Versus Nuggets (102.3 dRtg) = 107.3 oRtg
Versus Rockets (101.4 dRtg) = 105.3 oRtg

1995 Lakers:
Versus Sonics (106.3 dRtg) = 107.7 oRtg
Versus Spurs (105.4 dRtg) = 97.9 oRtg

1995 Rockets:
Versus Jazz (105.7 dRtg) = 120.6 oRtg
Versus Suns (110.4 dRtg) = 115.9 oRtg
Versus Spurs (105.4 dRtg) = 110.6 oRtg
Versus Magic (107.8 dRtg) = 117.1 oRtg

1996 Jazz:
Versus Blazers (103.5 dRtg) = 113.4 oRtg
Versus Spurs (103.5 dRtg) = 114.1 oRtg
Versus Sonics (102.1 dRtg) = 104.9 oRtg

2000 Suns:
Versus Spurs (98.6 dRtg, no Duncan) = 92.0, without Kidd
Versus Lakers (98.2 dRtg) = 101.2 oRtg, with Kidd

rk2023 · Post #4 » by **rk2023** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 3:58 pm

Vote - Dirk Nowitzki
Nomination - Chris Paul
Alternate Nomination - Julius Erving

I'm quite surprised Dirk hasn't gained much traction yet! In theory, I could see why people might not be the highest in the room on his game because of the general lack of (1) volume creation and (2) defense when compared to some of the recent selections and current nominees. When taking a deeper look and understanding basketball holistically however, there is a lot to like about Dirk (I mean the Mavericks won 50+ games for however many straight seasons with one key common denominator!

). To start, one key feather in his cap is longevity. Aside from a 2013 campaign where he was hurt, Dirk was at an All-NBA+ level from a 14 year span of 2001-14 (with 7 straight Mild MVP-level campaigns, imo). His box profile isn't the most gaudy, but the team results really speak for themselves here - where the spacing effect and scoring gravity Dirk brought for his time served as a very unique catalyst for elite team offense. More of this was felt through 2005-12, where Dirk was deployed as a "lone star" with some very solid, some very "meh" teammates around him following the Mavs' trade of Steve Nash. Before that, Dirk was very arguably the best player - albeit not as good as his heyday years - on historically good offenses (though the 2001-04 Maverick teams certainly did come with their question marks in terms of roster construction).

https://www.si.com/nba/2016/03/10/dirk-nowitzki-dallas-mavericks-steve-nash-jason-terry
Thanks to Proxy for linking this. I find the article here to be a cool overview of Dirk's career arc

As I mentioned in last thread, here are Dirk's Playoff rORTGs in 3-year increments.

rk2023 wrote:Dirk Three Year PS rORTGs (h/t Thinking Basketball):
Code: Select all
8.1, 2001-03 (97th %ile) 8.0, 2003-05 (97th) 7.8, 2002-04 (96th) 6.8, 2004-06 (92nd) 6.7, 2005-07 (92nd) 6.4, 2011-14 (90th) 6.3, 2009-11 (90th) 5.1, 2006-08 (81st) 5.1, 2010-12 (81st) 4.2, 2008-10 (73rd)

As the Mavericks finally proved just like Denver did this past year, a solid defense can also be constructed around Dirk en-route to a title team - where such happened onwards from 2008 I'd say. Though I'm not that high on Dirk's defense and regard him as a neutral to a marginal positive for most of his 'lone-star' prime, I think it is a testament to his scalability and flexibility in terms of building around him Dallas was able to slant defensively around Dirk and have his offensive game serve as a very good safety net (in these seasons, his on-off looks the best of his career in a playoff setting as well. For some proof of concept of his scalability, I linked below how he fares in terms of offensive play-type from 2006-11. A Power Forward being this good in transition and as a spot-up player (keep in mind, this is compared to a holistic player pool) is no small feat. This is without even mentioning how well he serves as an isolation and post-up player in the half-court. High frequencies for either play, in a vacuum, may serve as an indicator a given player is deployed as a "ball stopper" without much playmaking utility.
https://imgur.com/gallery/jBDHfUn

On film however, the opposite strikes me as true. I found a great article from 2014 published by Grantland depicting such. As seen on a lot of these film snippets, Dirk is a pretty decisive and proactive mover off-the-ball though not an outlier mover like Curry or outlier screener like Steven Adams or Jokic just for example(s). On top of that, he is skilled enough a player/scorer to put the ball on the floor and attack a mismatch for a post-up or isolation - an area he vastly improved upon following 2007's 1st round upset to Golden state. Dirk's turnover economy always has been stellar, but so was his toch economy per my speculation. Touches per Game and Time of Possession only have been tracked from 2014 onwards, but Dirk in 2014 only had the ball in his hands for 1.9 minutes of play. His volume was down compared to his prime in that year to be fair, but with extrapolation and some reasonable mental curving - I think it's perfectly fine to assume this style of play generally translated to a lot of his prime (especially in years sharing offensive responsibility with Finley and Nash). As for proof of concept towards Dirk's 'gravity', in Engelmann's study of teammate's effect on eFG% was 3.5 percentage points - one of the highest marks recorded across the entire 2001-14 sample. This checks out with how Dirk's spacing would open up lanes for teammates to attack or create hockey assists from further ball movement after Dirk warps a defenses' coverage.

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/steve-nash-george-karl-and-others-on-dirk-nowitzki-and-the-unguardable-play/
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329072330/http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/adj_PPS_shooter_all.html

For one last snippet of analysis, ESPN's Dr. Snellings (drza on the PC Board) posted a good side-by-side of Kobe vs. Dirk as part of the 2017 iteration of the T-100 as food for thought.
https://hoopslab.rotowire.com/post/164218149771/kobe-vs-dirk-scouting-boxscores-and-impact

Spoiler:

So in Summary, Dirk:
+ Ability to fit with and provide notable impact in various contexts
+ Stellar turnover and touch economy, adds a theoretical vouch for his seamless fit to support the proof of concept in his prime
+ All-time++ caliber shot-making (both as a self-creator and off of) ball movement coupled with the two aforementioned points
- Some more questionable on/off playoff data from the Nash X Dirk era and the beginning of his tenure as a low star
- As the Mavs did get better at roster construction later on, there are some question as to how his defense would hold up across various roster contexts and how "situational" a positive-value defender he was

To conclude, here is how I value most of his prime using a framework similar to ElGee's CORP Model:

Spoiler:

lessthanjake · Post #5 » by **lessthanjake** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:02 pm

Vote for #16: David Robinson
Alternate Vote: Karl Malone
Nomination: Moses Malone
Alternate Nomination: Nikola Jokic

I’m very torn between David Robinson and Karl Malone. I wrote about this in the last thread. Basically, I think David Robinson looks superior in terms of impact, while Karl Malone has a very substantial longevity edge. David Robinson also has an edge in team achievements—having actually won two titles (though I only really put much value on one of them).

In the last thread, I went for Karl Malone above David Robinson for the alternate vote slot. But it was very close. I’m flip-flopping here. The reason is a tiny one, but a tiny reason can change a really close call: Squared posted a ton of plus/minus data for David Robinson for 1990-1991, and Robinson had around a +14 on-off in those games (https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107977605#p107977605). It’s only around half the season, but it does go to a lingering question I had—which was whether the impact data we have for prime Robinson is really unrepresentative because it is from his best years. This data for 1990-1991 is not quite as high as his peak years, but it still looks really good! This gives me a bit more confidence in Robinson’s impact edge, which tips the balance for me here. But I don’t feel super confident on this vote. Not sure it really matters how I order these two guys, though, since I suspect Karl Malone won’t get much traction quite yet so my vote will go to Robinson regardless of how I order them here.

My nominations have been explained in prior threads, so I just refer back to those.

Colbinii · Post #6 » by **Colbinii** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:28 pm

lessthanjake wrote:Vote for #16: David Robinson
Alternate Vote: Karl Malone
Nomination: Moses Malone
Alternate Nomination: Nikola Jokic

I’m very torn between David Robinson and Karl Malone. I wrote about this in the last thread. Basically, I think David Robinson looks superior in terms of impact, while Karl Malone has a very substantial longevity edge. David Robinson also has an edge in team achievements—having actually won two titles (though I only really put much value on one of them).

In the last thread, I went for Karl Malone above David Robinson for the alternate vote slot. But it was very close. I’m flip-flopping here. The reason is a tiny one, but a tiny reason can change a really close call: Squared posted a ton of plus/minus data for David Robinson for 1990-1991, and Robinson had around a +14 on-off in those games (https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107977605#p107977605). It’s only around half the season, but it does go to a lingering question I had—which was whether the impact data we have for prime Robinson is really unrepresentative because it is from his best years. This data for 1990-1991 is not quite as high as his peak years, but it still looks really good! This gives me a bit more confidence in Robinson’s impact edge, which tips the balance for me here. .

And yet, Dirk has 3 seasons [2001, 2003 and 2011] where he clearly surpasses +14 On-Off [+17.7, +20.4 and +16.0] while having multiple prime years right in-line with this [2005, 2007 and 2008 at +13.4, +12.5 and +11.8 respectively].

rk2023 · Post #7 » by **rk2023** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:38 pm

Code: Select all

Robinson - 1990 through 1996:
27.8 PER, 59.2% TS, .260 WS/48, 8.7 BPM (5.4-3.3)
24.1 PER, 55.7% TS, .189 WS/48, 6.5 BPM (3.9-2.6)

Dirk - 2005 through 2011:
25.1 PER, 58.6% TS, .229 WS/48, 6.1 BPM (5.4-0.7)
25.2 PER, 58.6% TS, .211 WS/48, 6.9 BPM (5.9-1.0)

Dirk and Robinson's side-by-side stats here. Of course, the BBR box score is quite far from an end-all, be-all but it is clear that Robinson has a tail-off here - for reasons I (amongst many others too, just refer to AEnigma's post above) have alluded to throughout the years and amidst this project. For some reason, Robinson supporters have this explained as "his defense was great and his offense fell off due to not having adequate help".

I do not deny that his supporting cast was absymal for a fair share of his prime. If Robinson was around a better basketball ecosystem however, it makes sense to assume that his scoring volume would go down - where I am left unsure if he would put up parallel impact with the gaudy +/- and WOWY track record in his name (this logic holds for backup/supporting big-man and guard play). If that were the case, would people be as high on him in this projects' context? A rhetorical question, but an intriguing one given most of the arguments in his favor are coming from +/- and his "advanced stats" from BBR. By that logic, shouldn't Chris Paul for example garner votes at this point in time too?

I find this study as a good explaining factor, considering both PS/RS play.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1338043#p40799443

As I have posted on imgur too:
https://imgur.com/a/UT9jsLU

OldSchoolNoBull · Post #8 » by **OldSchoolNoBull** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:48 pm

I posted this in the last thread but I think it got buried(it was the last post on a page), so I'm putting it here again.

OldSchoolNoBull wrote:I'd like to talk about Karl Malone. As he's officially on the ballot now, and as some of you might be considering voting for him now or in the next thread or two, I want to make my argument for why everyone else we're talking about in this thread in terms of the current ballot and potential nominees(save for Jokic and Giannis because they don't have enough years, and CP3 because I'm not as high on him as some of you are) should be inducted before him. I'm also going to be including Stockton in these comparisons because he was Malone's teammate for 18 years and I think it's relevant. Also, I know "we" aren't talking about Barkley yet, but I am, so he's included.

First, let's look at RAPM. I've taken career averages for all available RAPM years for each player. I am using J.E.'s 1997-2019 RS+PS combined with Squared2020's RAPM sets for 79-80, 84-85, 87-88, 90-91, and 95-96(where applicable to each player). I don't presently have RAPM for KD's most recent three seasons, so they're not included in his number:

DRob 4.52(9 seasons inc. 2 from Squared)
Stockton 4.39(11 seasons inc. 4 from Squared)
Dirk 4.24(21 seasons)
Barkley 2.58(8 seasons inc. 4 from Squared)
KD 2.08(12 seasons)
KD's first two seasons are massive negative outliers, if you remove them it gets up to 3.44
K.Malone 1.98(11 seasons inc. 3 from Squared)
Dr. J -0.92(2 seasons from Squared)

Now, for Dr. J, it's only two seasons, way less than everyone else, and one of those seasons is from the tail end of his career in 1985, so I'm really not sure how much we can take from that.

So, besides the limited Dr. J sample, Malone is in last place here. We should note his teammate Stockton is way ahead of him. Malone has a great four year stretch from 97 to 00 where he posts between 4.12 and 5.31 each year, but outside of that window, from the data we have, he never gets close to those numbers. After 00, his last four years see a significant drop-off. From the earlier Squared samples, we can see he finishes below Stockton, Barkley, and Robinson in those years:

88
Barkley #5 4.49
Stockton #14 3.49
Malone #64 1.07

91
Robinson #4 4.60
Stockton #8 4.03
Barkley #60 1.65
Malone #258 -0.83

96
Robinson #12 3.97
Stockton #49 2.10
Barkley #150 0.41
Malone #162 0.28

Now, let's look at RAPTOR.

These are each REGULAR SEASON RAPTORs for each season of each player's career, with career averages at the bottom:

Some of these players have outliers that drag their average down. The last five years of Dirk's career does that; the last three of Malone's; and the first two of Durant's. I've included modified averages for those players that omit those years.

The upshot is that Malone's average is behind everyone except Dirk, and using the modified averages for the two of them, they're very close. But some of these guys are ahead of Malone by significant margins.

Now, these are PLAYOFF RAPTORS for each season of each player's career, with career averages at the bottom:

Malone is in dead last, a full two points below his (unmodified) RS career average. Now, to be fair, others dropped to, but not as much. Stockton dropped by 0.3 points; Doc fell by 0.7 points; KD by 0.98 points(from his unmodified RS average); DRob fell by 1.4 points(but his RS average was nearly twice Malone's, so his PO average still four points above Malone). Barkley rose in the playoffs by 0.9 points, while Dirk rose 1.56 points(from his unmodified RS average, 0.5 points up from even his modified RS average), so while he and Malone were perhaps close in their modified RS averages, Dirk is 2.77 points above him in the playoffs.

You get the picture.

As another measure of looking at playoff performance, comparing each player's career average playoff TS with the league average over the duration of their careers, it looks like this:

KD: +5.1
Barkley: +4.8
Dirk: +4.3
Stockton: +3.6
Dr. J: +2.6
DRob: +1.6
Malone: -0.5

Now, let's talk about defense.

I'm just going to give you a complete string of all available D-RAPMs(from JE and Squared) in chronological order for a few of these players:

Barkley: -0.54,-2.00,-1.18,-2.22,0.04,-1.74,-2.64,-2.22
Malone: -2.36, -2.01, -2.56, 0.14, 0.14, -0.44,-1.42, -0.3, -1.85, -2.52, 0.27
Dirk: -0.92, -0.49, 2.40, 1.17, 2.41, 1.45, 2.17, 1.29, 0.88, 0.79, 0.89, 1.60, 2.67, 2.49, 2.21, 1.30, -0.3, 1.41, 0.22, -0.08, -1.00
Stockton: 1.33,1.15,1.23,-0.67,1.54,2.04,2.27,3.06,2.50,2.85,2.25

Dirk is positive 16 of 21 times, 1+ 12 times
Stockton is positive 10 of 11 times, 1+ all 10 times
Malone is positive 3 of 11 times, all just barely
Barkley is equally bad.

How about D-RAPTOR? Here's REGULAR SEASON D-RAPTOR:

Looking at this, DRob is way way ahead of everyone, Stockton and Dr.J are both 0.79/0.8 points ahead of Malone, and Malone is only 0.06 points ahead of Barkley. I will say, Dirk looks notably worse in D-RAPTOR than in D-RAPM, not sure what to make of that.

PLAYOFF D-RAPTOR:

Malone rises a tiny bit, by about 0.03 points, but still the the third lowest, ahead of only Dirk(who again D-RAPTOR doesn't seem to like) and KD, with DRob blowing everyone away. Barkley is a notable riser.

I've seen several people here insist that Malone was a good defender, a two-way player, etc, but the numbers do not seem to bare it out. I am open to the possibility that I am missing something, but I do not see it right now.

Now, let's look at RS efficiency

Career RS rTS averages over # of seasons:

Stockton: +7.6 over 19 seasons
KD: +7.4 over 15 seasons
Barkley: +6.9 over 16 seasons
DRob: +4.96 over 14 seasons
Malone: +4.3 over 19 seasons
Dirk: +3.96 over 20 seasons(I have omitted his final season, which was a huge -9.1 outlier; if I omitted seasons 19 and 20 too he would end up at 4.42, between DRob and Malone.)
Dr. J: +2.9 over 16 seasons

In this context, while Malone's +4.3 in 19 years is really good, there 4-5 players on this list alone that look better with a healthy amount of years.

A word about Malone and Stockton

They are perhaps the most inextricable duo in the history of the game. You say one of their names, you hear the other. They played 18 seasons together, and both were ironmen, rarely missing any games. There are little to no WOWY opportunities with them. It has always been difficult to parse one's impact from the other. Was Malone the scorer he was because of all those assists, or was Stockton the playmaker he was because he had Malone at the end of those assists?

The data we have shows Stockton measuring out higher than Malone time and again in multiple metrics. Now, Stockton is a notorious case of a player that a lot of people think impact metrics overrate, and I get that, but I don't think we ought to dismiss it completely either. There is a tendency to give Malone the lion's share of the credit for those Finals teams because he's the one that did the volume scoring and he's the won that won the MVP(twice).

I don't have an easy answer. I'm not advocating for inducting Stockton on the next vote because of those gaudy metrics, but I do think it's reason to take pause when considering Malone. Consider that Barkley was more efficient, in both RS and PO, on similar volume, without a Stockton feeding him. Consider that Stockton's defensive numbers are much better than Malone's across the board(and consider Mark Eaton's defensive impact in Malone's early years, and Greg Ostertag's good D-RAPMs during those Finals years[2.83,3.42]).

You can argue the other way by pointing at their 97-onward on/off numbers - +10.3 RS and +13.6 PO for Malone, +10.8 RS and +7.9 PO for Stockton. They're both good...Stockton with a small RS edge, and Malone with a considerable playoff edge. Does sample size matter - hundreds of RS games in that period vs a smaller amount of PO games?

Like I said, no easy answer.

What I do think, is that given the Malone/Stockton question, given that other players on this list are comparably efficient or more efficient scorers in both the regular season and the playoffs(everyone but Dr. J in the regular season, everyone in the playoffs), and some of them are measurably better defenders(based on the data I've presented anyway), namely Dirk and, to a much greater extent, DRob, given that a lot of the players discussed appear to have better impact profiles(RAPM but also in a lot of cases RAPTOR), and given that a lot of them have rings, I just remain unconvinced of the argument for Malone at this point other then longevity.

One_and_Done · Post #9 » by **One_and_Done** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:52 pm

Vote: D.Rob

Alternate: Dirk (because he's getting more traction than KD or Mailman)

Nominate: Dr J

Alternate nomination: Giannis

As I've outlined a fair bit, D.Rob has the highest peak of the remaining players, combining a GOAT level defensive player in his prime with a superb if slightly flawed offensive player. He's just so far above the remaining candidates in that respect, that I don't care about his longevity; he has "enough" longevity that I'm just not fussed. I do go back and forth between him, Dirk and Dr J. But only one of those other candidates is available to me here, and for now I'm sticking with D.Rob. 7

More on D.Rob:

Spoiler:

So who do I think we should nominate next. I’m torn between several candidates. First is KD, who would be my first choice for the reasons set out below. We now have nomination preferences so there's no reason not to just nominate KD every time until he gets in, with an alternate.

Spoiler:

As for Durant vs Kobe I don’t understand the argument for Kobe. Durant was a better scorer, better defender, and a better complementary piece who fit in more easily with others. His longevity is enough that any minor advantage Kobe has is negated.

Let’s just look at a peak to peak comparison to start with. Because KD has the consistency of a metronome (when he’s on the court), a number of different years can be advanced as his “peak”. But 2014 seems to have the strongest case. So let’s look at 2014 KD v.s 2008 Kobe (which is often advanced as Kobe’s best year).

KD: 41.8 pp 100, 9.6 rp 100, 7.2 ap 100, 123 Ortg, 104 Drtg, on an insane 635. TS%

Kobe: 36.5 pp 100, 8.1 rp 100, 6.9 ap 100, 115 Ortg, 106 Drtg, on 576. TS%

KD is better in literally every, single category, and not by a small margin. But let’s be fair to them and look at a bigger, more representative sample.

Here’s KD from 2010 to 2023, a 13 year stretch if we exclude 2020.

RS per 100: 38.2, 10, 6.3, 120 Ortg, 106 Drtg, on 631. TS%

PS per 100: 36.9, 9.8, 5.3, 115 Ortg, 108 Drtg 598. TS%

Kobe from 2000 to 2013:

RS per 100: 37.1, 7.6, 6.9, 112 Ortg, 105 Drtg, TS% 556.

PS per 100: 35.3, 6.9, 6.5, 110 Ortg, 106 Drtg, TS% 543.

So again, KD is basically beating him in every single category except for a trivial defensive rating difference, which could just be noise given how close it is and the sample size. He’s scoring more, and scoring more on insane efficiency. Even his assists are similar, despite Kobe’s supposed passing advantage (which FYI isn’t much of an advantage if you don’t like passing). The difference in Ortg is insane. KD is just cooking him.

On the defensive end KD is almost 7 feet tall with crazy long arms, so he can to a limited extent provide rim protection and switch on to bigger guys, all of which was key to his time on the Warriors. KD fits so much better than Kobe in so many situations, needing a lower usage and complementing other guys. KD was also misused to some degree in OKC, with it now being apparent in hindsight that Westbrook was not an optimal co-star for KD (to put it lightly). He often played with poor spacing in OKC, and thrived anyway.

But let’s turn to the one thing Kobe supporters can maybe argue, which is longevity. I don’t buy this, because KD has had enough longevity to score almost 27K points despite playing through several seasons cut short by COVID and lock outs, so at that point I’d say he has “enough” longevity that unless the person he’s being compared to is a comparably good player longevity isn’t enough to move the needle. But then I’m not even sure we can criticise KD’s longevity too much. Kobe has basically 12-13 healthy-ish, prime type seasons. His last few seasons were negative value add, and the early part of his career is mostly not adding too much. If we took out those years Kobe actually only has 28k+ points, so barely different to KD (who isn’t done yet either).

But what of KD? He was healthy from 2010 to 2014. That’s 5 prime seasons right there. 2016 healthy. That’s 6. 2017 and 2018 he was being rested and was out by design basically, I count those as healthy seasons. KD is up to 8 prime seasons. 2019? He was healthy all the way to the finals, then had an injury. I don’t dock him for that because it’s absurd. It would be rewarding guys like Kobe for getting bounced out in the first round, before they had a chance to injure themselves. That’s 9 prime seasons. In my mind that’s enough to overcome Kobe’s longevity easily. But I also feel KD added good value from 2021 to 2023. In those 3 seasons some of the games he missed were for rest, or due to reasons having nothing to do with injury; if he and the team were keen on him playing more, he could have. He was also healthy for the playoffs in 2021 and 2023 when it mattered (which is what he was being rested for).

I just don’t see what Kobe’s argument over KD would be. KD is just flat out better.

I’d also be interested in Karl Malone, who has more longevity than most if not all remaining candidates, and whose case v.s Kobe I discussed below. Moses Malone has a lot of longevity also, but I am doubtful about how his game would translate today. He feels like a player who was built for a different era, and that holds him back a little.

Spoiler:

Dr J seems to have peaked higher than Kobe, who has already been nominated, as I discuss below.

Spoiler:

There’s also D.Rob, who doesn’t have great longevity, but arguably has “enough” that it doesn’t matter. Giannis is another player in this category. Yeh, sure, Giannis only has 10 years in the league; but when Jordan first retired he only had 9 and people were already calling him one of the greatest ever. In today’s game would Jordan really be more impactful than Giannis? I have my doubts. Just comparing Giannis/D.Rob/Dirk/Kobe’s best seasons, here’s how they come out:

Giannis 2019-23 – 42.6 pp100, 17.6 rp100, 8.4 ap100, 120 Ortg/103 Drtg, 625 TS%

D.Rob (pre-Duncan) prime 90-96 – 33.9 pp100, 15.6 rp100, 4.1 ap100, 118 Ortg/97 Drtg, 592 TS%

Dirk (post-Nash) prime 2005-11 RS – 35.7 pp100, 12.1 rp100, 4.2 ap100, 119 Ortg/104 Drtg, 586 TS%.

Kobe (post-Shaq) prime 2006-10 RS – 39.2 pp100, 7.3 rp100, 6.6ap100, 114 Ortg/106 Drtg, 565 TS%

How about playoffs?

Giannis 19-23: 39 pp100, 17.8 rp100, 7.5 apg, 113 Ortg/ 102 Drtg 580 TS%

D.Rob 90-96: 31.6 pp100, 15.5 rp100, 3.9 ap100, 113 Ortg/101 Drtg 557 TS%

Dirk 05-11: 34.3 pp100, 13.3 rp100, 3.9 ap100, 119 Ortg/107 Drtg, 586 TS%

Kobe 06-10: 38.1 pp100, 7.3 rp100, 6.9 ap100, 114 Ortg/108 Drtg, 570 TS%

So the first observation is that Giannis is the best of the bunch and it’s not close. The only reason not to take him yet is if you don’t think he has “enough” longevity. He isn’t just a force offensively, he’s one of the best defensive players you could have in the modern era. Defense is something that’s hard to measure, but I think we can all agree D.Rob and Giannis are 2 of the best defensive players ever. Then on the other end they’d only need to be solid to be in discussion here. But they’re not just solid. Giannis is flat out better than the rest on offense, and while D.Rob is the “worst” of the 4 in the playoffs on O, he’s still close enough that I don’t know that the others have much of a case over him given his all-time defensive anchoring ability. If you’re taking Dirk or Kobe it’s got to be on longevity. Kobe looks the worst on balance by far. He’s 2nd of the group on volume scoring, but he does it by having bad efficiency which is probably part of why his TS% is the worst of anyone except playoffs D.Rob, and his Ortg is the worst of the bunch on balance (because regular season isn’t worthless, your performance there adds a lot of value). Then factor in this is literally Kobe’s very best stretch. If we’d run this from 00-10 for instance, he’d look so much worse (see above comparison with KD).

Dirk’s high end run in the 2011 playoffs is a level of impact neither D.Rob nor Kobe had during a singular playoff run, putting up 39.1 pp100, 11.5 rp100, 3.6 ap100 on 115 Ortg/105 Drtg, and 609 TS% while taking out Kobe’s Lakers, KD’s Thunder, and Blazers, and the first incarnation of the Heatles, is crazy impressive. Yeh, they’d have gone down to the 2012 Heatles once they balanced the team a little and figured out the line-ups to play, etc, but nobody expected them to win that year. They weren’t even supposed to beat the Lakers, and they ka-rushed them. Check out the stat-line of 32 year old Kobe v.s 32 year old Dirk. It’s not pretty. Kobe had 23.3 ppg, 3rpg, 2.5 apg on 519 TS%, v.s Dirk’s 25.3ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.5apg on an insane 673 TS%.

rk2023 · Post #10 » by **rk2023** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 6:08 pm

Robinson vs. Malone in three playoff series from 1994-98:

Robinson:
19.3-10.5-2.3-1.1-2.9 , 42.8% FG, 49.4% TS

Malone:
26.0-10.3-3.6-1.3-0.9 , 44.8% FG, 50.1% TS

The Net Rating from each series:
1994 - 110.6-101.1 in Utah's favor
1996 - 114.1-100.2 in Utah's favor
1998 - 101.8-101.5 in Utah's favor

Not that this is a Malone's career over Robinson's sort of "gotcha", but how the offensive rating(s) of San Antonio dropped around 9 or 10 points in the first two years and how the defensive rating(s) of San Antonio dropped around 6 and 9 points here does raise an eyebrows for me as the information stands. Some +/- and on-off (even with a small sample) could be of use to explain if San Antonio fell apart sans Robinson (they sure did without him, as a whole) but I think some of the questions posted by drza in an earlier post here ought to garner a fair share of consideration before a fair share looks to enshrine him as the 16th greatest career in league history.

lessthanjake · Post #11 » by **lessthanjake** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 6:56 pm

Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:Vote for #16: David Robinson
Alternate Vote: Karl Malone
Nomination: Moses Malone
Alternate Nomination: Nikola Jokic

I’m very torn between David Robinson and Karl Malone. I wrote about this in the last thread. Basically, I think David Robinson looks superior in terms of impact, while Karl Malone has a very substantial longevity edge. David Robinson also has an edge in team achievements—having actually won two titles (though I only really put much value on one of them).

In the last thread, I went for Karl Malone above David Robinson for the alternate vote slot. But it was very close. I’m flip-flopping here. The reason is a tiny one, but a tiny reason can change a really close call: Squared posted a ton of plus/minus data for David Robinson for 1990-1991, and Robinson had around a +14 on-off in those games (https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107977605#p107977605). It’s only around half the season, but it does go to a lingering question I had—which was whether the impact data we have for prime Robinson is really unrepresentative because it is from his best years. This data for 1990-1991 is not quite as high as his peak years, but it still looks really good! This gives me a bit more confidence in Robinson’s impact edge, which tips the balance for me here. .

And yet, Dirk has 3 seasons [2001, 2003 and 2011] where he clearly surpasses +14 On-Off [+17.7, +20.4 and +16.0] while having multiple prime years right in-line with this [2005, 2007 and 2008 at +13.4, +12.5 and +11.8 respectively].

Dirk also has prime seasons that are much lower, such that we know that prime Dirk had an on-off of about +12 (and substantially lower than that if we looked at playoffs as well). I guess with Robinson the 1998 and 1999 data point might still be considered his prime and it wasn’t that high, but the pre-injury stuff is all super high (albeit we don’t have full data, which is why getting half of one more year mattered to me for these purposes). I also think we have to remember that Robinson also is #1 all time in WOWYR. Overall, there’s a lot of uncertainty with older impact data, but I think it at least looks like prime Robinson’s impact was likely higher than prime Dirk’s. Of course, Dirk had more longevity, so that has to play into things, and Dirk also has a title as the best player.

Honestly, though, I just kind of have an unwillingness to vote Dirk this high, based on having been around and watching basketball when he played. I just never regarded him as even close to the best player in the world (even when he won the MVP and/or when he won a title), which makes it really difficult for me to justify voting for him at #16. Robinson wasn’t really ever the best player in the world either, but he felt a lot closer to it to me than Dirk ever did. I know that’s largely just a vibes-based thing. But to put a bit of meat on the bones here, Robinson was top 3 in MVP voting in 5 years in a 6-year span, while Dirk was only even top 5 in MVP voting three times (all in a row, though, so there was a consistent little span there). Now, to be clear, I’m not basing my vote on that fact. Rather, I’m just using it to illustrate that I don’t think my vibes about Dirk were idiosyncratic. I just think the esteem that Dirk and David Robinson were held in when they played in their primes was not really the same.

Colbinii · Post #12 » by **Colbinii** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 6:59 pm

lessthanjake wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:Vote for #16: David Robinson
Alternate Vote: Karl Malone
Nomination: Moses Malone
Alternate Nomination: Nikola Jokic

I’m very torn between David Robinson and Karl Malone. I wrote about this in the last thread. Basically, I think David Robinson looks superior in terms of impact, while Karl Malone has a very substantial longevity edge. David Robinson also has an edge in team achievements—having actually won two titles (though I only really put much value on one of them).

In the last thread, I went for Karl Malone above David Robinson for the alternate vote slot. But it was very close. I’m flip-flopping here. The reason is a tiny one, but a tiny reason can change a really close call: Squared posted a ton of plus/minus data for David Robinson for 1990-1991, and Robinson had around a +14 on-off in those games (https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107977605#p107977605). It’s only around half the season, but it does go to a lingering question I had—which was whether the impact data we have for prime Robinson is really unrepresentative because it is from his best years. This data for 1990-1991 is not quite as high as his peak years, but it still looks really good! This gives me a bit more confidence in Robinson’s impact edge, which tips the balance for me here. .

And yet, Dirk has 3 seasons [2001, 2003 and 2011] where he clearly surpasses +14 On-Off [+17.7, +20.4 and +16.0] while having multiple prime years right in-line with this [2005, 2007 and 2008 at +13.4, +12.5 and +11.8 respectively].

Dirk also has prime seasons that are much lower, such that we know that prime Dirk had an on-off of about +12 (and substantially lower than that if we looked at playoffs as well). I guess with Robinson the 1998 and 1999 data point might still be considered his prime and it wasn’t that high, but the pre-injury stuff is all super high (albeit we don’t have full data, which is why getting half of one more year mattered to me for these purposes). I also think we have to remember that Robinson also is #1 all time in WOWYR.

That is because the 1997 team blatantly tanked due to the injury to Robinson. It is no different than using 2011 Cleveland Cavaliers for WOWY for LeBron--but we don't do that :wink:

1998 was certainly still Robinson's prime--unless you are trying to say that 7 years of Prime Robinson is better than 11 years of Prime Dirk--which is absolutely baffling to me.

Post #13 » by **trex_8063** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:01 pm

(small edits from prior thread applied)

VOTE: Karl Malone
Alternate: David Robinson

The recent emergence of Malone as a candidate totally changed my top vote. I have him #13 on my personal list, and am thinking of moving him up to #12, displacing Larry Bird believe it or not. But in the 13 years of '89-'01, Malone had a 25.8 PER, .235 WS/48, and +6.5 BPM [for 13 f***ing years!], while playing the equivalent of 1.5 seasons more than Bird did in his entire career. And Malone has other value-adding years ('87, '88, '02-'04 [he's even an All-Star level player some of these]).

Playoff drop-off is a concern, though in that same 13-year span he was a 23.1 PER, .162 WS/48, +5.4 BPM (in >40 mpg) in the playoffs. That's still a pretty substantial player.
Did I mention the guy missed 6 games total in those 13 years (rs + ps)?
He was 2nd in the league in rs AuPM in '94, 5th in '95 and '96, 14th in NPI RAPM in '97 (that includes playoffs), 8th in PI RAPM in '98, 16th in '99, 19th in '00. So his impact profile lags slightly behind his box-based profile......but only slightly.

And if the reffing gaffs I'd previously mentioned didn't occur, and Karl Malone had a title and FMVP in '98 (not a sure-thing, but a better than coin-flip chance)........not a single poster would blink at me for putting him in the top 15 (or the top 12), even if his playoff performances were exactly the same.
In fact, I'm semi-confident in saying he would not still be on the table at this point if those things had happened, despite how many claim team results do not play a lot into their thinking.

Seriously, putting a.....
*2-time MVP (8th all-time in total shares)
*who is 2nd all-time in career rs pts (8th all-time in playoffs)
*and 8th all-time in career rs reb (7th all-time in playoffs)
*a PF who's primarily known as a scorer, but who's also 61st all-time in rs assists (44th all-time in playoffs), and made 3 All-D teams
*and who won a title as the best player, winning FMVP.....

....putting him #12-15? Madness!!!

I don't want to get into his personal life or how well you like the guy (and yes, I'd speculate those things leave a small imprint on his ranking for some, too). I don't like him either.
And while there have been cautions about not telling others what this list is or isn't, I'm fairly certain how much we personally do or do not "like" a guy is not intended to be a component of criteria.
The guy was really good at basketball, for a really long time, and almost never missed any games until his 19th and final season. That's the consideration that matters.

DRob had a super-high peak and was still a solid contributor (I'd gauge him as at least sub All-Star) in his final season: thirteen healthy seasons [not counting '97], having come into the league a superstar [solid All-NBA level] player and never declining below Sub All-Star (and peaking somewhere between MVP and "All-Time Tier")......it amounts to a lot of career value, even without the extended prime that Nowitzki or Malone had.

For any who did not see much of Robinson, he was an athletic freak, sort of like a 7'1" version of Giannis Antetokounmpo: similar [I think] wingspan, fast in the open court, could elevate quickly off the ground, strong upper body. Not quite as lithe and agile as Giannis [to my eye, anyway], but then he was 2" taller in the balance. Just a phenomenal athletic specimen.

He combined that with good defensive instincts and timing, decent mid-range and FT shooting, a fair/decent BBIQ (he wasn't a savaant, but he wasn't Dwight Howard either) which helped translate into very solid big-man ball-control (despite consistently facing doubles/triples constantly in his prime).

While I know few people here agree, I'm of the opinion that he peaked marginally higher than Hakeem defensively, while also being a helluva good offensive player. This was, after all, a guy who once led the league in scoring on very good shooting efficiency and turnover economy, while simultaneously averaging a team-best 4.8 apg and anchoring the 4th-rated offense (again: facing double-teams/triple-teams A LOT; that's where most of the assists came, in fact).

He was doing that while being in the conversation as the best defensive player in the league......a league containing prime/peak versions of Hakeem, Mutombo, and Ewing. Seriously think about that.

It's a narrative thing, but I'll say it again: the Spurs circa mid-90s were asking of Robinson---nay, requiring of Robinson [in order to succeed]---to be Michael Jordan on offense AND Bill Russell on defense.
And the guy was so f***ing phenomenal, that he damn near pulled it off........in the regular season.

Therein lies the [small] catch. While I'm of the opinion that his defensive value mostly held up in the ps, his offensive value did not. He fell from being a "diet Jordan" level offensive talent in the rs to being more, idk..........something notably less than that (can't think of a good comp; Dan Issell, maybe) in the ps. And sadly, the Spurs just never had the offensive talent around him to adequately pick up the slack. Sean Elliott [not there until '95], Avery Johnson [gone in '94], an aging Dale Ellis [gone by '95] and Dennis Rodman [for his offensive rebounding] were the best offensive talents he was ever surrounded by (note two weren't there in '94, the season I've referenced above).

I still believe if Rodman had not gone supernova toxic in the '95 playoffs (and I'm sorry, I refuse to hold Robinson accountable for another man's bull****), and had, you know......actually played any defense on Robert Horry (the principle thing his reputation would have you expect of him), then the Spurs may have won that series, and we'd have an entirely different perception of Robinson (and Hakeem, for that matter).
Or alternately, Rodman can still be a dink, and the perimeter core doesn't wet the bed from behind the arc, maybe the Spurs still win the series.
I know I know: if "if's" and "buts" were candy and nuts.......
Gosh, there are so many little contextual twists and turns and elements of chance in the NBA's history, though. Truly.

Robinson shapes out as one of the very best of his generation in the impact metrics we have (rs AuPM ['94-'96], RAPM ['97 onward]), despite very little of that falling in his prime:

'94: 1st in league [by silly margin: +1.5 over 2nd place (K.Malone)]
'95: 1st in league [by even sillier margin: +2.8 over 2nd place (S.Pippen)]
'96: 1st in league [+0.2 over returned Michael Jordan]
**Honestly, I think you could make an argument that David Robinson, peri-peak, was the regular season GOAT.

PI RAPM [playoffs included] after returning from injury (and well into his 30s, fwiw):
'98: 23rd
'99: 3rd (1st in NPI, fwiw)
'00: 4th
Remained top 10 in '01 [NPI], still top 20 in '02, bounces back to fringe top-10 in '03 [more limited minutes].

He was a beast, plain and simple. Lot of accumulated value during his span, imo.

Nomination #1: Chris Paul
Alt. Nomination: Julius Erving

lessthanjake · Post #14 » by **lessthanjake** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:05 pm

Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
And yet, Dirk has 3 seasons [2001, 2003 and 2011] where he clearly surpasses +14 On-Off [+17.7, +20.4 and +16.0] while having multiple prime years right in-line with this [2005, 2007 and 2008 at +13.4, +12.5 and +11.8 respectively].

Dirk also has prime seasons that are much lower, such that we know that prime Dirk had an on-off of about +12 (and substantially lower than that if we looked at playoffs as well). I guess with Robinson the 1998 and 1999 data point might still be considered his prime and it wasn’t that high, but the pre-injury stuff is all super high (albeit we don’t have full data, which is why getting half of one more year mattered to me for these purposes). I also think we have to remember that Robinson also is #1 all time in WOWYR.

That is because the 1997 team blatantly tanked due to the injury to Robinson. It is no different than using 2011 Cleveland Cavaliers for WOWY for LeBron--but we don't do that

1998 was certainly still Robinson's prime--unless you are trying to say that 7 years of Prime Robinson is better than 11 years of Prime Dirk--which is absolutely baffling to me.

I kind of do actually think that 7 years of prime Robinson may be better than 11 years of prime Dirk. I don’t really have them in the same tier of player to be honest. Again, to me Dirk was just never even close to being the best player in the NBA. I always just thought of him as a top 5-10 guy. And I put a lot more value on years as a top 3 guy than years as a top 5-10 guy.

Am not really sure how to deal with 1998 and 1999 for Robinson to be honest. I simultaneously think he was noticeably declined from before, but also that he was still one of the league’s best players (he was perhaps a top 5-10 guy himself at that point). It holds value to me, but I see it as distinct from the earlier years.

Colbinii · Post #15 » by **Colbinii** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:07 pm

This spot is really a Dirk vs Robinson, heavy weight duel. While many comparisons favor one or the other [David Robinson's Box-Score composites place him firmly in the Top 10, for example], I would instead like to focus more on Playoff Scoring Resiliency.

For Playoff Scoring Resiliency, The Great Ty 4191 along with 70sFan have compiled most of this information.

David Robinson (1990-98):

RS: 37.4 mpg, 11.6 rpg,3.0 apg, 2.9 tov, 25.1 ppg on 52.4% FG, 74.5% FT and 59.1% TS (+5.61% rTS)
Against Bad Defenses (12.90% of playoffs games): 38.8 mpg, 12.7 rpg, 2.5 apg, 3.1 tov, 27.9 ppg on 60.6% FG, 85.1% FT and 67.8% TS (13.96% rTS)
Against Average Defenses (56.54% of playoffs games): 39.4 mpg, 11.6 rpg, 2.8 apg, 3.1 tov, 23.6 ppg on 46.4% FG, 71.8% FT, 53.8% TS (-0.04% rTS)
Against Good Defenses (30.65% of playoffs games): 39.4 mpg, 12.8 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2.4 tov, 21.0 ppg on 45.9% FG, 64.8% FT and 51.7% TS (-1.54% rTS)
Against Elite Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --
Against All-Time Great Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --

The first thing that comes to mind is Robinson crushed bad defense and struggled against Average and Good Defense. The 2nd thing is he never, ever, faced Elite or ATG defenses. We can assume from this data that he would have struggled mightily, considering his struggled against Average-to-Good defenses.

Dirk Nowitzki (2001-11):

RS: 37.4 mpg, 8.8 rpg, 2.8 apg, 2.0 tov, 24.3 ppg on 47.9% FG, 38.5% 3FG, 88.2% FT and 58.6% TS (+5.43% rTS)
Against Bad Defenses (4.03% of playoffs games): 42.4 mpg, 11.8 rpg, 1.4 apg, 1.2 tov, 26.6 ppg on 45.0% FG, 46.7% 3FG, 85.7% FT and 56.1% TS (+4.53% rTS)
Against Average Defenses (48.39% of playoffs games): 41.7 mpg, 10.4 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.5 tov, 27.4 ppg on 46.7% FG, 39.1% 3FG, 88.4% FT, 59.4% TS (+6.08% rTS)
Against Good Defenses (19.35% of playoffs games): 40.6 mpg, 9.8 rpg, 2.6 apg, 2.5 tov, 25.8 ppg on 46.8% FG, 45.9% 3FG 94.5% FT and 57.8% TS (+4.38% rTS)
Against Elite Defenses (28.23% of playoffs games): 41.1 mpg, 10.6 rpg, 2.6 apg, 2.0 tov, 23.4 ppg on 45.5% FG, 29.3% 3FG, 88.4% FT and 57.4% TS (+4.41% rTS)
Against All-Time Great Defenses (0.00% of playoffs games): --

What a resilient chart. It literally didn't matter what type of defenses Dirk faced--he fared around +4 rTS% against all defenses--Bad, Average or Elite. To tie this in, I would like to show Dirk's Regular Season, On-Court Ortg over this span.

https://ibb.co/1vDV2zw

What you can see is Dirk's Regression line is perfectly linear--regardless of the defense faced, teammates, coaches, ect. This very well could be the most resilient scorer in NBA history. This has resulted in Great Offenses countless times over an 11-year sample.

I just can't justify a player like Robinson, playing in the 1990s and being less resilient than guys like KG, Hakeem and Ewing, to be ahead of Dirk.

1. Dirk Nowitzki
Nominate: Chris Paul

Colbinii · Post #16 » by **Colbinii** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:09 pm

lessthanjake wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:
Dirk also has prime seasons that are much lower, such that we know that prime Dirk had an on-off of about +12 (and substantially lower than that if we looked at playoffs as well). I guess with Robinson the 1998 and 1999 data point might still be considered his prime and it wasn’t that high, but the pre-injury stuff is all super high (albeit we don’t have full data, which is why getting half of one more year mattered to me for these purposes). I also think we have to remember that Robinson also is #1 all time in WOWYR.

That is because the 1997 team blatantly tanked due to the injury to Robinson. It is no different than using 2011 Cleveland Cavaliers for WOWY for LeBron--but we don't do that

1998 was certainly still Robinson's prime--unless you are trying to say that 7 years of Prime Robinson is better than 11 years of Prime Dirk--which is absolutely baffling to me.

I kind of do actually think that 7 years of prime Robinson may be better than 11 years of prime Dirk. I don’t really have them in the same tier of player to be honest. Again, to me Dirk was just never even close to being the best player in the NBA. I always just thought of him as a top 5-10 guy. And I put a lot more value on years as a top 3 guy than years as a top 5-10 guy.

Am not really sure how to deal with 1998 and 1999 for Robinson to be honest. I simultaneously think he was noticeably declined from before, but also that he was still one of the league’s best players (he was perhaps a top 5-10 guy himself at that point). It holds value to me, but I see it as distinct from the earlier years.

If your goal is to win championships, Dirk got significantly further and closer as the #1 option compared to Robinson as the #1 option.

lessthanjake · Post #17 » by **lessthanjake** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:12 pm

Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
That is because the 1997 team blatantly tanked due to the injury to Robinson. It is no different than using 2011 Cleveland Cavaliers for WOWY for LeBron--but we don't do that

1998 was certainly still Robinson's prime--unless you are trying to say that 7 years of Prime Robinson is better than 11 years of Prime Dirk--which is absolutely baffling to me.

I kind of do actually think that 7 years of prime Robinson may be better than 11 years of prime Dirk. I don’t really have them in the same tier of player to be honest. Again, to me Dirk was just never even close to being the best player in the NBA. I always just thought of him as a top 5-10 guy. And I put a lot more value on years as a top 3 guy than years as a top 5-10 guy.

Am not really sure how to deal with 1998 and 1999 for Robinson to be honest. I simultaneously think he was noticeably declined from before, but also that he was still one of the league’s best players (he was perhaps a top 5-10 guy himself at that point). It holds value to me, but I see it as distinct from the earlier years.

If your goal is to win championships, Dirk got significantly further and closer as the #1 option compared to Robinson as the #1 option.

Yeah, sure, and I do value that, since team success matters to me on its own. But, mitigating that a good deal, I do also think Dirk had clearly better teams, while Robinson was dragging teams that were awful to 50-60 win records.

Owly · Post #18 » by **Owly** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:15 pm

rk2023 wrote:Robinson vs. Malone in three playoff series from 1994-98:

Robinson:
19.3-10.5-2.3-1.1-2.9 , 42.8% FG, 49.4% TS

Malone:
26.0-10.3-3.6-1.3-0.9 , 44.8% FG, 50.1% TS

The Net Rating from each series:
1994 - 110.6-101.1 in Utah's favor
1996 - 114.1-100.2 in Utah's favor
1998 - 101.8-101.5 in Utah's favor

Not that this is a Malone's career over Robinson's sort of "gotcha", but how the offensive rating(s) of San Antonio dropped around 9 or 10 points in the first two years and how the defensive rating(s) of San Antonio dropped around 6 and 9 points here does raise an eyebrows for me as the information stands. Some +/- and on-off (even with a small sample) could be of use to explain if San Antonio fell apart sans Robinson (they sure did without him, as a whole) but I think some of the questions posted by drza in an earlier post here ought to garner a fair share of consideration before a fair share looks to enshrine him as the 16th greatest career in league history.

Have raised this in other contexts and partially its a function of prizing this small sample (and it's a bit ad hoc for me anyhow) but I'm not convinced of the virtue of celebrating the Jazz's free throw defense. Put Robinson at his RS norm for the 94-98 span (.754) to the nearest whole basket made (.7537) and he generates an extra 14 points at the line (101 rather than 87) and he's at 0.517570144 or 51.8 if rounded as above. Malone's may also rise looking at the second two series numbers, but am focusing on DR as it appears the case is more against him (than for Malone). It also nets him almost 1 extra point per game (14pts over 15 games).

Colbinii · Post #19 » by **Colbinii** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:17 pm

lessthanjake wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
lessthanjake wrote:
I kind of do actually think that 7 years of prime Robinson may be better than 11 years of prime Dirk. I don’t really have them in the same tier of player to be honest. Again, to me Dirk was just never even close to being the best player in the NBA. I always just thought of him as a top 5-10 guy. And I put a lot more value on years as a top 3 guy than years as a top 5-10 guy.

Am not really sure how to deal with 1998 and 1999 for Robinson to be honest. I simultaneously think he was noticeably declined from before, but also that he was still one of the league’s best players (he was perhaps a top 5-10 guy himself at that point). It holds value to me, but I see it as distinct from the earlier years.

If your goal is to win championships, Dirk got significantly further and closer as the #1 option compared to Robinson as the #1 option.

Yeah, sure, and I do value that, since team success matters to me on its own. But, mitigating that a good deal, I do also think Dirk had clearly better teams, while Robinson was dragging teams that were awful to 50-60 win records.

But we already agreed the +/- and On/Off says the players were similar :crazy:

So now we are talking in circles.

Can you provide evidence--statistical evidence-- which showed Dirk having clearly better teams while Robinson was dragging teams that were awful to 50-60 wins.

But, let's also not forget, this isn't just team success--Dirk is, without a doubt, a significantly better scorer and offensive player--regardless of teammates.

trelos6 · Post #20 » by **trelos6** » Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:23 pm

16. David Robinson. He came into the league playing MVP level basketball. The thumb injury set him back for a season, before he exploded in 1994 for what is a fantastic 3 year stretch. This was borderline all time level quality he produced.

Taking this from Ben Taylor’s back picks, D Rob is a small step below 00-02 Shaq on the offensive end regular season.

He did drop all his efficiency in the post season,

But that graph is comparing him to 4 guys already inducted into our top 10, another who’s been nominated and one soon to come. His teams were still ok on offence. Posting +4.1, +3.5, +2.5 rOrtg in the playoffs.

Now all that is on offense. David Robinson was arguably a top 5 player in NBA history on D.

After his back and foot injury in 1997, he came back and was still valuable defensively, and alongside Duncan, the Spurs were one of the best defensive teams of all time.

Looking at my big board:

I’m going with 17. George Mikan. The game has changed a lot over the years. It’s nigh impossible to compare a player like Mikan to a player like Steph Curry, thus we must compare them to their own era’s.

And Mikan dominated his era. I think 17 feels about right. There are players above who had long illustrious careers. Once we leave Mikan behind, there are only a one who reached such heights, and that is Jokic for me (who still needs more longevity, but should be considered around the 22-30 spot).

Nominations.

1. Giannis Antentokounmpo
2. Chris Paul