2024 Retro Player of the Year Project UPDATE [Discussion Thread]

[B-Mitch 30]

Would Enigma mind extending the discussion time for 1992-1993 when we get to it? I recently bought a few of Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bibles, which are the best contemporary stat books for this period (they even include true shooting percentage!).

[AEnigma]

Would Enigma mind extending the discussion time for 1992-1993 when we get to it? I recently bought a few of Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bibles, which are the best contemporary stat books for this period (they even include true shooting percentage!).

Sure. Discussion will extend an extra day into Monday.

Could we make Lebronnygoat a voter?

With six in support and none opposed, Lebronnygoat is admitted. Will define the standards for any future interested parties shortly, based on how many threads of participation he had prior to admittance.

EDIT: For future interested parties, the standard to request late admittance is at least seven threads of involved participation in discussion of that year pre-tally, by which I mean offering thoughts on the players and their season and engaging with the thoughts of others on average at least twice per thread before I close voting (because otherwise someone could just make a quick series of post-hoc contributions; the intent here is to show real commitment to the project).

[B-Mitch 30]

Sure. Discussion will extend an extra day into Monday.

I hate to do this, but could you extend this deadline by 6-8 hours? The book I mentioned getting has finally reached my post office, but it's too late for it to be delivered today, and tomorrow is obviously Sunday.

[1993Playoffs]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

[OhayoKD]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

[Cavsfansince84]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

Ya, I think what happened since the late 90's is that a narrative gained traction that MJ actually should have won every mvp from 88-93 and that this thinking should also carry over to a project such as this which is debating poy while including playoffs. So I think there's a lot of bb fans who probably would name him as poy from 88-93 and 96-98(which is how the voting went in the 2010 project) and might feel like people who don't agree are kind of biased against him. So it is what it is. I'm sure him not winning the 88 or 89 votes and possibly not winning 1993 is going to cause some rankling but I think it might be time to admit that his case outside of 90-92 or 96-98(though Malone might get a few votes) isn't that ironclad.

[One_and_Done]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

A handful of posters are generating most of the text tbh.

[1993Playoffs]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

Ya, I think what happened since the late 90's is that a narrative gained traction that MJ actually should have won every mvp from 88-93 and that this thinking should also carry over to a project such as this which is debating poy while including playoffs. So I think there's a lot of bb fans who probably would name him as poy from 88-93 and 96-98(which is how the voting went in the 2010 retro poy project) and might feel like people who don't agree are kind of biased against him. So it is what it is. I'm sure him not winning the 88 or 89 votes and possibly not winning 1993 is going to cause some rankling but I think it might be time to admit that his case outside of 90-92 or 96-98(though Malone might get a few votes) isn't that ironclad.

Do you personally think MJ was the best during that 88-93 stretch? I can definitely get behind Magic being a better offensive player even in 91 but overall eh. I don’t really get the Ewing votes tbh lol.

[Bidofo]

I've been peeking my head in the RPOY threads and the discussion has been...interesting to say the least . Though I do have some bystander thoughts:

a) What was the ruling on the Kola 'proxy' votes? I think this was legislated but I may have missed it. Why exactly are proxy votes allowed? Probably most would agree that the fundamental goal of a project like this is to spur discussion, challenge each others beliefs, and come away with something new. How does a proxy vote from someone who cannot even defend their position facilitate that? I'm aware a lot of ballots come away uncriticized, but at least someone can engage with those ballots and hope for a response. Is someone going to relay any comments on Kola's ballots back to him/her?

I'll also add that it doesn't help that Kola's ballots, at least from the recent threads, are...slightly biased to say the least. It's one thing for Jordan to have uniquely backhanded ball techniques like "Cursed Chucker" and "Gifted Gambler". Sure, I can see a way to interpret those as positives I guess. But his baller vow ("In exchange for a fake DPOY, Jordan can only win playoff games with Pippen") isn't even in the same format as those of other players! As I understand it, the first part of the vow is supposed to be a positive or redeemable attribute. Compare it to Hakeem's ("In exchange for dominating Micheal Jordan in Baller-Battles, Hakeem may never face MJ in a battle that matters") where there's a clear positive (vs Jordan nonetheless ) or Barkley's ("In exchange for being the funniest sorcerer, Barkley must attempt and miss 1500 long-range attacks or swear off McNuggets") where it's just a joke at no expense of the player, and the difference is clear imo. Those baller vows aren't even necessarily specific to the specific year in question, though maybe I don't understand 'baller vows' then. I could just be reading into it though, so I'm curious about other opinions.

b) There's been a lot of discussion about the validity of some of the tracking data. Fwiw, while there may be issues of subjectivity involved, I would support those using their own tracking to color their perception of a RPOY race. Selecting a top 5 is a subjective endeavor itself. However, I don't see how tracking data for one individual is enough to compare with another individual without the same tracking data. For instance, in some of the Magic vs Jordan threads, I've seen ballots use disappointing tracking data of Jordan's defense to knock him down, but how can that be sufficient without the corresponding tracking data of Magic's defense, which by all accounts was quite bad towards the end of the 80s? It just seems to me like an inadequate amount of data to make conclusions with. I know the retort to that may be "Well, go through the tracking data and see where you disagree or do your own" but 1) not everyone has the time to do that of course, but 2) I think the burden of proof is on the creator of tracking data to back their conclusions! For instance, in the context of say scientific papers, it doesn't take just one piece of research to prove a hypothesis and have it be accepted, but it should be replicable many times over and probably by different people. As of right now, I'd have to say that the data is incredibly limited. And honestly it's a bit frustrating when other ballots take the tracking data as wholehearted fact without a skeptic eye.

I know this all sounds like a Jordan fan upset with the results, but trust me I'm far from a Jordan fan lol. I'm coming at this with an open mind. It just seems like to me there's a lot of bickering about what's the 'truth' and the best way to come about it. Idk, just some food for thought, not like I'm active in the project. Call me a whiny leech if you must

[Cavsfansince84]

Do you personally think MJ was the best during that 88-93 stretch? I can definitely get behind Magic being a better offensive player even in 91 but overall eh. I don’t really get the Ewing votes tbh lol.

I think if I voted I'd probably have Magic ahead in 88. 89 is close, I can't say which way I'd go off the top of my head. MJ's Det series isn't that good. 93 I'm not sure either. It's almost a coin flip to me. I'd need to get a better sense of how I feel about MJ's defense in 93 before I voted.

[OhayoKD]

I've been peeking my head in the RPOY threads and the discussion has been...interesting to say the least . Though I do have some bystander thoughts:

a) What was the ruling on the Kola 'proxy' votes? I think this was legislated but I may have missed it

It was legislated here:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=114998176#p114998176
TLDR is Kola had their computer and phone both nearly died, and in case they died for real for real, asked enigma for permission before hand if they could submit ballots in advance. They got approval. submitted 9 ballots, and then the votes were falsely reported as bait. Voters overwhelmingly supported their ballots being counted, and so it was decided they would be. Similar courtesy was also extended towards eminence and mcbubbles, the latter using it for the 1986 thread.

For instance, in the context of say scientific papers,

In the context of "scientific papers" bbr box-score, all-in-ones, box-stats, wowyr and it's variants, and wildly incomplete rapm data would not be treated as meaningful evidence in most usage, but that hasn't stopped people from saying things like "patrick ewing was a 20 +3" or certain voters form just spamming all-in-ones again and again as the primary justification for their votes. Tracking gets some weighting here mostly due to a lack of evidence either way, and to the degree it is weighed, they are typically complimented by cold data. If arch-angel Jordan did not achieve vastly inferior results than the likes of point-Lebron or Magic(as well as smaller deltas in general), I imagine much less weight would be put on tracking suggesting creation is oversold by his assists.

As is, I've made a point of caveating concluions from these things with terms as "plausible" and in the case of Bird the tracking has come from several sources with no real counterpoints. I can't speak for others, but I only plan to consider these things as evidence when the data is even-ish or favoring a player my interpretations support(or in the total absence of evidence i guess)

[lessthanjake]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

I think you’re referring largely to me engaging a lot more in recent threads, and the actual reason has nothing to do with how prior votes have gone (again, if I cared about that, I would be a voter!), but rather is that I went from being quite busy with work to not having much work on my plate for a bit. Not everything is about what you think it is.

[OhayoKD]

Not super surprised that 1993 is the most active discussion

It’s probably the first season where basketball junkies like us can say prime MJ isn’t even the best player in the league anymore

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

I think you’re referring largely to me engaging a lot more in recent threads, and the actual reason has nothing to do with how prior votes have gone (again, if I cared about that, I would be a voter!), but rather is that I went from being quite busy with work to not having much work on my plate for a bit. Not everything is about what you think it is.

No, I'm referring to 3 posters who never posted in the project posting during the 91 thread and then an additional 4 joining in in the 93 thread. Your first post came in the 89 thread. The commentary revolving around Jordan's voting performance seems to suggest that was the principle motivator.

To be expected I guess. I do find it surprising there wasn't similar commentary on Bird losing in 86

[lessthanjake]

I don't know if that's the cause. 88 and 89 weren't particularly active threads despite Jordan losing. I think the activity is mostly from a bloc that got interested in the project after Magic gave Jordan a bit of a scare in 91.

I think you’re referring largely to me engaging a lot more in recent threads, and the actual reason has nothing to do with how prior votes have gone (again, if I cared about that, I would be a voter!), but rather is that I went from being quite busy with work to not having much work on my plate for a bit. Not everything is about what you think it is.

No, I'm referring to 3 posters who never posted in the project posting during the 91 thread and then an additional 4 joining in in the 93 thread. Your first post came in the 89 thread. The commentary revolving around Jordan's voting performance seems to suggest that was the principle motivator.

To be expected I guess. I do find it surprising there wasn't similar commentary on Bird losing in 86

Trust me, if I’d been paying attention to RealGM when the 1986 thread came along, I’d have definitely made some commentary about it. I only realized what happened there when I posted that I figured the 1989 thread was probably the first time a unanimous 2010-project winner lost, but then checked to see if that was true and found out it had actually already happened with 1986. I definitely strongly disagree with the result of that vote.

[Djoker]

Just for the record, there are three results so far I strongly disagree with.

1964 - Just think Wilt was better here. Russell's offense was non-existent in the PS that even with a major defensive edge, I don't see how he's even close to Wilt as an overall player this season. Mind you I voted for Russell in many other years but this is WIlt's arguable peak against a clearly bad offensive PS by Russell.

1986 - Peak Bird to me is flat out better than second year Hakeem. Way better offensive player, more refined, and led an all-time great team to a title as well. Hakeem wasn't even better than Bird in the Finals.

1993 - I just don't see the signals for Hakeem being as good as Jordan. Virtually none of the data supports it. If you're very high on big man impact because of defense you can make a case but you also have to be low on accomplishments. Because MJ led the weakest Bulls cast in the decade to a title while Hakeem lost to a team that lost to a team that lost to the Bulls. Someone like 70sFan I get his vote and it's 100% justified because he's very high on bigs in general. I think his top 3 peaks are all bigs (Kareem, Wilt and Duncan?) if I remember right and then after them Jordan and Lebron.

There were quite a few other years where I preferred other candidates but I could certainly see strong arguments for the other side. But these three I struggle to see how the voting turned out the way it did.

[One_and_Done]

I also disagree with some of the results, but I'll save my takeaways from this project till after it concludes.

[AEnigma]

Just for the record, there are three results so far I strongly disagree with.

1964 - Just think Wilt was better here. Russell's offense was non-existent in the PS that even with a major defensive edge, I don't see how he's even close to Wilt as an overall player this season. Mind you I voted for Russell in many other years but this is WIlt's arguable peak against a clearly bad offensive PS by Russell.

1986 - Peak Bird to me is flat out better than second year Hakeem. Way better offensive player, more refined, and led an all-time great team to a title as well. Hakeem wasn't even better than Bird in the Finals.

1993 - I just don't see the signals for Hakeem being as good as Jordan. Virtually none of the data supports it. If you're very high on big man impact because of defense you can make a case but you also have to be low on accomplishments. Because MJ led the weakest Bulls cast in the decade to a title while Hakeem lost to a team that lost to a team that lost to the Bulls. Someone like 70sFan I get his vote and it's 100% justified because he's very high on bigs in general. I think his top 3 peaks are all bigs (Kareem, Wilt and Duncan?) if I remember right and then after them Jordan and Lebron.

There were quite a few other years where I preferred other candidates but I could certainly see strong arguments for the other side. But these three I struggle to see how the voting turned out the way it did.

To recap:

You supported (and “struggle to see how” the collective did not support) 1964 Wilt over Russell despite a less accomplished season (literally the best of the Celtics dynasty) and consistently worse impact indicators. Neither won MVP, but Wilt did do better in MVP voting.

You supported 1969 West over Russell despite a less accomplished season and worse impact indicators. Neither was a serious competitor for MVP, but Russell did better (no votes for West).

You supported 1970 Kareem over West despite a less accomplished season and arguably worse impact indicators. Neither won MVP, but West was the one who did better in MVP voting.

You supported 1978 Kareem over Walton and were in fact the third lowest vote for Walton, despite Kareem having a less accomplished season and undeniably worse impact indicators. Walton won MVP.

You supported 1982 Moses over Magic despite Moses having a less accomplished season and worse impact indicators. Moses did win MVP.

You supported 1985 Bird over Magic despite having a less accomplished season and at this point worse impact indicators. Bird did win MVP.

You supported 1988 Jordan over Magic despite having a less accomplished season and not showing Magic’s “ceiling raising” impact (at this point, you very evidently just do not think much of Magic). Jordan did win MVP.

You also are not marking the collective choice of 1976 Kareem over Erving as anything seriously objectionable, even though Erving won the ABA title and Kareem missed the postseason entirely. Granted, Kareem did win MVP, but then again, so did Erving.

What this all tells me is that you do not really care about traditional “accomplishments” as a foundation for a vote; you just find it convenient support for Jordan in this specific instance.

There is an “accomplishment” I forgot to mention though: in every single one of those instances, you sided with the higher volume postseason scorer and — but for 1970, where you also pointedly mentioned Kareem’s second half increase — the higher volume regular season scorer too. Probably just coincidence, right?

[Djoker]

To recap:

You supported (and “struggle to see how” the collective did not support) 1964 Wilt over Russell despite a less accomplished season (literally the best of the Celtics dynasty) and consistently worse impact indicators. Neither won MVP, but Wilt did do better in MVP voting.

Like I said, Wilt was just very clearly the superior individual player in that season. There is no defensive impact level by Russell that can close the gap when Russell is giving you 13 ppg on -8 rTS with good passing and Wilt is giving 35 ppg on +5 rTS with good passing while also anchoring a strong defense. The offensive disparity is just humongous. I would take 1963 or 1965 Russell but 1964 Russell just had a terrible PS offensively.

You supported 1969 West over Russell despite a less accomplished season and worse impact indicators. Neither was a serious competitor for MVP, but Russell did better (no votes for West).

Because Russell was in his last year and like 1964 gave little to nothing offensively. West also had a historically great Finals. This one isn't as lopsided as 1964 though because 1969 West isn't nearly as good as 1964 Wilt. It can go either way.

You supported 1970 Kareem over West despite a less accomplished season and arguably worse impact indicators. Neither won MVP, but West was the one who did better in MVP voting.

I was flip-flopping on this vote and eventually went with Kareem because I truly believe he was by far the best player in the league by the end of the season. His PS was superior to West offensively plus as a big he had a much larger defensive impact.

You supported 1978 Kareem over Walton and were in fact the third lowest vote for Walton, despite Kareem having a less accomplished season and undeniably worse impact indicators. Walton won MVP.

Walton missed too many games including the PS. I punish PS injuries pretty severely compared to you. Same logic applies with 1989 Magic who gets demoted to a clear #2 on my list because of his Finals injury. Those who care less or give passes to injuries could vote Magic here.

You supported 1982 Moses over Magic despite Moses having a less accomplished season and worse impact indicators. Moses did win MVP.

I'm quite low on early Magic. Honestly if Kareem didn't have a such a meek PS statistically, Magic could be a fair bit lower for me than #3 actually. Moses meanwhile looks like clearly the best player in the league dragging a poor roster to respectability and then he didn't even have a bad PS while losing as a major underdog.

You supported 1985 Bird over Magic despite having a less accomplished season and at this point worse impact indicators. Bird did win MVP.

I guess not as high on Magic. I see peak Bird as a superior player to peak Magic.

You supported 1988 Jordan over Magic despite having a less accomplished season and not showing Magic’s “ceiling raising” impact (at this point, you very evidently just do not think much of Magic). Jordan did win MVP.

They also had a very large gap in the quality of their supporting casts. Magic also had his weakest season (from 1987-1990) in 1988 declining statistically in both the RS and PS. In the PS, the Lakers as a team struggled and barely managed to win.

That said, this year is close. Even I can see myself voting Magic here.

You also are not marking the collective choice of 1976 Kareem over Erving as anything seriously objectionable, even though Erving won the ABA title and Kareem missed the postseason entirely. Granted, Kareem did win MVP, but then again, so did Erving

Because I'm low on the ABA. While in 1976 the ABA was the strongest it would ever be, the NBA was still the far superior league. An MVP win in the ABA is equivalent to maybe a top 3 finish in the NBA. I voted Erving IIRC but I can see him much lower depending on how one grades the ABA.

What this all tells me is that you do not really care about traditional “accomplishments” as a foundation for a vote; you just find it convenient support for Jordan in this specific instance.

Nope. I care about accolades. And unless there is a very good reason not to, I will vote for the best player on the title team. Worth noting that sometimes the official voting for accolades gets it wrong. I may be so biased but I always say that Jordan didn't deserve the 1988 DPOY. And Oscar for example didn't deserve the 1964 MVP over Wilt.

There is an “accomplishment” I forgot to mention though: in every single one of those instances, you sided with the higher volume postseason scorer and — but for 1970, where you also pointedly mentioned Kareem’s second half increase — the higher volume regular season scorer too. Probably just coincidence, right?

So that means I only care about volume scoring? SMH

Funny thing is that the original POY project pretty much agrees on all three votes I've contested (1964, 1986, 1993) and pretty decisively so. It's not like I'm dropping outlandish or controversial takes on any of these threads.

[AEnigma]

I did not say any of that was outlandish or controversial. I did not even say you were being internally inconsistent. And you obviously do not only care about volume scoring, otherwise a guy like Gervin would have been regularly topping your ballots. However, when you relax standards on accolades or accomplishments — which you have done with some regularity, especially across the past fifteen threads — invariably it is to the benefit of the higher volume scorer, and when you penalise players, it is invariably because of a perceived failure to score. So you can say you honestly see no way lower volume scorers are making up the gap, but again that ultimately says more about you than about the results.

[OhayoKD]

Want to get some deltarune in before I sleep, wake-up, and work so just going to post my 94 ballot here fell asleep while typing entry #5:

Voting Post

Spoiler:

1. Hakeem

Very few players can say they've won titles with teams that slid to being bad when they didn't suit up. Hakeem can:

1-1 without him in 1994 (+14.5 on/off), 3-7 without him in 1995 (+11.9 on/off), 1-9 without him in 1996 (+10.3 on/off). Just so tough to determine whether he was carrying bad teams.

.
A step back from an all-time regular season in 93 but in the playoffs:

All of this had a profound impact on the Houston offense. From 1993 to 1995, the Rockets were about a point better than the defenses they faced in the regular season, averaging 109 points per 100 possessions. But in 57 playoff games, with Hakeem ramping up, Houston was 5.3 points better than the defenses it faced, posting a 111 offensive rating. So while the Rockets hovered around 50-wins during the season with a small margin of victory, in those 57 playoff games they posted a 7.6 SRS (62-win pace) by maintaining a small margin over the best teams in the league. Hakeem’s inelasticity as a player likely turned Houston into a resilient team.

The league's most dynamic defender, for the postseason I'd say it's 2nd best rim-protector, one of it's best rebounders, in addition to one of it's best creators and maybe it's best scorer come playoff-time.

I had him comfortably ahead of Jordan last year and now there is no Jordan. David Robinson's got a pretty good regular-season argument working as a solid early ought's KG analog but there's a pretty big difference between the two in the postseason.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107990460#p107990460

In 94 the Spurs don't just lose in the first round. They get demolished. 1 win followed by 3 losses with a M.O.V of -8 giving them a PSRS of -4. Against their rs performance that is a 9-point collapse from a player with a robust track-record of team collapses on both ends vs decent competition. Robinson doesn't really come close to my top 5 as a playoff performer this year.

2. Pippen
3. Ewing

The 94 Bulls are very good. 55-wins, 50-win SRS overall. 58-win pace, 55-win SRS with Pippen playing, and then they are really really good in the postseason. Disregard them sweeping the Cavs; against a 60-win SRS, 57-win Knicks team they win 3 games at home by an average of 6 points. They lose 4 games by an average of 4. The Knicks likely do not have home-court if Pippen does not miss 10 games with an uncharacteristic injury. And in that extra decisive home-game, the one which ultimately decides who wins and goes home...I have Pippen as the best player on the floor.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=115885297#p115885297

It's also not lost to me that the Bulls series is probably Ewing's peak. He shoots horribly on less shots vs the Nets, shoots horribly vs the Rockets while also seeing his assists go down(12:30, 7.8 percentage of assists: turning it over 12.4 percent of possessions), and shoots fine on much lessened volume vs the Pacers.

I will not claim with high confidence that for the season Pippen was the "normative" rim-protector. But it is my impression he did it more than anyone else and if nothing else I will say with confidence he would at least be close to one. I will also say with confidence he was the team's lead at every other notable aspect(excepting rebounding): Scoring, ball-handling, passing, creation, offensive floor-general, defensive floor-general, help defense, man defense. Being all that for a top team is impressive.

They're slightly below average without him(4-6, -0.1) and a proper contender with him this year with Pippen having not much time to acclimate himself to the bright lights of being a franchise guy. Similar to Ewing on a much more stretched sample (8-8, +0.6 for 16 games between 94-97, -1.6 and 1-2 over 3 in 94, +5.6 and 4-2 for 94/95(Knicks do substantially better in 95 than the Pippen-led Bulls do), but in a season chalk-full of negative externalities, I'm more impressed with Pippen's effort then Ewing's.

4. Dikembe Mutombo

For Mutombo, most people might only think of the 1st round upset and consider it a fluke but he was great the entire year. If we look at regular season impact numbers,

Mutombo: +5.5 on, -8.8 off, +14.3 net
O'Neal: +5.5 on, -2.2 off, +7.7 net
Pippen: +5.5 on, -1.6 off, +7.0 net

Mutombo is hanging with top 4 MVP candidates in on-court team performance despite playing with far worse teammates. The Nuggets were the youngest team in the league and besides Mutombo, nobody ever made All Star or All Defense in their career. They were also the worst 3pt shooting team in the league by percentage and second worst by volume. Denver's RS win record was mediocre but it's not because of Mutombo.

In the playoffs, the Nuggets faced the Sonics in round 1. This is a team which:
- Fell one game short of the Finals the previous year
- Had the best SRS by a clear margin (+2.2 over second, +3.6 over third)
- Was #2 on offense behind only Barkley/KJ Suns
- Went 17-2 heading into the playoffs (losing to Nuggets and Suns).

Mutombo delivered arguably the greatest non-Russell defensive series ever and shut down the entire Sonics team while averaging a record 6.2 blocks. Kemp, who was otherwise a good postseason scorer during his All Star prime (20 ppg on 61% TS), was held to only 15 ppg on 44% TS. For full disclosure, the Sonics internal problems after the Payton/Pierce fight at G2 halftime probably helped but the Nuggets also had a competitive series with the Jazz the next round too. They forced a G7 and lost by a much closer margin than Robinson Spurs did. While a second round exit might not seem like much, only Hakeem/Ewing/Malone/Reggie advanced further and Miller didn't actually have a good series to push the Pacers into the Conference Finals (18.5 points on 53.3% TS).

I have not finalized my order yet but Mutombo has a very strong top 5 case for me. He's not a scorer but neither was Thurmond who still placed highly in the past despite his offensive limitations.

Most substantial signals we have are 96 (team improves without him over 8 games), the year before his rookie-year (3-point, 4-win improvement from a terrible -10 floor in 91), his rookie-year (5-point, 18-win improvement from horrible 1-10/-13 base over 11 games), and 01-02 (13-win, 6-point improvement looking at the Hawks with a 30 game without sample, sixers much better without over an extremely injury plagued rs sample of 26 games). Inconsistent but I would generally interpret it as evidence he provides lift to terrible teams. And without a clear consensus here, I'm fine to looking at

-> youngest team in the league
-> not a single teammate made an all-star or all-nba
-> high plus-minus

as an indicator he was providing poy-ish ballot worthy lift in the regular-season albeit to a much less impressive record averaging a paltry 34 minutes to be a co-minutes leader(techincally 2nd actually). But the Nuggets turn very good in the postseason, and are good enough that even the best withouts (96) would mark Mutombo as excellent in the playoffs. As important they do so with Mutombo as the biggest difference, going from 34 minutes to 42.6, with Mutombo averaging 6 more minutes than any teammate. That minutes increase catalyzes a +8 PSRS performance vs the Sonics (outscored by 4 over 6 games) and a +2 psrs performance vs the Jazz as they nearly completed the only 3-0 comeback to force a game 7 against a team that was a game away from knocking off the eventual champions. With that, I'm reasonably comfortable taking Mutumbo's postseason over Malone, or David Robinson, or Shaq's

5. David Robinson

Honestly a token inclusion as the league's most impactful regular-season player. Horrific postseason collapse but Malone and the Jazz are not very impressive in the next two rounds and is not to his level in the regular-season. Miller was tempting but I assess him as having a better cast than anyone here listed besides Pippen and Ewing.

OPOY
1. Reggie Miller
2. Kevin Johnson
3. Hakeem Olajuwon

DPOY
1. Hakeem Olajuwon
2. Dikembe Mutombo
3. Scottie Pippen