Retro Player of the Year 1993-94 UPDATE — Hakeem Olajuwon

[70sFan]

Leaving the discussion about about the legitimacy of our argumentation aside, does anyone doubt that Hakeem had a better team around him than Robinson in 1994?

[AEnigma]

This isn't really about David Robinson, although he does benefit from this exercise, I'm genuinely flabbergasted at the roster. Dale Ellis was the second leading scorer at 15.2 points per game, the next player after that was Willie Anderson at 11.9, which was his last season ever in double digits. During the series versus the Jazz only Ellis cleared double digits besides Robinson at 10.5. The next highest scorer was someone named Negele Knight at 9.3. And I know you think the four players you listed aren't that bad, but I still can't imagine a team of Ellis, Anderson, Del Negro, Rodman and a league average center with that same bench winning more than 15 games.

I think "look at the ppg of the teammates of a player who takes a high-volume of shots and is a limited creator" isn't a great way to assess supporting casts tbh.

You focus on points per game and completely ignore the rest of my comment. Nice!

Not particularly sure what additional interaction you want. You gave your opinion; most people might not go for “8 or 9 wins”, but I have never seen anyone ballpark that specific 1994 roster as higher than 20 wins without Robinson. It is generally recognised as an outstanding instance of regular season lift. I personally have it in my top three to five, although I think the cast of the 2003 Timberwolves was more than four wins worse and that the cast of the 2009 Cavaliers was fewer than 11 wins better.

But when you say it is a comment not specifically about Robinson, in response to my contention that it is more about the structure of the team leaving it vulnerable without a superstar than about the superstar himself, that seems to me like the discussion has run its course. Great regular season lift acknowledged, and any criticism of their loss to the Jazz is more about how they lost rather than about the fact they lost, because no one believes they were a real 55-win, 5-SRS team. For me, I care more about the postseason, so ultimately I am more impressed by Dikembe upsetting the league’s best regular season team and then going to a game 7 than I am by Robinson valiantly building a paper tiger. For others, yeah, Robinson is an obvious high ballot spot because they see more championship value in elevating a bad team to a high seed and losing than they do in upsetting a high seed once. To an extent we will see both sides of that next year, where Robinson sets up an easy conference finals path for his team but ultimately cannot manufacture a series win against any legitimately good team.

[lessthanjake]

Hakeem should be #1 here. However, despite the MVP vote, Robinson was pretty clearly the better player in the RS that year IMO. He clearly did have a worse team than Hakeem IMO, and yet he actually took the Spurs to a better SRS than the Rockets, while also having box numbers that I’d say were better than Hakeem’s, and better on-off numbers. I think Robinson was the clear-cut better RS player in 1993-94, and that the MVP vote would’ve surely been flipped if people back then were focused more on teams’ MOV/SRS and less on wins. That said, obviously the Spurs lost in the first round of the playoffs, with Robinson having a pretty weak series, while the Rockets won the title with Hakeem playing really well. So Hakeem clearly should be POY over Robinson, even with Robinson having been the clearly superior player in the RS.

[Djoker]

I don't think it's at all controversial to say that Robinson had a better RS than Hakeem. In fact, I'd say he definitely had a better RS. However, he was so poor in the PS looking horrible in several games against Utah that I can't take any #1 argument very seriously. In the mid 90's, he consistently looks like two tiers behind Hakeem in the PS.

[konr0167]

1. Hakeem

POY pretty easily lol. One of the best seasons ever. Wins MVP DPOY and FMVP and deserves all 3 just owning Ewing on both ends to clinch his first championship after maybe the biggest play ever to force game 6. He might have been better in 93 but he’s still awesome and gets an overdue ring.

2. Pippen


Bulls just completely blow expectations out of the water with no Jordan. If he’s not hurt for 10 games there’s a good chance they get game 7 home and probably make the finals. He does great vs the Cavs kind of missing everyone and struggles scoring against the Knicks(maybe outplayed by Ewing) but has an awesome playmaking series and plays great D.

3. Ewing

Really just here off a finals run and a great series vs Chicago even if he chokes badly in the finals (cutting him a bit of slack for this due to facing hakeem)


4. Drob

scoring title, 2nd best regular season, but just completely falls apart vs utah in the playoffs.


5. Mutembo

42 wins isn’t a lot but no current or future all-stars or all-nba teammates makes it understandable and then he has an awesome postseason beating a good Sonics team and pushing a stacked Utah side with Malone Stockton and Horneack to 7. If this was just playoffs he might be top 3. I don’t think much of on/off but leading a bunch of other POY guys with it helps a bit. Sonics series is straight up one of the best defensive performances ever

[AEnigma]

I don't think it's at all controversial to say that Robinson had a better RS than Hakeem. In fact, I'd say he definitely had a better RS. However, he was so poor in the PS looking horrible in several games against Utah that I can't take any #1 argument very seriously. In the mid 90's, he consistently looks like two tiers behind Hakeem in the PS.

The thing is that it was not restricted to the postseason, because he was nothing too special against playoff teams in the regular season either. He had a dominant 29-4 record against non-playoff teams and a relatively standard 25-22 record against playoff teams. Against those playoff teams, his scoring average was 27.4 points per game on 54.4% true shooting — which is still better than what he actually did in the postseason, but definitely a ways down from his raw regular season averages. By contrast, Hakeem’s record against playoff teams was 31-17, with a scoring average of 26.4 points per game on 55.1% true shooting.

Now, wins against bad teams count too, and those wins are how you put yourself in position to play the worst playoff teams (as will be the case for Robinson next year) or otherwise secure homecourt against a similarly good team (which cost the Rockets last year). But averages are less binary than “win/loss”, and I struggle to care about Robinson statpadding against the Kings, Wolves, and Clippers (a sixth of his season) when assessing him.

[lessthanjake]

I don't think it's at all controversial to say that Robinson had a better RS than Hakeem. In fact, I'd say he definitely had a better RS. However, he was so poor in the PS looking horrible in several games against Utah that I can't take any #1 argument very seriously. In the mid 90's, he consistently looks like two tiers behind Hakeem in the PS.

The thing is that it was not restricted to the postseason, because he was nothing too special against playoff teams in the regular season either. He had a dominant 29-4 record against non-playoff teams and a relatively standard 25-22 record against playoff teams. Against those playoff teams, his scoring average was 27.4 points per game on 54.4% true shooting — which is still better than what he actually did in the postseason, but definitely a ways down from his raw regular season averages. By contrast, Hakeem’s record against playoff teams was 31-17, with a scoring average of 26.4 points per game on 55.1% true shooting.

Now, wins against bad teams count too, and those wins are how you put yourself in position to play the worst playoff teams (as will be the case for Robinson next year). But averages are less binary than “win/loss”, and I struggle to care about Robinson statpadding against the Kings, Wolves, and Clippers (a sixth of his season) when assessing him.

I think it’s perhaps worth noting that the Spurs SRS in those games against playoff teams that Robinson played in was 5.46—which is actually above their overall RS SRS of 5.05. They had a lot of pretty close losses to playoff teams—particularly against Seattle and Utah (who they went a collective 0-9 against, with mostly close games). Meanwhile, the Rockets’ SRS against playoff teams in games Hakeem played was 5.77. So, while the Rockets’ win-loss record against playoff teams was better, their overall performance against playoff teams according to SRS was basically the same. And that’s with Robinson having a worse supporting cast—so probably still more impressive from Robinson, on balance. Meanwhile, of course, when we map that onto the fact that the Spurs had a higher SRS overall but slightly lower SRS against playoff teams, it is obviously true that the Spurs must’ve had a higher SRS against non-playoff teams. As you note, though, those games do matter.

[AEnigma]

It is not a positive to lose games close; it is just generally a better indicator than being outright blown out. If you are taking the position that “actually it is more impressive to go 25-22 than 31-17 because the point differentials were basically even,” then you are no longer talking about anything real. SRS is generally more predictive but not what actually matters — and for both these players, SRS rarely correlated well to their postseasons (in opposite directions).

[lessthanjake]

It is not a positive to lose games close; it is just generally a better indicator than being outright blown out. If you are taking the position that “actually it is more impressive to go 25-22 than 31-17 because the point differentials were basically even,” then you are no longer talking about anything real. SRS is generally more predictive but not what actually matters — and for both these players, SRS rarely correlated well to their postseasons (in opposite directions).

Yes, winning games matters. But at this point you’re just talking about wins and losses in a particular subset of games. Ultimately, the Spurs won 55 games, while the Rockets won 58. And the supporting cast of the Spurs was definitely notably worse. So it’s not like looking at wins makes Hakeem’s regular season look better than Robinson’s either. The win-loss record overall is more impressive for Robinson. So what you’re choosing to do is to not look at winning overall. Nor are you choosing to look at SRS overall or even to look at SRS against playoff teams. Rather, you are parsing things down to look specifically at win-loss record only against playoff teams, because that’s the way to slice things to downplay Robinson as much as possible. That seems like an obviously weak point, where you’re just leveraging the fact that in one specific subset of games the Spurs happened to lose more close games than the Rockets did.

[Lebronnygoat]

POY
1. Hakeem
No brainer, playoffs bar none, regular season however in contention with Robinson
2. David Robinson
Perhaps the best regular season, best defender, and elite scoring in the regular season but simply got cooked in the playoffs, lost in 3-4 games…
3. Ewing
Offensive holes during this time as his shot couldn’t fall in the playoffs but he anchored an ATG defense which led the Knicks to 57 wins while having a below average offense.
4. Shaq
Less impact than Ewing in the regular season but can be argued over him via scoring and playmaking through his gravity. Baby Shaq has some flaws though which transpires come playoffs.
5. Pippen
To lead the Bulls to a +4srs when playing, and should’ve made it to the conference finals is worthy of the top 5 spot. Honestly could be over Shaq, and I might say he is over posting this. The team Pippen outplayed (blown call game 5 and had a higher team rating during the series) went 7 games with the Pacers in the conference finals, then went 7 games in the finals. Proving this team was well equipped as a finals contending team, but, unfortunately basketball has luck.

[Djoker]

VOTING POST

POY

1. Hakeem Olajuwon - 1st Team All-NBA. 1st Team All-Defense. MVP. DPOY. Second best player in the RS and then the best player by far in the PS as he led a good solid team of role players to a title. I may be in the minority but I find this run of his more impressive than 1995 due to better defense. Easy #1. Averaged 27.3/11.9/3.6 on 56.5 %TS (+3.7 rTS) in the RS then 28.9/11.0/4.3 on 56.8 %TS (+4.9 rTS) in the PS.

2. David Robinson - 2nd Team All-NBA. 2nd Team All-Defense. He finished behind Hakeem in most major accolades but I find his RS more impressive leading a much worse team to almost the same result while being superior statistically. However, Robinson then proceeded to produce a total stinker in the PS as he had several horrible games against the Jazz. He could be argued lower because that's how bad it was even though it was only 4 games. Averaged 29.8/10.7/4.8 on 57.7 %TS (+4.9 rTS) in the RS then 20.0/10.0/3.5 on 47.1 %TS (-4.8 rTS) in the PS.

3. Patrick Ewing - Despite no major accolades (only so much with two better players in the same position), Ewing had a strong RS leading the Knicks on both ends to a strong finish and #1 seed which they leveraged to get to the Finals and take the Rockets to 7 games. Ewing stank on offense against Hakeem but did well rebounding the ball and defended well and the Knicks as they usually did fought like hell and came very very close to a title. The closest they would come during Ewing's entire career in fact. Averaged 24.5/11.2/2.3 on 55.1 %TS (+2.3 rTS) in the RS then 21.9/11.7/2.6 on 49.5 %TS (-1.9 rTS) in the PS.

4. Karl Malone - 1st Team All-NBA. Had a bit weaker RS then more of the surrounding years but then had a strong PS run leading to the Jazz to the WCF. I can definitely see him as high as #2 but decided that here is the right place for him. He scored much better than Ewing but was also a much less impactful defender. It was definitely close. Averaged 25.2/11.5/4.0 on 55.0 %TS (+2.2 rTS) in the RS then 27.1/12.4/3.4 on 53.1 %TS (+2.9 rTS) in the PS.

5. Shaquille O'Neal - 3rd Team All-NBA. Shaq had a huge statistical year as a sophomore player and broke into the elite players' club. I absolutely hate his three game miniseries against the Pacers where he showed low defensive IQ but the roster around him was still a work in progress with rookie Penny and essentially the whole team having no PS experience. He was a dominant force attracting more double teams than maybe anyone on this list except Hakeem and that's something. Averaged 29.3/13.2/2.4 on 60.5 %TS (+7.7 rTS) in the RS then 20.7/13.3/2.3 on 51.7 %TS (-0.4 rTS) in the PS.

HM:

Scottie Pippen - 1st Team All-NBA. Good bounce-back season without Jordan. Almost made the list.

Reggie Miller - huge PS scoring the ball but just way too far back in the RS to make up the ground.

Dikembe Mutombo - a giant on D but not producing enough on offense.

OPOY

1. Hakeem Olajuwon - Most resilient PS scorer with competent playmaking. Gets extra points for winning it all.

2. Karl Malone

3. Shaquille O'Neal - Already a huge force offensively drawing double teams and causing foul trouble.

DPOY

1. Dikembe Mutombo - Anchored the #5 defense without a good team around him then had a monster defensive PS.

2. Hakeem Olajuwon - Anchored the #2 defense and pivotal defensively in Houston winning the title.

3. Patrick Ewing - Anchored the #1 defense. Takes into account complete body of work through the PS as well.

[AEnigma]

It is not a positive to lose games close; it is just generally a better indicator than being outright blown out. If you are taking the position that “actually it is more impressive to go 25-22 than 31-17 because the point differentials were basically even,” then you are no longer talking about anything real. SRS is generally more predictive but not what actually matters — and for both these players, SRS rarely correlated well to their postseasons (in opposite directions).

Yes, winning games matters. But at this point you’re just talking about wins and losses in a particular subset of games. Ultimately, the Spurs won 55 games, while the Rockets won 58. And the supporting cast of the Spurs was definitely notably worse. So it’s not like looking at wins makes Hakeem’s regular season look better than Robinson’s either. The win-loss record overall is more impressive for Robinson. So what you’re choosing to do is to not look at winning overall. Nor are you choosing to look at SRS overall or even to look at SRS against playoff teams. Rather, you are parsing things down to look specifically at win-loss record only against playoff teams, because that’s the way to slice things to downplay Robinson as much as possible. That seems like an obviously weak point, where you’re just leveraging the fact that in one specific subset of games the Spurs happened to lose more close games than the Rockets did.

The only one trying to downplay anything is you — which is why when confronted with a pointed observation of a pertinent trend, your reflex is to distract from it with banal gestures back to something no one disputed and hope it goes unnoticed.

It is relevant that Robinson’s raw numbers are severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did. Hakeem was the one who beat elite teams, Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own, and Hakeem is the one — to your comically perpetual frustration — who outperformed SRS predictions time and time and time and time again. You can bluster all you like about how all these teams were theoretically better because SRS said so, but theory is not a rule, nor is it a substitution for reality — no matter how desperately you wish it were otherwise.

At some point career trends stop being coincidence. That applies to both Robinson and to you yet again projecting your own actions onto everyone else.

[lessthanjake]

It is not a positive to lose games close; it is just generally a better indicator than being outright blown out. If you are taking the position that “actually it is more impressive to go 25-22 than 31-17 because the point differentials were basically even,” then you are no longer talking about anything real. SRS is generally more predictive but not what actually matters — and for both these players, SRS rarely correlated well to their postseasons (in opposite directions).

Yes, winning games matters. But at this point you’re just talking about wins and losses in a particular subset of games. Ultimately, the Spurs won 55 games, while the Rockets won 58. And the supporting cast of the Spurs was definitely notably worse. So it’s not like looking at wins makes Hakeem’s regular season look better than Robinson’s either. The win-loss record overall is more impressive for Robinson. So what you’re choosing to do is to not look at winning overall. Nor are you choosing to look at SRS overall or even to look at SRS against playoff teams. Rather, you are parsing things down to look specifically at win-loss record only against playoff teams, because that’s the way to slice things to downplay Robinson as much as possible. That seems like an obviously weak point, where you’re just leveraging the fact that in one specific subset of games the Spurs happened to lose more close games than the Rockets did.

The only one trying to downplay anything is you — which is why when confronted with a pointed observation of a pertinent trend, your reflex is to distract from it with banal gestures back to something no one disputed and hope it goes unnoticed.

It is relevant that Robinson’s raw numbers are severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did. Hakeem was the one who beat elite teams, Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own, and Hakeem is the one — to your comically perpetual frustration — who outperformed SRS predictions time and time and time and time again. You can bluster all you like about how all these teams were theoretically better because SRS said so, but theory is not a rule, nor is it a substitution for reality — no matter how desperately you wish it were otherwise.

At some point career trends stop being coincidence. That applies to both Robinson and to you yet again projecting your own actions onto everyone else.

I see you’ve mostly moved off of meaningfully discussing team results in the 1993-1994 season, because the best you could do here was to cherry-pick out win-loss record in a specific subset of games, where the Rockets had a better win-loss record but not a meaningfully better SRS. The overall team results speak for themselves here. The Spurs had a slightly worse win-loss record and a slightly better SRS, despite Robinson having a notably worse supporting cast. No amount of cutting up the data into a subset and zeroing in on a specific aspect of it to try to make the comparison look favorable to Hakeem will change that. Regular season team results definitely suggest Robinson was the superior player in the regular season. As does the one-off data we have for that season, I’ll note.

Meanwhile, there’s no basis for the notion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” In games against teams that made the playoffs, Robinson averaged 27.4 points, 10.9 rebounds, and 4.7 assists, with a 54.4% TS%. Against teams that made the playoffs, Hakeem averaged 26.4 points, 11.8 rebounds, and 3.8 assists, with a 55.1% TS%. These numbers are obviously similar and are not particularly different from the full-season numbers for either guy. Both scored a little less than normal and with a little less efficiency, but there’s nothing even remotely dramatic here. Certainly there’s no basis for the assertion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed” or that Robinson “struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” It is definitely the case that Robinson ultimately struggled more in these playoffs, but the idea that he meaningfully struggled against good teams in this regular season is just not supported by the “raw numbers” that the claim purports to be based on.

Finally, I’d note that, in the 1993-1994 regular season I don’t think there’s much of any argument that “Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own,” given that the Spurs won 55 games and most teams that the Spurs beat had a much better roster than Robinson’s, unless we say that teams didn’t have better rosters because David Robinson was so good (which would defeat the purpose of the point). The Spurs supporting cast was very weak. Even keeping in mind that the Spurs had a worse regular season record against playoff teams than the Rockets, it’s still almost certainly true that Robinson won more regular season games against teams with much better rosters than his than Hakeem did, because there just were a lot more teams that had a much better roster than the Spurs.

EDIT: Also, the “to your comically perpetual frustration” line is just very bizarre blustering straw manning. I’ve rarely engaged with that argument people have made, except to just note that measuring superstars’ quality based on whether they won or lost in the playoffs as SRS underdogs is quite odd, since they themselves are a huge determinant of their own team’s SRS—so the measure would perversely reward a player for regular season underperformance. It’s such an obvious point that there could not possibly be any frustration associated with it. It’s also completely irrelevant to any point I’ve made in this thread, since I am very explicitly not talking about the playoffs and therefore winning playoff series as an SRS underdog is not at all relevant.

[AEnigma]

Yes, winning games matters. But at this point you’re just talking about wins and losses in a particular subset of games. Ultimately, the Spurs won 55 games, while the Rockets won 58. And the supporting cast of the Spurs was definitely notably worse. So it’s not like looking at wins makes Hakeem’s regular season look better than Robinson’s either. The win-loss record overall is more impressive for Robinson. So what you’re choosing to do is to not look at winning overall. Nor are you choosing to look at SRS overall or even to look at SRS against playoff teams. Rather, you are parsing things down to look specifically at win-loss record only against playoff teams, because that’s the way to slice things to downplay Robinson as much as possible. That seems like an obviously weak point, where you’re just leveraging the fact that in one specific subset of games the Spurs happened to lose more close games than the Rockets did.

The only one trying to downplay anything is you — which is why when confronted with a pointed observation of a pertinent trend, your reflex is to distract from it with banal gestures back to something no one disputed and hope it goes unnoticed.

It is relevant that Robinson’s raw numbers are severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did. Hakeem was the one who beat elite teams, Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own, and Hakeem is the one — to your comically perpetual frustration — who outperformed SRS predictions time and time and time and time again. You can bluster all you like about how all these teams were theoretically better because SRS said so, but theory is not a rule, nor is it a substitution for reality — no matter how desperately you wish it were otherwise.

At some point career trends stop being coincidence. That applies to both Robinson and to you yet again projecting your own actions onto everyone else.

I see you’ve mostly moved off of meaningfully discussing team results in the 1993-1994 season,

You never had any interest in a meaningful discussion, hence why you immediately sought to derail it.

because the best you could do here was to cherry-pick out win-loss record in a specific subset of games, where the Rockets had a better win-loss record but not a meaningfully better SRS.

If you think looking at a majority of a season against playoff teams is cherry-picking, no wonder you consistently show so much antipathy to the playoffs themselves.

The overall team results speak for themselves here.

Yep, championship versus wholly uncompetitive first round exit.

The Spurs had a slightly worse win-loss record and a slightly better SRS, despite Robinson having a notably worse supporting cast. No amount of cutting up the data into a subset and zeroing in on a specific aspect of it to try to make the comparison look favorable to Hakeem will change that. Regular season team results definitely suggest Robinson was the superior player in the regular season. As does the one-off data we have for that season, I’ll note.

^ Someone who definitely read what I wrote throughout this thread.

Meanwhile, there’s no basis for the notion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” In games against teams that made the playoffs, Robinson averaged 27.4 points, 10.9 rebounds, and 4.7 assists, with a 54.4% TS%. Against teams that made the playoffs, Hakeem averaged 26.4 points, 11.8 rebounds, and 3.8 assists, with a 55.1% TS%. These numbers are not particularly different from the full-season numbers for either guy. Both scored a little less than normal and with a little less efficiency, but there’s nothing even remotely dramatic here. Certainly there’s no basis for the assertion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed” or that Robinson “struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” It is definitely the case that Robinson ultimately struggled more in these playoffs, but the idea that he meaningfully struggled against good teams in this regular season is just not supported by the “raw numbers” that the claim purports to be based on.

Uh huh. What were Robinson’s numbers against non-playoff teams.

Finally, I’d note that, in the 1993-1994 regular season I don’t think there’s much of any argument that “Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own,” given that the Spurs won 55 games and most teams that the Spurs beat had a much better roster than Robinson’s, unless we say that teams didn’t have better rosters because David Robinson was so good (which would defeat the purpose of the point). The Spurs supporting cast was very weak. Even keeping in mind that the Spurs had a worse regular season record against playoff teams than the Rockets, it’s still almost certainly true that Robinson won more regular season games against teams with better rosters than his than Hakeem did, because there just were a lot more teams that had a much better roster than the Spurs.

^ Someone definitely not trying to drown out a point with banal gestures to a different conversation topic.

[lessthanjake]

The only one trying to downplay anything is you — which is why when confronted with a pointed observation of a pertinent trend, your reflex is to distract from it with banal gestures back to something no one disputed and hope it goes unnoticed.

It is relevant that Robinson’s raw numbers are severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did. Hakeem was the one who beat elite teams, Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own, and Hakeem is the one — to your comically perpetual frustration — who outperformed SRS predictions time and time and time and time again. You can bluster all you like about how all these teams were theoretically better because SRS said so, but theory is not a rule, nor is it a substitution for reality — no matter how desperately you wish it were otherwise.

At some point career trends stop being coincidence. That applies to both Robinson and to you yet again projecting your own actions onto everyone else.

I see you’ve mostly moved off of meaningfully discussing team results in the 1993-1994 season,

You never had any interest in a meaningful discussion, hence why you immediately sought to derail it.

because the best you could do here was to cherry-pick out win-loss record in a specific subset of games, where the Rockets had a better win-loss record but not a meaningfully better SRS.

If you think looking at half a season against playoff teams is cherry-picking, no wonder you consistently show so much antipathy to the playoffs themselves.

Finally, I’d note that, in the 1993-1994 regular season I don’t think there’s much of any argument that “Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own,” given that the Spurs won 55 games and most teams that the Spurs beat had a much better roster than Robinson’s, unless we say that teams didn’t have better rosters because David Robinson was so good (which would defeat the purpose of the point). The Spurs supporting cast was very weak. Even keeping in mind that the Spurs had a worse regular season record against playoff teams than the Rockets, it’s still almost certainly true that Robinson won more regular season games against teams with better rosters than his than Hakeem did, because there just were a lot more teams that had a much better roster than the Spurs.

^ Someone definitely not trying to drown out a point with banal gestures to a different conversation topic.

This is basically all just very rude (and non-substantive) and is behavior that really should be beneath someone trying to run a serious project.

The overall team results speak for themselves here.

Yep, championship versus wholly uncompetitive first round exit.

This is not a valid response in a discussion that is explicitly only about the regular season. I very explicitly said Hakeem “clearly should be POY over Robinson” because of the playoffs, and you surely know that. I don’t know why you’d respond with this, except perhaps that you have no valid response.

The Spurs had a slightly worse win-loss record and a slightly better SRS, despite Robinson having a notably worse supporting cast. No amount of cutting up the data into a subset and zeroing in on a specific aspect of it to try to make the comparison look favorable to Hakeem will change that. Regular season team results definitely suggest Robinson was the superior player in the regular season. As does the one-off data we have for that season, I’ll note.

^ Someone who definitely read what I wrote throughout this thread.

You are right that I have not read every word of every post you’ve made in this thread. I did not know that that was a prerequisite in order to discuss things in this thread or to respond to the substance of posts you later made that clearly relate to posts I’ve made. So I find this an odd response.

In any event, I see that you somewhat equivocally referred to Robinson as “potentially the most valuable regular season player,” and you also extolled the “lift” he provided (while not specifically comparing to Hakeem). It’s definitely not clear from that whether or not you think Robinson had the better regular season than Hakeem in 1993-1994. If you do, then I’d have expected you to make that clear at some point in this exchange, since the exchange started with you responding to push back on a post that suggested Robinson definitely had the better regular season than Hakeem. So, for sake of clarity, do you agree with me that Robinson had the better regular season than Hakeem? If yes, then I don’t really think there’s much more for us to discuss on this, since we agree. If no, then this line you say above is just a non-serious deflection.

Meanwhile, there’s no basis for the notion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” In games against teams that made the playoffs, Robinson averaged 27.4 points, 10.9 rebounds, and 4.7 assists, with a 54.4% TS%. Against teams that made the playoffs, Hakeem averaged 26.4 points, 11.8 rebounds, and 3.8 assists, with a 55.1% TS%. These numbers are not particularly different from the full-season numbers for either guy. Both scored a little less than normal and with a little less efficiency, but there’s nothing even remotely dramatic here. Certainly there’s no basis for the assertion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed” or that Robinson “struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” It is definitely the case that Robinson ultimately struggled more in these playoffs, but the idea that he meaningfully struggled against good teams in this regular season is just not supported by the “raw numbers” that the claim purports to be based on.

Uh huh. What were Robinson’s numbers against non-playoff teams.

His numbers against non-playoff teams are 33.2 points, 10.3 rebounds, and 4.9 assists, with a 62.2% TS%. Hakeem’s numbers against non-playoff teams are 28.6 points, 12.1 rebounds, and 3.4 assists, with a 58.6% TS%. Unsurprisingly, both of them score more points and more efficiently against non-playoff teams. The difference is definitely a bit bigger for Robinson, but this really is not very dramatic overall. To say his numbers are “severely skewed” or that he “struggled more” against good teams just seems clearly wrong. As shown above, Robinson’s raw stats against playoff teams are still extremely good—and very arguably better than Hakeem’s. Robinson did not struggle against good teams. He just also dominated non-playoff teams even more than Hakeem did—a fact that was surely part of why Robinson’s team had a better record against non-playoff teams despite Robinson’s supporting cast being worse. If you’d like to caveat things to say that you think Robinson was better in the 1993-1994 regular season than Hakeem but that Robinson and Hakeem were about equal in the RS games against playoff teams, then that might be a plausible argument that the data we’ve discussed could potentially support. But that argument would still just be parsing subsets of things to find somewhere where Robinson doesn’t have an advantage, when he pretty clearly has an advantage overall in the regular season.

[ShaqAttac]

how these threads get so big?

[ShaqAttac]

[B[HAKEEM[/b]

Dream wins MVP and chip with great d and great o. Ig Drob impact might be higher in rs but Drob mega choke and Hakeem mega don't.

DEKE
awesome d and almost makes CF with no help. Bird made great arg and i ain't putting shaq or robinson over just cause they win rs games so they get stomped in round 1 with teamamtes like rod and penny.

PIPPEN
bulls almost win as much as last year and almost beat ny with no MJ. They might have won more if he didn't get hurt. His ts vs ny bad but he get lotta assists and he great on d. can't put him over deke tho when deke do just as well without ho grant.

REGGIE
Sweeps shaq with at home draymond and almost makes the final.

EWING
Almost chokes vs Bulls and Pacers and mega chokes vs Rox. He do make the final. It's wierd how much better he do last season vs MJ and PIPPEN instead of just Pippen. Still great D tho the O not there.

Sorry Shaq but 70s nuked ya.

[OhayoKD]

Some tracking some may find relevant.

Pippen 94 Game 7 (general tracking) - Rudimentary version of what Falco's done with Bird, I'd say standards for "creation" seem similar to what Lebronny and Ben use. No time-stamps and got the shot per points wrong so weigh accordingly

Spoiler:

Pippen 1994 Game 7

20 Opportunities created
4 great defensive plays
17 good defensive plays
7 defensive breakdowns
5 fouls
20 points on 19 22 shots
4 turnovers[/spolier]

94 ECSF Knicks vs Bulls Game 7 Paint Protection tracking (this has time-stamps though it only covers the first half (80-possessions)
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=115885141#p115885141
[spoiler]Let’s start with rim-load distribution (PPs) among the 5 defenders tracked

New York overall
Oakley - 15
Ewing - 13

Chicago overall
Pippen - 15
Grant - 7
Cartwright - 6

New York with Ewing (22 Possessions)

Ewing - 13
Oakley - 5

Overall

Pippen/Oakley - 15
Ewing - 13
Grant - 7
Cartwright - 6



Here is the distribution of IAs:

Overall
Ewing - 3
Pippen/Grant - 1

Currently my ballot is probably going to go something like

Hakeem
Pippen
Ewing
Mutembo
Robinson

I'l log in once more probably before before the deadline and give a look at what people are posting before I vote. For those any interest in persuasion the other guys I'm considering are Reggie, Shaq, and Malone.

Easiest ways to shift my votes:

-> Provide evidence for Mutembo's help actually being comparable or advantaged relative to the rest. I'm not particularly high on on/off or media-accolades so it wouldn't take much to shift me away from a guy whose only real attribute is his ability to protect the rim/rebound

-> Convince me Reggie had significantly weaker help relative to Ewing or Pippen

-> Convince me Ewing's help was comparable or disadvantaged relative to Pippen(the latter will really do more here since their victory seems more an accident of an injury-induced home-court advantage than real superiority and I have Pippen as outright better in the decisive game)

-> Convince me Shaq or Drob were such regular-season monsters their team's collapses still allow for the possibility of "well below top 5" playoff value.

As things stand I think my positions on Mutembo and Reggie are the most open to change. Do what you will with that.

[penbeast0]

Again, quit trying to pick a fight and stick to talking about 1993-94. It's not all on one side but AEnigma, you are running this project, try to be more professional.

[AEnigma]

I see you’ve mostly moved off of meaningfully discussing team results in the 1993-1994 season,

You never had any interest in a meaningful discussion, hence why you immediately sought to derail it.

because the best you could do here was to cherry-pick out win-loss record in a specific subset of games, where the Rockets had a better win-loss record but not a meaningfully better SRS.

If you think looking at half a season against playoff teams is cherry-picking, no wonder you consistently show so much antipathy to the playoffs themselves.

Finally, I’d note that, in the 1993-1994 regular season I don’t think there’s much of any argument that “Hakeem was the one who beat teams with much better rosters than his own,” given that the Spurs won 55 games and most teams that the Spurs beat had a much better roster than Robinson’s, unless we say that teams didn’t have better rosters because David Robinson was so good (which would defeat the purpose of the point). The Spurs supporting cast was very weak. Even keeping in mind that the Spurs had a worse regular season record against playoff teams than the Rockets, it’s still almost certainly true that Robinson won more regular season games against teams with better rosters than his than Hakeem did, because there just were a lot more teams that had a much better roster than the Spurs.

^ Someone definitely not trying to drown out a point with banal gestures to a different conversation topic.

This is basically all just very rude (and non-substantive) and is behavior that really should be beneath someone trying to run a serious project.

Ever since you started posting again you have treated it unseriously at every turn. And unfortunately there is no substantive way to respond to a non-substantive derail someone at best made because they did not care to read one post above their own.

The overall team results speak for themselves here.

Yep, championship versus wholly uncompetitive first round exit.

This is not a valid response in a discussion that is explicitly only about the regular season. I very explicitly said Hakeem “clearly should be POY over Robinson” because of the playoffs, and you surely know that. I don’t know why you’d respond with this, except perhaps that you have no valid response.

I very explicitly said Robinson had an all-time regular season, yet here you are acting as if it were in question and something you really needed to clarify, because you now admit to not even bothering to read the preceding discussion (or indeed merely one post up).

The Spurs had a slightly worse win-loss record and a slightly better SRS, despite Robinson having a notably worse supporting cast. No amount of cutting up the data into a subset and zeroing in on a specific aspect of it to try to make the comparison look favorable to Hakeem will change that. Regular season team results definitely suggest Robinson was the superior player in the regular season. As does the one-off data we have for that season, I’ll note.

^ Someone who definitely read what I wrote throughout this thread.

You are right that I have not read every word of every post you’ve made in this thread. I did not know that that was a prerequisite in order to discuss things in this thread or to respond to the substance of posts you later made that clearly relate to posts I’ve made. So I find this an odd response.

I find it odd you think — or claim to think — that it is okay to waste time because reading one post before your own was too much work.

In any event, I see that you somewhat equivocally referred to Robinson as “potentially the most valuable regular season player,” and you also extolled the “lift” he provided (while not specifically comparing to Hakeem). It’s definitely not clear from that whether or not you think Robinson had the better regular season than Hakeem in 1993-1994. If you do, then I’d have expected you to make that clear at some point in this exchange, since the exchange started with you responding to push back on a post that suggested Robinson definitely had the better regular season than Hakeem. So, for sake of clarity, do you agree with me that Robinson had the better regular season than Hakeem? If yes, then I don’t really think there’s much more for us to discuss on this, since we agree. If no, then this line you say above is just a non-serious deflection.

I think it was more impressive lift season long, and you had everything available to you to determine that much if it were of actual interest to you.

I have never seen anyone ballpark that specific 1994 roster as higher than 20 wins without Robinson. It is generally recognised as an outstanding instance of regular season lift. I personally have it in my top three to five, although I think the cast of the 2003 Timberwolves was more than four wins worse and that the cast of the 2009 Cavaliers was fewer than 11 wins better.

I also said as much here, and while I do not expect you to have read that comment made in a different thread, I would expect you to give a little more critical thought to the implication of my comparing Robinson’s regular season lift to two completely different players and years rather than to anyone else in this season.

1993 Hakeem I think is an interesting question, although Robinson still deserves the benefit of doubt in that comparison because as I said, wins over bad teams count too. But Hakeem’s 1994 is a step down from his 1993, and I have never suggested that 1994 Hakeem’s regular season is on the level of 2004 Garnett or 2010 Lebron — which already puts us past the stated 3-5 range, even just leaving it in the realm of win change rather than SRS change.

Meanwhile, there’s no basis for the notion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed toward the terrible teams and that he struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” In games against teams that made the playoffs, Robinson averaged 27.4 points, 10.9 rebounds, and 4.7 assists, with a 54.4% TS%. Against teams that made the playoffs, Hakeem averaged 26.4 points, 11.8 rebounds, and 3.8 assists, with a 55.1% TS%. These numbers are not particularly different from the full-season numbers for either guy. Both scored a little less than normal and with a little less efficiency, but there’s nothing even remotely dramatic here. Certainly there’s no basis for the assertion that “Robinson’s raw numbers were severely skewed” or that Robinson “struggled more against the better ones than Hakeem did.” It is definitely the case that Robinson ultimately struggled more in these playoffs, but the idea that he meaningfully struggled against good teams in this regular season is just not supported by the “raw numbers” that the claim purports to be based on.

Uh huh. What were Robinson’s numbers against non-playoff teams.

His numbers against non-playoff teams are 33.2 points, 10.3 rebounds, and 4.9 assists, with a 62.2% TS%. Hakeem’s numbers against non-playoff teams are 28.6 points, 12.1 rebounds, and 3.4 assists, with a 58.6% TS%. Unsurprisingly, both of them score more points and more efficiently against non-playoff teams. The difference is definitely a bit bigger for Robinson, but this really is not very dramatic overall. To say his numbers are “severely skewed” or that he “struggled more” against good teams just seems clearly wrong.

Fortunately I trust most others will acknowledge a six-point drop and -8 worse efficiency as more than “a bit” of a “not very dramatic” skew.