Retro Player of the Year 1997-98 UPDATE — Michael Jordan

[AEnigma]

Defensive Player of the Year

1. Dikembe Mutombo
2. Tim Duncan
3. Kevin Garnett

Dikembe an easy choice. Highest defensive impact in the league, did not miss a game, and yet again led the league in blocks.

Duncan played significantly more than Robinson, led the team to a 6-3 record without Robinson, and looks like a similarly valuable per possession defender as Robinson based on the RAPM numbers I have seen (although generally yeah I side with Robinson as the more impactful per possession defender for now). The disparity between Malone’s and the Jazz’s numbers against the Spurs this year compared to what they were in 1994 and 1996 also reflects quite well on Duncan.

Ewing and Hakeem are disqualified by missed time and lack of an offsetting deep postseason run. Mourning misses quite a bit of time himself and similarly does not excuse it with a real postseason run. So then my consideration is between Robinson or Garnett, and frankly I do not think Robinson is so much more valuable than Garnett that it excuses Garnett playing 30% more. May as well acquaint ourselves with this power forward duo early, because they will both be relative mainstays for the next decade (and even longer for Garnett).

Offensive Player of the Year

1. Michael Jordan
2. Reggie Miller
3. Shaquille O’Neal

Shaq is probably the most valuable offensive player when he does play, but after playing twenty fewer games than Jordan and Reggie and not coming closer to a title, he is stuck at third. Payton misses the cut because I cannot reasonably look at that Lakers/Sonics series and come away thinking Payton drove better offence; he will need to wait two more seasons to appear on this ballot.

Jordan is capable of more outright lift than Reggie is, wins the title, and I would say looked like the more impressive offensive player head-to-head (although Reggie helped the series be more competitive than many would expect). Jordan also played nearly 400 more minutes in the regular season than Reggie did, and Reggie in turn played over 600 more minutes than Shaq did, without Shaq establishing any postseason advantage the way he did when compared to Payton.

Player of the Year

1. Michael Jordan
2. Karl Malone
3. Tim Duncan
4. Reggie Miller
5. Shaquille O’Neal
HM: Gary Payton

Jordan a relatively uncontested top spot for me. I see the theory behind Duncan but ultimately I would need to be much more confident that Duncan outplayed Jordan against the Jazz. Do not really see the case for Shaq after 20 missed games and a humiliating exit, nor do I see the case for Malone. Jordan was better, played better across the postseason, played better in the Finals, won the Finals, overcame more adversity… Even those low on Jordan tend not to see Malone as particularly close (in contrast to Shaq and Duncan), so when you are worse and less accomplished, why would you be at the top.

Malone had some truly vile scoring performances this postseason (outside of the Lakers series, where Shaq’s defensive limitations were never more apparent); however, he does have a significant advantage in season accomplishment over Duncan. In turn, I think those respective Jazz series (and what we know from next year) support that the Spurs were a much more serious contender than the Lakers, and then the same applies to the Pacers (possibly the true second-best postseason team this year, although they missed out on juicing their offensive rating against Shaq).

[DirtyDez]

Yes because touching the ball last means you were the only one who contributed to the basket.

Layup, steal, shot is pretty straightforward.

https://youtu.be/xSexPrywGqg
Jordan is not getting that steal in the first place if his teammate isn't holding Malone in place
He isn't shooting in single coverage if Utah aren't wary of what his teammates can do
And that still leaves 6 points (and 3 defensive possessions) unaccounted for.

I have Duncan behind Robinson. Better post scorer from day 1 but the Spurs won on defense and Robinson was the anchor on that end. Playoffs net rating in Duncan minutes without Robinson were pretty ugly first couple playoffs but get overlooked by most.

So basically when Duncan is playing with Robinson's backups?

Yeah basketball is fluid. Did he make the plays or not?

[jjgp111292]

Yeah this whole, "He just had the ball last" thing is ludicrously reductive. Somebody's gotta, y'know, actually do the thing.

[LA Bird]

I have Duncan behind Robinson. Better post scorer from day 1 but the Spurs won on defense and Robinson was the anchor on that end. Playoffs net rating in Duncan minutes without Robinson were pretty ugly first couple playoffs but get overlooked by most.

So basically when Duncan is playing with Robinson's backups?

Well yes. Robinson also played with Duncan's backup too and Carl Herrera was worse than Will Perdue.

The Spurs lost 3 games in the Jazz series (1, 2, 5) despite winning in Robinson's minutes. In every one of those games, Duncan without Robinson lineups were giving up 115 points or more per 48 while Robinson without Duncan lineups were giving up 80 points or less. If the Spurs had some defense in the Duncan without Robinson minutes, they might have won 4-1 but instead they got outscored by 20 points in 27 minutes. And that's with Duncan sharing the court with Malone less than a third as frequently as Robinson in the same situation. The only counter for Duncan here is sample size but it's a combined 30% of game time and we saw the exact same pattern in the Spurs championship run the following season.

[LA Bird]

[Duncan] looks like a similarly valuable per possession defender as Robinson based on the RAPM numbers I have seen

Which ones? Robinson looks clearly ahead in all of them

2.128 vs 0.8591, basketball-analytics
2.37 vs 1.60, thebasketballdatabase
3.31 vs 2.32, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (NPI)
3.64 vs 1.80, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (PI)
3.2 vs 2.2, nbarapm (2 year)

[capfan33]

1. MJ- In many other years he’d be struggling to make the top 3 but once again, no one else I think that can really be argued over him.

2. Malone- While I think Duncan is already a clearly better player as a rookie, the accomplishment gap is big enough for me to favor Malone. And he did well the last 3 games of the finals so overall a respectable enough performance.

3. Duncan- one of the greatest rookie campaigns ever, and in a vacuum may already be the best player in the league.

4. Shaq- injury as well as getting swept in the playoffs prevent me from putting him higher but he wasn’t too far removed from the force he’d become in the next few years.

5. Robinson- Still an elite defender and with Duncan at his side turns into an elite 2nd option.

[AEnigma]

[Duncan] looks like a similarly valuable per possession defender as Robinson based on the RAPM numbers I have seen

Which ones? Robinson looks clearly ahead in all of them

2.128 vs 0.8591, basketball-analytics
2.37 vs 1.60, thebasketballdatabase
3.31 vs 2.32, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (NPI)
3.64 vs 1.80, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (PI)
3.2 vs 2.2, nbarapm (2 year)

Do you feel that Duncan was so much better on offence than Robinson, and more of an offence booster than a defence booster? Do you feel Kukoc was an elite defender and Pippen and Malone were neutral ones?

Small sample RAPM is already noisy, and splitting it into “offence and defence” exacerbates the issue. If you want to take those splits at face value, go ahead, but that is not how I perceive the disparity in role between these two players. If anything, most of the box production here suggests Robinson’s advantage would be more on offence, and while again that is not really what I feel best encapsulates the dynamic at play, it strikes me as odd to express total confidence that Robinson was a marginally positive offensive player (although in the postseason…).

[Lebronnygoat]

I got Shaq here

[Djoker]

I'm pretty sure I recall a bunch of data showing that Robinson was superior to Duncan defensively in 1999 so then him being superior in 1998 over rookie Duncan seems a pretty straight-forward conclusion. However, fully agree about offense/defense splits being unreliable and they should always be taken with a grain of salt.

[One_and_Done]

1) Duncan
2) Shaq
3) Jordan
4) K.Malone
5) G.Hill

I thought about it long and hard, and I’m going to ride with Duncan as #1. I should be clear, I don’t think Duncan was as good this year as he was next year. That’s understandable. He was a rookie, he needed to learn little things about the game like how to pace himself, how to get the right calls, how to adjust to the NBA game in general. He was also being played out of position at SF for much of the season. That said, I still think he was the most impactful player. D.Rob had already fallen off quite a bit post injury. His hardcore fans will point to advanced stats on small samples as usual, but there’s many reasons those could be wrong. I also find it troubling that D.Rob’s strong advanced stat signal continued well into his final years, even when he was demonstrably not making a big difference (e.g. the Spurs going 15-3 without him in 03, or improving their D without him after he retired). It looks to me more like the noise from other stuff (e.g. strength of replacement, the line-ups used around you, and the coach just being careful to use you against line-ups where you’ll fare better). I also don’t much care for advanced stats anyway.

The Spurs 36 game improvement I mostly attribute to Duncan, I don’t think post injury D.Rob had anything like that kind of floor raising anymore. D.Rob also had his usual playoff drop off. His 18ppg on 39% shooting in the Jazz series is pretty disappointing if he was supposedly the lead on the team. Of course, in reality he wasn’t. The Spurs realised in training camp that Duncan was the better player, and made him the hub of the offense. While it’s not for this season, I broke down a 99 Spurs playoff game in this thread, to highlight just how overrated the ‘names’ on the Spurs were. In reality Duncan was doing almost everything by year 2.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2367353&hilit=99+Spurs
That’s not as true this year, but I look at the Spurs season and I ask “if Duncan had the same quality of support cast as Karl Malone or Jordan, do they win the title?” I think it’s pretty obvious. Duncan had a fine playoffs, he just didn’t have the veteran help and support that the Jazz or Bulls did.

I hesitated on Shaq at #2, because he only played 60 games. What sways me is that the Lakers were 46-14 in games he did play, and that he was fully healthy for the playoffs. Basically, Shaq’s overall impact was already greater than Jordan. What wasn’t greater was his support cast. Of course, Shaq continued to have his problems in the PnR in the playoffs, and next year Duncan just smoked him straight up, but most players have weaknesses. The real question, again, is whether Shaq would have triumphed over the Jazz or Bulls with an equal support cast. I think he would have.

Jordan squeaks in at #3 for me, and honestly I debated this long and hard. There’s an argument that Malone was better this year, but for now I’m leaning to Jordan. Grant Hill is my #5. Yeh, his team didn’t make the playoffs, but he had almost nothing around him. He was a flat out better player than guys like D.Rob or Pippen at this point (especially with Pippen missing half the season), and I don’t even think he’s controversial here. I would have gone with Mourning, but he missed too many games, and he’s not Shaq.

[OhayoKD]

I have Duncan behind Robinson. Better post scorer from day 1 but the Spurs won on defense and Robinson was the anchor on that end. Playoffs net rating in Duncan minutes without Robinson were pretty ugly first couple playoffs but get overlooked by most.

So basically when Duncan is playing with Robinson's backups?

Well yes. Robinson also played with Duncan's backup too and Carl Herrera was worse than Will Perdue.

Duncan averaged 6 more minutes in the regular season and 3 more minutes in the playoffs in 1998. He averaged 8 more minutes in the regular season and 8 more minutes in the playoffs in 1999. Please be serious.

The only counter for Duncan here is sample size but it's a combined 30% of game time and we saw the exact same pattern in the Spurs championship run the following season.

Oh that's the only counter? Say. How did San-Antonio do without Duncan in the 1996 playoffs getting to use a much better David Robinson. Surely they didn't go from 15-2 to getting cooked by postseason fodder in 2000 with Drob steering the ship?

Duncan goes 6-3 without Robinson this year, 1-0 next year, and 2-0 in 2000. Robinson goes 5-3 without Tim Duncan (and then 1-3 in the playoffs). "Robinson was the real mvp" is not what I'm seeing here.

But hey, since many people apparently love the "player who averaged 6-12 more minutes than everyone else on his team on his prime and kept seeing co-stars look way better in on/off than any other approach is not actually the driver of his team" take, I'm going to go track this bill-russell-type defense Robinson must be exerting. If Robinson isn't torching Duncan in Rim-load I'm done with y'all.

[OhayoKD]

Layup, steal, shot is pretty straightforward.

https://youtu.be/xSexPrywGqg
Jordan is not getting that steal in the first place if his teammate isn't holding Malone in place
He isn't shooting in single coverage if Utah aren't wary of what his teammates can do
And that still leaves 6 points (and 3 defensive possessions) unaccounted for

Yeah basketball is fluid. Did he make the plays or not?

He made plays. You claimed he was the only one doing that. This is how we get silly claims like "best perimeter player ever"

Yeah this whole, "He just had the ball last" thing is ludicrously reductive. Somebody's gotta, y'know, actually do the thing.

Do you know what "reductive" means? "Jordan did everything" is reductive. Especially when on one of the plays in question (the steal) you could argue his teammate did more. Jordan touched the ball last is a direct neutral description.

But of course that reductiveness is pretty standard. '"Won more" transforms into "goat cieling raisier" when other plays have seen bigger improvement on championship-winning teams(including a player who won many more yet you have ranked 5th).

Describing things accurately is outrageous for those invested in a myth. Present company included:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2420383&start=180

Contrary to what his proponents have claimed en masse with comical equivocations (1993 MJ ~ 1988/1983 Magic!), the reasoning and evidence and skillset weightings behind low Jordan's votes is rather consistent with what has been used for basically the entirety of the project. Yet Jordan is the one and only player so far who position has sparked mass outrage even when his best competition repeatedly draws ballots which leave them completely off (this year, included). I wonder why?

No. My description is accurate and devoid of emotive flavor. Dirty Dez's was an extreme simplification for a player whose reputation lives off extreme, and as tellingly, inconsistent, simplification. When complexity is warranted it is only selectively considered("the bulls were fatigued in 93, not 94!"). And when simplicity finds an unfavorable conclusion, complexity is hailed as the solution, even when such complexity should benefit other players more.

Reducing basketball to touching the ball last certainly helps Jordan, just like reducing soccer to touching the ball last helps Ronaldo
and reducing football to who touches the ball last helps Matthews. That doesn't mean they were actually doing things themselves or uniquely close to doing so.

[lessthanjake]

Jordan seems like the obvious answer here again. He’s definitely slowed down at this point, but this is still a player who was undoubtedly one of the several very top-tier players in the RS and then led his team to the title. I think it takes a lot to overcome that.

I think there’s three crucial things to think about here:

1. The Bulls had major health/age issues this season (not to mention other drama), and Jordan still led the Bulls to a title. To begin with, Pippen missed almost half the season, and the Bulls played at a 6.4 SRS pace during those 38 games. That’s a 59-win pace by SRS, and it was a 56-win pace by win-loss record. And that’s despite the fact that Rodman was also very old at that point, and would not really play meaningful NBA basketball again after that year. Jordan really carried the Bulls to still be a great team during Pippen’s absence, despite really not having much help at all. Of course, when Pippen came back, they won at a 67-win pace—a very impressive ceiling once again, led by Jordan. Then we get to the playoffs. Pippen is healthy for this, but does break down at the end. Meanwhile, by the playoffs, Rodman had deteriorated to the point of becoming a bench player. Not to mention that the rest of the supporting cast had aged a lot. Throughout all this, the team also had tons of external drama, including open fighting between Phil Jackson and the GM/ownership. Overall, this was not a situation where you’d expect the Bulls to be able to keep winning. But they did. And it didn’t require a lucky cakewalk playoff run (indeed, the Pacers and Jazz were really good teams). This was a really impressive title for Jordan—including a regular season and playoffs steeped in adversity.

2. It should take a lot to overcome the arguable best RS player (and MVP winner) leading his team to the title. And the other candidates really don’t make a particularly great case for themselves. Shaq was great when he played, but only played 60 regular season games (and started only 57), and his team proceeded to get swept in the playoffs by the Jazz—with Shaq putting in a very flawed performance (being a significant defensive liability, having 4 assists in the whole series, and being awful on high volume from the FT line). Duncan has been mentioned but wasn’t at his best yet, and had his team go out easily in the second round of the playoffs at the hands of the Jazz—with Duncan having a pretty quiet series (not to mention a negative on-off for the playoffs as a whole, though I don’t put much stock in that, due to the sample size). Karl Malone probably has the best case outside of Jordan. He was very good in the regular season (and could’ve won MVP), and he actually had a solid playoffs. But Malone was defeated by Jordan in the Finals, with the defining moment of those Finals involving Jordan stripping Malone.

3. For what it’s worth in terms of data, while the major candidates are close to each other, Jordan’s pure RAPM in this season (as per basketballdatabase) was above any other POY candidate except Shaq—who, again, only played 60 games. The same is true with RPM (and Jordan is above Shaq in RPM Wins). Meanwhile, while playoff RAPM is largely useless due to the small sample size, I will note that Jordan’s combination of +8.1 ON, and +13.1 ON-OFF almost certainly means he had the top playoff RAPM (and, indeed, FWIW we see him in 1st in the Gitlab playoff RAPM—which is the only playoff RAPM for that year that I’m aware of). The box metrics have different orders but generally show Malone, Jordan, Shaq, and Robinson as the top players (with Malone looking the best in box metrics overall, I’d say). Overall, looking at the panoply of impact and box metrics we have, I don’t think the data conclusively shows Jordan having been the best regular season player (nor does it do so for anyone else), but I do think it shows him clearly one of the top few guys in that conversation. When you then combine that with Jordan winning the title despite substantial adversity, while beating Malone and with Shaq and Duncan/Robinson going out relatively easily and/or quietly in the playoffs, it seems like a pretty easy decision IMO (though I’d say Karl Malone has a valid argument).

[One_and_Done]

It's still a 56 win pace with Jordan, vs a 67 win pace with Pippen. So let's look at the 56 win pace Bulls. Is that support cast really worse than what Duncan had on the Spurs? I'd say if anything it's better. Jordan had Kukoc, Rodman, Longley, and Harper. That's a really solid starting 4 to go around Jordan. Sure, Rodman was older, but he was also still looking very effective this year. In contrast Duncan had D.Rob and then basically nothing else worth a damn.

In the playoffs Jordan had Pippen back too. Then leaving aside Duncan, Shaq had the Lakers play 46-14 in the games he played (a 63 win pace). Shaq definitely had less around him than Jordan.

[lessthanjake]

It's still a 56 win pace with Jordan, vs a 67 win pace with Pippen. So let's look at the 56 win pace Bulls. Is that support cast really worse than what Duncan had on the Spurs? I'd say if anything it's better. Jordan had Kukoc, Rodman, Longley, and Harper. That's a really solid starting 4 to go around Jordan. Sure, Rodman was older, but he was also still looking very effective this year. In contrast Duncan had D.Rob and then basically nothing else worth a damn.

In the playoffs Jordan had Pippen back too. Then leaving aside Duncan, Shaq had the Lakers play 46-14 in the games he played (a 63 win pace). Shaq definitely had less around him than Jordan.

Considering Rodman was pretty cooked that year and Robinson was still one of the very best players in the NBA, yeah I’d say the Pippen-less Bulls were a worse supporting cast. And, even if you somehow disagreed with that, that’s not even getting into the fact that the Bulls in that span were a 6.4 SRS team and the Spurs were a 3.3 SRS team, so the Pippen-less Bulls actually performed substantially better than the Spurs. Nor is it getting into the organizational drama that was enveloping the Bulls—which was a further impediment that had to be overcome. I think it’s very straightforward to conclude that what Jordan did with the Bulls without Pippen that year was more impressive than what Duncan did with the Spurs in general that year. Of course, a half-season span of the regular season isn’t necessarily determinative, so Jordan’s case could’ve ended up worse overall regardless of how impressive that 38-game span without Pippen was. But that’s where it comes in that they won at a 67-win pace when Pippen came back and then won the title despite Rodman being fully cooked and Pippen breaking down at the end of the playoffs. The rest of the year was really impressive from Jordan too! Meanwhile, Duncan lost easily in the second round while having a pretty quiet series (and a negative playoff on-off for the little amount that’s worth).

[Special_Puppy]

Jordan seems like the obvious answer here again. He’s definitely slowed down at this point, but this is still a player who was undoubtedly one of the several very top-tier players in the RS and then led his team to the title. I think it takes a lot to overcome that.

I think there’s three crucial things to think about here:

1. The Bulls had major health/age issues this season (not to mention other drama), and Jordan still led the Bulls to a title. To begin with, Pippen missed almost half the season, and the Bulls played at a 6.4 SRS pace during those 38 games. That’s a 59-win pace by SRS, and it was a 56-win pace by win-loss record. And that’s despite the fact that Rodman was also very old at that point, and would not really play meaningful NBA basketball again after that year. Jordan really carried the Bulls to still be a great team during Pippen’s absence, despite really not having much help at all. Of course, when Pippen came back, they won at a 67-win pace—a very impressive ceiling once again, led by Jordan. Then we get to the playoffs. Pippen is healthy for this, but does break down at the end. Meanwhile, by the playoffs, Rodman had deteriorated to the point of becoming a bench player. Not to mention that the rest of the supporting cast had aged a lot. Throughout all this, the team also had tons of external drama, including open fighting between Phil Jackson and the GM/ownership. Overall, this was not a situation where you’d expect the Bulls to be able to keep winning. But they did. And it didn’t require a lucky cakewalk playoff run (indeed, the Pacers and Jazz were really good teams). This was a really impressive title for Jordan—including a regular season and playoffs steeped in adversity.

2. It should take a lot to overcome the arguable best RS player (and MVP winner) leading his team to the title. And the other candidates really don’t make a particularly great case for themselves. Shaq was great when he played, but only played 60 regular season games (and started only 57), and his team proceeded to get swept in the playoffs by the Jazz—with Shaq putting in a very flawed performance (being a significant defensive liability, having 4 assists in the whole series, and being awful on high volume from the FT line). Duncan has been mentioned but wasn’t at his best yet, and had his team go out easily in the second round of the playoffs at the hands of the Jazz—with Duncan having a pretty quiet series (not to mention a negative on-off for the playoffs as a whole, though I don’t put much stock in that, due to the sample size). Karl Malone probably has the best case outside of Jordan. He was very good in the regular season (and could’ve won MVP), and he actually had a solid playoffs. But Malone was defeated by Jordan in the Finals, with the defining moment of those Finals involving Jordan stripping Malone.

3. For what it’s worth in terms of data, while the major candidates are close to each other, Jordan’s pure RAPM in this season (as per basketballdatabase) was above any other POY candidate except Shaq—who, again, only played 60 games. The same is true with RPM (and Jordan is above Shaq in RPM Wins). Meanwhile, while playoff RAPM is largely useless due to the small sample size, I will note that Jordan’s combination of +8.1 ON, and +13.1 ON-OFF almost certainly means he had the top playoff RAPM (and, indeed, FWIW we see him in 1st in the Gitlab playoff RAPM—which is the only playoff RAPM for that year that I’m aware of). The box metrics have different orders but generally show Malone, Jordan, Shaq, and Robinson as the top players (with Malone looking the best in box metrics overall, I’d say). Overall, looking at the panoply of impact and box metrics we have, I don’t think the data conclusively shows Jordan having been the best regular season player (nor does it do so for anyone else), but I do think it shows him clearly one of the top few guys in that conversation. When you then combine that with Jordan winning the title despite substantial adversity, while beating Malone and with Shaq and Duncan/Robinson going out relatively easily and/or quietly in the playoffs, it seems like a pretty easy decision IMO (though I’d say Karl Malone has a valid argument).

I would also have Jordan as the POY, but I think you are somewhat underrating Jordan's supporting cast that season. It was still one of the 5 best in the league. Like I don't really see why Jordan's supporting cast was appreciably worse than Reggie Miller's this season

[LA Bird]

[Duncan] looks like a similarly valuable per possession defender as Robinson based on the RAPM numbers I have seen

Which ones? Robinson looks clearly ahead in all of them

2.128 vs 0.8591, basketball-analytics
2.37 vs 1.60, thebasketballdatabase
3.31 vs 2.32, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (NPI)
3.64 vs 1.80, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (PI)
3.2 vs 2.2, nbarapm (2 year)

Do you feel that Duncan was so much better on offence than Robinson, and more of an offence booster than a defence booster? Do you feel Kukoc was an elite defender and Pippen and Malone were neutral ones?

Small sample RAPM is already noisy, and splitting it into “offence and defence” exacerbates the issue. If you want to take those splits at face value, go ahead, but that is not how I perceive the disparity in role between these two players. If anything, most of the box production here suggests Robinson’s advantage would be more on offence, and while again that is not really what I feel best encapsulates the dynamic at play, it strikes me as odd to express total confidence that Robinson was a marginally positive offensive player (although in the postseason…).

You: They are similar based on DRAPM.
Me: Which RAPM source are you using?
You: RAPM is noisy, ORAPM/DRAPM splits are even more noisy...

It was you, not me, who brought up RAPM numbers. When asked for a source, you pivoted to questioning the interpretation of the data and its accuracy instead. Valid points but nothing to do with your original claim that you could not back up.

As for Robinson and Duncan on offense vs defense, I would have thought it's uncontroversial to say Duncan was better on offense and Robinson on defense (for the first couple years only obviously). You don't give the rookie more shots and the low post spot in high low action unless he was the better post scorer. Maybe there is the argument that post scoring isn't that efficient so being better in a relatively inefficient shot isn't that valuable but given the league wide efficiency at the time and the lack of offensive alternatives on the team, I don't know if that's a strong case.

[LA Bird]

Duncan averaged 6 more minutes in the regular season and 3 more minutes in the playoffs in 1998. He averaged 8 more minutes in the regular season and 8 more minutes in the playoffs in 1999. Please be serious.

If you want to argue that Duncan was more valuable than Robinson because of the minute advantage, sure. But if you are arguing any player who plays more must be better, please be serious yourself.

Oh that's the only counter? Say. How did San-Antonio do without Duncan in the 1996 playoffs getting to use a much better David Robinson. Surely they didn't go from 15-2 to getting cooked by postseason fodder in 2000 with Drob steering the ship?

Since you completely dodged the data I posted for this year, yes, I'm guessing you have no counter to it.
1996 - I voted Robinson even lower than you that season already.
1999 - You mean the title run where Robinson set a record +20 on-court net while Duncan lagged far behind?
2000 - Calling a 1.2 ppg loss to a 5 SRS team cooked by fodder is wild exaggeration.

Duncan goes 6-3 without Robinson this year, 1-0 next year, and 2-0 in 2000. Robinson goes 5-3 without Tim Duncan (and then 1-3 in the playoffs). "Robinson was the real mvp" is not what I'm seeing here.

Very convenient for you to pick between SRS and W/L for WOWY depending on which suits you best. Say, what's the SRS change for 98 Robinson? And 00 Duncan too since you brought him up?

But hey, since many people apparently love the "player who averaged 6-12 more minutes than everyone else on his team on his prime and kept seeing co-stars look way better in on/off than any other approach is not actually the driver of his team" take, I'm going to go track this bill-russell-type defense Robinson must be exerting. If Robinson isn't torching Duncan in Rim-load I'm done with y'all.

"I'm done with yall" is such a weird attitude to have but you do you I guess. You can block me already if you want.

[Djoker]

Jordan seems like the obvious answer here again. He’s definitely slowed down at this point, but this is still a player who was undoubtedly one of the several very top-tier players in the RS and then led his team to the title. I think it takes a lot to overcome that.

I think there’s three crucial things to think about here:

1. The Bulls had major health/age issues this season (not to mention other drama), and Jordan still led the Bulls to a title. To begin with, Pippen missed almost half the season, and the Bulls played at a 6.4 SRS pace during those 38 games. That’s a 59-win pace by SRS, and it was a 56-win pace by win-loss record. And that’s despite the fact that Rodman was also very old at that point, and would not really play meaningful NBA basketball again after that year. Jordan really carried the Bulls to still be a great team during Pippen’s absence, despite really not having much help at all. Of course, when Pippen came back, they won at a 67-win pace—a very impressive ceiling once again, led by Jordan. Then we get to the playoffs. Pippen is healthy for this, but does break down at the end. Meanwhile, by the playoffs, Rodman had deteriorated to the point of becoming a bench player. Not to mention that the rest of the supporting cast had aged a lot. Throughout all this, the team also had tons of external drama, including open fighting between Phil Jackson and the GM/ownership. Overall, this was not a situation where you’d expect the Bulls to be able to keep winning. But they did. And it didn’t require a lucky cakewalk playoff run (indeed, the Pacers and Jazz were really good teams). This was a really impressive title for Jordan—including a regular season and playoffs steeped in adversity.

2. It should take a lot to overcome the arguable best RS player (and MVP winner) leading his team to the title. And the other candidates really don’t make a particularly great case for themselves. Shaq was great when he played, but only played 60 regular season games (and started only 57), and his team proceeded to get swept in the playoffs by the Jazz—with Shaq putting in a very flawed performance (being a significant defensive liability, having 4 assists in the whole series, and being awful on high volume from the FT line). Duncan has been mentioned but wasn’t at his best yet, and had his team go out easily in the second round of the playoffs at the hands of the Jazz—with Duncan having a pretty quiet series (not to mention a negative on-off for the playoffs as a whole, though I don’t put much stock in that, due to the sample size). Karl Malone probably has the best case outside of Jordan. He was very good in the regular season (and could’ve won MVP), and he actually had a solid playoffs. But Malone was defeated by Jordan in the Finals, with the defining moment of those Finals involving Jordan stripping Malone.

3. For what it’s worth in terms of data, while the major candidates are close to each other, Jordan’s pure RAPM in this season (as per basketballdatabase) was above any other POY candidate except Shaq—who, again, only played 60 games. The same is true with RPM (and Jordan is above Shaq in RPM Wins). Meanwhile, while playoff RAPM is largely useless due to the small sample size, I will note that Jordan’s combination of +8.1 ON, and +13.1 ON-OFF almost certainly means he had the top playoff RAPM (and, indeed, FWIW we see him in 1st in the Gitlab playoff RAPM—which is the only playoff RAPM for that year that I’m aware of). The box metrics have different orders but generally show Malone, Jordan, Shaq, and Robinson as the top players (with Malone looking the best in box metrics overall, I’d say). Overall, looking at the panoply of impact and box metrics we have, I don’t think the data conclusively shows Jordan having been the best regular season player (nor does it do so for anyone else), but I do think it shows him clearly one of the top few guys in that conversation. When you then combine that with Jordan winning the title despite substantial adversity, while beating Malone and with Shaq and Duncan/Robinson going out relatively easily and/or quietly in the playoffs, it seems like a pretty easy decision IMO (though I’d say Karl Malone has a valid argument).

Great post.

Just want to add that in 44 games with Pippen, the Bulls had a +8.4 SRS which is 63 Pythagorean Wins. The 67-win pace you mentioned is based on wins and losses. Either way, the Bulls with Pippen were 2 SRS points better which isn't nothing but +6.4 SRS without him is still really strong carrying by MJ. I do think the Bulls cast minus Pip is still fantastic on defense with Rodman/Harper and a good system but on offense, they really needed someone to carry that roster in a big way.

[AEnigma]

Which ones? Robinson looks clearly ahead in all of them

2.128 vs 0.8591, basketball-analytics
2.37 vs 1.60, thebasketballdatabase
3.31 vs 2.32, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (NPI)
3.64 vs 1.80, ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt (PI)
3.2 vs 2.2, nbarapm (2 year)

Do you feel that Duncan was so much better on offence than Robinson, and more of an offence booster than a defence booster? Do you feel Kukoc was an elite defender and Pippen and Malone were neutral ones?

Small sample RAPM is already noisy, and splitting it into “offence and defence” exacerbates the issue. If you want to take those splits at face value, go ahead, but that is not how I perceive the disparity in role between these two players. If anything, most of the box production here suggests Robinson’s advantage would be more on offence, and while again that is not really what I feel best encapsulates the dynamic at play, it strikes me as odd to express total confidence that Robinson was a marginally positive offensive player (although in the postseason…).

You: They are similar based on DRAPM.

Not what I said, no.

Me: Which RAPM source are you using?
You: RAPM is noisy, ORAPM/DRAPM splits are even more noisy...

Yes?

It was you, not me, who brought up RAPM numbers.

Correct.

When asked for a source, you pivoted to questioning the interpretation of the data and its accuracy instead. Valid points but nothing to do with your original claim that you could not back up.

My original claim was not that they had equal DRAPM; that was your interpretation, and while it was an understandable one, you have decided to cling to it rather than accept that implausible splits were not a basis for my stance.

As for Robinson and Duncan on offense vs defense, I would have thought it's uncontroversial to say Duncan was better on offense and Robinson on defense (for the first couple years only obviously). You don't give the rookie more shots and the low post spot in high low action unless he was the better post scorer. Maybe there is the argument that post scoring isn't that efficient so being better in a relatively inefficient shot isn't that valuable but given the league wide efficiency at the time and the lack of offensive alternatives on the team, I don't know if that's a strong case.

Sure, which is why I said I thought Robinson was the better defender more than he was the better offensive player, but if you are taking RAPM splits at face value, then Robinson is in fact a relatively marginal offensive player despite being more efficient (in the regular season), scoring more points per possession (in the regular season), turning the ball over less (in the regular season), drawing more fouls, grabbing more offensive rebounds, being a more involved passer…