Does Robinson's metrics make him top 15 at least

[migya]

David Robinson's metrics are among the best ever, for regular season and playoffs. He gets knocked down for his longevity and some PS performances but what should he rank alltime?


In comparison to an alltime great and favorite on this forum, Garnett, who is a top 15 player at least alltime:

[Ol Roy]

The degrees of separation for the great players are so small, IMO, that the "top" lists become almost meaningless. Especially because different eras, positions, and criteria are being considered, with more great players moving up the ranks all the time.

I would take Robinson on my team every day, though.

[lessthanjake]

While I like Robinson, I think there’s still some uncertainty with his impact metrics, which makes it not all that conclusive in terms of where he should be placed:

1. His post-1997 RAPM had him getting into the top 10 in the league, but wasn’t overwhelming. This was post-injury, so it would make sense to infer that he was more impactful earlier, but we don’t know for sure how much more impactful he was (if at all), and the post-1997 data doesn’t on its own suggest he must be in the top 15.

2. The best data we have for Robinson is the 1994-1996 on-off data we have. That data looks great! While we don’t have full RAPM for those years, the on-off makes it very likely his RAPM was extremely good. We don’t know exactly how good, so there’s at least a little uncertainty there, though I’d be shocked if his impact data from those years wouldn’t be incredible.

3. We don’t really have much of any impact data from Robinson’s 1990-1993 time period. We do have Squared RAPM data from about 80 games Robinson played in 1990, 1991, and 1993, and it looks good overall but not incredible. That’s a small sample though, so there’s a lot of uncertainty here. I wouldn’t say that this data precludes Robinson from being a top 15 player, but it definitely doesn’t require us to put him in the top 15.

4. Overall, across Squared’s entire 1985-1996 sample, Robinson is 3rd, behind Jordan and Magic. With all the usual caveats about Squared’s data being partial, that is potentially supportive of Robinson being a top 15 player. Being 3rd in that time period is exactly what we’d want from a top 15 player! But he’s also miles behind Jordan and Magic, and not a lot ahead of several players just behind him. So it’s a positive data point for Robinson, but not overly conclusive.

I also think the biggest issue for Robinson comes outside of impact metrics. It is his playoff performance. He does have good playoff on-off from 1998 onwards, so that helps him in this regard. But playoff on-off is very noisy, and we have seen Robinson’s playoff performances. He’s definitely far from top 15 ever in terms of playoff performance, which matters a lot.

[migya]

While I like Robinson, I think there’s still some uncertainty with his impact metrics, which makes it not all that conclusive in terms of where he should be placed:

1. His post-1997 RAPM had him getting into the top 10 in the league, but wasn’t overwhelming. This was post-injury, so it would make sense to infer that he was more impactful earlier, but we don’t know for sure how much more impactful he was (if at all), and the post-1997 data doesn’t on its own suggest he must be in the top 15.

2. The best data we have for Robinson is the 1994-1996 on-off data we have. That data looks great! While we don’t have full RAPM for those years, the on-off makes it very likely his RAPM was extremely good. We don’t know exactly how good, so there’s at least a little uncertainty there, though I’d be shocked if his impact data from those years wouldn’t be incredible.

3. We don’t really have much of any impact data from Robinson’s 1990-1993 time period. We do have Squared RAPM data from about 80 games Robinson played in 1990, 1991, and 1993, and it looks good overall but not incredible. That’s a small sample though, so there’s a lot of uncertainty here. I wouldn’t say that this data precludes Robinson from being a top 15 player, but it definitely doesn’t require us to put him in the top 15.

4. Overall, across Squared’s entire 1985-1996 sample, Robinson is 3rd, behind Jordan and Magic. With all the usual caveats about Squared’s data being partial, that is potentially supportive of Robinson being a top 15 player. Being 3rd in that time period is exactly what we’d want from a top 15 player! But he’s also miles behind Jordan and Magic, and not a lot ahead of several players just behind him. So it’s a positive data point for Robinson, but not overly conclusive.

I also think the biggest issue for Robinson comes outside of impact metrics. It is his playoff performance. He does have good playoff on-off from 1998 onwards, so that helps him in this regard. But playoff on-off is very noisy, and we have seen Robinson’s playoff performances. He’s definitely far from top 15 ever in terms of playoff performance, which matters a lot.

Garnett was not a better playoff performer and certainly had his problems.

In context, Robinson looks alltime great for his prime, carrying his average at best rosters to very good regular seasons and some good playoff performances.

[lessthanjake]

One thing I’ll add here is that David Robinson’s best argument for top 15 is probably a WOWY-based argument.

The 1989 Spurs were a -7.45 SRS team, and then David Robinson joined and they became a +3.58 SRS team in 1990. The 1996 Spurs were a +5.98 SRS team, and then David Robinson got injured very early the next year and they became a -7.93 SRS team in 1997. He was back in 1998 and they went from a -7.93 SRS team to a +3.30 SRS team (though obviously they added Duncan too). These are massive signals that average out to like +12 SRS lift. It’s a good set of data for him. But multi-year WOWY signals are extremely noisy—as per DraymondGold’s analysis, the difference between the same player’s WOWY signals in the same year when they leave a team and when they join another team average a variance of over 100%. There’s obviously just a lot of other context that goes into this sort of data, which makes it not a good type of data to exclusively focus on. Other than that, there’s not a lot of WOWY data, since Robinson didn’t miss many games, but he did miss 14 games in the 1992 season and the Spurs had a -5.55 SRS in the games he missed and a +4.53 SRS in the games he played. It’s a small sample, but it does look good too.

Overall, I think there’s some validity to looking at the WOWY data, the 1994-1996 on-off, the Squared 1985-1996 RAPM, and the post-1997 RAPM and deciding that that overall picture is pretty convincing. The chances that David Robinson would have the entirety of this RAPM & WOWY data picture without being an extremely impactful player is probably pretty low. But the per-possession impact data we have is relatively limited, and the game-level WOWY stuff we have is inherently noisy. So it may not be airtight enough to overcome concerns over his translation to the playoffs.

[falcolombardi]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

[Djoker]

I have no problem with calling Robinson a top 15 regular season player of all time. The issue with him is the playoffs. He is definitely not a top 15 playoff performer of all time which pretty much for most people means he's just not top 15 since the playoffs are weighed more heavily.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

As a big proponent of the Admiral, Top 15 is tough. I have him Top 20. The WOWY stuff, the post-97 RAPM, impact on both sides of the ball, the combination of athletic ability and skill, it's all there. His playoff performance is the issue, but I feel that the 1999 title in particular makes up for some(not all) of that.

[Ol Roy]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

Because of titles?

I'd struggle to see how Robinson on those Warriors teams doesn't win 6+ titles.

[Special_Puppy]

Definitely not a lock for the top 15. He's brought down by losing some bite in the playoffs and his lack of longevity. I'd put him around 17th all time viewtopic.php?t=2393827

[Special_Puppy]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

This is crazy ****

[rrravenred]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

Because of titles?

I'd struggle to see how Robinson on those Warriors teams doesn't win 6+ titles.

Eh. Nowhere near the distributor and arguably not as good a spacer (unless you think Robinson's middy will translate seamlessly into a decent 3).

Way better slasher ofc and at the very least his equal as defender (and given reduced offensive responsibilities, probably way better). Worlds apart better shotblocker, although at least part of the numbers are down to the post-heavy era.

Globally, I don't think there's any argument The Admiral is a better player, but on that Warriors squad there's a situational argument that Dray is more useful.

[falcolombardi]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

Because of titles?

I'd struggle to see how Robinson on those Warriors teams doesn't win 6+ titles.

No, i didnt say anythingh about titles

I dont have draymond above robinson but probably have robinson in the high 20's to low 30's and draymond as fringe top 50 player contender, somewhere in a 51-70 range

Draymond is a worse offensive player at any role (first, second, third, fourth option) and a worse regular season lifter

But robinson is a extremely flawed lead option that struggled against playoffs defense and had a knack for underperforming relative to his admiteddly elite regular seasons, his defense was great but not otherwordly against good competition either

Draymond is a surprisingly resilient playoffs player and has been the 2nd mpst important player in 2 different title teams like robinson

Someone like anthony davis is probably functionally closer to the admiral

[DCasey91]

Jordan
James
Kareem
Duncan
Russell
Shaq
Bird
Johnson
Hakeem
Wilt
Curry
Jokic
Kobe
Oscar
West

That's 15 right there. Then there's Giannis, Erving, Garnett, Dirk which I'm comfortable putting DROB around there also Mikan. So yeah top 15 isn't a guaranteed lock but not far of it. I just don't like flawed players at the top when starting the thing rolling. Pretty big anti Garnett advocate for the very same reason as well though DROBs playoff resume isn't all that bad all things considered for his skillet.

I have Giannis and Dirk ahead because they just have a higher standing when it comes down to it. Don't know why people refuse to acknowledge that the hill you stand on isn't a number one option no matter what you do. And that holds most value in championship equity. Crunch whatever you want you'll always fall short.

It's like Dirk plus all nba def anchor
Or DROB with elite wing/guard guy

... I can do the exact same thing with Dirk but regardless your going to need someone better at putting ball in hoop to get the job done but not in Dirks case. It's literally the same analogous argument with Ewing. Great RS play but you'll be short which happened. The exact same with Garnett into Pierce

If I'm closer objectively to champ equity with an individual I'm taking that said individual over one whose further away.

On a purely statistical or metric scale he definitely has an argument to be top 15 but so does Harden, Embiid but we aren't stupid enough to buy it.

[Ol Roy]

No, i didnt say anythingh about titles

I dont have draymond above robinson but probably have robinson in the high 20's to low 30's and draymond as fringe top 50 player contender, somewhere in a 51-70 range

Draymond is a worse offensive player at any role (first, second, third, fourth option) and a worse regular season lifter

But robinson is a extremely flawed lead option that struggled against playoffs defense and had a knack for underperforming relative to his admiteddly elite regular seasons, his defense was great but not otherwordly against good competition either

Draymond is a surprisingly resilient playoffs player and has been the 2nd mpst important player in 2 different title teams like robinson

Someone like anthony davis is probably functionally closer to the admiral

While I give Draymond a lot of credit for being a key member of the Warriors teams, to me he is fundamentally a 2nd/3rd option. And that was in his prime. I can't overlook his supporting cast, either. By contrast, Robinson was clearly a first option who could have used a high-level perimeter sidekick, as well as more intelligent offensive scheme to play within.

[eminence]

His RS numbers '90-'96 put him up for discussion with anyone (his run with Duncan is very good but also clearly a step down), but there's just nothing to hang his hat on playoffs wise in his best years. The best team they beat in that 7 year run was a +2, 51 win Blazers with Clyde Drexler injured.

Even KG in Minnesota at least has the '04 Kings on his resume.

[Ol Roy]

I am not even sure he is all that much ahead of draymond green

Because of titles?

I'd struggle to see how Robinson on those Warriors teams doesn't win 6+ titles.

Eh. Nowhere near the distributor and arguably not as good a spacer (unless you think Robinson's middy will translate seamlessly into a decent 3).

Way better slasher ofc and at the very least his equal as defender (and given reduced offensive responsibilities, probably way better). Worlds apart better shotblocker, although at least part of the numbers are down to the post-heavy era.

Globally, I don't think there's any argument The Admiral is a better player, but on that Warriors squad there's a situational argument that Dray is more useful.

I'll grant that Green is a much better distributor (although, distributing to Curry and Klay and sometimes KD is a dream job) and as a smaller player, he's a better ball-handler. I do think Robinson had the requisite skills to occasionally bring up the ball and distribute some. I like his passing a lot, despite being in a poor system to showcase it, and the rules today would open up his movement with the ball. I think he'd shoot a serviceable three, but obviously the main role you want him in is the finisher at the rim.

I guess the question is, if you swap Green for Robinson, is the tradeoff in playmaking for everything else worth it? I would say it is. The gravity of Robinson at the rim contrasted with the Splash shooters would be just about impossible to defend. If you look at free throw rates, Robinson was fouled on 58% of his shots, the same as Shaq, despite shooting way more middies than Shaq. And he usually made 3/4 of his FTs. Now, Shaq was better at getting to the rim, but if Robinson got there, he was even more likely to be fouled.

Again, with the shooting, spacing, less double teams (he was always doubled teamed), and freedom of movement (I think Robinson would do a fair number of Gianni-step drives too), not to mention the lack of bruisers at the rim in this modern era...I think it would have been game-over for the rest of the league.

And as a bonus, Robinson wouldn't drive KD away like Green did, lol.

[rrravenred]

I'll grant that Green is a much better distributor (although, distributing to Curry and Klay and sometimes KD is a dream job) and as a smaller player, he's a better ball-handler. I do think Robinson had the requisite skills to occasionally bring up the ball and distribute some. I like his passing a lot, despite being in a poor system to showcase it, and the rules today would open up his movement with the ball. I think he'd shoot a serviceable three, but obviously the main role you want him in is the finisher at the rim.

And that sort of speaks to what sort of offence you want to craft around this talent. If it's based on offball movement, who's doing the distribution. If it's based on iso plays, how do you counter modern switching D. Think Curry could perform a more traditional PG role, though that's arguably taking away from his biggest strength.

Robinson is a faceup demon, but does he have the vision and technical passing ability to leverage the gravity that brings.

I guess the question is, if you swap Green for Robinson, is the tradeoff in playmaking for everything else worth it? I would say it is. The gravity of Robinson at the rim contrasted with the Splash shooters would be just about impossible to defend. If you look at free throw rates, Robinson was fouled on 58% of his shots, the same as Shaq, despite shooting way more middies than Shaq. And he usually made 3/4 of his FTs. Now, Shaq was better at getting to the rim, but if Robinson got there, he was even more likely to be fouled.

Again, with the shooting, spacing, less double teams (he was always doubled teamed), and freedom of movement (I think Robinson would do a fair number of Gianni-step drives too), not to mention the lack of bruisers at the rim in this modern era...I think it would have been game-over for the rest of the league.

Giannis is a good comparison in the modern game, I think, with Middleton and Jrue being the pauper's versions of the Splash Brothers. Definitely good enough for a championship or two.

And as a bonus, Robinson wouldn't drive KD away like Green did, lol.

Heh, as NBA citizens can't imagine anyone preferring Dray.

[migya]

One thing I’ll add here is that David Robinson’s best argument for top 15 is probably a WOWY-based argument.

The 1989 Spurs were a -7.45 SRS team, and then David Robinson joined and they became a +3.58 SRS team in 1990. The 1996 Spurs were a +5.98 SRS team, and then David Robinson got injured very early the next year and they became a -7.93 SRS team in 1997. He was back in 1998 and they went from a -7.93 SRS team to a +3.30 SRS team (though obviously they added Duncan too). These are massive signals that average out to like +12 SRS lift. It’s a good set of data for him. But multi-year WOWY signals are extremely noisy—as per DraymondGold’s analysis, the difference between the same player’s WOWY signals in the same year when they leave a team and when they join another team average a variance of over 100%. There’s obviously just a lot of other context that goes into this sort of data, which makes it not a good type of data to exclusively focus on. Other than that, there’s not a lot of WOWY data, since Robinson didn’t miss many games, but he did miss 14 games in the 1992 season and the Spurs had a -5.55 SRS in the games he missed and a +4.53 SRS in the games he played. It’s a small sample, but it does look good too.

Overall, I think there’s some validity to looking at the WOWY data, the 1994-1996 on-off, the Squared 1985-1996 RAPM, and the post-1997 RAPM and deciding that that overall picture is pretty convincing. The chances that David Robinson would have the entirety of this RAPM & WOWY data picture without being an extremely impactful player is probably pretty low. But the per-possession impact data we have is relatively limited, and the game-level WOWY stuff we have is inherently noisy. So it may not be airtight enough to overcome concerns over his translation to the playoffs.

I'm not much familiar with some of these advanced metrics but in light of this information on Robinson, a good way to look at it is; How many other players have those numbers? Doubt there's many, which can be a strong indicator of him being alltime great.

[migya]

I have no problem with calling Robinson a top 15 regular season player of all time. The issue with him is the playoffs. He is definitely not a top 15 playoff performer of all time which pretty much for most people means he's just not top 15 since the playoffs are weighed more heavily.

For me context is massive with this. Robinson should have performed better, no doubt, but his teams were below average at best, particularly in the playoffs. He was on his own and carried more than most alltime greats, it was ridiculous that they just couldn't get a good enough guard to go alongside him. Elliott was pretty good for two seasons but a limited player compared to his era good wings. Robinson did have good playoff showings, like his first three playoffs, 1990-93. 1995 was very good too and it's been discussed how he got a raw deal in the wcf against Houston with being doubled but not getting help from his own teammates in that regards. 1996 was good too. It was his issues with Karl Malone and in reality not using his size against him the right way. He played into Malone's strengths in 1994 and 1996 instead of playing close to the basket and punishing him. All that can really be said is that he didn't shoot as good as he did in the RS overall, but that is in truth that his RS level was so high that his drop gets overblown. His playoff performances were better than many other stars, even with the lack of talent on his teams.