Retro Player of the Year Project

[sp6r=underrated]

I think the 1st thread of this project is the most important because it's gonna set a certain standard, the direction which we're going to follow in the other years. if people don't value team accomplishments so far, I expect them to do the same in the other years. if statistics are primary criterion of evaluating players, let's be consistent and use the same statistics in other years.

I wouldn't go that far. We all have players who we think are under/overvalued by our method of evaluating players. What is important is that the arguments stay as high quality as they have been and that people explain why they are going against their general method of evaluating players.

[bastillon]

I think the 1st thread of this project is the most important because it's gonna set a certain standard, the direction which we're going to follow in the other years. if people don't value team accomplishments so far, I expect them to do the same in the other years. if statistics are primary criterion of evaluating players, let's be consistent and use the same statistics in other years.

I wouldn't go that far. We all have players who we think are under/overvalued by our method of evaluating players. What is important is that the arguments stay as high quality as they have been and that people explain why they are going against their general method of evaluating players.

ok, but if (for example) LeBron is over Kobe in '09 because of advanced stats then I expect people to be consistent and go by the same criterias in other years. if we're going to give RS much weight, we should do the same in whole project.

[Sedale Threatt]

But isn't there any room for nuance?

If not, then let's just vote the best player on the championship team as No. 1 every year, and be done with it. In a lot of cases, that's going to work out just fine.

In others -- such as last year, in my opinion -- the best player might be so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him.

[bastillon]

But isn't there any room for nuance?

If not, then let's just vote the best player on the championship team as No. 1 every year, and be done with it. In a lot of cases, that's going to work out just fine.

In others -- such as last year, in my opinion -- the best player might be so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him.

no, I meant something different. people are putting a lot of emphasis on advanced stats. the popular view at the time was that Kobe and LeBron were equals, but now that we have stats and not game tape, we're focusing on them and LeBron's "so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him". I just don't think it's the case, but advanced stats really justify this stance.

that being said, as much as I understand this argument, while not necessarily agreeing with it, I want people to be consistent about it and base their opinion on advanced stats once we move to the earlier eras as well.

shorter version: if we're using certain criterion to put one player ahead of another, we should use the same standard in other cases as well.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

But isn't there any room for nuance?

If not, then let's just vote the best player on the championship team as No. 1 every year, and be done with it. In a lot of cases, that's going to work out just fine.

In others -- such as last year, in my opinion -- the best player might be so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him.

no, I meant something different. people are putting a lot of emphasis on advanced stats. the popular view at the time was that Kobe and LeBron were equals, but now that we have stats and not game tape, we're focusing on them and LeBron's "so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him". I just don't think it's the case, but advanced stats really justify this stance.

that being said, as much as I understand this argument, while not necessarily agreeing with it, I want people to be consistent about it and base their opinion on advanced stats once we move to the earlier eras as well.

shorter version: if we're using certain criterion to put one player ahead of another, we should use the same standard in other cases as well.

Not in the project, but the popular view you are referencing was more a product of the media than anything else. On RealGM, it has always been LeBron far and away, several polls held last year confirmed it.

If anything, I'd think a project would want to avoid media bias as much as possible, which is exactly what placed Kobe as equal to LeBron last season.

[Doctor MJ]

I think the 1st thread of this project is the most important because it's gonna set a certain standard, the direction which we're going to follow in the other years. if people don't value team accomplishments so far, I expect them to do the same in the other years. if statistics are primary criterion of evaluating players, let's be consistent and use the same statistics in other years.

As was mentioned, there's more to the story than we can get from any particular stat. I do think people will tend to use the same techniques over and over again - but there's bound to be deviations, and in general I'm inclined to believe those deviations are for a reason. I'm more interested in the voting panels thoughts and conclusions than I am in just the stats.

You're undoubtedly concerned about people ignoring stats when they have a bias - which could result in a group bias in a certain direction as we go deeper into history. This is definitely a reasonable concern. I certainly plan to be looking to ask people how they come to conclusions that aren't obviously supported by statistics, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. We won't get this perfect, but I think we'll do pretty well.

[Doctor MJ]

no, I meant something different. people are putting a lot of emphasis on advanced stats. the popular view at the time was that Kobe and LeBron were equals, but now that we have stats and not game tape, we're focusing on them and LeBron's "so far ahead of the pack that the fact his team did not win the championship isn't enough to move anybody ahead of him". I just don't think it's the case, but advanced stats really justify this stance.

I don't know how you think this is revisionist. LeBron won the MVP in a landslide last year, and then put up the greatest statistical playoffs in history. Not saying there weren't people who still considered Kobe at #1 - there were, and there are (though they'll typically acknowledge the current injury) - but last year there was a major contingent of people who thought LeBron was clearly #1. It may be the wrong opinion, but it's not due to revisionism.

[semi-sentient]

Is this thing locked up or can I get in still?

So, in or out?

I put my $.02 for 08-09, but if I'm too late then I'll just remain a spectator for the other years.

[Doctor MJ]

Is this thing locked up or can I get in still?

k, you're in with the reminder: You need to plan to stick with this project for the long haul.

[Sedale Threatt]

LeBron won the MVP in a landslide last year, and then put up the greatest statistical playoffs in history.

Exactly. There is ample reason to put him at No. 1 on the list. The only reason that there's even a shred of debate here is because his team faltered in the playoffs. Otherwise you're looking at one of the best individual seasons in NBA history.

[tkb]

Never mind..

[Doctor MJ]

I'm probably going to have a bias towards the player I think performed the best on the team that won the championship in this project since that's one of the things I value the most on my all time lists.

I'm not going to rank that person over other people I clearly think were superior, but winning the championship as the best player will boost a players ranking a lot on my lists.

My list looks like this from 3 and down:

3. Dwight Howard
4. Dwyane Wade
5. Chauncey Billups

Billups might be the surprise pick here over guys like Paul and Nowitzki, but I just think he had a great year and led his team beyond expectations. He also helped establish a better defensive focus in Denver, and IMO his leadership was just invaluable to that team.

My top 2 are obviously LeBron and Kobe. Will reveal ranking between those two later.

Wrong thread tkb.

[TrueLAfan]

Well, statistical analysis is imperfect…and one thing that multiple types of “advanced” (and, yes, I’m putting it in quotes for a good reason) statistical analysis has brought us is that pretty much anyone can find a certain analytic tool to support his/her conclusions. People become wedded to bad statistical analysis and tools. You have take a certain amount of these opinions with a grain of salt…and this is from someone who’s been doing statistical sports analysis for over two decades.

I think tkb’s selections (and point) have merit, not necessarily because he’s doing something “right” (since there’s no “right” answer…which, again, is something that some analytic tools either don’t admit or don’t want to admit), but because he’s an intelligent viewer who’s acknowledging something that, IMO, was generally known and acknowledged…and isn’t really statistically quantifiable. That means sometimes/often/usually means a whole lot more than a bunch of numbers taken in a poor context and interpreted with bias.

[Sedale Threatt]

Changing gears, what's the schedule for this going to be? One a week? Two?

I glanced back but didn't see an answer, so apologies if it's there.

[Doctor MJ]

Changing gears, what's the schedule for this going to be? One a week? Two?

I glanced back but didn't see an answer, so apologies if it's there.

We'll start a new one every two days, and each will last 3 days. So:

'09 Mon-Thu
'08 Wed-Sat
'07 Fri-Mon
etc

[Silver Bullet]

hey, how about doing a `10 series in real time. That way, we don't have to go back and rewatch all the games. We can just add posts as the games are happening.

[bastillon]

hey, how about doing a `10 series in real time. That way, we don't have to go back and rewatch all the games. We can just add posts as the games are happening.

great point.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

hey, how about doing a `10 series in real time. That way, we don't have to go back and rewatch all the games. We can just add posts as the games are happening.

great point.

I think its a really bad idea, because not only would opinions wildly vary from one game to the next, but the playoffs would get far more weight than deserved, and there would be almost no discussion about guys as soon as they're eliminated.

[drza]

hey, how about doing a `10 series in real time. That way, we don't have to go back and rewatch all the games. We can just add posts as the games are happening.

great point.

I think its a really bad idea, because not only would opinions wildly vary from one game to the next, but the playoffs would get far more weight than deserved, and there would be almost no discussion about guys as soon as they're eliminated.

Agreed. One of the benefits of a retro project is that everything is completed, and we have the hindsight benefit in making our evaluations. I think we'd lose that if we tried to evaluate in real time.

[lorak]

Agreed. One of the benefits of a retro project is that everything is completed, and we have the hindsight benefit in making our evaluations. I think we'd lose that if we tried to evaluate in real time.

Exactly.