Retro POY '01-02 (ends Thu morning PST)

[ronnymac2]

Regular season games played is something I think about, but it's not a major breaking point of my critiria. Unless you miss playoff games or like, half the season, I'm probably not going to penalize you. Especially if I feel the guy was the best player in the league, was the most dominant statistically, and won a title.

how Shaq was the most dominant statistically ? I have no problem with you saying best player in the league based on this gut feeling. I don't know though, what you're refering to in this case. Duncan outclassed Shaq statistically if you talk about it from all-year perspective... and then he dominated head2head too. I just don't see how you can make that case after seeing the head2head numbers which weren't JUST in Tim's favor but clearly seperated him in the series... and that's after he outplayed him during the course of the RS. I don't see it.

Well, most statistically dominant meant...the stats. It is my understanding that PER is able to compare two players cumulative box-score stats from the same year and compare them to the rest of the league. Now, I don't think of PER as a great tool, mainly because I think boxscore stats themselves only tell half the story. So a bunch of half-truths combined aren't THAT valuable. That's better than nothing, but not quite enough. Still, Shaq had greater statistical domination over the league that year using PER.

Again, I explained why the head-to-head stats in that 2nd round aren't that valuable when comparing the two. Shaq had Kobe to rely on; Duncan didn't have a Kobe. Lakers won mainly because of that. Shaq's impact was in equalizing things against SAS's frontcourt. Kobe finished them off.

[ronnymac2]

Time to vote.....

If it isn't clear why i am voting for Shaq already, here is something a little extra....

IMHO, Shaq may have had the two most meaningful games of his entire career this season. Lakers are down 3-2 in the WCF's against SAC, an old rival. It's similar to what Lebron James and the Cavs face (different home courts) right now. It's like what Charles and Kenny were talking about after tonight's game. Cleveland is going to look to LBJ to be aggressive and come out and dominate in game 6. They'll follow. I don't usually use player quotes, but Brian Shaw has a good one in this video about Shaq's attitude going into that huge game 6. It's at the 1:28.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfEFG7A-JfA&feature=related

He dropped 41 and 17 in that game. He hit 13/17 free throws.

Then gm 7. On Sacramento's raucus home floor. Both teams slug away at each other, and at the end of regulation, the game is tied 100-100 (a fitting way to have these two teams decide who was best, right?). IIRC, Shaq's impact in the 4th was huge. SAC tried to illegally defend him, leaving Fisher and then Horry open for huge 3's.

Then in OT, the lakers outscore the Kings 12-6, with Shaq scoring 6 points. Game 7 of the WCF's, on the road, and he drops 6 in ot to help win the game. He finishes with 35/13/4. Hits 11/15 free throws.

With a 3-peat on the line, he dropped 38ppg/15rpg and hit 75% of his free throws. He shot 52% on field goals. Blocked 3 shots per game.

You are player of the year in my book if you do that.

Timmy is a clear second.

The rest...Payton, Kidd, Pierce, Dirk, KG, Bryant, McGrady, Webber.....

No to GP. No to Pierce. No to Webber. We have a 5 player race for 3 spots. Two players are going to get screwed.

This is interesting with McGrady, Bryant, and KG. They were amazing this year, but were still developing into the players they'd become in 03. I'm not sure how far each was into their development though.

Though I think Dirk was an average defender at this point, I think the other four have him there. He's beastly offensively though. This was around the time I was thinking (damn, 10 boards a game and shooting 3's.....this guy is crazy). Actually, his development is right there with the other three. Because it was in 03 where I thought Dirk arrived with that crazy gm 7 against Portland. So this was his year-before superstardom imo.

I love Kidd this year. He was amazing.

I think I'm going to put Kobe over McGrady. Again, mainly because of superior defense. Kobe also gets an edge in the tie-breaker category- team success.

I've got KG over Dirk. Dirk still has to become a better defender and passer here. I'll take KG's advantages at this developmental stage over Dirk.

I've got KG over McGrady as well. I think KG and Kobe are basically even this year as players, so....

As much as I love Kidd, I have to put him behind Kobe and Garnett.

So Kobe vs. KG for 3 and 4. Kidd vs. Dirk vs. T-Mac for 5.

I think KG is closer to Kobe this year as a player than in 03 to be honest. Which basically means they are even considering there is such little separating them in 03. Kobe's ring and stellar play in the SAS series, last 2 games vs. SAC, and a strong finals give him the edge.

I have to put Kidd over Dirk. I think Dirk has over the years become a lot better at helping his teammates out. I need that in a star. I don't think Dirk did that this year. He doesn't get an edge in D either. Kidd's teams faced **** in the East, but his team was ****, too. He led a bunch of decent role players to the finals. He was able to elevate the play of his teammates. An offensive constant must consist of scoring and passing. Neither of these guys have both. I'm going to take Kidd based on his leadership, defensive advantage, and at least getting to the finals (not admonishing Dirk for not doing that, but giving Kidd at least a little extra credit).

Kidd vs. T-Mac.....

Before I vote on this one....Bastillion, I think it was you who talked about McGrady being hurt that post-season. If you or anybody else has more details about that, can they let me know? I don't remember that, and I didn't see it reading in this thread.

Not going to put official vote up yet....I'll wait to hear the verdict on Tracy.

[Rick45]

Iverson was my boy in these days, man I LOVED him a lot more than I like LeBron now. I like LeBron I loved Iverson lol. I guess it's because we both come from the hood and he dress and talk like us but I learned when I got older how so inefficient he was but still had pretty bad teams

[ElGee]

I'd like to see more discussion on Garnett. Clearly he improved significantly in '02-03, but I'm rather surprised he isn't getting more mentions than he is particularly because there's actually less depth this year.

I have KG and Dirk in a battle for 5th right now. To me, Garnett was a tier below where he'd venture in 2003...but his all-around impact on the game at that time was still pretty large. I just re-watched 10 minutes of a game from the playoff series vs Dallas and the Mavs look loaded and have mismatches everywhere, and yet these two teams 'SRS's were similar. So, KG was still pretty darn good. Dirk was younger, but I thought he took a nice jump - similar to, and slightly better than, Paul Pierce's.

I'd also like more analysis of Kobe vs T-Mac. I had Kobe ranked higher at the time -- is there a strong argument someone can make against that other than low PS efficiency? I mean, are we docking Kobe that much in 02 because he didn't have the numbers of 01 and 03 Kobe? I'd agree his 03 season was better...but so was McGrady's.

I re-watched G5 vs. SA and he had a quality ballgame -- better than Shaq's -- and made big plays down the stretch (Horry, of course, made the closing 3 on a Kobe drive-and-kick). Kobe averaged ~9 ppg in the 4th quarter in that series.

[drza]

I'd like to see more discussion on Garnett. Clearly he improved significantly in '02-03, but I'm rather surprised he isn't getting more mentions than he is particularly because there's actually less depth this year.

I have KG and Dirk in a battle for 5th right now. To me, Garnett was a tier below where he'd venture in 2003...but his all-around impact on the game at that time was still pretty large. I just re-watched 10 minutes of a game from the playoff series vs Dallas and the Mavs look loaded and have mismatches everywhere, and yet these two teams 'SRS's were similar. So, KG was still pretty darn good. Dirk was younger, but I thought he took a nice jump - similar to, and slightly better than, Paul Pierce's.

I'd also like more analysis of Kobe vs T-Mac. I had Kobe ranked higher at the time -- is there a strong argument someone can make against that other than low PS efficiency? I mean, are we docking Kobe that much in 02 because he didn't have the numbers of 01 and 03 Kobe? I'd agree his 03 season was better...but so was McGrady's.

I re-watched G5 vs. SA and he had a quality ballgame -- better than Shaq's -- and made big plays down the stretch (Horry, of course, made the closing 3 on a Kobe drive-and-kick). Kobe averaged ~9 ppg in the 4th quarter in that series.

I'd actually take it in a different direction...I've seen Kobe and TMac paired in conversation, and I've seen KG and Dirk paired...but I haven't seen much discussion for the Kobe/TMac pair vs the KG/Dirk pair. I mean, I guess I don't see why Kobe/Tmac are enjoying such a clear separation over the PFs in this thread.

From my POV, my general observations from that year would be (as I mentioned before) that it was in the era of the power forward. Whereas after the rules changed for '05 we've seen more emphasis on perimeter players, back then it seemed that you needed a quality big to build a strong team around. That the Dirks, KGs and Webbers of the world were a bit more valuable than the wings or perimeter players.

If I take it to advanced stats (now I've only got 3 to look at for this group), we see that in PER all four players were within 2 points of each other (Kobe lowest, TMac highest with KG and Dirk in the middle), in Win Shares all were within 2 points of each other (TMac lowest, Dirk highest with Kobe and KG in the middle), and in wins produced KG led, followed by TMac then Kobe (I couldn't find a WP measure for Dirk, but based on things Berri has written through the years it seems likely he'd be right around TMac in WP for that year).

Likewise, if you look at team record and team role, the big men still seem competitive to me. Dirk carried his talented cast to a similar record as the Lakers, but he was more of the main guy than Kobe was on his team. KG carried a perhaps slightly better (but roughly comparable) cast to a better record/similar standing in a stacked West than TMac was able to do with the Magic in the East.

I guess I'm just not seeing the separation here. It seems to me that after Duncan and Shaq it should be a 5-man scrum for those last 3 spots (throwing Kidd into the mix as well). Instead, it seems to almost universally be the perimeter players getting the nod with the wings in particular ranking higher than the PFs. I just wonder why?

[sp6r=underrated]

I'm still leaning towards

1. Shaq
2. Duncan

But the insightful conversation of the last few pages has already muddled by thinking on KG, Dirk, Kidd, Kobe, T-MAC.

On an individual level I think we are entering a very important period for the NBA. 01 and 02 are the seasons when the Dirk, KG, TD, Kobe, T-MAC, Nash, etc., really started breaking out and would carry the NBA until 08 in my mind when Lebron, Wade, Paul, etc. really began to exert their influence.

98-01 was sort of a weak period for individual campaigns.

Shaq didn't take over in 98 or 99 the way we expected him. It allowed a past prime MJ and Malone to still be considered the best players in the NBA. It wasn't until 2000 that he really used all of his potential. The draft classes from Shaq's era were generally disappointments. Some due to injury (Hill, Penny, Mourning (After 01), etc.) other because they never fully figured out how to use their ability, think Webber.

The players who dominated the middle part of this decade were still coming into their own. So, it was a strange time period that were entering.

[Sedale Threatt]

1. Shaq. I really, really struggled with this one, believe it or not. It was probably going to come down to the last good argument I read, and that was from Ronny Mac. When it counted, he wrecked.

2. Duncan. Possibly his best all-around season. He has a tremendous case. I was literally changing my mind every time I logged into this thread, and I went with my guy. Sue me.

3. KG. He was a season away from being all-time elite, but I still love everything he brings to the table -- the versatility, the defense, the intangibles. Really like Dirk, but he's not in that class, IMO.

4. Kobe. I'll use Ronny Mac's approach. Not his best year, but this is what Kobe did in two elimination games against Sacto: 31/11/5 and 30/10/7. I think that matters.

5. McGrady. No matter what the stats say, I never put Tracy on Kobe's level. Maybe it was the lazy eye ball, but he always seemed like George Gervin to Kobe's Jordan. Great, but not as good.

[Doctor MJ]

My vote:

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. Kidd
5. Garnett

Shaq's a pretty easy #1 for me. I'm quick to criticize him, and didn't hesitate to knock him out of my top 5 in '03, but in this year he is the reigning king, and come playoff time, he took no prisoners once again. And of course, it's not like he was bad during the regular season, he was still elite - coasting just meant he wasn't MVP worthy.

Duncan's then a really easy #2. Big drop off after him.

Kobe takes the 3rd spot. It's not a big gap between him and the next 4 guys, but I really am impressed with the 3-peat, and I really think without his seriousness keeping Shaq a bit more honest, the Lakers become significantly more likely to fall.

Kidd. People in this group really aren't impressed with him, and I get it. Certainly, the fact that rose in prominence so much this year overrates him a bit, but still: Kidd switches teams, and both teams feel a big shift. Subsequent years show Kidd to be a consistent +/- performer. Dude's an impact player. Of course he's also helped in this year relative to '02-03 in that the competition isn't so tough.

One thing, someone mentioned in the Nash discussion about Marbury, and maybe it's not so much Nash & Kidd are that good, but that Marbury's just NOT good. There's some truth to that, he was overrated, but Marbury wasn't a scrub who was net hurting every team he was on. He did lead teams to the playoffs - and the problems with the Knicks really were mostly with inept management. Was Marbury a top 5 point guard in terms of positive impact? Maybe not - but he certainly wasn't below average, and quite possibly significantly better than that. That Kidd & Nash improved teams so much over him is primarily a testament to how much impact a primary ball handler with sky high BBIQ and strong leadership can have.

Garnett snags the 5th spot. He didn't improve THAT much in '02-03. Dude was an MVP candidate in the two years previous, he just got lost in the shuffle this year because of other guys doing exciting stuff.

Honorable Mention:

Nowitzki - Almost made my top 5. Clearly having impact, but at this point in his career, I'm just not quite as sold on him as the guys above him.

McGrady - I guess I'm just not as sold on TMac in general as others are. He is like a lot of scorers imho - if they aren't at the very top of their game, he doesn't provide as much net impact as you'd think. He made #3 on my list in '02-03, but he also made a quantum leap that year. I mean 7 more points per game with a significant increase in efficiency? You don't see that very often. Still, not a big gap between him and the guys above him sans Shaq/Duncan.

Pierce - Great player with a solid year. I always feel like he doesn't get enough praise.

Payton - Payton's a great player, in his last year carrying the Sonics.

Webber - Someone from the Kings has to get on here right? Well, not really, but someone from the NBA has to get on here since I give 5 HM spots each year, and I don't know who else to pick. The #1 on a team that almost, ALMOST won it all.

[Silver Bullet]

^ The Marbury as a net negative thing doesn't really work for me - because we saw how when we replaced Marbury (with the Knicks) with someone who's not a top 5 point guard all time, the team does not win an iota more.

[ElGee]

Doc - McGrady's pulling 8 boards a game and is creating a good amount of offense for his teammates. They had a quality offense...I guess I just read your blurb on him and hear "Allan Houston" and when I watch him and look at his stats he's a lot closer to Kobe Bryant.

[Doctor MJ]

Doc - McGrady's pulling 8 boards a game and is creating a good amount of offense for his teammates. They had a quality offense...I guess I just read your blurb on him and hear "Allan Houston" and when I watch him and look at his stats he's a lot closer to Kobe Bryant.

This is the tough thing about explaining rankings. I always feel the need to explain the tough calls, which results in me saying bad things about the guy I rank lower. As I said, not a massive gap between 3 & 7, and "The Waiver" nowhere to be found.

[lorak]

1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

Last two votes might be controversial but that’s how I remember that season. Unfortunately that means I have to leave off KG, what’s difficult to me because I was one of the few who voted for him in top 5 every year (of course expect 2009).

4. Webber – during 00s Lakers dynasty only Blazers and Sacramento were so close to defeat LA (damn you officials in game 6) and Cwebb was the best Kings player. Sure, he missed a lot of games in regular season, but played every game in playoffs (I'm sure Bill Wolton will get many votes in 1977).

5. Kidd – weak conference, but he was the best player on the best East team and played even better in playoffs.

[drza]

My vote:

1) Duncan - Like I said before, I was leaning this direction before the thread began and I didn't read anything that made me change my mind. To me, this was his peak year, and it slid neatly into the slot after Shaq started leaving his own peak and right before KG entered his. This was also the first year when Robinson had completely lost his own fastball as well, leaving more on Timmy and he stepped up. My only question would have been that he was inefficient in the postseason, but when reminded of the circumstances I understood why his shot might desert him since he was doing everything else as the focus of everything.

2) Shaq - Even with the missed games, it still took an absolute peak season by someone as gifted as Duncan to edge Shaq out of the top spot. Though we talk a lot about how high Shaq's peak was, it took going back through the years in detail for this project to really remind me about how much of a monster he was back in those days.

3) Garnett - My lingering impression from this season before this project was that it was the last one before he catapulted up a level in '03, so I had forgotten how strong KG was that season. I had forgotten that he finished second in the Defensive Player of the year vote. I had forgotten how much of a hit the team took with Brandon's career-ending injury, and how much KG had to step up at the offensive end to help Chauncey run the team as he learned to be a PG. I had forgotten just how ridiculous the Flip's "KG-get-everyone-then-rebound" zone was. This project was a welcome reminder in that respect.

4) Nowitzki - IIRC, this was the first year that I really looked at Dirk and saw a beast. He had been good before, but he was just borderline unguardable for large stretches and really showed me that he was to be reckoned with. I was more of a Webber guy at the time, but Dirk started making a believer of me then (and of course, years later the advanced stats would paint a portrait of Dirk opening up space between them around this time).

5) A virtua-tossup between Kobe, TMac and Kidd. My preference would be to put Kidd here because I really did think at the time that he should have been MVP. But in hindsight, I have the feeling that Kidd will end up like Nash in my rankings: right on the cusp of the top-5, but rarely breaking in. There's also just so little to separate Kobe and TMac this season, so in some ways it'd almost be easier to just leave Kidd there since his style clearly differentiates him from the wings and there's only one slot. How do I decide between Kobe doing his thing as the elite #2 on a champ vs TMac doing his thing trying to carry not much as far as he could? There's just no separation there, outside of Kobe scoring slightly more efficiently (understandable playing off Shaq) and TMac grabbing more boards (understandable without having a Shaq to vacuum them up). I just don't know. Kobe and TMac dominate the B-R stats compared to Kidd, though he does destroy them in WP. I thought I was ready to vote, but I'm still too torn.

ETA: 5) Kobe. I'm completely unsatisfied here, since I essentially am just saying Kobe because when all's said and done, I think he was the best of the 3 players. I'm not sure he was the best in 2002, which sucks, but I can't really prove that he wasn't either. Big HM to Tracy and Kidd, who very very easily could have gone into this spot.

[ronnymac2]

Okay, I don't remember McGrady being injured. Which sucks, because I really wanted to get Kidd on one of these lists. I think T-Mac was a little better. His playmaking was good enough to make him a complete enough player to get over Kidd.

Final Vote:

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe
Garnett
McGrady

[bastillon]

T-Mac was playing through back pain.

[ronnymac2]

He played 44 minutes per game in the 4 games. He averaged 30 pgg. His production seems stable throughout that series.

Do you think this back pain is enough to really affect his play? To the point where Kidd should be ranked ahead of him based on it? (I'm seriously asking you...I'll reconsider my vote based on it)

[bastillon]

no, I consider Kidd to be much worse than Orlando T-Mac so even with back pain he has a significant nod. that back pain could be nonexistent if the circumstances were somewhat normal as opposed to carrying team of nobodies by yourself. IMO this is clearly T-Mac. as you said, iso scoring is extremely valuable in the playoffs Kidd doesn't provide any efficient scoring aside from spot-up 3s and that's why he regressed in the PS.

[ronnymac2]

Okay, then my vote stands.

To defend Kidd a bit though, he was probably the best iso scorer on that Nets team. That doesn't say much obviously, but it speaks to how great Kidd was and his passing ability that he was able to elevate those players and make the team good enogh on offense to get to the finals (defense was their strength, but you still need some offense, even in that bad East).

[bastillon]

Kenyon Martin was easily better than Kidd as an iso scorer. Kidd didn't have an efficient go-to move and Kenyon had some back to the basket game and obviously as explosive as anybody in the league. Kittles wasn't that bad either, not that he could create for himself or his teammates but good enough to come off screens/backdoors and knock down that jumpshot on the move. that's valuable... somewhat.

Kidd was great in transition, but there was hardly any offense for the Nets in the half court.

[Silver Bullet]

This was a transition year for KG