Retro POY '00-01 (Voting Complete)

[bastillon]

playoff head2head:

Code: Select all

          MPG   PPG   TS%   APG   TOV   RPG   BPG   SPG
Duncan   38.5  22.5  0.51   3.5   2.8  13.0   2.0   1.0
Garnett  41.3  21.0  0.57   4.3   1.5  12.0   1.5   1.0

I guess Duncan's much closer to Garnett than to Shaq. you can make a good case that KG outplayed him in their h2h series.

RS

Code: Select all

          MPG   PPG   TS%   APG   TOV   RPG   BPG   SPG
Duncan   38.7  22.0  0.54   3.0   3.0  12.2   2.3   0.9
Garnett  39.5  22.0  0.53   5.0   2.8  11.4   1.8   1.4

pretty damn close.

Duncan finished 3rd in DPOY, right behind KG who was 2nd.

Wolves
ORtg 105.2 (11th of 29)
DRtg 103.7 (16th of 29)
won 47 games
1.81 SRS
with Brandon, Szczerbiak, Peeler, Laphonso Ellis, Billups in 23 MPG off the bench
coach: Saunders

Spurs
ORtg 106.6 (6th of 29)
DRtg 98.0 (1st of 29)
won 58 games
7.92 SRS
with Robinson, Avery, Antonio Daniels, Elliot and Derek Anderson
coach: Pop

if you have Duncan at 2nd, be consistent and put KG at 3rd. if you have Duncan 3rd, put Garnett at 2nd or 4th. if you leave Garnett off the ballot, be consistent and don't include Timmy either. they're pretty much as close as it gets.

[ronnymac2]

^^^Statistically......

[CellarDoor]

Yup, TS% 42....that's just outright terrible.

So is 48%. And that's over a 22 game sample size.

[bastillon]

Code: Select all

              MPG   PPG   TS%   APG   TOV   RPG   BPG   SPG
    Duncan   38.7  22.0  0.54   3.0   3.0  12.2   2.3   0.9
    Garnett  39.5  22.0  0.53   5.0   2.8  11.4   1.8   1.4

Ronnymac, when players are SOOO close it's hardly possible that one could be visibly/clearly better. there's absolutely no reason to have Duncan at 2 and Garnett at 5, unless players between them fit exactly in that diminutive gap, which is highly unlikely because of its tiny-ness.

[Doctor MJ]

'00-01 Results

Code: Select all

Player             1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Pts   POY Shares
1. Shaquille O'Neal 26   0   0   0   0 260   1.000
2. Tim Duncan        0  19   5   2   0 164   0.631
3. Kobe Bryant       0   5  10   9   2 119   0.438
4. Allen Iverson     0   1   6   6   7  62   0.238
5. Kevin Garnett     0   1   5   6   8  58   0.223
6. Vince Carter      0   0   0   2   4  10   0.038
7. Chris Webber      0   0   0   1   3   6   0.023
8. Jason Kidd        0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004
   Ray Allen         0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004


[Silver Bullet]

are we on a break ?

[Doctor MJ]

Yup. On break. Next thread, Monday morning.

[semi-sentient]

Site updated with 00-01 results: www.dolem.com/poy

Duncan breaks 5.0 on the all-time shares list. I don't think Shaq is going to catch him, and I wouldn't be shocked if guys like Magic and Bird fall short as well.

[Silver Bullet]

I think he'll catch him fairly easily - He has 8 more years of top 2-3 play to come.

[bastillon]

Code: Select all

2. Tim Duncan        0  19   5   2   0 164   0.631
5. Kevin Garnett     0   1   5   6   8  58   0.223

this is exactly what I was talking about. I can understand why Duncan gets more love, but when he gets 3 times as many votes while being basically the same player, it's just ridiculous.

I bet Duncan gets some TOP3 votes from homers even in 2000 when he missed the playoffs, but practiced at the time (IIRC he was worried about his contract). it'll be interesting how anti-KG bias (which was flat out apparent in this thread - nobody answered to my pts of them being pretty much equal) will affect 2000. Iverson nowhere, Kobe not at elite level yet and injured in the finals, Timmy injured in the postseason. I wonder who is gonna push Garnett out of TOP5. An Unbiased Silver Bullet will probably choose David Robinson ahead of him.

sorry for my tone, but I just had to let my frustration out... this is what happens when I make a case for my player, nobody responds to that and that ignores that argument in voting. I feel like I'm gonna be very disappointed in Hakeem votings as he's almost as controversial as Nash and Garnett and unfortunately I'm their fan. damn me and my preferences...

[Gongxi]

I think he'll catch him fairly easily - He has 8 more years of top 2-3 play to come.

Not really, because in plenty of those seasons he missed a third or more of it. That's certainly going to effect my ranking of him; it won't effect yours?

it'll be interesting how anti-KG bias (which was flat out apparent in this thread - nobody answered to my pts of them being pretty much equal) will affect 2000.

Nobody?

[bastillon]

^^^Statistically......

technically this was a response, but it wasn't really supported by anything so you know, kinda doesn't feel like a response. no offense ronnymac, because I got the message, but you have to bring some arguments supporting that message.

[ronnymac2]

Statistically, they were even. Like you said- you already know what my message was. Stats are only half-truths, and a bunch of half-truths are still only half true.

Perhaps Duncan's boxscore stats were hampered by sharing the interior with another very, very good big man. Obviously Robinson's presence helped Duncan gain his advantage over KG ito team success, so it is a give and take.

I understand Tim and David have games that mesh well. Tim had underrated quickness at the time, so you had versatile bigs on defense and hitting the glass. Offensively, both are unselfish, they really don't get in each other's way ito spots on the floor. Both were good passers.

Still, the majority of the boxscore stats of two bigs playing together will almost always deflate individual stats (not necesarily impact though, obviously).

That's a possible explanation.

FWIW, on defense that year, they are basically even. Both were straight up great. KG wasn't quite the dominant rebounder he would become, and Tim has an edge this season on the glass (Garnett was still very good though....able to get those big-time rebounds when the ball is at its apex....always impressed me). Offensively is where Tim gets the edge. The low-post game is what I greatly prefer over KG's more perimeter-oriented attack. Perimeter-oriented attack is imo the correct way to describe KG back in 01 on offense, because he was still taking more fade-away jump shots from the mid-range area rather than going into the post more often, a la post-2003.

Duncan and KG aren't separated by a whole lot (Kobe and Iverson are right there, too ....yes, I know you hate AI). The stats being so even is uncanny. I do think Tim is the better player though, primarily based on his advantage stylistically on offense at this point in time, which was more pronounced than in 04 or 06 or the present.

[Iceman778]

sounds interesting

[bastillon]

Statistically, they were even. Like you said- you already know what my message was. Stats are only half-truths, and a bunch of half-truths are still only half true.

Perhaps Duncan's boxscore stats were hampered by sharing the interior with another very, very good big man. Obviously Robinson's presence helped Duncan gain his advantage over KG ito team success, so it is a give and take.

I understand Tim and David have games that mesh well. Tim had underrated quickness at the time, so you had versatile bigs on defense and hitting the glass. Offensively, both are unselfish, they really don't get in each other's way ito spots on the floor. Both were good passers.

Still, the majority of the boxscore stats of two bigs playing together will almost always deflate individual stats (not necesarily impact though, obviously).

That's a possible explanation.

FWIW, on defense that year, they are basically even. Both were straight up great. KG wasn't quite the dominant rebounder he would become, and Tim has an edge this season on the glass (Garnett was still very good though....able to get those big-time rebounds when the ball is at its apex....always impressed me). Offensively is where Tim gets the edge. The low-post game is what I greatly prefer over KG's more perimeter-oriented attack. Perimeter-oriented attack is imo the correct way to describe KG back in 01 on offense, because he was still taking more fade-away jump shots from the mid-range area rather than going into the post more often, a la post-2003.

Duncan and KG aren't separated by a whole lot (Kobe and Iverson are right there, too ....yes, I know you hate AI). The stats being so even is uncanny. I do think Tim is the better player though, primarily based on his advantage stylistically on offense at this point in time, which was more pronounced than in 04 or 06 or the present.

so your whole explanation is that Garnett was less efficient with his game further away from the basket but that is just incorrect, because they were just as efficient and in fact Garnett was easily more efficient in their playoff matchup.

I don't know what to say.

[ronnymac2]

"The low-post game is what I greatly prefer over KG's more perimeter-oriented attack."

I like my bigs to put pressure on the defense by being able to set up 8-10 feet away as opposed to 15 feet away. Thus, my preference for Duncan's style of play at this point over Garnett's style.

It has very little to do with the numbers. It has more to do with what is happening when Duncan is on the floor and getting the ball in the post. Getting the defense in rotation or having 6 to 10 eyes on somebody 8 feet away from the basket is the effect on the game I prefer over KG's ability to spread the floor with his jumper. Spreading the floor with your J is nice because it allows room for others. Actively creating havoc for a defense by attacking at it's core is more valuable imo.

[bastillon]

so why were Wolves better than Spurs offensively ? and more importantly, why is that margin between them so big that suddenly Duncan is several times better than Garnett ? you might have noticed or not, but I'm not arguing for KG > Tim, I myself prefered Duncan's impact that year and voted accordingly. I'm disputing the notion that Duncan holds a noticeable advantage when they were pretty much equals with advantages being more like preferences and stuff. Duncan slightly better ? I'm ok with that, absolutely. Duncan getting 3 times as many votes ? now that's ludicrous idea.

[Sedale Threatt]

Well, I still prefer Duncan to Garnett, and always will, but I understand where you're coming from. Anybody who left him off their ballot, especially in favor of one-way players like Cater and Iverson...I seriously don't understand that. That's probably what the beef really comes down to, not Duncan vs. KG.

[ronnymac2]

so why were Wolves better than Spurs offensively ? and more importantly, why is that margin between them so big that suddenly Duncan is several times better than Garnett ? you might have noticed or not, but I'm not arguing for KG > Tim, I myself prefered Duncan's impact that year and voted accordingly. I'm disputing the notion that Duncan holds a noticeable advantage when they were pretty much equals with advantages being more like preferences and stuff. Duncan slightly better ? I'm ok with that, absolutely. Duncan getting 3 times as many votes ? now that's ludicrous idea.

I can only answer for myself, so I don't know why Duncan got three times as many votes. I can tell you that I personally don't think that that gap is telling of the difference between the two. I also have a feeling that the gap isn't really telling of what most of the people here think the gap was either. I'd assume most thought like I did....that Duncan was clearly the superior player, but that clearly doesn't mean significantly. There is noticeable separation, but it isn't Jabbar against Ewing or something like that.

The vast majority (all?) thought this way, and thus, the votes are a bit out of whack. Again, I don't think it reflects a group thought of "Duncan is super dominant and much better than Garnett in every way."

[NO-KG-AI]

I think BAstillon's point is that the gap between Duncan and Garnett is small enough where Duncan should get the nod, but they should probably be next to each other on the list. If you think one is better than Kobe/McGrady/Ai, they probably both are, since they bring much the same things to the table.