Retro POY '68-69 (Voting Complete)

[ThaRegul8r]

Been thinking about it, trying to consider everything that's been discussed, but I should probably post a ballot now in case I don't get the chance to later:

1. Bill Russell. For all the reasons given on the first page and throughout this thread. 9.9 points, 19.3 rebounds (3rd in the league [behind Wilt Chamberlain (21.1) and Nate Thurmond (19.7)]), 4.9 assists in 42.7 minutes per game (5th [behind Chamberlain (45.3), Thurmond (45.2), Elvin Hayes (45.1), and Oscar Robertson (43.8)]). First Team All-Defense in the first year of its existence, and led league in defensive win shares (9.9) for the 11th time—by 2.9 over runner-up Wes Unseld, anchoring the league’s best defense (est. 88.4 DRtg). To reiterate what ElGee said on the 6th page about 13 blocks not being an aberration for Russell but the norm, 11/1/68, Russell grabbed 30 rebounds and blocked 14 shots—including three in seven seconds on Luke Jackson—in a 118-99 win over Philadelphia. 2/2/69, Russell suffered a knee injury against the Knicks and was sidelined for a week. Boston went 0-5 during his absence, their longest losing streak since the 1949-50 season. Returned to the lineup 2/9 against Philadelphia and led Boston to a 122-117 win, helping them overcome a 10-point deficit, blocking two shots, and tied the game and sent it into OT with a dunk with two seconds left, then in OT make a key free throw and a key steal to preserve the win. Finished fourth in the MVP voting.

In the postseason averaged 10.8 points, 20.5 rebounds (2nd in the playoffs) and 5.4 assists (4th [behind Walt Frazier (9.1), Jerry West (7.5), and John Havlicek (5.6)]) in 46.1 minutes per game (4th), and coached as well. Led team through the playoffs despite not having home court advantage in any round of the playoffs, a feat which took 26 years to be duplicated. Beat three of the top four teams record-wise in the league. Walked out a champion, which Jordan had the opportunity to do in '98. This year is my #1.


2 Jerry West. 25.9 points on 47.1 percent shooting and 55.7 percent true shooting (6th), 4.3 rebounds, 6.9 assists in 39.2 minutes per game in 61 games. Led league in PER (22.3). Second Team All-NBA and Second Team All-Defense.

In the postseason averaged 30.9 points (led playoffs) on 54.2 percent true shooting, 3.9 rebounds and 7.5 assists in 42.1 minutes per game. Led playoffs in points (556), assists (135), field goals attempted (423) and made (196), free throws attempted (204) and made (164), PER (25.2), win shares (4.3), offensive win shares (3.2) and win shares per 48 minutes (.274). Averaged 37.9 points in NBA Finals, and had 42 points, 13 rebounds and 12 assists in the deciding Game 7. First NBA Finals Most Valuable Player.

Comment: West missed 21 games—25.6% of the season, and the Lakers went 12-9 (57.1%) in those games. Russell missed five games due to injury, and the Celtics went 0-5 (0%). Russell was fourth in the MVP voting while West was unranked.


3. Willis Reed. 21.1 points on 52.1 percent shooting (3rd in the league) and 56.2 percent true shooting (4th), 14.5 rebounds (7th) and 2.3 assists in 37.9 minutes per game, playing all 82 games. Led league in win shares (14.7) and win shares per 48 minutes (.227); second in offensive win shares (9.5), fourth in PER (21.4). Second Team All-NBA. Finished second in MVP voting.

In the postseason averaged 25.7 points (4th in the playoffs) on 51.0 percent shooting and 56.2 percent true shooting, 14.1 rebounds and 1.9 assists in 42.9 minutes. Reed was second in the playoffs in PER (22.0), third in offensive win shares (1.6), and fourth in win shares (2.2) and win shares per 48 minutes (.242). Averaged 28.3 points per game in the Eastern Division Semifinals against the Baltimore Bullets, with 35 points and 19 rebounds and 43 points and 17 rebounds in the last two games.

Comment: I have to decide how much missed games should factor in, because West missed a quarter of the season, while Reed played the full 82 and was great in the playoffs too.


4. Wes Unseld. 13.8 points, 18.2 rebounds (5th in the league) and 2.6 assists in 36.2 minutes per game. Second in the league in defensive win shares (7.0), and Baltimore was second in the league in DRtg (91.3) behind the Celtics. Improved Bullets from a 36-26 record—fourth-worst in the league—to an NBA best 57-25, an NBA-record 21-game turnaround. NBA Rookie of the Year and MVP. “[H]e’s certainly the difference in the Bullets this season,” Willis Reed said. “He’s the one guy who’s changed them” (The Free Lance-Star, Mar. 20, 1969).

2/5/69, Gus Johnson “suffered a torn ligament in his left knee in a third quarter spill” in a 124-112 win over Boston, playing without Russell (Spokane Daily Chronicle, Feb. 6, 1969). “Johnson suffered a torn medial ligament in his left knee” and was lost for the season (The Day, Feb. 6, 1969). Baltimore was 40-15 at the time (72.7%), and finished 17-12 (58.6%).

In the postseason averaged 18.8 points on 52.6 percent shooting (4th)—up from 47.2 percent from the regular season—and 57.4 percent true shooting (3rd in the playoffs)—up from 51.5 percent true shooting in the regular season, 18.5 rebounds (4th) and 1.3 assists in 41.3 minutes per game against the New York Knicks. Fifth in the playoffs in PER (20.7). Had 18 points and 27 rebounds in Game 2 of the Eastern Division Semifinals, and a team-high tying 25 points in Game 4.

Comment: Wilt wrote, “I beat Unseld in every department that year—scoring, rebounding, shooting percentage, assists, and minutes played—but everyone was so impressed with his taking Baltimore from last place to first place that he was chosen the most valuable player in the league. Then, in the first round of the playoffs, Baltimore choked: the Knicks bombed them four straight” (Wilt, p. 216). I find it highly disingenuous that he conveniently made nary a mention of Gus Johnson's injury—and that Baltimore had to play the last 29 games of the regular season and the playoffs without him—and tried to portray them as "chokers."


5. Oscar Robertson. 24.7 points (5th in the league) on 48.6 percent shooting and 57.9 percent true shooting (2nd), 6.4 rebounds and 9.8 assists (1st) in 43.8 minutes per game (4th). First Team All-NBA. Led league in offensive win shares (12.2) running the league’s top offense (100.4 ORtg), third in PER (21.8), third in win shares (12.9). All-Star Game MVP.

HONORABLE MENTION

John Havlicek. 21.6 points on 40.5 percent shooting and 45.9 percent true shooting, 7.0 rebounds and 5.4 assists in 38.7 minutes per game. Second Team All-NBA and Second Team All-Defense. In the postseason averaged 25.4 points (5th in the playoffs) on 44.5 percent shooting and 51.7 percent true shooting, 9.9 rebounds and 5.6 assists (3rd) in 47.2 minutes per game (led playoffs). Led playoffs in minutes (850), second in field goals attempted (382) and made (170), free throws made (118), assists (100), points (458) and offensive win shares (2.0), third in free throws attempted (138), total rebounds (179) and win shares (2.8), and fifth in defensive win shares (0.8).

Comment: Russell was 4th in the MVP voting, and Havlicek was unranked. And when Russell was out with injury, Havlicek couldn't lead Boston to a single victory. When Russell came back, Boston ended their losing streak. Havlicek himself said, "It's a damn shame you have to place so much of a load on one person. They keep saying this guy is the key, that guy is the key. There's only one key—him [Russell] ...." The MVP voting bears it out, the results with and without Russell bears it out, Havlicek himself admits it. No one was more pivotal than Russell. “Russ should be given all the credit. We didn’t have a strong bench. But he knew just when to substitute.” as aforementioned, Russell had to coach in addition to everything else, and his coaching is credited just as much as anything for Boston winning.

Walt Frazier. Averaged 17.5 points on 50.5 percent shooting and 56.0 percent true shooting (5th in the league), 6.2 rebounds and 7.9 assists (3rd) in 36.9 minutes per game. First Team All-Defense. Fourth in the league in win shares (12.7), third in win shares per 48 minutes (.227). In the postseason averaged 21.2 points on 50.3 percent shooting and 52.5 percent true shooting, 7.4 rebounds and 9.1 assists (led playoffs). Fourth in the playoffs in assists (91), fourth in PER (21.3), and win shares per 48 minutes (.198). Held Earl Monroe to 28.3 points per game on 28.5 field goal attempts, 38.6 percent shooting and 44.3 percent true shooting in the Eastern Division Semifinals.

Billy Cunningham. 24.8 points (3rd in the league), 12.8 rebounds (10th) and 3.5 assists in 40.8 minutes per game (9th). First Team All-NBA. My Retro Regular Season MVP for leading Philadelphia to a 55-27 record after Wilt Chamberlain was traded to the Los Angeles Lakers—only seven fewer games than with Chamberlain the previous year, and the same amount of games as the Lakers with Chamberlain. And West. And Baylor. Finished third in actual MVP voting. In the postseason averaged 24.4 points, 12.6 rebounds and 2.4 assists in 43.4 minutes per game.

Nate Thurmond. 21.5 points, 19.7 rebounds and 3.6 assists in 45.2 minutes per game. Had 35 points and 34 rebounds 1/18/69 in a 98-97 win over Philadelphia. In the postseason averaged 16.7 points, 19.5 rebounds and 4.7 assists in 43.8 minutes per game against the Los Angeles Lakers. Had 15 points and 27 rebounds to Chamberlain’s 11 and 30 in Game 1, and 27 points, 28 rebounds and 12 blocked shots to Chamberlain’s 10 points (didn't find rebound total, but less than Thurmond) in Game 2, and put Chamberlain on the bench with five fouls with 8:51 left in what Thurmond called “my best game ever against Chamberlain.”

[drza]

This has been an incredible discussion. And historically, the fact that we get to swap out Kareem for Russell in one season is incredibly...ironic? Is that the word? We go from one GOAT candidate that played one style of game to another GOAT candidate that plays an entirely different style at the exact same position. Oh yeah, and both of them got to use Wilt as a foil with which to prove their greatness.

I've been especially interested in reading about Russell and his tangible intangibles, as well as Oscar and whether he's gotten a bum rap because of his team's lack of success. I must admit, in Oscar's case I find the combination of circumstances (i.e. that maybe his team just wasn't that good) with the numbers (the with/without him numbers were pretty convincing) and personal testimonials (like the Kareem anecdote) to be a pretty strong case that he may, indeed, be taking too much criticism. It's much more difficult for me to gauge since it was before my time, but I will say that the arguments I've seen against Oscar in this thread haven't been nearly as convincing as those arguing for him.

Back to Russell, I just don't see any way in the world he doesn't get the top slot. The one "argument" against him seems to be the one that still makes me grind my teeth often today...the thought that if your biggest impact is defensive, instead of offensive, you just can't make as big of an impact on a game as an offensive player. That's just incredibly wrong to me, and this seems to be the most glaring counter-example in NBA history. Russell was THE best player in the NBA for a full half of the game...and then he was also a good offensive player on top of that (good in total offense, if not obviously a great scorer). How can that not add up to a superstar? I don't care HOW the impact is made, if it's made than it is what it is. You can't just attenuate it because it happens to not fit the textbook of how it's supposed to be done.

Also, "intangibles" has always been a secretly dirty word in player evaluations because they connote a sense of mysticism with wiggle room. Because they weren't "provable", so therefore they may not be as strong as numbers in a boxscore that can be pointed out. One of the reasons that I really like the growing body of advanced stats is that, perfect or not, they shrink the working space of "intangible" because we are now able to measure things that weren't measured before. Bringing that to Russell, it seems to me that his "intangibles" were in fact very tangible and just weren't measured very well at the time. But again, things like ElGee's (and ThaRegul8ter's) numerical breakdowns show me that, even with the rudimentary data that we have access to, we can very clearly see some of Russell's direct impact. Not just in a "the team won, he was the best player so he must be great" kind of way, but in a way that isolates his huge impact even from his supporting cast's. Russell is a clear #1 to me this year.

West, Wilt and Baylor are interesting cases. West seems to be getting the most love in this thread and the project (and in the personal anecdotes). Wilt is a lightening rod...either he gets love like from Calavera or straight venom like from Bastillion. And Baylor...he hardly gets any mention at all (at least in this thread) despite seemingly splitting the difference between West and Wilt as far as numbers and apparent "impact". I guess for me this is a continuation from the West/Alcindor issues I had last thread, but I still just don't see how West has really separated himself from his peers enough to be getting so many #1 votes. I've seen what appear to be legit arguments that West may not have been the best or most valuable player on his own team for large swatches of the season, and I definitely don't see him having an impact to rival Russell's. In fact, echoing some of what I've seen from Bastillion, I'm not sure exactly why West is so universally acclaimed above Robertson in this year. Robertson's numbers were as good, he didn't miss any time, and taking history into context we know what Robertson was able to accomplish next to a Wilt-like presence in Milwaukee just a couple of years later...so do we really have anything to definitely say that West's impact this season was larger?

Reed and Unseld round out the crew of very interesting and historic figures that I feel more in-tune with after this discussion. Again, the numbers really help to put Unseld's impact into perspective and the revelation that his second best player was injured by the postseason (as well as the team's lower SRS despite the better record than the Knicks) really helps change what may have appeared to be a rookie postseason choke from the ROY/MVP into a situation where he really couldn't do much more. And Reed is in the midst of a 2-year period where he could have been MVP either year, and may have been even more deserving this season than in the one when he actually won it.

So, my finalists are Russell, West, Oscar, Wilt, Reed, and Unseld. I'd like to put Baylor in the mix as well, but I don't know enough about him on my own and he's been casually ignored by pretty much everyone in here (including those that were around to watch this season) so perhaps he was the Bosh to Wilt/West's LeBron/Wade. I don't know that for sure, but right now that's the information level that I'm working from (though the MVP vote from that season drastically argues against that). I won't really feel comfortable leaving off any of the 6, but i guess I have to.

1. Russell

2. Oscar Robertson
3. West
4. Wilt
5. Unseld

I post those rankings with a bad taste in my mouth, because no matter what order I put them in it seems wrong. I can't decide between the Laker's 3-some, and in my gut I can't shake the notion that Wilt was the most important player on that team. But I don't know that for sure, and the argument that the team didn't get any better once he arrived...it's not fully convincing, but it has enough merit that I'm leaving West above him for now. But outside of having better teammates, I just don't see what West did that Oscar didn't. Yes, West had a great Finals...but I just don't see how he maximized his situation more than Oscar did or was move valuable in his situation than Oscar was. And Unseld/Reed is essentially a toss-up, so with the revelations in this thread and Reed getting more votes from me in previous threads I'll give this one to the rookie.

[semi-sentient]

I looked at Baylor early on, but he really struggled in the post-season (his worst as a pro), as did Wilt. When it comes down to it, West was pretty clearly the best Laker and the only one who really elevated his game. I'm not sure how Robertson can be ranked higher. Yeah, he was great, but what did he do to make up for the post-season run that Jerry West had?

[JordansBulls]

I'll just chime in: Russell & West are my two top candidates. Still waiting for my epiphany putting one ahead of the other, looking increasingly likely that said epiphany will not come before I have to make my vote.

don't you think that Celtics 0-5 record without Russell, Lakers 14-9 record without West, Celtics winning the title because of Russell's dominating defense over West's offense, Russell having worse supporting cast out of the two, West missing a lot more games in the RS and, on top of all of this, Russell both playing AND coaching which makes his intangibles this year insane... don't you think that's enough to sway your opinion ?

This. A thousand times this. If after everything that's been posted in this thread regarding this season—by both myself and others—if none of that does it, then I'm afraid I just don't know what will. And regarding the last thing bastillon said, ronnymac said that Russell "put up Jordan's 98"... but... Jordan didn't coach the team on top of everything else. No other superstar in NBA history ever did that. People just aren't considering that—to do everything Russell did for the team and then coach it as well. Go out and guard Willis Reed and Wilt Chamberlain back-to-back, and then coach the team too. Are you serious?

And another thing to add to what bastillon said, Russell was 4th in the league in MVP voting, and West was unranked. Russell played in the toughest division in the league. The top records in the league all came from the Eastern Division. The top four SRS in the league came from the Eastern Division. Wilt said, “by all logic Boston shouldn't be in the finals.” But they were. Everyone knows why.

Yeah, but this is POY not COY. Also IMO, saying Russell this particular year in 1969 is #1 because he was the defensive anchor on a title winning team would be similar to putting Ben Wallace in 2004 #1 because he was the defensive anchor and only great defender on that Pistons team.
Truth be told Ben Wallace wasn't even voted top 5 that year.
Now by no means am I saying Russell is the same as Ben Wallace, but this season compares to Ben Wallace's 2004 season especially when the Pistons were underdogs just like the Celtics were this season in '69.
Also, Havlicek in the playoffs had literally double the Total Win Shares that Russell had this season.
While it is ok for others to finish ahead of you, it shouldn't be nearly by double on your own team, not to mention Russell finished 7th in WS/PER 48 on the C's this year.
Now I believe other than 1968, Russell generally was #1 in those on the C's.

[Sedale Threatt]

A great discussion. While an excess of statistical analysis tends to bog things down for me -- although I can see why somebody like bastillon is so reliant, considering he can't even get basic details right when recounting historic events -- I learned two things in particular: That Russell's defensive impact was every bit as great as a superstar offensive player, and Oscar Robertson was much better than I would have guessed.

1. Russell. I will never, ever back off my stance that he was the player he was in no small part to environment and support.

For example -- Game 7, Russell scores six points on 2 for 7 shooting, while his counterpart triples his output, but three teammates chip in with 20 or more points, and a fourth has 16, including the game's biggest basket, to score the historic upset. Clearly, even in this year, Russell wasn't going it alone.

But being a fabulously great defensive player and emotional bulwark for a team that upset two better teams en route to the title is good enough for me, especially considering nobody else had a substantially better case over him. If West had been a little bit better during the RS, maybe. But he didn't so...

2. West. In a career filled with historic performances in a losing cause, this was obviously the best. You put up 42/13/12 in Game 7 of Finals, at home, and it's still not enough. The story of Jerry's frustrating career, which is why he's probably the most sympathetic figure in league history. Although I generally haven't put a huge amount of stock in games missed, 21 seems a bit too much, especially considering the Lakers did fairly well without him.

3. Unseld. I really didn't want to put him this high, as I've always thought of him as more of a role player than a true front-line guy. Like Russell, his biggest contributions are in areas that are difficult to measure. At some point, you have to digest that and respect it.

4. Oscar. Not a huge fan of the plus/minus stuff, especially in such a basic form as here. Relying on the won/loss records seems a little too formulaic to me, particularly after what we saw with Kareem in the 1970s. Kareem dominates like no one else, but hey, he didn't have any impact because he can't get Don Ford and a washed-up Cazzie Russell into the playoffs.

But as some point, as with Unseld, the numbers get to be a little hard to ignore, especially when combined with his excellent production.

5. Chamberlain. It's not all about numbers, but as Wilt pointed out -- he outperformed Unseld almost across the board. That still matters on some level. How much is probably going to depend on your opinion of Wilt. While I definitely think he could be soft at times, and was not the competitor Russell was, in no way, shape or form do I think he quit in that seventh game.

At the same time, the fact of the matter is clear -- he did not step up, and in fact regressed in some key areas in the playoffs. We've been punishing guys for this for years and years in this project, so get in line, Wilton. Not enough to bump him entirely out of the top 5 -- and no honorable mention? really Reg? -- but certainly enough to mark him down a couple of spots.

[Doctor MJ]

1. Wilt Chamberlain
2. Bill Russell
3. Oscar Robertson
4. Willis Reed
5. Wes Unseld

I'd really like to hear your reasoning on Wilt at #1 this year. The Lakers basically did the same thing they did before without Wilt - don't you expect a bit more of a guy having the best year of anyone in the league?

If you asked me who had the best year or accomplished the most Wilt wouldn't be #1, he may not be top 5. But my criteria has always been given one year which player gives you the best shot at a title and in this year I feel Chamberlain gives me the best shot.

Hey Manuel, I sent you a PM. We should chat a bit in private.

[Optimism Prime]

1. Bill Russell
2. Jerry West
3. Oscar Robertson
4. Wilt Chamberlain
5. Wes Unseld

[ElGee]

Bastillon - Sorry, it's a lot clearer in another format than in green. It's actually an overly simple look at what happened to the team a star left ("OLD ORgt / DRtg") and what happened to the team a star joined ("New ORtg / DRtg"). Not meant to be complicated, but I see how it's fuzzy because I included all the specifics.

So, let's say Shaq leaves Orland and joins LA in 97. The OLD numbers are Orlando's change in ORtg / DRtg from 96 to 97 (with/without Shaq). The NEW numbers are LA's change in ORtg / DRtg from 96 to 97 (without/with Shaq). The NET numbers are just the changes in each category and the *Total* is the combined two, which corresponds to the net SRS change in the former team and the new team.

So, Garnett's monstrous number comes from Minnesota regressing about ~3.5 pts and Boston improving by ~15.0.

It's actually just the numerical representation of "every star in NBA history has had a noticeable impact when changing teams...except two."

[ronnymac2]

He "probably" made easy shots created by teammates. That isn't enough to sway me.

if he had been creating for himself then his assists would have been a lot higher. high FG%, low APG, a lot of guys on his team being high APG guys (including West who almost led the league). all logic points out to this conclusion.

you can name other historical example of player creating for himself under these circumstances. that's pretty tough challenge IMO. I've always liked reading your posts because of how you appreciated intangibles and watching these guys play. I'm now confused if your opinion isn't too much dependant on their rep. Wilt was simply nowhere near his best that year.

I don't think he quit in game seven either. He drops 18/26 or whatever, then decides to fake an injury? I'm not buying that. His dumbass coach who clearly had problems with him didn't let him back in the game. He probably should have shoved the dude out of the way, said "I'm Wilt Chamberlain, bitch," and gotten back into the game. Wilt was too much of a good soldier. That is a fault of his, but that isn't the same as quitting. I don't think he quit. His fault isn't as bad as being a quitter.

he was healthy all season long, playing close to 48 MPG, and suddenly he injures himself in the most important moment of the season, while his team is losing ? doesn't look like legit to me.

his coach wasn't that bad either. look at his '68 season. despite health issues on all of his roster, he took them to the finals when they put up a good fight against the Celtics.

Wilt - good soldier is another myth that I'm not sure where it came from. reading through old SI articles there are numerous accounts of Wilt feuding with nearly every coach. how is that supposed to be good soldier ? where's the evidence to support the notion that he changed his game to adjust to his team and not because he wanted to stat-padd assists for example (which, in fact, was what he admitted to). I'm not buying this at all.

All logic definitely doesn't point to that conclusion. What about teams balanced in playmaking duties like the early 70's Knicks and 08 Celtics? You have Rondo, Pierce, KG, and even allen sometimes creating. You have Frazier, DeBusschere, Lucas and Monroe in some years, with Reed, Bradley, Barnett. Very smart team. Assists numbers for everybody get deflated.

I do believe Wilt was used more as a finisher in his Laker years, especially later in his tenure there. But offense was still run through him. He was still a great passer this year, and he still scored in iso situations.


Look, you think he quit. I don't. I don't think either of us will really ever know if he did or not. Nobody knows his motivations at that moment. It just seems like a crappy thing that happened to him. If you want to tag him for being injured, fine. Not for quitting though. If he actually quit, he wouldn't make my top ten.

The dude had played an insane amount of minutes in his career. He could have caught an injury anytime. He needed a breather and wanted back in soon, too. His coach had something to do with that, and I'm not sure how you can ignore that his coach was a dumbass who personally didn't like Wilt.

My big thing with Wilt is that this year, he tried to be like Russell. He should have been like Wilt. No identity is something I dislike. He failed being Russell. Wilt was never- NEVER- as good a defender as Russell. He should have shifted gears and given his team more scoring because that is what his team needed. He didn't do that. You can tag him for that. He didn't play Russel's role as well as Russell. That's why I put Russell over Wilt (and Russell won tie-breakers like a championship). He's still Wilt Chamberlain though. He failed at this one odd-ball goal of his this year, but it doesn't mean he didn't give it a good try. Trying to be Russell is more difficult than leading the league in assists or scoring imo.


Regulator....When I likened Russ to MJ in 98, that was a compliment. I don't know how I personally will look at Russell's coaching. Mainly because I don't know what happens in Boston's lockerroom. From what I do know, other players handled substitutions. Russell asked the guys what strategy they should use. Don't get me wrong- Russell was the leader. But I mean...can we give Hondo extra credit over Wilt, West, Oscar, and Unseld because of his input on situations during timeouts?

[Doctor MJ]

My vote:

1. Russell
2. West
3. Reed
4. Oscar
5. Cunningham

Here is my dilemma: If a player is clearly the best player in the playoffs, and leads a team to the title, I've yet to side against him for POY. West didn't win the title, but he became damn close - it seems irrational to say that when a ball bounces the wrong way that changes everything.

With that said, the argument of "Russell's team got lucky" rings hollow. His team kept coming out on top year after year. When I look at Russell's career holistically, I keep in mind that there was some luck involved, but looking at one year and treating it as if the Celtics didn't win seems silly.

Now, if the best player happens to have the weaker supporting cast, of course I go with the best player. However, the Lakers team was THE superteam built to beat Russell's Celtics. They had the talent edge. It didn't come together like was had hoped, but still to act like he did more with less than Russell doesn't make much sense to me.

Re: POY not COY. This is an important point - but does anyone think that if Russell had retired as player and stayed on as coach the next year, the result would have been totally different? I don't.

Reed's my #3. Clear star at this point of the team with the best SRS in the regular season. For me, I think it is important to give the man his due even as we recognize that he got too much credit when Frazier emerged as what should have been thought of as a superstar.

Giving Oscar the 4 spot, but I'm still bouncing him around in my head. From this point on, Oscar has great individual stats, and Cincy has great ORtg. That's important. However, Oscar was an ass, and the weak defense of the team is not something that's reasonable to ignore.

Cunningham gets the 5 spot. How well Philly did this year without Wilt is amazing, and getting "upset" by Boston is a crime that everyone else is guilty of as well.

Honorable Mention

Hondo - I wanted to put him in the top 5, but I'm too high on Oscar & Cunningham.

Unseld - I really do like him, but his limitations always keep him just out of the top 5. The Gus Johnson injury is relevant, but still, if a guy other than Unseld is the difference between best in the league and getting swept in the first round, it doesn't make that much sense to act like Unseld did the turnaround all by himself - and the only reason Unseld's an MVP candidate is because of that turnaround.

[ElGee]

My 1969 POY Ballot:

1. Bill Russell
2. Jerry West
3. Willis Reed
4. Oscar Robertson
5. Walt Frazier

Certainly the most epic year of the project. Boston went completely under the radar because they were crammed in the Eastern Division, but by all accounts Russell's defense was still other-worldly and his playoff run was fantastic. He may have worn down a little by the Finals, but I think he had the largest overall impact on the game from beginning of the season to the end. That includes a small boost I'm giving him for, by all accounts, coaching the team quite well in 69. (Am I the only one who loved how he subbed himself out for offense/defense?)

Jerry West's season reminds me a little of Kobe 2010. He missed a lot of time, and there's nothing to indicate that it was his best regular season, but he possesses an impressive overall game. His playoffs weren't something to write about until the Finals, when he absolutely exploded. In the end, the missed games made it too difficult for West to have a case over Russell, but I think he's good enough in 1969, and played well enough, to go next.

Willis Reed goes next because of his defensive impact. He played well in the playoffs and regular season, I like his defense over the remaining candidates, and he's a player who's offense and intangibles seem to really jell with playing styles in this era. Put a quality guard or two around Willis, a solid defensive forward, and even a pivot player, and I think that's a pretty good team every time. The Knicks, after all, were the best team in the regular season (again) and incredibly similar to their 1970 title team. Only Russell didn't play for the Celtics in 1970.

I wish the arguments about Oscar Robertson had some more traction. I'm sure I'll learn more about him throughout these years, but as of now I have a lot of respect for Oscar's game. More so than before the project started. He's an offensive machine who didn't do much defensively. He's comfortably fourth as the last player on this tier.

For the last spot, I looked at Unseld, Cunningham, Frazier and Wilt. Unseld is a really good basketball player, and he had a great rookie year, but he's a player who has more value for his team than intrinsic impact IMO. I would think it'd be darn near impossible to build a championship team with Unseld as its best player. Cunningham's percentages were just too low, particularly in the postseason, and I consider the team around him to be pretty good anyway.

That left Wilt and Frazier. I've been fairly clear that I don't think Wilt had a large defensive impact in 1969. I gather his offense was pretty good -- not huge numbers but it seems he's playing a team-oriented role and doing it well, and of course he can blow up for a huge game. I'm not overly concerned about Game 7 of the Finals. Thought he played very well from what I remember (haven't re-watched the game in a while). Two things turned me off to Wilt here:

(1) I DO hold it against a player (in this project format), to a small degree, when his circumstance hurts him. So if Baylor/Van Breda Kolff clashed with Wilt on/off the court and that diminished his impact, it still diminished his impact.

(2) If this is a player giving me good offense, in theory, then I don't want his offense to absolutely plummet in the postseason. His efficiency AND his volume dip big time in the playoffs.

[penbeast0]

I feel like I'm missing something with the really high Wilt Chamberlain votes.

I scanned through the top 50 MVP Share players, and only a handful of players changed teams before their twilight years (King and Walton not included because of injury gaps, Barry because he changed leagues and missed a year). Wilt and Shaq changed twice. A crude look at those situations -- the team the star left and the new team he joined -- shows that most players do have a sizeable impact and/or leave a noticeable void.

(The efficiency figures are the change in the team's from rating from one year to the next. So, for Elvin Hayes, his old team's change from 1972 (his last year there) to 1973 (the first year without him) was -2.8 to +1.3, or an ORtg change of 4.1, and a DRtg decline from 1.6 to -2.8, -4.4 total. Simply put, they were 4.1 pts better on offense and 4.4 pts worse on defense without Hayes.)

Code: Select all

        OLD ORtg   DRtg   NEW ORtg   DRtg   NET ORtg   DRtg   *Total*   
================================================================== 
Garnett    -1.1   -2.3        6.0    9.0        7.1    11.3 |  18.4
Erving     -1.0   -3.3        5.5    5.9        6.5    9.2  |  15.7
Shaq II    -0.6   -6.9        4.8    1.8        5.4    8.7  |  14.1
Moses      -9.1   -2.2        0.9    0.8        10.0   3.0  |  13.0
Kidd        1.5   -4.5        2.5    7.5        1.0    12.0 |  13.0
Nash       -5.0    6.5        9.9    1.6        14.9  -4.9  |  10.0
Webber     -1.2   -1.2        4.7    1.0        5.9    3.0  |  8.9
Oscar       1.4   -1.7        3.3    3.5        1.9    5.2  |  7.1
Shaq I     -6.4    0.0       -2.2    2.0        4.2    2.0  |  6.2
Kareem     -1.3   -0.3        2.2    1.7        3.5    2.0  |  5.5
Barkley    -3.5   -0.9        1.4   -0.7        4.9    0.2  |  5.1
Hayes       4.1   -4.4        0.9    3.3       -3.2    7.7  |  4.5
Wilt II     0.8   -3.6       -2.0    0.9       -2.8    4.5  |  1.7
McGrady    -1.0    6.3        2.1    0.5        3.1   -5.8  | -2.7


Not worth getting into the roster turnover outside of those key players -- I imagine we all know them anyway -- but the point is all of them made some kind of impact and received high praise for it...except Tracy McGrady and Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt didn't make an all-nba team, an all-D team, or receive an MVP vote.

(Btw, Wilt's first switch was in midseason in 1965. We'll get to it then, but the change during the season to his old team and new team was nearly identically uninspiring.)

LG, May I say I absolutely love this analysis. You are bringing your A game to this project time and time again. Thanks.

[shawngoat23]

I'm going to change up my ballot:

1) Jerry West
2) Bill Russell
3) Willis Reed
4) Wes Unseld
5) Wilt Chamberlain

I went into my previous ballot with the assumption that Wilt is an all-time great, which he certainly is, and that clouded my judgment. But as some have mentioned, the Lakers didn't perform noticeably better (more wins, lower SRS, lose in Finals again) with his addition and the Sixers didn't get significantly worse (-7 wins, -3 SRS) despite the fact that so much of the team was built around Wilt. Combine that with the fact that he didn't receive any MVP votes or make either All-NBA team, that Elgin Baylor was deemed the best Laker in the regular season (probably because West only played 61 games) and that West was clearly better in the playoffs. He doesn't really do enough to earn a #3 spot from me, and I certainly wouldn't put him there if his name wasn't "Wilt Chamberlain". That being said, I will give him some benefit of the doubt and give a spot (barely) on my top 5.

Omitting Oscar Robertson, Billy Cunningham, and John Havlicek is pretty difficult this year. But there are a lot of great players and only 5 votes to go around.

[bastillon]

Doctor MJ, could you postpone the voting a little ? I think this has been the best thread ever since I joined realGM. it deserves some more time and there are really a lot of things to analyse.

[Doctor MJ]

Doctor MJ, could you postpone the voting a little ? I think this has been the best thread ever since I joined realGM. it deserves some more time and there are really a lot of things to analyse.

Okay, extended until this evening - and by that I mean late this evening. I won't count it up until after midnight Pacific time.

[ronnymac2]

Doc....I'm making one change. Oscar over Wilt.

Final Rankings:

Jerry West
Bill Russell
Oscar Robertson
Wilt Chamberlain
John Havlicek


He should have either played better defense throughout the season or given his team more scoring in the finals. Oscar vs. Wilt is incredibly close this year for me. And odd to figure out.

[bastillon]

am I the only one who thinks that Wilt doesn't deserve TOP5 selection at all ? Lakers got worse in RS, then had a very easy playoff bracket up until the finals and of course they lost after all. as someone beautifully put it: Baylor was considered best Laker in the RS, West was much better player in the PS. if you think about it though, West clearly had a visible impact in the RS too, and he posted better individual statline as well, so he was also better than Wilt in the RS.

Baylor vs Wilt in the playoffs is interesting. Wilt rebounded like a mad man, even with 46 MPG. 25 rebounds is crazy, really. Baylor was a great rebounder too. 9 rebounds in 35 MPG isn't as valuable, but considering different positions and role on the team (Wilt was a finisher/offensive rebounder, Baylor was used as more of a playmaker), I'd say Wilt's rebounding impact wasn't as overwhelming (in comparison to Baylor) as it may appear at first. still, it's a pretty big gap between them. scoring is another thing, Baylor just sucked in the playoffs as a scorer... but it's not like Wilt did anything spectacular. considering his huge mins, his production was well below average scoring-wise, and very likely as an outcome of Baylor's and West's passing. so overall, Wilt did have a better boxscore production, but by no means was it a huge gap between them. now given Baylor's superior RS, why is it so obvious for most people that Wilt is ahead of Elgin ? as far as I'm concerned they played at the same, or at least very similar, level.

so that's how I'm looking at Lakers Big Three. West clearly seperated himself as the undisputed leader, though it wasn't his finest season (finals aside, it wasn't very impressive for his standards). I regard Wilt and Baylor as close players that year. Baylor being more recognized in MVP voting and Wilt being more productive in the playoffs seems like a pretty close comparison. now Lakers were 55W team that wasn't really a favorite to win it all (that'd be Bullets pre-injuries, NYK post-Debuscherre trade). they didn't play any good team up until the finals, which they lost.
how much sense does it make to put three of these guys in TOP5, when there are clearly individuals who did just as much, or in fact more, with less ? I don't see any. if they had all been TOP5 players, then Lakers would've smashed 70W mark and easily beat up on the inferior teams. that's just not what happened. give me a historical example of team with three TOP5 players (hell you may even lower that bar to TOP10-15) underachieving so much. so I'm gonna punish all of them accordingly.

Unseld vs Wilt - the difference is the defense.

Wes was far more impactful defender as evidenced by Baltimore's 2nd ranked defense and Lakers being close to average, as well as their turnaround being caused pretty much by defense alone and no other changed besides Unseld's arrival were made in the meantime.

I've also read some stories from Knicks players from '71 playoffs, who said that Unseld not only always had played great defense on Reed, but more importantly, he was so ridiculous on the defensive glass (and then outlet passing following his rebounds) that they simply quit on offensive rebounding just to put more pressure on his outlet passing, sometimes even double teaming him right away. I'm not sure what to make of his defense given his lack of size resulting in poor shotblocking, but his impact was undeniable on that end. lack of media recognition hurts him though, I'd imagine he would be given more credit on all-defense selections which he never seemed to get. Unseld's defense is something that should be discussed more. Penbeast ? anyone ?

anyway, Wes easily had a better RS than Wilt because of defense. with vastly worse supporting cast, his team was actually better.

now, in the playoffs Wilt regressed from 20 PPG/56% TS to 14 PPG/51% TS, while Unseld went from 14 PPG 51% TS in RS to 19 PPG 57% TS. I just don't know how you can put Unseld behind Wilt under these circumstances. even considering Wilt's superior rebounding and passing, it's just not enough to overcome Unseld's defense and scoring. especially, when he was the one gaining more MVP recognition as well.

Reed is pretty much at Unseld's level and both go ahead of Wilt/Baylor easily. I'll have to think about West though.

Oscar was IMO visibly better than all of these guys. huge +/-, huge boxscore value. his offensive numbers directly translating into the best offense in the league. enormous drop off without him on offense. that's a legit 25/9/6 guy with intangibles too (not only +/- numbers, but anecdotal evidence I earlier provided). just happened to play with very poor teammates.

so I'm guessing:
1.Russell

2.Oscar
3.West
4.Unseld
5.Reed

2-5 is interchangeable though. I'll have to think about it.

it'd be awesome to read some old SI articles/writeups to find out more. I know Elgee provided these in '71 and '70 threads. are there any older ?

[Doctor MJ]

Okay, last call.

[Doctor MJ]

'68-69 Results

Code: Select all

Player             1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Pts   POY Shares
1. Bill Russell     11   6   0   0   0 152   0.844
2. Jerry West        7   6   2   1   2 127   0.706
3. Willis Reed       0   2   6   3   1  54   0.300
4. Oscar Robertson   0   3   3   4   2  50   0.278
5. Wes Unseld        0   0   4   5   3  38   0.211
6. Wilt Chamberlain  0   1   1   4   3  27   0.150
7. John Havlicek     0   0   2   1   1  14   0.078
8. Walt Frazier      0   0   0   0   3   3   0.017
9. Billy Cunningham  0   0   0   0   1   1   0.006
   Elgin Baylor      0   0   0   0   1   1   0.006
   Zelmo Beaty       0   0   0   0   1   1   0.006


[semi-sentient]

Site updated: www.dolem.com/poy

No changes in the top 15. Jerry West will take the 14th spot from D-Rob after the next round of voting, knocking out Dwyane Wade. Wilt Chamberlain might also make an appearance into the top 15, possibly knocking Robinson out.

Code: Select all

1.  Kareem Abdul-Jabbar  10.221
2.  Michael Jordan        9.578
3.  Magic Johnson         7.114
4.  Tim Duncan            6.153
5.  Larry Bird            6.147
6.  Shaquille O'Neal      5.910
7.  Julius Erving         5.046
8.  Karl Malone           4.649
9.  Hakeem Olajuwon       4.380
10. Kobe Bryant           4.326
11. Moses Malone          3.478
12. Kevin Garnett         3.388
13. LeBron James          3.083
14. David Robinson        2.431
15. Dwyane Wade           2.179