'15-16 RealGM Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[KD35Brah]

How is this possible?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/FredKatz/status/734589673075539968[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/734582004591788032[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/734582450395832320[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/734582868416987136[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/MikeSGallagher/status/734591046479454208[/tweet]

[SideshowBob]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_top_10_p.html

Best Playoffs Top 2 in BPM since 08 and probably best ever for top 4-5.

Its best ever for top 4, top 5, top 6, etc. all the way down to top 10. It has the 8th best top 2, 5th best top 3.
Here is the list of best top 5's:

Code: Select all

2009   9.60   L. James    T. Parker    K. Bryant    D. Howard    D. Wade


Parker 8.43
Bryant 7.48
Howard 7.13
Wade 6.81

Top 5 average 9.60

[bondom34]

Well this got interesting.

[SideshowBob]

How much better is Steph defensively vs last season? (If at all?)

[Dr Spaceman]

How much better is Steph defensively vs last season? (If at all?)

I'm not going to overreact to this series and I'm certainly not going to take a "heads will roll" approach to GSW losing as it appears some are. I still favor GSW in this series frankly and don't think what the thunder are doing is unsolvable.

Re: Steph's D, well what I'd point to first is that the Warriors are not losing this series in the half court. It's not like Westbrook is pick and rolling them to death although his jumper did get hot last night. The Thunder are just way more athletic and a much better running team; where GSW uses pace as a means to get their smart dudes good looks, OKC just literally wants to rip open the defense any chance they get. Also as I've mentioned elsewhere I'm still not sold on Steph being totally healthy.

If the Thunder win this series convincingly and beat Cleveland in the finals it will be hard to argue against WB being the POY. But until then... This series is getting a lot more competitive than I thought, but the Dubs have been down 2-1 before and a huge part of their process last year was figuring things out as they go. Obv the deatth lineup is off the table as far as that goes, but if the Warriors are as good as they appeared to be they have the versatility to swing things back in their favor. If they can win G4 (admittedly a big if), OKC still has to win another game on the road to win the series.

[SideshowBob]

TBH the series outcomes moving forward really aren't going to change my rankings from what they are - unless I spot some fundamental change/attribute in a player that I wasn't already aware of (ie player X's game really suffers against a specific type of defense).

The only big shifts will be Paul dropping out due to missed games and injury & missed games penalty for Curry.

[kayess]

TBH the series outcomes moving forward really aren't going to change my rankings from what they are - unless I spot some fundamental change/attribute in a player that I wasn't already aware of (ie player X's game really suffers against a specific type of defense).

The only big shifts will be Paul dropping out due to missed games and injury & missed games penalty for Curry.

What's your list like atm?

[RSCD3_]

You know I started to freak out about last night but then I remembered that this series through 3 games is heavily resembling the 2013 nba finals, banged up superstar coming off a GOAT RS peak and his #2 has gotten off to a poor start. Ill wait until game 4 until I freak out

[PaulieWal]

I still expect the Warriors to win this series but it will be hard to keep Steph #1 if the Warriors lose this series. I am usually with the "depends on how he played" crowd rather than winning or losing the series/title. But Steph has already missed 2 rounds and has only had 1 good game in this series. If the Warriors lose this series with him under-performing he definitely won't be #1.

[RSCD3_]

I still expect the Warriors to win this series but it will be hard to keep Steph #1 if the Warriors lose this series. I am usually with the "depends on how he played" crowd rather than winning or losing the series/title. But Steph has already missed 2 rounds and has only had 1 good game in this series. If the Warriors lose this series with him under-performing he definitely won't be #1.

26.0/5.7/4.3 on 64.4 TS%, 112 ORTG, 22.2 AST% and 15.4 TOV%

His scoring doesnt look that off but his passing purely off box score looks lower. If they lose due to defense and he has a great rest of the series how should we judge it. We gave lebron leeway in 2014 because he defense collapsed around him and if that's what happens with curry can we blame him that much.

If he has a very good series in total, I might have him at #3, because of time missed and have two of westbrook/durant/lebron over him.

[SideshowBob]

TBH the series outcomes moving forward really aren't going to change my rankings from what they are - unless I spot some fundamental change/attribute in a player that I wasn't already aware of (ie player X's game really suffers against a specific type of defense).

The only big shifts will be Paul dropping out due to missed games and injury & missed games penalty for Curry.

What's your list like atm?

Steph
James

Westbrook
Durant

Paul

Leonard
Green

Paul drops out of top 5. Can't do the math on Steph right now but he goes down to the lower half. Not sure which of Leonard or Green I'll have in honestly.

James is behind Steph/Durant/Russ on offense but his defensive gap over all three of them is bigger IMO (this is his best defensive year since 13, maybe 12 if full-year consistency is more important).

ITO offensive portability on 5-tier scale:

Steph/Green

Durant/Leonard

Paul

James

Westbrook

[PaulieWal]

I still expect the Warriors to win this series but it will be hard to keep Steph #1 if the Warriors lose this series. I am usually with the "depends on how he played" crowd rather than winning or losing the series/title. But Steph has already missed 2 rounds and has only had 1 good game in this series. If the Warriors lose this series with him under-performing he definitely won't be #1.

26.0/5.7/4.3 on 64.4 TS%, 112 ORTG, 22.2 AST% and 15.4 TOV%

His scoring doesnt look that off but his passing purely off box score looks lower. If they lose due to defense and he has a great rest of the series how should we judge it. We gave lebron leeway in 2014 because he defense collapsed around him and if that's what happens with curry can we blame him that much.

If he has a very good series in total, I might have him at #3, because of time missed and have two of westbrook/durant/lebron over him.

His numbers are looking fine overall but you can't tell me he played well in games 1 and 3. Game 2 he was amazing and took over in he 3rd quarter.

Keep in mind though, I said that the missed time was a huge factor for me as it was happening so I am not being reactionary here now.

Basically it comes down to his performance in his remaining playoff games. If he dominates rest of the series + the Cavs then I can still consider him for #1. With the missed time his margin for error is very small now on my irrelevant POY ballot .

[Doctor MJ]

I still expect the Warriors to win this series but it will be hard to keep Steph #1 if the Warriors lose this series. I am usually with the "depends on how he played" crowd rather than winning or losing the series/title. But Steph has already missed 2 rounds and has only had 1 good game in this series. If the Warriors lose this series with him under-performing he definitely won't be #1.

I think this post-season has the potential to really cause utter chaos in our voting.

That can be a bad thing, but I'm hopeful that for us it will lead to thought-provoking conversation.

[bondom34]

I still expect the Warriors to win this series but it will be hard to keep Steph #1 if the Warriors lose this series. I am usually with the "depends on how he played" crowd rather than winning or losing the series/title. But Steph has already missed 2 rounds and has only had 1 good game in this series. If the Warriors lose this series with him under-performing he definitely won't be #1.

I think this post-season has the potential to really cause utter chaos in our voting.

That can be a bad thing, but I'm hopeful that for us it will lead to thought-provoking conversation.

Or everyone's ballot is:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

[Quotatious]

I basically agree with Paulie about 99% of the time, but I would have to disagree here. I can't fathom Curry not being #1 this year. His regular season was just too great (arguably top 5 all-time, top 10 for sure), and even in the playoffs, his numbers are still pretty damn good - obviously not as good as they were in the regular season, but with his health issues, such a decline is totally understandable.

I might go with LeBron at #2. I didn't have him that high on my initial ballot (just 4th behind Curry, Westbrook and Leonard), but he's been arguably the best player in the postseason so far (it's amazing how he's still able to shoot 57.7% TS even though he's shooting only 28.3% on threes, and 61.5% on FTs).

Westbrook would be my #3. Leonard and Durant #4 and 5. Green a close #6.

[Basileus777]

The Thunder winning the title would produce some interesting discussion here, especially as if they do so it would arguably be the greatest post-season run in NBA history considering the competition they would have to get through.

[kayess]

inb4 Kobe fans cite LeBron's 2009/2010 wins in the RPOY voting

I mean obviously 2009 isn't even close to being the same situation because of the should've-been-GOAT playoff run, but what about 2010? In both instances, the runaway best player in the league underperforms vs. an eventual finalist (who match up very well against them), probably due to injury (Spaceman's talked about Steph's, SSB's talked about Bron's elbow thing and the 2 days of rest theory). Both might get outperformed in the playoffs by a superstar at the tail end of their prime.

Of course, tail end prime Bron > tail end prime Kobe, even accounting for portability, and Bron's single-year NPI RAPM is actually just .09 (!!) behind Curry, and his team has been killing it in the playoffs.

[SideshowBob]

inb4 Kobe fans cite LeBron's 2009/2010 wins in the RPOY voting

I mean obviously 2009 isn't even close to being the same situation because of the should've-been-GOAT playoff run, but what about 2010? In both instances, the runaway best player in the league underperforms vs. an eventual finalist (who match up very well against them), probably due to injury (Spaceman's talked about Steph's, SSB's talked about Bron's elbow thing and the 2 days of rest theory). Both might get outperformed in the playoffs by a superstar at the tail end of their prime.

Of course, tail end prime Bron > tail end prime Kobe, even accounting for portability, and Bron's single-year NPI RAPM is actually just .09 (!!) behind Curry, and his team has been killing it in the playoffs.

The bolded is a significant difference between the two comparisons (2016 vs. 2010), and the other is that 16 Curry actually missed 8 games, whereas James didn't (and personally I dock his offense a bit for that elbow issue, if you've seen my thread on 10 James vs. 89 Jordan - his mid-season offense was crazy that year, but my overall rating for him that year is lower w/playoff struggles kept in mind).

So FWIW, Curry playing hampered a bit isn't as penalizing for me as the missed playoff time. If he drops from new GOAT offensive standard to just matching GOAT offensive standard due to injury, that alone wouldn't be as much of a problem.

With that in mind, I'm still open to being convinced not to stick with this criteria for the sake of this project - I just haven't been convinced yet. In my mind, looking for separation between "POY" and "best player" and "goodness" and whatever else is moot; I don't see why it doesn't all mean the same thing.

[Texas Chuck]

In my mind, looking for separation between "POY" and "best player" and "goodness" and whatever else is moot; I don't see why it doesn't all mean the same thing.

I'd love for you to expound on this a bit if you would. And I'll start by giving a bit of my take on this issue as perhaps a jumping off point?

I've always looked at the best player being more static than reflected by MVP's or RPOY or what have you. I just don't think there is major change on a year to year basis all the time. Like if Lebron is better than Dirk in 2009 and 2010 and 2012 and 2013 I'd need a really good reason to feel Dirk is "better" in terms of who is the "best player" conversation. But I might could be convinced Dirk deserved POY for how important he was to that Mavs team and his fairly epic overall playoffs.--I'd take Lebron btw as I think his Finals performance overshadows a great year too much.

But to me the "best player" has moved pretty steadily from Bird to Magic to Mike to Dream to Mike to Shaq to Duncan to Lebron. Yeah there might be a season or two in there where it should be somebody else, but regardless of the MVP I feel very confident Shaq was the best player in the league for multiple years in a row. But considering games missed and what not maybe others take POY. Or Duncan doesn't win every POY he is the "best player" because he plays fewer minutes and isn't a box score stuffer the way some others are.


OTOH it feels odd saying someone is the "best player" if someone else had a better season. It seems unfair to me. But at the same time regardless of what happens from here, I'm convinced Steph is the "best player" when I think its very possible Lebron or GOATbrook might end up having a far superior playoffs and thus deserve "POY"


Ugh, this is repetitive and rambling and all. But I struggle with this question. I believe strongly that how guys actually play is the most important factor in analyzing them. Not how they'd do in some theoretical different circumstances, but how they performed in the only set of circumstances they had the opportunity to play in. Which means I should be okay with letting the title of "best player" move on a year to year basis. But that's at direct odds with for lack of a better term--my common sense which tells me Curry is the best and Lebron was before him and Duncan was before him and so on and that a month here or there really shouldn't change that.

So I'm looking for help trying to reconcile these different though processes.

[RSCD3_]

In my mind, looking for separation between "POY" and "best player" and "goodness" and whatever else is moot; I don't see why it doesn't all mean the same thing.

I'd love for you to expound on this a bit if you would. And I'll start by giving a bit of my take on this issue as perhaps a jumping off point?

I've always looked at the best player being more static than reflected by MVP's or RPOY or what have you. I just don't think there is major change on a year to year basis all the time. Like if Lebron is better than Dirk in 2009 and 2010 and 2012 and 2013 I'd need a really good reason to feel Dirk is "better" in terms of who is the "best player" conversation. But I might could be convinced Dirk deserved POY for how important he was to that Mavs team and his fairly epic overall playoffs.--I'd take Lebron btw as I think his Finals performance overshadows a great year too much.

But to me the "best player" has moved pretty steadily from Bird to Magic to Mike to Dream to Mike to Shaq to Duncan to Lebron. Yeah there might be a season or two in there where it should be somebody else, but regardless of the MVP I feel very confident Shaq was the best player in the league for multiple years in a row. But considering games missed and what not maybe others take POY. Or Duncan doesn't win every POY he is the "best player" because he plays fewer minutes and isn't a box score stuffer the way some others are.


OTOH it feels odd saying someone is the "best player" if someone else had a better season. It seems unfair to me. But at the same time regardless of what happens from here, I'm convinced Steph is the "best player" when I think its very possible Lebron or GOATbrook might end up having a far superior playoffs and thus deserve "POY"


Ugh, this is repetitive and rambling and all. But I struggle with this question. I believe strongly that how guys actually play is the most important factor in analyzing them. Not how they'd do in some theoretical different circumstances, but how they performed in the only set of circumstances they had the opportunity to play in. Which means I should be okay with letting the title of "best player" move on a year to year basis. But that's at direct odds with for lack of a better term--my common sense which tells me Curry is the best and Lebron was before him and Duncan was before him and so on and that a month here or there really shouldn't change that.

So I'm looking for help trying to reconcile these different though processes.

Well lebron's a easier case since all the added weight took away much of his offensive strength, with how little he used his extra muscle mass, it almost operate the same as fat. So If say Kevin Durant got a little chubby next year and the lost the weight the year after it wouldn't be unreasonable for some guys to pass him in that down year that weren't as good before or after.