trex_8063 wrote:E-Balla wrote:trex_8063 wrote:2nd ballot - '95 David Robinson
Don't know if this is a "dark-horse" pick for many at this stage, but the near-reality as I see is that David Robinson was asked [by the Spurs] to be Bill Russell on defense and simultaneously be Shaquille O'Neal on offense.......and he kinda takes some flack for not being up to the task [primarily in the playoffs]. But realistically, if he'd been consistently capable of maintaining his rs standard of offensive performance and efficiency during the playoffs, we'd have been discussing him in the top 3 positions of this project. So I don't think it's off base to give him some consideration now around #10.
But the biggest criticism of Robinson's whole career is specifically that he COULDN'T produce on that level both offensively as the primary option and defensively as the anchor in series when the going got tough.
I know, that's what I'm saying. If David Robinson
had been capable of being arguably the best defensive player
in the league (and on the short-list of greatest
all-time)
and simultaneously being capable of scoring 25-29 ppg on good efficiency as anchor of a good offense
in the playoffs, we wouldn't be having this discussion here in the #11 thread.......because that hypothetical player would have been voted in somewhere around the top 3 of this project.
But he wasn't, and so we didn't. Now I'm wondering how just how far we go down the line before we give him consideration.
fwiw, if we removed the words "in the playoffs" from the description I laid out above, that DOES describe exactly what Robinson did in the rs in his best years. In the playoffs, his defense largely sustains, but his offense falls off to a point which is still fairly good in the grand scheme of things [though I recall we've disagreed in the past on semantics here]........like roughly the equivalent of what rs Patrick Ewing was doing [on average] ~'92-'96 (I don't recall people saying Ewing sucked offensively at that time).
E-Balla wrote:If Robinson has an argument based off his total impact and how much he'd impact the game hypothetically with someone else to lead the offense, how highly are you rating Draymond, Dwight, Zo, and other guys who are undeniably better defenders than him while still being top tier defensive anchors?
Wait, what? Undeniably better defenders? Or did you mean offensive players (since you repeat praise of their defense at the end of sentence)? I guess I won't agree with that statement either way (especially with the modifier "undeniably" added), actually.
Yes I meant offensive players. I'm mad because I lost this post once but let's go again.
First I want to address you saying Robinson in the playoffs was like Ewing's regular seasons. If anything he was worse that Ewing himself.
Against teams in the playoffs with a good (-2 to -4 DRTG) defense here's their averages.
Robinson (90-98): 21.0 ppg, 3.3 apg, 2.4 topg, 51.7 TS%
Ewing (88-97): 21.2 ppg, 2.5 apg, 2.8 topg, 53.4 TS%
Against teams in the playoffs with an averaged (-2 to +2 DRTG) defense here's their averages.
Robinson (90-98): 23.6 ppg, 2.8 apg, 3.1 topg, 53.8 TS%
Ewing (88-97): 24.2 ppg, 3.0 apg, 2.8 topg, 54.6 TS%
To me Ewing has a very slight, but clear, edge here so I feel like you should say Robinson compares less than favorably to Ewing period, not regular season Ewing. Then we can add in the fact that Robinson's defenses in series where he struggled offensively underperformed defensively.
Then we add in Ewing's absurd 1990 peak and I take him over Robinson for peak (Robinson gets it for career for what he did as #2 to Duncan IMO).
Then with those other guys I named you have:
1. We have playoff RAPM for both Draymond and Robinson as #2s. Draymond is tied for first with LeBron, and the 3rd in DRAPM (close to Robinson at first place, 3.9 vs 4.1) and Robinson from 98 on is 4th, but there's a gap between 3rd (Manu) and Robinson. Now I can easily believe peak Robinson would've been a better second option, but I don't think he would be as impactful as Draymond's offense has been to the Warriors. And he's a player who's offensive production in the postseason rises a ton, plus we've seen him and Klay without Curry look dominant still in Dray's peak year. I can easily see an argument he's more impactful as a #2 than Robinson, and if the argument is Robinson can be this high because of his impact if he would be a #2, I think Draymond shouldn't be too far behind.
2. Dwight is great. I actually put 2011 Dwight as the 3rd best player in the league that year. In 08-11 RAPM he's 4th, in a big bunch of players (Nash, KG, CP3, Dirk) under LeBron at 1. He was the 2nd best defender to KG at worst (I'd say he was better than KG some of those years), and a guy that averaged 20/14 on 63 TS% in the playoffs from 08-11. He was also 2nd in MVP in 2011 and of course won 3 straight DPOYs.
3. Zo unlike Dwight had a full offensive game. Then he has 99, a season where I think he was the 3rd best player in basketball, but only under 2 people already on here. He averaged 20/11 on +5 rTS% with 4 bpg, won DPOY, was MVP runner up (it was close too), and lead the league in RAPM. In the playoffs he played well, but they lost to the NBA Finalist Knicks that Robinson knocked off as a #2 to Duncan (who was dominant).
If strong +/- numbers from players that might not really be a #1 is your thing, these guys are more proven in the playoffs as #1s or in the case of Draymond #2s.
