RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 (Oscar Robertson)

Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier

Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#101 » by Dutchball97 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:10 pm

LA Bird wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote:Okay so I understand Karl Malone was really good for really long but imo his longevity is a disadvantage if anything against certain other players.

I mentioned in the last thread that Karl Malone, Dirk and KD have nearly identical cumulative stats in the play-offs. Dirk has 23.1 WS and 11.8 VORP, KD has 23.1 WS and 12.6 VORP and Karl Malone has 23 WS and 12.1 VORP.

The main difference is that KD needed 139 play-off games to reach these numbers, Dirk needed 145 games and Karl Malone needed 193 games to do the same the other two did in about 50 less games. To me that looks like Karl Malone gets rated ahead of the other two because he played for longer but it seems like people are overlooking how even with Karl Malone's lengthy career, KD has already done at least as much in the play-offs. That means KD was better than Karl year by year by quite a bit.

In comparisons like Kobe vs KG or West vs Oscar you have one more succesful play-off performer vs someone with a clear regular season edge. What I'm arguing here is that KD is a step above Karl Malone both in the play-offs and regular season.

How in the world is Durant a step above Karl Malone in the regular season? If you are going to post cumulative WS and VORP for the playoffs, do the same for the regular season too.

Malone: 234.6 WS, 99.0 VORP
Durant: 141.7 WS, 69.0 VORP

Even if we ignore 1/3 of Malone's career, he still has a higher WS and VORP from 1990~2000 in a similar number of games as Durant.


Should've clarified that last sentence was about peak. I don't think Karl Malone has a regular season on the level of Durant's 13/14 season. With KG/Kobe and Oscar/West you get one guy that peaked higher in the regular season vs one who peaked higher in the play-offs. With KD vs Malone I see KD as having substantially higher peaks than Karl Malone in both the regular season and play-offs.

Also regular season means less than the play-offs to me. Malone playing for longer and racking up cumulative stats in the regular season is much less of an argument than KD achieving more play-offs WS and VORP than Karl Malone in significantly less years and total games.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,599
And1: 24,915
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#102 » by 70sFan » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:21 pm

Dutchball97 wrote:
LA Bird wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote:Okay so I understand Karl Malone was really good for really long but imo his longevity is a disadvantage if anything against certain other players.

I mentioned in the last thread that Karl Malone, Dirk and KD have nearly identical cumulative stats in the play-offs. Dirk has 23.1 WS and 11.8 VORP, KD has 23.1 WS and 12.6 VORP and Karl Malone has 23 WS and 12.1 VORP.

The main difference is that KD needed 139 play-off games to reach these numbers, Dirk needed 145 games and Karl Malone needed 193 games to do the same the other two did in about 50 less games. To me that looks like Karl Malone gets rated ahead of the other two because he played for longer but it seems like people are overlooking how even with Karl Malone's lengthy career, KD has already done at least as much in the play-offs. That means KD was better than Karl year by year by quite a bit.

In comparisons like Kobe vs KG or West vs Oscar you have one more succesful play-off performer vs someone with a clear regular season edge. What I'm arguing here is that KD is a step above Karl Malone both in the play-offs and regular season.

How in the world is Durant a step above Karl Malone in the regular season? If you are going to post cumulative WS and VORP for the playoffs, do the same for the regular season too.

Malone: 234.6 WS, 99.0 VORP
Durant: 141.7 WS, 69.0 VORP

Even if we ignore 1/3 of Malone's career, he still has a higher WS and VORP from 1990~2000 in a similar number of games as Durant.


Should've clarified that last sentence was about peak. I don't think Karl Malone has a regular season on the level of Durant's 13/14 season. With KG/Kobe and Oscar/West you get one guy that peaked higher in the regular season vs one who peaked higher in the play-offs. With KD vs Malone I see KD as having substantially higher peaks than Karl Malone in both the regular season and play-offs.

Also regular season means less than the play-offs to me. Malone playing for longer and racking up cumulative stats in the regular season is much less of an argument than KD achieving more play-offs WS and VORP than Karl Malone in significantly less years and total games.

What makes 2014 Durant so much better than 1997 Malone?
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,514
And1: 2,940
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#103 » by Odinn21 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:21 pm

sansterre wrote:I absolutely am new here, but I am certainly aware that context to numbers is a thing. That said, I prefer starting from the numbers, as the alternative is to open yourself up to a million cognitive biases. And without the numbers, discussion gets unproductive pretty easily.

And all my numbers were postseason numbers.

But if this discussion is going to be me saying "I don't know that there's objective evidence for that, look at these numbers" and you saying "numbers mean nothing, Moses was obviously better", then absolutely nothing I would want to write will go anywhere useful for the discussion.

Cheers.

You're trying to extract context from numbers without doing the vice versa. That's your issue.

Did I say numbers mean nothing? I gave you an explanation why some of the numbers are not even worth considering (Rtg numbers on player profile pages) or what to consider for them while looking at them (PER). Or tried to point out why we should use OBPM more often than BPM?
Marcus Camby from 2004-05 to 2006-07; 3.5 DBPM and led the league in DBPM in each three seasons.
Tim Duncan from 2004-05 to 2006-07; 2.9 DBPM.
Kevin Garnett 2004-05 to 2006-07; 2.3 DBPM.
Their D-RAPM goes; Duncan > Garnett > Camby for those 3 seasons' total.

Did not I use numbers also?
"From Olajuwon's rookie season to Moses' last 19/10 season, in those 6 seasons, Malone made Olajuwon fouled out more than half the time in their h2h meetings. 40% of the time with Ewing."
This is a statistic. You just wouldn't see it on player profile pages.

Here's a comparison for Moses Malone's best 3 season stretch and David Robinson's best 3 season stretch;

Moses Malone from 1980-81 to 1982-83

27.8 pts 14.9 reb 1.6 ast 1.0 stl 1.8 blk 3.6 tov per game on .580 ts (+4.6 rts) in 239 regular season games
33.4 pts 17.9 reb 1.9 ast 1.2 stl 2.2 blk 4.3 tov per 100
25.7 per (1.7 rank on average), 5.0 obpm (4.7 rank on average)

26.3 pts 15.2 reb 1.8 ast 0.9 stl 1.6 blk 2.8 tov per game on .549 ts in 37 playoff games
30.7 pts 17.8 reb 2.1 ast 1.1 stl 1.9 blk 3.3 tov per 100
23.6 per, 5.6 obpm
In his two deep playoff runs in 1981 and 1983; among players played more than 1 series, he had the highest per in both playoffs. His obpm was 4th in 1981 and 2nd in 1983.

In playoffs, Malone's scoring volume went down but not his offensive quality by looking at obpm.

David Robinson from 1993-94 to 1995-96

27.5 pts 11.2 reb 3.6 ast 1.6 stl 3.3 blk 2.8 tov per game on .589 ts (+5.1 rts) in 243 regular season games
37.0 pts 15.2 reb 4.8 ast 2.1 stl 4.4 blk 3.8 tov per 100
29.8 per (1.0 rank on average), 6.6 obpm (2.7 rank on average)

24.0 pts 11.1 reb 2.9 ast 1.4 stl 2.6 blk 3.1 tov per game on .538 ts in 29 playoff games
33.7 pts 15.6 reb 4.1 ast 1.9 stl 3.6 blk 4.3 tov per 100
24.6 per, 4.0 obpm
In his two playoff runs went further than 1st round in 1995 and 1996; among players played more than 1 series, His per was 6th in 1995 and 1st in 1996. His obpm was 10th in 1995 and 7th in 1996.

He dropped in every single category there is on box numbers.

Comparing their single series playoffs in 1982 and 1994;
1982 Malone did better than 1994 Robinson.

Now, an observation about per;
To achieve 15.0 average across regular season or playoffs, per method uses iterative process and that causes the players with the most games played to be at a disadvantage because the players with the most GP are more involved in establishing the 15.0 baseline. The method needs something to continue at obviously. That makes players with less playtime act like more outlier like.
That's why Reggie Miller had a per of 35.8 in 1996 playoffs with 31 minutes of playtime.
(Though BBRef leaderboards usually ignore the players with so little playtime.)

In 1981 playoffs, Malone led the games and minutes played.
In 1983 playoffs, Malone played in 13 games while the highest was 15 and his 524 minutes of play time was the 5th highest (#1 was Magic with 643). 524/643 = 81.5%
In 1996 playoffs, Robinson played in 10 games while the highest was 21 and his 353 minutes of play time was the 28th highest (#1 was Payton with 911). 353/911 = 38.7%
Robinson leading 1996 playoffs per was a situation like Duncan leading in 2002 and O'Neal leading in 2003.

So, while Robinson was helped by per design to lead the 1996 playoffs, Malone led per on merit more in 1981 and 1983.

You don't like me talking about the situation that Malone was in in 1981? Because my post was "nah, I just like Malone more" to you?
This is how I use numbers.

Note: If you're going to point out Malone's per 100 numbers, I'd suggest you to take a look at my signature to see my stance. I'm bigger on per game numbers.
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#104 » by Dutchball97 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:32 pm

70sFan wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote:
LA Bird wrote:How in the world is Durant a step above Karl Malone in the regular season? If you are going to post cumulative WS and VORP for the playoffs, do the same for the regular season too.

Malone: 234.6 WS, 99.0 VORP
Durant: 141.7 WS, 69.0 VORP

Even if we ignore 1/3 of Malone's career, he still has a higher WS and VORP from 1990~2000 in a similar number of games as Durant.


Should've clarified that last sentence was about peak. I don't think Karl Malone has a regular season on the level of Durant's 13/14 season. With KG/Kobe and Oscar/West you get one guy that peaked higher in the regular season vs one who peaked higher in the play-offs. With KD vs Malone I see KD as having substantially higher peaks than Karl Malone in both the regular season and play-offs.

Also regular season means less than the play-offs to me. Malone playing for longer and racking up cumulative stats in the regular season is much less of an argument than KD achieving more play-offs WS and VORP than Karl Malone in significantly less years and total games.

What makes 2014 Durant so much better than 1997 Malone?


Durant scored 5 points more per game than Karl Malone on better efficiency, he was also a superior playmaker and while Karl Malone probably has an edge in the defensive department I don't see that as a bigger gap than the scoring or playmaking. Besides that KD won MVP in a landslide over prime LeBron, while Karl Malone barely edged out MJ. I don't even really see a good reason for Karl Malone to win that MVP outside of voter fatigue. KD also has a higher PER, WS, WS/48, BPM and VORP in 13/14 than Malone in 96/97. Just giving one stat and claiming it is the reason a player is better isn't productive but when pretty much all the stats point towards 13/14 KD being better than 96/97 Karl Malone I'd like to hear your argument for the opposite.
Hornet Mania
General Manager
Posts: 8,905
And1: 8,388
Joined: Jul 05, 2014
Location: Dornbirn, Austria
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#105 » by Hornet Mania » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:32 pm

I'm running a bit late with some work this afternoon so this will have to be abbreviated, but I wanted to be sure I got my votes in on time.

I'm going with Oscar this round once again. He was one of the most statistically dominant players of all-time, an offensive dynamo at every level of play, and widely considered to be even higher than this in all-time ranking by experts as recently as the late-90s.

My runner-up votes go to Mikan, who I've touched upon in a post earlier in the thread, and Karl Malone. Ultimately I went with Malone over Dirk, D-Rob and Moses because his career value is so strong. Kareem and Lebron are his only peers in terms of longevity, the Mailman was banking MVP-caliber seasons into his 30s which is exceedingly rare. I think the three men I mentioned before are all superior to him in terms of peak but none of them can match the sheer number of minutes Mailman was able to amass. His longevity wasn't just years played, it also includes the fact he rarely missed games. Mailman missed 10 games total in his first 18 seasons, which is simply absurd.

My vote:
1. Oscar Robertson
2. George Mikan
3. Karl Malone
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,599
And1: 24,915
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#106 » by 70sFan » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:52 pm

Dutchball97 wrote:Durant scored 5 points more per game than Karl Malone on better efficiency,

So pace and era differences matter only in certain comparisons, right?

1997 Malone: 30 pts/75 on +6.4 rTS%
2014 Durant: 31.4 pts/75 on +9.4 rTS%

Sure, Durant has edge especially in efficiency, but "5 points more per game" is very misleading - they scored on basically the same volume.
he was also a superior playmaker

To be honest, I don't see any reason to believe in this thing. Malone is one of the best passing bigs ever and unlike some, he pressured opponent's defense a lot. Durant isn't elite perimeter playmaker and I wouldn't take many non-perimeter playmakers over Malone in terms of passing and playmaking.

Even for a boxscore assists/turnovers stats, Durant has no edge:

Malone: 4.9/3.1 per75, 24.7 ast% to 11.1 tov%
Durant: 5.4/3.5 per75, 26.7 ast% to 12.2 tov%

and while Karl Malone probably has an edge in the defensive department I don't see that as a bigger gap than the scoring or playmaking.

Well, he has quite significant edge on defense and as I pointed out, there is no gap in playmaking and scoring gap isn't that large either.
Besides that KD won MVP in a landslide over prime LeBron, while Karl Malone barely edged out MJ. I don't even really see a good reason for Karl Malone to win that MVP outside of voter fatigue.

So you really believe that KD was better player than James in 2014? I see this as voters fatigue as well.
KD also has a higher PER, WS, WS/48, BPM and VORP in 13/14 than Malone in 96/97. Just giving one stat and claiming it is the reason a player is better isn't productive but when pretty much all the stats point towards 13/14 KD being better than 96/97 Karl Malone I'd like to hear your argument for the opposite.

Actually, if you use scaled versions of PER and WS (which makes much more sense in comparing players from different eras), they are on identical level:

viewtopic.php?t=1474454

1997 Malone: 28.92 PER, .276 WS/48
2014 Durant: 28.98 PER, .299 WS/48

I don't use these kind of formulas though, because they don't tell you much about either player.

It's not about Durant being better than Malone, you'd have to have him as MUCH better than Malone and I don't see it. Yeah, he has slightly higher boxscore stats but Malone was better in non-boxscore value (better defender, passer, P&R player, transition finisher). You're acting like Durant is so much better at his peak that gigantic longevity difference doesn't matter. To some players it doesn't, but I'm not buying Durant as some kind of top 15 peak player ever. Not even close to this in fact.
Dutchball97
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,406
And1: 5,001
Joined: Mar 28, 2020
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#107 » by Dutchball97 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 3:03 pm

70sFan wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote:Durant scored 5 points more per game than Karl Malone on better efficiency,

So pace and era differences matter only in certain comparisons, right?

1997 Malone: 30 pts/75 on +6.4 rTS%
2014 Durant: 31.4 pts/75 on +9.4 rTS%

Sure, Durant has edge especially in efficiency, but "5 points more per game" is very misleading - they scored on basically the same volume.
he was also a superior playmaker

To be honest, I don't see any reason to believe in this thing. Malone is one of the best passing bigs ever and unlike some, he pressured opponent's defense a lot. Durant isn't elite perimeter playmaker and I wouldn't take many non-perimeter playmakers over Malone in terms of passing and playmaking.

Even for a boxscore assists/turnovers stats, Durant has no edge:

Malone: 4.9/3.1 per75, 24.7 ast% to 11.1 tov%
Durant: 5.4/3.5 per75, 26.7 ast% to 12.2 tov%

and while Karl Malone probably has an edge in the defensive department I don't see that as a bigger gap than the scoring or playmaking.

Well, he has quite significant edge on defense and as I pointed out, there is no gap in playmaking and scoring gap isn't that large either.
Besides that KD won MVP in a landslide over prime LeBron, while Karl Malone barely edged out MJ. I don't even really see a good reason for Karl Malone to win that MVP outside of voter fatigue.

So you really believe that KD was better player than James in 2014? I see this as voters fatigue as well.
KD also has a higher PER, WS, WS/48, BPM and VORP in 13/14 than Malone in 96/97. Just giving one stat and claiming it is the reason a player is better isn't productive but when pretty much all the stats point towards 13/14 KD being better than 96/97 Karl Malone I'd like to hear your argument for the opposite.

Actually, if you use scaled versions of PER and WS (which makes much more sense in comparing players from different eras), they are on identical level:

viewtopic.php?t=1474454

1997 Malone: 28.92 PER, .276 WS/48
2014 Durant: 28.98 PER, .299 WS/48

I don't use these kind of formulas though, because they don't tell you much about either player.

It's not about Durant being better than Malone, you'd have to have him as MUCH better than Malone and I don't see it. Yeah, he has slightly higher boxscore stats but Malone was better in non-boxscore value (better defender, passer, P&R player, transition finisher). You're acting like Durant is so much better at his peak that gigantic longevity difference doesn't matter. To some players it doesn't, but I'm not buying Durant as some kind of top 15 peak player ever. Not even close to this in fact.


He doesn't have to be much better than Malone in the regular season at all, he's already better in the post-season. I really don't agree with your view of Malone as this huge plus defender and I don't think he's a better passer either like I just said. Karl being better at P&R and transition offense seems like a weird argument when KD is a much more complete offensive player.

KD winning over LeBron because of voter fatigue is once again based on nothing. Was KD a better player than LeBron in 2014? Maybe, probably not. Did KD have a better regular season than LeBron in 2014 and won the MVP in a landslide deservedly? Yes. You're saying you don't want to be a KD hater but it sounds like the bias is hard to fight.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,599
And1: 24,915
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#108 » by 70sFan » Wed Nov 11, 2020 3:14 pm

Dutchball97 wrote:He doesn't have to be much better than Malone in the regular season at all, he's already better in the post-season.

But he's not... definitely not in 2014. If you want to use limited sample and point out 2012, then keep in mind that I can use good Malone runs like 1992, 1998 or 2000 as well. The truth is that neither one is great postseason performer, but Durant got redemption because he scored well in GSW when he faced as much defensive pressure as Harrison Barnes...
I really don't agree with your view of Malone as this huge plus defender

I mean, Durant was weak for most of his prime so the gap being huge doesn't mean that Malone was some kind of all-timer on that end.
and I don't think he's a better passer either like I just said.

How? Durant's passing has always been his weakness and it's the reason why he never reached the greatest level on offense. Malone's main strength on offense was his passing.
Karl being better at P&R and transition offense seems like a weird argument when KD is a much more complete offensive player.

Define "complete". Durant is more complete scorer, not more complete offensive player. I mean, the only meaningful edge KD has over Malone is shooting.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,694
And1: 21,632
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#109 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Nov 11, 2020 4:41 pm

Odinn21 wrote:
Spoiler:
This whole the PF debate aside, I find this as an interesting pick.

As you know, I have Moses Malone ahead of David Robinson when I compare them, this is what I see going by my criterias;
* Peak- I have higher regards for 1981, 1982 and 1983 Moses over 1994, 1995 and 1996 Admiral. The gap on offense was bigger than the gap on defense IMO. Robinson's high post offense never translated into proper postseason performances and Malone's offense was much more impactful. And even if we do not agree on that, I think we have to agree that Moses' rebounding and ability to draw fouls should put him over Robinson.
It's worth mentioning that Robinson was better at passing but that also did not translate into postseason impact well enough due to Robinson's high post approach in a time of low post dominance.
* Prime duration- Both had 7 seasons of proper prime.
* Average prime level- Aside from their peaks, I have higher regards for Malone's non-peak seasons. Malone from 1979 to 1985 was a better player than Robinson from 1990 to 1996, despite 1984 being a clear down season for him.
* Longevity- This is where it gets interesting. Robinson was pretty strong in 1998 and 1999. I'm not so sure if I'd say he was a top 5 player in the league in 1998, but he was in 1999. One could make a very good argument for his 1999 being the best #2 scoring option performance of all-time. 2000 and 2001 are also good seasons for him. Malone on the other hand, kept being a 20+/10+ player for another 5 seasons. His offensive production was there, though his defense was pretty inconsistent. 1986 did not go well for him or the Sixers. But he and Jeff Malone were the players that took the Bad Boys Pistons to an elimination game in 1988. 1989 was another strong season from him. There's also the seasons before 1978-79 which he added some value to his career.
I guess I'm going to give the edge to Robinson because Robinson looks more consistent. But I'm not so sure if the longevity edge makes up for the gap between their primes.
* Career resume- This is among my criterias and I'd say Moses had the better career resume for sure. But I don't think it really matters between players this close.

Interesting note; looking at Retro PotY vote shares, Moses is 18th with 3.478 and Robinson is 24th with 2.431. I don't know what to do with that right now. At a first glance, Moses looks like he was on the next level compared to Robinson. But that's just first glance.

Edit;
Diving into those Retro PotY results...

Moses Malone
3rd in 1979, agreed. (0.529 share)
4th in 1980, he was the 3rd best after Abdul-Jabbar and Erving, rookie Bird was not better than him. (0.259 share)
2nd in 1981, being 2nd to Bird is a winning bias IMO, should've been 1st. (0.572 share)
1st in 1982, not much to discuss. (0.971 share)
1st in 1983, again. (1.000 share)
8th in 1984, I think he shouldn't get a single top 5 vote. (0.042 share)
5th in 1985, I'd probably have him at 4 but it's just interchangeable between him, Abdul-Jabbar and Jordan. 3-5 range is accurate for him. They were very close, picking a certain spot is just being too nit-picky on this occasion. (0.105 share)

David Robinson
6th in 1990, agreed. (0.045 share)
5th in 1991, agreed. (0.268 share) [I was about to say maybe that share was a bit too much for Robinson but then realized other than Jordan and Magic, that was not a particularly good season for individuals.]
5th in 1992, agreed. (0.165 share)
5th in 1993, agreed. (0.096 share)
2nd in 1994, I think that's overrated. I wouldn't put Ewing behind Robinson. I'd say Robinson should be in 3-5 range along with Malone and O'Neal after Olajuwon and Ewing. (0.538 share)
3rd in 1995, agreed. (0.559 share)
2nd in 1996, agreed. (0.567 share)
5th in 1998, agreed I guess. (0.116 share)
5th in 1999, agreed. (0.077 share) [Though I'd expect him to have a higher share. That's too low.]

So...
The rankings look in line with my evaluation. Moses was not a top 5 player outside of his prime. Robinson was barely.
Moses' top results 1/1/2/3/4/5.
David's top results 2/2/3/5/5/5/5/5. Two not so strong but still top 5 seasons after his big injury.

We can talk about the individual competition Robinson faced being better than what Moses had but Moses was closer to late prime Abdul-Jabbar and he was better than prime Erving and early prime Bird, while Robinson struggled to put a clear distance between himself and Malone, Barkley and young / early prime O'Neal.


Appreciate the thoughts on Moses & Robinson. I've put it in spoilers because it's long and my main thrust here is going to be talking how I see the two of them. I will though try to be touching on some stuff relevant to what you mentioned.

First thing: In general I think big men shine with defense, and that makes it real hard to side against Robinson when he's glaringly superior on defense and really dang good on offense.

You talk about Robinson's offense not working the playoffs but consider:

Here are the top post-seasons by each guy in terms of points scored per 100 possessions:

1. Robinson '95-96 37.0
2. Moses '80-81 32.8
3. Robinson '94-95 32.6
4. Robinson '99-00 32.1
5. Moses '82-83 31.9
6. Moses '78-79 31.1
7. Robinson '89-90 30.4
8. Moses '81-82 30.3
9. Robinson '93-94 30.1

I think it's clear that it's not like both guys' teams were relying on Moses/Robinson to achieve a certain level of volume scoring that only Moses was able to achieve, and there's no glaring difference in efficiency despite the fact that Robinson is in general asked to manufacture more for his team's attack (while Moses relies more on offensive rebounds and the instant scoring opportunity that comes from that).

I think Moses really solidified himself with the way he was able to go to the 76ers and elevate them to one of the great teams we still talk about today, but they were already really good and I think it's worth asking what we could expect from Robinson in such a situation. Those 76ers got worse on offense compared to the previous year and made up for it with a defensive improvement. It's awfully hard for me to imagine that Robinson couldn't have improved that defense even more, and I think it unlikely the offense gets worse.

You separate out rebounding from offense and defense like many do, but while skill-wise this makes sense, impact-wise, it's split across the two main categories. There's no doubt that Moses was a better rebounder and this was helping his team on both offense and defense. The numbers are what they are despite this.

Re: prime duration 7 seasons. Yes, and then Robinson played an incredibly valuable role as the #2 offense, #1 defense guy with Duncan's arrival, while Moses got traded from team to team.

Re: Moses RPOY Share edge. This is true, just as it's true that Moses won 3 MVPs. Thing is that he did this at a particular weak point in the NBA and even still probably got overrated. I mean, did people actually think Moses was better than Kareem in '78-79 or was there just a pull to give the fresh new blood some shine? Does Moses win the '81-82 MVP without the '81 series win over the Lakers in a Best-of-3 game series?

Re: Moses better than prime Erving & Bird. If you think that then I'd expect you to champion Moses as you are. I think Erving & Bird at their best were considerably better than Moses. I will say that when I think of Erving like this I'm thinking of his ABA years and I'm not disputing that Moses was the MVP of the 76ers when he went there.

Regarding the comparison with Bird, here I feel a need to draw attention to just how drastically different the two players were. I see Moses as a specialist looking to do particular things where he's found a competitive advantage, and I see Bird as perhaps the ultimate generalist adding value every minute he's on the court by being smarter than everyone else. I'm wary of ranking specialists over generalists. Not that it never makes sense, but if I get the sense that the player's specialized method of impact is something that wouldn't work as well in a more sophisticated league, it's an issue.

And this is my sense with Moses. I think rebounding is less valuable today, and Moses' method of scoring is less valuable today, because guys are better shooters from the perimeter. In our as-of-yet-peak-NBA, outside shooting matters more, passing matters more, and individual rebounding becomes less valuable because the rebounds are spread further around the half court with the bounce of the longer shots.

As I've said before, I understand and respect those who see anything resembling "How would he do in another era?" as outside the bounds of their criteria, but a case like Moses is one of the reasons why I feel I need to ask these questions. He slide into his superstardom not by being an all-around obvious superstar prospect, but specifically because of his ability to wrestle on the interior and come out ahead. If the impact he had through this was a quirk of immature team basketball strategy, and in a more mature league he'd end up more at the level that was expected of him based on his all-around skillset, it matters to me.

I'll end with a note in the other direction though:

I really think that a significant image of Moses getting the best of Kareem is a big part of his legacy. While I think it's oversimplistic to simply assert that Moses beat Kareem in that match up overall, and while I think it's worth noting that Moses' rebounding superiority is particularly easy to see because Kareem was older and slower, there is a commonality of stiffness between Kareem and Robinson. By contrast, Moses was downright feral.

If Moses and Robinson matched up, I think he'd be able to make Robinson look silly at times as they fought for rebounds too and that's no inconsequential thing. If you see that edge as big enough, that's another reason to side with Moses. But there's more to the game than that - more to offense, and a lot more to defense for big men - and I find myself still thinking I'd rather have Robinson.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
TrueLAfan
Senior Mod - Clippers
Senior Mod - Clippers
Posts: 8,164
And1: 1,619
Joined: Apr 11, 2001

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#110 » by TrueLAfan » Wed Nov 11, 2020 4:42 pm

Odinn21 wrote:That looks like name reading. That is like saying “Garnett had Szczerbiak, Billups, Brandon and Nesterovic and the Wolves underperformed”.
The Royals had good potential on offense but not so good fit and their defense was terrible despite Robertson being slightly positive defender.


Well, to use your own point—Garnett did have those guys—for relatively short periods of time. And they performed far, far better than Oscar’s team. They averaged 51 wins a year from 2000 to 2004. The Royals won 50 games once in Oscar’s tenure.

And, to an extent, I’m assuming people are aware of these names. Wayne Embry wasn’t a great defender—but he wasn’t a bad defender. The phrase “heavy footed” was used to describe him; he didn’t elevate well, and wasn’t super tall. But he was good at getting and maintaining position. If you’d had two frontcourt players like that, it might have been a problem—but Jerry Lucas wasn’t like that. And Bob Boozer, Bob Love, Tom Hawkins, Happy Hairston—they were pretty good to very good defenders. They weren’t scorers—well, Hairston could put some points on the board—but they didn’t need to be. I disagree completely about the “fit” of Oscar’s teams. Big low post rebounders that were okay but not great defenders (Embry, Connie Dierking, Walt Wesley) with Lucas at the PF providing scoring and rebounding. Good defense from the mid-rotation multi-position players like Hawkins, Boozer, Hairston, and Love. Perimeter shooting from the SG position (Bucky Bockhorn and Adrian Smith--one dimensional, but that could seen as a plus with a multifaceted PG like Oscar); good scoring and overall play at SF (Twyman, Van Arsdale—both very good players). Again, it’s a good mix of scorers (Oscar, Lucas, Twyman/Van Arsdale) and adequate defenders that know their roles. How is that off? And if it is, why isn’t it the fault of the person running the offense? I don’t get it.

I’d also like to point out that Jerry Lucas wasn’t a good defender in the later parts of his career, once his knees started to go south (which was after 1966)—but he was actually relatively well regarded in his early years. You can pull up the old newspaper stories and SI articles about his hustle in his early years; it was on both ends back then. (In one humorous SI piece, Lucas was hoped to provide the defensive stopping abilities that Hawkins and Boozer didn’t have. Hmm.) He was limited in some ways, but made an effort. The Kevin Love comparison is apt on both ends.
Image
mailmp
Sophomore
Posts: 173
And1: 124
Joined: Oct 16, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#111 » by mailmp » Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:19 pm

Odinn21 wrote:
sansterre wrote:
Spoiler:
I could understand somebody preferring Moses over Robinson on account of career length/longevity. But I'm genuinely surprised to hear the argument being built around peak. Would you mind elaborating on that?

For the three-year peaks (playoffs only) you're talking about (I'm going to grab Robinson's entire '90 to '99 Peak, because including '94 seems weird since his playoff sample size is tiny):

Moses: 54.9 TS%, 15.0 Oreb%, 24.0 DReb%, 6.8 Ast%, 1.1 Stl%, 2.2 Blk%, 10.6% TOV, 26.2 USG%
Robinson: 55.1 TS%, 10.2 Oreb%, 24.3 DReb%, 13.3 Ast%, 1.9 Stl%, 5.4 Blk%, 12.3% TOV, 26.6 USG%

They're weirdly comparable in a lot of ways. Almost identical shooting, defensive rebounding and usage rates. The difference is pretty simple: Moses was much better at offensive rebounding (though Robinson, at 10.2% was quite good); that's his upside. Robinson was much better at passing and *way* better at defense. So I feel like giving the edge to Moses on offense is pretty automatic; those 5% offensive rebounds are awesome. But him being such a ball-stopper isn't great for his team offense, and Robinson, while not a *strong* passer, has an assist rate that says "I work well with my offense; my passing doesn't compromise my value". And with Moses it certainly did. Moses is still probably better on offense, but on defense there's no question; Robinson is obviously way better (steals and blocks are fairly bad approximations of defensive value, but they're what we have. And scouting reports certainly agree).

And overall stats:

Moses: 0.203 WS/48, +4.3 BPM, +5.6 OBPM, -1.3 DBPM, 114 ORat, 102 DRat, +12 Net
Robinson: 0.199 WS/48, +6.6 BPM, +3.7 OBPM, +2.9 DBPM, 111 ORat, 98 DRat, +13 Net

Comparable WS/48 numbers, but Robinson has considerably better BPM numbers, mostly because he's considered a strong defender and Moses is weak.

So let's say we looked at this and concluded that the two players are comparable. This is Moses' three-year peak, but Robinson's *ten* year peak.

I see the argument for Robinson here as follows:

1) Robinson's peak was comparable to (or better than) Moses' in quality but far longer
2) Robinson's wildly superior regular season performance was worth better seedings for his team, which in turn led to championship equity value that we can't see in their postseason stats.

I see the argument for Moses as follows:

1) He played longer
2) He was a better offensive player in the postseason
3) He had more team success during the peak years that you picked

The team success argument doesn't seem too reasonable; Moses' team success magically got better once he was playing with Erving; Robinson's team success magically got better once he was playing with Duncan.

I'm not saying that I think that there aren't arguments for Moses, but I'm surprised by the argument that peak is the selling point for you. Would you mind elaborating?

If I'm not mistaken, you're rather new to this goat talks stuff. And I get the appeal of looking at numbers on BBRef. Though there's more to it.

...

Like I said, I get the appeal of extracting context out of numbers. But in majority of the time, numbers need context.


Seeing this level of condescension from someone who literally trumpets the BPM 2.0 box score aggregate above all else has me in absolute hysterics. :rofl:

Man, I am something of a Robinson hater, but you may as we well argue Reggie Miller was better than Robinson if your entire argument draws from freakin’ OBPM. :roll: Ah, wait, I forgot, Moses had a couple of a solid defensive years so obviously he is just shy of David Robinson on that end. :lol:
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 20,833
And1: 19,266
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#112 » by Hal14 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:54 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:You talk about Robinson's offense not working the playoffs but consider:

Here are the top post-seasons by each guy in terms of points scored per 100 possessions:

1. Robinson '95-96 37.0
2. Moses '80-81 32.8
3. Robinson '94-95 32.6
4. Robinson '99-00 32.1
5. Moses '82-83 31.9
6. Moses '78-79 31.1
7. Robinson '89-90 30.4
8. Moses '81-82 30.3
9. Robinson '93-94 30.1


1) This is an example of why we shouldn't base too much off per 100 possession stats. If the pace of the game was sped up that much to the point where Robinson's Spurs were playing 100 possessions in 95-96, then his efficiency would undoubtedly suffer (and he'd play less minutes per game since he'd be more fatigued with a faster paced game). Meanwhile if you slow down the pace of the game n Moses' era then his efficiency would be even better (and his minutes per game would be higher since he'd be less fatigued with a slower pace).

2) If we look at the PPG numbers rather than per 100 possessions, Robinson's postseason scoring numbers don't look as impressive. 95-96 was prime Robinson, yet his scoring average dropped by 3 PPG from the previous season to 2 PPG, and that was 5 PPG lower than his career high season. His scoring average in the playoffs dropped to 23.6 PPG and in the series vs the Jazz where the Spurs lost in 6 games despite the fact that they had home court advantage, Robinson's scoring average dropped to 19 PPG (compared to 25 PPG for Karl Malone). That series, in the Jazz 4 wins, they beat the Spurs by 20, 20, 15 and 27.

If we look at 94-95, Robinson's scoring average went down by over 2 PPG from the previous season, in the playoffs it went down another 2 PPG and in the series vs the Rockets his scoring average went from 27.6 during the season to 23.8 vs the Rockets. So Robinson put up 23.8, whereas Hakeem torched him for 35 PPG that series and the Rockets win in 6 games despite the fact that the Spurs had home court advantage.

Doctor MJ wrote: I really think that a significant image of Moses getting the best of Kareem is a big part of his legacy. While I think it's oversimplistic to simply assert that Moses beat Kareem in that match up overall, and while I think it's worth noting that Moses' rebounding superiority is particularly easy to see because Kareem was older and slower


Older and slower, yet the 2 years Moses beat Kareem in the playoffs were 81 and 83, but after that Kareem was top 4 in MVP voting each of the next 2 seasons, he was top 5 in MVP voting in each of the next 3 seasons and was finals MVP in 85..
1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 52,694
And1: 21,632
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#113 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:49 pm

Hal14 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:You talk about Robinson's offense not working the playoffs but consider:

Here are the top post-seasons by each guy in terms of points scored per 100 possessions:

1. Robinson '95-96 37.0
2. Moses '80-81 32.8
3. Robinson '94-95 32.6
4. Robinson '99-00 32.1
5. Moses '82-83 31.9
6. Moses '78-79 31.1
7. Robinson '89-90 30.4
8. Moses '81-82 30.3
9. Robinson '93-94 30.1


1) This is an example of why we shouldn't base too much off per 100 possession stats. If the pace of the game was sped up that much to the point where Robinson's Spurs were playing 100 possessions in 95-96, then his efficiency would undoubtedly suffer (and he'd play less minutes per game since he'd be more fatigued with a faster paced game). Meanwhile if you slow down the pace of the game n Moses' era then his efficiency would be even better (and his minutes per game would be higher since he'd be less fatigued with a slower pace).


Whoa, sounds to me like you're simply equating "faster pace" with "harder to execute things right" which to me is problematic. The reason why you push the pace is to catch the other team before their defense is set, and thus make your job easier.

Yes in theory playing faster makes the game more tiring, but not always. I think players put in a lot more effort on average per possession now compared to they did in the '90s or earlier because each extra possession doesn't mean you're getting full effort from everybody on the court. On the other side of things, the '90s is known for its brutality, which is quite hard on the body.

Regardless though, if you want to use era differences to adjust for guys in a comparison here you should do that, but note that I was responding to someone who said that Robinson's way just wasn't working in the playoffs like Moses' way was, and your response here does not pertain to that point.

Hal14 wrote:2) If we look at the PPG numbers rather than per 100 possessions, Robinson's postseason scoring numbers don't look as impressive. 95-96 was prime Robinson, yet his scoring average dropped by 3 PPG from the previous season to 2 PPG, and that was 5 PPG lower than his career high season. His scoring average in the playoffs dropped to 23.6 PPG and in the series vs the Jazz where the Spurs lost in 6 games despite the fact that they had home court advantage, Robinson's scoring average dropped to 19 PPG (compared to 25 PPG for Karl Malone). That series, in the Jazz 4 wins, they beat the Spurs by 20, 20, 15 and 27.

If we look at 94-95, Robinson's scoring average went down by over 2 PPG from the previous season, in the playoffs it went down another 2 PPG and in the series vs the Rockets his scoring average went from 27.6 during the season to 23.8 vs the Rockets. So Robinson put up 23.8, whereas Hakeem torched him for 35 PPG that series and the Rockets win in 6 games despite the fact that the Spurs had home court advantage.


Re: if we look at PPG numbers Robinson's scoring doesn't look as impressive. To the extent we're talking about pace, that's why we need to use pace. Failure to do that gives the impression that Wilt was the best scoring in basketball history in '61-62 when he was nothing close.

If you're looking at things like MPG and stuff, that's fine to discuss. Clearly if I quoted a number that you see as inflated because of low MPG, it bears further scrutiny.

Re: Robinson's scoring down in the playoffs. This is why Robinson isn't already in. I'm using playoff numbers here so the fact he was even better in the regular season isn't immediately relevant.

Re: Malone's team, Hakeem's team. Okay, but I'm not advocating for Robinson over those guys.

I will though note that Hakeem had a HUUUUUUUGE advantage over Robinson in that legendary series because he had a coach with a sense of how basketball strategy should have always been working and Robinson did not. Force Hakeem to play on a team without 3-pointers creating beautiful spacing and you don't get anything like that type of performance.

I'll also mention that Hakeem met Shaq in the finals and Shaq also had the type of advantage Hakeem did. Both of their teams were playing space-ball, and that gave them an advantage at scoring compared to a guy like Robinson. While I still rank Hakeem & Shaq ahead of Robinson, the gap between those guys and Robinson as alphas is grossly exaggerated based on team context.

Hal14 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote: I really think that a significant image of Moses getting the best of Kareem is a big part of his legacy. While I think it's oversimplistic to simply assert that Moses beat Kareem in that match up overall, and while I think it's worth noting that Moses' rebounding superiority is particularly easy to see because Kareem was older and slower


Older and slower, yet the 2 years Moses beat Kareem in the playoffs were 81 and 83, but after that Kareem was top 4 in MVP voting each of the next 2 seasons, he was top 5 in MVP voting in each of the next 3 seasons and was finals MVP in 85..


Kareem was still an MVP candidate because 1) Kareem could score until he was 105 years old due to that sky hook, 2) the Lakers still kept Kareem as the first scoring option longer than they should have, and 3) people still thought of Kareem as "Kareem". None of that changes the fact that Moses can be seen getting for rebounds over Kareem because Kareem isn't jumping and Moses is on his second jump.

I don't want to imply that prime Kareem would have been entirely different from this. Moses had an incredibly quick second (and third and fourth) leap by any standards, and Kareem was never the quickest off his feet. That, along with Moses' thickness, would always be competitive advantages over Kareem, but it was surely a bigger advantage against '80s Kareem.

I also think that it's absolutely significant to note that in the '81 upset, the deciding game was quite close and Kareem was considerably more effective as a scorer than Moses. You can certainly still argue that Moses got the best of the match up, but this wasn't a case of Moses shutting down Kareem.

'83 is obviously a bit different, but I'll note that it's still not like Kareem's getting shut down.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,450
And1: 8,114
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 

Post#114 » by trex_8063 » Wed Nov 11, 2020 8:46 pm

Thru post #113:

Oscar Robertson - 8 (Doctor MJ, DQuinn1575, Hal14, HeartBreakKid, Hornet Mania, lebron3-14-3, Magic Is Magic, Odinn21)
Karl Malone - 3 (Joao Saraiva, Matzer, trex_8063)
George Mikan - 2 (eminence, penbeast0)
Dirk Nowitzki - 1 (Dr Positivity)
David Robinson - 1 (sansterre)
Julius Erving - 1 (TrueLAfan)
Kevin Durant - 1 (Dutchball97)


17 counted votes, so 9 is required for majority. We'll eliminate those bottom four players: 1 vote transfers to Malone, the other three to Oscar....

Oscar - 11
Malone - 4
Mikan - 2

So Oscar's got this one in the bag rather easily. Will have the next up in a moment.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

Ambrose wrote:.

Baski wrote:.

bidofo wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

DQuinn1575 wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dutchball97 wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

Franco wrote:.

freethedevil wrote:.

Gregoire wrote:.

Hal14 wrote:.

HeartBreakKid wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

Jordan Syndrome wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

lebron3-14-3 wrote:.

limbo wrote:.

Magic Is Magic wrote:.

mailmp wrote:.

Matzer wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Odinn21 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

O_6 wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

PistolPeteJR wrote:.

RSCD3_ wrote:.

[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]
Senior wrote:.

SeniorWalker wrote:.

SHAQ32 wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

Tim Lehrbach wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

Whopper_Sr wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

876Stephen wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
90sAllDecade
Starter
Posts: 2,261
And1: 812
Joined: Jul 09, 2012
Location: Clutch City, Texas
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #14 (Oscar Robertson) 

Post#115 » by 90sAllDecade » Wed Nov 11, 2020 8:51 pm

Good for Oscar, I would have voted for him but work and other things came up.

I'll try to jump in the next one when I have time, looks like it might get interesting after this next pick.
NBA TV Clutch City Documentary Trailer:
https://vimeo.com/134215151

Return to Player Comparisons