All-NBA Teams Project: 1981-85 All-NBA Second Team

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Bernard King was 2nd to Bird in 1984 MVP voting.
I don't like sports writers as voters as much as I like coaches.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1984.html

[Odinn21]

I think even Sidney Moncrief would take rookie MJ over Sidney Moncrief. I assume players aren't penalized for only playing one season in the chosen time bracket.

Edit: rookie MJ also had a (slightly) better game score in their first round match up FWIW

One season is enough. If Rookie Jordan was better than peak Moncrief then Rookie Jordan should get the vote. But Rookies always have flawed games. Could Rookie Jordan really be better than peak Moncrief? Then there are those who say they know that Jordan's defense and maybe his team offense was too flawed for rookie Jordan to have been better than the best versions Moncrief, Isiah or 1980s Gervin. I am on the fence.

Rookie MJ was an MVP candidate. Full stop. Yes his game was flawed - his game always had flaws - but the good outweighed the bad so disproportionately that it's inconsequential. MJ finished ahead of Moncrief in MVP voting that year despite rookie bias. Know who else finished ahead? Terry Cummings, Sidney's teammate.

MJ was the GOAT rookie. It's only because he was a rookie that fans use whatever biases to hold his 84/85 season back in these kinds of discussions. It was apparent within the first few months that Jordan was already likely the best player in the league.

Rookie Jordan was not an MVP candidate. He was closer to you and me than Bird for 1985 MVP award. Bird should've become the 1st uMVP in that season.
Saying rookie Jordan was an MVP candidate is on the same level as Iverson was an MVP candidate in 2000.

Jordan would not break into top 5 among rookies, let alone being the goat of them. Chamberlain, Robertson, Abdul-Jabbar, Bird, Robinson were all better. There's still Bellamy, Baylor, Duncan and O'Neal.

[VanWest82]

One season is enough. If Rookie Jordan was better than peak Moncrief then Rookie Jordan should get the vote. But Rookies always have flawed games. Could Rookie Jordan really be better than peak Moncrief? Then there are those who say they know that Jordan's defense and maybe his team offense was too flawed for rookie Jordan to have been better than the best versions Moncrief, Isiah or 1980s Gervin. I am on the fence.

Rookie MJ was an MVP candidate. Full stop. Yes his game was flawed - his game always had flaws - but the good outweighed the bad so disproportionately that it's inconsequential. MJ finished ahead of Moncrief in MVP voting that year despite rookie bias. Know who else finished ahead? Terry Cummings, Sidney's teammate.

MJ was the GOAT rookie. It's only because he was a rookie that fans use whatever biases to hold his 84/85 season back in these kinds of discussions. It was apparent within the first few months that Jordan was already likely the best player in the league.

Rookie Jordan was not an MVP candidate. He was closer to you and me than Bird for 1985 MVP award. Bird should've become the 1st uMVP in that season.
Saying rookie Jordan was an MVP candidate is on the same level as Iverson was an MVP candidate in 2000.

Jordan would not break into top 5 among rookies, let alone being the goat of them. Chamberlain, Robertson, Abdul-Jabbar, Bird, Robinson were all better. There's still Bellamy, Baylor, Duncan and O'Neal.

Rookie MJ finished 2nd in PER, 2nd in WS, 2nd in BPM, 2nd in VORP...Bulls finished +11 wins despite an inferior supporting cast.

You just compared MJ to Iverson. I don't know where to go from here.

[Odinn21]

You just compared MJ to Iverson. I don't know where to go from here.

I just said Jordan in 1985 was an MVP candidate just as much as Iverson in 2001.
If you took this like that, I think I should be the one to call it quits. Cheers.

[VanWest82]

You just compared MJ to Iverson. I don't know where to go from here.

I just said Jordan in 1985 was an MVP candidate just as much as Iverson in 2001.
If you took this like that, I think I should be the one to call it quits. Cheers.

You said 2000. Iverson didn't finish in the top 20 of any box score metric outside of ppg, and wasn't a big plus/minus guy. In 2001 there's at least a case due to team success.

[HeartBreakKid]

Michael Jordan the best rookie ever? Not really even close...


Michael Jordan finishing ahead of Sidney Moncrief doesn't mean he's better, and Michael Jordan was a much more popular player than Sidney Moncrief....he was a well known name before he came to the NBA.

[Dutchball97]

MJ not even getting consideration just because he was a rookie is insane considering how often D-Rob's rookie season gets praised. He was top 3 in pretty much every available stat in the regular season and he had a good showing in the play-offs even though he couldn't drag that team any further.

Just because he wasn't peak MJ yet, that doesn't mean he can't be better than the peak of other players as a rookie. Just because he had some flaws he gets disqualified, while highly incomplete players with bigger flaws get voted in ahead of him. Rookie MJ gets criticized for his defense and then Gervin gets votes instead of him. Gervin wasn't even a better scorer.

Do people just really despise me for some reason and don't vote MJ because I brought him up or is this more of a general anti-MJ train of thought? The 90s were already iffy with lots of guys getting in on name value but I've been kinda checked out from this project ever since Gervin's 0.6 BPM in the 81 play-offs means he's better than someone with 9.5 BPM in the post-season. Want me to vote anyway or should I just go away and stop trying to make sense of it all?

[70sFan]

MJ not even getting consideration just because he was a rookie is insane considering how often D-Rob's rookie season gets praised.

Rookie Robinson didn't make 2nd team

He was top 3 in pretty much every available stat in the regular season and he had a good showing in the play-offs even though he couldn't drag that team any further.

You talk about volume stats like ppg, PER and BPM. Here are more stats from Ben Taylor:

Load:
Gervin - 46.6, Jordan - 43.7

Pts per75:
Gervin - 31.8 on +2.4 rTS%, ScoreVal - 1.8
Jordan - 26.6 on +4.9 rTS%, ScoreVal - 1.4

Playmaking:
Gervin: Box Creation - 4.1, Passing Rating - 3.6, Spacing - 93, cTOV% - 7.3, PlayVal - -0.2
Jordan: Box Creation - 5.8, Passing Rating - 5.6, Spacing - 90, cTOV% - 10.3, PlayVal - 0.5


Gervin is clearly better scorer than Jordan and short playoffs runs won't change that. Jordan created more due to his driving game, but Gervin was better off-ball player.

By the way, Jordan had only one good scoring night in 1985 series vs Bucks. He had two poor shooting night, one night when he shot terribly from the field but shot 20 FTs to get 29 points and one great scoring performance. He didn't domiate Bucks at all and Bulls didn't play well offensively either.

In comparison, Gervin put up 32/8/6 on 52 TS% against better team in 4 games. He had one poor shooting night (like Jordan) and in three other games he averaged 37 ppg on 56 TS%. How is that worse than what Jordan did? Especially when Gervin was far better scorer in RS.

Do people just really despise me for some reason and don't vote MJ because I brought him up or is this more of a general anti-MJ train of thought? The 90s were already iffy with lots of guys getting in on name value but I've been kinda checked out from this project ever since Gervin's 0.6 BPM in the 81 play-offs means he's better than someone with 9.5 BPM in the post-season. Want me to vote anyway or should I just go away and stop trying to make sense of it all?

Just vote to whoever you want, but please don't act like your opinion is the only one possible... You bring up a lot of value in this project and I hope you to continue, but we don't have to agree all the time - otherwise it'd be boring.

By the way, we have only 4 votes so far. I'm sure Jordan will get more votes.

[70sFan]

Voting so far:

Guards

Isiah Thomas 4
George Gervin 3
Gus Williams 1

Forwards

Adrian Dantley 3
Bernard King 2
Marques Johnson 1
Kevin McHale 1
Alex English 1

Centers

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 4

We need more votes guys, come on!

[HeartBreakKid]

MJ not even getting consideration just because he was a rookie is insane considering how often D-Rob's rookie season gets praised. He was top 3 in pretty much every available stat in the regular season and he had a good showing in the play-offs even though he couldn't drag that team any further.

Just because he wasn't peak MJ yet, that doesn't mean he can't be better than the peak of other players as a rookie. Just because he had some flaws he gets disqualified, while highly incomplete players with bigger flaws get voted in ahead of him. Rookie MJ gets criticized for his defense and then Gervin gets votes instead of him. Gervin wasn't even a better scorer.

Do people just really despise me for some reason and don't vote MJ because I brought him up or is this more of a general anti-MJ train of thought? The 90s were already iffy with lots of guys getting in on name value but I've been kinda checked out from this project ever since Gervin's 0.6 BPM in the 81 play-offs means he's better than someone with 9.5 BPM in the post-season. Want me to vote anyway or should I just go away and stop trying to make sense of it all?

What does David Robinson have to do with anything? He is not a similar player to Michael Jordan nor were they the same age or anything in common really. David Robinson is pretty much in his prime already by his rookie season.



I already gave my opinion on why I think Gervin was better. It's because I thought he was a better off ball player and played better within an offense more naturally - his season also correlates with a better offense. What does BPM have to do with any of that? BPM isn't designed to quantify those types of things.

Should you stop voting because others are disagreeing with you? Just vote, I'm not happy with every selection either, nor is anyone.

[70sFan]

I'm not happy with King over Marques at all, but I don't think Johnson will make this team (hell, he probably won't make 3rd team as well).

[Odinn21]

I'm not happy with King over Marques at all, but I don't think Johnson will make this team (hell, he probably won't make 3rd team as well).

Why don't you like 1984 King? When we had a discussion, I thought we came over your reservations about King.
viewtopic.php?p=82893987

[Dutchball97]

I mean I don't mind voting but it's just that I have a harder time agreeing with the selections each round. In the 00s and 10s the selections I didn't agree with were usually my 2nd or 3rd choice and had strong arguments over my own picks in my eyes. I enjoyed the different opinions as much as anyone. It's just that in the 90s there were votes for guys that weren't impressive at all (to me at least) and someone like Coleman didn't get any traction despite putting together a very good overall season. I understand stuff like WS, BPM and VORP doesn't cover everything, or even close to that, but they are valuable indicators for a player's performance.

Any one stat alone is pretty much useless but using a combination of stats like I just mentioned usually gives a pretty decent picture. High BPM in a small sample size isn't the best indicator for anything and a high VORP could also be because a player simply played a lot of games/minutes. Having both a high BPM and high VORP is almost waterproof evidence for a player performing at a high level though. That means a player was impactful over one game and was also able to carry that over across all games played. Next to that you'll also need context of course, otherwise it'd mean Mike Conley had a better play-offs than Luka Doncic this year. Conley being a third option who missed two games against Luka, who is clear best player on the Mavs, is an unfair comparison.

However, MJ and Gervin both were the first option on their teams and I don't think there is much of an argument for MJ having a better supporting cast than Gervin either. MJ had the highest BPM in the play-offs though and ended up with a higher VORP than Gervin, while playing half the games. The play-offs isn't the entire argument though. MJ was a top 3 player in the regular season and while the gap wasn't as big as in the play-offs, I still see MJ as having had the better season. I don't think Gervin being a better off-ball scorer is enough to offset this but I'll rest my case and agree to disagree.

[70sFan]

I'm not happy with King over Marques at all, but I don't think Johnson will make this team (hell, he probably won't make 3rd team as well).

Why don't you like 1984 King? When we had a discussion, I thought we came over your reservations about King.
viewtopic.php?p=82893987

I like King and I have him neck and neck with Dantley - I just let my bias go ahead But more seriously, I think that Dantley had better RS than King and Dantley also played excellent in playoffs.

With Johnson vs King, I already said that I view Marques as Dr J-esque as he's much better all-around player than King/Dantley. He was better defender, better rebounder, better ball-handler, better passer... Basically better at everything other than scoring and Marques was very good scorer himself. It's not that I don't like King - I have Marques over Dantley as well here.

[VanWest82]

It seems like there's ongoing bias against Jordan that continues from thread to thread.

We're apparently not even prepared to consider his rookie season against other rookie greats despite being the only one outside of Wilt to finish 2nd or higher in all the major advanced box metrics. Other players like Shaq and TD are ahead of him despite rating well outside top 10 in their respective rookie years. Even KAJ - the best college player ever - who was incredible as a rookie only finished 4th in WS.

(edit: my bad on the year, mixing 82 and 85) Ranking Gervin ahead of MJ in 85 when he was only playing 29 mpg and clearly not the same guy he was a few years prior is tough. Spurs were a .500 team that year. This wasn't Giannis coasting on a +10 SRS juggernaut. MJ scored 800+ more points and had 300+ more assists. Throw the rate stats out. (edit 2: MJ still had 300+ more assists in 85 than Gervin in 82)

When the discussion gets so slanted against the guy with the best case for greatest ever it's hard to get past it. I think maybe that's part of what Dutchball is getting at in terms of abstaining from the vote. I feel that but if it counts it's easily MJ for me, and should have been MJ on first team.

[70sFan]

Ranking Gervin ahead of MJ in 85 when he was only playing 29 mpg and clearly not the same guy he was a few years prior is tough. Spurs were a .500 team that year. This wasn't Giannis coasting on a +10 SRS juggernaut. MJ scored 800+ more points and had 300+ more assists. Throw the rate stats out.

Nobody picked 1985 Gervin over 1985 Jordan...

[VanWest82]

Ranking Gervin ahead of MJ in 85 when he was only playing 29 mpg and clearly not the same guy he was a few years prior is tough. Spurs were a .500 team that year. This wasn't Giannis coasting on a +10 SRS juggernaut. MJ scored 800+ more points and had 300+ more assists. Throw the rate stats out.

Nobody picked 1985 Gervin over 1985 Jordan...

Maybe I'm missing something but is your current tally not three votes for Gervin and 0 for MJ? Edit: 82 Gervin. So same points but MJ still had 300+ more assists.

[70sFan]

Ranking Gervin ahead of MJ in 85 when he was only playing 29 mpg and clearly not the same guy he was a few years prior is tough. Spurs were a .500 team that year. This wasn't Giannis coasting on a +10 SRS juggernaut. MJ scored 800+ more points and had 300+ more assists. Throw the rate stats out.

Nobody picked 1985 Gervin over 1985 Jordan...

Maybe I'm missing something but is your current tally not three votes for Gervin and 0 for MJ?

Read the rules of this project before joining to discussion. People took 1982 Gervin over 1985 Jordan. Nobody said a thing about 1985 Gervin.

[VanWest82]

Nobody picked 1985 Gervin over 1985 Jordan...

Maybe I'm missing something but is your current tally not three votes for Gervin and 0 for MJ?

Read the rules of this project before joining to discussion. People took 1982 Gervin over 1985 Jordan. Nobody said a thing about 1985 Gervin.

My bad on the year. I stand by my overall point re MJ.

[70sFan]

Maybe I'm missing something but is your current tally not three votes for Gervin and 0 for MJ?

Read the rules of this project before joining to discussion. People took 1982 Gervin over 1985 Jordan. Nobody said a thing about 1985 Gervin.

My bad on the year. I stand by my overall point re MJ.

That's fine, you can join to the voting if you want to. Just read rules and come back with your choices