[Project] Top 5 single season peaks by franchises: The Rockets

[Colbinii]

Where's the Michael Jordan of the Western Conference, aka '92 Drexler

He is in Portland.

Hey, cool sig, and cute post. But you're actually wrong, he's in Houston.

1992 Clyde was not in Houston.

But my post was directed at the McGrady and Yao nods. I don't see their arguments over Drexler, as Clyde had a great playoff run heading into the finals vs MJ, and finished 2nd in MVP voting.

I recommend reading the first post as Odinn21 does a great job of explaining the rules of the project.

[SHAQ32]

He is in Portland.

Hey, cool sig, and cute post. But you're actually wrong, he's in Houston.

But my post was directed at the McGrady and Yao nods. I don't see their arguments over Drexler, as Clyde had a great playoff run heading into the finals vs MJ, and finished 2nd in MVP voting.

Drexler played in Portland in 1992, what are you talking about??

1) I thought he meant now
2) In a moment of stupor I got confused into thinking were discussing the Blazers

[Dr Positivity]

Where's the Michael Jordan of the Western Conference, aka '92 Drexler

He is in Portland.

Hey, cool sig, and cute post. But you're actually wrong, he's in Houston.

But my post was directed at the McGrady and Yao nods. I don't see their arguments over Drexler, as Clyde had a great playoff run heading into the finals vs MJ, and finished 2nd in MVP voting.

I would have considered Rockets Drexler if he missed less games in 96 or 97

[homecourtloss]

Where's the Michael Jordan of the Western Conference, aka '92 Drexler

He is in Portland.

Hey, cool sig, and cute post. But you're actually wrong, he's in Houston.

But my post was directed at the McGrady and Yao nods. I don't see their arguments over Drexler, as Clyde had a great playoff run heading into the finals vs MJ, and finished 2nd in MVP voting.

What?

[Dr Positivity]

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

Magic's numbers after returning from injury don't seem that affected

[Colbinii]

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

Magic's numbers after returning from injury don't seem that affected

Was Moses the player who made him play like **** in the post-season?

[70sFan]

I'm just not impressed by the 1981 playoff run. The team faced mediocre teams on the way to losing the Finals by an MOV of 10.

It's hard to brush over beating a dynasty team in Round 1. Yes it was a 3 game series but winning twice in LA is pretty good. The Spurs are a credible team and the Kings while mediocre had taken out the 1st seed the round before.

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

The Spurs and Kings--look for any justification you can to prop up Moses.

1. It's true that Magic playing terrible was the main reason why Lakers lost, but you can't just take away from Moses that he put up 31/18/3 on good efficiency. Moses did his job and should be credited for that.

2. Kings had terrible RS season, but they beat very strong Suns team in 7 games before losing to the Rockets. It's important to note that Rockets dominated Kings, despite being roughly similar level in RS and Moses, again, put up very strong 27/15/1 on strong efficiency.

3. I don't see why you call Spurs weak, they were very solid win for Moses in the 2nd round. Moses put up very strong numbers on them again.

4. It's true that Rockets didn't face all-time great competition, but it's not really that weak. If you exchange the Lakers with Kings, you'd have typical first round opponent, solid second round opponent and strong third round opponent. All while playing on mediocre team. You have to keep in mind that you can't just compare the level of competition without taking into account the strength of own team. 2018 Rockets were far more talented than 1981 Rockets.

5. Who did 2018 Rockets beat exactly in playoffs? I'd not call Timberwolves better than Kings and Jazz certainly were weaker than Spurs. Warriors were much better than the Lakers of course, but CP3 got injured in that series, while Moses dominated.

[Odinn21]

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

Magic's numbers after returning from injury don't seem that affected

The anomaly was Magic having probably his worst postseason game ever. But it was not injury related.
After the 1st game in March until 3rd game against the Rockets in the playoffs, Magic was like 23/10/9 on 55% fg over 17 games.

[Dr Positivity]

Finally a franchise I already have a list for it.

1. 1994 Hakeem Olajuwon
It's obvious, isn't it? Easily one of the best seasons ever, not just #1 for the Rockets.

2. 1982 Moses Malone
31/15/2 season might not look too great compared to Harden's best. But this was a season that Moses willed his team to the postseason. The Rockets were sitting at below .500 mark at the half mark of the season with 19-22. Then Moses had 2 strong performances going into February and started a winning streak. He was 38.1/17.3 in February and 35.0/14.4 in March. The Rockets went 20-10 in those months. Certainly a major jump from below .500 with 19-22. There was a fellow named ShaqAttack3234, thanks to him, I learnt about existence of Moses' 35+/14+ b2b months before BBRef complete their logs for the season. That was when I was building my archive. I got my hands on 12 of those 30 games, and I can safely say that I've never seen a player working that hard and much. You can think any name for such aspect, and I can guarantee you that Moses worked even harder. And it wasn't just effort, he also had the quality and impact.
The biggest issue for his play in 1982 is his defense, but he was still a better defensive presence than Harden.

(Surprisingly, even ElGee's CORP has 1982 Moses over 2019/2020 Harden due to offensive portability argument. Though I've always been higher than ElGee on Moses' offensive impact as Moses had one of the biggest repertoires for a big man with solid efficiency and putting his matchups into foul trouble)

3. 2020 James Harden
From 2017 to 2020, 2020 is the only postseason his efficiency did not take a nosedive. Fairly obvious pick at this point.

4. 1969 Elvin Hayes
The Rockets were founded just one season before 1968-69. An expansion team with nobody and no draft position to build on. They were 15-67 with -8 SRS in 1968. Then they get rookie Elvin Hayes. Directly 20W improvement, if we look at SRS/NRtg the improvement is even bigger. They go from absolute worst to mid table team. Hayes is 1st in ppg, 6th in rpg and 3rd mpg. He already starts to show his insane motor. Then a strong postseason series against a better team in Atlanta Hawks, dominated Zelmo Beaty.

5. 2005 Tracy McGrady
Probably the most complete season left on the board for the Rockets. Had the production (5.2 obpm in reg. season and 8.4 obpm in postseason), he had the quality and impact. 2005 Rockets roster structure was quite like 2001 Sixers and 2011 Bulls, yet McGrady still managed to get that slanted offense to an average level. He was in top 1% O-RAPM and in top 4% overall RAPM. He was the reason why the Rockets were a top 5 SRS team. He's usually a slight negative impact on defense but what he did against Nowitzki in the 1st round was quite exceptional. He owned Nowitzki.

HM; 2003 Steve Francis, 2018 Chris Paul (he's definitely ahead of McGrady and Francis in terms of quality but missed way too many games)

You've been bullish on RAPM and +/-, why not 2009 Yao?

+11.8 on/off
10th RAPM on Engelmann

20/10 on .618 TS%, .196 WS/48, 3.1 BPM is not bad boxscore. Very low maintenance player compared to Hayes and McGrady.

Had some decent games in the playoffs helping them take Game 1 in both series including a nice series win against prime Roy Rockets. The Rockets competing against the Lakers without him was probably not as impressive as it seemed in retrospect, they got their azz kicked in the two games in LA and managed to pull of a few home wins to extend to 7, like a mini version of a Hawks @ Celtics 7 game series or Raptors @ Cavs ECF. The win @ LA in the first game was Rockets most impressive of the series.

[Colbinii]

It's hard to brush over beating a dynasty team in Round 1. Yes it was a 3 game series but winning twice in LA is pretty good. The Spurs are a credible team and the Kings while mediocre had taken out the 1st seed the round before.

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

The Spurs and Kings--look for any justification you can to prop up Moses.

1. It's true that Magic playing terrible was the main reason why Lakers lost, but you can't just take away from Moses that he put up 31/18/3 on good efficiency. Moses did his job and should be credited for that.

2. Kings had terrible RS season, but they beat very strong Suns team in 7 games before losing to the Rockets. It's important to note that Rockets dominated Kings, despite being roughly similar level in RS and Moses, again, put up very strong 27/15/1 on strong efficiency.

3. I don't see why you call Spurs weak, they were very solid win for Moses in the 2nd round. Moses put up very strong numbers on them again.

4. It's true that Rockets didn't face all-time great competition, but it's not really that weak. If you exchange the Lakers with Kings, you'd have typical first round opponent, solid second round opponent and strong third round opponent. All while playing on mediocre team. You have to keep in mind that you can't just compare the level of competition without taking into account the strength of own team. 2018 Rockets were far more talented than 1981 Rockets.

5. Who did 2018 Rockets beat exactly in playoffs? I'd not call Timberwolves better than Kings and Jazz certainly were weaker than Spurs. Warriors were much better than the Lakers of course, but CP3 got injured in that series, while Moses dominated.

At the end of the day its all about how we view these things.

3. I dont see the Spurs as being better than the Jazz. SRS and MOV support my claim and I believe the league was stronger in 2018 compared to 1981.

5. The Timberwolves were certainly better than the Kings (When Butler was healthy). You can decide how healthy Butler was in the Rockets series for yourself.

My approach to this isn't "who had the better season"--its which players am I most likely to win with or which players increase my odds of winning the most.

[Odinn21]

My approach to this isn't "who had the better season"--its which players am I most likely to win with or which players increase my odds of winning the most.

So, you prefer the guy with durability issues who literally was not available in the most important games of the season for his team?

---

You've been bullish on RAPM and +/-, why not 2009 Yao?

+11.8 on/off
10th RAPM on Engelmann

20/10 on .618 TS%, .196 WS/48, 3.1 BPM is not bad boxscore. Very low maintenance player compared to Hayes and McGrady.

The numbers I have;
2005 Tracy McGrady 18th, top 4% in RAPM, 26/6/6/2/1 on -0.3 rts & 5.2 obpm
2009 Yao Ming 14th, top 3% in RAPM, 20/10/2/0/2 on +7.4 rts & 1.6 obpm
(I really do not care about WS/48 at this point, the only thing I use WS for is this project to create a shortlist as I look at players with 5+ WS to eliminate bad or injured players.)

Coupled with McGrady's performance in the playoffs, especially his defense on Nowitzki while keeping up with his usual offensive production and Ming missing 4 of 13 postseason games, the Rockets going 2-2 in those games, I really do not see much case for Ming in here.

As for Hayes, I've always been high on him. Despite his inefficient scoring, his creation volume was quite high as his motor and aggressiveness were off the charts. Ming was not the defensive player that Hayes was.

[Jaivl]

My approach to this isn't "who had the better season"--its which players am I most likely to win with or which players increase my odds of winning the most.

Can't increase the odds that much when you can't play half the conference finals, the finals and 20 other games. Certainly not more than an All-NBA caliber player, I'd say.

1) 1993 Hakeem Olajuwon
2) 2019 James Harden
3) 1982 Moses Malone
4) 2005 Tracy McGrady
5) 1969 Elvin Hayes

Explanation to come. 18 Paul would be there if healthy, 19 is narrowly out.

[70sFan]

3. I dont see the Spurs as being better than the Jazz. SRS and MOV support my claim and I believe the league was stronger in 2018 compared to 1981.

Well, you still don't account for the strenth of Rockets teams rosters. Spurs were more talented than Rockets in 1981, Jazz were not more talented than Rockets in 2018 (they'd probably have beaten them even without Paul). You also don't take into account that Jazz missed their starting PG for the whole series.

5. The Timberwolves were certainly better than the Kings (When Butler was healthy). You can decide how healthy Butler was in the Rockets series for yourself.

Kings beat two strong teams in playoffs, Wolves with injured Butler were clearly worse than them, especially given how terrible Towns played (and it's not related to Paul, so we should take it into account just like you do with Magic).

My approach to this isn't "who had the better season"--its which players am I most likely to win with or which players increase my odds of winning the most.

I think that Moses playing almost 48 mpg for full postseason run gives you higher chance of winning the title than Paul who got injured during the WCF.

[70sFan]

Seriously, you have to be extremely low on Moses to take 2018 Paul over any of his 1981-82 seasons. Prime Paul? Different debate, but not the version which missed 20+games in RS and got injured in playoffs.

[Dr Positivity]

The numbers I have;
2005 Tracy McGrady 18th, top 4% in RAPM, 26/6/6/2/1 on -0.3 rts & 5.2 obpm
2009 Yao Ming 14th, top 3% in RAPM, 20/10/2/0/2 on +7.4 rts & 1.6 obpm

Where is this RAPM from?

I usually use this one for seasons that are available where McGrady is 51st in 2005. https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2005-rapm

He is also -1.7 on/off this season although both him and Yao have outlier bad seasons in that stat and RAPM in 2005. Tmac from 2006 and 2007 does solid in both stats but not as good as 2009 Yao.

[Odinn21]

The numbers I have;
2005 Tracy McGrady 18th, top 4% in RAPM, 26/6/6/2/1 on -0.3 rts & 5.2 obpm
2009 Yao Ming 14th, top 3% in RAPM, 20/10/2/0/2 on +7.4 rts & 1.6 obpm

Where is this RAPM from?

I usually use this one for seasons that are available where McGrady is 51st in 2005. https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2005-rapm

He is also -1.7 on/off this season although both him and Yao have outlier bad seasons in that stat and RAPM in 2005. Tmac from 2006 and 2007 does solid in both stats but not as good as 2009 Yao.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZW5UBk5BwcrEhh4mEsWl_H1Y9QGTaMPaT4v6dSEIBIo/edit#gid=0
Engelmann's PI-RAPM on a Google Sheets document kept by Jacob Goldstein.

[Owly]

It's hard to brush over beating a dynasty team in Round 1. Yes it was a 3 game series but winning twice in LA is pretty good. The Spurs are a credible team and the Kings while mediocre had taken out the 1st seed the round before.

The Rockets won because Magic was terrible after injury. This wasn't Moses and the Rockets coming into LA and beating this team at their prime.

The Spurs and Kings--look for any justification you can to prop up Moses.

1. It's true that Magic playing terrible was the main reason why Lakers lost, but you can't just take away from Moses that he put up 31/18/3 on good efficiency. Moses did his job and should be credited for that.

2. Kings had terrible RS season, but they beat very strong Suns team in 7 games before losing to the Rockets. It's important to note that Rockets dominated Kings, despite being roughly similar level in RS and Moses, again, put up very strong 27/15/1 on strong efficiency.

3. I don't see why you call Spurs weak, they were very solid win for Moses in the 2nd round. Moses put up very strong numbers on them again.

4. It's true that Rockets didn't face all-time great competition, but it's not really that weak. If you exchange the Lakers with Kings, you'd have typical first round opponent, solid second round opponent and strong third round opponent. All while playing on mediocre team. You have to keep in mind that you can't just compare the level of competition without taking into account the strength of own team. 2018 Rockets were far more talented than 1981 Rockets.

5. Who did 2018 Rockets beat exactly in playoffs? I'd not call Timberwolves better than Kings and Jazz certainly were weaker than Spurs. Warriors were much better than the Lakers of course, but CP3 got injured in that series, while Moses dominated.

Moses had a good 3 game series ... but if someone is saying he "beat a dynasty team" (incidentally, 3.27 SRS Lakers ... I'm inclined to think that era Lakers were a bit overrated because of titles coming out of the West and stars but that version with Magic playing like that ... certainly not a vintage year) ... I think the context needs raising even just at a team level discussion.

2) Suns were very strong ... for that years West. There are three clearly superior performances over a large sample in the East. And then this isn't even that strong-ish Suns team ... the Kings won a 7 game series. It doesn't make them better. The Suns shot poorly from the line. That's likely not good defense, it's likely luck (though sensible/strategic fouling can be part of it). And even then Phoenix outscore them (every Kings win is single digits, one is by a single point). The Western Conference Finals that year is the conclusion of imbalanced conferences and mini-series and some bad luck (Phoenix) or play (Magic, Phoenix from the stripe) for the better teams.

3) Depends what you consider par to be and that will change with eras ... generally though, I'd say if 2.18 SRS is the toughest non-mini series opponent before the finals (coming out from a lower seed) you're doing pretty well.

4) If you swapped the Lakers with the Kings, the Rockets would have had to beat their toughest opponent best of 7 not best of 3.

I don't have a good read on Moses but I think arguing for him as great is viable, arguing for Houston's path as anything much ... to me, less so.

[Owly]

My approach to this isn't "who had the better season"--its which players am I most likely to win with or which players increase my odds of winning the most.

Can't increase the odds that much when you can't play half the conference finals, the finals and 20 other games.

You have '18 Paul as unavailable for all the finals?

I'm not an expert nor that close a follower of injuries, but that's worse than I recall coverage suggesting.

"Half the conference finals" seems more than I thought too.

[Dr Positivity]

Moses had a good 3 game series ... but if someone is saying he "beat a dynasty team" (incidentally, 3.27 SRS Lakers ... I'm inclined to think that era Lakers were a bit overrated because of titles coming out of the West and stars but that version with Magic playing like that ... certainly not a vintage year) ... I think the context needs raising even just at a team level discussion.

I don't think the Lakers regular season results are usable to Magic missed games. They are a clear stacked team in the middle of the two title teams, but weird results can happen in 3 games.

[Owly]

Moses had a good 3 game series ... but if someone is saying he "beat a dynasty team" (incidentally, 3.27 SRS Lakers ... I'm inclined to think that era Lakers were a bit overrated because of titles coming out of the West and stars but that version with Magic playing like that ... certainly not a vintage year) ... I think the context needs raising even just at a team level discussion.

I don't think the Lakers regular season results are usable to Magic missed games. They are a clear stacked team in the middle of the two title teams, but weird results can happen in 3 games.

I did look to note this but couldn't fit it in without making it more disjointed ... but then honestly I'd say the aggregate RS Lakers with 37 games of 25.7 PER, .225 WS/48, 8.8BPM are a tougher opponent than full time Magic at 17.0, .082 WS/48 (and negative offensive win shares), 2.1 BPM (negative OBPM).

Per the above the titles came out of the West. The early 80s Lakers SRSes are good but ... hardly great. '85 and on they are significantly better.

Honestly whilst the star power at the top end has been noted, that one might consider Wilkes (also playing poorly this series), Nixon (playing next to another point guard), early Cooper, Chones, Jim Brewer, Mark Landsberger and extended depth that looks almost entirely sub-replacement level (entirely so if one isn't high on Eddie Jordan's D) and performing at those levels as "clear[ly] stacked" ... it's not really a term I ever use but I can't see it applying here, except insofar as it only relates to the two stars and as has been repeated ad nauseam, one of those played very poorly in the relevant series.