Retro POY '90-91 (Voting Complete)

[sp6r=underrated]

Thanks for the response

[Sedale Threatt]

Man, I have the Lakers/Bulls Finals on VHS, but no damn VCR!

Do you really want to watch that over again? I was young and foolish when that series went down; I actually thought we had a chance to win after Perkins won Game 1. Then Jordan broke our heart in Game 3, and it was all over. It was so bad by the end rookie Elden Campbell and Tony Smith -- remember him? -- were getting major burn.

Sucks about VHS, though. I have about 100 vintage games or so, including every single playoff win during the three-peat, and some really cool odd regular season games from the past 20 some years, and have yet to get them switched over to DVD.

[mysticbb]

Unlike b-r.com's Win Shares, eWins are designed to be independent of team strength.

Don't know whether you are aware of that, but the Win Shares calculation changed.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

A player's eWin rate should translate from one team to another, regardless of pace, team defense, etc.
Other big differences are less correlation to high shooting% and low turnovers.

Which means a guy like Iverson will score high in your rating?

For example, Scottie Pippen is a lot better than Horace Grant. WS (in my opinion) gets it backwards. Horace didn't turn it over or miss many shots; but Scottie did a lot more.

Win Shares isn't determining which player was or is "better". ;)

[Sedale Threatt]

As usual, Jordan is Jordan.

I think Magic has to have the best case for second, though. That team totally changed gears, from Showtime to Slowtime -- they ranked 25th out of 27 in pace -- and he didn't skip a beat. Posted up more, didn't run nearly as much, and still put up phenomenal numbers, both box score (19 ppg, 13 apg, 7 rpg, 62 TS%) and advanced (25 PER, 15.4 win shares, 124 orating, .25 ws/48).

Laid the foundation to a huge upset of Portland with a Game 1 road victory, dishing out 21 assists while drawing 13 fouls, then had games of 14/7/19 and 22/9/9 as the Lakers went up 3-1. Then finished the Blazers off with 25/11/8 in a one-point Game 6 win. In summation, he basically willed L.A. past a superior Blazers team.

Couldn't push them over the top against Chicago, but he still turned in a very strong effort, including a triple double in Game 1 and 20 points, 16 assists in what looked like his last NBA game at that point.

As already noted, the thing that stands out to me is how he still thrived, and dominated, despite playing in a completely different system. How many players can do, or have done, that?

[ItsMillerTime]

Early Rankings

1. MJ
2. Magic
3. Malone - Very strong season by the Mailman
4. Robinson - Lost in 1st round, but not because of DR
5. Clyde Drexler - No real other candidate jumps out to me. I feel Barkely and Hakeem missed too many games, Pippen and Stockton weren't the leaders of their teams, and Mullin and Wilkens were guys who put up big scoring numbers but not much else. Any reason I shouldn't include Drexler, or strong argument to include someone else?

[mysticbb]

The stats for the 90-91 season (playoff games weighted 3x regular season games).

Code: Select all

Rk Player             PER    WS    ON   SUM
1  Michael Jordan     31.8  25.8  12.6  70.1
2  David Robinson     27.2  17.7  6.4   51.4
3  Magic Johnson      24.0  18.2  6.3   48.6
4  Charles Barkley    28.3  14.8  3.2   46.2
5  Scottie Pippen     21.2  14.8  9.1   45.1
6  Karl Malone        23.9  15.9  5.0   44.8
7  John Stockton      23.0  15.7  6.0   44.6
8  Terry Porter       20.5  14.7  6.5   41.8
9  Clyde Drexler      21.9  14.1  5.3   41.3
10 Kevin Johnson      21.7  11.0  3.8   36.6
11 Robert Parish      20.7  10.9  4.5   36.1
12 Hakeem Olajuwon    24.1  9.2   2.5   35.8
13 Reggie Miller      20.5  12.6  2.6   35.6
14 Chris Mullin       20.4  12.4  2.3   35.1
15 Kevin McHale       21.2  9.7   3.7   34.6
16 Tim Hardaway       21.4  11.3  1.4   34.0
17 Dominique Wilkins  22.4  10.8  0.5   33.7
18 Hersey Hawkins     19.8  11.8  1.5   33.2
19 Larry Nance        20.6  9.8   0.3   30.7
20 Patrick Ewing      22.4  9.1   -0.9  30.5


PER is underrating great passers like Magic Johnson. I have my own rating (called PRA) which values assists very differently and in that rating Magic was actually always closer to Jordan than by PER. For that season for example (only regular season, league average is set to 10): Jordan 22.0, Magic 20.8 (6% difference, while 25% difference in PER). Magic is also 2nd in my rating, while he is 4th in PER in regular season. What is the point? Well, Magic was better than Robinson, even though the stats I presented here would indicate something different. Additional to that I still have the opinion that Robinson's boxscore stats in comparison to his impact are higher, while I would say the opposite for Magic Johnson.
Robinson still get the nod over Barkley, because he was for sure defensively better and the offensive stats are not in favour of Barkley anyway.
The 5th place is interesting. I really like to give that spot to Pippen, because that was the first season in which he was able to play consistent and he played really good. On the other side I would also like to give some credit to John Stockton. Even though the numbers here have him slightly below Malone, I take that as a tie (human error for the stats keeper is easily 5% anyway). As I pointed out in other years before Stockton seems like a player who had a very high impact, higher than his boxscore numbers would indicate. Well, there is also the well known problem that the Jazz score keeper had the tendency to give out assists more easily, that is clearly shown in the difference of home ast% and road ast%. No idea, maybe the higher assists numbers are overrating Stockton in comparison to other great point guards. I would put Stockton over Malone, but as I said the 5th place is taken by Pippen for what he done that season and postseason.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Magic Johnson
3. David Robinson
4. Charles Barkley
5. Scottie Pippen

[sp6r=underrated]

As usual, Jordan is Jordan.

I think Magic has to have the best case for second, though. That team totally changed gears, from Showtime to Slowtime -- they ranked 25th out of 27 in pace -- and he didn't skip a beat. Posted up more, didn't run nearly as much, and still put up phenomenal numbers, both box score (19 ppg, 13 apg, 7 rpg, 62 TS%) and advanced (25 PER, 15.4 win shares, 124 orating, .25 ws/48).

Laid the foundation to a huge upset of Portland with a Game 1 road victory, dishing out 21 assists while drawing 13 fouls, then had games of 14/7/19 and 22/9/9 as the Lakers went up 3-1. Then finished the Blazers off with 25/11/8 in a one-point Game 6 win. In summation, he basically willed L.A. past a superior Blazers team.

Couldn't push them over the top against Chicago, but he still turned in a very strong effort, including a triple double in Game 1 and 20 points, 16 assists in what looked like his last NBA game at that point.

As already noted, the thing that stands out to me is how he still thrived, and dominated, despite playing in a completely different system. How many players can do, or have done, that?

Magic is my number 2 as well. I think what he accomplished from 88-91 is really underrated when it comes to lifting an above average supporting cast to elite status. Kareem was either washed up or retired. The 2nd best player was Worthy who everyone agrees was dependent on Magic. Admittedly the degree of that dependence is disputed. Still, the lakers were in the mix every year, and fell apart once he retired

[jicama]

... there is also the well known problem that the Jazz score keeper had the tendency to give out assists more easily, that is clearly shown in the difference of home ast% and road ast%. ..

For the 1990-91 season, Jazz were credited with assists on 71.3% of FG at home, vs 66.5% on the road. The ratio (713/665) is 1.072, suggesting that 7.2% of their home assists were 'bogus'. The league that year gave 6.2% more assists (per FG) at home. So the Jazz scorekeeper was a bit more generous than most.

Most years when Stockton played, Utah actually was less home-friendly than most, regarding assists. From '89 thru '94, their home/away Ast/FG ratio was 1.021 -- +2.1% being about one third of the league average.

See also this thread: viewtopic.php?f=344&t=962487

[Gongxi]

I think 1-2 and are consensus picks with the MJs, Jordan first, Magic second. Beyond that, it seems like there's 4-5 guys on the same level.

[An Unbiased Fan]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

[jicama]

I have Barkley as a solid #3

Barkley was just as good as Malone, but for 16 fewer games.

[lorak]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

Robinson was better: .615 and 750 TS%
And of course he played defense.

IMO top 3 has to be: MJ, Magic and Robinson - in that order. After that fun starts.

[Doctor MJ]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

Robinson was better: .615 and 750 TS%
And of course he played defense.

IMO top 3 has to be: MJ, Magic and Robinson - in that order. After that fun starts.

That fact that his team was a 2 seed that immediately got upset doesn't bother you? I understand it's a team game and Robinson still got his numbers, but considering Robinson's eventual trend of both individual and team playoff disappointment, it's hard for me to ignore.

[An Unbiased Fan]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

Robinson was better: .615 and 750 TS%
And of course he played defense.

IMO top 3 has to be: MJ, Magic and Robinson - in that order. After that fun starts.

Barkley as a PF had a higher TS% than DRob did. 64% vs 61%

And while DRob put up a ridiculous 75% TS against the Warriors, that was by Nelson's design. That was Run TMC, they were a run & gun team. They were HORRIBLE on defense, and had zero paint presence, so I have to take DRob's series against them with a grain of salt. Run TMC gave up 115 ppg, and had the #2 pace in the league.

Barkley led Philly to a 1st round upset of the Bucks, who only gave up 104 ppg, and #17 in pace.

Barkley's numbers are more impressive.

[lorak]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

Robinson was better: .615 and 750 TS%
And of course he played defense.

IMO top 3 has to be: MJ, Magic and Robinson - in that order. After that fun starts.

That fact that his team was a 2 seed that immediately got upset doesn't bother you? I understand it's a team game and Robinson still got his numbers, but considering Robinson's eventual trend of both individual and team playoff disappointment, it's hard for me to ignore.

He played very good. There are other years when part of the blame was on him. But not this time. He wasn't exposed like for example Dirk in 2007.

[ronnymac2]

Yeah, I'm with AUB fan. Classic Nellie. I have to say though, I respect his creativity and willingness to do different things with his lineups.

Robinson played really well, but I mean, I honestly wouldn't expect anything less against such an awfully designed defensive team. Robinson gets credit for doing what he was supposed to do as an individual. That won't automatically put him at three for me.

[lorak]

I have Barkley as a solid #3. His offensive efficiency was tremendous in both the RS & PS.

RS - 27.6/10.1/4.2, 57% FG, 64% TS

PS - 24.9/10.5/6.0, 59% FG, 63% TS

Robinson was better: .615 and 750 TS%
And of course he played defense.

IMO top 3 has to be: MJ, Magic and Robinson - in that order. After that fun starts.

Barkley as a PF had a higher TS% than DRob did. 64% vs 61%

And while DRob put up a ridiculous 75% TS against the Warriors, that was by Nelson's design. That was Run TMC, they were a run & gun team. They were HORRIBLE on defense, and had zero paint presence, so I have to take DRob's series against them with a grain of salt. Run TMC gave up 115 ppg, and had the #2 pace in the league.

Barkley led Philly to a 1st round upset of the Bucks, who only gave up 104 ppg, and #17 in pace.

Barkley's numbers are more impressive.

These numbers are only about one side of the floor. What with the other - defense?

[Doctor MJ]

These numbers are only about one side of the floor. What with the other - defense?

On the other side of the floor, the Spurs defense got slapped around by the Warriors resulting in the Spurs being not as good as a mediocre, one-dimensional team when it really mattered.

[lorak]

So we again ignore 82 games of regular season? And no matter that Robinson was way better defender than Barkley and on offense they were comparable...

[jicama]

Win Shares isn't determining which player was or is "better".

If WS is an estimate of how many wins a player contributed, then it claims Horace Grant had a better rate of contributing wins than did Scottie Pippen, every year until 1994, when Pippen barely edges Grant.

WS loves Horace enough to list his career WS/48 rate (.147) as greater than that of Pippen, Sikma, Ben and Rasheed Wallace, Cousy, Mullin, Havlicek, Kidd, Cummings, English, Iverson, Greer, Hayes, Billy C, Cowens, Twyman, Webber, Worthy, Haywood, Archibald, McGinnis, Monroe, Bernard King, ...