Vote for the all-time top 85 players

[Mike G]

The poll has been refreshed with 15 new player names.
Elected players #24-36: Ewing, Pippen, Wade, Drexler, Havlicek, Gilmore, Barry (tie) Kidd; and a 5-way tie: Frazier, Hayes, Nash, Pierce, Schayes.

We can still debate possible tiebreaking schemes. Those last 5 each received 5 votes in the first iteration (round 2) and 3 votes in this round.

Voting is now open for 25 players, so there will be lots of ties and probably several as unanimous choices.

[permaximum]

Voted for one player. Reverse discrimination...

[MW00]

Was surprised Barry and Hayes made it in a metrics board (and that Thomas is consensus thus far).

Barry's 37th in career win shares if we don't deduct anything from early era ABA numbers (and you should). Faux EWA had him 31 (in 2009, with Pierce and Wade surely overtaking him in that time and possibly Ginobili). Then add in the fact that some of his numbers are soft (he got steals but wasn't a good defender), his negative intangiables and the fact he didn't have a remarkable NBA peak (he destroyed the ABA in his first year before he got injured, but again, there are questions over the level of competition). Actually I'm not that bothered by this one, but I'd have him a little out of the top 35.

Hayes I've said before I didn't get. If you wanted career totals wasn't Dominique better? Parish (poor though Parish's playoff numbers are)? Neither was getting much consideration last time. Nor was Lanier who as I noted was considerably better, even on his best terms, versus a mainly Milwaukee Lanier, Hayes was significantly worse per minute.

Now we've got Isiah getting 2 of 2 votes. I said before he's should be in the Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, Kevin Johnson ballpark, above but in their ballpark. He was a worse regular season player than them (by most metrics. So how much do you have to weight playoffs to get him top 60. And if you are heavily playoff weighting make sure you're consistent in it. Are Shawn Kemp, Cliff Hagan and George Yardley in your top 60? I know having Isiah outside the top 30 already distinguishes our list from most opinion based rankings but I'd suggest Isiah is peripheral to a top 60 (and plausibly much lower)

I know Mike's method's have Isiah "high" (that is relative to my ballpark for him), and can at least see where an such an Isiah vote would be coming from (strong playoff performance, team playoff success), anyone else want to argue for why Isiah is top 60?

[Mike G]

I rank Isiah's "playoff career" 28th best of all time. He's ahead of Cousy, Moses, Barry, Pettit, Ginobili, Pierce, Worthy, Billups, Parish, Sam Jones, Hayes, Parker, Heinsohn, Cowens, Kidd, Reggie, Frazier, Gasol, Oscar, Horry ...

He's just #51 in playoff Win Shares. Among the top 100 in WS, he's 39th in points, 10th in assists, 17th in steals.

Not too many people questioned the perception in 1982 that the rookie Isiah was the main reason the Pistons nearly doubled their wins from the year before, from 21 to 39. Or that he had led them into contention (4th seed in the East) just 2 years later.

We didn't think too much about shooting% or turnover rates, but of course those were issues. The guy was just fearless, and that was generally a good thing.

In 1984, the top 3 Pistons gunners -- Isiah, Tripucka, Long -- all shot .460-.470 FG% and .520-.530 TS%
In 1987, Dantley came along, and then the Pistons had a high-% scorer who wasn't getting as many shots as the weaker shooters, Isiah and Vinnie Johnson.

Rick Barry's career is a bit similar. His FG% stalled out, was no longer elite, and eventually about the worst on his team. But he too had a persistent history of playoff excellence.

[Mike G]

Hayes I've said before I didn't get. If you wanted career totals wasn't Dominique better?

Well, let's see: http://bkref.com/tiny/HlqR4
Regular Seasons:
With 1/3 more minutes, Hayes has the distinct edge. Nique comes close in points, but Hayes has 2.2 times the rebounds.
Wilkins was 'better' per minute as a passer, offset by Hayes being better on defense.
Hayes with a small edge in win shares, Nique easily better in WS/48 and PER.

Playoffs:
'Nique was largely a playoff flop. Hayes was a beast.
Big E thereby got almost twice the PO minutes. And in those minutes, his PER went from 17.7 in RS to 19.1 in PO. Wilkins dropped from 21.6 to 18.7
In WS/48, Nique slumped from .148 RS to .079 PO; Elvin went from nothing-special .116 to formidable .135
Stl+Blk% -- Hayes has the RS edge, 4.1 to 2.8; and in PO it's 4.5 to 2.8

Hayes and Barry have the best career po/rs ratio of the 13 we just elected, at 1.05
Among the 50 we're currently voting, Wilkins (.92) is about 70% of the way down. He's even with Hill and above Nance, Parish, McAdoo, Mourning, Ginobili, Johnston (.90), Parker, Rodman, Webber, Marion, Allen, J Lucas, Sikma, Payton (.84)

Ray Allen and Ginobili were once very high in this ratio, before falling sharply in recent years.
Some -- Lucas, McAdoo -- just played disproportionate PO minutes after their prime: the Cartwright Effect.

[MW00]

I rank Isiah's "playoff career" 28th best of all time. He's ahead of Cousy, Moses, Barry, Pettit, Ginobili, Pierce, Worthy, Billups, Parish, Sam Jones, Hayes, Parker, Heinsohn, Cowens, Kidd, Reggie, Frazier, Gasol, Oscar, Horry ...

He's just #51 in playoff Win Shares. Among the top 100 in WS, he's 39th in points, 10th in assists, 17th in steals.

Not too many people questioned the perception in 1982 that the rookie Isiah was the main reason the Pistons nearly doubled their wins from the year before, from 21 to 39. Or that he had led them into contention (4th seed in the East) just 2 years later.

We didn't think too much about shooting% or turnover rates, but of course those were issues. The guy was just fearless, and that was generally a good thing.

In 1984, the top 3 Pistons gunners -- Isiah, Tripucka, Long -- all shot .460-.470 FG% and .520-.530 TS%
In 1987, Dantley came along, and then the Pistons had a high-% scorer who wasn't getting as many shots as the weaker shooters, Isiah and Vinnie Johnson.

Rick Barry's career is a bit similar. His FG% stalled out, was no longer elite, and eventually about the worst on his team. But he too had a persistent history of playoff excellence.

Even at the time Tripucka outpolled him in MVP votes that first year (and there were other arrivals too), and in reality there were other additions too and a very low base (the team was bad and Isiah's 3 predecessors at pg all had sub-replacement level PERs) helped.

So yeah, as you say the %s get ignored. I just feel he was the star (and in the mid 80s he was really good), so he got credit for the titles. But titles Isiah wasn't peak Isiah. So we say he sacrificed numbers, but did he? Really the team slowed it's pace a lot, and he missed more, got to the line less, but his usage rate was a little higher than over his best three years. Those teams won with defense. Isiah was, roughly, an average or slightly above defender (he got a lot of steals but once made Bob Ryan's "No-Defense Team" for just being a reckless gambler earlier in his career). Rodman, Dumars, Laimbeer, Mahorn and Salley were the noted defenders on the Bad Boys.

So even though he was better in the playoffs:
1) I don't think he should benefit as he does for playing on two title teams, because he wasn't the main driving cause, he was a part of an ensemble cast (and very plausibly not the best/most important member).
2) Because of the above (I'm not crediting him with titles) I'm not going to say he should benefit from having played so many playoff minutes. T-Mac was in absolute terms (i.e. not relative to regular season performance) a better playoff player than Thomas (he didn't have the same impact because of less minutes, but as above that's not his fault). So we should be looking at him per minute.
3) How great was he in the playoff? In absolute terms? If you throw out the defensive win shares (unreliable, and Thomas is a good example of this, they rate Thomas as better than Dumars on D in the title years, and having a greater impact on D than Rodman in the '90 season, though not per minute). By offensive win shares per minute, Thomas comes out middle of the pack versus good but not voted in yet modern point guards
Name, Playoff Mins, Playoff OWS, Playoff OWS/P Mins
G Williams, 2315, 6.7, 0.002894168
B Davis, 1851, 4.8, 0.002593193
T Porter, 3939, 8.6, 0.002183295
K Johnson, 3879, 7.6, 0.001959268
C Murphy, 1660, 3.2, 0.001927711
M Cheeks, 4848, 7.7, 0.001588284
Thomas, 4216, 5.5, 0.001304554
M Price, 1691, 2.2, 0.001301005
R Strickland, 1597, 2, 0.001252348
D Harper, 3094, 3.8, 0.001228184
T Parker, 6287, 6.7, 0.001065691
T Hardaway, 2052, 0.9, 0.000438596

Of course win shares prefer low mistake players, PER which favours shot creators like Thomas would put him higher. So, maybe it depends on your preference on whether a pg should be more controlled or creative, or maybe a fairer picture is somewhere halfway inbetween OWS and PER. Even by PER his career number is 19.8, good but not breathtaking.

And all of that is without mentioning that Thomas had the fortune to play the bulk of his playoff minutes aged 25-28 and missed the playoffs entirely in his three worst years.

[Mike G]

I don't trust Win Shares all that much, nor PER alone; but together with minutes they don't miss a whole lot.
I've multiplied WS* PER and divided by games to get the exquisitely-named XYG stat.
Pistons playoff leaders:

Code: Select all

1984      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG       1988     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Laimbeer  5   165   19.1   .181   .62   2.4      Isiah    23   911   20.7   .159   3.02   2.7
Isiah     5   198   20.6   .129   .53   2.2      Dantley  23   804   17.8   .180   3.02   2.3
Tripucka  5   208   18.1   .123   .53   1.9      Laimbeer 23   779   14.0   .140   2.27   1.4
                                          
1985      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG       1989     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Isiah     9   355   22.7   .165  1.22   3.1      Dumars   17   620   17.0   .160   2.07   2.1
Laimbeer  9   325   14.0   .083   .56    .9      Isiah    17   633   18.6   .135   1.78   1.9
Vinnie    9   235   16.0   .093   .46    .8      Salley   17   392   16.9   .207   1.69   1.7
.                                                Laimbeer 17   497   14.2   .155   1.60   1.3
1986      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG                        
Laimbeer  4   168   17.6   .140   .49   2.2       1990     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Isiah     4   163   21.1   .091   .31   1.6      Isiah    20   758   21.0   .194   3.06   3.2
Dumars    4   147   15.2   .126   .39   1.5      Laimbeer 20   667   15.3   .188   2.61   2.0
.                                                Salley   20   547   14.9   .189   2.15   1.6
1987      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG      Dumars   20   754   15.2   .133   2.09   1.6
Isiah    15   562   22.6   .178   2.08   3.1                        
Dantley  15   500   19.0   .171   1.78   2.3      1991     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Laimbeer 15   543   14.2   .131   1.48   1.4     Dumars   15   588   17.9   .148   1.81   2.2
.                                                Aguirre  15   397   19.4   .157   1.30   1.7
.                                                Vinnie   15   438   17.6   .093    .85   1.0
.                                                Laimbeer 15   446   13.8   .099    .92    .8
.                                                Rodman   15   495   11.8   .094    .97    .8
.                                                Isiah    13   436   15.0   .054    .49    .6

Isiah leads in PER every postseason for 8 years. While WS is not his friend, he still leads in minutes -- and sometimes in WS/48.
He's the clear leader or co-leader every year but perhaps 1986 (for 4 games).

[MW00]

Hayes I've said before I didn't get. If you wanted career totals wasn't Dominique better?

Well, let's see: http://bkref.com/tiny/HlqR4
Regular Seasons:
With 1/3 more minutes, Hayes has the distinct edge. Nique comes close in points, but Hayes has 2.2 times the rebounds.
Wilkins was 'better' per minute as a passer, offset by Hayes being better on defense.
Hayes with a small edge in win shares, Nique easily better in WS/48 and PER.

Playoffs:
'Nique was largely a playoff flop. Hayes was a beast.
Big E thereby got almost twice the PO minutes. And in those minutes, his PER went from 17.7 in RS to 19.1 in PO. Wilkins dropped from 21.6 to 18.7
In WS/48, Nique slumped from .148 RS to .079 PO; Elvin went from nothing-special .116 to formidable .135
Stl+Blk% -- Hayes has the RS edge, 4.1 to 2.8; and in PO it's 4.5 to 2.8

Hayes and Barry have the best career po/rs ratio of the 13 we just elected, at 1.05
Among the 50 we're currently voting, Wilkins (.92) is about 70% of the way down. He's even with Hill and above Nance, Parish, McAdoo, Mourning, Ginobili, Johnston (.90), Parker, Rodman, Webber, Marion, Allen, J Lucas, Sikma, Payton (.84)

Ray Allen and Ginobili were once very high in this ratio, before falling sharply in recent years.
Some -- Lucas, McAdoo -- just played disproportionate PO minutes after their prime: the Cartwright Effect.

Bearing in mind most metrics skew slightly favourable to bigs (and so Hayes should have an edge)

Hayes gets longevity and totals. Sure. But his win shares "victory" assumes you think there's value in post sub replacement level seasons. If, for example, you were to take shares in better than .100 WS/48 seasons Dominique is ahead 110 to 101.7. EWA type measures would have this gap substantially wider (playoff and RS faux EWA ranked Wilkins 33 all time, with Hayes at 67 (both circa 2009). And yes Dominique is better per minute. Hayes' best PER season is 2.3 below Wilkins' Hawks' season average (1.8 off his career average). He has two seasons with WS/48 above Wilkins' career number. I'd say Dominique has fair advantage overall here though it does depend on how much you value those extra minutes at 18-19 PER, ~.130 WS/48. They'd probably be most valuable on a team that was already good (generally true of the Hayes era Bullets) and that lacked a competent backup (not true for much of the Hayes era Bullets, Robinson and Kupchack). We're getting into tricky areas here anyway in terms of contextual value and factors not directly related to player performance (though it might be asked whether Hayes' big minutes stunted the growth or trade value of his backups).

I'd take issue with the bolded. I'd say closer to the truth is: Hayes played with Wes Unseld, Bob Dandridge, Phil Chenier, Kevin Porter, Dave Bing, Mitch Kupchack, Greg Ballard and Leonard "Truck" Robinson (not all at once), therefore he got almost twice the PO minutes. Who was Dominique's best teammate? Doc Rivers?

Also beast and flop are relative terms, by some metrics their playoff perforances are similar. And per the above, teams could plan for and focus on 'Nique more than they could the Big E. I'd guess Hayes' matchups were easier too certainly at a team level and likely an individual one. At the Hawks' peak Atlanta were frequently ousted by good (and good defensive) teams like Boston and Detroit (who could put McHale or Rodman on Wilkins). The 70s featured few dominant teams (so the step up in playoff competition was less) and I'd guess Hayes's matchups were worse too (though it depends if he was playing PF or C and I haven't checked their specific opponents).

Nonetheless certainly Hayes played better in the playoffs. Probably by a fair margin. I'd argue not enough to enough of an extent that it wipes out what I interpret as a substantial regular season lead for Wilkins.

[MW00]

I don't trust Win Shares all that much, nor PER alone; but together with minutes they don't miss a whole lot.
I've multiplied WS* PER and divided by games to get the exquisitely-named XYG stat.
Pistons playoff leaders:

Code: Select all

1984      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG       1988     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Laimbeer  5   165   19.1   .181   .62   2.4      Isiah    23   911   20.7   .159   3.02   2.7
Isiah     5   198   20.6   .129   .53   2.2      Dantley  23   804   17.8   .180   3.02   2.3
Tripucka  5   208   18.1   .123   .53   1.9      Laimbeer 23   779   14.0   .140   2.27   1.4
                                          
1985      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG       1989     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Isiah     9   355   22.7   .165  1.22   3.1      Dumars   17   620   17.0   .160   2.07   2.1
Laimbeer  9   325   14.0   .083   .56    .9      Isiah    17   633   18.6   .135   1.78   1.9
Vinnie    9   235   16.0   .093   .46    .8      Salley   17   392   16.9   .207   1.69   1.7
.                                                Laimbeer 17   497   14.2   .155   1.60   1.3
1986      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG                        
Laimbeer  4   168   17.6   .140   .49   2.2       1990     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Isiah     4   163   21.1   .091   .31   1.6      Isiah    20   758   21.0   .194   3.06   3.2
Dumars    4   147   15.2   .126   .39   1.5      Laimbeer 20   667   15.3   .188   2.61   2.0
.                                                Salley   20   547   14.9   .189   2.15   1.6
1987      G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS   XYG      Dumars   20   754   15.2   .133   2.09   1.6
Isiah    15   562   22.6   .178   2.08   3.1                        
Dantley  15   500   19.0   .171   1.78   2.3      1991     G   Min    PER   WS/48   WS    XYG
Laimbeer 15   543   14.2   .131   1.48   1.4     Dumars   15   588   17.9   .148   1.81   2.2
.                                                Aguirre  15   397   19.4   .157   1.30   1.7
.                                                Vinnie   15   438   17.6   .093    .85   1.0
.                                                Laimbeer 15   446   13.8   .099    .92    .8
.                                                Rodman   15   495   11.8   .094    .97    .8
.                                                Isiah    13   436   15.0   .054    .49    .6

Isiah leads in PER every postseason for 8 years. While WS is not his friend, he still leads in minutes -- and sometimes in WS/48.
He's the clear leader or co-leader every year but perhaps 1986 (for 4 games).

I think both measures are okay and combining them probably balances out any extreme tendencies. However I don't think either covers defense very well. I think win shares in attempting to cover defense significantly over credits Isiah for his steals and under credits Dumars and Rodman (non-boxscore defenders) and PER probably does so too though to a lesser extent.

But yes, Isiah was the most valuable offensive player in the playoffs on those teams. I'd still stand by my post.

[Mike G]

I'd guess Hayes' matchups were easier too certainly at a team level and likely an individual one. At the Hawks' peak Atlanta were frequently ousted by good (and good defensive) teams..
The 70s featured few dominant teams (so the step up in playoff competition was less) and I'd guess Hayes's matchups were worse too

Well, I decided to check into this. I averaged the po/rs ratios of players by decade, from my big list of 685 careers ranked; and again just top 200 players. The midpoint of a player's career is used to define his primary 'decade'.

Code: Select all

dec.   685    200
50s   .951   .961
60s   .949   .959
70s   .965   .985
80s   .946   .978
90s   .935   .969
00s   .913   .951

So it does indeed seem as if the '70s had the easiest playoffs of any decade. However, whether you put Wilkins in the '80s or the '90s the difference is somewhere in the .020 to .030 range.
Hayes' po/rs ratio is 1.049, and Wilkins' is .923. The difference is .125 -- something like 5 times the avg competitive difference.

Hayes' po/rs is 4th (and almost 2nd, behind Jo Jo White) among 24 '70s players. Wilkins is 28th among 35 '80s players. He'd be 37th of 49 in the '90s.

[Mike G]

I know having Isiah outside the top 30 already distinguishes our list from most opinion based rankings but I'd suggest Isiah is peripheral to a top 60 (and plausibly much lower)

Supposing that half of players in the current poll are deserving in the top 60, lets look at their Allstar Game selections:
13 - Cousy
12 - Isiah
11 - Iverson
10 - Arizin, Ray Allen
9 - Gervin, Wilkins, Parish, Payton
8 - Cowens, Lanier, Mutombo, Sharman, Carter

Isiah has more ASG than 48 of the other 49, and at least 50% more than 3/4 of them.
He had 5 straight years on the all-NBA team, the middle 3 being 1st team.

[MW00]

I know having Isiah outside the top 30 already distinguishes our list from most opinion based rankings but I'd suggest Isiah is peripheral to a top 60 (and plausibly much lower)

Supposing that half of players in the current poll are deserving in the top 60, lets look at their Allstar Game selections:
13 - Cousy
12 - Isiah
11 - Iverson
10 - Arizin, Ray Allen
9 - Gervin, Wilkins, Parish, Payton
8 - Cowens, Lanier, Mutombo, Sharman, Carter

Isiah has more ASG than 48 of the other 49, and at least 50% more than 3/4 of them.
He had 5 straight years on the all-NBA team, the middle 3 being 1st team.

We're deviating somewhat from measuring player quality if we take ASG appearances as a standard (not that it's unrelated but it's hardly an objective measure). Especially after balancing positions within conferences is sorted out. You've touched on some of the best seasons to miss out on ASG honours http://apbr.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4608

Players drafted high, and those who peak early benefit from a star name which they then carry about with them whether they deserve it or not. A version of this (earlier peak and higher draft status) is the only plausible reason I can think of that many people online think Charles Barkley had a better career than/was better than/should be ranked above Karl Malone.

e.g. Carmelo was NBA ready straight away, was a high pick and a high profile pick. Never mind that he stalled in terms of growth after three years (he finally broke out last year), casually he was percieved as star.

And this is reflected in things like ASG appearances: Did Max Zaslofsky deserve to be at the all-star game in '52? The stats say no but he was a name. Steve Francis in '04 the same plus a little reflected Yao glory. I'm not going to look back through all the names, but it happens.

This is definitely the case with Isiah. In '93 he's 40th amongst all 500+ minute guards/guard forwards in PER, 87th in WS/48.
'92 29th and 37th
'91 26th and 49th
'90 18th and 40th
'89 24th and 31st
'88 11th and 20th
'87 12th and 20th
(and also '83 8th and 27th)

Maybe all the best pgs were in the West. Maybe there were a lot of great two guards. But those numbers make arguing Isiah as one of the game's premier guards for that period, depending on the specific year, somewhat difficult. In '83, '87 and '88 he looks like a fringe all-star level player. In the last three years in it's clearly honourary and any assertion that he was elite is laughable.

More credible are All-NBA teams (and his 3 year peak is good for a pg, though not mind-blowing). But ...
1) Great as he was that year, he shouldn't have made first team over Jordan in '85, personally I'd take Moncrief in '84 and '86 though I can see others would (and did) go the other way.
2) A points based system based on All-NBA (1st=4, 2nd=2, 3rd=1) puts Isiah tied 45th, already away from where critics put him (consistently top 30), and as before I think some of these appearances are arguable. And rating based on that would likely force you to have two guards and two forwards for each center through our rankings, and at the top end I think centers have tended to be more valuable.

[Mike G]

According to this page -- http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... inals.html
... in the 1996 Finals, Bulls vs Sonics, Jordan had .31 Usg, with ORtg and DRtg of 116 and 107 respectively.
Kemp was 117 and 106, Usg .274. Does this mean Kemp outplayed Jordan in the Finals?
My numbers are similar: Kemp slightly better, but too close to really call.

Kemp had a great PO/RS mark for his career -- 1.04 . No doubt it was higher before some weak outings in '02 and '03.

[Mike G]

Here's a more comprehensive look at who may have outplayed Jordan in the Finals.
The final column on each side is Usg*ORtg^2, where ORtg has been converted to Pts/Poss.
Players listed are top 5 in minutes played.

Code: Select all

.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1991  Lakers   Usg   ORtg   O2U
Jordan     31.9   125   49.8       Magic     20.7   120   29.8
Pippen     26.0   107   29.8       Divac     20.8   112   26.1
Grant      16.0   120   23.0       Perkins   21.1   106   23.7
Paxson     15.7   139   30.3       Worthy    25.3   100   25.3
Cartwright 16.5    97   15.5       Scott      9.4    78    5.7
                        
.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1992  Blazers  Usg   ORtg   O2U
Jordan     35.9   116   48.3       Porter    17.1   111   21.1
Pippen     25.3   111   31.2       Drexler   29.8   113   38.1
Grant      10.7   120   15.4       Kersey    21.5    96   19.8
Paxson     14.4   114   18.7       Williams  11.5    99   11.3
Cartwright 15.0    87   11.4       Duckworth 19.7    90   16.0
                        
.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1993  Suns     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Jordan     38.9   119   55.1       Majerle   15.2   128   24.9
Pippen     28.0    97   26.3       Barkley   26.1   123   39.5
Armstrong  12.8   132   22.3       Johnson   23.1    95   20.8
Grant      12.7   122   18.9       Ainge     14.0   120   20.2
Williams   12.2    88    9.4       Dumas     24.7   120   35.6

                        
.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1996  Sonics   Usg   ORtg   O2U
Jordan     31.0   116   41.7       Payton    21.1   114   27.4
Pippen     22.3   106   25.1       Kemp      27.4   117   37.5
Rodman     11.0   115   14.5       Schrempf  22.0   107   25.2
Kukoc      22.4   111   27.6       Hawkins   16.9   114   22.0
Longley    19.4   106   21.8       Perkins   20.8   101   21.2
                        
.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1997  Jazz     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Pippen     25.5   101   26.0       Malone    32.7   102   34.0
Jordan     37.9   113   48.4       Russell   14.9   103   15.8
Rodman      8.9    73    4.7       Stockton  21.4   111   26.4
Harper     11.3   105   12.5       Hornacek  19.1   103   20.3
Kukoc      16.5   117   22.6       Ostertag  13.8    94   12.2
                        
.Bulls     Usg   ORtg   O2U   1998  Jazz     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Jordan     41.2   111   50.8       Malone    33.3   106   37.4
Pippen     22.9   104   24.8       Russell   14.0    96   12.9
Kukoc      20.5   108   23.9       Hornacek  18.7   109   22.2
Rodman      6.7   115    8.9       Stockton  18.8   103   19.9
Harper     12.9    93   11.2       Anderson  20.0    93   17.3

Other than Kemp in '96, nobody for either team ever came close.

[Mike G]

This is kind of fun. Sticking with Kemp, his playoff series follow an interesting trajectory.

Code: Select all

.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1991  Por     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Johnson  27.5   122   40.9      Drexler  26.6   121   38.9
Benjamin 17.4   117   23.8      Kersey   20.4   118   28.4
Kemp     24.4    93   21.1      Porter   17.2   123   26.0
.                               Williams 16.0   103   17.0
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1992  GSW     Usg   ORtg   O2U    
Kemp     20.9   126   33.2      Hardaway 25.6   106   28.8
Pierce   22.8   121   33.4      Mullin   19.0   106   21.3
McKey    18.2   126   28.9      Owens    19.6   120   28.2
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Uta     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Kemp     21.3   101   21.7      K Malone 28.3   129   47.1
McKey    20.8   115   27.5      Stockton 20.0   111   24.6
Pierce   26.3   110   31.8      J Malone 25.0   126   39.7
                        
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1993  Uta     Usg   ORtg   O2U
McKey    14.3   120   20.6      K Malone 29.4   101   30.0
Payton   20.5   102   21.3      Stockton 18.3   115   24.2
Kemp     20.8   113   26.6      Corbin   18.8   109   22.3
Perkins  20.8   110   25.2      J Malone 25.2    91   20.9
Pierce   23.4   106   26.3               
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Hou     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Kemp     20.5   112   25.7      Olajuwon 26.9   109   32.0
McKey    16.0   105   17.6      Maxwell  20.9   108   24.4
Perkins  17.3   123   26.2      Thorpe   16.4   133   29.0
Payton   21.5    99   21.1      Horry    18.9   110   22.9
Pierce   29.2   109   34.7      Smith    20.0   118   27.8
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Phx     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Kemp     22.4   120   32.3      Majerle  16.0   126   25.4
McKey    15.4   125   24.1      Barkley  25.8   124   39.7
Perkins  20.0   121   29.3      Johnson  21.3   109   25.3
Payton   20.8   100   20.8               
Pierce   24.5   130   41.4               
                        
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1994  Den     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Kemp     22.2    95   20.0      Mutombo  18.7    96   17.2
Payton   21.8   108   25.4      Ellis    19.8   114   25.7
Schrempf 20.9   132   36.4      Stith    15.3   109   18.2
Gill     23.1   102   24.0      Williams 23.1   110   28.0
Perkins  18.4   102   19.1

After the '94 debacle, Kemp has, in 4 years, been outplayed by Malone, Olajuwon, Barkley, and Mutombo. Pretty good company -- and, for the next 4 years ( 8 series), Kemp would not be dominated.
1995 would be another 1st-round exit, due mostly to Van Exel >> Payton.

Code: Select all

.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1995  LAL     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   21.2   107   24.3      Van Exel 21.9   130   37.0
Kemp     25.3   124   38.9      Divac    22.4   112   28.1
Schrempf 23.4   110   28.3      Ceballos 27.0    95   24.4
Perkins  18.6   109   22.1               
                        
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1996  Sac     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   23.2   114   30.2      Richmond 26.7   111   32.9
Schrempf 23.8    93   20.6      Polynice 17.4   119   24.6
Hawkins  16.8   130   28.4      Owens    16.8    85   12.1
Perkins  21.0    96   19.4      Grant    22.8    74   12.5
Kemp     30.7    89   24.3               
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Hou     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   24.4   119   34.6      Olajuwon 22.6    97   21.3
Kemp     28.2   107   32.3      Horry    18.3   102   19.0
Schrempf 23.8   116   32.0      Drexler  25.1   107   28.7
Hawkins  17.4   114   22.6               
Perkins  15.6   143   31.9               

.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Uta     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   26.1   106   29.3      Malone   33.6   105   37.0
Schrempf 21.9    92   18.5      Hornacek 21.5   126   34.1
Kemp     25.4   120   36.6      Stockton 17.4    97   16.4
Hawkins  15.4   120   22.2               
Perkins  17.4   112   21.8    
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Chi     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   21.1   114   27.4      Jordan   31.0   116   41.7
Kemp     27.4   117   37.5      Pippen   22.3   106   25.1
Schrempf 22.0   107   25.2      Rodman   11.0   115   14.5
Hawkins  16.9   114   22.0      Kukoc    22.4   111   27.6
Perkins  20.8   101   21.2      Longley  19.4   106   21.8
                        
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1997  Phx     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   26.9   112   33.7      Johnson  25.8    89   20.4
Hawkins  15.7   117   21.5      Kidd     15.9   107   18.2
Schrempf 18.7   127   30.2      Chapman  25.3   110   30.6
Kemp     25.8   117   35.3      Person   17.8   126   28.3
                        
.Sea     Usg   ORtg   O2U        Hou     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Payton   25.4   112   31.9      Drexler  23.4   112   29.4
Hawkins  15.6   125   24.4      Olajuwon 23.0   120   33.1
Schrempf 18.3   122   27.2      Barkley  23.9   116   32.2
Kemp     28.4   110   34.4      Elie     12.0   122   17.9
                        
                        
.Cle     Usg   ORtg   O2U  1998  Ind     Usg   ORtg   O2U
Hendrson 15.0    78    9.1      Miller   26.1   102   27.2
Kemp     35.8   109   42.5      Jackson  14.9   113   19.0
Ilgausks 24.5   105   27.0      D Davis  14.3   139   27.6
Person   12.1   117   16.6      Smits    32.6   108   38.0
Knight   13.0    82    8.7               

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 8_EC1.html
By the end of the '90s, Kemp had evened the score vs Malone, Olajuwon, and Barkley.