APBRmetrics

In the over 70 seasons of NBA and ABA basketball, the hundreds of variations of rules, and the thousands of players, it’s important to—at least theoretically—create a standard period of time in which comparisons between classic players and current players can be reasonably performed.
The Early 90s (ie 1990-94) period stands out as one of the most balanced periods in 75 total NBA and ABA seasons I’ve reviewed. The early 90s is mistaking characterized as a period dominated by Centers, but outside of the elites David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Patrick Ewing, and 1992-93 Shaquille O'Neal, the early 90s didn’t have the depth at Center as the position did in the 70s and 80s. However, the guard play was elevated in the early 90s compared to prior periods, especially if we look beyond the household names, players like Alvin Robertson, Hersey Hawkins, Terry Porter, Pooh Richardson, Mookie Blaylock, Reggie Lewis, and Micheal Williams were above average in their productivity from the backcourt.

The early 90s was a period of balanced production from all positions.

My methodology takes the NBA and ABA league average box stats for each year starting from 1950 and compares them in this Early 90s time period to produce a factor multiplied by each player’s individual stats. I was able to provide researched estimates where stats like turnovers, steals, and blocks are missing from the box record.

The second phase of my work assesses league quality and its function to describe the overall level of competition in a given time period. For example, the current NBA, while not as balanced across positions, is the highest quality era to date. Global interest in the NBA has changed demographics, which now include a much higher rate of international players—meaning player recruitment has expanded to reach additional populations competing for those limited roster spots. The development of the G League has helped provide high level training and skill development in the fashion of the MLB farm system.

All box stats fall subject to these two adjustments:
1. Aforementioned time period adjustment—a standard balanced era. The objective is to neutralize league level disparities created primarily by differences in rules and pace.
2. The league quality adjustment—which factors in the level of competition.

*All-time Players are listed in the first column by lowest score—The All-time Score is a combination of peak value and career value.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... dN/pubhtml

I can't seem to copy this sheet to get an overall assessment, but here are some head-scratchers:
74 - Al Jefferson
75 - Kevin McHale
76 - Bill Russell

95 - Joakim Noah
97 - Willis Reed
98 - Greg Monroe

I remember Monroe from last year's list. Seems his little bit of playoff performance has been pretty good, on a per-minute basis. Is that why he's among all-time greats?
These are from the "Score" ranking (1st columns). The alternative ranking is "Value Shares"
On the bottom of both lists are old-timers Bob Davies, Max Zaslofsky, and Joe Fulks. All-stars and Hall of Famers, they rank many spots below guys who barely played.

2211 - Adam Morrison
...
2219 - Bob Cousy

Mike G wrote:I can't seem to copy this sheet to get an overall assessment, but here are some head-scratchers:
74 - Al Jefferson
75 - Kevin McHale
76 - Bill Russell

95 - Joakim Noah
97 - Willis Reed
98 - Greg Monroe

I remember Monroe from last year's list. Seems his little bit of playoff performance has been pretty good, on a per-minute basis. Is that why he's among all-time greats?
These are from the "Score" ranking (1st columns). The alternative ranking is "Value Shares"
On the bottom of both lists are old-timers Bob Davies, Max Zaslofsky, and Joe Fulks. All-stars and Hall of Famers, they rank many spots below guys who barely played.

2211 - Adam Morrison
...
2219 - Bob Cousy

My work doesn't follow the traditional method of comparing players to other players in their era and then proceeding to rank them. Joe Fulks may have been great in the early 50s, but using league quality measures derived from player wins produced, roster/population, estimated effects of demographic changes, my lists determines how he would fair in neutral period from league data analyzed from 1950 - 2018. My lists corrects for historical bias. The quality of basketball has, for some reasons mentioned in the OP, increased over time.

Shawn Kemp had a great regular season in 1996, finishing with a value score of 11.54 -- avg. NBA Individual Value Score = 3.8 wins. Blake Griffin in '14, plays PF in era where PF gets less shots due to defensive rule changes that have pushed the game more into the perimeter. In a more neutral era like the early 90s, '14 Griffins 1359 FGA are adjusted to 1552. I needed to make this adjustment before comparing Griffin to Kemp, as well as all other players. 2014 Griffin has 14.45 value shares, topping '96 Kemp by the equivalent of nearly 3 wins. Griffin played in 68 games -- I calculate games based on MP/36 -- Kemp played in 65. Griffin, in a neutral period, had the better year.

Griffin vs Kemp is arguable.
But how do you explain Greg Monroe next to Willis Reed? Or Al Jefferson over McHale and Russell?

Funny, I also take minutes/36 and call it "equivalent games".

LaMarcus Aldridge (#29 all-time) has passed Dirk Nowitzki, in barely half as many games.
Paul Millsap (45) over Mourning (47)? He may have shot more in 1990, but would he be taking 3's?

Kawhi went from 73 last year to 64 despite hardly playing.
Carmelo dropped from 60 to 70.