1996 MVP and best player

[Shep]

The answer is Jordan, and Jordan

[juju151111]

It's not so much flawed, as it is people using it irresponsibly. Educated stat users will use RAPM as a nice way to figure out which player is more valuable on your team, and in some cases different teams. How "valuable" a player is to their team's success isn't the same thing as saying they're the best player in the game. According to the stat, for example, Mike Miller was valuable to the Heat, like REALLY valuable, but dude was probably at best their 5th or 6th best player. Along with comparing players with similar roles, RAPM does a good job normalizing a players impact - and only that. It's good in moderation, but posters I feel get a little carried away with it. I know I'll always be alright w/ raw numbers and simply watching the games

Agreed with every statistic you need to use context.

[3ball]

It's not so much flawed, as it is people using it irresponsibly. Educated stat users will use RAPM as a nice way to figure out which player is more valuable on your team, and in some cases different teams. How "valuable" a player is to their team's success isn't the same thing as saying they're the best player in the game. According to the stat, for example, Mike Miller was valuable to the Heat, like REALLY valuable, but dude was probably at best their 5th or 6th best player. Along with comparing players with similar roles, RAPM does a good job normalizing a players impact - and only that. It's good in moderation, but posters I feel get a little carried away with it. I know I'll always be alright w/ raw numbers and simply watching the games

i think i agree with your post 100%.

question... what type of player would you say is more important: a guy that takes a 2nd round team to a three-peat, and then another one... or, a guy that takes a bunch of D-leaguers to the conference finals?

[BIZARRO]

Let me end this thread and any of these other year by year threads from this period.

Other than the 2 seasons he took off, from 1986-87 to 1997-98, it's Jordan.

Ain't one player you would have traded him for, ain't another player you would have wanted on your team over him.

And if you watched this period, it is pretty obvious.

[julizaver]

Let me end this thread and any of these other year by year threads from this period.

Other than the 2 seasons he took off, from 1986-87 to 1997-98, it's Jordan.

Ain't one player you would have traded him for, ain't another player you would have wanted on your team over him.

And if you watched this period, it is pretty obvious.

When so much of us had watched him play during his Bulls days there is simply no need to use advanced metrics and other stats. Not to mention that all of his games are recorded and he won everything. Jordan was all above his competition in every possible way. He dominated his peers and they aknowledged it - no what ifs, no need to compare rosters. Just go watch the video and made the eye test.

[Da_Realist]

When a team wins a record setting 72 games, the best player of that team will get more than a passing interest in MVP consideration. When that player is the world's most famous athlete ever, even more-so. Especially when, after retiring on top of his game, he retired for practically 2 seasons, came back, redefined his game and then averaged numbers on par with what he averaged the season before he left, that guy will win the MVP.

I wonder how many think they made a mistake voting for Michael Jordan that year.

[Pointguard]

It's not so much flawed, as it is people using it irresponsibly. Educated stat users will use RAPM as a nice way to figure out which player is more valuable on your team, and in some cases different teams. How "valuable" a player is to their team's success isn't the same thing as saying they're the best player in the game. According to the stat, for example, Mike Miller was valuable to the Heat, like REALLY valuable, but dude was probably at best their 5th or 6th best player. Along with comparing players with similar roles, RAPM does a good job normalizing a players impact - and only that. It's good in moderation, but posters I feel get a little carried away with it. I know I'll always be alright w/ raw numbers and simply watching the games

Well said!

Mike Miller was more like the 9th best player on the team. He wasn't even second best off of the bench except on very rare occasions. RAPM which is usually a matter of how the team functions, but Miller wasn't even very good in his role like Allen, Cole and Birdman were.

[Pointguard]

I don't care who was playing, it was rare to see MJ outplayed by anybody on the court. He was thoroughly the best when he played after '90. For people who remember '96 Robinson wasn't in the same breath as MJ. Robinson really beat up on bottom feeders. In the nationally televised games Robinson frequently got hit hard literally by Malone, Barkley, Shaq, Rodman and Ewing while Hakeem usually got the best of him. And people were frustrated that this military guy wouldn't stand his ground. He had his big games against them once in a while but rarely on national television which is when we got to see him.

Jordan was the exact opposite. He feasted on guys getting MVP votes and while Shaq was more dominant, Jordan was better and rarely let you think that Shaq was competition. Robinson was a great athlete, a taller faster version of peak Dwight Howard, and was active as can be. He didn't have a go to move, wasn't firm in the post, and I never seen the Tiger in him. With that said if he had somebody like Magic, that could run with him and demand he post harder, he could have been a top ten GOAT. Still was special and a great player. But Jordan was the best.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Completely agree, OP.

[fpliii]

MJ. Hakeem fell off defensively (though this is another season when he faced gang defenses against Seattle in the elimination series), and Shaq missed too many games. I don't know about Robinson, I was too sour on him from the playoffs the season before, even though the domination in the Houston series was perhaps overstated.

I actually felt MJ was better in 97 than in the 72 win season, since he dropped some weight and looked more fluid. I think it was the tendinitis in his knees? They started out fast out of the gate that year too I believe.

[Roundball_Rock]

at no point was there a sliver of possibility that the bolded above could happen... jordan didn't just restore swagger to the Bulls - he put up a top 10 all-time statistical season... he had a 0.317 WS/48 and 29.4 PER, compared to 0.209 and 21.0 for scottie.

i was in Chicago at the time going to school and played with guys that played with Jordan... i heard a lot of stuff, but never heard anything about scottie having a "claim" for MVP... jordan was back in full force putting up GOAT-level stats.

Of course there was. MJ himself was leading that bandwagon. There is an ESPN interview from 96' on YouTube where Roy Firestone asks Pippen about people touting him as MVP. Then Bob Ryan in the post-interview discussion calls Pippen as good as Jordan, minus the aura of MJ. Again, this is on YouTube. Look it up for yourself. It should be under "Pippen interview" or "Pippen Sunday conversation." You can't look just at stats. MJ was scoring 8-9 more points than Pippen but Pippen was outproducing MJ in every other category while providing superior defense (arguable DPOY). So statistically it was not as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

Samurai is right, though, Pippen's MVP campaign lost steam after about 1/3 of the season and it was clear MJ was the MVP. It did not last, but there was a chunk of the 96' season where Pippen was essentially Jordan's equal (similar to how Westbrook currently is more or less equal to Durant in terms of play, even though in the long run we know Durant is the superior player). Pippen should have finished higher than 5th in MVP voting, though. MJ and Pippen were 1-2 in all-NBA voting and Pippen was #1 in all-Defensive voting that year (MJ also made the 1st team).

MJ was clearly the best player on the planet and the MVP in 96'. That was one of those years where one player was the clear MVP.