A Look Back: Player Pairs from 2003

[timvp]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...48_career.html

They have Jordan 1st at .2505 and Robinson 2nd at .2502.

.0003 difference? In other words tied.

But more so win shares. PER is seen by many as a useful tool; something to confirm opinions, as opposed to formulating them.

PER vs Win Shares is a debate for another thread but even if you want to use PER, Robinson is still fifth all-time.

It's not about the ages, it's about the mileage. At 24, his legs had zero NBA mileage on them. At 24, Duncan had already ac ulated nearly 10, 000 regular season minutes and nearly 2, 000 playoff minutes. So, yes, Robinson's unique career arc had something to do with his numbers appearing so gaudy.

Wait, so you are actually saying that if Duncan would have taken two years off after graduating from Wake Forest that his stats would be more gaudy?

Seriously?

[TD 21]

.0003 difference? In other words tied.

In other words, second. And you claim I have a problem admitting I'm wrong . . .

PER vs Win Shares is a debate for another thread but even if you want to use PER, Robinson is still fifth all-time.

You'd know probably as well, if not better than me, whether PER is generally viewed as more credible than win shares.

Wait, so you are actually saying that if Duncan would have taken two years off after graduating from Wake Forest that his stats would be more gaudy?

Seriously?

I'm saying that Robinson enjoyed a unique benefit and that is that he was perilously close to his prime upon debuting, only he had no NBA mileage yet. No one can say how much, if any, that contributed to his gaudy stats, but there's reason to believe it played some part. Just like him retiring right around the minutes threshold before dominant all around big men generally begin a steep decline, probably played a part.