The NBA's Equivalent of Superman vs Batman

THE NBA'S EQUIVALENT OF SUPERMAN VS BATMAN

Jul 12, 2012 by Patrick Minton

Kobe Bryant believes that the 2012 Redeem Team would beat the 1992 dream team. Arguing about this is basically, the NBA fan's equivalent of the "Who would win? Superman or Batman?" argument. And in this analogy, yes, I think the people that pick the Redeem Team are like the people that pick Batman -- it only sounds plausible if you have Batman jumping through a ridiculous series of logical hoops to somehow equalize the playing field. Yes, Batman would kick Superman's ass if he was wearing Kryptonite gloves and Superman is moronic enough not to just blast him off the earth with heat vision from a few miles away. My reaction to Kobe's statement is very much like Jordan's:

Snort.

I got lambasted by twitter arguments about how Westbrook, Paul, and Williams could use their athleticism to deny the passing lanes to guys like Jordan and Drexler. I bet a bunch of coaches from the 1992 NBA are now slapping their heads. "It's so obvious. I should have just put my most athletic defenders on the wing and tried to deny Jordan the ball!"

Unfortunately, due to software bugs that I am too lazy to fix, I only have partial numbers, and I am missing a couple of players. But let's take a look at the Dream Team from the nba in 1991-92:

Raw Stats
	Min	WP48	Wins	PTS	DRB	ORB	REB	AST	TO	BLK	STL	PF
Stockton	3002	.365	22.8	20.7	3.2	1.1	4.3	18.0	4.6	0.4	3.9	3.7
Robinson	2564	.359	19.2	29.5	10.6	4.9	15.5	3.4	3.4	5.7	3.0	4.1
Barkley	2881	.312	18.7	28.8	9.3	4.5	13.8	5.1	3.9	0.7	2.3	3.3
Drexler	2751	.260	14.9	33.2	5.8	2.9	8.7	8.9	4.2	1.2	2.4	4.0
Ewing	3150	.257	16.9	30.0	10.6	3.5	14.0	2.4	3.2	3.7	1.3	4.2
Jordan	3102	.257	16.6	37.2	6.5	1.4	7.9	7.6	3.1	1.2	2.8	3.1
Pippen	3164	.253	16.7	26.1	6.8	2.8	9.6	8.7	3.8	1.4	2.4	3.7
Malone	3054	.204	13.0	35.7	10.8	3.5	14.3	3.8	3.9	0.8	1.7	3.6
Bird	1662	.199	6.9	26.2	11.2	1.3	12.5	8.8	3.6	1.0	1.2	2.4
Mullin	3346	.174	12.2	29.8	4.6	1.8	6.5	4.1	2.9	0.9	2.5	2.5

Average SF	2063	.099	4.3	22.7	7.0	3.0	10.0	3.0	2.6	1.4	1.4	4.0
Average PF	2108	.099	4.3	23.4	8.4	4.3	12.7	3.4	3.1	0.9	1.4	4.2
Average C	1643	.099	3.4	19.3	8.3	4.2	12.5	2.5	2.7	2.1	1.3	5.3
Average PG	1709	.099	3.5	19.0	3.5	1.5	5.0	10.3	3.6	0.5	2.5	3.6
Average SG	2268	.099	4.7	25.7	3.9	1.6	5.5	5.8	3.4	0.6	2.1	4.1

Shooting Efficiency
	FG%	2FG%	3FG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FGA	3FGA	PPS	FTA
Stockton	48.2%	50.3%	40.7%	84.2%	52.7%	59.0%	15.0	3.3	1.38	5.9
Robinson	55.1%	55.4%	12.5%	70.1%	55.2%	59.7%	20.1	0.1	1.47	10.5
Barkley	55.2%	59.7%	23.4%	69.5%	56.7%	61.2%	18.8	2.3	1.54	10.9
Drexler	47.0%	51.0%	33.7%	79.4%	50.9%	56.0%	25.8	5.9	1.29	8.8
Ewing	52.2%	52.3%	16.7%	73.8%	52.2%	56.3%	23.2	0.1	1.29	7.8
Jordan	51.9%	53.3%	27.0%	83.2%	52.6%	57.9%	28.1	1.5	1.32	9.1
Pippen	50.6%	52.5%	20.0%	76.0%	51.1%	55.5%	20.6	1.2	1.27	6.6
Malone	52.6%	53.0%	17.6%	77.8%	52.7%	59.9%	23.8	0.3	1.50	13.6
Bird	46.6%	47.8%	40.6%	92.6%	50.0%	54.7%	21.9	3.7	1.20	4.7
Mullin	52.4%	54.4%	36.6%	83.3%	54.4%	58.6%	22.7	2.5	1.31	6.0

Average SF	47.7%	48.9%	35.9%	77.6%	49.3%	53.8%	18.6	1.7	1.22	5.6
Average PF	49.6%	50.4%	33.8%	77.1%	50.5%	55.9%	17.8	0.9	1.31	7.0
Average C	49.7%	50.1%	26.0%	72.2%	49.9%	54.3%	15.3	0.3	1.26	5.5
Average PG	45.2%	46.8%	33.2%	76.9%	47.1%	51.5%	16.4	2.0	1.16	4.6
Average SG	45.7%	48.0%	35.5%	78.4%	49.0%	52.8%	22.0	4.0	1.17	5.2

And the Redeem Team:

Raw Stats
	Min	WP48	Wins	PTS	DRB	ORB	REB	AST	TO	BLK	STL	PF
Chandler	2061	.311	13.3	16.3	9.3	4.9	14.3	1.3	2.4	2.1	1.3	4.3
Harden	1946	.263	10.6	25.8	5.5	0.7	6.2	5.6	3.4	0.4	1.5	3.7
Durant	2546	.226	12.0	34.9	9.2	0.8	9.9	4.4	4.7	1.5	1.7	2.5
James	2326	.358	17.3	34.7	8.2	1.9	10.2	8.0	4.4	1.0	2.4	2.0
Paul	2180	.313	14.2	26.2	3.8	0.9	4.7	12.0	2.7	0.1	3.3	3.0
Howard	2070	.243	10.5	25.8	13.6	4.6	18.2	2.4	4.1	2.7	1.9	3.7
Love	2145	.226	10.1	32.0	11.4	5.0	16.4	2.5	2.9	0.6	1.1	3.4
Wade	1625	.247	8.4	32.0	4.8	2.2	7.0	6.6	3.8	1.9	2.4	3.2
Griffin	2392	.186	9.3	27.5	10.0	4.4	14.4	4.2	3.0	1.0	1.1	4.3
Westbrook	2331	.102	4.9	32.1	4.2	2.0	6.2	7.5	4.9	0.4	2.3	3.0
Iguodala	2209	.255	11.7	16.8	7.1	1.2	8.3	7.4	2.5	0.7	2.3	2.0
Williams	1995	.060	2.5	27.8	3.8	0.6	4.4	11.6	5.3	0.5	1.6	2.9
Bryant	2232	.047	2.2	34.8	5.3	1.4	6.7	5.7	4.4	0.4	1.5	2.3
Anthony	1876	.104	4.0	31.9	6.6	2.3	8.8	5.1	3.7	0.6	1.6	4.0

Average PF	1307	.099	2.7	19.6	7.9	3.6	11.5	2.4	2.4	1.6	1.3	4.5
Average SG	1229	.099	2.5	20.2	4.5	1.1	5.5	4.2	2.7	0.4	1.5	3.1
Average SF	1326	.099	2.7	19.5	5.8	1.6	7.4	3.4	2.5	0.8	1.6	3.4
Average PG	1304	.099	2.7	19.4	3.9	0.9	4.8	8.3	3.5	0.4	1.9	3.4
Average C	1141	.099	2.4	17.9	9.0	4.2	13.2	2.3	2.7	2.0	1.3	4.8

Shooting Efficiency
	FG%	2FG%	3FG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FGA	3FGA	PPS	FTA
Chandler	67.9%	68.3%	0.0%	68.9%	67.9%	70.8%	8.3	0.0	1.97	7.3
Harden	49.1%	57.9%	39.0%	84.6%	58.2%	66.0%	15.5	7.2	1.66	9.1
Durant	49.6%	53.5%	38.7%	86.0%	54.7%	61.0%	24.5	6.5	1.43	9.4
James	53.1%	55.6%	36.2%	77.1%	55.4%	60.5%	24.1	3.1	1.44	10.4
Paul	47.8%	51.1%	37.1%	86.1%	52.2%	58.1%	19.6	4.7	1.34	6.6
Howard	57.3%	57.9%	0.0%	49.1%	57.3%	56.9%	16.8	0.2	1.53	13.3
Love	44.8%	47.5%	37.2%	82.4%	49.7%	56.8%	23.7	6.3	1.35	10.3
Wade	49.7%	51.3%	26.8%	79.1%	50.6%	55.9%	24.7	1.7	1.29	8.8
Griffin	54.9%	55.6%	12.5%	52.1%	55.0%	55.7%	20.5	0.3	1.34	9.4
Westbrook	45.7%	48.2%	31.6%	82.3%	48.1%	53.8%	26.1	4.0	1.23	8.5
Iguodala	45.4%	48.1%	39.4%	61.7%	51.4%	53.7%	13.7	4.2	1.22	4.3
Williams	40.7%	44.6%	33.6%	84.3%	46.7%	52.7%	23.1	8.2	1.20	7.3
Bryant	43.0%	46.4%	30.3%	84.5%	46.2%	52.7%	28.7	6.2	1.21	9.7
Anthony	43.0%	45.4%	33.5%	80.4%	46.3%	52.5%	26.2	5.2	1.21	9.4

Average PF	47.3%	48.9%	35.2%	71.8%	49.4%	53.1%	16.3	1.9	1.20	4.8
Average SG	42.7%	46.2%	35.5%	79.7%	48.5%	52.5%	17.4	5.7	1.16	4.2
Average SF	43.5%	47.0%	35.8%	78.4%	49.1%	53.1%	16.5	5.2	1.18	4.2
Average PG	42.8%	46.0%	34.7%	80.9%	47.8%	52.3%	16.6	4.8	1.17	4.4
Average C	49.9%	50.5%	25.0%	67.5%	50.2%	53.7%	14.5	0.4	1.24	5.0

Laettner isn't on here (he was a senior in college), and Magic isn't either. But Laettner wouldn't factor in to this discussion and anyone who has doubts about whether Magic could still play probably isn't really receptive to this argument.

So on paper this looks competitive, but the Redeem Team has a lot of problems. For one, Howard is hurt (and Kobe knew this when he made the claim, so we must assume that Kobe wasn't "counting" him). So the Redeem Teem has immediate defensive problems -- Chandler and James are its best interior defenders, and James and Iggy are its best wing defenders. Beyond Chandler and James, this team has real problems defending the physical pounding that's going to come from Robinson/Barkley/Ewing/Malone. Griffin and Love both get more flack than they deserve for their defense, but neither is an elite defender.

(As an aside, someone told me that Chandler was an advantage because he was a "defensive specialist". This person clearly did not ever watch David Robinson play. Robinson did everything Chandler did on defense, and more, but was far more gifted on offense. He was 91-92's defensive player of the year. Seriously, scroll up and look at the "BLK" column. That's not a typo. Nothing against Chandler, but he's not an "advantage" over Robinson. Nice try.)

Problem two: many of the Redeem Team's best players play the same position. Harden and Iggy are both great but wouldn't see much floor time because of Durant, Wade and James. The Dream Team has a lot more balance and isn't heavy at any one position so it is much easier for them to put five great players on the floor at once.

Three, after Chris Paul, this team's point guards cannot hold with Stockton and Magic. I got a tweet today from someone saying that they thought Paul, Westbrook and Will would not only defend Stockton well, but outplay him. Paul, Ok, we can hold a discussion, but the other two? Whaaaaaat? Let's look at some data. Here are Nashes' two MVP seasons:

Raw Stats
Season	Min	WP48	Wins	PTS	DRB	ORB	REB	AST	TO	BLK	STL	PF
Nash 05-06	2796	.293	17.1	25.6	4.9	0.8	5.7	14.2	4.7	0.2	1.0	2.1
Nash 04-05	2573	.283	15.2	21.7	3.6	1.1	4.6	16.1	4.6	0.1	1.4	2.5

Shooting Efficiency
	FG%	2FG%	3FG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FGA	3FGA	PPS	FTA
Nash 05-06	51.2%	54.8%	43.9%	92.1%	58.3%	63.2%	18.1	5.9	1.41	4.8
Nash 04-05	50.2%	52.6%	43.1%	88.7%	55.7%	60.6%	16.0	4.1	1.36	4.4

I know Nash isn't on the Redeem Team, but he's the best "modern-day" analogue for Stockton. I am also fairly sure that no one would argue that Williams or Westbrook, right now, is better than Nash during those two seasons. Given that, now note how favorably Stockton's 1991-92 season compares' to Nash's MVP years. He holds his own in shooting efficiency while far surpassing him in assists, steals (!!!), and getting to the line. Stockton was actually a very tenacious defender (it's not for nothing that he was considered a dirty player; the best defenders often are). And Stockton essentially held this level of play for the entire 90s. The idea that Russell Westbrook or Deron Williams could outplay this version of Stockton is simply laughable. Only if they were wearing kryptonite gloves. And the idea that somehow this Stockton, who was in the top 5 in steals for basically the whole 90s, and was 2nd-team all-defensive in 91-92, was too slow to defend these guards...

The final problem that the Redeem Team has is age. It's funny that Kobe refers to his team as the young one. In 1992, Barkeley and Jordan were 29. Malone was at the end of 28. Robinson had just turned 28. Pippen was at the end of 26. This isn't particularly old. Still, one presumes the Redeem Team *could* play a much younger lineup, but of course Kobe is presumably assuming that he'd start (and play the bulk of minutes) at shooting guard. Which would make him the oldest player on the court (assuming Stockton starts instead of Magic). I doubt that today's long-jumper-chucking Kobe would give that Jordan (who, by the way, was on the all-defensive team) any difficulties on the defensive end, and the idea that Kobe could defend 1992's Jordan is just plain whacko. It's very hard to see the Redeem Team's bench making up for the complete drubbing that Jordan would give Kobe at shooting guard on both ends.

Well, that's my comic book geek post for the summer. What say you guys, Superman or Batman?

Categories: Redeem Team, Dream Team

E. J. Fischer

Robinson was amazing on defense. In addition to the blocks, look how high his steals number is! He was a specialist of the kind of chase-down blocks that LeBron is getting known for, but he was so long and fast that he could often control the ball and STEAL it from behind on the shot attempt instead of block it. I've never seen anything else like it.

341 days ago

Brett Gunter

Yeah, it's not close. Of the 14 you list for the '12 team, ignoring injuries, you have 9 above average players. Speaking of injuries, let's throw in Bosh to make it 10. You only have 1 PG, so you need Williams or Westbrook; I take Williams, because he has at least been good before. For symmetry, add Anthony Davis, and maybe you get a matchup this team wins--although Laettner in college was a bad mofo.
But the rest? Good God. Match them up by best fit, and Dream Team has the clear edge with Stockton over Paul, Pippen over Durant, Malone over Griffin, and Robinson over Chandler. They give way with LeBron over Barkley, and Love over a broken-down Bird. Statistically, the other pairings are a wash--until you add context. MJ didn't have a great season, but he was on a mission for the Olympics--as was Magic. That MJ would have dusted Wade--and Magic would have been left with DWill, who in his best season couldn't carry half of Magic's jock.

341 days ago

Sol Orwell

Wasn't the '08 team better than the '12 team? DWade + D12 alone more than offset the addition of Durant don't they?

341 days ago

Patrick Minton

That team had Michael Redd, Carlos Boozer, Carmelo Anthony, and Tayshaun Prince, who all had no place on the floor. Kidd didn't play much and Bosh was the only other big. Bosh played very well in that tournament, but he's no match for Barkley/Malone/Ewing. The '12 team is better than the '08 team, I think.

341 days ago

David Plunk

I say Batman. Because he's Batman. And Superman isn't. But you've sold me on the Dream Team. I didn't realize Robinson was that good defensively. And there's no way the current PFs could handle the Dream Team's. So you would probably be left with Kobe jacking up touch jumpers, Lebron taking a pounding getting to the rim, and Paul trying to handle someone at least as gritty as himself. Good luck with that.

341 days ago

Sol Orwell

If we looked at *only* starters, where does '08 fit there?

PG: CP3
SG: Wade
SF: BronBron
PF: [o shit help] Bosh?
C: D12

2012:
PG: CP3 (worse now ... sigh fucking knee)
SG: Harden?
SF: Durant
PF: BronBron
C: Tyson

By my measure, 08 wins on PG, SG, and C. Then it's Bron+Bosh vs Durant+Bron, but I think the PG/SG/C pulls it out.

Dream Team:
PG: Stockton
SG: Jordan
SF: Pippen
PF: Sir Charles
C: The Admiral

... ok Dream Team slaps both starting fives around, but I think starting five '08>'12

341 days ago

Kyle Shook

As I understand it, WP compares your stats in a particular year to the stats of all the other players at your position that year. So could someone argue that the entire league is better than 20 years ago and that despite the Dream Team's higher WP48 they were playing against inferior competition and so would have inflated WP48 compared to today's great players?
Would this be a valid argument or have you/Dre/Dave/Arturo or someone else already addressed this?

340 days ago

Jon C

Yes, you can make the argument that the league is better and that a good squad of players from today would beat these legends. But I think a lot of people do not believe that we have made a quantum leap since 1992 to today. So I don't think many people will agree with you. I think most people believe that if Jordan were coming into the league now he would quickly become the best shooting guard. This would probably be different if we were looking at a dream team from the 80s. When you look back at teams from that era they just look very different physically from the players of today. Many guys hadn't put in time in the weight room and most teams had several guys who couldn't run and jump playing major minutes. There are body types playing serious minutes that just don't get to play in the NBA very often these days. And I'm not talking about Bird who had tremendous skills, I'm talking about guys like Greg Kite.

But by the 90s the game was similar to today's game. And the guys who are on the 92 team, with the exception of Barkley and Bird, look like players that play today.

But yes, I believe the model does not account for advancements in the total level of competition. I suspect it would be very hard to create a model that did and since you would have no way to test it, you wouldn't know how good it was if you created one.

But rest assured. Robinson/Ewing would have outplayed Chandler badly over 48 minutes. Malone and Barkly would have made the night tough for Lebron. And MJ would have lit up everyone, like he did all the time back then.

Obviously, if either Kobe or Melo are put on the court for any significant stretches of the game, this becomes a blowout. But I'm assuming these guys aren't played over Lebron, Durrant, Harden and Love.

339 days ago

Patrick Minton

I didn't account for changing body types, etc.

But I also didn't account for hand-checking. Wing play in the 90s was brutally physical; I think a lot of today's wing players would have tremendous trouble adjusting to that. I agree with Jordan that he'd probably have scored more points with today's hand-checking rules (although I don't think it's *that* big of a factor -- the main reason Jordan was so efficient is that he took it to the rim a lot, where defenders would bang on him just like rim protectors bang on people today).

I also don't think that the best players in 92 were necessarily all that much better than the best players today. The real problem is that Kobe, Melo, Westbrook, Williams and Chandler are just not today's best players. Compouned by the fact that LeBron, as great as he is at PF, is not as dominant as he is at SF.

If Dwight were in, Bynum were backing up Dwight, Love and Griffin were the PFs, LeBron and Durant the SFs, Harden and Wade at SG, and Rondo was backing up Paul instead of Westbrook/Williams, and Kobe and Melo were not playing, then you have a very interesting matchup.

338 days ago

Jonny Jetmore

By saying Chandler isn't one of today's best players, aren't you essentially saying you don't believe what your own WP numbers tell you? Unlike Kobe, Westbrook, Melo, and Williams, his advanced stats are great.

338 days ago

Patrick Minton

I believe Chandler is great but he's one-dimensional. I think Howard and Bynum are both better than Chandler.

338 days ago

BenMVPk7

What I wouldn't give to see Kobe guard a prime MJ. We're talking about an MJ that still had absurd athleticism, and who actually scored his points within the flow of a game, rather than a guy who takes 30,000 shots to score a high volume of points in order to give an impression of competence the way Kobe does.

No one is going to stop D-Rob, Barkley, Stockton or Michael.

338 days ago

Charles Connaughton

Tyson Chandler is an outstanding basketball player. He is also a very specialized player - he is a defense-focused center that performs very well on offense with a low usage (he converts his put-backs and open looks at a remarkable pace). When he can be utilized in that role, he is incredibly effective. At the same time, his teams need to be constructed with that in mind - in particular, his teams will need higher volume offensive players at other positions. So while he is an excellent player, and absolutely deserves to be called a star, he is also a role player.

Other players are more versatile. Dwight Howard is not just a force on defense, he is very effective on offense as well - in high volume. He is able to fill several roles on his team, and thus his teams can be more flexible with the players around him. That is a rare skill, and the flexibility it grants is extremely valuable - hence why I consider Dwight Howard a more valuable player than Chandler, even if their raw wins produced numbers are quite similar. Building a team around Dwight Howard is easy. Building one around Tyson Chandler is much harder.

338 days ago

Jonny Jetmore

I don't disagree, I'm just saying it goes against what the Wins Produced numbers say and usually we treat those as the bottom line.

338 days ago

Charles Connaughton

We say at the bottom line that, according to Wins Produced, Tyson Chandler was more productive last year than Dwight Howard. We can also say that Tyson Chandler had a career year last year, while Dwight Howard had an off year.

But to the real point, that wins produced isn't the be-all, end-all of team building - it can't be. Players fill different roles on their team. To point to the obvious - players have different positions. Why? If you just looked at the numbers naively, you'd forget all about position and just put the players with the highest raw productivity on the court - start with Tyson Chandler, Dwight Howard, Andrew Bynum, and go from there. That would be a good line-up, right? Of course not. Why not? Well, all those players play the same position, and want to do the same thing - they all want to play close to the basket, both on offense and defense, fighting for the easy points and rebounds, and there just isn't room for all of them there. The entire reason you only play with a couple bigs on the floor is because there just isn't room for any more of them inside, and putting players on the perimeter to compliment your bigs is much more effective.

This is obvious enough that there's a positional adjustment in wins produced to make clear that the big guys inside getting the easy points aren't all the best players - or, put another way, aren't giving you a lot of marginal productivity over the other team's guys.

There are other roles on a team as well, and you need to fill all of them. You need guys who excel on offense, and guys who excel on defense; you need guys who can be productive with the ball in their hands and guys who can be productive off the ball. If you don't compose a team well, everyone's productivity suffers. The Nets didn't have any high volume offense guys on their roster last year, and pretty much everyone's field goal percentage dropped 3-4% - coincidence? By the same token, if you pack a bunch of high volume guys on your team, they all step on each other from not getting enough touches, and you lose out from not having off the ball production instead - I agree with the Thunder playing Sefolosha alongside Westbrook and Durant, for example, because they already have plenty of volume on the outside and they benefit more from Sefolosha's off the ball production than from having Harden step on those other guys (of course I'd play Harden / Thabo / Durant, but that's a different matter).

Dwight Howard does everything. You could drop him onto any team in the league, and he'd be able to produce the way he has been for several years. This is because he's an all-around player that is strong in every aspect of the game. Tyson Chandler is a ridiculously good role player, but will only excel on a team that compliments his skills. When he's on a team with high volume offense players, and is able to play as a help defender, he can be as productive as the best players in the league. If he doesn't have those high volume players on his team, or doesn't get any help on defense, he is much more exposed than Howard.

Which is why I'm happy to say Howard is a better player; and if I had to start a team with only one player, I'd choose Howard. That said, the mark of a really strong GM is building a team with players like Chandler. They are not the obvious plays like getting someone like Howard, but if you can assemble a team of players that compliment each other, you can get a team that plays like a bunch of can't-miss stars at a fraction of the cost.

337 days ago

Zachary Conrad

How do we know that the average NBA player in 1992 is comparable to the average NBA player in 2012? WP48 is basically a metric for how much more productive than "average" a player is, it is not absolute. Since it is not absolute, it seems like it cannot be used to compare players 20 years apart. In most sports athletes have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster since 1992. Additionally the talent pool for the NBA has gotten larger (because of basketball's increased popularity domestically and abroad) in the last 20 years. So using WP48 to compare 1992 players to 2012 players seems like comparing apples to oranges.

330 days ago

You must be signed in to leave a comment.

Signin with Facebook

Signin with Twitter