The Ewing Draft hype. I still have my “Patrick Ewing Growth Chart” Poster in a closet somewhere. It’s a 7+ foot lifesize photo fo Ewing with the feet measuring up the side so one could see how tall one was in relation to Ewing.It was a Garden giveaway (in either ’85-’86 or 86′-87′) when the team was laughably bad post-Bernard knee injury. And the Knicks were getting blown out and Ewing was having a lousy game, so, in protest, a chunk of fans on the front row near the bench began ripping up their free posters in the team’s face. Ugly, just ugly. (I clearly didn’t rip mine).

But yes, the fact that Ewing wasn’t Bill Russell like we all thought (dear god, this was pre-interwebs/ESPN uber-coverage. Ewing would be disemboweled if he came out now.) he’d be clearly took a toll on Ewing. He was a recluse to being with, but the NYC Bile machine probably (and I’m royally speculating here) made him more secretive, defensive (personality-wise, not B-ball wise), and unapproachable.

This seeming hostility/indifference to the fans made them demand more from him/be more critical when he came up short, which made him more hostile, which made them more critical and on and on and on…

So yeah, I remember it well.

It’s better than nothing, but still… I’ll have to do some math (and research) to try and figure out the scale of what we’re debating, i.e. how much of the “better than average” performance is accounted for by box-score stats.

This post from Dan Rosenbaum explains much better than I could, the weaknesses of Berri’s method of extrapolating team stats to individuals.

http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewtopic.php?t=877

Wins Produced would credit Ewing somewhat for his non-boxscore defense. Opponents field goals missed is part of the model. I believe they create a credit or a debit, depending on whether you are above or below average in the league. Given that the Knicks were the best team in the league on defense, Ewing would have received a large credit there. In Berri’s system defensive credit is divided up evenly among players according to minutes played. So to the extent Ewing was better than everyone else on the Knicks on defense he is being shorted a bit. But still, its not like non-boxscore defense isn’t in the model.

I think Malone really was an all time great, who happened to be around in the same era as the best player of all time. The Utah Jazz teams of the mid 90′s were some of the best of all time. Unfortunately, they were matched up against literally the best teams of all time.

Absolutely. It was a crime that some fans never forgave him for not living up to his draft hype. I hated the Knick fans that booed him – and there were plenty. Amazing that such a great player was criticized so much.

I would agree with this… to me, Barkley was just overrated… and the most amazing thing about Malone is that he played at a high level for so long, not that the level was ever one of the 2 or 3 best players in the league.

For the late 80s and 90s era – post Magic & Bird – Jordan was clearly head and shoulders above everyone else. It’s unfair he didn’t win MVP every year. After that, I’d say Olajuwon and Robinson were the next great players. Moving later in the decade, you’d have to put Shaq at or near the top of the list. Garnett and Duncan, too, but their prime was a different era.

Behind those guys, though, I’d rank Ewing as high as anyone – Malone and Barkley being the main competition.

I hate to posit something that is not provable one way or the other – not good science – but my point is that Ewing (and also Malone) offered significant value on defense, at least partly closing the gap between them and Barkley.

You said the early 90s Knicks were (at least among) statistically the strongest defensive teams of all time. Substantially better than average. Whose contribution made them so? I would say Ewing played a major role, which is barely measured by Berri (only via blocks & steals, and indirectly with rebounding #s – no measure of how reduced was the opposing team’s FG%).

I know we’ve debated this before, griping about the lack of good defensive measures. Just a guess, though — Ewing doesn’t suffer quite as much by the limitations of defensive stats, since as a shot-blocker his contribution was more measurable than it was for, say, Oakley.

http://www.wagesofwins.com/DreamTeam92.html

I have pored over Ewing and Oakley’s statistics in the past. My conclusion, Ewing was a great player, a hall of famer, but not quite in the elite echelon of all time greats. There were a lot of players he played against in that era who were better than him…

I don’t see Curry beating Pat in a foot race at age 24.

Brian – I think there is something in BOP on that. I think he does analyze the importance of Defense and OFfense in winning championships….

I dunno how old you guys are, but I get the feeling the formative years for most posters here were the late 90s, the Houston/LJ teams – so yeah, the image of Ewing dragging himself upcourt is pretty vivid.

But in his prime – he wasn’t quick enough to play forward like Robinson or Olajuwon, but he was easily faster-than-average going up and down the court. (and of course he and Oakley were great help defenders, sliding over)

He caught a lot of flack in the press, and the fans ran hot and cold… but that doesn’t mean the past wasn’t as good as we remember; it’s a reminder to appreciate great players when they’re around.

I’d say Ewing at his peak was the equal of Malone at his peak (Karl just maintained it a lot longer than anyone), and better than Barkley, who was awesome on offense and the boards, but as I recall played very little D.

Does that start an argument?