How many players have a reasonable case over Jordan offensively?

[Cavsfansince84]

Oscar (era relative*)

If anything, Oscar's case is mostly around his skillset and BBIQ, as his impact was significantly compressed by the era he played in. You can make a strong case that Oscar is one of the best offensive players ever, but I didn't reach his ceiling due to the era he played in.

I agree that if you put Oscar in a slowed down, defensive oriented era like the 90's he becomes most likely better era relative for the same reason that the Bulls were playing slowed down ball with MJ. His box score numbers would go down but his impact just increases.

[AEnigma]

Problem with Oscar is I do not see an era where he is truly more effective than peak Magic is.

I am also skeptical that improved league utilisation outpaces the effect of being a much larger outlier. It could, but I think Oscar gains more by being the only truly elite volume creator than he does by playing in an era with at least a dozen other elite volume creators.

[Djoker]

Unfortunately those many don't have any actual basis for their claim:

Ball-dominant playmaking seems to lead to the most of the top-tier playoff offenses

What is your claim? that playmaking is the only component that matters when evaluating a player's offensive ability? How much weight do you put on playmaking vs all the other components?

Given that the realistic maximum proportion of points that an individual player can score probably tops out at a bit over 30-35% of team points in a given season/series, while playmaking influences the rest of the team's scoring (which is a majority of a team's points), it by definition should rank higher than individual scoring when looking at how good players are at elevating team offenses. Otherwise, guys like Steve Nash/Magic Johnson would not have led consistently great offenses while not actually having elevated scoring volumes.

Playmaking also likely tops out though. It's not like a playmaker can create the other 65-70% of his team's points. It's pretty hard to say whether scoring or playmaking should rank higher.

[Cavsfansince84]

Problem with Oscar is I do not see an era where he is truly more effective than peak Magic is.

I am also skeptical that improved league utilisation outpaces the effect of being a much larger outlier. It could, but I think Oscar gains more by being the only truly elite volume creator than he does by playing in an era with at least a dozen other elite volume creators.

I think a. Oscar was the better athlete possibly even factoring in Magic's height adv. b. Magic had slightly better intangibles since Oscar had a reputation for being a bit too serious or overbearing despite his high iq for the game. I think putting Oscar on a team that needs more scoring presents a situation where he would be on par with or maybe even above peak Magic. Obviously there's no right/wrong answer but I could see it.

[AEnigma]

Disagree on both athleticism (with height in mind) and functional scoring volume. Oscar at his peak was averaging just slightly higher shots per possession than Magic was. It was just high pace + minutes that gave him a higher raw volume.

[Cavsfansince84]

Per100 doesn't have much meaning as a comparative tool though imo when one guy is playing around 110 possession per game and the other is playing more like 75-80. Which is part of what I think we're saying is that as offenses became more streamlined as pace dropped significantly and coaching evolved it tended to empower the star players more and as pace and mpg go down stars can player harder on a per minute basis. So you gotta factor that in if we are talking about an Oscar playing in the late 80's/early 90's on about 36-40mpg. I mean it's fine to disagree on this, I'm just adding in part of why Oscar's impact would go up if you moved him forwards to Magic and Michael's era. As possessions go down I think teams tend to make better choices with the ball and Oscar would be at the center of his team's offense even more than he was in the 60's when on the court. On top of most likely developing a 3 pt shot.

[70sFan]

Problem with Oscar is I do not see an era where he is truly more effective than peak Magic is.

Thankfully in this thread all he needs to be is better than Jordan

[shakes0]

Magic, Bird, Nash, Curry. That's it.

I agree that the answer is no one, but shouldn't Wilt make your list?

[EmpireFalls]

Unfortunately those many don't have any actual basis for their claim:

Ball-dominant playmaking seems to lead to the most of the top-tier playoff offenses

What is your claim? that playmaking is the only component that matters when evaluating a player's offensive ability? How much weight do you put on playmaking vs all the other components?

Given that the realistic maximum proportion of points that an individual player can score probably tops out at a bit over 30-35% of team points in a given season/series, while playmaking influences the rest of the team's scoring (which is a majority of a team's points), it by definition should rank higher than individual scoring when looking at how good players are at elevating team offenses. Otherwise, guys like Steve Nash/Magic Johnson would not have led consistently great offenses while not actually having elevated scoring volumes.

I agree with this but this is a bit simplistic. No player is ever just a scorer or playmaker, each balances the two in complex interplay with teammates and various defensive schemes. A bona fide alpha scorer who can get you 30+ per night might take the pressure off a second star who’s a better playmaker than scorer (obvious comparison: Scottie to MJ, but also other cases), and moreover, the alpha dog scorer can open up defenses without having to actually “playmake” the traditional way with dribbling+passing. Curry and Nash both tilt heavily toward one side of the scoring-passing tao but carry similar offensive results regardless.

Plus ultimately the calculation of offensive rating necessitates putting the ball in the basket repeatedly, not a measure of average shot quality. It’s kind of like xG in football. You need a scorer who can be relied upon in versatile ways repeatedly. Accordingly, a team of skilled shot makers (Kobe Bryants) will be better than a team of Jason Kidds.