Oscar Today vs Curry in the 60's

[One_and_Done]

League average TS% was what, 47.9% in 1965? If you use that as a representative element, before you start considering health, handles and footwork... Steph has made 4,058 3s in his career. Without those, his career TS% goes from 62.5% to 52.5%.

So assuming that he'd be able to still just move around and take jumpers and stuff, that's still a pretty efficient player. Not game-breakingly so, but still a good player. And D out on the perimeter wouldn't be as tight, so he wouldn't have to get away with some of the stepback footwork from today which is dicey by 60s travel standards. The thing is, Steph shoots 52.4% inside the arc on his career, and 54.9% over the past decade. Odds of that happening in the 60s are pretty low, so it's likely that his efficiency erodes even further. Still, he's like a 46-47% shooter in each of the zones from 3-10, 10-16 and 16-23, so it's more likely that his finishing around the rim would suffer, for fairly obvious reasons. Dunno exactly how that'd change, don't have a TON of shooting data for the time. Jerry West, a noted slasher, shot 47.4% from the field on his career, mixing jumpers and slashing, but his efficiency was a product of his ability to draw fouls. Given Steph's proficiency with his shot, if you translate that back, he probably WOULD shoot over 47% from the field, even if you knock his rim FG% down to like 58% or whatever it might be in the 60s. It'd erode his efficiency a little beneath that 52.5%, but on about 15% of his shooting volume. So straight adjustment down to 58% actually only change's Steph's raw FG% by 1%, because he takes over half his shots from above the 3pt line, and shoots about league-average for 1965 from 3 (42.3% on his career, league-average raw FG% in 1965 was 42.6%).

(EDIT: this change drops his adjusted TS% down to... 52.4%, for reference)

Sooooooo....

Yeah. He'd probably still be pretty good. One of the better scorers in the league, even just bombing from deep. Nothing like he is today, but still quite good.

i am pretty sure you calculated it wrong. Steph career TS% without three is 61.6%....how does he become a 53%TS player with elite mid range J, elite finish and best FT shooter of all time?

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

[Warspite]

i am pretty sure you calculated it wrong. Steph career TS% without three is 61.6%....how does he become a 53%TS player with elite mid range J, elite finish and best FT shooter of all time?

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s? Now add that Oscar has never eaten processed food nor does he have the toxins in his blood and he has a huge advantage to todays player. Again Oscar grew up in the 40s and 50s. He is better educated, more mature and knows more about hard work than anyone born in the 21st century. He is also a world class A hole who demands perfection from players who only have the ability to shoot the corner 3 and dunk. Im not sure he would stay in the league or not run into a Gilbert Arenas situation.

[One_and_Done]

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s? Now add that Oscar has never eaten processed food nor does he have the toxins in his blood and he has a huge advantage to todays player. Again Oscar grew up in the 40s and 50s. He is better educated, more mature and knows more about hard work than anyone born in the 21st century. He is also a world class A hole who demands perfection from players who only have the ability to shoot the corner 3 and dunk. Im not sure he would stay in the league or not run into a Gilbert Arenas situation.

If Oscar is knocking his own team mates teeth out on purpose in practise, then he should be traded. This kind of narrative does Oscar no favours.

Today's player has a better diet, better work out regime, and is more educated by far than Oscar or the average player back in the 60s. Honestly, if I had not seen you post like this for years I would be convinced this was a satirical post.

[penbeast0]

i am pretty sure you calculated it wrong. Steph career TS% without three is 61.6%....how does he become a 53%TS player with elite mid range J, elite finish and best FT shooter of all time?

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

Oscar would be much better than a Jason Kidd. Even without the top 5 all time playmaking, he's one of the greatest midrange scorers of all time. Kidd just doesn't have that skill set; he's a great defensive guard but not in the conversation offensively. If LeBron was only 6'5 and playing in Oscar's era, that's a reasonable comp. Add in Jimmy Butler's personality. One of the Oscar stories is that if you missed a pass, the next one was likely to hit you in the back of the head to make sure you remember to pay attention (Wayne Embry I think).

As for working harder, modern players live in a little bubble of personal trainers and dieticians and the like. Oscar ran 5 miles to high school everyday dribbling left handed in the morning and right handed in the afternoon through city streets according to his bio. He was notorious for his work ethic. But he didn't do the time that a modern player does, especially in the offseason. Of course, Curry wouldn't be doing modern workouts either. That's one of the reasons why Curry won't have the lift and flexibility he has today; players didn't train the same way. Others include the sneakers, the floor, the medical stuff, etc. But he will have the lift and flexibility compared to others of his era that he has today and would probably take over from West as the best outside shooter in the game. He's not West level as a defender, doesn't have the foul draw, and his playmaking is a bit weaker but I believe if he stayed healthy, he would be the 3rd best guard of the era ahead of Hal Greer and Sam Jones.

[One_and_Done]

I thought we were making progress when people admitted Oscar lacked the athleticism of Westbrook, but now he's being compared to Lebron who is one of the GOAT athletes ever. Again, is there any footage which shows this Lebron like athleticism?

[penbeast0]

Yes, you can see how he is stronger, more fluid, finding open men at hard to see angles, and able to get his shot against contemporaries but you aren't looking for that. You are looking for the things that modern athletes can do like go from half court to the basket on one dribble which will never show because those modern moves are illegal and being called so people don't try them. Or leaping ability and highlight dunks which were dangerous in no support canvas hightops in an era where every team had a few Bruce Bowen types who would cut your knees from under you or put their foot under your landing because that kind of a move was considered "disrespectful" in the NBA. There's a reason why the great dunkers of the 60s (other than Wilt) all had constant knee problems (Elgin, Gus Johnson, Connie Hawkins).

[Ol Roy]

Diet and exercise have always and continue to be mostly dependent on the player, regardless of era. Careful eating and obsessive training are not brand new inventions. One problem with dogmatic modernism is that is leads people to dismiss the top tier athletes within just a couple of generations, even though human evolution doesn't work that way, and (whether people want to admit it or not), while advancements are more noticeable across the broad talent pool, they remain largely on the margins for the best individuals. Not to mention, there have also been certain regressions in terms of health and activity, and we can't pretend they don't exist.

I actually see Luka as the better comparison for Oscar, not Westbrook. Deliberate, strength-based halfcourt offense. Smooth jumpers. Equally adept at scoring and facilitating. Eager to rebound. But the obvious difference between the two is conditioning. Oscar is simply a far better specimen and was more serious about his career.

If Oscar could achieve any benefits from modern advancements, he'd just be taking his already fantastic physique and abilities to another level. Ditto for other freaky athletes like Chamberlain, Russell, Thurmond, Gilmore, etc.

[Warspite]

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s? Now add that Oscar has never eaten processed food nor does he have the toxins in his blood and he has a huge advantage to todays player. Again Oscar grew up in the 40s and 50s. He is better educated, more mature and knows more about hard work than anyone born in the 21st century. He is also a world class A hole who demands perfection from players who only have the ability to shoot the corner 3 and dunk. Im not sure he would stay in the league or not run into a Gilbert Arenas situation.

If Oscar is knocking his own team mates teeth out on purpose in practise, then he should be traded. This kind of narrative does Oscar no favours.

Today's players has a better diet, better work out regime, and is more educated by far than Oscar or the average player back in the 60s. Honestly, if I had not seen you post like this for years I would be convinced this was a satirical post.

Thank you for making my point. People of 70 years ago were much harder and much more willing to use physical violence to achieve results. The current generation is just too soft to have lived in a world more than a generation ago.

I was coached by 60s and 70s players, played with my peers in the 80s and have coached young men for the last 35+years. I have 5 decades of direct comparisons of 17-20 yr old males to draw my conclusions.

You are very much entitled to your opinion, but the CDC, AMA, FDA and HHA disagree with you and agree more often with my anecdotal observations. Your whole MO is to make general sweeping claims about today or accusations about the past which was before you existed with little to no evidence. No context, no understanding of history or 1st, 2nd or even 3rd hand references. Don't feel bad though you have company for I was just debating with a young player of mine last week: Jerry West vs Austin Reeves. He said many of things you have posted.

[OhayoKD]

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s?

Citation please.

[One_and_Done]

Yes, you can see how he is stronger, more fluid, finding open men at hard to see angles, and able to get his shot against contemporaries but you aren't looking for that. You are looking for the things that modern athletes can do like go from half court to the basket on one dribble which will never show because those modern moves are illegal and being called so people don't try them. Or leaping ability and highlight dunks which were dangerous in no support canvas hightops in an era where every team had a few Bruce Bowen types who would cut your knees from under you or put their foot under your landing because that kind of a move was considered "disrespectful" in the NBA. There's a reason why the great dunkers of the 60s (other than Wilt) all had constant knee problems (Elgin, Gus Johnson, Connie Hawkins).

So you can't show any evidence for it is what I'm hearing.

This strikes me as alot like someone's uncle claiming they'd have been a great painter, if only they'd tried. Even in cases where the uncle actually has a deep understanding of art theory, the difference between theory and execution can be vast.

This is why I rate guys on the skillset they actually demonstrated, because other approaches lead to these sorts of claims. If someone is going to assert they had the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time, or the athleticism of one of the greatest athletes of all-time, then that extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof. Not even a smidgeon of proof has been offered, and you freely admit no such footage exists.

Maybe Oscar would have shown more hops or passing in a different environment, but as he never showed it in the actual career that happened it is completely inappropriate for us to grant it to him.

[Warspite]

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s?

Citation please.

10 second search on google

https://health.clevelandclinic.org/declining-testosterone-levels

We are looking at a 1% per year so todays 25 yr old has about half as a 25 yr old in 1975. someone who was 25 10 years earlier should be expected to have a T level that is double of todays.

[OhayoKD]

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s?

Citation please.

10 second search on google

https://health.clevelandclinic.org/declining-testosterone-levels

We are looking at a 1% per year so todays 25 yr old has about half as a 25 yr old in 1975. someone who was 25 10 years earlier should be expected to have a T level that is double of todays.

What's the point of 10 seconds on google if you don't take 10 seconds to read:

It’s normal for testosterone levels to decline as people age. The average drop is about 1% per year after age 30.

That 1 % figure has nothing to do with "era played in" never mind we are discussing people whose best years tend to come in their 20s.

Additionally, if we look at the "why" for the historic decline in Testosterone production:

As noted, this non-age-related drop in testosterone levels hasn’t occurred in a vacuum. “We’re seeing more people with their overall health status in decline,” notes Dr. Pantalone. “That may be accelerating the loss of testosterone compared to previous generations.”

Let’s look at some factors that can affect testosterone levels.

The downturn in testosterone levels coincides with higher numbers on the bathroom scale for much of the population … and that’s not just a coincidence.

Excessive weight and elevated BMI (body mass index) measurements put added stress on your body, which seems to affect testosterone production and its natural distribution process, says Dr. Pantalone.

We see it is basically irrelevant to discussing modern professional athletes who have much better fitness and dieting habits than their 1960s counterparts. At least by the rationale offered by your own link, modern players should have higher testosterone-levels.

Perhaps next time you should try reading what you're sharing?

[theonlyclutch]

I don't think anyone is assuming that the median level of NBA basketball is equivalent. But Oscar's advantage over those median level players was at the level of prime LeBron, he and Jerry West separated themselves from the rest of the guards that played significant time in the 60s by a huge margin (Sam Jones and Hal Greer would be the next two). Then you add in that you are taking Curry's main weapon away; like saying Kyrie can't dribble but can only catch and shoot. And still people are giving Curry's midrange scoring abilities a ton of credit and assuming he can adapt; just probably not quite at the level of Oscar Robertson or Jerry West. More at the level of a Rick Barry.

I also don't think people are assuming time travel which would significantly nerf Curry's abilities. He's spent a lifetime and millions of hours of practice training certain habits of dribbling, of going to the basket, of catching the ball on the move, that if you time travelled him they would betray him into a lot of carry and travel calls. Plus with canvas sneakers and often uneven floors, leaping and cutting with modern abandon would probably get him injured quite quickly. Instead, we are assuming Curry grew up playing 60s basketball with all the equivalent skills and training that other top players received and maximizes his game for that era.

The fact that you're invoking Jerry West as a peer to Oscar (a valid view shared by many) already punches a hole in the "Oscar's advantage over those median level players was at the level of prime LeBron" narrative, when prime Lebron has a great statistical case as the best player in the league (many of those seasons clear-cut) for a period of like 10 straight years, with no contemporary peers even coming close. Oscar couldn't even clearly separate himself as the best perimeter player in era (in an 8-team league rather than a 30-team league, no less), and even if he did, still has to contend with playing in the same era as Mr. 11 rings and Mr. 100 points.

And then, if we're assuming Curry grows up playing 60s basketball, then what parts of "Curry" are we allowed to keep here? His hair-trigger shooting motion (along with the accuracy) ? His superb conditioning (by modern standards let alone 60s)? His mindset to continuously move off-ball? Handwave enough of those away as "modern era" and the end result of that is just...not Steph Curry.

There are 4 players in the 1960s that are truly generational talents, Wilt, Russell, Oscar, and West. They are head and shoulders above everyone else. The 5th best player is probably Bob Pettit, 5th best scorer probably Rick Barry. That's a huge dropoff. There is only 1 in the 50s (Mikan and only for the early years), thereare only 2 in the 70s if you believe in ABA Dr. J, he and Kareem, 3 in the 80s if you include Kareem, etc. The 60s has the most generational talents of any generation despite its smaller league, Even if you keep all the mentioned attributes of Curry, but relative to the training, equipment, etc. of the 1960s, he's still not at the level of those 4 without a 3 point line.

So you're willing to give 4 generational talents for 1200 player-seasons (15 players *8 teams *10 years) in the 60s, by proportion that comes out to c. 15 generational talents in the '10s (15 players *30 teams *10 years), even if we say that the ability of the median player is better leading to tighter statistical distributions (the implication is not favorable to the older player here), such that only 5-7 generational talents can claim to be as large an outlier in the 10s rather than the 4 you mentioned in the 60s, in what world would Curry not be a part of those 5-7 in the '10s? I struggle to see how Curry isn't as much of an outlier in the '10s as your aformentioned 4 in the '60s.

Diet and exercise have always and continue to be mostly dependent on the player, regardless of era. Careful eating and obsessive training are not brand new inventions. One problem with dogmatic modernism is that is leads people to dismiss the top tier athletes within just a couple of generations, even though human evolution doesn't work that way, and (whether people want to admit it or not), while advancements are more noticeable across the broad talent pool, they remain largely on the margins for the best individuals. Not to mention, there have also been certain regressions in terms of health and activity, and we can't pretend they don't exist.

I actually see Luka as the better comparison for Oscar, not Westbrook. Deliberate, strength-based halfcourt offense. Smooth jumpers. Equally adept at scoring and facilitating. Eager to rebound. But the obvious difference between the two is conditioning. Oscar is simply a far better specimen and was more serious about his career.

If Oscar could achieve any benefits from modern advancements, he'd just be taking his already fantastic physique and abilities to another level. Ditto for other freaky athletes like Chamberlain, Russell, Thurmond, Gilmore, etc.

There is a good amount of film on (at least) Chamberlain & Russell which showed they'd be freaky athletes even now, if there's anything like this for Oscar then you should please show the accompanying film.

He has to face weak side help from Russell, Wilt or Thurmond for about 40% of his games.

When healthy Curry is battling with West and Greer for best guard in the league. His issues will be health and the simple fact that guard play is pretty weak or an afterthought for coaches. Some of the places he plays in will have lower ceilings prohibiting high arc shots. I do wonder how he will deal with the travel, 1960s phobias and no video/shoes/modern training and having to sell cars or unclog toilets in the offseason.

Oscar is somewhere between a rich mans Jaosn Kidd or a poor mans LBJ. Just depends on the team needs. I do question Oscar being able to communicate with this super soft, entitled, narcissistic generation. Im having trouble myself dealing with these kids and Oscar is generations behind. He was born in the Great Depression and lived WWII/jim crow. He knows what going without and sacrifice means. His demeaner was barely tolerable in 65 in 2025 he would come off stronger than a Marine drill Sargent.

Players today work ten times harder than Oscar did. Not because Oscar is lazy or anything, but because back them teams didn't have proper workout regimes and diets for guys to follow. Most guys didn't even do weights.

But will they listen to him and his my way or high way attitude? Will they be able to man up and get in line after he knocks out some teeth and breaks a nose or 2 in practice or will they go crying to their Instagram or agent and get traded?

Does it really matter how much they work out when they have less than 50% of the testosterone in their blood than a man who was born in the 30s? Now add that Oscar has never eaten processed food nor does he have the toxins in his blood and he has a huge advantage to todays player. Again Oscar grew up in the 40s and 50s. He is better educated, more mature and knows more about hard work than anyone born in the 21st century. He is also a world class A hole who demands perfection from players who only have the ability to shoot the corner 3 and dunk. Im not sure he would stay in the league or not run into a Gilbert Arenas situation.

Which is why Draymond Green and Chris Paul are known as the best leaders in the league with the most accolades to show for it, right, RIGHT?

[OhayoKD]

Diet and exercise have always and continue to be mostly dependent on the player, regardless of era. Careful eating and obsessive training are not brand new inventions. One problem with dogmatic modernism is that is leads people to dismiss the top tier athletes within just a couple of generations, even though human evolution doesn't work that way, and (whether people want to admit it or not), while advancements are more noticeable across the broad talent pool, they remain largely on the margins for the best individuals.

You are expressing incredible confidence in what is an entirely baseless assertion. There is more to athleticism than leaping, weight, and height you know? Even Wilt isn't the peak of athleticism unless you ignore stuff like fluidity of movement and the higher the bar for "skill" becomes (with broadening access to trying to achieve it), the less likely it is for an exceptional individual to stay exceptional.

While it may be comforting to think the best are always the best, there's simply no reason to actually think it's true.

[penbeast0]

Yes, you can see how he is stronger, more fluid, finding open men at hard to see angles, and able to get his shot against contemporaries but you aren't looking for that. You are looking for the things that modern athletes can do like go from half court to the basket on one dribble which will never show because those modern moves are illegal and being called so people don't try them. Or leaping ability and highlight dunks which were dangerous in no support canvas hightops in an era where every team had a few Bruce Bowen types who would cut your knees from under you or put their foot under your landing because that kind of a move was considered "disrespectful" in the NBA. There's a reason why the great dunkers of the 60s (other than Wilt) all had constant knee problems (Elgin, Gus Johnson, Connie Hawkins).

So you can't show any evidence for it is what I'm hearing.

This strikes me as alot like someone's uncle claiming they'd have been a great painter, if only they'd tried. Even in cases where the uncle actually has a deep understanding of art theory, the difference between theory and execution can be vast.

This is why I rate guys on the skillset they actually demonstrated, because other approaches lead to these sorts of claims. If someone is going to assert they had the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time, or the athleticism of one of the greatest athletes of all-time, then that extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof. Not even a smidgeon of proof has been offered, and you freely admit no such footage exists.

Maybe Oscar would have shown more hops or passing in a different environment, but as he never showed it in the actual career that happened it is completely inappropriate for us to grant it to him.

Oscar led the league in assists 7 times in his first 9 years and retired with the all-time assist record. How much more passing does he need to show in his actual career. It seems you ignore statistics as well as contemporary opinion in your obsession with downgrading older players.

[One_and_Done]

Yes, you can see how he is stronger, more fluid, finding open men at hard to see angles, and able to get his shot against contemporaries but you aren't looking for that. You are looking for the things that modern athletes can do like go from half court to the basket on one dribble which will never show because those modern moves are illegal and being called so people don't try them. Or leaping ability and highlight dunks which were dangerous in no support canvas hightops in an era where every team had a few Bruce Bowen types who would cut your knees from under you or put their foot under your landing because that kind of a move was considered "disrespectful" in the NBA. There's a reason why the great dunkers of the 60s (other than Wilt) all had constant knee problems (Elgin, Gus Johnson, Connie Hawkins).

So you can't show any evidence for it is what I'm hearing.

This strikes me as alot like someone's uncle claiming they'd have been a great painter, if only they'd tried. Even in cases where the uncle actually has a deep understanding of art theory, the difference between theory and execution can be vast.

This is why I rate guys on the skillset they actually demonstrated, because other approaches lead to these sorts of claims. If someone is going to assert they had the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time, or the athleticism of one of the greatest athletes of all-time, then that extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof. Not even a smidgeon of proof has been offered, and you freely admit no such footage exists.

Maybe Oscar would have shown more hops or passing in a different environment, but as he never showed it in the actual career that happened it is completely inappropriate for us to grant it to him.

Oscar led the league in assists 7 times in his first 9 years and retired with the all-time assist record. How much more passing does he need to show in his actual career. It seems you ignore statistics as well as contemporary opinion in your obsession with downgrading older players.

Wilt once led the league in assists. Does he have Magic Johnson like court vision too? Lots of guys lead the league in assists, but that's a long way from establishing they have the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time.

[70sFan]

Oscar didn't have Magic court vision or passing ability, basically nobody has. Oscar had plenty of advantages over Magic though, on both ends of the floor. I rate Magic higher for peaks and careers, but Oscar is the type of player that I can see being rated higher with more footage available from his peak seasons.

[penbeast0]

Wilt once led the league in assists. Does he have Magic Johnson like court vision too? Lots of guys lead the league in assists, but that's a long way from establishing they have the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time.

I see you continue to throw up straw men. How many players in NBA history have led the league in assists 7 times? I will save you the trouble, 3.

Cousy
Oscar
Stockton

Two others have done it 5 times, Nash and Kidd.
Magic only led the NBA 4 times.

That's a very exclusive club, though it was much easier with less teams. Still very rare to have that consistent a number over that long a period . . . though of course you don't think he's "flashy" enough to be a great passer. Assists have a very strong correlation to great playmaking though it's not perfect. Much stronger than "flash" -- by the way, neither Maravich nor White Chocolate ever led the league in assists.

[One_and_Done]

Wilt once led the league in assists. Does he have Magic Johnson like court vision too? Lots of guys lead the league in assists, but that's a long way from establishing they have the same court vision as the greatest passer of all-time.

I see you continue to throw up straw men. How many players in NBA history have led the league in assists 7 times? I will save you the trouble, 3.

Cousy
Oscar
Stockton

Two others have done it 5 times, Nash and Kidd.
Magic only led the NBA 4 times.

That's a very exclusive club, though it was much easier with less teams. Still very rare to have that consistent a number over that long a period . . . though of course you don't think he's "flashy" enough to be a great passer. Assists have a very strong correlation to great playmaking though it's not perfect. Much stronger than "flash" -- by the way, neither Maravich nor White Chocolate ever led the league in assists.

I don't see the correlation between leading the league in a stat for 7 years, and therefore you being the best ever at that thing. That's pretty elementary. If you want to present footage of Oscar that you think shows Magic Johnson court vision, I look forward to seeing it. That sounds like it'd be incredible to watch. But as you admitted earlier, no such footage exists, and even 70s fan who is super high on old timey players is baulking at this pretty staggering claim.

[tsherkin]

I actually see Luka as the better comparison for Oscar, not Westbrook. Deliberate, strength-based halfcourt offense. Smooth jumpers. Equally adept at scoring and facilitating. Eager to rebound.

This should gain more traction.

Oscar was maybe 6'6 in today's listings. He was called 6'5 then, which was probably without shoes, as was customary. He had a thick build and I love the word "deliberate." He was all about getting to the next best place, whatever the D would give him. He always seemed in control. Plenty of guys tried to play faster, but he had that Chris Paul kinda vibe about him in the sense of doing things at his own pace and forcing everything to conform.

Pick and roll was pretty rudimentary in his era, but he used it quite well even still. You don't see that mid-post screen for the ball handler as much these days, but the point was more that he knew how to use a screen to find space, and took advantage to score or pass. His pull-up going to the right was pretty nasty, and he could do it going left as well. Nasty little hitch of a pump fake, too. He had some hesi in him, some in-and-out dribbles and what-not, his handle was about as good as the actual rules allowed for. Great body control.

I don't love the Magic comparison, but I think Oscar made good passes when they were there, in volume. He saw the floor well. He was able to pass ahead in transition quite successfully. He passed well to the wings in transition, leading bounce passes and all that stuff. It was a different time, so you didn't really see a lot of lob city action. Pretty good pocket passer. Most high-volume assist producers aren't throwing crazy nonsense on most of their passes, it's a steady diet of sound passes, unless you want them to have an absurdly high turnover rate. So it doesn't super surprise. Oscar wasn't flashy, but he routinely made the best/fundamental pass, handled the ball a ton, played on fast-paced teams and played tons of minutes. He was what, an 8 AST36 guy on his career, something like that?

Basically all the footage I see of him is either layups or him smashing 15-footers. He was a brutally effective shooter around the key. Pull-ups, like I mentioned earlier, were super dangerous. And he got into his jumper well out of his backdown. With his mix of scoring and passing, he had the Royals pretty consistently around a +4 offense, twice hitting +4.7 and leading the league in each of his first 5 seasons (yes, in 8- or 9-team leagues, but whatever). Then they were 3rd, 2nd, 2nd, then led again in 69. Having Jerry Lucas for only 4 games tanked their O the year after, though. Norm Van Lier, Connie Dierking, etc, those dudes were not high-efficiency ballers and Oscar missed having Lucas as an outlet shooter for passes. Also, there was a pretty big upward shift in the league from 69 to 70. Cinci was the only 100+ ORTG team (b-ref estimate) in 69, but there were 7 of them in 1970 (Kareem's rookie season).

He's a fun player to consider. Dude was pretty impressive physically, even if he wasn't an explosive player. He was a good example of how to play WITHOUT explosion, and how to leverage base, power, timing and skill.