RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #14 (Jerry West)

[eminence]

I haven't found that the box-score all in ones are particularly poor at capturing the overall impact of defense first big men despite that being the common-sense conclusion. Anything on hand to suggest Robinson in particular is underrated by them compared to his impact? (alternatively that the other candidates are overrated)

[One_and_Done]

Fluke is the wrong word. These Nuggets would have been worthy champs in say 2006, 2009 or 1995. Today's league is not those leagues. The Nuggets are a darkhorse contender who actually had things line up and won. I don't expect it to repeat itself.

The Lakers had 2 key problems. The biggest was the 3 guard line-up that helped them get over the Warriors couldn't be deployed against the much bigger and more versatile Nuggets without getting exploited, and Vando starting just gave Jokic a place to hide on D. If the Lakers had say OG instead of Vando then they win easily.

The other thing is Lebron is just old. He can't play full throttle 48 minutes anymore, and he had a hurt foot. If healthy the Lakers might win anyway.

[rk2023]

I haven't found that the box-score all in ones are particularly poor at capturing the overall impact of defense first big men despite that being the common-sense conclusion. Anything on hand to suggest Robinson in particular is underrated by them compared to his impact? (alternatively that the other candidates are overrated)

Bumping this. Seems the bigger elephant in the room regarding DBPM is its overstating of perimeter players’ impact (eg. Stockton, CP3, Harden, Jordan, etc) due to box score overweighting. It probably is more accurate (rather closer to assessing value) in the context of big men, but still with its flaws in not being able to track rim contests/rotations/play disruption/so on. On top of tracking data and just watching in general (am aware Synergy and 2nd spectrum have a time bound), I like looking at on/off, D-WOWY, and (most cases) D-LEBRON/EPM/LARAPM. Here’s what I regard as a great stats/analytical view into defense, for example. TLDR is that defense is the harder end to quantity, but I’m not sure about DBPM still - though how it views big men is likely not its biggest drawback.

Read on Twitter

[Doctor MJ]

I considered including a point guard like CP3 instead, but then I thought 'why bother? How much dribbling ability do you ever need to get by these old timers? KD and Giannis have decent handles, they'll be fine. West only had one good hand anyway'.

My point was not that you needed a point guard to win the matchup, but that it's problematic to try to imagine who would win 3v3 matchups as if they say something about 5vs5 matchups, particularly when you're choosing trios that really aren't balanced the same way.

I will say though, hard to take seriously your arguments when you try to argue that the team would win based on KD & Giannis' handles because the opponent had handle issues. However good West's driving game was, what's relevant to KD & Giannis' handles is West's defensive claws, and it's hard to imagine you don't know this.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Vote: George Mikan

As always - most dominant era-relative player left, without any competition.

Secondary Vote: Jerry West

It's West or Oscar for me this time, and I'm going with West.

They were both incredible offensive outliers in their era, and by the regular-season numbers, I guess Oscar was even more of an outlier, with higher rTS on average than West, more APG than West on average, and perhaps most importantly, his teams had higher rORtgs(3.56 average rORtg vs 2.37 for West). So West was an incredibly great offensive player in his era and Oscar was an even more incredibly great offensive player in that era, by these numbers.

But by reputation and by the (very) limited data available, West was the superior individual defender and that balances things out. Box data is usually not the best for defense, but in this case it's all we have. In their final seasons, when both were declined, West recorded 3.6 steals and 1.0 blocks per 100 and a +0.86 D-PIPM, where Oscar recorded 1.4 steals and 0.1 blocks per 100 and a -0.65 D-PIPM.

On the question of playoff performance - I got curious about how they each performed in the highest-pressure playoff situations. I did a study this afternoon of how they performed in elimination playoff games - that is, games where if they lose, they lose the series. This may seem arbitrary, but I thought it was an interesting way of comparing their playoff performance without worrying about the team outcome as much. Here's how it shook out:

Oscar:

32 points/24 shots//11FT, 9 assists, 11 rebounds, 48M 1962 G4/Pistons L
29 points/19 shots/13FT, 11 assists, 9 rebounds, 46M 1963, G4/Nationals W
32 points/22 shots/19FT, 13 assists, 19 rebounds, 53M 1963 G5/Nationals W
36 points/31 shots/9FT, 14 assists, 15 rebounds, 48M 1963 G6/Celtics W
43 points/24 shots/22 FT, 6 assists, 6 rebounds, 48M 1963 G7/Celtics L
32 points/15 shots/12FT, 18 assists, 10 rebounds 48M 1964 G5/Sixers W
33 points/28 shots/11FT, 6 assists, 9 rebounds, 48M 1964 G4/Celtics W
24 points/22 shots/8FT, 6 assists, 9 rebounds, 47M 1964 G5/Celtics L
24 points/25 shots/8FT, 10 assists, 6 rebounds, 48M 1965 G4/Sixers L
37 points/31 shots/14FT, 9 assists, 7 rebounds 48M 1966 G5/Celtics L
12 points/15 shots/8FT, 7 assists, 1 rebound 46M 1967 Sixers/G4 L
18 points/12 shots/6FT, 4 assists, 5 rebounds 37M 1973 G6/Warriors L
18 points/13 shots/2FT, 10 assists, 4 rebounds 58M 1974 G6/Celtics W
6 points/13 shots/2FT, 11 assists, 3 rebounds 46M 1974 G7/Celtics L

(I left out the 1972 Bucks/Lakers G6 because Oscar was hurt.)

That comes out to 26.9ppg, 9.6apg, 8.1rpg on 52.5% TS in 47.8mpg over 14 games.

West:

25 points/14 shots/4FT, 15 rebounds, ? assists, ?M 1961 G5/Pistons W
29 points/22 shots,/9FT 12 rebounds, ? assists 48M, 1961 G7/Hawks L
35 points/30 shots/8FT, 0 assists, 6 rebounds 53M 1962 G7/Celtics L
27 points/23 shots/4FT, 7 assists, 11 rebounds 40M 1963 G7/Hawks W
32 points/26 shots/3FT, 6 assists, 7 rebounds 43M 1963 G5/Celtics W
32 points/24 shots/10FT, 9 assists, 7 rebounds 44M 1963 G6/Celtics L
39 points/29 shots/12 FT, 6 assists, 9 rebounds 44M 1964 Hawks G3/W
39 points/20 shots/15 FT, 4 assists, 6 rebounds 39M 1964 Hawks G4/W
25 points/18 shots/7FT, 3 assists, 5 rebounds 40M 1964 G5/Hawks L
33 points/25 shots/8FT, 0 assists, 4 rebounds 42M 1965 G5/Celtics L
35 points/25 shots/8FT, 6 assists, 2 rebounds 46M 1966 G7/Hawks W
31 points/24 shots/9FT, 5 assists, 8 rebounds, 46M 1966 G5/Celtics W
32 points/23 shots/10FT, 7 assists, 3 rebounds, 45M 1966 G6/Celtics W
36 points/27 shots/16FT, 3 assists, 10 rebounds, 48M 1966 G7/Celtics L
22 points/19 shots/7FT, 5 assists, 5 rebounds, 42M 1968 G6/Celtics L
42 points/29 shots/18FT, 12 assists, 13 rebounds, 48M 1969 G7/Celtics L
36 points/27 shots/13FT, 18 assists, 1 rebounds, 46M 1970 G5/Suns W
35 points/29 shots/11FT, 5 assists, 6 rebounds, 46M 1970 G6/Suns W
19 points/19 shots/3FT, 15 assists, 2 rebounds, 42M 1970 G7/Suns W
33 points/22 shots/9FT, 13 assists, 6 rebounds, 42M 1970 G6 Knicks W
28 points/19 shots/12FT, 5 assists, 6 rebounds, 48M 1970 G7 Knicks L
27 points/23 shots/12FT, 7 assists, 7 rebounds, 40M 1973 G7/Bulls W
12 points/17 shots/3FT, 4 assists, 5 rebounds, 33M 1973 G5/Knicks L

(I left out 1967 Lakers/Warriors G3 because West only played one minute.)

(Note the question marks in those 1961 games - that data isn't available for some reason, so what I did was for those two games I used the average APG and MPG over the rest of the games as inputs, because I didn't just want to use 0s and have it drag the numbers down.)

That comes out to 30.6ppg, 6.7apg, 7.0rpg on 56.2% TS in 43.8MPG over 23 games

Now, because Oscar played four minutes more per game in these samples, I converted the averages to PER 36 numbers, which look like this:

Oscar: 20.3 points, 7.2 assists, 6.1 rebounds on 52.5% TS over 14 games
West: 25.2 points, 5.5 assists, 5.8 rebounds on 56.2% TS over 23 games

So with their backs against the wall, West scores 4.9ppg more PER 36 on 3.7% higher TS while recording comparable assist and rebound numbers(the latter in particular is only 0.3 off), and while there's no data to compare, I am making an assumption - and yes, I know what they say about assumptions - that West played better defense.

So I am going with West.

Nomination #1: Julius Erving

Of the players being considered for nomination in this thread, Dr. J has by a good margin the best resume of any of them - across ABA and NBA, he has:

Six Finals appearances
Three championships
Four MVPs

In building this resume, he became one of the most important and influential players in the history of the game.

Nomination #2: Charles Barkley

It's frustrating to me that Barkley is pretty much not getting mentioned at all so far. Of the players being considered for nomination in this thread, he has maybe the highest peak as a scorer(I'd say Dr. J and maybe Jokic have an argument) and he's a GOAT-tier rebounder.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

So I just searched “Minneapolis Finals” on YouTube and this was the first result that came up. I challenge anyone who’s voting for Mikan to watch this and see if you really think he’s on the level of D-Rob or Dirk:

Watch on YouTube

I mean, as always, it depends what you mean by "on the level".

If the question is, would Mikan be on Robinson's level in Robinson's era, the answer is probably no.

If the question is, was Mikan more dominant in his own era than Robinson was in his, the answer is unequivocally yes.

The ultimate question is which of those things matters more to any individual here.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Re: Jokic and Giannis

So many of you go on and on and how important longevity is, and the complain when it that might preclude those two from getting in yet. You can't have it both ways.

Jokic was #95 last time, and Giannis was #74. Either one of them moving into the top 20 would probably constitute the biggest jump in the history of this project(though I haven't actually looked.)

[Doctor MJ]

Fluke is the wrong word. These Nuggets would have been worthy champs in say 2006, 2009 or 1995. Today's league is not those leagues. The Nuggets are a darkhorse contender who actually had things line up and won. I don't expect it to repeat itself.

The Lakers had 2 key problems. The biggest was the 3 guard line-up that helped them get over the Warriors couldn't be deployed against the much bigger and more versatile Nuggets without getting exploited, and Vando starting just gave Jokic a place to hide on D. If the Lakers had say OG instead of Vando then they win easily.

The other thing is Lebron is just old. He can't play full throttle 48 minutes anymore, and he had a hurt foot. If healthy the Lakers might win anyway.

The dark horse characterization is interesting. From a perception perspective it makes sense - after all, they were seen as literal underdogs against the Suns.

But the terminology implies that the Nuggets were meh in the regular season and vastly outperformed this in the playoffs when the reality is that the Nugget core was the dominant core in the league all year.

Top +/- in the NBA during the regular season:

1. Jokic (DEN)
2. Gordon (DEN)
3. KCP (DEN)

Top +/- in the playoffs:

1. Gordon (DEN)
2. Murray (DEN)
3. Jokic (DEN)

It was understandable to believe that they'd be vulnerable in the playoffs, but any notion that the team wasn't a dominant regular season team was just based on confusion. This then to say, the Nuggets as a horse were only dark to those with their eyes closed.

Re: Vando gave Jokic a place to hide. You're not coming off as a serious person when you make a statement like this:

Vando played a grand total of 41 minutes in that series, so it was obvious to all that Vando's play wasn't the key to the series.

Just feels like you made up your mind based on what you think should be able to be done with Jokic, and you're not taking the details of the in-vivo series all that seriously.

[rk2023]

Re: Jokic and Giannis

So many of you go on and on and how important longevity is, and the complain when it that might preclude those two from getting in yet. You can't have it both ways.

Jokic was #95 last time, and Giannis was #74. Either one of them moving into the top 20 would probably constitute the biggest jump in the history of this project(though I haven't actually looked.)

It seems more/most of the people pushing those two have been the ones with more of an emphasis on peak/prime play and achievement. For me, they’re both a ways’ to go from my nomination radar - being one who is moreso on the longevity side of things.

[iggymcfrack]

I haven't found that the box-score all in ones are particularly poor at capturing the overall impact of defense first big men despite that being the common-sense conclusion. Anything on hand to suggest Robinson in particular is underrated by them compared to his impact? (alternatively that the other candidates are overrated)

He has incredible impact data in the samples we have available and then there’s the team going from a +6 SRS to a -8 SRS when he got injured before bouncing back to a +3 the following season. IDK, I think just looking at the Spurs DRtgs year-by-year from the season before he joined the team until his retirement would show that he has a larger impact defensively than is measurable by the box score.

[Doctor MJ]

Re: Jokic and Giannis

So many of you go on and on and how important longevity is, and the complain when it that might preclude those two from getting in yet. You can't have it both ways.

Jokic was #95 last time, and Giannis was #74. Either one of them moving into the top 20 would probably constitute the biggest jump in the history of this project(though I haven't actually looked.)

Not sure who you're referring to here, but I'm not complaining about longevity getting in the way, longevity's just plain getting in the way and it is what it is.

Re: biggest jump in history of this project. Nah. Curry debut on the list in the 20s.

But I do expect Jokic to have one of the big jumps in history, which is what we should probably expect when a guy has 3 MVP-level seasons in 3 years in between projects.

[HeartBreakKid]

Yeah he’s been POY for 3 years straight on these boards if I can recall. Sealed up a title in his best season by far.

Why wouldn’t he have a gigantic jump? What else would constitute a reason for a large jump other than objective, real-time, dominance?

[One_and_Done]

That's the point; when the 3 guard line-up was too small against Denver, the Lakers had no viable back-up.plan because Vando's inability to shoot 3s would have just given Jokic somewhere to hide on D. In desperation they turned to Rui, and it worked better than you'd have guessed, but that wasn't going to be enough.

[iggymcfrack]

Re: Jokic and Giannis

So many of you go on and on and how important longevity is, and the complain when it that might preclude those two from getting in yet. You can't have it both ways.

Jokic was #95 last time, and Giannis was #74. Either one of them moving into the top 20 would probably constitute the biggest jump in the history of this project(though I haven't actually looked.)

I think it’s pretty clear that the people who are heavy on longevity aren’t the ones who are nominating Jokić and Giannis now. It’s never been a top factor for me personally. Steph would be the most comparable player to Jokić for having an incredible 3-year span that would cause him to make a big jump. He went from unranked in 2014 to #29 in 2017. He basically had 4 prime seasons at the time of the jump compared to 7 for Jokic now and had accumulated 41.4 VORP across 574 games compared to 52.8 VORP across 596 games for Nikola.

It will probably take a while to get a coalition of support together for Jokić since as you say, some posters value longevity a lot more than others so I don’t see him going much higher than 19 or 20 and that seems very fair to me given what he’s accomplished. He still has 76 more games played than Mikan even when you add in the NBL stats and Mikan went 19th in the previous project. I’m certainly MUCH more impressed with Jokić playing the best offensive basketball in the history of the sport in his 596 games than I am with Mikan camping out next to the basket with a 6 foot key and throwing it on over short white guys in his 520 games.

[rk2023]

Re: Jokic and Giannis

So many of you go on and on and how important longevity is, and the complain when it that might preclude those two from getting in yet. You can't have it both ways.

Jokic was #95 last time, and Giannis was #74. Either one of them moving into the top 20 would probably constitute the biggest jump in the history of this project(though I haven't actually looked.)

Not sure who you're referring to here, but I'm not complaining about longevity getting in the way, longevity's just plain getting in the way and it is what it is.

Re: biggest jump in history of this project. Nah. Curry debut on the list in the 20s.

But I do expect Jokic to have one of the big jumps in history, which is what we should probably expect when a guy has 3 MVP-level seasons in 3 years in between projects.

Would add the same logic holding true for Giannis (at-least as far as I'm concerned), though I see his 2023 season as the worst of the 6 between him and 21-23 Jokic due to the PS injury, that said. I also think they're substantially the best players peak for peak, excluding Walton, yet to be nominated into the pool. As I mentioned to OldSchoolNoBull however, that's not leaving me compelled to nominate them just yet (20s is more likely for me). Still think the 21-23 level of play is going to accurately explain both of them having catastrophic skyrockets - in the scope of this projects' history.

[iggymcfrack]

Yeah he’s been POY for 3 years straight on these boards if I can recall. Sealed up a title in his best season by far.

Why wouldn’t he have a gigantic jump? What else would constitute a reason for a large jump other than objective, real-time, dominance?

It's actually only 2, Giannis edged him out in 2021, but even still, there are very few multiple time POY winners who haven't been voted in yet. Jokic has 2, Moses has 2, and so does Pettit. That's the complete list. Meanwhile, Steph's already been voted in with only one and Kobe's been voted in despite never winning POY once.

[eminence]

I haven't found that the box-score all in ones are particularly poor at capturing the overall impact of defense first big men despite that being the common-sense conclusion. Anything on hand to suggest Robinson in particular is underrated by them compared to his impact? (alternatively that the other candidates are overrated)

He has incredible impact data in the samples we have available and then there’s the team going from a +6 SRS to a -8 SRS when he got injured before bouncing back to a +3 the following season. IDK, I think just looking at the Spurs DRtgs year-by-year from the season before he joined the team until his retirement would show that he has a larger impact defensively than is measurable by the box score.

I didn't mean to say he doesn't have great impact stats as well (and impact generally), just that it seems the box score captures it pretty well, he's generally top of the league in all of them as well over his best run ('94-'96 with a few narrow 2nds to '96 MJ in the major BBref #s). Top 5ish for the rest of the '90-'00 run.

[Colbinii]

There isn't a picture that encapsulates Dirk more than this one image. For starters, it is his patented one-legged, fadeaway jumpshot likely between 12-14 feet from the rim. For another, it is against Tim Duncan, who is his biggest rival [Sorry KG], who for the better part of a decade had a much better cast/coach/front office around him--but we aren't here to **** on Dirk's teammates.

As a posted in a previous thread, here are the results of Dirk's teams from 2001-2011 [Let's call this his 11-year prime where he could have been the best player on a championship team each year].

Spoiler:

2001: Dallas loses to a much better San Antonio team in the Conference Semi's.
2002: Dallas loses to a much better Sacramento team in the Conference Semi's.
2003: Dirk Gets hurt and Dallas loses in 6 to a San Antonio Spurs team with Peak Duncan [A better player than Dirk].
2004: Dallas loses to a better Sacramento team in the 1st round.
2005: Dallas loses to a better Phoenix team in the Conference Semi's.
2006: Dallas loses to Peak Wade and the Heat in the NBA Finals.
2007: This is a bad one.
2008: Dallas loses to a better Hornets team with [arguably] peak CP3 in round 1.
2009: Dallas loses to a much better Nuggets team with Peak Carmelo after beating a better Spurs team in round 1.
2010: Dallas loses to a much better San Antonio team in round 1.
2011: NBA Finals Victory

When looking at this, he lost to a Top 5 all-time guy in Tim Duncan 3 times, MVP Nash, Peak Wade, Peak CP3 and then some deep and well-rounded teams like the 2002 Sacramento Kings and 2009 Denver Nuggets [and 2007, but all players have blemishes, from the GOAT LeBron James to Kobe Bryant who was just selected].

When I look at Dirk, I see a consistent performer, both in the regular season and post-season, who tends to impove in the post-season.

To point to Dirk's consistency, here are his confidence level's [95th percentile, 11 seasons] for WS, OBPM, and TS+ [the best box-score's we can get at basketball-reference.com] over his prime.

WS is 13.85 +/- 1.3 [15.15-12.55]
OBPM is 5.27 +/- .78 [6.05-4.49]
TS+ is 175.00 +/- 29.55 [204.55-145.55]

The numbers are above are all-time great numbers and in compare favorably to the average prime season of West [12 seasons]/Oscar [11 seasons]/Robinson [8 seasons].

Robinson WS: 16.07
Robinson OBPM: 5.4
Robinson TS+: 187.84

West WS: 12.73
West OBPM: N/A
West TS+: 222.5

Robertson WS: 15.15
Robertson OBPM: N/A
Robertson TS+: 310.98

Furthermore, Dirks numbers in the Post-Season were consistent with his regular season production while all of Oscar [very slight decrease], West [moderate decrease] and Robinson [drastic decrease].

Dirk, in his prime, posted the box-score of 34/12.4/3.9 on 58.6 TS% in the regular season and 33.3/13.3/3.3 on 58.4 TS% in the post-season.

As a scorer, Dirk had 0 post-seasons below 50 TS%, only two below 56 TS% with three above 60 TS% [which is part of his 4-year peak]. From 2008-2011, Dirk posted 37.6/12.5/4.0 on 61.7 TS% [5.9 OBPM, 29.8 USG%, 42 games]. Compared to Robinson, who had two seasons below 50 TS%, 4 seasons below 56 TS% and just one [4 games] above 60 TS%.

For me, the comparison between Dirk and Robinson sides to Dirk with Longevity and Scoring Resiliency over the Defensive Advantages Robinson clearly possesses.

1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Oscar Robertson
Nomination: Karl Malone

Oscar's write-up from the #12 thread.

Spoiler:

The best offensive player pre-Magic [and maybe still better ], exceptional poise, control and efficiency as a basketball player. Excelled as a Pure On-Ball Catalyst in an era where few [if any] players were able to be catalysts for elite offenses unless they were big men.

Let's look at his impact.

Royals Pre-Robertson:
1959: -2.7 Ortg, +4.8 Drtg
1960: +0.2 Ortg, +5.4 Drtg

Royals with Robertson
1961: +3.5 Ortg, +6.3 Drtg
1962: +4.7 Ortg, +3.3 Drtg
1963: +3.5 Ortg., +2.4 Drtg

Now, let's look at Jack Twyman. Who? 6-time all-star, two-time all-nba scoring guard. He played for the Royals through his entire 11-year career [1956-1966]. Leading up to Oscar's arrival, the team went from terrible offensively [-5.0 in Twyman's rookie season] upto +0.2 in 1960 [This was Twyman's breakout season--31/9/3 on 115.2 TS+ for a 19-win team ]. But hey, clearly a talented scorer.

Now, let's look at Twyman in Oscar's rookie season, 1961: 25/9/3 on 236.2 TS+. And, the reality is, his FTR never changed, but his shot profile must have changed immensely with Oscar's arrival, because Twyman's FG+ went from 103 in 1960 to 118 in 1961. That 118 FG+ number ranks second in the NBA in 1961 to Wilt Chamberlain [Oscar finished 4th in the NBA at 114]. Twyman managed to rattle off 3 consecutive 52%+ TS% seasons from 1961-1963, his only 3 > 50% TS% of his career.

Over Oscar's time with the Royals, the team averaged a 3.8 Rel Ortg as an organization during the 9-seasons played with Cincinnati. For comparison, the Lakers with West from 1962-1970 posted a 2.5 Rel Ortg [2.9 Rel Ortg extending through 1972 and omitting 1962 and 1963]. Wilt's teams over a 9-year stretch starting in 1960 [or 1961] weren't even positive for Rel Ortg. No player was even close to Oscar at this time as an offensive anchor and catalyst. It is actually remarkable what Oscar was able to do in this era as nobody was able to replicate even 75% of what Oscar was capable and able to do.

Now, let's take a look at what happened when Oscar retired.

Oscar retired after helping Milwaukee earn an incredible 7.61 SRS and a finals trip where the team lost a 7-game series to Boston [and Oscar was not great in that finals]. However, look what happens when Oscar is removed from the team in 1975 and Kareem plays ~800 less minutes [16 games].

1974 Milwaukee SRS: 7.61
1975 Milwaukee SRS: 0.25

There is a reason Oscar is #1 in WOWY scorer all-time [Per Ben Taylor]. He impacted the game offensively like nobody before his time and--it is quite possible--that nobody after him has had his offensive impact, not Nash, Magic, Curry, LeBron--anyone.

What was Oscar like as a scorer?

Well, let's first take something from Ben Taylor [Credit to Backpicks for the graph].



And, how about elimination games [1962-1967]?

32 Points on 55.5 TS% [+7.6% Rel TS%]
29 Points on 59.7 TS% [+9.4% Rel TS%]
32 Points on 52.7 TS% [+3.4% Rel TS%]
36 Points on 51.5 TS% [+2.2% Rel TS% against Russell Celtics]
43 Points on 63.8 TS% [+14.5% Rel TS% against Russell Celtics]
31 Points on 53.8 TS% [+5.3% Rel TS%]
32 Points on 78.9 TS% [+30.4% Rel TS%]
32 Points on 48.7 TS% [+1.0% Rel TS% against Russell Celtics]
24 Points on 47.0 TS% [-0.7% Rel TS% against Russell Celtics]
24 Points on 42.1 TS% [-5.8% Rel TS% against Wilt 76ers]
37 Points on 49.8 TS% [+1.1% Rel TS% against Russell Celtics]
12 Points on 32.4 TS% [-16.9% Rel TS% against Wilt 76ers]

These numbers are impressive to say the least, especially considering over half are against Wilt/Russell led defenses. Furthermore, from 1962-1967, Oscar produced 29.7 PPG on 56.5 TS% in the post-season with an incredible 56.6% FTR. For reference, Magic reached 56.6% FTR or higher just twice in his career.

Suffice to say, Oscar is the first, OG Offensive Catalyst and could very well be the greatest offensive catalyst we have ever seen.

[HeartBreakKid]

Yeah he’s been POY for 3 years straight on these boards if I can recall. Sealed up a title in his best season by far.

Why wouldn’t he have a gigantic jump? What else would constitute a reason for a large jump other than objective, real-time, dominance?

It's actually only 2, Giannis edged him out in 2021, but even still, there are very few multiple time POY winners who haven't been voted in yet. Jokic has 2, Moses has 2, and so does Pettit. That's the complete list. Meanwhile, Steph's already been voted in with only one and Kobe's been voted in despite never winning POY once.

Ah right, I probably confused my POY list with the final ballet.

Like I said tho media is a year late

[Colbinii]

One of the key reasons I have Dirk/Oscar ahead of West/Robinson/Durant is because of the role of an offensive catalyst.

I like to think of an offensive catalyst as a player who stirs the drink offensively. He is the nucleus to the offense, he causes [precipitates] the offense. LeBron James is an easy example of this to picture with LeBron Ball, where LeBron uses up 30+% of possessions and produces an astronomically efficient offense with simply some shooters and a rim finisher. Magic, Curry and Nash are three others who can easily be pictured in the role of an offensive catalyst [as you can see, they come in different shapes and sizes and affect the game differently]. I can very easily see Oscar and Dirk in this mold as well.

However, when it comes to players like Jordan, Kobe, Durant and to a lesser-extent West, they are like an Enzyme in that they can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of an offense [or reaction] but aren't the reason for the offense itself.

To me, this differentiation isn't easy but it is important when comparing and identifying players at the highest level.