70sFan wrote:iggymcfrack wrote:70sFan wrote:
Oscar in 1971 was at least on 2018 CP3 level and he was more important for the Bucks than Paul was for the Rockets. We have very few games from that season, but in every single Bucks game from 1970-72 I have seen, Bucks offense played very bad without Oscar and he made them the best in the league. Keep in mind that Kareem played almost full games and they had some great players like Dandridge, Allen or McGlocklin. Milwaukee was elite team but Oscar was their catalyzator. Very few could force pace of the game as well as Robertson.
Regular season2018 Paul: 24.4 PER, .265 WS/48
1971 Oscar: 19.6 PER, .186 WS/48
Postseason2018 Paul: 22.8 PER, .193 WS/48
1971 Oscar: 21.1 PER, .213 WS/48
Yes, the playoff numbers are close, but considering that Paul’s an elite playmaker who continuously outperforms his box score numbers in impact (led NBA in RPM this season) and that he’s still the best defensive PG in the league, it’s a real stretch to say that Oscar had the same kind of impact. They has all-defensive teams starting in ‘69 and Oscar never made one once.
Oscar played 81 games in ‘71 so you can’t really do WOWY analysis there, but the next season Bucks were 50-14 (.781) with him and 13-5 (.722) without. The Rockets were 50-8 with Paul (.862) and 15-9 (.625) without him.
Oscar also was an elite playmaker (probably the best in the league).i wouldn't call Paul the best defensive PG in the league and Oscar played during Frazier prime, it's not fair to compare their accolades as Paul isn't as good defender as Frazier either. Read some interviews from that season - even Larry Costello said Oscar gave them huge defensive boost. I say this again - he was co-leader of one of the best teams in NBA history. He wasn't better than Kareem but he waa just as important for them.
Somehow Curry isn't blamed for playing with Durant for you, but Oscar's ring doesn't matter.
You do realize that Durant's only even played in Golden State for 2 years, right? Without him, Steph won a ring, set the all-time wins record, and led one of the best offenses of all-time, an offense that was twice as far above league average as Oscar's in his prime. And then, since they came together, they've been co-alphas. It's a real debate which one's better or more valuable. There's no clear consensus either way. Oscar wasn't in that situation with Kareem. He was the clear second fiddle. The reason I was comparing him to Pau, Kyrie, Kevin Love, etc., is because the gap between them and the star of their team was similar.
Then you didn't respond about differences in circumstances - Oscar played full decade in weak team with bad management, unstable situation of head coach and lack of firepower. Yet he always made them elite offensive team. What could he have done else? What would Curry have done in his situation? Not to mention that Royals lost 3 times against Russell's Celtics and 2 times against Wilt's Sixers during their best 5 years (1963-67). In 1968 Oscar missed some games and Royals didn't make playoffs (they were 35-30 with him and 4-13 without him). Curry can miss 30 games in RS and 10 games in playoffs and his team will still win championship. How can you compare that situation?
Curry would have made them a much more elite offensive team, because he's a much better offensive player. Warriors net rating with and without Steph by year:
2013/14: On +9.2, Off -5.9
2014/15: On +16.6, Off -1.4
2015/16: On +17.9, Off -4.3
2016/17: On +17.2, Off -0.3
2017/18: On +13.7, Off +0.7
They weren't just coasting due to the surrounding talent. When he went to the bench, the Warriors offense was mediocre to poor and when he was in, it was one of the best of all time. That's a massive, massive impact due to Curry, and is much more impressive than just having an offense that's 3 or 4 points better than league average throughout your prime. If leading an elite offense is the only criterion, Nash and Harden both have much better cases than Oscar.
Also, going 0-5 all 5 times you faced another great player doesn't really impress me much, and it doesn't make me feel sorry for Oscar. If you want to be a great player, sometimes you have to get it done against elite competition. Even before joining up with KD, Curry beat Anthony Davis, LeBron, James Harden (twice), and Russell Westbrook + Kevin Durant (together). That's 5 superstars that he beat without another superstar by his side. Plus, not all of those Wilt/Russell teams Oscar lost to were world-beaters. In '65, the 76ers went 40-40 (18-17 after trading for Wilt), and they still breezed past the Royals, outscoring them by 22 points over 4 games.