Elgin Baylor - as good as Oscar Robertson

[euroleague]

Elgin Baylor is, on this board, the most underrated star in history. At his peak, he was arguably equal to Oscar Robertson

Oscar vs Elgin
Per 36, Elgin Baylor was very comparable to the Big O. Oscar was slightly more efficient in the regular season. BUT, Oscar's numbers were lower in the playoffs, and Elgin's went up.

Elgin's best season: 29/17/4 per 36 on 50% TS, 28.2 PER
Oscar's best season: 25/10/9 per 36 on 55% TS, 27.6 PER
Elgin best playoffs: 31/12/4 per 36, on 54% TS, 28 PER
Oscar's best playoffs: 24/10/7 per 36, on 57% TS, 24.7 PER

I think Elgin is definitively the better playoff performer than Oscar.

1962 season injury:
Much of the criticism of Baylor’s play as being worse than West comes from criticism over 1962, how he missed much of the season and his team won more than with him without Jerry West. It ignores the fact they went 37-11 with him, and 17-15 without him (when Jerry West led the team). The SRS difference is that of a lottery team vs a title contender with the Celtics dynasty.

Elgin Baylor led the league in PER during Wilt’s prime, and was the only player to top Wilt. He took multiple teams singlehandedly to the Finals, showing his game is suitable for tougher competition. But Jerry West gets all the credit, despite Baylor being clearly superior during their early 60s runs.

Conclusion:
Elgin Baylor led teams to the Finals 3 times as the best player, only to be beaten by the Celtics dynasty.

Elgin Baylor is clearly at minimum a top 25 player of all time, and putting him below Pippen/Pettit (whom he beat multiple times with far worse teams) is absurd.

[ronnymac2]

I do agree he is underrated. Basketball strategy was not yet optimized, and so his fg% looks pretty poor in a historical sense, but given his volume, it's pretty good for the era (Plus scoring efficiency is overrated anyway). He's got some of the greatest playoff scoring games against the GOAT defensive dynasty in the Boston Celtics.

He was also an underrated passer/playmaker. This wasn't some 60's version of LeBron, but it also isn't a 60's version of Carmelo Anthony either. This guy was a gifted passer/playmaker. Creative. Excellent vision.

His knee injuries sapped him of explosiveness, and he didn't age well, so it's easy to look at his pedestrian impact later in his career and say he always had pedestrian impact, but I don't think that's true. He and West were **** animals on offense, and Baylor also dominated the boards for a doughnut team at a time when the rules were designed so that big men were golden tickets.

Not sure about ranking, and not sure how he compares to Pippen, but I would say he is underrated. Most underrated on this board goes to Maurice Lucas and Mo Cheeks though.

[iggymcfrack]

Super overrated. Had 4 or 5 good peak years in the very early days of the league. Never managed to win a single ring which is like never going to the conference finals in an 8-team league. Basically just a bulk scorer who wasn’t particularly efficient and didn’t create for others or contribute anything significant on defense.

[euroleague]

Super overrated. Had 4 or 5 good peak years in the very early days of the league. Never managed to win a single ring which is like never going to the conference finals in an 8-team league. Basically just a bulk scorer who wasn’t particularly efficient and didn’t create for others or contribute anything significant on defense.

He was a great passer, and set up his teams at an almost Lbj level

He went to the Finals 8 Times.

Because the league was small, the Celtics became ridiculously stacked. Smaller leagues mean more competition, not less

He had a short peak, it’s true. But 4-5 years of elite play, And being very solid in his later career, isn’t too far off Oscar Robertson... yet he’s ranked far lower

[euroleague]

putting this in OP

Spoiler:

Per 36, Elgin Baylor was very comparable to the Big O.

Elgin's best season: 29/17/4 per 36 on 50% TS
Oscar's: 25/10/9 per 36 on 55% TS

Oscar was slightly more efficient in the regular season. BUT, Oscar's numbers dipped in the playoffs, and Elgin's went up.

Edit to include playoffs:

Elgin best playoffs: 31/12/4 per 36, on 54% TS, 28 PER over 12 games
Oscar: 24/10/7 per 36, on 57% TS, 24.7 PER over 12 games

I think Elgin is definitively the better playoff performer than Oscar, and the better scorer than anyone except Wilt in that era.

[SkyHookFTW]

Baylor is hurt by a few things IMO. He was not a particularly good defender--not bad--but not near the level of his scoring ability. Also, here is a quirky stat: his 27.3 ppg average is the third highest in NBA history, but he never won a scoring title! In a sense, it was his misfortune to prime/peak during the same time Wilt was putting up insane volume numbers. Baylor was, in a way, Charles Barkley of the 1960's with his inside physical play, scoring ability and rebounding.

[euroleague]

Baylor is hurt by a few things IMO. He was not a particularly good defender--not bad--but not near the level of his scoring ability. Also, here is a quirky stat: his 27.3 ppg average is the third highest in NBA history, but he never won a scoring title! In a sense, it was his misfortune to prime/peak during the same time Wilt was putting up insane volume numbers. Baylor was, in a way, Charles Barkley of the 1960's with his inside physical play, scoring ability and rebounding.

he was more like LBJ of the 60s.

always got to the finals and lost to super-strong Celtics
great driving to the basket, great passer (but not quite as good), better rebounder

LBJ just had 12 years of peak, to Baylor's 5

[Clyde Frazier]

I don't think this is an accurate statement.

[euroleague]

I don't think this is an accurate statement.

I don’t think you read the post

There was more than one statement, making your response a slight non sequitur

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Oscar was better. Oscar shot a significantly higher true shooting percentage. Baylor's true shooting percentage was too low many years and would have been a negative if the opposing teams could shoot any better than Baylor. Early 1960s teams did not shoot well.

I don't think Baylor is underated. He was an athletic guy with modern moves that he did not finish all that well playing in a league that was not all that prepared to defend athletic guys with modern moves.

[iggymcfrack]

Baylor is hurt by a few things IMO. He was not a particularly good defender--not bad--but not near the level of his scoring ability. Also, here is a quirky stat: his 27.3 ppg average is the third highest in NBA history, but he never won a scoring title! In a sense, it was his misfortune to prime/peak during the same time Wilt was putting up insane volume numbers. Baylor was, in a way, Charles Barkley of the 1960's with his inside physical play, scoring ability and rebounding.

In another sense, he was lucky to play in the era of insanely fast pace, and his scoring average meant a lot less than it looked like since the average game was 118-116 with terrible shooting. That scoring average of 27.3 is the equivalent of ~22 at today’s pace, not even accounting for the larger number of minutes played by stars in the 60s. The fact that he never led the league in scoring shows that he really wasn’t that special of a scorer. In fact, not only did he never lead the league in scoring, he only even finished second one time. He’s definitely not a Top 50 player all-time.

[iggymcfrack]

Baylor is hurt by a few things IMO. He was not a particularly good defender--not bad--but not near the level of his scoring ability. Also, here is a quirky stat: his 27.3 ppg average is the third highest in NBA history, but he never won a scoring title! In a sense, it was his misfortune to prime/peak during the same time Wilt was putting up insane volume numbers. Baylor was, in a way, Charles Barkley of the 1960's with his inside physical play, scoring ability and rebounding.

he was more like LBJ of the 60s.

always got to the finals and lost to super-strong Celtics
great driving to the basket, great passer (but not quite as good), better rebounder

LBJ just had 12 years of peak, to Baylor's 5

This is the second post where you mentioned that Baylor was a “great passer”. I have no idea where you came up with this. He averaged 3.5 pace-adjusted APG while averaging 40 MPG for his career.

That’s the same as someone like Karl Malone, Antoine Walker, Alex English, Jamal Crawford, Vernon Maxwell, or Gordon Hayward. And all of those players did it in less minutes of course. What on earth gives you the idea he was a great passer? He was a good volume scorer and rebounder. That was about it.

[Doctor MJ]

Elgin Baylor is, on this board, the most underrated star in history. At his peak, he was arguably equal to Oscar Robertson

Oscar vs Elgin
Per 36, Elgin Baylor was very comparable to the Big O. Oscar was slightly more efficient in the regular season. BUT, Oscar's numbers were lower in the playoffs, and Elgin's went up.

Elgin's best season: 29/17/4 per 36 on 50% TS, 28.2 PER
Oscar's best season: 25/10/9 per 36 on 55% TS, 27.6 PER
Elgin best playoffs: 31/12/4 per 36, on 54% TS, 28 PER
Oscar's best playoffs: 24/10/7 per 36, on 57% TS, 24.7 PER

I think Elgin is definitively the better playoff performer than Oscar.

I think you should not be thinking you can make any definitive judgments based on a stat summary like this.

I think that before you are so sure you know better than the folks on this board you should understand the level of depth folks have already gone into on this like the RPOY and Top 100 rankings, and you should understand that there's nothing you can say in 4 lines of box score stats that can sway someone who has done serious analysis on the subject.

I don't have any expectation that you should just defer to the expertise of others. By all means, figure all of this out for yourself. But when I look at this, if just feels like you don't understand the level of effort others have already put into stuff like this.

[Jiminy Glick]

Baylor is hurt by a few things IMO. He was not a particularly good defender--not bad--but not near the level of his scoring ability. Also, here is a quirky stat: his 27.3 ppg average is the third highest in NBA history, but he never won a scoring title! In a sense, it was his misfortune to prime/peak during the same time Wilt was putting up insane volume numbers. Baylor was, in a way, Charles Barkley of the 1960's with his inside physical play, scoring ability and rebounding.

he was more like LBJ of the 60s.

always got to the finals and lost to super-strong Celtics
great driving to the basket, great passer (but not quite as good), better rebounder

LBJ just had 12 years of peak, to Baylor's 5

This is the second post where you mentioned that Baylor was a “great passer”. I have no idea where you came up with this. He averaged 3.5 pace-adjusted APG while averaging 40 MPG for his career.

That’s the same as someone like Karl Malone, Antoine Walker, Alex English, Jamal Crawford, Vernon Maxwell, or Gordon Hayward. And all of those players did it in less minutes of course. What on earth gives you the idea he was a great passer? He was a good volume scorer and rebounder. That was about it.

He was a great passer he just probably wasn't utilized in offenses enough. He could have averaged more assists if the offense called for it. They counted assists differently back then, I forget which years it was though.

Watch on YouTube

[euroleague]

Elgin Baylor is, on this board, the most underrated star in history. At his peak, he was arguably equal to Oscar Robertson

Oscar vs Elgin
Per 36, Elgin Baylor was very comparable to the Big O. Oscar was slightly more efficient in the regular season. BUT, Oscar's numbers were lower in the playoffs, and Elgin's went up.

Elgin's best season: 29/17/4 per 36 on 50% TS, 28.2 PER
Oscar's best season: 25/10/9 per 36 on 55% TS, 27.6 PER
Elgin best playoffs: 31/12/4 per 36, on 54% TS, 28 PER
Oscar's best playoffs: 24/10/7 per 36, on 57% TS, 24.7 PER

I think Elgin is definitively the better playoff performer than Oscar.

I think you should not be thinking you can make any definitive judgments based on a stat summary like this.

I think that before you are so sure you know better than the folks on this board you should understand the level of depth folks have already gone into on this like the RPOY and Top 100 rankings, and you should understand that there's nothing you can say in 4 lines of box score stats that can sway someone who has done serious analysis on the subject.

I don't have any expectation that you should just defer to the expertise of others. By all means, figure all of this out for yourself. But when I look at this, if just feels like you don't understand the level of effort others have already put into stuff like this.

I was in the top 100 project. I have put in much more depth than this as well. I felt Elgin Baylor was underrated in it, and have seen many videos/ready many analyses of the subject.

I'm not saying the statline is an entire argument. I have hundreds of lines of stats I could use to support this argument, the stats do indicate Baylor to have a better peak in the playoffs and in the regular season. I think Oscar's playmaking may be more valuable than Baylor's scoring on many teams, but I do think Baylor being considered 20 spots lower than Oscar is egregiously underrating him

[dhsilv2]

Given what WS tells us here, I'm not really sure I can get along with any argument for Baylor. The few games I've seen similarly paint these two are massively separate.

[euroleague]

Given what WS tells us here, I'm not really sure I can get along with any argument for Baylor. The few games I've seen similarly paint these two are massively separate.

WS, a minutes related stat, isn't telling the story as well as you think. And looking at a few games, depending on years, obviously doesn't paint an accurate picture

[Doctor MJ]

Elgin Baylor is, on this board, the most underrated star in history. At his peak, he was arguably equal to Oscar Robertson

Oscar vs Elgin
Per 36, Elgin Baylor was very comparable to the Big O. Oscar was slightly more efficient in the regular season. BUT, Oscar's numbers were lower in the playoffs, and Elgin's went up.

Elgin's best season: 29/17/4 per 36 on 50% TS, 28.2 PER
Oscar's best season: 25/10/9 per 36 on 55% TS, 27.6 PER
Elgin best playoffs: 31/12/4 per 36, on 54% TS, 28 PER
Oscar's best playoffs: 24/10/7 per 36, on 57% TS, 24.7 PER

I think Elgin is definitively the better playoff performer than Oscar.

I think you should not be thinking you can make any definitive judgments based on a stat summary like this.

I think that before you are so sure you know better than the folks on this board you should understand the level of depth folks have already gone into on this like the RPOY and Top 100 rankings, and you should understand that there's nothing you can say in 4 lines of box score stats that can sway someone who has done serious analysis on the subject.

I don't have any expectation that you should just defer to the expertise of others. By all means, figure all of this out for yourself. But when I look at this, if just feels like you don't understand the level of effort others have already put into stuff like this.

I was in the top 100 project. I have put in much more depth than this as well. I felt Elgin Baylor was underrated in it, and have seen many videos/ready many analyses of the subject.

I'm not saying the statline is an entire argument. I have hundreds of lines of stats I could use to support this argument, the stats do indicate Baylor to have a better peak in the playoffs and in the regular season. I think Oscar's playmaking may be more valuable than Baylor's scoring on many teams, but I do think Baylor being considered 20 spots lower than Oscar is egregiously underrating him

Huh, okay. I don't know why you're making definitive statements in short posts after being involved in much longer arguments, but so be it.

I think in general the thing to understand about Oscar is that he basically dominated NBA offense all the way through Baylor's prime. Like, he showed up, and as a rookie he led the best offense in the league by ORtg. Baylor had West...still wasn't enough to match what Oscar was doing.

Now you can certainly argue that you can't judge offense without defense and things like that, but your argument has been about offense, and offensively Oscar's impact was just clearly greater by such metrics.

Now also, you can point out that such stats are really only known and meaningful for the regular season, and since you're arguing Baylor was the superior playoff player, if you can find evidence to the contrary in the playoffs that would be meaningful.

There is of course the matter that in general the Lakers had more playoff success than the Royals, but the team contexts were very different.

Scoring volume? I mean, volume is what Baylor was known for.

For me though the issue that sticks in my craw is the fact that Baylor didn't adjust his primacy when West surpassed him whereas when Oscar went to Milwaukee, he instantly adapted his game to work perfectly with his new surroundings and this had everything to do with why they won the title.

Oscar has the better career by basically any measure you can think of, looks better when we look at on/off data, in general led better offenses, and when he needed to proved more capable of adapting to new settings. I don't really see a reason to think the two are that close.

[euroleague]

I think you should not be thinking you can make any definitive judgments based on a stat summary like this.

I think that before you are so sure you know better than the folks on this board you should understand the level of depth folks have already gone into on this like the RPOY and Top 100 rankings, and you should understand that there's nothing you can say in 4 lines of box score stats that can sway someone who has done serious analysis on the subject.

I don't have any expectation that you should just defer to the expertise of others. By all means, figure all of this out for yourself. But when I look at this, if just feels like you don't understand the level of effort others have already put into stuff like this.

I was in the top 100 project. I have put in much more depth than this as well. I felt Elgin Baylor was underrated in it, and have seen many videos/ready many analyses of the subject.

I'm not saying the statline is an entire argument. I have hundreds of lines of stats I could use to support this argument, the stats do indicate Baylor to have a better peak in the playoffs and in the regular season. I think Oscar's playmaking may be more valuable than Baylor's scoring on many teams, but I do think Baylor being considered 20 spots lower than Oscar is egregiously underrating him

Huh, okay. I don't know why you're making definitive statements in short posts after being involved in much longer arguments, but so be it.

I think in general the thing to understand about Oscar is that he basically dominated NBA offense all the way through Baylor's prime. Like, he showed up, and as a rookie he led the best offense in the league by ORtg. Baylor had West...still wasn't enough to match what Oscar was doing.

Now you can certainly argue that you can't judge offense without defense and things like that, but your argument has been about offense, and offensively Oscar's impact was just clearly greater by such metrics.

Now also, you can point out that such stats are really only known and meaningful for the regular season, and since you're arguing Baylor was the superior playoff player, if you can find evidence to the contrary in the playoffs that would be meaningful.

There is of course the matter that in general the Lakers had more playoff success than the Royals, but the team contexts were very different.

Scoring volume? I mean, volume is what Baylor was known for.

For me though the issue that sticks in my craw is the fact that Baylor didn't adjust his primacy when West surpassed him whereas when Oscar went to Milwaukee, he instantly adapted his game to work perfectly with his new surroundings and this had everything to do with why they won the title.

Oscar has the better career by basically any measure you can think of, looks better when we look at on/off data, in general led better offenses, and when he needed to proved more capable of adapting to new settings. I don't really see a reason to think the two are that close.

I am not really discussing career, and pretty explicitly mention peaks in the post. All my stats are about peaks, and in the peaks project he’s rated 20 spots below Oscar

Oscar’s as a rookie lifted his teams ORTG by more, but his team started out far better when he joined it offensively. In terms of SRS, a better metric of team performance than RTG, Elgin improves his team 4.4 SRS and led them to the Finals, compared to Oscar at 2.9 SRS added and missing the playoffs. Elgin improved his team by more wins as well

This argument is about peaks, not rookie performances. Oscar coming out of college was one of the greatest offensive prospects ever, and Elgin grew into his role.

You talk about Jerry West, but omit Jerry Lucas who was far better coming out of college than West was, and had far more overlap in his peak with Oscar than Baylor had with West.

In terms of using Team ORTG to define players, I think it overlooks coaching, minutes, and personnel fit while not addressing Baylor vs Oscar very well.

[Dr Positivity]

Baylor at his peak was an elite player and could be argued with guys like West and Oscar. The main reason he's ranked lower than them is longevity, after his 5th season the rest of his prime is not close to those guys, post knee surgery Baylor doesn't even have elite volume considering the pace inflation (22-24 pts/36) in addition to below average efficiency. Not sure if it's fair to even call him the Melo or Dominique of his era after his 5th season as their volume is much more impressive, it's almost more like Derozan level scoring