The best rORTG by player (97-22)

[SpreeS]

Nash 2005 14.2
Curry 2018 14.1
Curry 2016 12.6
Paul 2015 12.5
Curry 2017 12.3
Nash 2007 12.1
Durant 2017 11.4
Paul 2018 11.2
Curry 2015 11.0
Nowitzki 2004 11.0

Kawhi 2021 10.9
Stockton 1998 10.8
Harden 2012 10.8
Nash 2008 10.7
Paul 2013 10.7
Lebron 2013 10.7
Curry 2019 10.4
Nash 2004 10.4
Durant 2019 10.4
O'Neal 1998 10.4
Nash 2010 10.1
Nowitzki 2003 10.1
Nowitzki 2002 10.1

[Colbinii]

This is RS only, correct?

[RCM88x]

Nash 2005 14.2 - WEST
Curry 2018 14.1 - WEST
Curry 2016 12.6 - WEST
Paul 2015 12.5 - WEST
Curry 2017 12.3 - WEST
Nash 2007 12.1 - WEST
Durant 2017 11.4 - WEST
Paul 2018 11.2 - WEST
Curry 2015 11.0 - WEST
Nowitzki 2004 11.0 - WEST

Stockton 1998 10.8 - WEST
Harden 2012 10.8 - WEST
Nash 2008 10.7 - WEST
Paul 2013 10.7 - WEST
Lebron 2013 10.7 - EAST
Curry 2019 10.4 - WEST
Nash 2004 10.4 - WEST
Durant 2019 10.4 - WEST
O'Neal 1998 10.4 - WEST
Nash 2010 10.1 - WEST
Nowitzki 2003 10.1 - WEST
Nowitzki 2002 10.1 - WEST

Interesting

[BenoUdrihFTL]

Where are these figures coming from?

The player types I've noticed that seem to benefit most from BBREF's individual ORTG calculation are rim-running bigs who do virtually all of their super-efficient but limited scoring at the rim, and assist-generators with strong AST-TO ratios and efficient scoring numbers

Which is to say that Dirk and Durant are really impressive to me here if this is from BBREF

[Colbinii]

Where are these figures coming from?

The player types I've noticed that seem to benefit most from BBREF's individual ORTG calculation are rim-running bigs who do virtually all of their super-efficient but limited scoring at the rim, and assist-generators with strong AST-TO ratios and efficient scoring numbers

Which is to say that Dirk and Durant are really impressive to me here if this is from BBREF

It is relative rating. on-court rating, simply how well a team performs offensively with you on the court compared to league average offensive rating.

This has nothing to do with Individual Ortg from Basketball-reference.com, which is formula derived to predict the Offensive Rating a player produces when they are on the court.

[Colbinii]

Nash 2005 14.2 - WEST
Curry 2018 14.1 - WEST
Curry 2016 12.6 - WEST
Paul 2015 12.5 - WEST
Curry 2017 12.3 - WEST
Nash 2007 12.1 - WEST
Durant 2017 11.4 - WEST
Paul 2018 11.2 - WEST
Curry 2015 11.0 - WEST
Nowitzki 2004 11.0 - WEST

Stockton 1998 10.8 - WEST
Harden 2012 10.8 - WEST
Nash 2008 10.7 - WEST
Paul 2013 10.7 - WEST
Lebron 2013 10.7 - EAST
Curry 2019 10.4 - WEST
Nash 2004 10.4 - WEST
Durant 2019 10.4 - WEST
O'Neal 1998 10.4 - WEST
Nash 2010 10.1 - WEST
Nowitzki 2003 10.1 - WEST
Nowitzki 2002 10.1 - WEST

Interesting

The east is predominantly defensive focused going back to the 1990s. AI 76ers, Kidd Nets, Wallace Pistons, LeBron Cavaliers, KG Celtics, LeBron Heatles, Stevens Celtics and even the Casey Raptors were good defensively.

2016-2017 Cavaliers stand out as different but they were an all-time great post-season team who really utilized the Regular Season as a way to optimize for the post-season.

[BenoUdrihFTL]

Where are these figures coming from?

The player types I've noticed that seem to benefit most from BBREF's individual ORTG calculation are rim-running bigs who do virtually all of their super-efficient but limited scoring at the rim, and assist-generators with strong AST-TO ratios and efficient scoring numbers

Which is to say that Dirk and Durant are really impressive to me here if this is from BBREF

It is relative rating. on-court rating, simply how well a team performs offensively with you on the court compared to league average offensive rating.

This has nothing to do with Individual Ortg from Basketball-reference.com, which is formula derived to predict the Offensive Rating a player produces when they are on the court.

Ah that makes sense. A much better method than what I thought he was doing taking individual ORTG (which I'm not a fan of) and comparing it to league avg ORTG

[Colbinii]

Where are these figures coming from?

The player types I've noticed that seem to benefit most from BBREF's individual ORTG calculation are rim-running bigs who do virtually all of their super-efficient but limited scoring at the rim, and assist-generators with strong AST-TO ratios and efficient scoring numbers

Which is to say that Dirk and Durant are really impressive to me here if this is from BBREF

It is relative rating. on-court rating, simply how well a team performs offensively with you on the court compared to league average offensive rating.

This has nothing to do with Individual Ortg from Basketball-reference.com, which is formula derived to predict the Offensive Rating a player produces when they are on the court.

Ah that makes sense. A much better method than what I thought he was doing taking individual ORTG (which I'm not a fan of) and comparing it to league avg ORTG

A fun use of Individual Ortg is multiplying the Individual Ortg with Usage

[BenoUdrihFTL]

It is relative rating. on-court rating, simply how well a team performs offensively with you on the court compared to league average offensive rating.

This has nothing to do with Individual Ortg from Basketball-reference.com, which is formula derived to predict the Offensive Rating a player produces when they are on the court.

Ah that makes sense. A much better method than what I thought he was doing taking individual ORTG (which I'm not a fan of) and comparing it to league avg ORTG

A fun use of Individual Ortg is multiplying the Individual Ortg with Usage

That's actually brilliant. A friend I talk (debate) hoops with is married to individual ORTG and I no longer even bother to explain why it shouldn't be applied uniformly across all player roles nor have I come up with any quick calculation to "regularize" it for use in our discussions (debates). But this could work in a way that he might actually be able to process lol

[DraymondGold]

Nash 2005 14.2
Curry 2018 14.1
Curry 2016 12.6
Paul 2015 12.5
Curry 2017 12.3
Nash 2007 12.1
Durant 2017 11.4
Paul 2018 11.2
Curry 2015 11.0
Nowitzki 2004 11.0

Stockton 1998 10.8
Harden 2012 10.8
Nash 2008 10.7
Paul 2013 10.7
Lebron 2013 10.7
Curry 2019 10.4
Nash 2004 10.4
Durant 2019 10.4
O'Neal 1998 10.4
Nash 2010 10.1
Nowitzki 2003 10.1
Nowitzki 2002 10.1

Where are these figures coming from?

The player types I've noticed that seem to benefit most from BBREF's individual ORTG calculation are rim-running bigs who do virtually all of their super-efficient but limited scoring at the rim, and assist-generators with strong AST-TO ratios and efficient scoring numbers

Which is to say that Dirk and Durant are really impressive to me here if this is from BBREF

It is relative rating. on-court rating, simply how well a team performs offensively with you on the court compared to league average offensive rating.

This has nothing to do with Individual Ortg from Basketball-reference.com, which is formula derived to predict the Offensive Rating a player produces when they are on the court.

Cool stat! Do either of you know a website where I might look at the rest of this data?


Regardless,for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash. Paul's teams pop out way more than I would have expected. Shaq seems lower than I would have guessed (I certainly wouldn't have thought 98 was his best rORTG year).

[SpreeS]

I found one more

Kawhi 2021 +10.9

[LAL1947]

Regardless, for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash.

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

[SpreeS]

Regardless, for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash.

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

Why do you want to look at Nash 2006 / Curry 2021 offrtg when PHO was 62 wins team minus Amare and GSW was 15 wins team plus Curry year before?

[LA Bird]

Is this stat available on some website now or did you have to check every player individually? I remember I used to do this for some players but never had a comprehensive list.

Also, is there a list for the rDRtg leaders too?

[Colbinii]

Is this stat available on some website now or did you have to check every player individually? I remember I used to do this for some players but never had a comprehensive list.

Also, is there a list for the rDRtg leaders too?

You need to do it yourself unfortunately.

[LAL1947]

Spoiler:

Regardless, for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash.

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

Why do you want to look at Nash 2006 / Curry 2021 offrtg when PHO was 62 wins team minus Amare and GSW was 15 wins team plus Curry year before?

Well, why not?

In 2006 and 2021, both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality. Curry's other GSW teams have generally had much more offensive quality than Nash's PHO teams, especially for the years listed in the OP (i.e., 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019).

Also, this is just an observation to your question... I think if it was Curry on that PHO team in 2006 instead of Nash, PHO most likely would have been less than a 62 wins team. That team needed more of a play-maker (like Nash) than a scorer (like Curry) to make it as good as it was, i.e., if you consider the characteristics of the other PHO players.

[DraymondGold]

Regardless, for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash.

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Of course there was a different situation! Sorry, I thought that was implied haha... but yes, I'm glad you clarified and added some detail.

My original point was just that Nash's statistical claim as the offensive GOAT is his team's relative offensive ratings, where he is usually above the competition (Curry, Lebron, Jordan, maybe Bird/Shaq/Jokic soon). If we just look at team Relative Offensive Rating, Nash's teams have the top 2 all time, 4 out of the top 5 (Curry's team is 3rd), 5 out of the top 10 (Jordan gets 2). I was just trying to say when we just look at team Offensive Rating when the star offensive player is on, Curry catches up more ground than I was expecting, and looks as good if not better than Nash (without adjusting for any more context than the season-relative adjustment makes).

To your point, rule changes, league style, roster construction across the league, league parity vs super teams, (and of course teammates which you touch on later) might all make a difference.

I'd add a few clarifications to this.
Re: rule changes, you mention giving shooters landing space. This would only apply after 2017, so 3/4 of Curry's top seasons wouldn't be affected by this.
Re: league style: Since these are relative Offensive Ratings, in theory they adjust for the average league style. Even though the modern era shoots more 3s, that's not necessarily a relative-to-league advantage for Curry, since everyone else also shoots more 3s. The key that would buff a player's relative ORTG is having a style/strategy advantage relative to their league.

I certainly think volume 3 point shooting this might benefit early-prime Curry relative to his league (e.g. ~2015/2016 especially) since there weren't as many 3s taken then vs today, but Nash also had style/strategy advantages relative to his league. Nash and the Suns had far more pick and roll, and far more spread pick and roll than their league average, which would boost his numbers too.

Now re: teammates:

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

I tend to agree Curry had better overall teammates, which might boost his pure on/off. But are we sure Curry's teammates are that much better, offensively? Let's look at this same stat for Nash/Curry's teammates.

Nash/Curry's teammates' relative ORTG when Nash/Curry are off:
1. 2006 Nash's Teammates: -0.38
2. 2018 Curry's Teammates: -0.71
3. 2007 Nash's Teammates: -1.02
4. 2016 Curry's Teammates: -1.87
5. 2005 Nash's Teammates: -3.26
6. 2015 Curry's Teammates: -3.92
7. 2017 Curry's Teammates: -5.07
8. 2008 Nash's Teammates: -5.27
...
9. 2021 Curry's Teammates: -7.88

4-year average for Nash's Teammates: -2.48
4-year average for Curry's Teammates: -2.89

Curry's teammates actually come across worse offensively without Curry than Nash's teammates without Nash.

You suggest that Curry has perhaps better shooting depth than Nash, citing Klay/KD/Poole, but relative to his league... does he? The Warriors' best lineups often had 2 non-shooters (Draymond and Iguodala, particularly as they got older) in an era where plenty of other teams' best lineups had 1 or even 0 non-shooters. Nash's team was first in 3P% every year from 2005-2008, while Curry's was not from 2015-2018 (and Curry's teams had a far bigger shooting drop-off without him in 2019/2021/2022).

To be clear, both teams were near the top in this span, occasionally on top by a large margin, and both teams' shooting benefited significantly from their stars (both from Nash/Curry's shooting and their playmaking). But I'm just not so sure Curry had better shooters by so much of a margin. The Warriors were likely be more top heavy with shooting (Klay's certainly better than any shooter Nash played with), but they're also likely more "bottom-light" than the Suns.

You suggest that Curry had better playmaking next to him. This is almost certainly true. But I think it undersells how much better Curry fits with playmakers than Nash does. Curry's the better off-ball player, and I'd suggest it's by a landslide. Nash's ball dominance would pair far less well with Draymond or Iguodala offensively than Curry's off-ball play did.

I also think it's worth mentioning the fact that D'Antoni prioritized offense much more than Kerr who often preferred defense.

To me, these 3 factors make the Nash's supporting cast pretty close to Curry's when only considering offense. You could certainly argue Curry had the better supporting cast offensively, but I'm not sure it's by such a wide margin as you suggest... and you could also argue the reverse. To me, the gap in Curry/Nash's teammates is almost entirely defensive.

Spoiler:

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

Why do you want to look at Nash 2006 / Curry 2021 offrtg when PHO was 62 wins team minus Amare and GSW was 15 wins team plus Curry year before?

Well, why not?

In 2006 and 2021, both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality. Curry's other GSW teams have generally had much more offensive quality than Nash's PHO teams, especially for the years listed in the OP (i.e., 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019).

Re: 2006 Nash vs 2021 Curry, Nash definitely comes out on top in relative offensive rating.

2006 Nash's rORTG: +7.8
2021 Curry's rORTG: +3.22

But... I think your statement that "both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality" is a bit misleading. Could they be similar in overall quality? Maybe, sure. But they're far from equivalent in offensive quality.

2006 Nash's Teammates' rORTG (Nash off): -0.38
2021 Curry's Teammates' rORTG (Curry off): -7.88

That's a massive difference. I think many are too quick to see Klay or Draymond on a roster and assume the supporting cast for Curry is so clearly ahead of the pack. Some years, overall (including defense), sure. But offense only, in every year of Curry's prime? Not a chance.

In 2021, if we look at the Warriors' OBPM... literally only 3 players are positive. That's terrible offensive support, compared to 2005 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, 06 Suns' 10 positive OBPM players, 07 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, or even 08 Suns' 5 positive OBPM players.

Also, this is just an observation to your question... I think if it was Curry on that PHO team in 2006 instead of Nash, PHO most likely would have been less than a 62 wins team. That team needed more of a play-maker (like Nash) than a scorer (like Curry) to make it as good as it was, i.e., if you consider the characteristics of the other PHO players.

Sure, I'd agree with that. But I'd also suggest that Nash would have been far less effective on the Warriors too. Both teams were built around their best player's skillset... swap out those players, and the fit gets worse.

[falcolombardi]

Regardless, for all the talk of Nash's team offensive ratings being so far ahead of Curry, Curry seems right there with Nash.

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Of course there was a different situation! Sorry, I thought that was implied haha... but yes, I'm glad you clarified and added some detail.

My original point was just that Nash's statistical claim as the offensive GOAT is his team's relative offensive ratings, where he is usually above the competition (Curry, Lebron, Jordan, maybe Bird/Shaq/Jokic soon). If we just look at team Relative Offensive Rating, Nash's teams have the top 2 all time, 4 out of the top 5 (Curry's team is 3rd), 5 out of the top 10 (Jordan gets 2). I was just trying to say when we just look at team Offensive Rating when the star offensive player is on, Curry catches up more ground than I was expecting, and looks as good if not better than Nash (without adjusting for any more context than the season-relative adjustment makes).

To your point, rule changes, league style, roster construction across the league, league parity vs super teams, (and of course teammates which you touch on later) might all make a difference.

I'd add a few clarifications to this.
Re: rule changes, you mention giving shooters landing space. This would only apply after 2017, so 3/4 of Curry's top seasons wouldn't be affected by this.
Re: league style: Since these are relative Offensive Ratings, in theory they adjust for the average league style. Even though the modern era shoots more 3s, that's not necessarily a relative-to-league advantage for Curry, since everyone else also shoots more 3s. The key that would buff a player's relative ORTG is having a style/strategy advantage relative to their league.

I certainly think volume 3 point shooting this might benefit early-prime Curry relative to his league (e.g. ~2015/2016 especially) since there weren't as many 3s taken then vs today, but Nash also had style/strategy advantages relative to his league. Nash and the Suns had far more pick and roll, and far more spread pick and roll than their league average, which would boost his numbers too.

Now re: teammates:

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

I tend to agree Curry had better overall teammates, which might boost his pure on/off. But are we sure Curry's teammates are that much better, offensively? Let's look at this same stat for Nash/Curry's teammates.

Nash/Curry's teammates' relative ORTG when Nash/Curry are off:
1. 2006 Nash's Teammates: -0.38
2. 2018 Curry's Teammates: -0.71
3. 2007 Nash's Teammates: -1.02
4. 2016 Curry's Teammates: -1.87
5. 2005 Nash's Teammates: -3.26
6. 2015 Curry's Teammates: -3.92
7. 2017 Curry's Teammates: -5.07
8. 2008 Nash's Teammates: -5.27
...
9. 2021 Curry's Teammates: -7.88

4-year average for Nash's Teammates: -2.48
4-year average for Curry's Teammates: -2.89

[u]Curry's teammates actually come across worse offensively without Curry than Nash's teammates without Nash.[/u]

You suggest that Curry has perhaps better shooting depth than Nash, citing Klay/KD/Poole, but relative to his league... does he? The Warriors' best lineups often had 2 non-shooters (Draymond and Iguodala, particularly as they got older) in an era where plenty of other teams' best lineups had 1 or even 0 non-shooters. Nash's team was first in 3P% every year from 2005-2008, while Curry's was not from 2015-2018 (and Curry's teams had a far bigger shooting drop-off without him in 2019/2021/2022).

To be clear, both teams were near the top in this span, occasionally on top by a large margin, and both teams' shooting benefited significantly from their stars (both from Nash/Curry's shooting and their playmaking). But I'm just not so sure Curry had better shooters by so much of a margin. The Warriors were likely be more top heavy with shooting (Klay's certainly better than any shooter Nash played with), but they're also likely more "bottom-light" than the Suns.

You suggest that Curry had better playmaking next to him. This is almost certainly true. But I think it undersells how much better Curry fits with playmakers than Nash does. Curry's the better off-ball player, and I'd suggest it's by a landslide. Nash's ball dominance would pair far less well with Draymond or Iguodala offensively than Curry's off-ball play did.

I also think it's worth mentioning the fact that D'Antoni prioritized offense much more than Kerr who often preferred defense.

To me, these 3 factors make the Nash's supporting cast pretty close to Curry's when only considering offense. You could certainly argue Curry had the better supporting cast offensively, but I'm not sure it's by such a wide margin as you suggest... and you could also argue the reverse. To me, the gap in Curry/Nash's teammates is almost entirely defensive.

Spoiler:

Why do you want to look at Nash 2006 / Curry 2021 offrtg when PHO was 62 wins team minus Amare and GSW was 15 wins team plus Curry year before?

Well, why not?

In 2006 and 2021, both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality. Curry's other GSW teams have generally had much more offensive quality than Nash's PHO teams, especially for the years listed in the OP (i.e., 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019).

Re: 2006 Nash vs 2021 Curry, Nash definitely comes out on top in relative offensive rating.

2006 Nash's rORTG: +7.8
2021 Curry's rORTG: +3.22

But... I think your statement that "both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality" is a bit misleading. Could they be similar in overall quality? Maybe, sure. But they're far from equivalent in offensive quality.

2006 Nash's Teammates' rORTG (Nash off): -0.38
2021 Curry's Teammates' rORTG (Curry off): -7.88

That's a massive difference. I think many are too quick to see Klay or Draymond on a roster and assume the supporting cast for Curry is so clearly ahead of the pack. Some years, overall (including defense), sure. But offense only, in every year of Curry's prime? Not a chance.

In 2021, if we look at the Warriors' OBPM... literally only 3 players are positive. That's terrible offensive support, compared to 2005 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, 06 Suns' 10 positive OBPM players, 07 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, or even 08 Suns' 5 positive OBPM players.

Also, this is just an observation to your question... I think if it was Curry on that PHO team in 2006 instead of Nash, PHO most likely would have been less than a 62 wins team. That team needed more of a play-maker (like Nash) than a scorer (like Curry) to make it as good as it was, i.e., if you consider the characteristics of the other PHO players.

Sure, I'd agree with that. But I'd also suggest that Nash would have been far less effective on the Warriors too. Both teams were built around their best player's skillset... swap out those players, and the fit gets worse.

Not wanting to troll here dray but was not one of the pro curry arguments you used in other comparisions

(Like the on court plus-minus thread made from elgee video on jordan that went for 20 pages) based on the theory that curry can play with less dependant teammates

hence why it -doesnt- make it less impressive for curry that his teammates did better without him in comparision to other players whose teams struggled more when they went to bench?

Not wanting to call you out but i remember you argued heavily that in comparisions between lebron with curry/jordan we shouldnt look as much at the "OFF" part? And instead focus on the "ON" part for ceiling raising purposes?

I think i even remember arguments in that thread (not from you) that if lebron teams did worse without him maybe it was because he made them dependant on his playmaking in a way curry and jordan wouldnt?

shouldnt we then make a similar questioning for curry off ball style making his teammates dependant on him too when compared to nash? After all the main reason why that theory on lebron took off was his teams doing bad without him compared to curry/jordan

If nash was beneffiting from teammates dependant on him, why do they do better than curry teammates without him too? Wouldnt the same reasoning used in that other thread mean nash is the best ceiling raiser?

If you dont put much weight in the OFF part in a lebron vs curry/jordan comparision. Why now in a nash vs curry one?

[DraymondGold]

I wanted to expand the list of players a bit. I didn't hear what website/source Sprees used (and wasn't able to figure it out), so there may be minor differences (some websites calculate ORTG slightly differently). For my list, I used pbpstats for ORTG when a star's on and statmuse for league-average ORTG to adjust.

Without further ado, here's a larger list of rORTG in MVP level players. Tiers are approximate, I just put them where I saw larger gaps in value.

Player Year Relative ORTG

Tier 0: GOAT level rORTG:
Curry 2018 : 14.33
Nash 2005 : 13.86
Curry 2017 : 12.74
Paul 2015 : 12.73
Curry 2016 : 12.67
Durant 2021 : 12.34 (small game sample)

Tier 1: All-time rORTG
Nash 2007 : 11.95
Durant 2017 : 11.62
Paul 2018 : 11.22
Dirk 2004 : 11.15
Curry 2015 : 10.98
Kawhi 2021 : 10.95
Curry 2019 : 10.55
Nash 2004 : 10.55
Nash 2008 : 10.5
Durant 2016 : 10.45
Durant 2019 : 10.39
LeBron 2013 : 10.35
Paul 2013 : 10.19
LeBron 2015 : 10.15
Dirk 2003 : 10
LeBron 2017 : 9.91
Dirk 2002 : 9.91
Shaq 2001 : 9.72
Harden 2018 : 9.63
LeBron 2016 : 9.53
Jokic 2021 : 9.45
Durant 2018 : 9.42
Dirk 2007 : 9.41
Nash 2003 : 9.3

Tier 2: MVP-level rORTG
Paul 2012 : 8.83
Harden 2021 : 8.76
Nash 2009 : 8.66
Kawhi 2020 : 8.33
Harden 2017 : 8.25
Paul 2014 : 8.23
Shaq 2003 : 8.1
Luka 2020 : 8.08
LeBron 2010 : 8.03
Trae Young 2021 : 7.91
Nash 2006 : 7.8
Nash 2002 : 7.77
Harden 2019 : 7.69
Dirk 2006 : 7.63
Kobe 2009 : 7.56
Paul 2016 : 7.52
Wade 2011 : 7.45
Paul 2008 : 7.29
Shaq 2002 : 7.28
Kobe 2001 : 7.23
Shaq 2005 : 7.21
LeBron 2009 : 7.18
Trae Young 2022 : 7.12
Giannis 2022 : 7.08
Dirk 2008 : 7.05
Shaq 2006 : 7.03
Kobe 2008 : 7.02
LeBron 2014 : 7.01
Giannis 2021 : 7
Kawhi 2019 : 6.99
Jokic 2022 : 6.89
LeBron 2018 : 6.86
Kawhi 2017 : 6.78
Giannis 2019 : 6.68
Dirk 2005 : 6.62
Dirk 2011 : 6.47
Kobe 2011 : 6.47
Wade 2006 : 6.36
Luka 2021 : 6.35
Kobe 2002 : 6.33

Tier 3: Weak-level MVP rORTG:
Shaq 2004 : 6.09
Dirk 2001 : 6.08
Garnett 2008 : 5.95
Durant 2014 : 5.93
LeBron 2011 : 5.92
Duncan 2007 : 5.92
Durant 2022 : 5.78
McGrady 2003 : 5.75
Duncan 2005 : 5.46
LeBron 2012 : 5.39
Curry 2014 : 5.37
Garnett 2002 : 5.35
Garnett 2004 : 5.29
Durant 2015 : 5.23
Kobe 2006 : 5.21
Kawhi 2016 : 5.19
Kobe 2004 : 5.16
Giannis 2020 : 4.84
Jokic 2019 : 4.79
Kobe 2003 : 4.72
Garnett 2003 : 4.71
Jokic 2020 : 4.65
Harden 2020 : 4.51
LeBron 2020 : 4.35
Wade 2010 : 4.28
Duncan 2001 : 4.26

Tier 4: All-star rORTG
Curry 2022 : 4.03
Kobe Bryant 2010 : 4
Dirk 2009 : 3.99
Paul 2009 : 3.98
Duncan 2003 : 3.73
Luka 2022 : 3.65
Curry 2021 : 3.22
Dirk 2010 : 3.07
Kobe 2007 : 3.06
Duncan 2002 : 3.03
Giannis 2018 : 2.97
Kobe 2005 : 2.91
Duncan 2006 : 2.36
Dirk 2012 : 2.32
Garnett 2005 : 2.27
Paul 2011 : 2.23
Trae Young 2020 : 2.22
Wade 2009 : 2.16
Paul 2010 : 2.09
Wade 2007 : 1.88

Tier 5: Poor rORTG for an all star
AI 2001 : 0.58
Duncan 2004 : 0.54
Garnett 2007 : -0.51
Garnett 2006 : -0.71
Paul 2017 : -1.53
Wade 2008 : -2.66

[DraymondGold]

When you say things like that though, I feel it is important to remember the difference in prevailing situations between 2004-2010 and 2015-present.
1) Rule changes (eg: cannot be in shooter's landing zone).
2) Style of play across the league (eg: players not given green light to shoot threes before, more possessions and higher scores now than before).
3) Roster construction across the league (eg: depth is made up of better players who specialize in certain skills).
4) Player movement and super/stacked teams has led to a larger number of easier wins than before (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that the skill level between the rosters of top half teams compared to bottom half teams is larger than it used to be).

All 4 of these things will have an impact on how well a team performs offensively with their best offensive player on the court compared to league average offensive rating, right?

Of course there was a different situation! Sorry, I thought that was implied haha... but yes, I'm glad you clarified and added some detail.

My original point was just that Nash's statistical claim as the offensive GOAT is his team's relative offensive ratings, where he is usually above the competition (Curry, Lebron, Jordan, maybe Bird/Shaq/Jokic soon). If we just look at team Relative Offensive Rating, Nash's teams have the top 2 all time, 4 out of the top 5 (Curry's team is 3rd), 5 out of the top 10 (Jordan gets 2). I was just trying to say when we just look at team Offensive Rating when the star offensive player is on, Curry catches up more ground than I was expecting, and looks as good if not better than Nash (without adjusting for any more context than the season-relative adjustment makes).

To your point, rule changes, league style, roster construction across the league, league parity vs super teams, (and of course teammates which you touch on later) might all make a difference.

I'd add a few clarifications to this.
Re: rule changes, you mention giving shooters landing space. This would only apply after 2017, so 3/4 of Curry's top seasons wouldn't be affected by this.
Re: league style: Since these are relative Offensive Ratings, in theory they adjust for the average league style. Even though the modern era shoots more 3s, that's not necessarily a relative-to-league advantage for Curry, since everyone else also shoots more 3s. The key that would buff a player's relative ORTG is having a style/strategy advantage relative to their league.

I certainly think volume 3 point shooting this might benefit early-prime Curry relative to his league (e.g. ~2015/2016 especially) since there weren't as many 3s taken then vs today, but Nash also had style/strategy advantages relative to his league. Nash and the Suns had far more pick and roll, and far more spread pick and roll than their league average, which would boost his numbers too.

Now re: teammates:

Here's an example of why #3 roster construction is important. The best and most balanced Nash Phoenix team IMO was 2006-07, the year they should have won the title. Their main rotation was...

G: Nash / Leandro Barbosa
G: Raja Bell / Leandro Barbosa
F: Marion / Jumaine Jones
F: Boris Diaw / Kurt Thomas
C: Amar'e / Kurt Thomas

Except Barbosa, all of these guys depended on Nash to create different types of opportunities for them. If Nash had players who specialized as knockdown shooters next to him (such as Klay, Durant, even Poole, etc)... and players who could more easily convert any opportunities that he created for them (such as Iggy, Barnes, Wiggins, etc... while on the Suns, only Amar'e was better at converting opportunities)... then how many more assists would Nash have and what would be the impact on his team's ORtg then? If we look at the worst offensive options, Draymond isn't a shooter but he doesn't shoot often and instead he helps to make plays too (a step up from Diaw/Kurt or Bell)... and since Dray is usually in the lineup with Steph, Dray's impact to the ORtg through play-making is bundled in with Steph's.

So, since Curry has generally had a higher number of better offensive players alongside him than Nash did in Phoenix... I would be interested to know the ORtg for Nash in 2005-06 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Amar'e)... and the ORtg for Curry in 2020-21 (when his team was missing its 2nd best scorer, Klay)... to see if there's much difference there or if it's still close between them. The other players on their teams are comparable in quality for these 2 years.

If it is still close, then I guess you could rightly make the observation that you just did... but points #1, #2 and #4 would still apply.

I tend to agree Curry had better overall teammates, which might boost his pure on/off. But are we sure Curry's teammates are that much better, offensively? Let's look at this same stat for Nash/Curry's teammates.

Nash/Curry's teammates' relative ORTG when Nash/Curry are off:
1. 2006 Nash's Teammates: -0.38
2. 2018 Curry's Teammates: -0.71
3. 2007 Nash's Teammates: -1.02
4. 2016 Curry's Teammates: -1.87
5. 2005 Nash's Teammates: -3.26
6. 2015 Curry's Teammates: -3.92
7. 2017 Curry's Teammates: -5.07
8. 2008 Nash's Teammates: -5.27
...
9. 2021 Curry's Teammates: -7.88

4-year average for Nash's Teammates: -2.48
4-year average for Curry's Teammates: -2.89

[u]Curry's teammates actually come across worse offensively without Curry than Nash's teammates without Nash.[/u]

You suggest that Curry has perhaps better shooting depth than Nash, citing Klay/KD/Poole, but relative to his league... does he? The Warriors' best lineups often had 2 non-shooters (Draymond and Iguodala, particularly as they got older) in an era where plenty of other teams' best lineups had 1 or even 0 non-shooters. Nash's team was first in 3P% every year from 2005-2008, while Curry's was not from 2015-2018 (and Curry's teams had a far bigger shooting drop-off without him in 2019/2021/2022).

To be clear, both teams were near the top in this span, occasionally on top by a large margin, and both teams' shooting benefited significantly from their stars (both from Nash/Curry's shooting and their playmaking). But I'm just not so sure Curry had better shooters by so much of a margin. The Warriors were likely be more top heavy with shooting (Klay's certainly better than any shooter Nash played with), but they're also likely more "bottom-light" than the Suns.

You suggest that Curry had better playmaking next to him. This is almost certainly true. But I think it undersells how much better Curry fits with playmakers than Nash does. Curry's the better off-ball player, and I'd suggest it's by a landslide. Nash's ball dominance would pair far less well with Draymond or Iguodala offensively than Curry's off-ball play did.

I also think it's worth mentioning the fact that D'Antoni prioritized offense much more than Kerr who often preferred defense.

To me, these 3 factors make the Nash's supporting cast pretty close to Curry's when only considering offense. You could certainly argue Curry had the better supporting cast offensively, but I'm not sure it's by such a wide margin as you suggest... and you could also argue the reverse. To me, the gap in Curry/Nash's teammates is almost entirely defensive.

Well, why not?

In 2006 and 2021, both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality. Curry's other GSW teams have generally had much more offensive quality than Nash's PHO teams, especially for the years listed in the OP (i.e., 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019).

Re: 2006 Nash vs 2021 Curry, Nash definitely comes out on top in relative offensive rating.

2006 Nash's rORTG: +7.8
2021 Curry's rORTG: +3.22

But... I think your statement that "both teams were missing the 2nd best offensive player... and the rest of their team-mates were comparable in quality" is a bit misleading. Could they be similar in overall quality? Maybe, sure. But they're far from equivalent in offensive quality.

2006 Nash's Teammates' rORTG (Nash off): -0.38
2021 Curry's Teammates' rORTG (Curry off): -7.88

That's a massive difference. I think many are too quick to see Klay or Draymond on a roster and assume the supporting cast for Curry is so clearly ahead of the pack. Some years, overall (including defense), sure. But offense only, in every year of Curry's prime? Not a chance.

In 2021, if we look at the Warriors' OBPM... literally only 3 players are positive. That's terrible offensive support, compared to 2005 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, 06 Suns' 10 positive OBPM players, 07 Suns' 7 positive OBPM players, or even 08 Suns' 5 positive OBPM players.

Also, this is just an observation to your question... I think if it was Curry on that PHO team in 2006 instead of Nash, PHO most likely would have been less than a 62 wins team. That team needed more of a play-maker (like Nash) than a scorer (like Curry) to make it as good as it was, i.e., if you consider the characteristics of the other PHO players.

Sure, I'd agree with that. But I'd also suggest that Nash would have been far less effective on the Warriors too. Both teams were built around their best player's skillset... swap out those players, and the fit gets worse.

Not wanting to troll here dray but was not one of the pro curry arguments you used in other comparisions

(Like the on court plus-minus thread made from elgee video on jordan that went for 20 pages) based on the theory that curry can play with less dependant teammates

hence why it -doesnt- make it less impressive for curry that his teammates did better without him in comparision to other players whose teams struggled more when they went to bench?

Not wanting to call you out but i remember you argued heavily that in comparisions between lebron with curry/jordan we shouldnt look as much at the "OFF" part? And instead focus on the "ON" part for ceiling raising purposes?

Hiya falcolombardi, I appreciate the pushback.

A few things are being conflated here (offense vs wholistic teammate value, average over prime vs single years), so I want to make sure we're on the same page about what each other are saying.
-Peak Curry's teammates are worse without Curry than Peak Nash's are without Nash when looking at offense, only.
-Peak Curry's teammates are better without Curry than Peak LeBron's are without LeBron when looking at either offense or wholistic value.
-Peak Curry's teammates fall apart less without Curry in overall value (read: overall, not -offense only) in most years compared to some other superstars, but this is very clearly not in 2021 (the 2021 team was poor without Curry both overall and in offense only).

With that out of the way, I think it's important to consider why teammates fall apart without the star on the court.
One reason: the teammates are just flat-out bad. They get carried when the star's on, and they fall apart without the star. So here's our first case:
-Case 0, where we might not fault the superstar: terrible teammates, and the team's clearly not in championship contention.

But there's another possible reason: the system is built around the star "too much." This leads to great value when the star's on, but forces everyone to fall apart unnecessarily when the star is off (where a different system might put non-star players in a better position to succeed without the star). There's a few different possibilities here:
-Case 1, where we might not fault the superstar: teams not in championship contention, but are training role players to prepare for championship contention the next season.
Case 2, where we might partially (but not fully) fault the superstar: teams that are in championship contention, that are limited by their system when their star is off, but still believe it's the best overall system.
Case 3, where we might fully fault the superstar: teams that are in championship contention, that are limited by their system when their star is off, but would be better off with a different system.

I'd argue teams like the 2021 Warriors were more of the first case. The 21 Warriors didn't believe they could win a championship, but they thought they were better off next season by sticking to their system, training the players that they'd keep, and trading the players that wouldn't succeed on a championship team. (FWIW, the 1990 bulls did a similar thing preparing for the 1991 season, but obviously the 90/91 Bulls were a better overall team than the 21/22 Warriors).

I'd argue at some of LeBron's teams suffered from case 2 or case 3, at least more so than Curry. Which is why I faulted him more than I do Curry for what many might term "worse scalability".

You could make a similar argument for Nash's poor scalability. The idea here is that ball-dominant or heliocentric systems a) may face more diminishing returns with better players who want the ball more, and b) these systems might struggle more without their superstar than more off-ball superstars, since you can still have primary offensive creators on the court to run the offense when the superstar goes off. You can use the on/off data from LeBron to argue both a and b -- I haven't looked closely enough at Nash to know for sure, though it would be an interesting test of the theory. Edit clarifier: specifically, it would be interesting to look at why Nash's teams didn't fall apart offensively as much as when other more ball-dominant superstars go to the bench.

Edit: Regardless of the scalability concern, I think my main point in this thread was that the offense-only supporting cast gap between Curry/Nash isn't as large as people are portraying it. With more offense-focused teammates (at the cost of defense), and with league-leading shooting, Nash had plenty of offensive help. Curry had better overall help, but his help was at times more defense focused (at least near his peak... in 2021, Curry just had flat out worse help than peak Nash).


...
Finally, a quick qualifier on my previous argument in the Jordan On/off thread: In my very first post, in my thesis sentence, I said I was mostly disagreeing with the idea that the new on/off numbers for Jordan were the "nail in the coffin" for Jordan's GOAT peak case, or that they were the "nail in the coffin" for LeBron's scalability concerns. One poster said the data showed that LeBron's scalability concerns "collapse like a house of cards", and frankly I just don't think that's true.

I was playing devil's advocate in a largely pro-LeBron thread, because I found the claims being made a bit excessive. You could still use the on/off numbers to argue LeBron's GOAT case over Jordan's, or to argue that LeBron's scalability concerns are overrated, and that would be a fair argument. My point was that it wasn't far and away the winning case, and that you could also use the on/off data to argue for Jordan or against LeBron's scalability.