RealGM

Who is higher on your all-time list between KG and Oscar?

While their playstyle and skillset couldn't be more different, I see them as having very comparable careers. Both had outlier impact during their prime and were very effective post-prime as well on title winning teams but their play-off resumes fall short of top 10 status mainly due to them having relatively weak supporting casts at their best. I do have KG 1-2 places ahead though.

Oscar a bit ahead due to I think having perhaps goat level game management ability plus maybe being a top 5 efficiency volume scorer of all time as a guard/wing and having dominant size/athleticism. Its definitely close though.

I have them in the same tier, but I prefer two-way bigs over offensive dynamos. I have Garnett one or two spots ahead of Oscar.

I go Oscar, because I'm more confident in his general PS performance. There are some general WOWY indicators that suggest Robertson might have been more valuable to his teams, although they are somewhat shaky, and I would bet on KG in general being more indispensable to his teams throughout his career considering his plus-minus footprint back to 97 is really only 2nd in history to Lebron.

Oscar Robertson

Prime WOWYR (61-72)-8.4
Career WOWYR-8.5

Scaled WOWYR-7.8
Alt Scaled-8.4
10-year Scaled GPM (62-71)-7.7



Kevin Garnett

Prime WOWYR (97-13)-6.2
Career WOWYR-4.4


Scaled WOWYR-5.7
Alt Scaled-6.3
10-year Scaled GPM (97-06)-6.8

Oscar was arguably the best scorer and playmaker at points in his career, and that is a hard combo to pass up. I don't think KG has enough equity for me as a #1 on offense; I think of him as closer to David Robinson than Tim Duncan, so I feel more comfortable giving Oscar the nod.

Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Garnett is usually 10-12 for me and Oscar is usually 13-16 for me

migya wrote:Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

Not that i’d make the case, but it’s not that hard to see the case for Oscar as the goat offensive player. For one he led the top offense in the league for 6 years in his prime, and has one of the most well rounded shooting/scoring/passing packages in history. In some ways he was like a mix between Magic and Lebron.

“No where near the best offensive player ever” is quite a stretch. I mean he’s easily top 10 for anyone being objective, and I don’t think anyone is clearly better. Personally I’d probably have him in the 4-6 range or so though.

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

I suggest you to differentiate your opinions from facts, because saying that Oscar is "no where near the best offensive player ever" or that he has no case over Steph, Nash, Kobe or Bird is something a lot of posters here would disagree with.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever. What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

An easy argument.

The first decade of Robertson's career, 1960-61 to 1969-70, the league average PG shot just 42% on 2s, the league average SG just 43%.

That decade he shot 49% on 2s while outscoring all guards at 29.3 pts/g. That was better shooting than all guards (other than Frazier and Hudson who only played the latter half of that decade).

So not only did he score better, pass better, and rebound better than all other guards, he shot better too.

Curry never approached the assists Robertson threw for, was never the rebounder he was.

Magic never approached the scoring Robertson did.

Nash never approached the rebounder Robertson was, nor drew fouls like he did.

Among all-around guards the best comparables are likely West and Jordan, with arguments for all 3 as the best all-around guard ever.

As for players like James or Shaq, arguments among players that played different positions are harder to make.

I for one would take players like Chamberlain and Jabbar over Robertson, but would be happy with the Big "O" as the best guard (along with Jordan and West).

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

Take it you're a young guy.

When it comes to comparisons this close, it makes sense to look at the other stuff. KG was by all accounts a good teammate who made guys better (at least defensively). Oscar was like a worse, much more miserable version of MJ with less winning. His bitterness and all ways it undermined his success has to be part of the discussion. And it's especially relevant because KG very easily could've become someone bitter like Oscar (edit: this probably isn't fair. Oscar was bitter because of some pretty ridiculous racism). Instead, he kept his head down and was loyal to a fault even though his franchise sucked.

Both their careers kind of finished in similar fashion with chips on other teams outside their primes, but I think it's reasonable to argue KG was more responsible for his title than Oscar was for his. But I just have a hard time reading all those stories about what a miserable prick Oscar was and come away thinking he wasn't in many ways part of the problem in Cincy even though he was an ATG talent.

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:Oscar. On a bit better team he would be known as a winner comparable to West, losing to the Celtics. He is among the best offensive players ever, probably the best.

Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

Take it you're a young guy.

Yea I’m 18 but I don’t see why that should matter. I’ve still analyzed as much Oscar film as we have and I’ve done plenty of statistical analysis on him so I don’t see why my age should invalidate me from this conversation

but I think it's reasonable to argue KG was more responsible for his title than Oscar was for his

I think it's reasonable to say before either got to better teams that Robertson was the much better playoff performer.

Robertson (Cin) - 39 games, 47 min/g, 30 pts/g, 12 FTA/g, 9-10 reb/g, 9-10 ast/g

Garnett (Min) - 47 games, 43 min/g, 22 pts/g, 5-6 FTA/g, 13-14 reb/g, 5 ast/g

They both shot 46% on 2s but for Robertson's era that was much better as a guard than Garnett's 46% on 2s for a PF in his era, and Robertson got to the FT line much more and was a much better FT shooter.

Oscar was like a worse, much more miserable version of MJ with less winning.

Who were his teammates? Did Robertson have the quality of teammates that Chamberlain, Russell, or West had during the 60s?

Would you be saying the same things about Jerry West had he played for the Royals and Robertson had played for the Lakers?

Robertson won a title his very first year with a great talent in Jabbar, when Jabbar was just a 2nd year player and only 23 years of age.

That was Jabbar's only title until 9 years later. Would you be saying similar things about Jabbar now had he not won that title? The same things they said about Jordan before he finally won a title - that he was a selfish scorer that was not a team player?

Neither Robertson nor Jabbar win that title without each other. And while Jabbar was all-NBA 1st team that year Roberton was still all-NBA 2nd team at the age of 32.

But I just have a hard time reading all those stories about what a miserable prick Oscar was and come away thinking he wasn't in many ways part of the problem in Cincy.

So a player is the absolute best player at his position in the league for a decade but you are trying to infer he was part of the problem they didn't win a title?

I'll say it again - if Jabbar had not won that title with Robertson would you be saying the same things about Jabbar not winning a title until his 11th season in the league, despite being the best player in the league for a decade?

As for Robertson vs. Garnett.

All during the 60s and 70s I never heard anyone say there was a guard that was better than Oscar Robertson. On the contrary every great guard was compared to him.

Today the only guard I believe that has a cogent argument for being better than him is Jordan. A few can be claimed to have been as good (West, Magic, Curry), but actually better than the Big "O"? I don't see it.

As for Garnett I can see a host of PFs claiming to have been arguably better - Pettit, Duncan, McHale, Schayes, Malone, Elvin Hayes, Barkley, Nowitzki, Rodman.

kcktiny wrote:

but I think it's reasonable to argue KG was more responsible for his title than Oscar was for his

I think it's reasonable to say before either got to better teams that Robertson was the much better playoff performer.

Robertson (Cin) - 39 games, 47 min/g, 30 pts/g, 12 FTA/g, 9-10 reb/g, 9-10 ast/g

Garnett (Min) - 47 games, 43 min/g, 22 pts/g, 5-6 FTA/g, 13-14 reb/g, 5 ast/g

They both shot 46% on 2s but for Robertson's era that was much better as a guard than Garnett's 46% on 2s for a PF in his era, and Robertson got to the FT line much more and was a much better FT shooter.

It's debateable. One thing that isn't debateable is it's not a fair comparison to use per game stats when one guy is playing at a 120 pace and one at a 90 pace.

Oscar was like a worse, much more miserable version of MJ with less winning.

Who were his teammates? Did Robertson have the quality of teammates that Chamberlain, Russell, or West had during the 60s?

Would you be saying the same things about Jerry West had he played for the Royals and Robertson had played for the Lakers?

Robertson won a title his very first year with a great talent in Jabbar, when Jabbar was just a 2nd year player and only 23 years of age.

That was Jabbar's only title until 9 years later. Would you be saying similar things about Jabbar now had he not won that title? The same things they said about Jordan before he finally won a title - that he was a selfish scorer that was not a team player?

Neither Robertson nor Jabbar win that title without each other. And while Jabbar was all-NBA 1st team that year Roberton was still all-NBA 2nd team at the age of 32.

I have made the same comment about Kareem who was, umm...aloof is the nice way of putting it. But Oscar was more on Rick Barry's level. He was mid 00s Kobe, late 80s MJ, only worse, and like that most of his career. I look at KC's crappy defense and wonder if Oscar wasn't such an ass would they have been more connected as a team and actually played defense? I get he didn't have great teammates, but even untalented teams can play defense. At least MJ and Kobe had some charm.

Edit: I'll give Oscar the fact that he dealt with a lot of racism. That'd probably turn most people into horrible people to be around. We look at how Bill Russell handled this, mostly with class, and hold people like Oscar to that standard. It's not fair. But still...

All during the 60s and 70s I never heard anyone say there was a guard that was better than Oscar Robertson. On the contrary every great guard was compared to him.

Oscar was the best guard in NBA history pre-MJ. He was supremely talented.

As for Garnett I can see a host of PFs claiming to have been arguably better - Pettit, Duncan, McHale, Schayes, Malone, Elvin Hayes, Barkley, Nowitzki, Rodman.

I'll give you Duncan. Dirk and Chuck are fun discussions. The rest of that list is laughable.

I think it's reasonable to say before either got to better teams that Robertson was the much better playoff performer.

Robertson (Cin) - 39 games, 47 min/g, 30 pts/g, 12 FTA/g, 9-10 reb/g, 9-10 ast/g

Garnett (Min) - 47 games, 43 min/g, 22 pts/g, 5-6 FTA/g, 13-14 reb/g, 5 ast/g

They both shot 46% on 2s but for Robertson's era that was much better as a guard than Garnett's 46% on 2s for a PF in his era, and Robertson got to the FT line much more and was a much better FT shooter.

Using brief box score statline comparisons without much context about their playstyles or roles were to try to determine who the better playoff performer is, especially when one of the players in discussion is commonly considered a top-5 ish defensive player ever with value heavily underrated by that box doesn't really work well.

I think the indictators we have for the regular season point to KG being a bit more impactful - although there is no apples to apples comparison to have there ofc, and i've argued his playoff "drop" is historically overstated. The answer here for me is KG by a comfortable margin with what I know about Oscar for having a better prime in my estimation and superb longevity as well. I'd need more evidence of Oscar being a very clear positive on defense in his prime for it to move the needle enough on my personal list.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2212306&start=40#p100488805

EDIT: I think I saw someone else mention this in a different thread, but for evidence of defensive value potentially increasing in value in the playoffs we can see it in a player like Draymond in bballindex's LEBRON metric - looking like flat out one of the league's most valuable players in his prime. Seing as KG is maybe the most similar to him stylistically to Draymond(still very different) in terms of all-timers and outperforms him in the regular season of these types of metrics while also having multiple physical advantages benefitting his defense - I think there is a possibility his value on defense perhaps even increased in the playoffs as well like I alluded to on that post, but the measurements we have for that aren't great at all and this one specifically doesn't go that far back.

Just some food for thought I suppose and I believe worth considering before making conclusions there is an overall drop in his value because his offensive box numbers look weaker.
https://www.bball-index.com/my-playoff-lebron/

It's debateable. One thing that isn't debateable is it's not a fair comparison to use per game stats when one guy is playing at a 120 pace and one at a 90 pace.

Nice how you ignored Garnett's 45% playoff 2pt FG%.

The fact is in Cincinnati Robertson's 46% playoff 2pt FG% scoring 29.7 pts/g, when the league average guard from 1961-62 to 1966-67 in the playoffs shot just a 42% 2pt FG%, is much better than Garnett's Minnesota 45% playoff 2pt FG% scoring 21.4 pts/g from 1996-97 to 2003-04 when just the league average PF shot 46% in the playoffs.

I have made the same comment about Kareem who was, umm...aloof is the nice way of putting it.

In the 9 seasons Jabbar did not win a title prior to his title with the Lakers, in other words 1969-70 and 1971-72 to 1978-79, among all NBA players he scored the most points (19545), scored 28 pts/g shooting 55% on 2s (when the league average 2pt FG% was 46.5%), grabbed the 2nd most rebounds (10149), had the most FGM (8081) and the most FTM (3383), and played 41 min/g over 691 games.

Those same 9 years he scored more playoff points (2010) than any other NBA player, scored higher (31 pts/g) than any other player, and played 45 min/g over 65 playoff games.

Those 9 seasons he was all-NBA 1st team 5 times, all-NBA 2nd team 3 times, all-defensive 1st team 3 times, all-defensive 2nd team 3 time.

But you sum up this 9 year performance by calling it "aloof"? My you are a student of the game aren't you?

Tell me, have you ever watched even one complete game Jabbar played in prior to 1979-80?

I'll give you Duncan. Dirk and Chuck are fun discussions. The rest of that list is laughable.

You do need to watch some basketball. It's laughable Pettit, McHale, Schayes, Malone, Hayes, and Rodman are arguably better than Garnett? They are all Top 75 players.

especially when one of the players in discussion is commonly considered a top-5 ish defensive player ever

Garnett a top 5 defensive player ever? I can come up with a list of twice as many players better defensively right off the bat:

Russell
Chamberlain
Thurmond
Jabbar
Eaton
B.Wallace
Duncan
Gobert
Dw.Howard
Mutombo
Olajuwon
D.Robinson
Rodman

I think the indictators we have for the regular season point to KG being a bit more impactful

I should have known this would come from someone spouting off some plus/minus derivative as being the gospel.

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:
Oscar is no where near the best offensive player ever

What would even be the argument for him over MJ Steph Magic or LeBron? Or even guys like Nash Kobe bird or Shaq (who he’s closer to than the first 4)

Take it you're a young guy.

Yea I’m 18 but I don’t see why that should matter. I’ve still analyzed as much Oscar film as we have and I’ve done plenty of statistical analysis on him so I don’t see why my age should invalidate me from this conversation

Your view on this topic shows you don't know much about Oscar. He was touted buy some as the GOAT in the late 80s.