RealGM

If you had to pick one player who is the most similar to Oscar, particularly from nowadays but can be any era, who would it be? Would it be a James Harden/Luka Doncic? or maybe Russell Westbrook? Another name I'm not thinking of?

(Not adding a poll from now, might add later according to options listed)

Michael Ray RIchardson?

Not Richardson, he was very talented but he played fast and loose. Oscar was the essence of control. Think Chris Paul with forward size.

So a worse Chris Paul with more size. Kind of like a less athletic Deron Williams?

One_and_Done wrote:So a worse Chris Paul with more size. Kind of like a less athletic Deron Williams?

I wouldn't be surprised if modern oscar was better than cp3 tbh. The size difference is substantial. Oscar was a solid 6'5 220 - big guard.

Redmoon wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:So a worse Chris Paul with more size. Kind of like a less athletic Deron Williams?

I wouldn't be surprised if modern oscar was better than cp3 tbh. The size difference is substantial. Oscar was a solid 6'5 220 - big guard.

The size of Chris Paul's talent is a much bigger gap than those 5 inches.

One_and_Done wrote:

Redmoon wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:So a worse Chris Paul with more size. Kind of like a less athletic Deron Williams?

I wouldn't be surprised if modern oscar was better than cp3 tbh. The size difference is substantial. Oscar was a solid 6'5 220 - big guard.

The size of Chris Paul's talent is a much bigger gap than those 5 inches.

Prob not tbh

Chris Paul is a good comparison for approaching the game (methodological breaking down defenses with changes of pace and finding subtle openings) but their scoring profile is quite different, because Oscar was a massive 6'5 220 lbs guard, not an undersized PG. If you give CP3 a Dirk-like high post game, that would work better. Of course Oscar was a better slasher than Dirk.

Luka is also an interesting comparison, but he had a different temperament than Oscar with his crazy shooting selection. They do have a lot in common with the use of body, core strength and patient defense solving patterns. Oscar was more transition oriented, though it could be the case of era differences.

Except all those players are better than Oscar.

One_and_Done wrote:Except all those players are better than Oscar.

Maybe, maybe not. That's not the point of this thread.

Why do you bother replying to threads in which you have nothing substantial to say?

its clearly harden.. from the floor raising ability ALONE

Combination of Chris Paul and Jason Kidd, but not as strong of a defender.

NBA4Lyfe wrote:its clearly harden.. from the floor raising ability ALONE

Not sure why you think Oscar was a massive floor raiser. He was a great statistical player and did a great ceiling raising job when they paired him with Kareem; but playing with a ATG big who was one of the best of the early spacing bigs in Jerry Lucas which is a perfect match for his power offensive game, I would say that he did roughly what was expected or a bit less than the numbers would imply.

That's not to say he wasn't a great player; I have him as the 4th or 5th best guard of all time when measuring him against his competition and adjusting for strength of league. I just don't see him as a massive floor raiser relative to his statistical profile.

NBA4Lyfe wrote:its clearly harden.. from the floor raising ability ALONE

Harden's game looks nothing like Oscar. Oscar didn't have even a quarter of his bag of moves.

Maybe that's because in Oscar's day, you couldn't carry the ball on every dribble, take 3+ steps on moves to the hoop, drag your pivot foot in the post, set moving screens, or all the other ways that the rules have loosened up over time. Or maybe he didn't need them because even in the pack the paint era with no 3 point shot he played in, he got his shot more efficiently than any non-big in the game year in and year out with only Jerry West in the same ballpark.

Jordan Poole has a bag of tricks too; the Professor from the And1 tour does too; doesn't make them great players.

penbeast0 wrote:Maybe that's because in Oscar's day, you couldn't carry the ball on every dribble, take 3+ steps on moves to the hoop, drag your pivot foot in the post, set moving screens, or all the other ways that the rules have loosened up over time. Or maybe he didn't need them because even in the pack the paint era with no 3 point shot he played in, he got his shot more efficiently than any non-big in the game year in and year out with only Jerry West in the same ballpark.

Jordan Poole has a bag of tricks too; the Professor from the And1 tour does too; doesn't make them great players.

That's the point. Oscar's greatness is a product of his weak era. If Jordan Poole played back then he'd undoubtedly be seen as a great player.

One_and_Done wrote:That's the point. Oscar's greatness is a product of his weak era. If Jordan Poole played back then he'd undoubtedly be seen as a great player.

I'd argue that Oscar's era concentrated more talent than the 80s, and far more than the 70s or 50s. I do agree that there's more talent today but I think you ignore a lot of factors when you dismiss every non-big from before Magic/Bird's day or before Jordan's day as a product of a weak era. Their game resembled that of Jordan's era a lot more than today's stars do unless you are going to make the argument that Jordan wasn't that good either and wouldn't impress today without the 3 point shot that every guard relies on.

I will say that Jordan Poole would not be a great player in any era with the possible exception of the barnstorming segregation teams like the Globetrotters. He just doesn't have the size/strength/intelligence/defensive focus/fundamentals of the great players and without the 3 point shot, probably wouldn't be in the NBA at all.

One_and_Done wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Maybe that's because in Oscar's day, you couldn't carry the ball on every dribble, take 3+ steps on moves to the hoop, drag your pivot foot in the post, set moving screens, or all the other ways that the rules have loosened up over time. Or maybe he didn't need them because even in the pack the paint era with no 3 point shot he played in, he got his shot more efficiently than any non-big in the game year in and year out with only Jerry West in the same ballpark.

Jordan Poole has a bag of tricks too; the Professor from the And1 tour does too; doesn't make them great players.

That's the point. Oscar's greatness is a product of his weak era. If Jordan Poole played back then he'd undoubtedly be seen as a great player.

Roughly as great as something between Jim King and Walt Hazzard. Closer to the former though.

One_and_Done wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Maybe that's because in Oscar's day, you couldn't carry the ball on every dribble, take 3+ steps on moves to the hoop, drag your pivot foot in the post, set moving screens, or all the other ways that the rules have loosened up over time. Or maybe he didn't need them because even in the pack the paint era with no 3 point shot he played in, he got his shot more efficiently than any non-big in the game year in and year out with only Jerry West in the same ballpark.

Jordan Poole has a bag of tricks too; the Professor from the And1 tour does too; doesn't make them great players.

That's the point. Oscar's greatness is a product of his weak era. If Jordan Poole played back then he'd undoubtedly be seen as a great player.

Based on what?

penbeast0 wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:That's the point. Oscar's greatness is a product of his weak era. If Jordan Poole played back then he'd undoubtedly be seen as a great player.

I'd argue that Oscar's era concentrated more talent than the 80s, and far more than the 70s or 50s. I do agree that there's more talent today but I think you ignore a lot of factors when you dismiss every non-big from before Magic/Bird's day or before Jordan's day as a product of a weak era. Their game resembled that of Jordan's era a lot more than today's stars do unless you are going to make the argument that Jordan wasn't that good either and wouldn't impress today without the 3 point shot that every guard relies on.

I will say that Jordan Poole would not be a great player in any era with the possible exception of the barnstorming segregation teams like the Globetrotters. He just doesn't have the size/strength/intelligence/defensive focus/fundamentals of the great players and without the 3 point shot, probably wouldn't be in the NBA at all.

And we disagree, because I think most of the 'talent' in Oscar's era would have struggled to make the G-League today.