Infrequent Finalist Franchises - Discussion

flaco · Post #41 » by **flaco** » Mon Feb 3, 2025 11:01 pm

Curious to know where you guys rank Oscar all time.

top 10?
top 15?
top 20?
outside top 20?

Personally, I got him in my top 10 and consider him an under-the-radar GOAT candidate.

I got 9 GOAT candidates. In chronological order: Russ, Wilt, Oscar, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Jordan, Timmy, LeBron.

I also think he'd fit perfectly in today's game. I envision him running a heliocentric offense sort of like a rich man's Luka or Harden. From what I understand, he was a good defender as well. It's possible he's the only player in NBA history who had zero weaknesses in his game. I mean, all great players had at least one weakness. MJ and LeBron are mediocre 3pt shooters. Kareem lacked 3pt range and would likely be effective only in a drop scheme. Ditto for Wilt/Shaq, plus they were terrible FT shooters. Magic left a lot to be desired on D and wasn't really an alpha scorer. Bird lacked explosiveness and leaping ability. I could go on and on. The only other player who might had zero weaknesses was Jerry West(?). Similarly to Oscar, I've read reports he was a good defender. At the end of the day, it's tough to evaluate old school players. I've only watched Oscar and West in youtube videos.

Post #42 » by **MadNESS** » Mon Feb 3, 2025 11:19 pm

You forgot THE goat

Post #43 » by **MadNESS** » Mon Feb 3, 2025 11:21 pm

flaco wrote:Curious to know where you guys rank Oscar all time.

top 10?
top 15?
top 20?
outside top 20?

Personally, I got him in my top 10 and consider him an under-the-radar GOAT candidate.

I got 9 GOAT candidates. In chronological order: Russ, Wilt, Oscar, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Jordan, Timmy, LeBron.

I also think he'd fit perfectly in today's game. I envision him running a heliocentric offense sort of like a rich man's Luka or Harden. From what I understand, he was a good defender as well. It's possible he's the only player in NBA history who had zero weaknesses in his game. I mean, all great players had at least one weakness. MJ and LeBron are mediocre 3pt shooters, Kareem lacked 3pt range and would likely be effective only in a drop scheme. Ditto for Wilt/Shaq, plus they were terrible FT shooters. Magic left a lot to be desired on D and wasn't really an alpha scorer. Bird lacked explosiveness and leaping ability. I could go on and on. The only other player who might had zero weaknesses was Jerry West(?). Similarly to Oscar, I've read reports he was a good defender. At the end of the day, it's tough to evaluate old school players. I've only watched Oscar and West in youtube videos.

Up

Post #44 » by **MadNESS** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:00 am

Yeah it was PG/TMac there. Went for the more fun route.

Post #45 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:09 am

Oscar/Shaq is going to be tough to beat from a purely talent standpoint.

Post #46 » by **MadNESS** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:11 am

Snakebites wrote:Oscar/Shaq is going to be tough to beat from a purely talent standpoint.

Fit is strange though...

Laimbeer · Post #47 » by **Laimbeer** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:28 am

MadNESS wrote:
Snakebites wrote:Oscar/Shaq is going to be tough to beat from a purely talent standpoint.

Fit is strange though...

Great combo, but pre-peak Shaq and post-peak Oscar.

Post #48 » by **Fadeaway_J** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:31 am

Laimbeer wrote:
MadNESS wrote:
Snakebites wrote:Oscar/Shaq is going to be tough to beat from a purely talent standpoint.

Fit is strange though...

Great combo, but pre-peak Shaq and post-peak Oscar.

It's not post-peak Oscar.

Post #49 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 12:50 am

I don’t think the fit is that strange.

And it’s peak Oscar. The Royals are the Kings.

wackbone · Post #50 » by **wackbone** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 2:00 am

I really, really like the start of Luka-Dwight, but I'm having a hard time coming up with a concrete plan moving forward in this particular pool of players. Having Luka makes me feel obligated to (eventually) take a defensive guard to take on the opponent's best offensive guard, but almost all of the best guards available are either too ball-dominant to be a great offensive fit next to Luka and/or are not good defenders. There are a few guys who fit the bill but none are particularly exciting picks, and none would be good value this early. But I fear if I don't take them with my upcoming pick and then there's 20 picks until my next one, might be SOL.

On the other hand talent is running out quick so I don't think I can afford to go fit now, almost certainly better to prioritize talent this early.

And then there's Dwight down low, who isn't ideal to pair with a paint-dominant type PF, which limits some of the options there as well.

Decisions, Decisions.

Laimbeer · Post #51 » by **Laimbeer** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 2:07 am

Snakebites wrote:I don’t think the fit is that strange.

And it’s peak Oscar. The Royals are the Kings.

Ah damn forgot he is eligible as a King.

JimmyPlopper · Post #52 » by **JimmyPlopper** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 2:10 am

Rochester Seagrams
Rochester Royals
Cincinnati Royals
Kansas City Kings (mascot changed to differentiate from the baseball team in KC already called the Royals)
Sacramento Kings

Larry_Russell · Post #53 » by **Larry_Russell** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 2:38 am

wackbone wrote:I really, really like the start of Luka-Dwight, but I'm having a hard time coming up with a concrete plan moving forward in this particular pool of players. Having Luka makes me feel obligated to (eventually) take a defensive guard to take on the opponent's best offensive guard, but almost all of the best guards available are either too ball-dominant to be a great offensive fit next to Luka and/or are not good defenders. There are a few guys who fit the bill but none are particularly exciting picks, and none would be good value this early. But I fear if I don't take them with my upcoming pick and then there's 20 picks until my next one, might be SOL.

On the other hand talent is running out quick so I don't think I can afford to go fit now, almost certainly better to prioritize talent this early.

And then there's Dwight down low, who isn't ideal to pair with a paint-dominant type PF, which limits some of the options there as well.

Decisions, Decisions.

Used dwight and luka in the last draft.

Didnt work well for me. Lol

durantbird · Post #54 » by **durantbird** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:07 am

JimmyPlopper wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:

You two made it again lol. The clock hasn't started

JimmyPlopper · Post #55 » by **JimmyPlopper** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:18 am

durantbird wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:

You two made it again lol. The clock hasn't started

I thought clock started at 9PM... did it change again?

durantbird · Post #56 » by **durantbird** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:22 am

JimmyPlopper wrote:
durantbird wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:

You two made it again lol. The clock hasn't started

I thought clock started at 9PM... did it change again?

It changed once. Wrote a message about it and it's the first line in the sheets page

JimmyPlopper · Post #57 » by **JimmyPlopper** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:24 am

durantbird wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:
durantbird wrote:
You two made it again lol. The clock hasn't started

I thought clock started at 9PM... did it change again?

It changed once. Wrote a message about it and it's the first line in the sheets page

I don't look at the sheets page. I rely on these boards. Please make it clearer next time. Thanks for running it.

Post #58 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:44 am

JimmyPlopper wrote:
durantbird wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:
I thought clock started at 9PM... did it change again?

It changed once. Wrote a message about it and it's the first line in the sheets page

I don't look at the sheets page. I rely on these boards. Please make it clearer next time. Thanks for running it.

But he also posted it on the thread.

JimmyPlopper · Post #59 » by **JimmyPlopper** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:47 am

Snakebites wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:
durantbird wrote:It changed once. Wrote a message about it and it's the first line in the sheets page

I don't look at the sheets page. I rely on these boards. Please make it clearer next time. Thanks for running it.

But he also posted it on the boards.

Where? It's not on this OP. Got to make it clearer or draw it to people's attention when you change the rules in the middle of the game. Quote everyone at a minimum

Post #60 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 4, 2025 5:48 am

JimmyPlopper wrote:
Snakebites wrote:
JimmyPlopper wrote:I don't look at the sheets page. I rely on these boards. Please make it clearer next time. Thanks for running it.

But he also posted it on the boards.

Where? It's not on this OP. Got to make it clearer or draw it to people's attention when you change the rules in the middle of the game. Quote everyone at a minimum

Page 2.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect people to read the thread.

That’s just me.