The perimeter orientated, like-Mike focus of the league has certainly changed the way a team on the opposite end would approach this situation.

It's indeed an interesting question. I think that in an ideal sports world where all basketball players are around the same talent level, having each player take on around 20% of the offense WOULD be the best way to play the game. It would certainly be intuitive too -- having all five players on the floor carry a equal brunt of the load and maximize their efficiencies in a team game I think would be better than a team that has one player shouldering the entire load and and bunch of non-impact players around him. The only problem is as you suggested, that not everyone is the same in skill and talent level. As a Cavs fan, I heard the criticisms that LeBron dominates the ball too much and does too much for his team, and would be better off taking a step back in the offense. I actually think that LeBron himself would agree with that one...the only thing is, where would those shots go? Delonte West might be a good candidate -- he can handle the ball well (the Cavs best ball handler outside of Lebron), set others up, go to the basket and has a nice stroke especially off the dribble (the dribble-drive and stepback jumper on the wing is his specialty), but he can be a notoriously streaky shooter. Mo Wiliams is the best shooter on the team and is also a good playmaker, but he's prone to turning over the ball and doesn't have great ability to get by his man with the first-step and get to the rim. Andy Varejao has been really efficient on the offensive end and has improved his ability to finish around the rim. He's even surprised me this season with some moves in the paint, but I still wouldn't be calling plays for him in the post yet on a consistent basis, where you have Mo or LeBron take the ball and just dump it down to him on the block. Shaq can still post up and score, but he has been injury his game is not what it once was, and you can neutralize him by sending him to the foul line (and Dwight's not a good free throw shooter either, but unlike Shaq now he's both strong AND freakishly athletic, so he can punish you down-low and also with the pick-and-roll even if his post repertoire is still a work in progress). I think that picking up Jamison would be LeBron's best bet for shouldering that load offensively, but it's taken him a while to find his way in the offense and he has also been banged up this season. And NONE of them has Lebron's ability to hit tough shots especially at the basket. So I don't think it's bad at all to allow your star player (who is also the league's best player) to take the shots that you would probably struggle with your skill level. Perhaps if Lebron had someone like Bosh or Wade around him, he would certainly take a step back and give up the ball more often on offense (and you certainly saw that in the '08 Olympic games. LeBron setting up his superstar teammates in Kobe, Wade, Bosh, etc. was great for the game). And in several Cavs games I've watched this season, LeBron has always looked for his teammates when they are working well offensively moving without the ball and off of screens, cutting towards the basket, and knocking down open shots. But when they don't do that and the team needs offense or if the game is close in the 4th, I don't see how Lebron distributing his workload to the Delontes and Andys of the world will help you win more games. I know it's a team game, but SOMEONE has to shoot the ball, and I'd rather have my star player who has the best ability to put the ball into the rim (and also create looks for others by doing so) handle that responsibility more often than not.

I remember Chris Webber and Gary Payton (I think it was GP) saying that they played the same on good teams and bad teams and results had everything to do with the quality of their teammates - this was an argument about whether or not Al Jefferson deserved to be an All-Star last year when he was putting up great numbers on a losing team.

I don't know if I really buy that though. Are Peja and Bibby really better than Juwan and Strickland in the late 90s, or are they just a better fit with Webber allowing him to play his game?

It gets me thinking about player roles and the whole shot distribution question we touched on above. If the optimal split of shot attempts for any 5 man unit is 20% of the shots each instead of a higher proportion going to the better scorer, how does that work from a logistical standpoint? If the plays aren't going to the star who demands a double team, how does the spot shooter get open? If the slashing scoring specialist or post scorer isn't drawing help defenders at the rim, how does the offensive rebounding specialist get his tip ins? Sure it might make sense for the ball to be spread evenly, but how do you accomplish it?

I know I'm not a pro basketball player by ANY means, but after playing a pick-up game yesterday where the players on my team couldn't make a single shot and I had to keep taking the ball on offense to make some something happen, I'm going to say that players tend to share the ball less when your don't have a great team around you (or your team is struggling) rather than the other way around.

Now I know how Allen Iverson sometimes feels on offense.

PER = 31.6 in the regular season (2nd only to his 1988 season) & 32.0 the playoffs (his best ever)
WS/48 = 0.321 in the regular season (his best ever) & 0.333 the playoffs (also his best ever)
ORTG = 125 in the regular season (his best ever) & 127 the playoffs (also his best ever)

All of this while his USG% is among the lowest of his careers.

In other words 1991 is the year where Jordan relied the most on his teammates to win.
You can notice that with his outstanding average of 11.4 assists per game in the NBA Finals. This is also the year when the Bulls had their easiest title run, losing only 2 games in the playoffs.

By 1993 he had returned to a higher USG% and lower efficiency (by his standards of course), as illustrated by his 41.0 ppg average the NBA Finals.

The question of course is, did Jordan share the ball less because his team was weaker, or was his team weaker because Jordan shared the ball less?

Knew I'd finally find this somewhere on the web: an example of a skill curve for Kobe. This is the one from 2008 http://www.basketballgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/picture-4.png

The beauty of this example is that you only look at the usage vs. efficiency from one season so you can avoid some of the problems of looking at this phenomenon from season to season. Of course variance always plays a part in these things (Kobe actually improved his efficiency a little when he went from around 20% to 23% of the offense, so it could be showing what Neil said earlier about elite players not being really affected by a small workload increase.I think it also partly might be due to he usually doesn't have many games working under 24% of the offense as he does for 25%-33%, so it could skew the regression curve), but overall you can see that his efficiency does take a gradual hit as he increases his load especially as he hits the 30% + range.

This is true for Dantley (career .617 TS%) and for Walker (.484). Not everyone needs 20 shots or any particular number. But maybe everyone has his own optimum.

When Dantley went from Utah to Detroit, his Usg% went from 30 to 24, but his TS% remained right around .620 . He was already 30 YO, so that faded gradually.

Jordan in 1991 averaged a career low 37 minutes. For the first time in his career, he had decent help in the backcourt: BJ and Pax filling the other slot, Hodges and Hopson backing MJ himself. And Pippen in a pinch.

In what would be a recurring theme, Phil Jackson always wanted MJ to stay under 38 MPG, and he never could. In '92, Hopson's career went belly-up, Hodges was on his last legs, and Bobby Hansen was brought in well past his prime.

So, while Jordan's Usage rate may not have been taxing, his minutes were. He didn't exactly coast through many minutes, at either end of the court. His only recourse was to 'retire' every few years.