PDA

View Full Version : Longevity vs Peak Performance



Chronz
08-14-2009, 08:47 PM
What defines a players career more, how great he is in his prime (MVP Candidate) and how long he sustains it, or a career of neither extreme highs or lows but nearly 2 decades worth of consistent All-Star caliber play.

In terms of positional examples, these are the best I could come up with.

Willis Reed vs Robert Parish
Tmac vs Reggie Miller
Wade vs Drexler
Walt Frazier vs John Stockton
Bill Walton vs D-Rob
Grant Hill vs Nique



The guys in front were without a doubt better players at their peak, but the players next to them sustained an overall similar level of play throughout their careers on a consistent year to year basis.

Whos on your winners list?

Raps18-19 Champ
08-14-2009, 08:56 PM
Depends how long he was dominating.

And after his dominating years, is he still solid or is he ****?

MTar786
08-14-2009, 09:38 PM
parish, miller, stockton, malone, nique and GP over the others. except if tmac wasnt killed by injuries i think his career would have been better than niques. tmac wouldve even been the CLEAR better player too

Raoul Duke
08-14-2009, 09:41 PM
Tmac vs Dominique

That one really sums up the argument for me. It's neither peak performance nor longevity, but a combination of the two with respective accomplishments taken into account as well. It always irks me to see guys like T-Mac in the same discussion with the all-time greats. Regardless of his numbers at any point in his career, he hasn't accomplished very much aside from a huge payday.

theuuord
08-14-2009, 09:47 PM
I wouldn't argue that Mitch was better than Reggie at their respective peaks, personally.

theuuord
08-14-2009, 09:48 PM
But to answer the question, I normally take peak performance over longevity unless the peak is very short or the longevity is very long - and above average as performance. you don't get credit for just hanging on if you're not producing at some level.

Hawkeye15
08-14-2009, 10:07 PM
In terms of positional examples, these are the best I could come up with.

Willis Reed vs Robert Parish--Parish
Mitch Richmond vs Reggie Miller-- Miller (I don't know how Mitch was better ever)
Walt Frazier vs John Stockton--Stockton (all time assist and steals, defines PG)
Bill Walton vs Moses Malone--Moses
Tmac vs Dominique--Nique (better at the only thing either does, score)
AI vs GP-- GP (top level defender, on top of 20/9)

Hawkeye15
08-14-2009, 10:09 PM
there are extremes of both. Parish, for instance, would just be a great franchise center, he played for freakin ever.
The AI-GP matchup is interesting. Its so easily Payton to me, which makes me think I overestimate Iverson at times.
Frazier vs Stockton? John Stockton, if he would have won a ring, would have been the best pure PG to ever play in my opinion, so Stockton.

Chronz
08-15-2009, 01:47 AM
That one really sums up the argument for me. It's neither peak performance nor longevity, but a combination of the two with respective accomplishments taken into account as well. It always irks me to see guys like T-Mac in the same discussion with the all-time greats. Regardless of his numbers at any point in his career, he hasn't accomplished very much aside from a huge payday.
Ugh yea thats a tough one, toss that comparison out for the sake of it not being unanimous.


I wouldn't argue that Mitch was better than Reggie at their respective peaks, personally.

Really? How do you account for the fact that he was regularly listed ahead of him on the All-NBA squads?

DerekRE_3
08-15-2009, 01:49 AM
It's a shame Mitch had 0 help in Sacramento during the prime of his career.

theuuord
08-15-2009, 01:52 AM
Really? How do you account for the fact that he was regularly listed ahead of him on the All-NBA squads?

Not sure, but I rarely try to understand the mind of an NBA voter in the first place. It may be because Mitch was viewed as more versatile than Reggie, who was mostly known for his ability to shoot from Saturn with his eyes closed. However, even though Mitch Richmond was my absolute favorite player in his era (seriously - I owned every card of his and followed every box score, even when he was in Washington, and even though I lived in New Jersey), I'd have to say that Reggie had both a stronger prime and (obviously) longer above-average career insofar as efficiency and ability to help his team win games.

JordansBulls
08-15-2009, 01:58 AM
What defines a players career more, how great he is in his prime (MVP Candidate) and how long he sustains it, or a career of neither extreme highs or lows but nearly 2 decades worth of consistent All-Star caliber play.

In terms of positional examples, these are the best I could come up with.

Willis Reed vs Robert Parish
Mitch Richmond vs Reggie Miller
Walt Frazier vs John Stockton
Bill Walton vs Moses Malone
Tmac vs Dominique
AI vs GP


The guys in front were without a doubt better players at their peak, but the players next to them sustained an overall similar level of play throughout their careers on a consistent year to year basis.

Whos on your winners list?


I'll take Peak as long as the player played a long time at a high level as well. If a player played 10-12 years at a high level and had the greater peak it is greater than someone who played 15 years.

Chronz
08-15-2009, 02:09 AM
Not sure, but I rarely try to understand the mind of an NBA voter in the first place. It may be because Mitch was viewed as more versatile than Reggie, who was mostly known for his ability to shoot from Saturn with his eyes closed. However, even though Mitch Richmond was my absolute favorite player in his era (seriously - I owned every card of his and followed every box score, even when he was in Washington, and even though I lived in New Jersey), I'd have to say that Reggie had both a stronger prime and (obviously) longer above-average career insofar as efficiency and ability to help his team win games.
How do you even begin to differentiate Reggies prime? Which season(s)? What chapter of his career, when did it start and how long did it last because looking at his entire body of work, hes been the same guy for years imo.

Chronz
08-15-2009, 02:17 AM
It's a shame Mitch had 0 help in Sacramento during the prime of his career.
How many playoff births would Reggie have gotten out of a core consisting of Olden Polynice, Spudd Webb (at the end of his career). Still perhaps we should rewrite that one.

Reggie Miller vs Tmac seems to fit
Grant Hill vs Nique

DerekRE_3
08-15-2009, 02:29 AM
How many playoff births would Reggie have gotten out of a core consisting of Olden Polynice, Spudd Webb (at the end of his career). Still perhaps we should rewrite that one.

Reggie Miller vs Tmac seems to fit
Grant Hill vs Nique

Don't forget the year he had Anthony Johnson (2nd round rookie that year), a young Corliss Williamson, Brian Grant, and Michael Stewart as the core players around him.

Chronz
08-15-2009, 02:34 AM
Don't forget the year he had Anthony Johnson (2nd round rookie that year), a young Corliss Williamson, Brian Grant, and Michael Stewart as the core players around him.
Corliss so wasnt worth mentioning when that team actually made the playoffs it had fluke written all over it. Sonics creamed em

What do you think of Drexler vs Wade, if Wade's career were to end now?

DerekRE_3
08-15-2009, 02:43 AM
Corliss so wasnt worth mentioning when that team actually made the playoffs it had fluke written all over it. Sonics creamed em

What do you think of Drexler vs Wade, if Wade's career were to end now?

They both have one ring right? The only difference I see with them is Clyde got his ring near the end of his career while Wade got this a when he was only 24. Drexler still scored 18.4 PPG when he was 35, which is pretty good. Just by quickly looking at his stats it looked like he peaked when he was around 25-26. But I'm only 20 years old so I didn't really see Drexler in his prime. I don't think I know enough to comment on how well they compare career wise.