PDA

View Full Version : ESPNs top 10 PGs of all time



WaDe03
01-13-2016, 05:20 PM
1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Stockton
4. Curry
5. Isiah
6. CP3
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Walt Frazier
10. Cousy

Thoughts? Curry isn't top 4 already. He's a great player and has a good chance to be up there when his career is over but let's not overrate him already as many have done with Anthony Davis. Magic knows he's GOAT but his opinion is there's no way Stockton and curry are better than Isiah and goes more into detail on his Twitter. Someone feel free to link his tweets if you want idk how to do it. Also NBA on ESPN tweeted both of these list if anyone was to link them as well they go into detail on their decisions a little. I assume they'll do SF, PF, and C in order the next 3 days.

Hawkeye15
01-13-2016, 06:20 PM
what? Curry will probably end up 2-4, but he is not #4 now. No way.

LOb0
01-13-2016, 06:29 PM
If you had to take a guy for 1 season you'd likely pick Curry or Magic.

Phantom Dreamer
01-13-2016, 06:34 PM
Too early for Curry to be ranked that high. ESPN is so desperate for viewers.

LOb0
01-13-2016, 06:37 PM
Too early for Curry to be ranked that high. ESPN is so desperate for viewers.

If there was a draft with all these guys you'd take Stockton or Isaiah over Curry?

Hawkeye15
01-13-2016, 06:49 PM
If there was a draft with all these guys you'd take Stockton or Isaiah over Curry?

that doesn't matter when evaluating careers in this case. Curry will probably get there, but he has some awards, stats, and plenty of other things to keep adding.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 06:53 PM
Curry has made me a believer. Just need to put him 3rd, Thomas 4th and cp3 5th. And the list would be good.

Vincent33
01-13-2016, 06:54 PM
This list is from like 5yrs in the future.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 06:59 PM
If there was a draft with all these guys you'd take Stockton or Isaiah over Curry?

that doesn't matter when evaluating careers in this case. Curry will probably get there, but he has some awards, stats, and plenty of other things to keep adding.


Of course it matters, it matters more than anything. If ur doing a career evaluation list then fine. But if ur talking about who better. There is no freaking way Stockton is better then curry. He's not even on curry's level.

Although Cousy being in this does make me wonder if this is a "career evaluation" list. Cause there is no way in hell Cousy is one of the best 10 pgs. There are at least 50 guys who would destroy Cousy, probably more.

Phantom Dreamer
01-13-2016, 07:03 PM
Too early for Curry to be ranked that high. ESPN is so desperate for viewers.

If there was a draft with all these guys you'd take Stockton or Isaiah over Curry?I wouldn't take Isaiah, but I would take Isiah.

WaDe03
01-13-2016, 07:06 PM
I would take Isiah over Curry if you had to pick right now but as others have said this is based on their whole career and body of work. No way should Curry be 4th. He has a chance to be when its all said and done though.

valade16
01-13-2016, 07:13 PM
If we're basing it on careers and tomorrow Curry got hit by a bus and die, do people think what he's accomplished thus far would be top 4?

tredigs
01-13-2016, 07:16 PM
Just means the voters were more focused on peak than longevity, but that Stockton's consistent greatness for so long is enough to keep him above Curry while for Zeke it's not.

I don't know, whatever. Just some dudes opinions. No more meaningful than any list PSD comes up with other than the fact that this one will be talked about more due to the website it was published from.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 07:19 PM
If we're basing it on careers and tomorrow Curry got hit by a bus and die, do people think what he's accomplished thus far would be top 4?

So does curry need to become a better player to move ahead of Stockton or are does he just need to keep being the player he is for longer? Point being ur either better or ur not. And curry's clearly better.

tredigs
01-13-2016, 07:23 PM
If we're basing it on careers and tomorrow Curry got hit by a bus and die, do people think what he's accomplished thus far would be top 4?

He did lead a team to a title, has an MVP, holds NBA season records, and is arguably the games best player, which is more than just about any other PG can say. Just depends on whether you're the kind of person that needs further proof/numbers to back up the peak. Rankings are never agreed upon for that reason, and also because different eras are so different.

kdspurman
01-13-2016, 07:23 PM
If we're basing it on careers and tomorrow Curry got hit by a bus and die, do people think what he's accomplished thus far would be top 4?

I guess they do, I don't yet.. I wouldn't have him above Thomas either. These lists do nothing but spark debate and what not.

WaDe03
01-13-2016, 07:30 PM
He did lead a team to a title, has an MVP, holds NBA season records, and is arguably the games best player, which is more than just about any other PG can say. Just depends on whether you're the kind of person that needs further proof/numbers to back up the peak. Rankings are never agreed upon for that reason, and also because different eras are so different.

I personally value both. Currys peak may be better than a lot of guys but he hasn't done more than a lot of guys also, yet. I think he'll definitely be top 5 when its all said and done but I don't think he's better than Stockton or Thomas at this point in his career. It's somewhat like T-Mac having a great peak but did nothing career wise in the NBA so he isn't viewed as an all time great. Injuries played a big role in that though. If Curry started having bad injury problems again like he had early in his career it would probably have a huge effect on his legacy, especially if it makes him worse by the time he gets back. He's off to a great start though.

tredigs
01-13-2016, 07:42 PM
I personally value both. Currys peak may be better than a lot of guys but he hasn't done more than a lot of guys also, yet. I think he'll definitely be top 5 when its all said and done but I don't think he's better than Stockton or Thomas at this point in his career. It's somewhat like T-Mac having a great peak but did nothing career wise in the NBA so he isn't viewed as an all time great. Injuries played a big role in that though. If Curry started having bad injury problems again like he had early in his career it would probably have a huge effect on his legacy, especially if it makes him worse by the time he gets back. He's off to a great start though.

I thought of T-Mac too. Difference is that Curry has records, has the title, and has the MVP. They're probably also considering the fact that he's on pace to have another MVP. T-Mac's still a borderline top 10 wing for many due to his peak, so in that sense it would be in line to consider Curry with the top 5 PG's.

Personally, I'm not sure where I'd rank him. I'm becoming less of a fan of All-Time lists due to the fact that there's a different criteria for every person (including whatever group of people it was that voted on this ESPN list). I'll say that if Curry does in fact win MVP again this year and the Warriors were to break the Bulls 72 win mark + take down the title (a LOT of work to do before that's something of a reality, but it's also well within reason at this point), I'm banking that nobody will ever consider Zeke > Curry. Peak or otherwise. So in less than 5 months, that's how much things can change for those on the other side of this debate. These guys have just already said that they've seen enough.

Bruno
01-13-2016, 07:47 PM
Scott Skiles is the best PG ever. 30 assists in one game, has anyone peaked out higher? i think not.

Bostonjorge
01-13-2016, 07:48 PM
Isiah should be #2 for sweeping magic, KAJ and worthy alone. Winning back to back titles puts you on a special players list.

If curry can end this season with a MVP, championship and finals MVP then give him #3 and climbing.

Penny should of and could of been on this list. Big PG was looking like the next magic before the injury. The number one "what if" at the PG position.

flea
01-13-2016, 07:59 PM
Why is it that NBA fans only want to judge a player on his best 2 or 3 seasons? Do they really think the difference between peak years of guys like Lebron and Magic are all that different? Or Dirk and Barkley? Because they aren't. How good you were at your best matters certainly, but it also matters if you can sustain that and - you know - actually win stuff along the way too.

Baseball fans don't call Doc Gooden or Sammy Sosa or Albert Belle inner circle HOFers just because they had 2-3 year stretches as good as almost anyone else's. Football fans don't call Richard Sherman a top 5 all-time CB just because of 3 elite seasons - hell he's not even a lock for HOF.

Curry is having a great 2 season stretch, and will almost certainly be a HOFer because that's how basketball works, but he's got a great team and yet has only had 1 playoff run where you could say the team lived up to expectations. He's got a good shot at top 5 all-time PGs but let's see him win stuff - consistently go deep in the playoffs, etc. - before we crown him something just because he can make 4 three-pointers per game for a couple years.

valade16
01-13-2016, 08:00 PM
He did lead a team to a title, has an MVP, holds NBA season records, and is arguably the games best player, which is more than just about any other PG can say. Just depends on whether you're the kind of person that needs further proof/numbers to back up the peak. Rankings are never agreed upon for that reason, and also because different eras are so different.

My counter to that would be what about Bill Walton? If we go by peak he's got to be Top 10 C's ever right?

Lead his team to a title, has an MVP and a DPOY and was the 2nd best player in the league (to KAJ).

I personally don't need anymore proof if we're talking best as in talent, but if this is legacy or greatest, it's the longevity and accolades that matter isn't it?

Bruno
01-13-2016, 08:02 PM
ESPN makes lists like this to make readers emotionally invested. how are we supposed to be emotionally invested in something that is purely logical? controversy sells, truth doesn't.

tredigs
01-13-2016, 08:16 PM
My counter to that would be what about Bill Walton? If we go by peak he's got to be Top 10 C's ever right?

Lead his team to a title, has an MVP and a DPOY and was the 2nd best player in the league (to KAJ).

I personally don't need anymore proof if we're talking best as in talent, but if this is legacy or greatest, it's the longevity and accolades that matter isn't it?
I like the Walton counter. He's a better example than T-Mac. But he's got a few issues also. #1, he only made one playoff run in his prime (the awesome '77 run) and was just a 2 time All-Star. Curry's already got 3 All-Stars (taking this one as a given) and 2x the playoff games while he's still a starting player (@Flea, "only 1 playoff run where they lived up to expectations"? HUH? Nobody had them winning the title before last season started, and they were not the favorites going into the post-season. They also over-achieved in winning their 1st round series without HCA versus the Nugges a few years back, and forseeably lost to the Clippers in 7 without Bogut/HCA the following year. On the contrary, they've never under achieved).

Even before this seasons voting, Curry is 33rd All Time in MVP award shares to Walton's career 53rd. Beyond that, Center's just a much tougher position to crack the top 10 All Time than PG. It's full of MVP's and All Time greats. Not the same at the PG position.


ESPN makes lists like this to make readers emotionally invested. how are we supposed to be emotionally invested in something that is purely logical? controversy sells, truth doesn't.
Eh, I think this is sort of a cop-out response that a lot of people have who don't think this out (no offense to you, I'm just sort of tired of seeing this response to ESPN lists. As if ESPN is some single person/idea). These are just employees sharing their opinions and voting accordingly. I highly doubt there are overlords at ESPN telling them "they better vote X or else!", or editors changing their votes. Doesn't exactly make sense. People said the same thing when Kobe was ranked so low on their little preseasons lists. But guess what, they were far more right than wrong.

beasted86
01-13-2016, 08:21 PM
Why is it that NBA fans only want to judge a player on his best 2 or 3 seasons? Do they really think the difference between peak years of guys like Lebron and Magic are all that different? Or Dirk and Barkley? Because they aren't. How good you were at your best matters certainly, but it also matters if you can sustain that and - you know - actually win stuff along the way too.

Baseball fans don't call Doc Gooden or Sammy Sosa or Albert Belle inner circle HOFers just because they had 2-3 year stretches as good as almost anyone else's. Football fans don't call Richard Sherman a top 5 all-time CB just because of 3 elite seasons - hell he's not even a lock for HOF.

Curry is having a great 2 season stretch, and will almost certainly be a HOFer because that's how basketball works, but he's got a great team and yet has only had 1 playoff run where you could say the team lived up to expectations. He's got a good shot at top 5 all-time PGs but let's see him win stuff - consistently go deep in the playoffs, etc. - before we crown him something just because he can make 4 three-pointers per game for a couple years.

Gotta agree with the sentiment. Might as well say Bo Jackson was the greatest running back also. Okay, maybe that's taking the analogy to a crazy level, but let's see Curry play a lot more years first.

Meth
01-13-2016, 08:26 PM
do all-star appearances really matter? I know there's some value in all-star appearances, but considering how it's mostly a popularity contest, how much weight is put in this?

Bruno
01-13-2016, 08:32 PM
Eh, I think this is sort of a cop-out response that a lot of people have who don't think this out (no offense to you, I'm just sort of tired of seeing this response to ESPN lists. As if ESPN is some single person/idea). These are just employees sharing their opinions and voting accordingly. I highly doubt there are overlords at ESPN telling them "they better vote X or else!", or editors changing their votes. Doesn't exactly make sense. People said the same thing when Kobe was ranked so low on their little preseasons lists. But guess what, they were far more right than wrong.

i don't think you understand how click for profit and big business works.

why would i care about what you're tired of? personal bias much?

ranking Kobe that low was controversial to the mouth breathing public, thus it had the same effect.

TheMightyHumph
01-13-2016, 08:39 PM
I don't know what to think about Curry.

I think Thomas is ranked higher than he should be because of the play of Joe Dumars.

And I think people forget, or just don't know, how good a defender Frazier was.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 08:46 PM
Why is it that NBA fans only want to judge a player on his best 2 or 3 seasons? Do they really think the difference between peak years of guys like Lebron and Magic are all that different? Or Dirk and Barkley? Because they aren't. How good you were at your best matters certainly, but it also matters if you can sustain that and - you know - actually win stuff along the way too.

Baseball fans don't call Doc Gooden or Sammy Sosa or Albert Belle inner circle HOFers just because they had 2-3 year stretches as good as almost anyone else's. Football fans don't call Richard Sherman a top 5 all-time CB just because of 3 elite seasons - hell he's not even a lock for HOF.

Curry is having a great 2 season stretch, and will almost certainly be a HOFer because that's how basketball works, but he's got a great team and yet has only had 1 playoff run where you could say the team lived up to expectations. He's got a good shot at top 5 all-time PGs but let's see him win stuff - consistently go deep in the playoffs, etc. - before we crown him something just because he can make 4 three-pointers per game for a couple years.

Because they like to debate who was the better player. That's why people always say "in there prime". It's silly to do it any other way.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 08:52 PM
He did lead a team to a title, has an MVP, holds NBA season records, and is arguably the games best player, which is more than just about any other PG can say. Just depends on whether you're the kind of person that needs further proof/numbers to back up the peak. Rankings are never agreed upon for that reason, and also because different eras are so different.

My counter to that would be what about Bill Walton? If we go by peak he's got to be Top 10 C's ever right?

Lead his team to a title, has an MVP and a DPOY and was the 2nd best player in the league (to KAJ).

I personally don't need anymore proof if we're talking best as in talent, but if this is legacy or greatest, it's the longevity and accolades that matter isn't it?


Why shouldn't if he's one of the 10 best ever. I wish they didn't use "top".
They should go with either "best" or "greatest". So that there's less confusion.

TheMightyHumph
01-13-2016, 08:54 PM
In his prime, Tiny lead the league in scoring and assists one season. Where does he rank?

tredigs
01-13-2016, 09:04 PM
i don't think you understand how click for profit and big business works.

why would i care about what you're tired of? personal bias much?

ranking Kobe that low was controversial to the mouth breathing public, thus it had the same effect.


It's an All-Time rankings list put out on the ESPN site. They're getting the clicks regardless of where Curry ranks. Did you read the piece/who voted/their reasoning. Or, are you just blindly commenting on the matter? Because it comes off as the latter. I find it very hard to believe that these individual writers are being strongarmed by some editors looking for clicks in how to make their rankings for the middle spots of the PG list. To me, it's far more likely that this is simply where they rank the MVP, just as it was far more likely that that is where they ranked Kobe on an NBA roster. Truth is, they ranked him too high. Their lists simply get hated on immediately if anybody disagrees with a certain player because they're the most popular site, not because they're any better/worse than any other random subjective lists you're going to find on the net. Bear in mind, it's entirely possible that exactly no members of these lists voted on the preseason lists. The network/site is massive, and filled with 10,000 different opinions on the same subject.

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 09:05 PM
In his prime, Tiny lead the league in scoring and assists one season. Where does he rank?

Depends on how "good" you think he actually was in his prime. For example in his prime Bob Cousy was great. But he would get killed today.


If you get confused,just use track as an example a guy like Jesse ownes is much "greater" than many guys today who are actually (faster). So ask yourself could tiny in his prime be that guy today if you say yes, then he should be ranked high.

More-Than-Most
01-13-2016, 09:14 PM
He did lead a team to a title, has an MVP, holds NBA season records, and is arguably the games best player, which is more than just about any other PG can say. Just depends on whether you're the kind of person that needs further proof/numbers to back up the peak. Rankings are never agreed upon for that reason, and also because different eras are so different.

Guys like Stockton/CP3 had to deal with guys like Jordan/James in the primes of their careers... Something CP3 has the luxury of side stepping... Also neither guy ever had as talented a team around them... I think curry will end up top 4 but I doubt he will be great enough long enough to ever be ahead of stockton/magic

tredigs
01-13-2016, 09:19 PM
Guys like Stockton/CP3 had to deal with guys like Jordan/James in the primes of their careers... Something CP3 has the luxury of side stepping... Also neither guy ever had as talented a team around them... I think curry will end up top 4 but I doubt he will be great enough long enough to ever be ahead of stockton/magic

Uhh. What? Both Stockton and CP3 played/play with a player arguably better than them. Neither faced the defensive pressure that is put on Curry on a nightly basis. Curry side-stepped Lebron but CP3 went up against him? Are you drunk again?

jayjay33
01-13-2016, 09:22 PM
Guys like Stockton/CP3 had to deal with guys like Jordan/James in the primes of their careers... Something CP3 has the luxury of side stepping... Also neither guy ever had as talented a team around them... I think curry will end up top 4 but I doubt he will be great enough long enough to ever be ahead of stockton/magic

Uhh. What? Both Stockton and CP3 played/play with a player arguably better than them. Neither faced the defensive pressure that is put on Curry on a nightly basis. Curry side-stepped Lebron but CP3 went up against him? Are you drunk again?


He must be. lol

More-Than-Most
01-13-2016, 09:31 PM
Uhh. What? Both Stockton and CP3 played/play with a player arguably better than them. Neither faced the defensive pressure that is put on Curry on a nightly basis. Curry side-stepped Lebron but CP3 went up against him? Are you drunk again?

Playing with a stacked team------------->playing with another great player... I love Jordan but People underestimate how much help he had as well.... I think the warriors are almost as stacked as those bulls teams... Curry will still go down as one of the best ever... I just think when in comparison to a guy like stockton who yes played with malone... Didnt have nearly the talent around him that curry currently has when going by championships.

More-Than-Most
01-13-2016, 09:33 PM
Uhh. What? Both Stockton and CP3 played/play with a player arguably better than them. Neither faced the defensive pressure that is put on Curry on a nightly basis. Curry side-stepped Lebron but CP3 went up against him? Are you drunk again?

Curry wasnt a dominate player or noted as one of the best players in the game while James was in his prime... CP3 had to go up against a prime Lebron when CP3 was in his prime... Now with Lebron on his decline curry has who exactly to fight with for best player in the league? Nobody that was on a james/jordan level like cp3/stockton... How is that hard to understand?

I am going by your justification that he is the best player in the game and has a championship as being measuring sticks to why he could be better but its without context... Again Curry has the luxury of a league where there is no prime James/Jordan... Stockton/CP3 did not have that luxury in their primes.

tredigs
01-13-2016, 09:46 PM
Playing with a stacked team------------->playing with another great player... I love Jordan but People underestimate how much help he had as well.... I think the warriors are almost as stacked as those bulls teams... Curry will still go down as one of the best ever... I just think when in comparison to a guy like stockton who yes played with malone... Didnt have nearly the talent around him that curry currently has when going by championships.

I'm not "going by championships", but it is another notch on his resume. Denouncing Stockton's roster is just silly, considering he played with a HOF MVP PF and great role players in guys like Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell and Ostertag later on. Plus a HOF coach. If you remove their teams and you just go by strictly who was the more dominant player at the top of their game, it's Curry over Stockton and it's not close dude. Stockton's case is that he was great for a long time, not that he was a better prime player. I'd definitely have Stockton over Curry on an All-Time list myself, by the way.


Curry wasnt a dominate player or noted as one of the best players in the game while James was in his prime... CP3 had to go up against a prime Lebron when CP3 was in his prime... Now with Lebron on his decline curry has who exactly to fight with for best player in the league? Nobody that was on a james/jordan level like cp3/stockton... How is that hard to understand?

I am going by your justification that he is the best player in the game and has a championship as being measuring sticks to why he could be better but its without context... Again Curry has the luxury of a league where there is no prime James/Jordan... Stockton/CP3 did not have that luxury in their primes.
Lmao, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you saying Lebron has not been in his prime the past 7 years Curry has been in the league? Because you do realize that Curry is the one who has faced him in the playoffs and not CP3, right? And don't let his regular season coasting fool you, Lebron is still very much in his prime. Dude is 3 yrs older than Curry.

@MTM, he's going against Lebron/Durant/Westbrook/Kawhi/AD, etc etc. There is no shortage of prime talent in the NBA, if that is in fact the line you're trying to take here. That's a pretty pathetic one. Are you insinuating Stockton could be considered the best player in the NBA over those guys if he was in the league right now?

More-Than-Most
01-13-2016, 09:51 PM
I'm not "going by championships", but it is another notch on his resume. Denouncing Stockton's roster is just silly, considering he played with a HOF MVP Center and great role players in guys like Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell and Ostertag later on. Plus a HOF coach. If you remove their teams and you just go by strictly who was the more dominant player at the top of their game, it's Curry over Stockton and it's not close dude. Stockton's case is that he was great for a long time, not that he was a better prime player. I'd definitely have Stockton over Curry on an All-Time list myself, by the way.


Lmao, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you saying Lebron has not been in his prime the past 7 years Curry has been in the league? Because you do realize that Curry is the one who has faced him in the playoffs and not CP3, right? And don't let his regular season coasting fool you, Lebron is still very much in his prime. Dude is 3 yrs older than Curry.

@MTM, he's going against Lebron/Durant/Westbrook/Kawhi/AD, etc etc. There is no shortage of prime talent in the NBA, if that is in fact the line you're trying to take here. That's a pretty pathetic one.

See again no context just going by age... Lebron is still a damn good player but he is declining even though he is having a better season this year then last he is physically declining and can no longer be the utter dominate player at almost every area of the game and cover up his lackluster shooting. Lebron James has now played in like 1100 NBA basketball games and is at the age of 30 with a massive body.

LOb0
01-13-2016, 09:53 PM
This just turned into the longevity vs peak argument.

Curry could get hurt and never be the same a year from now, but his peak would still be better than nearly any PG on that list. So you'd have to make a decision, would you rather have: Curry and his short run or a lesser player that was great for a long term run like Stockton.

Really I guess there's no wrong answer, its more decision. But there is no doubt that Curry's peak is better than everyone on that list outside of Magic which can be a debatable.

How you rank peak vs longevity is tricky and really just goes by what you value more.

More-Than-Most
01-13-2016, 09:54 PM
I'm not "going by championships", but it is another notch on his resume. Denouncing Stockton's roster is just silly, considering he played with a HOF MVP PF and great role players in guys like Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell and Ostertag later on. Plus a HOF coach. If you remove their teams and you just go by strictly who was the more dominant player at the top of their game, it's Curry over Stockton and it's not close dude. Stockton's case is that he was great for a long time, not that he was a better prime player. I'd definitely have Stockton over Curry on an All-Time list myself, by the way.


Lmao, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you saying Lebron has not been in his prime the past 7 years Curry has been in the league? Because you do realize that Curry is the one who has faced him in the playoffs and not CP3, right? And don't let his regular season coasting fool you, Lebron is still very much in his prime. Dude is 3 yrs older than Curry.

@MTM, he's going against Lebron/Durant/Westbrook/Kawhi/AD, etc etc. There is no shortage of prime talent in the NBA, if that is in fact the line you're trying to take here. That's a pretty pathetic one. Are you insinuating Stockton could be considered the best player in the NBA over those guys if he was in the league right now?

Never said there wasnt a ton of talent... AGAIN CONTEXT... You are using curry as the best player in the game for 1 year as a credential over a cp3/Stockton... BUT CURRY HAS NOT HAD TO BE THE BEST PLAYER IN THE WORLD WITH A TOP 5 PLAYER EVER IN THE LEAGUE IN THEIR PRIME AT THE SAME TIME AS HIM. CP3 in his prime had godly seasons but stood no chance because of a guy called Lebron James in his prime.

tredigs
01-13-2016, 10:03 PM
Here's Curry's #'s the past 200 games going into 2013, not including the title run:
25/4.5/8 on 49/44/90. WS/48 = .270. PER = 27.0. ~34 minutes per game. 3 All Stars. Likely multiple MVP's. Broke his own 3pt record every year.

You're not going to find a run like that from Stockton or Zeke, and those numbers are all going to go up by the end of the year.

Anyway, so while I wouldn't personally put him over Stockton in some career ranking. That's his case, and those who prefer peak/prime play are going to go with it.

TheMightyHumph
01-13-2016, 11:29 PM
Depends on how "good" you think he actually was in his prime. For example in his prime Bob Cousy was great. But he would get killed today.


If you get confused,just use track as an example a guy like Jesse ownes is much "greater" than many guys today who are actually (faster). So ask yourself could tiny in his prime be that guy today if you say yes, then he should be ranked high.

Tiny in his prime today would be different than Tiny in his actual prime.

valade16
01-13-2016, 11:48 PM
Curry had to face LeBron in the finals last year and this year the Spurs statistically have the highest point diff. of all time. He's had to face plenty of top talent.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 01:19 AM
League today is more competitive than ever. IDC what anyone says. I have yet to see this much talent in any era of basketball. This list is terrible. Curry is way too high and if you're judging off peak, he should be #1/2. Can someone spill ESPN's ranking formula?

tredigs
01-14-2016, 01:31 AM
League today is more competitive than ever. IDC what anyone says. I have yet to see this much talent in any era of basketball. This list is terrible. Curry is way too high and if you're judging off peak, he should be #1/2. Can someone spill ESPN's ranking formula?


To create All-Time #NBArank, we put together a ballot with the 150 greatest players ever. Then our ESPN expert panel voted on thousands of head-to-head matchups, with voting based on both peak performance and career value. The result is our all-time NBA Top 100.

The Top 100 will begin to roll out next week. Meanwhile, we are presenting the top 10 by position.

That's what they gave. And they have comments from 4 of the voters following each choice.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 01:47 AM
I'm not "going by championships", but it is another notch on his resume. Denouncing Stockton's roster is just silly, considering he played with a HOF MVP Center and great role players in guys like Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell and Ostertag later on. Plus a HOF coach. If you remove their teams and you just go by strictly who was the more dominant player at the top of their game, it's Curry over Stockton and it's not close dude. Stockton's case is that he was great for a long time, not that he was a better prime player. I'd definitely have Stockton over Curry on an All-Time list myself, by the way.


Lmao, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you saying Lebron has not been in his prime the past 7 years Curry has been in the league? Because you do realize that Curry is the one who has faced him in the playoffs and not CP3, right? And don't let his regular season coasting fool you, Lebron is still very much in his prime. Dude is 3 yrs older than Curry.

@MTM, he's going against Lebron/Durant/Westbrook/Kawhi/AD, etc etc. There is no shortage of prime talent in the NBA, if that is in fact the line you're trying to take here. That's a pretty pathetic one.

See again no context just going by age... Lebron is still a damn good player but he is declining even though he is having a better season this year then last he is physically declining and can no longer be the utter dominate player at almost every area of the game and cover up his lackluster shooting. Lebron James has now played in like 1100 NBA basketball games and is at the age of 30 with a massive body.

What? Did you see lbj in the finals? That was the most dominant he's ever been. He's never been better than he was in last years finals. That is without question part of his prime. No player has ever faced lbj playing better than he was when curry beat him.

Curry didn't side step lbj in his prime, he beat lbj in his prime.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 01:51 AM
This just turned into the longevity vs peak argument.

Curry could get hurt and never be the same a year from now, but his peak would still be better than nearly any PG on that list. So you'd have to make a decision, would you rather have: Curry and his short run or a lesser player that was great for a long term run like Stockton.

Really I guess there's no wrong answer, its more decision. But there is no doubt that Curry's peak is better than everyone on that list outside of Magic which can be a debatable.

How you rank peak vs longevity is tricky and really just goes by what you value more.


Agreed, but I'd still put magic and big O 1and 2.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:06 AM
What? Did you see lbj in the finals? That was the most dominant he's ever been. He's never been better than he was in last years finals. That is without question part of his prime. No player has ever faced lbj playing better than he was when curry beat him.

Curry didn't side step lbj in his prime, he beat lbj in his prime.

Just saying, that wasn't prime LeBron there. If you thought it was, you never watched 2011-2014. Prime LeBron won't shoot 40% for a series.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 02:17 AM
Just saying, that wasn't prime LeBron there. If you thought it was, you never watched 2011-2014. Prime LeBron won't shoot 40% for a series.

and the defense as well.. Prime Lebron was MVP and should have been defensive player of the year

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 02:21 AM
Curry had to face LeBron in the finals last year and this year the Spurs statistically have the highest point diff. of all time. He's had to face plenty of top talent.

Man... Love you Valade and its no disrespect but people not reading in here... I never said the talent wasnt there... Tre was trying to make the case for Curry and using Rings/Mvp... I have no issues with that because he does have the ring and the MVP which Stock and CP3 do not... But there needs to be context because Curry currently is not playing against 2 of the best players ever and 2 of the most dominant players ever Like both Stock and CP3 did... CP3 put up 22/12/4 on 48 percent shooting and avg 2.5 steals and under 3 turnovers a game and played insane defense and did not win the MVP because he was up against a Demi god in a prime Lebron James. There might be a ton of talent in the NBA but there just isnt a prime lebron or Prime Jordan for curry to go up against like CP3 had to deal with in 09 and several other years when he could have very easily been the very best player in the game.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:25 AM
and the defense as well.. Prime Lebron was MVP and should have been defensive player of the year

That too but more-so than anything, I can't believe anyone thought that was prime LeBron. I saw a LeBron who took too many shots, couldn't finish at the rim like he used to, and forced way too many bad shots. I love Iggy's game but there is zero chance Iggy can cover a prime LeBron. His numbers are also terrible if you take a look at his USG%/MPG/efficiency. I can't blame him for it but at the same time, I feel a prime LeBron would have won them the series.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 02:27 AM
That too but more-so than anything, I can't believe anyone thought that was prime LeBron. I saw a LeBron who took too many shots, couldn't finish at the rim like he used to, and forced way too many bad shots. I love Iggy's game but there is zero chance Iggy can cover a prime LeBron. His numbers are also terrible if you take a look at his USG%/MPG/efficiency. I can't blame him for it but at the same time, I feel a prime LeBron would have won them the series.

yup... I thought Lebron was other worldly in the finals when you factor in the lack of help he had and the insane team he was going up against but a Prime Lebron would have done so much more on both sides of the ball but appearently Lebron is still in his prime to some people which is just ludicrous if you watched him in 08/09/10/11/12

Ariza's Better
01-14-2016, 02:38 AM
I'm always against putting players who are still playing in greatest of all time lists. So adding CP3 and Curry is dumb to me.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 02:55 AM
Just saying, that wasn't prime LeBron there. If you thought it was, you never watched 2011-2014. Prime LeBron won't shoot 40% for a series.

May not have been max-peak Lebron, but yes, that was prime Lebron. That's what happens when he doesn't have enough help on offense and is going against a top 3 perimeter defender + the leagues best defense. Pretty sure James has more than a couple series in the 40% FG range. You'll say he was too young, but I know for a fact that's what he shot in his first Finals (and he sure wasn't shooting that leading up to that Finals). Not sure about 2014 against the Spurs, or in some of the Celtics or Pistons or Bulls series. But I'd bet he has.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 02:57 AM
yup... I thought Lebron was other worldly in the finals when you factor in the lack of help he had and the insane team he was going up against but a Prime Lebron would have done so much more on both sides of the ball but appearently Lebron is still in his prime to some people which is just ludicrous if you watched him in 08/09/10/11/12
You don't include '13, the year most consider his best ever? Crazy what a meteoric fall he has had since that epic campaign to go from PEAK Lebron to no longer prime Lebron in such a short amount of time. Especially considering he spends most of the regular season biding his time + resting for the playoffs now a days.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:06 AM
May not have been max-peak Lebron, but yes, that was prime Lebron. That's what happens when he doesn't have enough help on offense and is going against a top 3 perimeter defender + the leagues best defense. Pretty sure James has more than a couple series in the 40% FG range. You'll say he was too young, but I know for a fact that's what he shot in his first Finals (and he sure wasn't shooting that leading up to that Finals). Not sure about 2014 against the Spurs, or in some of the Celtics or Pistons or Bulls series. But I'd bet he has.

I don't know what makes you believe that was a prime LeBron. He lost a huge part of his athleticism that season. I also recall that his back was giving him trouble as well; more-so than ever. 2014 Spurs, LeBron shot in the mid fifties. His first NBA Finals vs the Spurs, he never had a post game. I didn't see a prime LeBron at all last season. Has he shot 40% for a series during his prime (2010-2014)? I'm not sure but the claim that LeBron put a Godly performance in that Finals isn't true.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:11 AM
Lebron's athletic prime was 2004-2008. That's not the question here. Like all athletes he peaked in his early to mid 20's.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 03:13 AM
You don't include '13, the year most consider his best ever? Crazy what a meteoric fall he has had since that epic campaign to go from PEAK Lebron to no longer prime Lebron in such a short amount of time. Especially considering he spends most of the regular season biding his time + resting for the playoffs now a days.

I dont mind including 14 and earlier years as well... I wasnt shooting the actual years... You could add 07 as well possibly... 14 wasnt his best year... He was a god from like 07-12 in terms of a 2 way player... I love lebron more than just about anyone but he no longer tries to play defense like he once did and maybe thats because he cant to a degree. He is still an amazing player but not the unstoppable force that was his early years.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:14 AM
You don't include '13, the year most consider his best ever? Crazy what a meteoric fall he has had since that epic campaign to go from PEAK Lebron to no longer prime Lebron in such a short amount of time. Especially considering he spends most of the regular season biding his time + resting for the playoffs now a days.

He has had chronic back problems dating from high school but the games played has been unmatched by any other in a four year span. He's relatively always healthy but again, four years heading deep into the playoffs is no joke. It's also not fair to claim he's spending the regular season resting. He's the highest scoring 4th quarter player this season because Cavs aren't playing a complete game from the start. Even still, LeBron is putting in an amazing season. The days of him being on another planet is gone but he's still amazing.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:14 AM
This is like someone saying Jordan wasn't in his prime in '97 because he wasn't quite as peak as his '92 self, and no longer had the same explosiveness athletically. But, guess who would say that? Exactly no person on Earth. And that is the same that will go for Lebron when we look back at his career 10 years from now.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:18 AM
This is like someone saying Jordan wasn't in his prime in '97 because he wasn't quite as peak as his '92 self, and no longer had the same explosiveness athletically. But, guess who would say that? Exactly no person on Earth. And that is the same that will go for Lebron when we look back at his career 10 years from now.

Not trying to sound harsh but that just sounds like you want to boost GSW's accomplishment because they beat the best LeBron. That wasn't prime LeBron. Whether you evaluate it on a statistical standpoint or eye test, how can you deny that?

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 03:20 AM
This is like someone saying Jordan wasn't in his prime in '97 because he wasn't quite as peak as his '92 self, and no longer had the same explosiveness athletically. But, guess who would say that? Exactly no person on Earth. And that is the same that will go for Lebron when we look back at his career 10 years from now.

Jordan also played in about 200-250 less games then James did if you compare their careers in 97 till james right now....James also has alot more body and would fall off more athletically and his game suffers a bit more than a jordans does in that area.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:21 AM
Not trying to sound harsh but that just sounds like you want to boost GSW's accomplishment because they beat the best LeBron. That wasn't prime LeBron. Whether you evaluate it on a statistical standpoint or eye test, how can you deny that?

No, I just understand what is/is not considered a players prime, and I assure you, when the dust settles, there will be exactly nobody who looks back and says that was anything but Lebron's prime. Just as nobody would say that the 33 yr old MJ was not in his prime when leading those Bulls squads to Finals in the late 90's. Don't confuse max-peak with prime. Just because it was simply a great season, and not his best, does not alter the fact that Lebron in that series is still in his prime.

Athletically, James in '13 could not do what he could do as a 22 year old. Guess what? It was still his peak season.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 03:25 AM
there is no point even arguing this... you are just delusional if you think James is the force he once was physically or player wise... that is what happens when you play almost 1200 games... He was once MVP on both sides of the floor... He isnt close to that and hasnt been close to that on defense for a few years but he is still in his prime? Come on man.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:26 AM
Lebron's athletic prime was 2004-2008. That's not the question here. Like all athletes he peaked in his early to mid 20's.

That might be true but his overall game wasn't at its prime until 2010-2014. He may have been more athletic in the timespan you mentioned but he lacked a post game and he was still too young mentally. I think even you will agree LeBron didn't hit his peak until he matured and took his game to the post.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 03:28 AM
http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/nba-east/cleveland-cavaliers/how-many-more-prime-years-does-lebron-james-have-left/

Jamesís VORP this last season, at age 30, was the lowest of his career. I think this is really important, given the trends we saw with the players above. The average player started their decline around age 32, which might give James another season of high-level production. At the same time, however, we need to be mindful of the minutes that heís played. Itís entirely possible that this is the year that LeBron James concedes his title as ďBest Player on the Planet.Ē


Basically when its all said and done last year would have been statistically the start of his decline. He is better this year but never like he was early on.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:28 AM
Jordan also played in about 200-250 less games then James did if you compare their careers in 97 till james right now....James also has alot more body and would fall off more athletically and his game suffers a bit more than a jordans does in that area.

He may have played less pro games, but he also had a college career, and it's not as if he was laying on the couch or in rehab during his time away from basketball in the early 90's. He was grinding himself away on the road in the minor leagues trying to go pro in another sport. Beyond that, those years after 30 yrs old matter, NBA games or not. And it showed. He was athletically nowhere close to himself in the 80's, but it didn't matter, he was still in his prime due to the overall dominance of his game and the knowledge/adaption he made over the years.

Are we also to assume that Kobe at age 30-32 in 2009-11 when he was winning titles for his LA was also not in his prime? Because this is the kind of nonsense you two are spewing right now.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:32 AM
No, I just understand what is/is not considered a players prime, and I assure you, when the dust settles, there will be exactly nobody who looks back and says that was anything but Lebron's prime. Just as nobody would say that the 33 yr old MJ was not in his prime when leading those Bulls squads to Finals in the late 90's. Don't confuse max-peak with prime. Just because it was simply a great season, and not his best, does not alter the fact that Lebron in that series is still in his prime.

Athletically, James in '13 could not do what he could do as a 22 year old. Guess what? It was still his peak season.

I'm not understanding your argument here. Who cares what people view In the future? This isn't about what kids from 2030 will think but more-so what is really going on presently. So apparently, father time does not exist in your vocabulary. It's entirely possible for a player to lose even more of their athleticism as they age. What did Wade say again? Once you hit thirty and wake up, things aren't the same. So while LeBron wasn't as athletic in 2013 as he was in 2008, he was still incredibly athletic. 2015, there was just a bigger decline in his body. Still incredibly athletic but not on the tier of Wilt.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 03:36 AM
anywho I need to log... You 2 have fun. I am not gonna waste time on this because its silly that some are trying to actually argue james the last 2 years is as good as early on.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:39 AM
He may have played less pro games, but he also had a college career, and it's not as if he was laying on the couch or in rehab during his time away from basketball in the early 90's. He was grinding himself away on the road in the minor leagues trying to go pro in another sport. Beyond that, those years after 30 yrs old matter, NBA games or not. And it showed. He was athletically nowhere close to himself in the 80's, but it didn't matter, he was still in his prime due to the overall dominance of his game and the knowledge/adaption he made over the years.

Are we also to assume that Kobe at age 30-32 in 2009-11 when he was winning titles for his LA was also not in his prime? Because this is the kind of nonsense you two are spewing right now.

So are you claiming that Kobe's athleticism was comparable to that of LeBron? LeBron has a history of chronic back problems. Like Bird, it tends to catch up to you eventually. Is it a coincidence he has taken back shots starting from last season? Kobe doesn't rely on his athleticism as much as LeBron so the drop-off isn't really comparable. The one issue with James everyone had regarding his latter career was how he would deal with his detioriating athletic ability. So you bring up the mental aspect of the game. Yes, he was more mentally prepared than ever but he was also lacking in the physical aspect as well. I'm not sure what you're claiming we've been spewing. You're probably the only guy here willing to claim that was the best version of LeBron. Here's an example since you used Kobe: why is he not dominating? Surely his knowledge is there but isn't it due to a huge loss in his physical body?

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:42 AM
I'll leave it at this: That was not the absolute max-best that Lebron could have played from an individual level. And that is not mutually exclusive from the fact that he was clearly still playing prime-Lebron level basketball. Think of it as a bell-curve, with his 2015 dot on the waning side, but very clearly still in his prime. You only get a couple years of peak ball. Lebron's a way smarter player now than he was in 2008, and there is NO scenario where I can see that version of Lebron in his 2015 stead taking over and winning the 2015 title with TT + Mosgov.

IBleedPurple
01-14-2016, 07:46 AM
Lol, please. Annointing current players is ridiculous. The GOATs aren't really GOATs until they're done

GodsSon
01-14-2016, 09:18 AM
Curry at 4 is a joke. Guy has had a stretch of 2 awesome years and that's it.

Where does Penny Hardaway fit into all time lists? Or McGrady? Chris Webber? Vince Carter?

If we're using a two year window to make a career, the lines get blurred way too easily.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 10:18 AM
Lebron's athletic prime was 2004-2008. That's not the question here. Like all athletes he peaked in his early to mid 20's.

Exactly...people thinking the second you lose the slightest bit of athleticism ur out ur prime are ridiculous. Most times you haven't even reached ur prime because ur "game" gets better.

Lbj shot 40% for the series because of the Warriors defense and lack of Perimeter shooting on his team. This is not football YOU CANT JUST RUN OVER PEOPLE in basketball. There is no wing player that can shoot a good % against a good "team" defense without shooters.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 10:34 AM
Not trying to sound harsh but that just sounds like you want to boost GSW's accomplishment because they beat the best LeBron. That wasn't prime LeBron. Whether you evaluate it on a statistical standpoint or eye test, how can you deny that?

No, I just understand what is/is not considered a players prime, and I assure you, when the dust settles, there will be exactly nobody who looks back and says that was anything but Lebron's prime. Just as nobody would say that the 33 yr old MJ was not in his prime when leading those Bulls squads to Finals in the late 90's. Don't confuse max-peak with prime. Just because it was simply a great season, and not his best, does not alter the fact that Lebron in that series is still in his prime.

Athletically, James in '13 could not do what he could do as a 22 year old. Guess what? It was still his peak season.


Ur right, but they don't understand the difference between peak and prime. So they will never get it. Plus you have to factor in mental aspect as well. Being smarter and more skilled can make you a better player even though you don't run and jump as well. Most players actually become better "players" on the down side of there athleticism.

And Lbj actually got better "after" he added a post game. By there logic lbj and pretty much every other player had about a 2 year prime. Which absurd. For some insane reason they can't seem to understand that's "peak" not prime.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 10:40 AM
anywho I need to log... You 2 have fun. I am not gonna waste time on this because its silly that some are trying to actually argue james the last 2 years is as good as early on.


No what we're arguing is that Peak and
Prime are two different things. What's silly is that you think there the same thing.

valade16
01-14-2016, 10:46 AM
Man... Love you Valade and its no disrespect but people not reading in here... I never said the talent wasnt there... Tre was trying to make the case for Curry and using Rings/Mvp... I have no issues with that because he does have the ring and the MVP which Stock and CP3 do not... But there needs to be context because Curry currently is not playing against 2 of the best players ever and 2 of the most dominant players ever Like both Stock and CP3 did... CP3 put up 22/12/4 on 48 percent shooting and avg 2.5 steals and under 3 turnovers a game and played insane defense and did not win the MVP because he was up against a Demi god in a prime Lebron James. There might be a ton of talent in the NBA but there just isnt a prime lebron or Prime Jordan for curry to go up against like CP3 had to deal with in 09 and several other years when he could have very easily been the very best player in the game.

I see what you mean (see my response to FlashBolt below).


League today is more competitive than ever. IDC what anyone says. I have yet to see this much talent in any era of basketball. This list is terrible. Curry is way too high and if you're judging off peak, he should be #1/2. Can someone spill ESPN's ranking formula?

Do you mean from top to bottom or at the top? Because I think there was more top end talent in the 90's.

Now you have Curry, Bron, Durant, Westy, Harden, Griffin, Kawhi, PG, CP3, and AD.
In 96 you had MJ, Shaq, Hakeem, Karl Malone, D-Rob, Barkley, Mourning, Ewing, Pippen, Drexler, the Glove and Stockton

And that's just the top level guys, you also had a ton of 2nd level guys like Penny, Hill, Kidd, Kemp, Miller, Mutombo, etc.

I just don't think the top level talent was as plentiful now as it was in the middle of the 90's.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 10:52 AM
He may have played less pro games, but he also had a college career, and it's not as if he was laying on the couch or in rehab during his time away from basketball in the early 90's. He was grinding himself away on the road in the minor leagues trying to go pro in another sport. Beyond that, those years after 30 yrs old matter, NBA games or not. And it showed. He was athletically nowhere close to himself in the 80's, but it didn't matter, he was still in his prime due to the overall dominance of his game and the knowledge/adaption he made over the years.

Are we also to assume that Kobe at age 30-32 in 2009-11 when he was winning titles for his LA was also not in his prime? Because this is the kind of nonsense you two are spewing right now.

So are you claiming that Kobe's athleticism was comparable to that of LeBron? LeBron has a history of chronic back problems. Like Bird, it tends to catch up to you eventually. Is it a coincidence he has taken back shots starting from last season? Kobe doesn't rely on his athleticism as much as LeBron so the drop-off isn't really comparable. The one issue with James everyone had regarding his latter career was how he would deal with his detioriating athletic ability. So you bring up the mental aspect of the game. Yes, he was more mentally prepared than ever but he was also lacking in the physical aspect as well. I'm not sure what you're claiming we've been spewing. You're probably the only guy here willing to claim that was the best version of LeBron. Here's an example since you used Kobe: why is he not dominating? Surely his knowledge is there but isn't it due to a huge loss in his physical body?

Your argument is not the problem. Your definition of peak vs prime is. It goes like this (not yet in prime.....in prime.....at PEAK.....declining but STILL in prime.....out of prime).

Get it now? The "still in prime stage is where he was in last years finals. Past his "peak" (which is what ur really arguing) but still in his prime which is what were arguing. Why is that so hard to understand. Out of world lbj is PEAK, not PRIME.

ewing
01-14-2016, 11:20 AM
League today is more competitive than ever. IDC what anyone says. I have yet to see this much talent in any era of basketball. This list is terrible. Curry is way too high and if you're judging off peak, he should be #1/2. Can someone spill ESPN's ranking formula?

what other era did you actually watch?

Tony_Starks
01-14-2016, 11:32 AM
Although Curry over Zeek already is a obvious attention grab I can't really argue with it. On the way to back to back mvps and most likely championships, leading the league in scoring/3's and maybe breaking the Bulls record?

I'm a believer.

WaDe03
01-14-2016, 01:44 PM
Wade played PG his rookie season so therefore he is the 2nd/3rd greatest PG of all time. Sort of like how West only played 2 seasons at SG.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:17 PM
Exactly...people thinking the second you lose the slightest bit of athleticism ur out ur prime are ridiculous. Most times you haven't even reached ur prime because ur "game" gets better.

Lbj shot 40% for the series because of the Warriors defense and lack of Perimeter shooting on his team. This is not football YOU CANT JUST RUN OVER PEOPLE in basketball. There is no wing player that can shoot a good % against a good "team" defense without shooters.

Did you watch the series?


No what we're arguing is that Peak and
Prime are two different things. What's silly is that you think there the same thing.

You have no argument. Tredigs insists that it was LeBron's peak/prime while you're arguing that the word peak doesn't = prime despite that prime = best quality.


Your argument is not the problem. Your definition of peak vs prime is. It goes like this (not yet in prime.....in prime.....at PEAK.....declining but STILL in prime.....out of prime).

Get it now? The "still in prime stage is where he was in last years finals. Past his "peak" (which is what ur really arguing) but still in his prime which is what were arguing. Why is that so hard to understand. Out of world lbj is PEAK, not PRIME.

So you're basically saying LeBron wasn't in his peak but still at his prime? Is that why numerous sources of the word have pegged the meaning of prime as being of the highest quality? Are you somehow turning this into an English course and not of what truly matters: LeBron wasn't at his peak/prime or however else you wish to twist it?

kdspurman
01-14-2016, 02:18 PM
Wade played PG his rookie season so therefore he is the 2nd/3rd greatest PG of all time. Sort of like how West only played 2 seasons at SG.

You're really bothered by the SG rankings, aren't you... :p

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:19 PM
what other era did you actually watch?

So you're telling me the NBA as a whole was more talented back during which era exactly?


I see what you mean (see my response to FlashBolt below).



Do you mean from top to bottom or at the top? Because I think there was more top end talent in the 90's.

Now you have Curry, Bron, Durant, Westy, Harden, Griffin, Kawhi, PG, CP3, and AD.
In 96 you had MJ, Shaq, Hakeem, Karl Malone, D-Rob, Barkley, Mourning, Ewing, Pippen, Drexler, the Glove and Stockton

And that's just the top level guys, you also had a ton of 2nd level guys like Penny, Hill, Kidd, Kemp, Miller, Mutombo, etc.

I just don't think the top level talent was as plentiful now as it was in the middle of the 90's.

From top to bottom, obviously. The parity of talent has exploded at most facets of the game.

ewing
01-14-2016, 02:22 PM
[QUOTE=FlashBolt;30670716]So you're telling me the NBA as a whole was more talented back during which era exactly?




Do you need someone to translate English into English for you?

tredigs
01-14-2016, 02:38 PM
Did you watch the series?



You have no argument. Tredigs insists that it was LeBron's peak/prime while you're arguing that the word peak doesn't = prime despite that prime = best quality.



So you're basically saying LeBron wasn't in his peak but still at his prime? Is that why numerous sources of the word have pegged the meaning of prime as being of the highest quality? Are you somehow turning this into an English course and not of what truly matters: LeBron wasn't at his peak/prime or however else you wish to twist it?

No, JayJay fully comprehended it. And I fully explained it in great detail. There's really no use in going over this any longer with you. As per usual, you have a horrible debate acumen.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:41 PM
No, JayJay fully comprehended it. And I fully explained it in great detail. There's really no use in going over this any longer with you. As per usual, you have a horrible debate acumen.

Okay, Tredigs. So why did it take you so long to do what JayJay did in a few sentences if he's proving what you're saying? The definition of prime is what exactly? There's really no point in going over this with you because it's clear: You want to say LeBron was at his ultimate best because it will make you feel better about GSW beating them. Face it.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 02:42 PM
[QUOTE=FlashBolt;30670716]So you're telling me the NBA as a whole was more talented back during which era exactly?




Do you need someone to translate English into English for you?

So if you can't answer the question, I'll take it that you don't have an answer?

ewing
01-14-2016, 02:48 PM
[QUOTE=ewing;30670722]

So if you can't answer the question, I'll take it that you don't have an answer?

i asked you a question.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 02:54 PM
Okay, Tredigs. So why did it take you so long to do what JayJay did in a few sentences if he's proving what you're saying? The definition of prime is what exactly? There's really no point in going over this with you because it's clear: You want to say LeBron was at his ultimate best because it will make you feel better about GSW beating them. Face it.
Lol no, I could not care less what iteration of 'Bron you feel he was at against the Warriors. There's no version of him that wins that series. If you understood where this debate is coming from, it's coming from his contention that the league is currently weak at the top and that Curry's MVP should be marginalized due to that fact. He then went on to further say that Curry has not played against a prime Lebron while CP3 had, etc etc.

As for peak/prime, I laid it out in much greater detail in multiple posts. The bell curve description, the comparisons of guys like Kobe and Jordan and Hakeem who had fallen off much more athletically and at later ages in their career than Bron is at, while everyone still fully understands they were playing in their prime while contending/winning titles in their 30's. Were they at their max peak? As I have clearly said, no. Same goes for 'Bron. What you're failing to understand is that not the same as a players prime. Jordan in 98 = nothing CLOSE to the dominant athletic force, wing defender or overall takeover machine he was in 1990. Yet, Jordan in 98 was still prime Jordan and the MVP of the league + Finals. You're a Lebron apologist, and this parallel of saying he's past his prime makes absolutely no sense when applied to other players of the same stature.

/debate.

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:12 PM
Lol no, I could not care less what iteration of 'Bron you feel he was at against the Warriors. There's no version of him that wins that series. If you understood where this debate is coming from, it's coming from his contention that the league is currently weak at the top and that Curry's MVP should be marginalized due to that fact. He then went on to further say that Curry has not played against a prime Lebron while CP3 had, etc etc.

As for peak/prime, I laid it out in much greater detail in multiple posts. The bell curve description, the comparisons of guys like Kobe and Jordan and Hakeem who had fallen off much more athletically and at later ages in their career than Bron is at, while everyone still fully understands they were playing in their prime while contending/winning titles in their 30's. Were they at their max peak? As I have clearly said, no. Same goes for 'Bron. What you're failing to understand is that not the same as a players prime. Jordan in 98 = nothing CLOSE to the dominant athletic force, wing defender or overall takeover machine he was in 1990. Yet, Jordan in 98 was still prime Jordan and the MVP of the league + Finals. You're a Lebron apologist, and this parallel of saying he's past his prime makes absolutely no sense when applied to other players of the same stature.

/debate.

Once again, Tredigs believing he's the the Greg Popovich of online basketball forums but doesn't understand he doesn't even know the lone definition of the word: prime.

There's no version of him that wins that series based off what? Everything about you is an agenda with your fascination with the Warriors. You simply have no idea how to evaluate correctly when it comes to them. Why are you using another person's argument as a response to me? I stated as much that Curry has had a better season than CP3 ever had. It doesn't matter if you take LeBron in or out of the question.

"As for peak/prime." Maybe I am having trouble with the meaning of those words but prime has always been understood as the greatest strength of a time. You admitted as much by saying LeBron wasn't playing the absolute best basketball but now you're saying because he's still in the bell curve, that was prime LeBron? See, you're not using words correctly here and then you refuse to acknowledge it. A prime LeBron does not post a PER of 25 nor does he shoot 40% against the Bulls/Hawks. He may have done so against the Warriors but during his prime and against better defensive teams, he never shot 40% in any series.

I'm a LeBron apologist? How many times have you criticized Curry vs how many times I've criticized LeBron? You just want to believe I'm a LeBron apologist because it helps your narrative by claiming someone is biased.

You keep thinking MJ was at his prime at 34. What you saw was a player being Godly and then declining but still being much better than everyone else. If you wish to associate that with it being their prime, have at it. By thedefinition of any dictionary, you're wrong.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:20 PM
Lebron James 2010/11 #'s: 26.7 / 7.5 / 7.0 +1.6 stl and 0.6 blk on 59.4% TS in 38.8 mpg. PER = 27.3

Lebron James 2015/16 #'s: 25.8 / 7.4 / 6.1 +1.5 stl and 0.7 blk on 57.3% TS in 35.9 mpg. PER = 27.2

2015 NBA Playoff dunk montage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h-Dr3hBbwU

I mean, will somebody please roll out the stretcher for this CLEARLY past-his-prime geriatric POS already? You had a fine career dude, but the best is WAY behind you. Hang 'em up.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:25 PM
To get back tot he crux of this argument, all I know is that the dude was right, there is no world where Curry could have won MVP versus that 2010/11 Lebron that CP3 had to face.

/scene

ewing
01-14-2016, 03:25 PM
LeBron still good at basketball. I mean i'd like to disagree with both of you but tredigs has a point

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 03:28 PM
Lebron James 2010/11 #'s: 26.7 / 7.5 / 7.0 +1.6 stl and 0.6 blk on 59.4% TS in 38.8 mpg. PER = 27.3

Lebron James 2015/16 #'s: 25.8 / 7.4 / 6.1 +1.5 stl and 0.7 blk on 57.3% TS in 35.9 mpg. PER = 27.2

2015 NBA Playoff dunk montage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h-Dr3hBbwU

I mean, will somebody please roll out the stretcher for this CLEARLY past-his-prime geriatric POS already? You had a fine career dude, but the best is WAY behind you. Hang 'em up.

So you're showing me videos of him dunking presumably because you want to prove he can still what? Dunk?

The issue here is clearly simple. You are talking about a span of his career which I will agree, 2014-15 still fits in that span of his best years. But that was not his prime and you said so as much. I don't need to go back and forth with your bell curve story. The fact is that wasn't his best and now you're going on with videos of him dunking?

tredigs
01-14-2016, 03:42 PM
So you're showing me videos of him dunking presumably because you want to prove he can still what? Dunk?

The issue here is clearly simple. You are talking about a span of his career which I will agree, 2014-15 still fits in that span of his best years. But that was not his prime and you said so as much. I don't need to go back and forth with your bell curve story. The fact is that wasn't his best and now you're going on with videos of him dunking?

Oh, the dunk montage? Figured since I just proved that his #'s right now were virtually identical to a season of his during the midst of his peak 5 years ago, you would prefer some casual youtube videos of the athletic freak showing off last year to help you ween off this discussion. I'm about 20 minutes in on some jaw-dropping highlights myself. Still on 2015. -shrug. Enjoy buddy!

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 04:27 PM
"That was not the absolute max-best that Lebron could have played from an individual level. And that is not mutually exclusive from the fact that he was clearly still playing prime-Lebron level basketball."



Prime: of the best possible quality.

If you refuse to acknowledge this level of arrogance, well, it just explains you're attitude outside of these forums.

Tony_Starks
01-14-2016, 04:38 PM
Steph aside, I'm just glad to see Thomas get the recognition he well deserves. Around these parts he usually gets NO love.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 04:46 PM
"That was not the absolute max-best that Lebron could have played from an individual level. And that is not mutually exclusive from the fact that he was clearly still playing prime-Lebron level basketball."



Prime: of the best possible quality.

If you refuse to acknowledge this level of arrogance, well, it just explains you're attitude outside of these forums.

Here my son, I'm going to hold your hand for ONE last post/analogy and then I am done handling you.

Think of "prime" as a grade a beef (we'll stick with prime and do away with choice/select/standard). When you're evaluating the marbling of prime beef you will find prime- quality, prime o quality, and prime + quality. This prime+ meat ('90 Jordan) is the best of the best of the best. It's the absolute apex. The PEAK, if you will, of prime meat. Prime o and prime - on the other hand, while still the best of the best and clearly prime beef, don't have quite the all around perfection as is possible. That's Jordan in 98 (34 yrs old). That's Duncan in 08 (31 yrs old). Kobe in 2010 (31 yrs old). And that's Lebron in 2015 (29/30 yrs old).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ttV65LBhsQ

ewing
01-14-2016, 05:06 PM
i love meat analogies. please do that more often!

mngopher35
01-14-2016, 05:06 PM
Outside of Curry being too high this list is pretty solid to me as well. Curry can be in the conversation in a couple years (literally) but if his career ended today he wouldn't be that high IMO.

ManningToTyree
01-14-2016, 06:02 PM
Curry to high Clyde too low. Rest is fair

FlashBolt
01-14-2016, 06:46 PM
Here my son, I'm going to hold your hand for ONE last post/analogy and then I am done handling you.

Think of "prime" as a grade a beef (we'll stick with prime and do away with choice/select/standard). When you're evaluating the marbling of prime beef you will find prime- quality, prime o quality, and prime + quality. This prime+ meat ('90 Jordan) is the best of the best of the best. It's the absolute apex. The PEAK, if you will, of prime meat. Prime o and prime - on the other hand, while still the best of the best and clearly prime beef, don't have quite the all around perfection as is possible. That's Jordan in 98 (34 yrs old). That's Duncan in 08 (31 yrs old). Kobe in 2010 (31 yrs old). And that's Lebron in 2015 (29/30 yrs old).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ttV65LBhsQ

Lol @ you using meat references. It doesn't even add up. Why did you do away with choice/select/standard? Oh right.. doesn't fit your memo. Listen, Tredigs. I know you're arrogant and I'm probably not the first to ever call you that. You probably realize that yourself. The definition of prime is the ultimate best. If you want to talk about who had a better stretch of elite play, then that isn't considered prime. "Here my son." I feel bad for you.

jayjay33
01-14-2016, 06:59 PM
Exactly...people thinking the second you lose the slightest bit of athleticism ur out ur prime are ridiculous. Most times you haven't even reached ur prime because ur "game" gets better.

Lbj shot 40% for the series because of the Warriors defense and lack of Perimeter shooting on his team. This is not football YOU CANT JUST RUN OVER PEOPLE in basketball. There is no wing player that can shoot a good % against a good "team" defense without shooters.

Did you watch the series?


No what we're arguing is that Peak and
Prime are two different things. What's silly is that you think there the same thing.

You have no argument. Tredigs insists that it was LeBron's peak/prime while you're arguing that the word peak doesn't = prime despite that prime = best quality.


Your argument is not the problem. Your definition of peak vs prime is. It goes like this (not yet in prime.....in prime.....at PEAK.....declining but STILL in prime.....out of prime).

Get it now? The "still in prime stage is where he was in last years finals. Past his "peak" (which is what ur really arguing) but still in his prime which is what were arguing. Why is that so hard to understand. Out of world lbj is PEAK, not PRIME.

So you're basically saying LeBron wasn't in his peak but still at his prime? Is that why numerous sources of the word have pegged the meaning of prime as being of the highest quality? Are you somehow turning this into an English course and not of what truly matters: LeBron wasn't at his peak/prime or however else you wish to twist it?



What I'm saying is peak and prime are NOT the same thing. There's no way to debate this with you because you think peak and prime are the same. Where as almost everyone else understands they are not.

Lbj was definitely in his prime, but not at his peak.

tredigs
01-14-2016, 07:06 PM
Why did I not include "choice/standard", etc in my analogy? Easy answer. Some players enter their prime much sooner than others, and never fall out of it until their final injury riddled season or two. Magic? His whole career is prime. Bird? Same thing until his final 2 seasons (a player with a REAL back injury btw). There's no "choice" meat for Lebron outside of maybe his 1st season and a half. Certainly by 21 yrs old when he was putting up 31/7/7 he was already entering his prime level of play (not prime+ mind you, because it wasn't his peak and despite the counting #'s his defensive acumen and late game decision making was still suspect, but clearly prime o or prime -). That was the rising part of his prime bell curve. Now, he's on the waning side. If he plays 5 more seasons, he'll be his personal choice meat again just like his rookie year.

Fun fact: I'm more arrogant with the self important *** holes on this site. You won't see this tone with anybody I respect.

More-Than-Most
01-14-2016, 09:18 PM
Okay, Tredigs. So why did it take you so long to do what JayJay did in a few sentences if he's proving what you're saying? The definition of prime is what exactly? There's really no point in going over this with you because it's clear: You want to say LeBron was at his ultimate best because it will make you feel better about GSW beating them. Face it.

this is basically why i stopped arguing... The Def of prime makes our argument... Lebron is no longer the player he was.. He is still a fantastic player but not the beast of years ago... It really is that simple..

mngopher35
01-14-2016, 10:54 PM
I am not completely sure why we are arguing where Lebron is but he is at the end of his prime currently. He is a few years removed from peak and clearly on the downswing but looking back in 10 years we will likely say something along the lines of he had a prime of 2005ish-2017ish or something like that (same way for Kobe I use 2000-2012 most of the time to look at prime stats etc).

It won't be his best year or even probably top 8 or so season, but it will still be considered a prime year for him most likely.

Chronz
01-14-2016, 11:11 PM
What I'm saying is peak and prime are NOT the same thing. There's no way to debate this with you because you think peak and prime are the same. Where as almost everyone else understands they are not.

Lbj was definitely in his prime, but not at his peak.

I rarely agree with you but I have a fetish for NBA terminology and I agree with your interpretation of prime vs peak. Tho it is hard to identify ones prime for alot of players.

ewing
01-14-2016, 11:24 PM
how do you feel about meat?

Chronz
01-14-2016, 11:28 PM
how do you feel about meat?

I like them the way I like CP3 turnovers, rare.......

ewing
01-14-2016, 11:31 PM
I like them the way I like CP3 turnovers, rare.......

is it a fetish?

Chronz
01-15-2016, 01:03 AM
is it a fetish?

ur a weird guy

IKnowHoops
01-15-2016, 04:52 AM
1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Stockton
4. Curry
5. Isiah
6. CP3
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Walt Frazier
10. Cousy

Thoughts? Curry isn't top 4 already. He's a great player and has a good chance to be up there when his career is over but let's not overrate him already as many have done with Anthony Davis. Magic knows he's GOAT but his opinion is there's no way Stockton and curry are better than Isiah and goes more into detail on his Twitter. Someone feel free to link his tweets if you want idk how to do it. Also NBA on ESPN tweeted both of these list if anyone was to link them as well they go into detail on their decisions a little. I assume they'll do SF, PF, and C in order the next 3 days.

1. Curry
2. Magic
3. Cp3
4. Russell Westbrook
5. Big O
6. Isaiah
7. Gary Payton
8. Steve Nash
9.John Stockton
10.Tim Hardaway

basch152
01-16-2016, 01:42 PM
I just realized... where the **** is the glove?

You're talking about arguably the greatest defensive guard of all time, arguably the best two-way guard of all time.

I'd easily put him in the top 5ish.

DboneG
01-16-2016, 07:29 PM
ESPNs top 10 PGs of all time

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Stockton
4. Curry
5. Isiah
6. CP3
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Walt Frazier
10. Cousy


DboneG's top 10 PGs of all time

1. Magic Johnson.......A no brainer
2. Oscar Robertson....Mr. Triple-double, awesome player.
3. John Stockton.........Great player!
4. Isaih Thomas.........Great player! Did what it took to win.
5. Chris Paul...............Great player.
6. Steve Nash............ Very good player.
7. Jason Kidd..............His game came a long way. I remember when, he didn't have a good jump shot.
8. Gary Payton............The Glove! Great passer, defender, scorer.
9. Walt Frazier ............Great all-round player.
10. Bob Cousy.............Great all-round player.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 04:59 PM
Magic
Robertson
Isiah
Stockton
DJ
KJ
Archibald
Frazier
Payton
Parker