PDA

View Full Version : Top 5 PG All-Time: GO!



lol, please
01-04-2018, 03:32 PM
My list:

1.Johnson
2. Curry
3. Thomas
4. Nash
5. Robertson

Runner ups:
Payton
Stockton
Paul (I hate Paul so it took a lot to add him here)

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 03:38 PM
:facepalm: Jesus Christ, dude. Curry at 2nd and Paul at 8th? Do you have any idea how to have an objective opinion on NBA players?

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 03:41 PM
My list would look something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Frazier
10. Payton

Heediot
01-04-2018, 04:18 PM
My list would look something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Frazier
10. Payton

roughly this. flip zeke and kidd for me. might have walt ahead of zeke. curry will move up 5-10 years down the line.

mngopher35
01-04-2018, 04:25 PM
Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Paul
Curry
Nash
Kidd

I think Curry moves up to 2/3 by end of his career.

WaDe03
01-04-2018, 04:38 PM
Chalmers
LeBron
Magic
Oscar
Paul
Zeke
Stockton
Nash
Kidd
Westbrook

valade16
01-04-2018, 04:51 PM
Top 5 in terms of who is actually the best (i.e. if they were all at their peak and were in a draft who would I want on my team):

1. Magic
2. Curry
3. Big O
4. CP3

After that I'd have guys like Stockton, Nash, Zeke, Kidd, Payton and Frazier on roughly the same plane (i.e. I would take one of them over the other depending on the rest of the team's construction).

I would also have to give strong consideration to Penny, Arenas and Rose just after them (or maybe even ahead of some depending on circumstances).

IndyRealist
01-04-2018, 04:51 PM
In before Lonzo, Ben Simmons, or Giannis mentioned.

KnicksorBust
01-04-2018, 04:51 PM
My list would look something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Frazier
10. Payton

Argument for Paul over Stockton?

AllBall
01-04-2018, 05:10 PM
1. Dylan
2. Dylan
3. Dylan
4. Dylan
5. Dylan

Hot fire

valade16
01-04-2018, 05:29 PM
Argument for Paul over Stockton?

Other than him simply being the better and more impactful player?

That's the problem with anyone who tries to do these things, they never specify if it's by accolades or ability.

I am tempted to begin a Top 25 all-time list based purely on their actual ability and see how the results differ from an accolades based list.

WaDe03
01-04-2018, 05:48 PM
Other than him simply being the better and more impactful player?

That's the problem with anyone who tries to do these things, they never specify if it's by accolades or ability.

I am tempted to begin a Top 25 all-time list based purely on their actual ability and see how the results differ from an accolades based list.

Do it.

WaDe03
01-04-2018, 05:48 PM
So no one else is going to put Chalmers?

AntiG
01-04-2018, 05:56 PM
1. Lonzo
2. Lamelo
3. Liangelo
4. Chalmers
5. Mike James
5-tied. Lavar

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 06:00 PM
Argument for Paul over Stockton?

Statistically Paul is the superior player, and it's not that close. I'll give Stockton the edge as a pure point guard in terms of passing and assist numbers. But I'll take Paul at pretty much everything else. Stockton was slightly more efficient at scoring, but his scoring numbers and usage pale in comparison to Paul. Stockton topped 16 PPG three times in 19 seasons. Paul has done in 12 times in 13 years. And pretty much every advanced statistic on the planet says Paul is the statistically superior player: PER, WS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, ORTG, etc.

If we measure accolades, Paul already has eight All-NBA teams compared to Stockton's 11, but Paul made All-NBA 1st team four times compared to only twice for Stockton. Paul also has nine All-Defensive appearances compared to five for Stockton, and Paul finished top 10 in MVP voting seven times compared to five times for Stockton.

And unlike with some other point guards, Stockton really doesn't have a major edge in postseason resume over Paul. In fact, he's known as much for his failures in the playoffs as CP3 is, and unlike Paul, he played with another top 25 player his entire career. So really the only barometers by which we could give Stockton an edge is as a passer and in terms of longevity. But I'm judging by pretty much any other criteria, Chris Paul is the superior player in an all-time discussion.

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 06:02 PM
Chalmers
LeBron
Magic
Oscar
Paul
Zeke
Stockton
Nash
Kidd
Westbrook

I realize that Chalmers and Lebron are a joke, but an interesting argument could be made for Westbrook in the top 10. I'd love to see someone try to argue him over guys like Frazier and Payton.

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 06:09 PM
Top 5 in terms of who is actually the best (i.e. if they were all at their peak and were in a draft who would I want on my team):

1. Magic
2. Curry
3. Big O
4. CP3

After that I'd have guys like Stockton, Nash, Zeke, Kidd, Payton and Frazier on roughly the same plane (i.e. I would take one of them over the other depending on the rest of the team's construction).

I would also have to give strong consideration to Penny, Arenas and Rose just after them (or maybe even ahead of some depending on circumstances).
Penny, Arenas and Rose? I'd love to see you make a case for one of those guys as a better basketball player than Walt Frazier. Westbrook, I could see a decent case for in the top 10, but not any of those guys. I do really like your idea of discussing a top 25 list of "who would you rather have at his peak?" And if that was your criteria for this list, Curry certainly would make a strong case for No. 2 and might even have a decent case for No. 1.

In an all-time list right now, though, Curry's still 4th or 5th for me among point guards somewhere in that top 20-30 range of all players all-time.

mngopher35
01-04-2018, 06:12 PM
I realize that Chalmers and Lebron are a joke, but an interesting argument could be made for Westbrook in the top 10. I'd love to see someone try to argue him over guys like Frazier and Payton.

I think Westbrook is where we will really see a fight back against using stats and comparing different era's. Which is somewhat fair btw not saying it isn't, things have clearly changed. I have already pointed out how compared to a guy like even Durant from this era compares to Westbrook and how he has some strong arguments to be at least somewhat close.

I actually kinda agree with your take on CP3 so this is not trying to discredit his numbers either. It is something that will need consideration though as we will see many players from today with better stats individually than other stars in the past.

Cp3 v Westy v Stockton statistically over their careers:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Chris+Paul&player_id1_select=Chris+Paul&y1=2018&player_id1=paulch01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Russell+Westbrook&player_id2_select=Russell+Westbrook&y2=2018&player_id2=westbru01&idx=players&player_id3_hint=John+Stockton&player_id3_select=John+Stockton&y3=2003&player_id3=stockjo01&idx=players

Hawkeye15
01-04-2018, 06:20 PM
My list would look something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Frazier
10. Payton

Drop Zeke 4 spots and this is mine

Vee-Rex
01-04-2018, 06:25 PM
Chalmers
LeBron
Magic
Oscar
Paul
Zeke
Stockton
Nash
Kidd
Westbrook

Gotta put backup-Wade in that list somewhere

valade16
01-04-2018, 06:39 PM
Penny, Arenas and Rose? I'd love to see you make a case for one of those guys as a better basketball player than Walt Frazier. Westbrook, I could see a decent case for in the top 10, but not any of those guys. I do really like your idea of discussing a top 25 list of "who would you rather have at his peak?" And if that was your criteria for this list, Curry certainly would make a strong case for No. 2 and might even have a decent case for No. 1.

In an all-time list right now, though, Curry's still 4th or 5th for me among point guards somewhere in that top 20-30 range of all players all-time.

Is it really so hard? We're talking about them at their peak when healthy, they were all pretty great basketball players.

First, Frazier's career high in PER is 21.6, his career high in TS% is .576, his WS/48 high is .236, his BPM is 5.8 and his VORP is 6.3.

Penny's 3rd year he had a PER of 24.6, a TS% of .605, a WS/48 of .229, a BPM of 6.4 and a VORP of 6.4.

So in his one truly healthy season at his best his advanced stats are every bit comparable to Frazier's. Additionally, Penny was an All-NBA 1st team player that year (and 95) and finished 3rd in MVP voting ahead of his teammate Shaq (though to be fair, Shaq was hurt that year) and behind only MJ and D-Rob. His talent was considered among the peak players in the game at a time when the NBA was heavily loaded with peak players. Despite Shaq missing nearly 30 games the Magic still won 60 games.

The same things apply to Derrick Rose. His MVP year he had stats of:

23.5 PER, .550 TS%, .208 WS/48, 5.9 BPM and 6.0 VORP. Comparable to Walt Frazier. Although he was considered in actuality a step below LeBron even though he won MVP, he was still considered among the games best players, certainly he was considered the best young player in the league at the time.


And that's my point and the problem with a Top 25 based on actual talent, it will be really hard for people to overcome the ingrained accolade rankings we are all accustomed to.

It is difficult for people to acknowledge guys who wouldn't sniff a spot in the Top 30-50 all things considered to suddenly be vaulted that high because of a few good years, even if in the case of Penny and D-Rose there were extenuating circumstances (injuries) for why they didn't stockpile accolades.

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 06:40 PM
I think Westbrook is where we will really see a fight back against using stats and comparing different era's. Which is somewhat fair btw not saying it isn't, things have clearly changed. I have already pointed out how compared to a guy like even Durant from this era compares to Westbrook and how he has some strong arguments to be at least somewhat close.

I actually kinda agree with your take on CP3 so this is not trying to discredit his numbers either. It is something that will need consideration though as we will see many players from today with better stats individually than other stars in the past.

Cp3 v Westy v Stockton statistically over their careers:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Chris+Paul&player_id1_select=Chris+Paul&y1=2018&player_id1=paulch01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Russell+Westbrook&player_id2_select=Russell+Westbrook&y2=2018&player_id2=westbru01&idx=players&player_id3_hint=John+Stockton&player_id3_select=John+Stockton&y3=2003&player_id3=stockjo01&idx=players
Yeah, but at least most guys in the top 10 of any PG discussion played in the 90s-2000s, so they're fairly easy to compare. The rules haven't changed so drastically in the last 20 years that we have to put an asterisk by anyone's name. And the only guys who played in the 70s and 80s on the list (Magic and Frazier) posted such strong advanced numbers that we don't have to completely throw out efficiency and advanced stats when comparing them.

Now if you want to start talking about Cousy and throw him in the mix, then things get really tough...


Drop Zeke 4 spots and this is mine

Zeke is such a hard guy to judge. How much do we take his postseason resume, base statistics and defense into account when measuring them against his mediocre efficiency and advanced numbers? I bounce him around so much that I honestly don't know if I have him at 6 or at 10, and that could vary on any given day. My top 5 guys are pretty much locks, but that 6-10 range is so hard to judge, that I can't honestly say that I disagree with any order of those five guys.

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 06:51 PM
Is it really so hard? We're talking about them at their peak when healthy, they were all pretty great basketball players.

First, Frazier's career high in PER is 21.6, his career high in TS% is .576, his WS/48 high is .236, his BPM is 5.8 and his VORP is 6.3.

Penny's 3rd year he had a PER of 24.6, a TS% of .605, a WS/48 of .229, a BPM of 6.4 and a VORP of 6.4.

So in his one truly healthy season at his best his advanced stats are every bit comparable to Frazier's. Additionally, Penny was an All-NBA 1st team player that year (and 95) and finished 3rd in MVP voting ahead of his teammate Shaq (though to be fair, Shaq was hurt that year) and behind only MJ and D-Rob. His talent was considered among the peak players in the game at a time when the NBA was heavily loaded with peak players. Despite Shaq missing nearly 30 games the Magic still won 60 games.

The same things apply to Derrick Rose. His MVP year he had stats of:

23.5 PER, .550 TS%, .208 WS/48, 5.9 BPM and 6.0 VORP. Comparable to Walt Frazier. Although he was considered in actuality a step below LeBron even though he won MVP, he was still considered among the games best players, certainly he was considered the best young player in the league at the time.

Oh, I see, you're going solely off peak production. While, I get that, I don't know how you can have the "Top 25 based on talent" without any discussion regarding postseason performance, which is where Frazier earns his ranking on this list. That was my biggest problem with the last All-Time Re-draft we did: by doing a 1-year peak, you're almost completely eliminating the impact of postseason performance.


And that's my point and the problem with a Top 25 based on actual talent, it will be really hard for people to overcome the ingrained accolade rankings we are all accustomed to.

It is difficult for people to acknowledge guys who wouldn't sniff a spot in the Top 30-50 all things considered to suddenly be vaulted that high because of a few good years, even if in the case of Penny and D-Rose there were extenuating circumstances (injuries) for why they didn't stockpile accolades.
But are you talking about a one-year peak or overall peak? Because, again, I'm not a fan of the 1-year peak argument. In addition to diminishing the impact of the playoffs, it also won't account for a fluke season or the one-hit wonders. Tiny Archibald is the perfect example. If we're judging all-time point guards based on their best seasons, you could easily make a case for Tiny in the top 10 based on his ridiculous 72-73 season, which he never came close to replicating the rest of his career.

lol, please
01-04-2018, 07:03 PM
Other than him simply being the better and more impactful player?

That's the problem with anyone who tries to do these things, they never specify if it's by accolades or ability.

I am tempted to begin a Top 25 all-time list based purely on their actual ability and see how the results differ from an accolades based list.

The goal here was based off of ability. That said, hard to separate them because accolades can be a proof of said ability. It depends on the "share" of the "win" they contributed. (see what I did there? :p)

valade16
01-04-2018, 07:08 PM
Oh, I see, you're going solely off peak production. While, I get that, I don't know how you can have the "Top 25 based on talent" without any discussion regarding postseason performance, which is where Frazier earns his ranking on this list. That was my biggest problem with the last All-Time Re-draft we did: by doing a 1-year peak, you're almost completely eliminating the impact of postseason performance.

But are you talking about a one-year peak or overall peak? Because, again, I'm not a fan of the 1-year peak argument. In addition to diminishing the impact of the playoffs, it also won't account for a fluke season or the one-hit wonders. Tiny Archibald is the perfect example. If we're judging all-time point guards based on their best seasons, you could easily make a case for Tiny in the top 10 based on his ridiculous 72-73 season, which he never came close to replicating the rest of his career.

First Bolded: Nor do I, which is why post-season performance should be evaluated in that, if you choose player X over player Y because you think they, at their peak, would perform better than player Y in the post-season, that is a completely reasonable argument to make.

In regards specifically to the Penny vs Frazier debate, Penny performed very well that year in the playoffs for Orlando, nearly matching his regular season production. But you'd then have the subjective argument of whether you think Penny could consistently do that to the level of Frazier in this hypothetical.

Second Bolded: I'm talking about them at their best. It's essentially the subjective question of "who would you take if all are at their best/in their peak in a draft based". You can use statistics and/or accolades to bolster your point (otherwise nobody can posit any true evidence other than the eye test). It doesn't necessarily have to be a 1 year peak, and you can certainly claim a specific year from a player is a generally non-duplicable fluke season (as in the case of Tiny).

But in regards specifically to Penny, was it really a fluke season because he wasn't good enough to duplicate that performance? Remember, the reason he never did that good again wasn't because he started playing worse, it's because he got injured. Had he not gotten injured, I don't see a compelling reason to doubt him being as good as we saw in 96.

In essence, it's all about context. A 1 hit wonder for a healthy guy in a 12 year career is easy to contextually know he couldn't duplicate that performance. But there were lots of really good players who simply got injured, but based on their ability, are on par with the upper levels of the league all-time.

Guys like Penny, D-Rose, Walton, Hill, etc.

Then there are guys who were extremely good but didn't get the requisite team success to reflect their actual peak level. Guys like T-Mac, CP3, etc.

T-Mac is actually an example of both our points. Not only does his ability far exceed his ranking on most lists, but he also has an outlier year.

In 2003 he shot 38.6% from 3 and had a TS% of .564 and nowhere in his peak did he come close to those numbers again, so we can surmise that was an anomaly and not indicative of how good he would be at his best more often than not. But even without that one year, his play from 2001 to 2005 still demonstrates he's insanely good and would certainly be drafted higher if picking to play a game of everyone at their peak compared to where he falls on all-time rankings.

valade16
01-04-2018, 07:23 PM
Also, I would like to give a shout-out to Tiny Archibald for a moment, as people seem to think his 1973 season was some vast outlier compared to the rest of his seasons and he never came close to that level of production.

In 1973 he led the league in PPG and APG averaging 34.0 and 11.4 in 46.0 MPG. But the year before, in 1972, he averaged 28.2 PPG and 9.2 APG in 43 MPG. He was second that year in PPG and 3rd in APG. He also had years where he averaged 26 and 25 PPG as well.

In terms of scoring and passing, he was very much near that level (if not quite as good as that year indicates, certainly close), and would certainly merit a higher ranking on a peak performance list than where he is listed here on PSD.

lol, please
01-04-2018, 07:29 PM
I think Westbrook is where we will really see a fight back against using stats and comparing different era's. Which is somewhat fair btw not saying it isn't, things have clearly changed. I have already pointed out how compared to a guy like even Durant from this era compares to Westbrook and how he has some strong arguments to be at least somewhat close.

I actually kinda agree with your take on CP3 so this is not trying to discredit his numbers either. It is something that will need consideration though as we will see many players from today with better stats individually than other stars in the past.

Cp3 v Westy v Stockton statistically over their careers:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Chris+Paul&player_id1_select=Chris+Paul&y1=2018&player_id1=paulch01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Russell+Westbrook&player_id2_select=Russell+Westbrook&y2=2018&player_id2=westbru01&idx=players&player_id3_hint=John+Stockton&player_id3_select=John+Stockton&y3=2003&player_id3=stockjo01&idx=players

That's because of how the game has evolved, from a professional standpoint. That context is important and cannot be ignored. Similarly to how in the NFL, guys who can't walk a step in Montana's shoes will dwarf his passing yards, among other things.

lol, please
01-04-2018, 07:35 PM
Is it really so hard? We're talking about them at their peak when healthy, they were all pretty great basketball players.

First, Frazier's career high in PER is 21.6, his career high in TS% is .576, his WS/48 high is .236, his BPM is 5.8 and his VORP is 6.3.

Penny's 3rd year he had a PER of 24.6, a TS% of .605, a WS/48 of .229, a BPM of 6.4 and a VORP of 6.4.

So in his one truly healthy season at his best his advanced stats are every bit comparable to Frazier's. Additionally, Penny was an All-NBA 1st team player that year (and 95) and finished 3rd in MVP voting ahead of his teammate Shaq (though to be fair, Shaq was hurt that year) and behind only MJ and D-Rob. His talent was considered among the peak players in the game at a time when the NBA was heavily loaded with peak players. Despite Shaq missing nearly 30 games the Magic still won 60 games.

The same things apply to Derrick Rose. His MVP year he had stats of:

23.5 PER, .550 TS%, .208 WS/48, 5.9 BPM and 6.0 VORP. Comparable to Walt Frazier. Although he was considered in actuality a step below LeBron even though he won MVP, he was still considered among the games best players, certainly he was considered the best young player in the league at the time.


And that's my point and the problem with a Top 25 based on actual talent, it will be really hard for people to overcome the ingrained accolade rankings we are all accustomed to.

It is difficult for people to acknowledge guys who wouldn't sniff a spot in the Top 30-50 all things considered to suddenly be vaulted that high because of a few good years, even if in the case of Penny and D-Rose there were extenuating circumstances (injuries) for why they didn't stockpile accolades.

I agree with regards to Penny, and your main point, but there has to be balance, with regards to your last statement. One elite season out of 6 or more for example, you can't responsibly move someone up too far. You would have to maintain that level of play, or close to it, I don't know, 40% of the career body of work? I'm not set in stone on 40% i'm just using it as an example.

Also you can't just assume Penny maintains a high level of play if he doesn't get injured. And we don't reward players for production they only achieved hypothetically. If that's the case let's move Rose up to 3 because we can say he kept that MVP level of play throughout he career.

mightybosstone
01-04-2018, 07:35 PM
Also, I would like to give a shout-out to Tiny Archibald for a moment, as people seem to think his 1973 season was some vast outlier compared to the rest of his seasons and he never came close to that level of production.

In 1973 he led the league in PPG and APG averaging 34.0 and 11.4 in 46.0 MPG. But the year before, in 1972, he averaged 28.2 PPG and 9.2 APG in 43 MPG. He was second that year in PPG and 3rd in APG. He also had years where he averaged 26 and 25 PPG as well.

In terms of scoring and passing, he was very much near that level (if not quite as good as that year indicates, certainly close), and would certainly merit a higher ranking on a peak performance list than where he is listed here on PSD.

Tiny also played a ridiculous amount of minutes in that 73 season, averaging 46 minutes a game, or the 8th most of any season of any player in the history of the NBA (the top 7 are all Wilt). So that sort of inflates those numbers in 73 a bit. But if you look at his per 36 numbers that season (27 and 9), they're not that much more impressive than his per 36 numbers in 72 (24 and 8) or 75 (24 and 6).

What's crazy to me is that Tiny didn't make the All-Star game in 1972 despite averaging 28/9/3. How in the hell did that happen? What were the criteria for making the All-Star team back then? Or maybe he just started super slow and didn't come on strong until after the All-Star break?

valade16
01-04-2018, 07:45 PM
I agree with regards to Penny, and your main point, but there has to be balance, with regards to your last statement. One elite season out of 6 or more for example, you can't responsibly move someone up too far. You would have to maintain that level of play, or close to it, I don't know, 40% of the career body of work? I'm not set in stone on 40% i'm just using it as an example.

Also you can't just assume Penny maintains a high level of play if he doesn't get injured. And we don't reward players for production they only achieved hypothetically. If that's the case let's move Rose up to 3 because we can say he kept that MVP level of play throughout he career.

Well it's about context, is the reason they couldn't sustain that level of play because they had some unsustainable event (like T-Mac's 38.6 3pt%), or was it because of injuries?

I am not trying to reward Penny with hypothetical production, I'm saying if I had to take a guaranteed healthy, at his peak Penny for a game, or a series, or a season, what would I care that he got hurt and his career was over. I'm taking him because of how good he was at his best. I have no reason to think Penny wouldn't do what he did at his best in the NBA for my team if I chose him. The skills are all there.

As for Rose, if you got MVP level Rose to play in your pickup game on your team, would you give a rat's *** if someone said "I'm taking Mark Jackson because he's 4th all-time in assists!"? No, you wouldn't care that Mark Jackson played far longer than D-Rose or compiled way more assists, because in that game, you'd know that D-Rose is about to whoop Mark Jackson's ***.

Raps18-19 Champ
01-04-2018, 07:56 PM
In no order, Magic/Oscar/Curry/Paul/Stockon.

WaDe03
01-04-2018, 08:09 PM
Gotta put backup-Wade in that list somewhere

Was going to let him get halfway through the season before I put him right behind Chalmers

KnicksorBust
01-04-2018, 09:04 PM
Argument for Paul over Stockton?

Other than him simply being the better and more impactful player?

That's the problem with anyone who tries to do these things, they never specify if it's by accolades or ability.

I am tempted to begin a Top 25 all-time list based purely on their actual ability and see how the results differ from an accolades based list.

I dare you. :)

KnicksorBust
01-04-2018, 09:09 PM
Argument for Paul over Stockton?

Statistically Paul is the superior player, and it's not that close. I'll give Stockton the edge as a pure point guard in terms of passing and assist numbers. But I'll take Paul at pretty much everything else. Stockton was slightly more efficient at scoring, but his scoring numbers and usage pale in comparison to Paul. Stockton topped 16 PPG three times in 19 seasons. Paul has done in 12 times in 13 years. And pretty much every advanced statistic on the planet says Paul is the statistically superior player: PER, WS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, ORTG, etc.

If we measure accolades, Paul already has eight All-NBA teams compared to Stockton's 11, but Paul made All-NBA 1st team four times compared to only twice for Stockton. Paul also has nine All-Defensive appearances compared to five for Stockton, and Paul finished top 10 in MVP voting seven times compared to five times for Stockton.

And unlike with some other point guards, Stockton really doesn't have a major edge in postseason resume over Paul. In fact, he's known as much for his failures in the playoffs as CP3 is, and unlike Paul, he played with another top 25 player his entire career. So really the only barometers by which we could give Stockton an edge is as a passer and in terms of longevity. But I'm judging by pretty much any other criteria, Chris Paul is the superior player in an all-time discussion.

Great post. I value longevity more than most but this is a pretty compelling argument. Maybe I should move Paul up on my list.

mrblisterdundee
01-04-2018, 09:36 PM
1. Lonzo
2. Lamelo
3. Liangelo
4. Chalmers
5. Mike James
5-tied. Lavar

Which one? Obviously they're both contenders.


Great post. I value longevity more than most but this is a pretty compelling argument. Maybe I should move Paul up on my list.

It's all a matter of perspective. Would Stockton have had the same longevity or success if he had to carry Paul's load? Would Paul have more longevity if he never had to be the best player on his own team?

mrblisterdundee
01-04-2018, 09:44 PM
1. LeBron
2. Magic
3. Curry
4. Oscar
5. Paul

lol, please
01-04-2018, 09:50 PM
1. LeBron
2. Magic
3. Curry
4. Oscar
5. Paul

Players who've actually played the PG position for the majority of their careers...

JasonJohnHorn
01-04-2018, 10:08 PM
In terms of fulfilling the role of the point guard, the 'traditional' role, I've never seen anybody play that position better than John Stockton. But if you are looking at overall game, I think the Big O is likely the best. Now... if you are looking overall impact (impact on the game, helping the team), I think Magic is tops.

So it really depends on how you look at it. I mean... Westbrook has a case for 'best all-around player' at the PG position (defesive inconsistency aside) as he can score, pass and rebound so well, but his impact on the game, in terms of helpig teammates is highly questionable. Whereas the Big O got the 3D season too, but helped improve things for his team. So, simply being an all-around great player doens't get you a top-five ranking, even if there is a clear case for you being the best all-around player at that position.


So... I put Stockton, Magic, and the Big O in my top three in no particular order because I feel like it is widely dependent on how an individual is appraising such a list.

After that... I feel like Chris Paul comes next (yes, I know.. no rings) and then Nash and Kidd (in whatever order you want to put them) follow by Zeke and Payton (in whatever order you want to put them).

Curry is a question mark to me. What position does he play? Under Mark Jackson, he was a point guard, and one of the best, but under Kerr, it seems like every player on the court is responcible for setting up teammates. He's essentially got 4 poitn guards on the floor at all times, or at least three. Green, KD, and Curry are all setting up teammates throught he system, but everybody is moving the ball around, and everybody is moving without the ball. When playing off the ball, Curry is one of the best scoring SG ever. When playing with the ball, he's a great scoring PG, or passing PG.

Curry certainly has the skill set and PG designation to qualify for this list, but the traditional positions simply do not apply to the GSW roster, so it is hard to categorize anybody beyond 'front court' and 'wing' and 'backcourt', and even those three categories are fluid (Curry, Klay, KD and Green all play 'wings', while Klay and Curry often play 'backcourt', and KD plays frontcourt, wing, and backcourt, and Green play wing and front court.


Curry deserves as high a place on the PG list as Chris Paul at least, and likely as high as Stockton, and by the end of his career, will be there with Magic. But his skill set and the system he is in transcend conventional positions, so it seems unfair to pideonhold him to 'point guard'.

But that said... if I made a top five and inlcude him, they would include (in no particular order), Stockton, Magis, Curry, Chris Paul and the Big O.

Chris Paul may not see the same sucess that Zeke saw, but he IS the better player, and had he played when Zeke played, he would have been considered clearly better. But in this generation of players, his size makes it harder for him to really excel in a 7-game series against a bigger player like Curry, who would have totally abused and embarassed Zeke were Zeke playing today and Zeke and Paul to have exchange eras, while Paul would have made the Pistons teams even more dominante with his high efficiency scoring and lower assist-to-turnover ratio and defense.



So yeah... in any order:
Stockton
Magic
O
CP3
Curry

tredigs
01-05-2018, 12:59 AM
In terms of fulfilling the role of the point guard, the 'traditional' role, I've never seen anybody play that position better than John Stockton. But if you are looking at overall game, I think the Big O is likely the best. Now... if you are looking overall impact (impact on the game, helping the team), I think Magic is tops.

So it really depends on how you look at it. I mean... Westbrook has a case for 'best all-around player' at the PG position (defesive inconsistency aside) as he can score, pass and rebound so well, but his impact on the game, in terms of helpig teammates is highly questionable. Whereas the Big O got the 3D season too, but helped improve things for his team. So, simply being an all-around great player doens't get you a top-five ranking, even if there is a clear case for you being the best all-around player at that position.


So... I put Stockton, Magic, and the Big O in my top three in no particular order because I feel like it is widely dependent on how an individual is appraising such a list.

After that... I feel like Chris Paul comes next (yes, I know.. no rings) and then Nash and Kidd (in whatever order you want to put them) follow by Zeke and Payton (in whatever order you want to put them).

Curry is a question mark to me. What position does he play? Under Mark Jackson, he was a point guard, and one of the best, but under Kerr, it seems like every player on the court is responcible for setting up teammates. He's essentially got 4 poitn guards on the floor at all times, or at least three. Green, KD, and Curry are all setting up teammates throught he system, but everybody is moving the ball around, and everybody is moving without the ball. When playing off the ball, Curry is one of the best scoring SG ever. When playing with the ball, he's a great scoring PG, or passing PG.

Curry certainly has the skill set and PG designation to qualify for this list, but the traditional positions simply do not apply to the GSW roster, so it is hard to categorize anybody beyond 'front court' and 'wing' and 'backcourt', and even those three categories are fluid (Curry, Klay, KD and Green all play 'wings', while Klay and Curry often play 'backcourt', and KD plays frontcourt, wing, and backcourt, and Green play wing and front court.


Curry deserves as high a place on the PG list as Chris Paul at least, and likely as high as Stockton, and by the end of his career, will be there with Magic. But his skill set and the system he is in transcend conventional positions, so it seems unfair to pideonhold him to 'point guard'.

But that said... if I made a top five and inlcude him, they would include (in no particular order), Stockton, Magis, Curry, Chris Paul and the Big O.

Chris Paul may not see the same sucess that Zeke saw, but he IS the better player, and had he played when Zeke played, he would have been considered clearly better. But in this generation of players, his size makes it harder for him to really excel in a 7-game series against a bigger player like Curry, who would have totally abused and embarassed Zeke were Zeke playing today and Zeke and Paul to have exchange eras, while Paul would have made the Pistons teams even more dominante with his high efficiency scoring and lower assist-to-turnover ratio and defense.



So yeah... in any order:
Stockton
Magic
O
CP3
Curry
I would agree with most of this. Especially that top-5, and it changes depending on whether you're valuing peak, prime, or consistency/longevity, etc more. There's also a lot of era/rule consideration as well. Lists are always weird in that sense. That's why tiers are more reasonable, and this is the top tier as I see it.

IKnowHoops
01-05-2018, 02:03 AM
Argument for Paul over Stockton?

His Peak crushes Stockton’s.

IKnowHoops
01-05-2018, 02:09 AM
Most dominant players I’ve seen in my lifetime. Jordan, Shaq, Lebron, Curry.

I can’t ignore Curry’s Shaq-like dominance.

Curry
Magic
Paul
Oscar
Not sure

LA_Raiders
01-05-2018, 02:18 AM
1- Magic
2- Oscar
3- Stockton (Maybe CP3 once his career is over)
4- CP3
5- Payton

Curry will definitely be a top 3 PG but not yet.

nastynice
01-05-2018, 05:27 AM
Someone mentioned penny earlier, what a tragedy. Dude was a 6’7 pg who could legit back players down in the post, filthy skill set. Woulda loved to see him have a full career

JasonJohnHorn
01-05-2018, 05:32 AM
In no order, Magic/Oscar/Curry/Paul/Stockon.

You can't get a better list than that.

nastynice
01-05-2018, 05:32 AM
Most dominant players I’ve seen in my lifetime. Jordan, Shaq, Lebron, Curry.

I can’t ignore Curry’s Shaq-like dominance.

Curry
Magic
Paul
Oscar
Not sure

Curry legit got shaq like dominance! lmao

Hes the exact oppsite of Shaq. He draws defenders away from the basket the way Shaq drew them in. At an absurd rate

JasonJohnHorn
01-05-2018, 05:48 AM
Curry legit got shaq like dominance! lmao

Hes the exact oppsite of Shaq. He draws defenders away from the basket the way Shaq drew them in. At an absurd rate

It is crazy. I've heard a lot of conversation surrounding Curry's 'gravity'. I think that is the best for for it.

This video displays it as best as I can imagine.

https://gfycat.com/UnlinedWhisperedAfricanparadiseflycatcher

This is an example. This doesn't happen every play. It is in part, bad defense and bad communication on the opposing team's part; however, Curry is so good that he creates these kinds of mistakes. He doesn't simply benefit from the mistakes; he generates them.

Kerr said it best here:



I think Steph is at his absolute peak right now, physically and emotionally. This is probably as good as he's ever going to be. I think he's better now than he was last year or the year before. And that's saying something.

He is the most impactful offensive player, in terms of what he does to the defense, maybe ever. There's guys, obviously Michael Jordan impacted things, but the way Steph plays puts the fear of God into defenses like no one I've ever seen. Nobody has been able to shoot off the dribble from 35 feet in a normal setting. But he does that, which changes the entire game. So everything we do revolves around Steph.

You can talk about where he stands in terms of the best players in the league. He's obviously one of the best, by that standard he's the best. If you want to just say: ‘Who affects the game the most offensively?' Steph is the best player in the NBA. But there's different ways of measuring that stuff. From a two-way standpoint, if you like the two-way guys, maybe it's Kawhi Leonard or (Kevin Durant) or LeBron because they're bigger or stronger and can protect the rim.

This is coming from a guy who has KD and Klay on his team, and who has played with Duncan and Jordan, and against Shaq.


Shaq would have been AMAZING in a generation where so many guys can shoot .400 from the arc. His beast most in the paint would have opened things up for them, and his passing ability in the LAL onward part of his career would have utlilized the with amazing efficiency. The same could be said of Hakeem (I mean, look at what he did with guys shooting between .300-.350 from the arc).

But the fact that Curry does this in reverse? Pulling them to the perimiter with his 'gravity'? It is just insane.


I would have been curious to see Shaq and Curry on the same team... or if the Warriors has a slasher that cut the basket off the ball to get some crazy ally-oops, like maybe Griffin (though it'd work better with a guy who shoots the 3-ball well).

Great post. nastynice.

Legitimate
01-05-2018, 06:16 AM
Not to stir up the pot or anything but isn't cp3 too high on most these lists? You give curry 2 stars and he turns them into a dynasty you give chris paul 2 stars and they struggle to make it past the 2nd round, somethin about himm that just screams overrated to me, well it did happen in LA, he was on the big stage and lots of people over rated him because of it. People don't even take into account all the rest he gets, of course he's going to have better numbers if he's resting 30 percent of the time, lol. my 2 cents.

IMO nash isn't getting much love, he turned PHX into one of the best offensive teams this league has ever seen and is a 2 time mvp and one of the most efficient player to ever shoot the ball. He could of easily avg over 25 ppg and shoot over 50percent from anywhere on the floor but thats the good thing, he actually liked passing the ball lol.

Just a utter joke that cp3 is ahead of steve nash on every list, i'm about to vomit lol.

Heediot
01-05-2018, 06:22 AM
Not to stir up the pot or anything but isn't cp3 too high on most these lists? You give curry 2 stars and he turns them into a dynasty you give chris paul 2 stars and they struggle to make it past the 2nd round, somethin about himm that just screams overrated to me, well it did happen in LA, he was on the big stage and lots of people over rated him because of it.

IMO nash isn't getting much love, he turned PHX into one of the best offensive teams this league has ever seen and is a 2 time mvp and one of the most efficient player to ever shoot the ball. He could of easily avg over 25 ppg and shoot over 50percent from anywhere on the floor but thats the good thing, he actually liked passing the ball lol.

The stars cp3 played with were more suited for generations past. Griffin has a shaky jumper, and DJ has no jumper. In an era of stretch bigs and high volume shooting from distance it is a big draw back. OTOH, both guys are good rolling to the basket, as it is also a PNR league now too.

Legitimate
01-05-2018, 06:39 AM
The stars cp3 played with were more suited for generations past. Griffin has a shaky jumper, and DJ has no jumper. In an era of stretch bigs and high volume shooting from distance it is a big draw back. OTOH, both guys are good rolling to the basket, as it is also a PNR league now too.

Ok i'll take another jab, since you bit :P. If you wanna make excuses to what cp3 would of did with big men who can shoot (opposed to what he had with LA clips). Then I'm going to make a case with Steve Nash of what he would of did if he was on the current houston team. Steve would be god like in that offense, everything he touched including the ball would turn into gold, and most importantly he wouldn't make excuses he would just lead them to the finals, and harden would of been his side kick lol. So then why is cp3 ahead of steve nash, when nash actually produced in the playoffs and was actually clutch(which is seriiously overlooked by most posters in this). My 2 cents.

Don't get me wrong, i really think cp3 is a really good pg and one of the best in a pg heavy league. but to have him ranked top 3 on every damn list in here? man somethings gots to give lol. I wouldn't even have him ahead of jason kidd or curry till he actually does something inthe playoffs.

Heediot
01-05-2018, 07:06 AM
Ok i'll take another jab, since you bit :P. If you wanna make excuses to what cp3 would of did with big men who can shoot (opposed to what he had with LA clips). Then I'm going to make a case with Steve Nash of what he would of did if he was on the current houston team. Steve would be god like in that offense, everything he touched including the ball would turn into gold, and most importantly he wouldn't make excuses he would just lead them to the finals, and harden would of been his side kick lol. So then why is cp3 ahead of steve nash, when nash actually produced in the playoffs and was actually clutch(which is seriiously overlooked by most posters in this). My 2 cents.

Don't get me wrong, i really think cp3 is a really good pg and one of the best in a pg heavy league. but to have him ranked top 3 on every damn list in here? man somethings gots to give lol. I wouldn't even have him ahead of jason kidd or curry till he actually does something inthe playoffs.

That is fair. Playoff success does matter, but when you look at his numbers and percentages he is one of the rare guards and wings that actually maintains his efficiency in the playoffs. I do not have a problem with anyone knocking cp3 down a bit due to playoff success. He did play his part in the OKC choke. I think it is fair to say even with the steady playoff numbers cp3 needs to take his team to another level, to cement his status as a top 3-5 goat PG. Even without it though, there will always be people who support his advanced numbers both regular season and playoffs. I respect both sides of the argument. This coming from a big cp3 fan.

Legitimate
01-05-2018, 07:14 AM
On a side note, when I address most these lists, why is it people insert - best new pg in the new era on top of every list, seems a bit homerish to me , as if you don't know your basketball. You can't take away what players in the past have done just because they wouldn't be good in this era and also vice versa! too many new age cats on this forum i'm about to bounce, lol. anywho good morning all....

KnicksorBust
01-05-2018, 11:46 AM
1. Lonzo
2. Lamelo
3. Liangelo
4. Chalmers
5. Mike James
5-tied. Lavar

Which one? Obviously they're both contenders.


Great post. I value longevity more than most but this is a pretty compelling argument. Maybe I should move Paul up on my list.

It's all a matter of perspective. Would Stockton have had the same longevity or success if he had to carry Paul's load? Would Paul have more longevity if he never had to be the best player on his own team?

Call me an optimist but I am hoping Paul will still build on his resume and longevity in Houston.

People forget Karl Malone was consistently plugging out 30ppg seasons and 82 games like clockwork. It was insane. So Stockton played the prototypical pg role perfectly. The most interesting thing is if guys like Stockton or Mark Price were in the NBA now coaches would have them bombing 6s per game instead of 2.

DanG
01-05-2018, 12:40 PM
Y'all are smoking that good crack, CP3 over Steph Curry? :facepalm:

Steph Curry revolutionized basketball, won 2 MVPs, most important player on a 73 win team, won a ring against LeBron James, there's not a single season Chris Paul has had that comes close to the 15-16 season Curry put together.

Paul is and always has been the most overrated player on this board.

DanG
01-05-2018, 01:02 PM
I still can't believe this :laugh2:

You mean to tell me if both players retired today CP3 would be ranked higher all-time?

Paul has played 930 career games including playoffs. Curry has 675. That's basically only THREE seasons.

What is the argument over Curry?

2x MVP
Best player on a 73 win team
2x NBA champion against a top 2 player all-time
Best shooter of all-time
2015-2016 absolutely crazy regular season, most of us thought someone has finally surpassed LeBron James as the best player (even though in the end that wasn't the case)

Not even a debate.

mngopher35
01-05-2018, 01:13 PM
I still can't believe this :laugh2:

You mean to tell me if both players retired today CP3 would be ranked higher all-time?

Paul has played 930 career games including playoffs. Curry has 675. That's basically only THREE seasons.

What is the argument over Curry?

2x MVP
Best player on a 73 win team
2x NBA champion against a top 2 player all-time
Best shooter of all-time
2015-2016 absolutely crazy regular season, most of us thought someone has finally surpassed LeBron James as the best player (even though in the end that wasn't the case)

Not even a debate.

Chris Paul was better every season from when he entered the league until about 4 seasons ago (2014). So this is just the 4th season we are seeing a better version of Curry than CP3 in the NBA. Considering it is CP3's like 12th season that means something. He has played about 30k minutes to 20k for Curry. His advanced stats are very arguably better both RS and post season still on top of the longevity as well ( he leads PER, WS/48, BPM for career in both RS and post season. More efficient, more apg, better defender but yes Curry has the edge scoring wise for sure.

Curry will get there but CP3 has a pretty solid argument on taking him still imo. The top end for Curry (last 3 seasons) are definitely where he starts to make his case and has the edge over anything Paul has done.

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 01:16 PM
Y'all are smoking that good crack, CP3 over Steph Curry? :facepalm:

Steph Curry revolutionized basketball, won 2 MVPs, most important player on a 73 win team, won a ring against LeBron James, there's not a single season Chris Paul has had that comes close to the 15-16 season Curry put together.

Paul is and always has been the most overrated player on this board.

In an all-time discussion, you have to take overall accolades and longevity into account. Peak Curry is unquestionably better than peak Paul, but his peak has not lasted very long. This is only his fifth year of All-NBA caliber production and only his third year averaging 25+ points per game. Paul has been putting up All-NBA level production for almost a decade and has basically been at least a 17/11/4/2 guy for 12 consecutive seasons, which is ridiculous.

Also, I don't necessarily think you can just give Steph a huge edge in postseason resume. Yes, he has the two rings and Paul hasn't played in the conference finals, but Paul's postseason numbers are actually much better than Steph's, Steph has obviously played on superior teams and Steph hasn't exactly stepped up huge in the postseason, with no Finals MVPs despite the two rings.

nastynice
01-05-2018, 01:21 PM
You know the guy almost averaged a triple double in the finals last year, right?

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 01:42 PM
You know the guy almost averaged a triple double in the finals last year, right?

Last postseason was easily the best of Curry's career and the only year where he didn't see a steep decline from his regular season production. If he keeps that up, he'll absolutely lose any narrative that he struggles at times in the playoffs. And while he was excellent in the Finals, he was clearly the third best guy on the floor behind Lebron and Durant, which didn't do him any favors.

Over time, another thing that will be interesting to watch and could have a huge impact on where Curry falls in any all-time discussion will be Durant's effect. If Durant is the No. 1 guy on this team moving forward and Curry becomes like a super No. 2 in the same way Wade did in Miami, that will definitely hurt his legacy. Curry was on pace to be an all-time top 10 guy before Durant came along, but I'm not so sure he is anymore.

Jets012
01-05-2018, 01:45 PM
Magic
Paul
Oscar
Steph
Stockton

It really is a shame this is the first time we've seen Paul play with elite talent. Because if he had better teams and players around him, this is a guy who could have possibly surpassed Magic. He's as perfect as a PG as you can get. Fantastic defensively, great shooter, good finisher, elite playmaker, solid defensively. He really doesn't have a flaw besides the fact that before this year he spent 6 years with David West as his 2nd best player and then another 6 with the limited DeAndre Jordan and the always injured Blake Griffin. Probably has another 2-4 seasons of playing at an All-Star/All-NBA level.

Steph will no doubt move into the top 2. While I think Paul's peak gets underrated (his 2007-2009 he was probably the 2nd best player in the league and would have been the best if LeBron hadn't been utterly ridiculous at that time), Steph still has the better peak. Just need to see a bit more of longevity from him.

mrblisterdundee
01-05-2018, 02:09 PM
Players who've actually played the PG position for the majority of their careers...

LeBron has been his team's floor general all but one of his seasons in the NBA, so I'm counting him. Deal with it:cool:

lol, please
01-05-2018, 03:42 PM
It is crazy. I've heard a lot of conversation surrounding Curry's 'gravity'. I think that is the best for for it.

This video displays it as best as I can imagine.

https://gfycat.com/UnlinedWhisperedAfricanparadiseflycatcher

This is an example. This doesn't happen every play. It is in part, bad defense and bad communication on the opposing team's part; however, Curry is so good that he creates these kinds of mistakes. He doesn't simply benefit from the mistakes; he generates them.

Kerr said it best here:



This is coming from a guy who has KD and Klay on his team, and who has played with Duncan and Jordan, and against Shaq.


Shaq would have been AMAZING in a generation where so many guys can shoot .400 from the arc. His beast most in the paint would have opened things up for them, and his passing ability in the LAL onward part of his career would have utlilized the with amazing efficiency. The same could be said of Hakeem (I mean, look at what he did with guys shooting between .300-.350 from the arc).

But the fact that Curry does this in reverse? Pulling them to the perimiter with his 'gravity'? It is just insane.


I would have been curious to see Shaq and Curry on the same team... or if the Warriors has a slasher that cut the basket off the ball to get some crazy ally-oops, like maybe Griffin (though it'd work better with a guy who shoots the 3-ball well).

Great post. nastynice.As far as your last point, I absolutely agree, I've made several fantasy matchup threads with a starting 5 of Curry/Klay/Durant/Green/Shaq

The starting 5 i want to see more than any in history lol.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-05-2018, 03:42 PM
Not to stir up the pot or anything but isn't cp3 too high on most these lists? You give curry 2 stars and he turns them into a dynasty you give chris paul 2 stars and they struggle to make it past the 2nd round, somethin about himm that just screams overrated to me, well it did happen in LA, he was on the big stage and lots of people over rated him because of it. People don't even take into account all the rest he gets, of course he's going to have better numbers if he's resting 30 percent of the time, lol. my 2 cents.

IMO nash isn't getting much love, he turned PHX into one of the best offensive teams this league has ever seen and is a 2 time mvp and one of the most efficient player to ever shoot the ball. He could of easily avg over 25 ppg and shoot over 50percent from anywhere on the floor but thats the good thing, he actually liked passing the ball lol.

Just a utter joke that cp3 is ahead of steve nash on every list, i'm about to vomit lol.I love everything about this post lol

:love:

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-05-2018, 03:47 PM
The stars cp3 played with were more suited for generations past. Griffin has a shaky jumper, and DJ has no jumper. In an era of stretch bigs and high volume shooting from distance it is a big draw back. OTOH, both guys are good rolling to the basket, as it is also a PNR league now too.

Please stop.

1. That team was assembled before the Warriors rose to greatness.

2. This wasn't "an era of stretch bigs and high volume shooting from distance". That's barely a thing now, and stretch bigs weren't even a conversation like they are now until that Clippers team had several seasons together. And it's only a different style of play, and only the Warriors are truly effective at that kind of floor spreading. The only reason we haven't seen bigs dominating lately...is because we are coming out of a weak center era. Traditional power forwards and centers can still dominate with shooter guards etc and the ball movement can still be there, if the players are defensively capable of handling the matchups and zones.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-05-2018, 03:49 PM
On a side note, when I address most these lists, why is it people insert - best new pg in the new era on top of every list, seems a bit homerish to me , as if you don't know your basketball. You can't take away what players in the past have done just because they wouldn't be good in this era and also vice versa! too many new age cats on this forum i'm about to bounce, lol. anywho good morning all....If this is about curry, there is plenty of evidence to show that he already deserves that second spot. It's not a disrespect to players of the past. I'm big on acknowledging them. He's just that great.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-05-2018, 03:52 PM
LeBron has been his team's floor general all but one of his seasons in the NBA, so I'm counting him. Deal with it:cool:I know that's exactly why you listed him and it's not allowed. This isn't about who you think is a better floor general for their team, it's about who is a better PG at the actual position.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 04:25 PM
Please stop.

1. That team was assembled before the Warriors rose to greatness.

2. This wasn't "an era of stretch bigs and high volume shooting from distance". That's barely a thing now, and stretch bigs weren't even a conversation like they are now until that Clippers team had several seasons together. And it's only a different style of play, and only the Warriors are truly effective at that kind of floor spreading. The only reason we haven't seen bigs dominating lately...is because we are coming out of a weak center era. Traditional power forwards and centers can still dominate with shooter guards etc and the ball movement can still be there, if the players are defensively capable of handling the matchups and zones.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

You're missing the point. Curry's supporting cast in his career is superior in pretty much every possible way to the guy's that Paul has played with. That's why team success isn't really a fair barometer to use between the two of them, especially when Paul's postseason numbers are so much better and Curry was such a no-show in the playoffs up until last season.

JAZZNC
01-05-2018, 04:55 PM
You're missing the point. Curry's supporting cast in his career is superior in pretty much every possible way to the guy's that Paul has played with. That's why team success isn't really a fair barometer to use between the two of them, especially when Paul's postseason numbers are so much better and Curry was such a no-show in the playoffs up until last season.

I really don't think it's a question as to why Curry put up better numbers last year. When you have the greatest team ever assembled you can't focus on Curry like before and that kind of playoff pressure obviously bothers Curry. But when you add Durant to the mix it totally changes things.

europagnpilgrim
01-05-2018, 05:09 PM
Lebron
Zeke
Oscar
Magic
Iverson

Frazier
Archibald
K Johnson
Payton
Kidd
CP3

lol, please
01-05-2018, 05:48 PM
You're missing the point. Curry's supporting cast in his career is superior in pretty much every possible way to the guy's that Paul has played with. That's why team success isn't really a fair barometer to use between the two of them, especially when Paul's postseason numbers are so much better and Curry was such a no-show in the playoffs up until last season.

I agree with that.

I just hate the lazy "league changed, only way you can win is stretch bigs and 3 point shooting" attitude. It makes me go on a rant every time. ONE team has been successful with that formula. Enough with the blanket statement myths.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

ewing
01-05-2018, 05:54 PM
I really don't think it's a question as to why Curry put up better numbers last year. When you have the greatest team ever assembled you can't focus on Curry like before and that kind of playoff pressure obviously bothers Curry. But when you add Durant to the mix it totally changes things.

He’s really good in a blow out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 06:35 PM
I agree with that.

I just hate the lazy "league changed, only way you can win is stretch bigs and 3 point shooting" attitude. It makes me go on a rant every time. ONE team has been successful with that formula. Enough with the blanket statement myths.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Mmm... Agree to disagree on this. Have there been other really good teams in the last decade that have been successful without loading up on 3-pointers and stretching the floor with 3-point shooting bigs? Sure. But if we're talking recent history, most of the teams that have won it all or are consistently at the top of the standings have done so by stretching the floor and lighting it up from deep.

Last year, four of the top 5 teams—Golden State, Cleveland, Houston and Boston—in the league were literally the top four teams in the entire NBA in 3-pointers made. All four of those teams are still in the top six this year, and Toronto's eighth. In 2015-16, the top two teams in 3-pointers made were Cleveland and Golden State. The year before that, Golden State and Cleveland were 2nd and 4th, respectively. This isn't a coincidence.

Sure, San Antonio is consistently the outlier here, but I think they're the exception to the rule at this point, not the norm. If this era has taught us anything, it's that the 3-point shot is worth more than the 2, and the more shooters you have a roster, the better.

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 06:37 PM
Lebron
Zeke
Oscar
Magic
Iverson

Frazier
Archibald
K Johnson
Payton

Wow. You'd put Tiny and KJ over Nash, Kidd, Paul and Curry? Also, Lebron is not a PG, and most people would consider Iverson more of a 2-guard.

Chronz
01-05-2018, 07:17 PM
Curry has done enough and been lucky enough to have 2 rings (that counts like 2-3 extra seasons in terms of comparing longevity imo) to be in tier 1, tho that might just be me projecting the rest of this year with him stamping his name as the games best, which is all he's missing to move up and create his own tier.
Magic, Oscar n Curry are clearly tier 1 any way you slice it except for longevity whores.

After that, much of this depends on roster composition as there is so much diversity at the top. More than any other position, opposing matchups and teammates influence their effectiveness.

Chronz
01-05-2018, 07:28 PM
Not to stir up the pot or anything but isn't cp3 too high on most these lists? You give curry 2 stars and he turns them into a dynasty you give chris paul 2 stars and they struggle to make it past the 2nd round, somethin about himm that just screams overrated to me, well it did happen in LA, he was on the big stage and lots of people over rated him because of it. People don't even take into account all the rest he gets, of course he's going to have better numbers if he's resting 30 percent of the time, lol. my 2 cents.

IMO nash isn't getting much love, he turned PHX into one of the best offensive teams this league has ever seen and is a 2 time mvp and one of the most efficient player to ever shoot the ball. He could of easily avg over 25 ppg and shoot over 50percent from anywhere on the floor but thats the good thing, he actually liked passing the ball lol.

Just a utter joke that cp3 is ahead of steve nash on every list, i'm about to vomit lol.
What 2 stars? Both players have always lost to superior teams. CP3 overachieved on the big stage.

Nash rested and never put up the individual numbers despite playing in far more modernized offenses so what's with the fake news?

Nash is prolly underrated but CP3 was definitely better in my book, just more efficient on both ends. Cp3 is in that Stockton conversation to me.

Consider that this is the first year cp3 has ever played in a D Antoni styled offense, he's old af and somehow crushing it more than last year. Poor CP3 never had that kind of spacing or support in lac. Nash never beat the spurs, wtf do I care that it happened in r1 when it was CLEARLY a conference finals type of affair, so evident was this that they made sure to correct the rule so that such a matchup never happens again.

HandsOnTheWheel
01-05-2018, 07:38 PM
I really don't think it's a question as to why Curry put up better numbers last year. When you have the greatest team ever assembled you can't focus on Curry like before and that kind of playoff pressure obviously bothers Curry. But when you add Durant to the mix it totally changes things.

Pretty much this. He turns into a complete shell of himself when he's pressured to win at the highest level. But with how ridiculous GS is, he can just play it off like it's a regular season game and excel with no pressure

More-Than-Most
01-05-2018, 07:46 PM
are people really putting Curry over Stock so soon? I mean really? Curry has been insane for about 5 seasons but its literally just 5 seasons and he is literally a 1 way player... Stocks defense much like CP3--------------------------------------------->Curry


Curry has the titles but he has also had the teams and has never been the best player on any finals team where CP3 is usually the best player on the floor for his teams.... How is Curry above stock right now when he shouldnt even be above CP3? Does defense just not count anymore?

I think curry/cp3/stock/magic will be my top 4 in no order once both curry and cp3 retire but man the disrespect right now for stock and CP3 is nasty.

tredigs
01-05-2018, 08:01 PM
"Curry has never been the best player on any of his Finals teams" is a bad troll.

These lists with current players included just depend on whether or not you value prime or longevity more.

More-Than-Most
01-05-2018, 08:31 PM
"Curry has never been the best player on any of his Finals teams" is a bad troll.

These lists with current players included just depend on whether or not you value prime or longevity more.

Durant last year was the best player

Iggy the first year with his finals MVP

Lebron and the cavs exploited curry the 2nd year which is a big part of the several reasons they upset the warriors...

The only argument would be the first year

mightybosstone
01-05-2018, 09:08 PM
Everyone arguing Curry over Paul or assuming that any argument of Paul over Curry is based solely on longevity, let's play devil's advocate here for a moment. Couldn't we argue that Curry's 15-16 is like T-Mac's 02-03? A remarkable one-hit wonder amid an amazing career, but no other season comes remotely close?

Let's break down the top 7 seasons in every advanced statistic between Curry and Paul:

PER
1. 31.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 30.0 - Paul 08-09
3. 28.3 - Paul 07-08
4. 28.0 - Curry 14-15
5. 27.0 - Paul 11-12
6. 26.4 - Paul 12-13
7 (tie) 26.2 - Paul 15-16, Paul 16-17

WS
1. 18.3 - Paul 08-09
2. 17.9 - Curry 15-16
3. 17.8 - Paul 07-08
4. 16.1 - Paul 14-15
5. 15.7 - Curry 14-15
6. (tie) 13.9 - Paul 10-11, Paul 12-13

WS/48
1. .318 - Curry 15-16
2. .292 - Paul 08-09
3. .287 - Paul 12-13
4. .284 - Paul 07-08
5. .278 - Paul 11-12
6. (tie) .270 - Paul 13-14, Paul 14-15

BPM
1. 12.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 11.2 - Paul 08-09
3. 9.9 - Curry 14-15
4. 9.2 - Paul 07-08
5. 8.8 - Paul 16-17
6. 7.9 - Paul 11-12
7. 7.8 - Paul 15-16

VORP
1. 10.0 - Paul 08-09
2. 9.8 - Curry 15-16
3. 8.5 - Paul 07-08
4. 7.9 - Curry 14-15
5. 6.7 - Curry 13-14
6. 6.2 - Curry 16-17
7. 6.1 - Paul 10-11

So obviously Curry's 15-16 season stands out here, but Paul has more of the top seven seasons in every one of these statistical categories with the exception of VORP. In fact, with the exception of VORP, Paul has at least five of the top seven seasons in every other category, with six of the top seven seasons in WS/48.

It's extremely unlikely that Paul will ever have a season as strong as Curry's 15-16 (although his 07-08 and 08-09 seasons were close). But I also think it's extremely likely that Curry will never never have a season as strong as he had in 15-16. And if Curry continues to produce closer to or lower than the level he produced at in 13-14 and 14-15, then the rest of his career is on par with or maybe slightly below Paul's best seasons.

This goes back to the discussion Valade and I were having yesterday. If you take the best single season of a player in NBA history versus looking at the player at his peak/prime, then it's a very different conversation. Paul's prime years will probably end up being at least on par with Curry's, if not statistically stronger. But Curry will have the best singular season of the bunch. Paul's prime is also likely to last longer given that he was playing at an elite level at age 22 while Curry didn't get there until age 25.

I'm not trying to say that Curry won't surpass Paul at some point or that there isn't a case for him to be made over Paul right now. He likely will, and there certainly is a case there. But I also don't think that longevity alone is the sole reasoning for taking Paul over Curry. Paul's prime right now has been arguably stronger overall than Curry's, and it's possible that will could remain to be the case, in addition to being longer.

tredigs
01-05-2018, 09:33 PM
Durant last year was the best player

Iggy the first year with his finals MVP

Lebron and the cavs exploited curry the 2nd year which is a big part of the several reasons they upset the warriors...

The only argument would be the first year

Dear Lord help us -- for this man has fallen to a depth of stupidity where only the blind fish and zooplankton can survive.

nastynice
01-05-2018, 09:48 PM
Durant last year was the best player

Iggy the first year with his finals MVP

Lebron and the cavs exploited curry the 2nd year which is a big part of the several reasons they upset the warriors...

The only argument would be the first year

Curry is currently the best warrior, last post season he also was, year before that he was playing injured so it’s expected for his game to take a dip, the year before that he was again the best player on the warriors. Cavs attacked curry when they won and shot I believe a low 30’s fg percent against him, I forget the exact number

DanG
01-07-2018, 04:41 AM
Everyone arguing Curry over Paul or assuming that any argument of Paul over Curry is based solely on longevity, let's play devil's advocate here for a moment. Couldn't we argue that Curry's 15-16 is like T-Mac's 02-03? A remarkable one-hit wonder amid an amazing career, but no other season comes remotely close?

Let's break down the top 7 seasons in every advanced statistic between Curry and Paul:

PER
1. 31.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 30.0 - Paul 08-09
3. 28.6 - Curry 17-18*
4. 28.3 - Paul 07-08
5. 28.0 - Curry 14-15
6. 27.0 - Paul 11-12
7. 26.4 - Paul 12-13
8. (tie) 26.2 - Paul 15-16, Paul 16-17

WS
1. 18.3 - Paul 08-09
2. 17.9 - Curry 15-16
3. 17.8 - Paul 07-08
4. 16.1 - Paul 14-15
5. 15.7 - Curry 14-15
6. (tie) 13.9 - Paul 10-11, Paul 12-13

WS/48
1. .318 - Curry 15-16
2. .292 - Paul 08-09
3. .288 - Curry 14-15 you left this out
4. .287 - Paul 12-13
5. .286 - Curry 17-18*
6. .284 - Paul 07-08
7. .278 - Paul 11-12
8. (tie) .270 - Paul 13-14, Paul 14-15

BPM
1. 12.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 11.2 - Paul 08-09
3. 9.9 - Curry 14-15
4. 9.2 - Paul 07-08
5. 8.8 - Paul 16-17
6. 8.5 - Curry 17-18*
7.. 7.9 - Paul 11-12
8. 7.8 - Paul 15-16

VORP
1. 10.0 - Paul 08-09
2. 9.8 - Curry 15-16
3. 8.5 - Paul 07-08
4. 7.9 - Curry 14-15
5. 6.7 - Curry 13-14
6. 6.2 - Curry 16-17
7. 6.1 - Paul 10-11

TS%
1. .669 - Curry 15-16
2. .661 - Curry 17-18*
3. .638 - Curry 14-15
4. .624 - Curry 16-17
5. .614 - Paul 16-17
6. .610 - Curry 13-14
7. .599 - Paul 08-09
8. .596 - Paul 14-15


I can play the advanced stats game with you, but let's be honest you can argue all kinds of stupid things with these stats.

Why are you leaving out the efficiency stat TS%?

Also, after this season, in 40 games, this argument will be very even.

Lastly, Curry's 15-16 is even statistically clearly better than Paul's 08-09. And when you take into consideration the 73 win record, the 3 point record, the unanimous MVP, it's not really close.

DanG
01-07-2018, 04:49 AM
Now lets look if it was just top 5.

PER
1. 31.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 30.0 - Paul 08-09
3. 28.6 - Curry 17-18*
4. 28.3 - Paul 07-08
5. 28.0 - Curry 14-15


WS
1. 18.3 - Paul 08-09
2. 17.9 - Curry 15-16
3. 17.8 - Paul 07-08
4. 16.1 - Paul 14-15
5. 15.7 - Curry 14-15


WS/48
1. .318 - Curry 15-16
2. .292 - Paul 08-09
3. .288 - Curry 14-15
4. .287 - Paul 12-13
5. .286 - Curry 17-18*


BPM
1. 12.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 11.2 - Paul 08-09
3. 9.9 - Curry 14-15
4. 9.2 - Paul 07-08
5. 8.8 - Paul 16-17

VORP
1. 10.0 - Paul 08-09
2. 9.8 - Curry 15-16
3. 8.5 - Paul 07-08
4. 7.9 - Curry 14-15
5. 6.7 - Curry 13-14


TS%
1. .669 - Curry 15-16
[B]2. .661 - Curry 17-18*
3. .638 - Curry 14-15
4. .624 - Curry 16-17
5. .614 - Paul 16-17

I don't know man, if you're argument is that Paul has had 2-3 more 'good' seasons it's clearly not enough to argue against Curry's MVP's, team success etc.

Finesser
01-07-2018, 05:07 AM
1)Magic
2)Robertson
3)Stockton
4)Thomas
Tied 5th)Paul/Curry

ewing
01-07-2018, 10:49 AM
Magic
Kidd
Stockton
Nash
Paul
Westbrook
Thomas
Curry

MygirlhatesCod
01-07-2018, 11:44 AM
1. Dylan
2. Dylan
3. Dylan
4. Dylan
5. Dylan

Hot fire

he does spit hot fire!

MygirlhatesCod
01-07-2018, 12:00 PM
Last postseason was easily the best of Curry's career and the only year where he didn't see a steep decline from his regular season production. If he keeps that up, he'll absolutely lose any narrative that he struggles at times in the playoffs. And while he was excellent in the Finals, he was clearly the third best guy on the floor behind Lebron and Durant, which didn't do him any favors.

Over time, another thing that will be interesting to watch and could have a huge impact on where Curry falls in any all-time discussion will be Durant's effect. If Durant is the No. 1 guy on this team moving forward and Curry becomes like a super No. 2 in the same way Wade did in Miami, that will definitely hurt his legacy. Curry was on pace to be an all-time top 10 guy before Durant came along, but I'm not so sure he is anymore.

how could you write this and also say that cp3 is currently ahead of Curry? has anyone ever said that about cp3?

lol, please
01-07-2018, 01:43 PM
how could you write this and also say that cp3 is currently ahead of Curry? has anyone ever said that about cp3?Yes lol. Several times in this thread sadly.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-07-2018, 01:43 PM
Magic
Kidd
Stockton
Nash
Paul
Westbrook
Thomas
CurryWestbrook over Curry?

[emoji23][emoji23] based on what?

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

lol, please
01-07-2018, 01:55 PM
Westbrook has a slight edge in VORP and a .2 edge in PER over Curry career wise.


[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

And the accolades don't come close. Plus Westbrooks usage is higher.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

mngopher35
01-07-2018, 02:11 PM
Westbrook has a slight edge in VORP and a .2 edge in PER over Curry career wise.


[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

And the accolades don't come close. Plus Westbrooks usage is higher.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

2012-2016 playoffs for both (Curry's career totals pre stacking starting age 24 and Westy since age 23):

Curry: 22.3 PER .179 WS/48 6.6 BPM
Westbrook: 24.7 PER .167 WS/48 7.8 BPM

Mr.B
01-07-2018, 02:17 PM
In no particular order:

Magic
Stockton
Oscar
Zeke
Kidd

tredigs
01-07-2018, 02:44 PM
Magic
Kidd
Stockton
Nash
Paul
Westbrook
Thomas
Curry

You forgot KJ, Mark Price and Dennis Johnson over Curry.

ewing
01-07-2018, 02:48 PM
You forgot KJ, Mark Price and Dennis Johnson over Curry.

I like curry he’s just more of an undersized 2 guard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
01-07-2018, 02:49 PM
Westbrook over Curry?

[emoji23][emoji23] based on what?

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

He is the reining MVP. It’s not so crazy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tredigs
01-07-2018, 03:07 PM
I like curry he’s just more of an undersized 2 guard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only with crazy passing ability who plays point guard lol.

And no, Westbrook is not on Curry's level, let alone above it.

ewing
01-07-2018, 04:18 PM
Only with crazy passing ability who plays point guard lol.

And no, Westbrook is not on Curry's level, let alone above it.

the people voting for MVP last year thought otherwise

FlashBolt
01-07-2018, 04:25 PM
In terms of advanced stats, CP3 is probably the greatest PG out there. But in terms of impact and everything combined, Stephen Curry might be the GOAT PG. I wouldn't put Curry above CP3 because CP3 has had the better statistical and longevity argument right now but Curry has achieved more in terms of titles/MVP's. Not out of the picture to put Curry above CP3 after a few more years, though. Can't ignore that Curry has been the driver of this insane Warriors team that has been destroying everyone the past 3-4 years.

lol, please
01-07-2018, 04:29 PM
the people voting for MVP last year thought otherwiseThat's a single season MVP award home skillets. Those same people who voted Westbrook for MVP all would rate Westbrook below Curry all time lol.



Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Finesser
01-07-2018, 04:32 PM
In terms of advanced stats, CP3 is probably the greatest PG out there. But in terms of impact and everything combined, Stephen Curry might be the GOAT PG. I wouldn't put Curry above CP3 because CP3 has had the better statistical and longevity argument right now but Curry has achieved more in terms of titles/MVP's. Not out of the picture to put Curry above CP3 after a few more years, though. Can't ignore that Curry has been the driver of this insane Warriors team that has been destroying everyone the past 3-4 years.

Curry is not a “GOAT”. The GOAT PG would be Magic

FlashBolt
01-07-2018, 04:38 PM
Curry is not a “GOAT”. The GOAT PG would be Magic

At his peak, yes, I would take Curry over Magic. It's a matter of preference on some teams but what Curry can do is only surpassed by a handful amount of players. What he will never get enough credit for is revolutionizing this game by turning it into a three point contest. Granted, D'Antoni had a large role in it as well but Curry is the one who really put it into perspective.

nastynice
01-07-2018, 05:15 PM
Curry is not a “GOAT”. The GOAT PG would be Magic

For now ;)

Allphakenny1
01-07-2018, 05:26 PM
2012-2016 playoffs for both (Curry's career totals pre stacking starting age 24 and Westy since age 23):

Curry: 22.3 PER .179 WS/48 6.6 BPM
Westbrook: 24.7 PER .167 WS/48 7.8 BPM

I feel like this is unfair if you take out Curry's playoffs last year as it looks like you did.

#1. Curry actually achieved those stats, we cannot just take them away because of his teammates.

#2. If we do not count the stats when Curry played with Durant, how do we count the stats when Westbrook played with Durant. Just because they were drafted on the same team does not take away the fact that they both played with the same player. "Pre stacking" as you called it, has Curry's best offensive teammates being Thompson and I guess Iggy. Westbrook has Durant and Harden (albeit a young Harden). Westbrook seemed to have the advantage so do we fault him for that like you do Curry?

#3. I am guessing you are including Curry's injured playoff of 2016 in these career totals. This probably hurt his numbers overall. I am just guessing, but without including that season, his overall numbers would most likely look much better, no? I am all for you including that season in his numbers as they did actually happen, but so did his "post stacking" playoffs, so if we include one, it is only fair to include both.

Jamiecballer
01-07-2018, 05:52 PM
I like curry he’s just more of an undersized 2 guard.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI like your list. Curry is great but we've seen him play with all the best toys a good portion of his career. I'd like to see what he would do in a less favorable spot before I elevate him into the same category as paul

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk

ewing
01-07-2018, 06:18 PM
Only with crazy passing ability who plays point guard lol.

And no, Westbrook is not on Curry's level, let alone above it.

He is the point guard for a fast paced high scoring team and he is a 6 assists guy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mngopher35
01-07-2018, 06:21 PM
2012-2016 playoffs for both (Curry's career totals pre stacking starting age 24 and Westy since age 23):

Curry: 22.3 PER .179 WS/48 6.6 BPM
Westbrook: 24.7 PER .167 WS/48 7.8 BPM

I feel like this is unfair if you take out Curry's playoffs last year as it looks like you did.

#1. Curry actually achieved those stats, we cannot just take them away because of his teammates.

#2. If we do not count the stats when Curry played with Durant, how do we count the stats when Westbrook played with Durant. Just because they were drafted on the same team does not take away the fact that they both played with the same player. "Pre stacking" as you called it, has Curry's best offensive teammates being Thompson and I guess Iggy. Westbrook has Durant and Harden (albeit a young Harden). Westbrook seemed to have the advantage so do we fault him for that like you do Curry?

#3. I am guessing you are including Curry's injured playoff of 2016 in these career totals. This probably hurt his numbers overall. I am just guessing, but without including that season, his overall numbers would most likely look much better, no? I am all for you including that season in his numbers as they did actually happen, but so did his "post stacking" playoffs, so if we include one, it is only fair to include both.

The entire point is looking at what they were doing before this goat situation. It's to point out that this situation set curry up for the most recent performance.

Westy had Durant but not klay/dray/iggy Keres system etc. both of them were on very talented teams so looking at their production then with each having talent seems fair.

Currys numbers in 16 were the 2nd best of his career until this team formed. I think you can make some arguments overall about lacking context from my end for sure here though (it's best sample we have of playoff performance but that injury etc isn't factored in).

Lastly though I'm not actually arguing that alone makes westy better so I won't disagree at all that just looking these specific numbers are unfair in an overall sense but I have done this with harden too. I can probably find others. It is somewhat telling about the level of currys playoff play without insane help though.

tredigs
01-07-2018, 06:43 PM
He is the point guard for a fast paced high scoring team and he is a 6 assists guy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you understand why? Do you know who leads the league in secondary assists by a 70% margin over #2? Do you see Curry's mpg? First time the Warriors have had a pace of 100+ btw and they're still not top 3. They're a slow paces team compared to 80s squads. As usual, you're not helping yourself here.

IKnowHoops
01-07-2018, 07:15 PM
are people really putting Curry over Stock so soon? I mean really? Curry has been insane for about 5 seasons but its literally just 5 seasons and he is literally a 1 way player... Stocks defense much like CP3--------------------------------------------->Curry


Curry has the titles but he has also had the teams and has never been the best player on any finals team where CP3 is usually the best player on the floor for his teams.... How is Curry above stock right now when he shouldnt even be above CP3? Does defense just not count anymore?

I think curry/cp3/stock/magic will be my top 4 in no order once both curry and cp3 retire but man the disrespect right now for stock and CP3 is nasty.

Yes!!! So easily over Stockton. He’s already accomplished more....a lot more in half the time. Stockton has never been CLOSE to this level. Quit it. It’s as bad as comparing Stockton to Shaq at this point...and no that is not close at all either.

IKnowHoops
01-07-2018, 07:19 PM
Everyone arguing Curry over Paul or assuming that any argument of Paul over Curry is based solely on longevity, let's play devil's advocate here for a moment. Couldn't we argue that Curry's 15-16 is like T-Mac's 02-03? A remarkable one-hit wonder amid an amazing career, but no other season comes remotely close?

Let's break down the top 7 seasons in every advanced statistic between Curry and Paul:

PER
1. 31.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 30.0 - Paul 08-09
3. 28.3 - Paul 07-08
4. 28.0 - Curry 14-15
5. 27.0 - Paul 11-12
6. 26.4 - Paul 12-13
7 (tie) 26.2 - Paul 15-16, Paul 16-17

WS
1. 18.3 - Paul 08-09
2. 17.9 - Curry 15-16
3. 17.8 - Paul 07-08
4. 16.1 - Paul 14-15
5. 15.7 - Curry 14-15
6. (tie) 13.9 - Paul 10-11, Paul 12-13

WS/48
1. .318 - Curry 15-16
2. .292 - Paul 08-09
3. .287 - Paul 12-13
4. .284 - Paul 07-08
5. .278 - Paul 11-12
6. (tie) .270 - Paul 13-14, Paul 14-15

BPM
1. 12.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 11.2 - Paul 08-09
3. 9.9 - Curry 14-15
4. 9.2 - Paul 07-08
5. 8.8 - Paul 16-17
6. 7.9 - Paul 11-12
7. 7.8 - Paul 15-16

VORP
1. 10.0 - Paul 08-09
2. 9.8 - Curry 15-16
3. 8.5 - Paul 07-08
4. 7.9 - Curry 14-15
5. 6.7 - Curry 13-14
6. 6.2 - Curry 16-17
7. 6.1 - Paul 10-11

So obviously Curry's 15-16 season stands out here, but Paul has more of the top seven seasons in every one of these statistical categories with the exception of VORP. In fact, with the exception of VORP, Paul has at least five of the top seven seasons in every other category, with six of the top seven seasons in WS/48.

It's extremely unlikely that Paul will ever have a season as strong as Curry's 15-16 (although his 07-08 and 08-09 seasons were close). But I also think it's extremely likely that Curry will never never have a season as strong as he had in 15-16. And if Curry continues to produce closer to or lower than the level he produced at in 13-14 and 14-15, then the rest of his career is on par with or maybe slightly below Paul's best seasons.

This goes back to the discussion Valade and I were having yesterday. If you take the best single season of a player in NBA history versus looking at the player at his peak/prime, then it's a very different conversation. Paul's prime years will probably end up being at least on par with Curry's, if not statistically stronger. But Curry will have the best singular season of the bunch. Paul's prime is also likely to last longer given that he was playing at an elite level at age 22 while Curry didn't get there until age 25.

I'm not trying to say that Curry won't surpass Paul at some point or that there isn't a case for him to be made over Paul right now. He likely will, and there certainly is a case there. But I also don't think that longevity alone is the sole reasoning for taking Paul over Curry. Paul's prime right now has been arguably stronger overall than Curry's, and it's possible that will could remain to be the case, in addition to being longer.

No, we can compare David Robinson and Shaq’s #s all day and Admiral will come out on top half the time, yet we still know there was a clear difference in effect on the game. By the way if we compare Admiral and Hakeem using same numbers Admiral destroys him bad.

IKnowHoops
01-07-2018, 07:21 PM
Dear Lord help us -- for this man has fallen to a depth of stupidity where only the blind fish and zooplankton can survive.

😂...oh s—-

IKnowHoops
01-07-2018, 07:30 PM
No, we can compare David Robinson and Shaq’s #s all day and Admiral will come out on top half the time, yet we still know there was a clear difference in effect on the game. By the way if we compare Admiral and Hakeem using same numbers Admiral destroys him bad.

Destroys him bad may be an understatement when I actually look at what stats you are really comparing. Seriously, there is a good chance that Drob locks up the top 7 spots available on everyone one of those stats over Hakeem. I have not looked at all but I’m am guessing off of what I have researched in the past.

ewing
01-07-2018, 07:34 PM
[QUOTE=tredigs;32085732]Do you understand why? Do you know who leads the league in secondary assists by a 70% margin over #2? Do you see Curry's mpg? First time the Warriors have had a pace of 100+ btw and they're still not top 3. They're a slow paces team compared to 80s squads. As usual, you're not helping yourself here.[/

Is 6 a big number? Is secondary assists a stat that tells you about his ability to create for others?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
01-07-2018, 07:35 PM
That's a single season MVP award home skillets. Those same people who voted Westbrook for MVP all would rate Westbrook below Curry all time lol.



Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Hopefully KD can bale him out in crunch time if they meet in the playoffs, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

europagnpilgrim
01-07-2018, 08:31 PM
Wow. You'd put Tiny and KJ over Nash, Kidd, Paul and Curry? Also, Lebron is not a PG, and most people would consider Iverson more of a 2-guard.

I forgot to add a couple but CP3/Kidd would be there, KJ was better than or every bit as good as those players, his mid range pull up was unstoppable, Lebron is about as much of a PG as Magic but he loves to get his points as well so he doesn't get the 11APG like a Magic but his whole game is facilitating/distribution for most part, same with Wilt who could get 8APG as a Center, Iverson was drafted out of G'Town as a PG, he ran PG as a rookie, he avg almost 8APG as a rookie, Brown switched him over to shooting guard to make up for the 5ppg scorers on the roster, so of course by default he would be a scoring 2 guard, but by his true size/height he was a PG, 5'10'' greatest player poundforpound ever according to the highly intelligent/IQ of Lebron

Jordan once had a stretch of games where he had crazy triple doubles but we all know Jordan was a scoring 2 guard, not a PG, but when you are as good as those type of players you usually become whatever the team needs, like when Lebron went off for 30 straight against Detroit, he would rather score 10pts and assists on the other 20 but he did what he had to do for the team, true winners do that

tredigs
01-07-2018, 08:41 PM
Nobody will ever confuse you with a man who understands context. Goes for both above posters

tredigs
01-07-2018, 08:42 PM
Double

lol, please
01-07-2018, 08:56 PM
Hopefully KD can bale him out in crunch time if they meet in the playoffs, right?


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkAre you implying Curry chokes in the playoffs bro?

2014-15: 3.9 24.5 PER WS 567 eFG% 607 TS% averaging 28.3 points a game and 6.4 assists a game
2016-17: 3.4 WS 27.1 PER 599 eFG% 659 TS% averaging 28.1 points a game and 6.7 assists a game
2015-16: 1.9 WS 22.3 PER 556 eFG% 603 TS% averaging 25.1 points a game and 5.2 assists a game

Hardly underperforming. Just saying.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

ewing
01-07-2018, 09:07 PM
Are you implying Curry chokes in the playoffs bro?

2014-15: 3.9 24.5 PER WS 567 eFG% 607 TS% averaging 28.3 points a game and 6.4 assists a game
2016-17: 3.4 WS 27.1 PER 599 eFG% 659 TS% averaging 28.1 points a game and 6.7 assists a game
2015-16: 1.9 WS 22.3 PER 556 eFG% 603 TS% averaging 25.1 points a game and 5.2 assists a game

Hardly underperforming. Just saying.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

We both know where they will go when they need a bucket


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tredigs
01-07-2018, 10:50 PM
We both know where they will go when they need a bucket


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I Understand you don't watch Warriors ball but Curry carried that team from the point KD went down and through the post season. In the Finals the Cavs did their thing and sold out on Curry while attempting to go 3-4 against the rest of the team. PROBLEM is Curry is very unselfish (talking about the guy who a team attempted to guard 4 on 1 for a full game to render him scoreless in college when he led the NCAA in buckets... Only to lose by 40), while KD is an ISO specialist and absolutely slaughtered them in that role. As did Curry by the way. Some day you'll wake up and realize why all the RPM stats showcase Curry at the top of the field year in/out.

Or, you won't.

lol, please
01-07-2018, 11:01 PM
I Understand you don't watch Warriors ball but Curry carried that team from the point KD went down and through the post season. In the Finals the Cavs did their thing and sold out on Curry while attempting to go 3-4 against the rest of the team. PROBLEM is Curry is very unselfish (talking about the guy who a team attempted to guard 4 on 1 for a full game to render him scoreless in college when he led the NCAA in buckets... Only to lose by 40), while KD is an ISO specialist and absolutely slaughtered them in that role. As did Curry by the way. Some day you'll wake up and realize why all the RPM stats showcase Curry at the top of the field year in/out.

Or, you won't.2nd at 5.78, Harden with 6.57 this season lol.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

FlashBolt
01-07-2018, 11:09 PM
Curry is already better than Stockton ever was to the point where I don't even care about longevity in this case. I actually think CP3 is the 2nd best PG with Curry being 3rd. He's just too good. Nothing else needs to be said.

ewing
01-07-2018, 11:22 PM
I Understand you don't watch Warriors ball but Curry carried that team from the point KD went down and through the post season. In the Finals the Cavs did their thing and sold out on Curry while attempting to go 3-4 against the rest of the team. PROBLEM is Curry is very unselfish (talking about the guy who a team attempted to guard 4 on 1 for a full game to render him scoreless in college when he led the NCAA in buckets... Only to lose by 40), while KD is an ISO specialist and absolutely slaughtered them in that role. As did Curry by the way. Some day you'll wake up and realize why all the RPM stats showcase Curry at the top of the field year in/out.

Or, you won't.

I watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
01-07-2018, 11:24 PM
2nd at 5.78, Harden with 6.57 this season lol.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Lucky for both they have a teammate that is better then them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tredigs
01-08-2018, 12:15 AM
I watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let's be honest here. The Warriors games are very late on the East coast and end after midnight. You're older. You don't watch. Definitely not regularly. And if you do, God have mercy on your opinions.


Lucky for both they have a teammate that is better then them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair this comment does ring true... half a decade ago.

ewing
01-08-2018, 11:30 AM
Let's be honest here. The Warriors games are very late on the East coast and end after midnight. You're older. You don't watch. Definitely not regularly. And if you do, God have mercy on your opinions.

yeah when KD was out he carried those losers

To be fair this comment does ring true... half a decade ago.


Who was on the Warriors 5 years ago that was better then Curry?

Firefistus
01-08-2018, 01:54 PM
Statistically Paul is the superior player, and it's not that close. I'll give Stockton the edge as a pure point guard in terms of passing and assist numbers. But I'll take Paul at pretty much everything else. Stockton was slightly more efficient at scoring, but his scoring numbers and usage pale in comparison to Paul. Stockton topped 16 PPG three times in 19 seasons. Paul has done in 12 times in 13 years. And pretty much every advanced statistic on the planet says Paul is the statistically superior player: PER, WS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, ORTG, etc.

If we measure accolades, Paul already has eight All-NBA teams compared to Stockton's 11, but Paul made All-NBA 1st team four times compared to only twice for Stockton. Paul also has nine All-Defensive appearances compared to five for Stockton, and Paul finished top 10 in MVP voting seven times compared to five times for Stockton.

And unlike with some other point guards, Stockton really doesn't have a major edge in postseason resume over Paul. In fact, he's known as much for his failures in the playoffs as CP3 is, and unlike Paul, he played with another top 25 player his entire career. So really the only barometers by which we could give Stockton an edge is as a passer and in terms of longevity. But I'm judging by pretty much any other criteria, Chris Paul is the superior player in an all-time discussion.

This piqued my curiosity, growing up in Utah and watching Stockton naturally I'm bias towards my favorite player of all time. But I wanted to check the numbers for myself and here's what I found.


I went to basketball reference with John Stockton, and they have a compare feature, I added Paul as player number 2 and the numbers are VERY similar. However there are some things that stick out a bit.


Paul currently scores 5 more ppg's than Stocktons on the career. Turns the ball over less, which surprises me actually, and fouls less, which doesn't surprise me at all considering Sloan liked players fouling each other and didn't believe in giving players open looks.

However, you mention that Stockton is less efficient at scoring, this in fact is completely false.

Their Defense rating is tied, but Paul has a 2 point higher offense plus/minus. Probably because of the teams they play on.

Chris Pauls Effective FG is .517 compared to Stockton at .541

Stockton was a much better three point and 2 point scorer in Per 36 minutes, per 100 possessions, and in the advanced stats he Stockton dominates Paul.

Offensive Win Shares - 142.8
Defensive Win Shares - 64.9
Total Win shares - 207.7
Free Throw Attempt Rating - .424
True Shooting % - .608

Pauls are as follows
OWS - 117.5
DWS - 40.8
WS - 158.3
FTr - .358
TS% - .580

You mention that Stockton performs worse than Paul in the playoffs, this is also not true. Stockton beats Paul in almost all advanced metrics in the playoffs.

I must admit, you made a good argument, to Paul being a better player, but after looking at the numbers I would have to disagree with you. Stockton was a better player, and played with 1 injury his whole career. That's the reason no one will ever catch him in total assists and steals. Because he was a healthy, great player.

tredigs
01-08-2018, 02:48 PM
Who was on the Warriors 5 years ago that was better then Curry?

I didn't write the bold nor do I understand what you're getting at.

mightybosstone
01-08-2018, 02:54 PM
However, you mention that Stockton is less efficient at scoring, this in fact is completely false.
I actually never said this. I said the opposite. I specifically stated that Stockton was the more efficient scorer, but his attempts and usage weren't remotely close to Paul. It's easy to be more efficient when you're taking significantly fewer shots.


You mention that Stockton performs worse than Paul in the playoffs, this is also not true. Stockton beats Paul in almost all advanced metrics in the playoffs.
Based on what?
PER: Paul-25.8, Stockton-19.8
WS/48: Paul-.209, Stockton-.160
BPM: Paul-8.5, Stockton-4.1

Paul crushes Stockton in every non-cumulativec advanced statistic. Stockton obviously beats Paul in total WS and VORP, but those statistics are cumulative, and Stockton has played in more than twice as many playoff games so he obviously has a huge edge there. WS/48 gives a major edge to Paul, and if we measure the VORP per game, Paul (.101) has a massivec edge there as well over Stockton (.054)


I must admit, you made a good argument, to Paul being a better player, but after looking at the numbers I would have to disagree with you. Stockton was a better player, and played with 1 injury his whole career. That's the reason no one will ever catch him in total assists and steals. Because he was a healthy, great player.
If you're putting Stockton over Paul based on the numbers, than I'm not sure what numbers you're using, because every significant comprehensive advanced metric says Paul is the better player in the regular season and postseason.

I'll concede Stockton was a better passer and playmaker, and a better set 3-point shooter. I'll give Paul the edge in everything else. You do make a fair point about Stockton's longevity and health, but I value prime production more than longevity.

ewing
01-08-2018, 02:57 PM
I didn't write the bold nor do I understand what you're getting at.


This is what you said :

Curry carried that team from the point KD went down and through the post season.

mightybosstone
01-08-2018, 03:12 PM
I can play the advanced stats game with you, but let's be honest you can argue all kinds of stupid things with these stats.

Why are you leaving out the efficiency stat TS%?
Because it's a singular statistic. I'm posting solely comprehensive numbers. If I posted every single advanced statistic, not only would it take forever, but it wouldn't really tell us anything we don't already know. Paul would have a huge edge in stats not related to scoring (AST%, TRB%, STL%, DRtg, etc.), while Curry would have an edge in scoring and scoring efficiency.

I'm sticking solely to comprehensive stats that take a player's overall impact into account, not just one facet of their games.


Also, after this season, in 40 games, this argument will be very even.
It could be, but it's an incomplete picture of the season. I didn't want to include this season since not even half of it has been played yet. Curry and Paul's numbers have been impacted by injuries to their fellow stars, and we need to wait the season out before including it with the rest of the numbers.


Lastly, Curry's 15-16 is even statistically clearly better than Paul's 08-09. And when you take into consideration the 73 win record, the 3 point record, the unanimous MVP, it's not really close.
Yes. It's clearly the best season he or Paul ever had by a wide margin. But that's kind of my point—no other season of Curry's comes close, and Paul has had a ton of elite seasons in his career as a top 5-10 player in the league. If we consider who has had the stronger prime overall, I think it's Paul as of today.


Now lets look if it was just top 5.

PER
1. 31.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 30.0 - Paul 08-09
3. 28.6 - Curry 17-18*
4. 28.3 - Paul 07-08
5. 28.0 - Curry 14-15


WS
1. 18.3 - Paul 08-09
2. 17.9 - Curry 15-16
3. 17.8 - Paul 07-08
4. 16.1 - Paul 14-15
5. 15.7 - Curry 14-15


WS/48
1. .318 - Curry 15-16
2. .292 - Paul 08-09
3. .288 - Curry 14-15
4. .287 - Paul 12-13
5. .286 - Curry 17-18*


BPM
1. 12.5 - Curry 15-16
2. 11.2 - Paul 08-09
3. 9.9 - Curry 14-15
4. 9.2 - Paul 07-08
5. 8.8 - Paul 16-17

VORP
1. 10.0 - Paul 08-09
2. 9.8 - Curry 15-16
3. 8.5 - Paul 07-08
4. 7.9 - Curry 14-15
5. 6.7 - Curry 13-14


TS%
1. .669 - Curry 15-16
[B]2. .661 - Curry 17-18*
3. .638 - Curry 14-15
4. .624 - Curry 16-17
5. .614 - Paul 16-17

I don't know man, if you're argument is that Paul has had 2-3 more 'good' seasons it's clearly not enough to argue against Curry's MVP's, team success etc.
The smaller the sample size, the better it looks for Curry, so again, you're kinda missing my point. My point is that Curry's had one otherworldly season and 1-2 seasons at the same level or worse than Paul's best seasons, and that Paul's prime has simply been longer and better than Curry's.

That's not necessarily fair considering that Curry has been in the league a lot less time, but this isn't a "top 5 PG list 10 years from now" discussion. It's a "who are the top 5 PGs of all-time as of today" discussion.

mightybosstone
01-08-2018, 03:18 PM
No, we can compare David Robinson and Shaq’s #s all day and Admiral will come out on top half the time, yet we still know there was a clear difference in effect on the game. By the way if we compare Admiral and Hakeem using same numbers Admiral destroys him bad.

OK, but what is the "clear difference in game" factors that we can't measure with statistics? Defense? Because Paul is clearly the better defensive player. Postseason performance? Because every advanced statistical measurement says Paul has been the better player in the playoffs.

mightybosstone
01-08-2018, 03:21 PM
Are you implying Curry chokes in the playoffs bro?

2014-15: 3.9 24.5 PER WS 567 eFG% 607 TS% averaging 28.3 points a game and 6.4 assists a game
2016-17: 3.4 WS 27.1 PER 599 eFG% 659 TS% averaging 28.1 points a game and 6.7 assists a game
2015-16: 1.9 WS 22.3 PER 556 eFG% 603 TS% averaging 25.1 points a game and 5.2 assists a game

Hardly underperforming. Just saying.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Those 15-16 numbers are actually really bad when you compare them to his regular season numbers. 2016-17 was really the first time we saw Curry not have a steep decline from the regular season to the playoffs in his entire career.

tredigs
01-08-2018, 03:33 PM
This is what you said :

Curry carried that team from the point KD went down and through the post season.

I'll rephrase for you if it helps: Curry was clearly the teams best player after KD went down through the duration of the season and through this year. For the first couple months he was overcompensating in his willingness to integrate KD. Though that's another reason why a superstar of Currys level having that trait makes him even more valuable for a team.

WaDe03
01-08-2018, 03:34 PM
I'll rephrase for you if it helps: Curry was clearly the teams best player after KD went down through the duration of the season and through this year. For the first couple months he was overcompensating in his willingness to integrate KD. Though that's another reason why a superstar of Currys level having that trait makes him even more valuable for a team.

KD showed who the top dog was in the Finals, even though it's the weakest championship ever.

tredigs
01-08-2018, 04:08 PM
KD showed who the top dog was in the Finals, even though it's the weakest championship ever.

Because he scored more against single coverage while they overloaded on Curry and he still averaged an efficient 27/8/10? He took what the Cavs gave them and opted for the slaughter/Chip rather than forcing the case. That's also the only series KD was better and it simply is because it's the easiest he had it all season. That's the Curry effect, who is very clearly the teams top player and the guy who puts the team into the GOAT realm (before and with KD).

valade16
01-08-2018, 04:13 PM
Was Stockton ever an MVP caliber player? I mean, was there any point in Stockton's career when you thought "he deserves MVP" Or even to be a top 3 MVP candidate?

Would Stockton have been anywhere near the MVP vote from 2009-2017 when CP3 and Curry were winning and/or coming in 2nd or 3rd?

Chronz
01-08-2018, 05:06 PM
Was Stockton ever an MVP caliber player? I mean, was there any point in Stockton's career when you thought "he deserves MVP" Or even to be a top 3 MVP candidate?

Would Stockton have been anywhere near the MVP vote from 2009-2017 when CP3 and Curry were winning and/or coming in 2nd or 3rd?

Nash era

valade16
01-08-2018, 05:13 PM
Nash era

True, if Nash could win 2 MVPs, it's not inconceivable that Stockton could be MVP level at that point in time.

IndyRealist
01-08-2018, 06:47 PM
This piqued my curiosity, growing up in Utah and watching Stockton naturally I'm bias towards my favorite player of all time. But I wanted to check the numbers for myself and here's what I found.


I went to basketball reference with John Stockton, and they have a compare feature, I added Paul as player number 2 and the numbers are VERY similar. However there are some things that stick out a bit.


Paul currently scores 5 more ppg's than Stocktons on the career. Turns the ball over less, which surprises me actually, and fouls less, which doesn't surprise me at all considering Sloan liked players fouling each other and didn't believe in giving players open looks.

However, you mention that Stockton is less efficient at scoring, this in fact is completely false.

Their Defense rating is tied, but Paul has a 2 point higher offense plus/minus. Probably because of the teams they play on.

Chris Pauls Effective FG is .517 compared to Stockton at .541

Stockton was a much better three point and 2 point scorer in Per 36 minutes, per 100 possessions, and in the advanced stats he Stockton dominates Paul.

Offensive Win Shares - 142.8
Defensive Win Shares - 64.9
Total Win shares - 207.7
Free Throw Attempt Rating - .424
True Shooting % - .608

Pauls are as follows
OWS - 117.5
DWS - 40.8
WS - 158.3
FTr - .358
TS% - .580

You mention that Stockton performs worse than Paul in the playoffs, this is also not true. Stockton beats Paul in almost all advanced metrics in the playoffs.

I must admit, you made a good argument, to Paul being a better player, but after looking at the numbers I would have to disagree with you. Stockton was a better player, and played with 1 injury his whole career. That's the reason no one will ever catch him in total assists and steals. Because he was a healthy, great player.

This is the exact kind of analysis that makes people distrust analytics. If you don't know what you're talking about, please don't use them. Stockton has 6 more years, 649 more games, and 17,450 more minutes than Paul. I would be shocked if Stockton did NOT beat Paul in any cumulative number.

Chronz
01-08-2018, 07:07 PM
This is the exact kind of analysis that makes people distrust analytics. If you don't know what you're talking about, please don't use them. Stockton has 6 more years, 649 more games, and 17,450 more minutes than Paul. I would be shocked if Stockton did NOT beat Paul in any cumulative number.

Longevity might matter to his argument. Nothing wrong with dabbing in stats, just educate him.

HandsOnTheWheel
01-08-2018, 07:36 PM
Wow the titlwe of point guard must have cahnged since the last time I checked.

ewing
01-08-2018, 09:20 PM
I'll rephrase for you if it helps: Curry was clearly the teams best player after KD went down through the duration of the season and through this year. For the first couple months he was overcompensating in his willingness to integrate KD. Though that's another reason why a superstar of Currys level having that trait makes him even more valuable for a team.

or you could say, I was wrong

tredigs
01-08-2018, 09:56 PM
or you could say, I was wrong

I thought you were talking about yourself at first and actually having a brief moment of clarity. Alas, just another one-liner troll. Moving on from all Ewing debates. You're a waste of time and provide no substance behind your takes.

JasonJohnHorn
01-09-2018, 06:05 AM
Was Stockton ever an MVP caliber player? I mean, was there any point in Stockton's career when you thought "he deserves MVP" Or even to be a top 3 MVP candidate?

Would Stockton have been anywhere near the MVP vote from 2009-2017 when CP3 and Curry were winning and/or coming in 2nd or 3rd?

Not even sure how to respond to this.

Just because a guy is under rated in his era, doesn't mean he's not a top tier player at his position. And that said, he finished in the top 15 12 times in his career. Bigs jsut got more praise back then, so K Malone often got the praise when Stockton was breaking records.

In 89 the only PG to finish ahead of him in MPV voting was Magic. Isiah Thomas finished behind him.

The same the following year. In 91 Terry Porter some how got ahead of him, but he was second among PG's in MVP voting. The next year Mark Price was the only PG ahead of him, and in 93 as well. In 95 not a single PG finished ahead of him in MVP voting. In 96, only Penny finished ahead of him. Tim Hardaway and GP finished ahead of him in 97.

When you go down and look at where he ranks among PGs in his generation, you see in many seasons he finished second among PGs or third. And those who finished ahead of him (Magic, Payton, Kidd, Penny) were either legends (like Magic) had stellar seasons (like Penny, Hardway, and Payton), or didn't have to share the glory with a dominant front court player who voters prioritized at the time (like Mark Price or JAson Kidd).


And what does MVP ranking amount to anyways? CP3 and Stockton have the same number of rings and same number of MVPs at this point, and Stockton has two more final appearances.

I'm not saying that makes Stockton better; CP3 is one of my favorites, but to go to this MPV voting, without considering era, that seems a little silly.

Payton. Isiah Thomas. Stocton. Kidd. There are a lot of great PGs who never won an MVP award. Between Magic in 1990 and Nash in in 05, zero won it. That's none in 15 years. Since then, it's been won by an MVP six times (Nash twice, Rose, Curry twice, and Westbrook) and the last three years it has gone to a PG.

The current league prizes wing play and play making more than they did in the 90's when Stockton was at his peak.

So yeah... he may not have been a top-3 MVP candidate, but he's also got the record for most career assists, one of the lowest assist-to-turnover ratios, the most career steals, and a shooting percentage that would make him even more valuable today than he was at the time.

Certainly deserving of a top-five all-time PG spots.

Though that is admittedly a subjective opinion.

JasonJohnHorn
01-09-2018, 06:09 AM
Wow the titlwe of point guard must have cahnged since the last time I checked.

Position designation in the league has been eroding for a long time, especially since MJ/Pippen and the triangle offense turned wing players into playmakers. Then Webber and Mason turned PF's into playmakers. And Hakeem and Shaq, and Brad Miller running plays out of the paint helped. And then LBJ came along and nobody even knows what to call him.

Now with the Warriors.... everybody is a play maker and shoot guard.

It's hard to figure out who plays what anymore.

ewing
01-09-2018, 06:34 AM
I thought you were talking about yourself at first and actually having a brief moment of clarity. Alas, just another one-liner troll. Moving on from all Ewing debates. You're a waste of time and provide no substance behind your takes.

or you could continue to backtrack when you are wrong and call me a troll to save face.

IndyRealist
01-09-2018, 09:18 AM
Longevity might matter to his argument. Nothing wrong with dabbing in stats, just educate him.

He didn't ask why. Why does x say something that y doesn't? You can't teach that. He was looking for the shallow answer, which stats rank Stockton higher, and he found the shallow answer. He wasn't bothered with why.

tredigs
01-09-2018, 01:15 PM
or you could continue to backtrack when you are wrong and call me a troll to save face.

You didn't make a single sound argument. If you resort to making your last stand on the semantics of a guy being the leader/best-player and "carried", you've already lost.

Bored of your one liner nonsense.

Insert: nonsense one liner

valade16
01-09-2018, 01:32 PM
Not even sure how to respond to this.

Just because a guy is under rated in his era, doesn't mean he's not a top tier player at his position. And that said, he finished in the top 15 12 times in his career. Bigs jsut got more praise back then, so K Malone often got the praise when Stockton was breaking records.

In 89 the only PG to finish ahead of him in MPV voting was Magic. Isiah Thomas finished behind him.

The same the following year. In 91 Terry Porter some how got ahead of him, but he was second among PG's in MVP voting. The next year Mark Price was the only PG ahead of him, and in 93 as well. In 95 not a single PG finished ahead of him in MVP voting. In 96, only Penny finished ahead of him. Tim Hardaway and GP finished ahead of him in 97.

When you go down and look at where he ranks among PGs in his generation, you see in many seasons he finished second among PGs or third. And those who finished ahead of him (Magic, Payton, Kidd, Penny) were either legends (like Magic) had stellar seasons (like Penny, Hardway, and Payton), or didn't have to share the glory with a dominant front court player who voters prioritized at the time (like Mark Price or JAson Kidd).


And what does MVP ranking amount to anyways? CP3 and Stockton have the same number of rings and same number of MVPs at this point, and Stockton has two more final appearances.

I'm not saying that makes Stockton better; CP3 is one of my favorites, but to go to this MPV voting, without considering era, that seems a little silly.

Payton. Isiah Thomas. Stocton. Kidd. There are a lot of great PGs who never won an MVP award. Between Magic in 1990 and Nash in in 05, zero won it. That's none in 15 years. Since then, it's been won by an MVP six times (Nash twice, Rose, Curry twice, and Westbrook) and the last three years it has gone to a PG.

The current league prizes wing play and play making more than they did in the 90's when Stockton was at his peak.

So yeah... he may not have been a top-3 MVP candidate, but he's also got the record for most career assists, one of the lowest assist-to-turnover ratios, the most career steals, and a shooting percentage that would make him even more valuable today than he was at the time.

Certainly deserving of a top-five all-time PG spots.

Though that is admittedly a subjective opinion.

There's a lot to digest here.

1. Stockton was not underrated in his era. He was considered the best PG throughout the 90's, he was an 11x All-NBA player, he was on the Dream Team. There is zero evidence to suggest he was underrated in his time.

2. Just because you are the best player at your position doesn't mean you are MVP caliber. The best Center in the league today is not a top 5 MVP candidate. Stockton could have been the best PG and not an MVP level player, they are not mutually exclusive.

3. Top 15 in MVP voting does not mean you were MVP caliber. MVP caliber to me, means a serious shot at winning the award. Stockton finished Top 10 3 times in his entire career and his highest finish was 7th. He received 1 first place vote his entire career (in 1995).

4. As for your second bolded, that's why I specifically asked if there was a modern era in which Stockton would have been considered MVP caliber, because it's doubtful he would have been MVP caliber when CP3 was coming in 2nd for the award.

5. I know he's got the record for most assists, and steals. But that's longevity. As I posed in other threads, if you were picking between 2 players to play a game, or a series, or a season, would you care that one could player well for 20 years if the other player was flat out better? No, you are going to take the flat out better player for the shorter duration.

If we're talking Top 5 greatest PGs, he is easily one of the Top 5. If we're talking the top 5 best PGs as in who would you take in a game vs the other PGs? Does anyone think he'd outplay some of the guys that go below him all-time?

He played at a very good level for a very long time, but my point is there were PGs who, if only for brief points, played better than Stockton did. They aren't considered as great and won't be as high on lists because they couldn't sustain that level.

lol, please
01-09-2018, 03:30 PM
Position designation in the league has been eroding for a long time, especially since MJ/Pippen and the triangle offense turned wing players into playmakers. Then Webber and Mason turned PF's into playmakers. And Hakeem and Shaq, and Brad Miller running plays out of the paint helped. And then LBJ came along and nobody even knows what to call him.

Now with the Warriors.... everybody is a play maker and shoot guard.

It's hard to figure out who plays what anymore.

None of this matters here (in this thread).

Like I told the wise guy wanting to list Lebron: this is for players who play the actual PG position the majority of the time on paper. Period. Who you think makes "plays", or is a teams "floor general" in unique or specific situations is irrelevant. Don't overthink it dude.

ewing
01-09-2018, 03:42 PM
You didn't make a single sound argument. If you resort to making your last stand on the semantics of a guy being the leader/best-player and "carried", you've already lost.

Bored of your one liner nonsense.

Insert: nonsense one liner

Those are clearly different things. The dudes team is stacked with or without KD and this is not not the first time I've called you out for being clearly wrong about things relating to Curry.

tredigs
01-09-2018, 04:38 PM
Those are clearly different things. The dudes team is stacked with or without KD and this is not not the first time I've called you out for being clearly wrong about things relating to Curry.

Lol. The irony is so rich in this comment.

There is nothing historically significant about the Warriors prior to KD (or after for that matter) if you remove Curry from the mix. They're a slightly above average team prior to KD sans Curry (we can argue them all the way up to a borderline top-10 team I suppose), and have ALWAYS performed as such without Curry on the floor. Feel free to actually attempt to make a real argument against that, though.

What am I even saying though. I'm talking to the guy who still thinks Curry is essentially just a shooter and that Dame Lillard is a reliable replacement for him.

ewing
01-09-2018, 08:42 PM
Lol. The irony is so rich in this comment.

There is nothing historically significant about the Warriors prior to KD (or after for that matter) if you remove Curry from the mix. They're a slightly above average team prior to KD sans Curry (we can argue them all the way up to a borderline top-10 team I suppose), and have ALWAYS performed as such without Curry on the floor. Feel free to actually attempt to make a real argument against that, though.

What am I even saying though. I'm talking to the guy who still thinks Curry is essentially just a shooter and that Dame Lillard is a reliable replacement for him.

you said he carried them. It was at best a poor choice of words. Also, I never said he was just a shooter. you said if he wasn't an exceptional shooter he would still be an all NBA player then you backtracked to and said if you took the 3 point line away when I called you out. Sorry, the only difference b/t you and MTM or Wade is that you lack self-awareness and humor

JasonJohnHorn
01-09-2018, 10:40 PM
If we're talking Top 5 greatest PGs, he is easily one of the Top 5. If we're talking the top 5 best PGs as in who would you take in a game vs the other PGs? Does anyone think he'd outplay some of the guys that go below him all-time?

He played at a very good level for a very long time, but my point is there were PGs who, if only for brief points, played better than Stockton did. They aren't considered as great and won't be as high on lists because they couldn't sustain that level.

But this is a list of top-five PGs all time. If you say "How does play X at his peak compare to average Stockton ina 7-game series?" I'll gladly concede that there might be some who would outplay him. But is that the conversation we are having here?

Even so, when you look at past-his-prime-39-year-old Stockton defending prime Allen Iverson, he had hims shooting well below his season average in nearly every match-up.

I mean... Nash vs. Stockton? I take Stockton. Detter defender, as agood a shooter, and better passer. Nash was more suited to certain styles of play/players, but Stockton was adaptable. Stockton vs. Kidd? Of course Stockton. Stockton was every bit as good a defender, a better passer, and a better scorer. Tim Haraway? Sure... Hardaway might have scorer more points, but like playing against Iverson in his prime and making him shoot inefficiently, Stockton could to the same to any number of slashing point guards. He was a smart defender who wasn't known for getting his ankles broken and biting in flash ball handling. He forced these guys to make choices and positioned himself well to make the shot hard for them.

Magic. Paul. I take those guys in their prime over Stockton in his, but in a 7-game series, there are few who I am confident would play as smart and consistently on both ends of the floor, and take care of the ball like Stockton, and in a 7-game series, that's what matter. Because having a big 40 or 50 point night only helps you for one game. But shooting over .500 floor and .400 from the arc, and no causing turnovers, and dishing out 14 assists and playing solid D and getting your opponent to put up tough/contest shots is what wins a 7-game series.

Respectfully. I see you point, but Stockton was a chess player, which is what wins a series.

KobeOwnSU
01-09-2018, 10:52 PM
Lonzo.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

IKnowHoops
01-10-2018, 12:58 AM
OK, but what is the "clear difference in game" factors that we can't measure with statistics? Defense? Because Paul is clearly the better defensive player. Postseason performance? Because every advanced statistical measurement says Paul has been the better player in the playoffs.

Paul is going to have his advantages, but Beast Curry is scarier than Paul, and that’s that. His 3 is 3x the game changer of any outlet of things that Paul has over him.

ewing
01-10-2018, 01:00 AM
Paul is going to have his advantages, but Beast Curry is scarier than Paul, and that’s that. His 3 is 3x the game changer of any outlet of things that Paul has over him.

i think I actually agree with you here

IKnowHoops
01-10-2018, 01:03 AM
Because he scored more against single coverage while they overloaded on Curry and he still averaged an efficient 27/8/10? He took what the Cavs gave them and opted for the slaughter/Chip rather than forcing the case. That's also the only series KD was better and it simply is because it's the easiest he had it all season. That's the Curry effect, who is very clearly the teaums top player and the guy who puts the team into the GOAT realm (before and with KD).

They are not in GOAT realm though, they are easily the GOAT team. Before Durant, they were just in the realm, but Bron beat them with what no one would call a GOAT team. Curry’s lack of physicality is his biggest weakness and it’s easy to exploit. He is awfully lucky he is sourrounded by shooters because they protect his lil —- just as much as he helps them.

IKnowHoops
01-10-2018, 01:13 AM
Was Stockton ever an MVP caliber player? I mean, was there any point in Stockton's career when you thought "he deserves MVP" Or even to be a top 3 MVP candidate?

Would Stockton have been anywhere near the MVP vote from 2009-2017 when CP3 and Curry were winning and/or coming in 2nd or 3rd?

No he wasn’t...not even close. This guy benefits from stats more than anyone I’ve seen. When he played, if you took the actual temperature of the NBA, he was not ever a top 10 player in the league. Prime Iverson was much more of a force than Stockton ever was. Im not trying to take away from him, but while both were playing, nobody would take Stockton over Payton...accept when a Gary was like a rookie or second year guy. Now Stockton is all time and GP gets no mentions. Stockton was great but not this great, not close to Steph Curry.

IKnowHoops
01-10-2018, 01:14 AM
True, if Nash could win 2 MVPs, it's not inconceivable that Stockton could be MVP level at that point in time.

Stockton was no Nash man.

IKnowHoops
01-10-2018, 01:28 AM
There's a lot to digest here.

1. Stockton was not underrated in his era. He was considered the best PG throughout the 90's, he was an 11x All-NBA player, he was on the Dream Team. There is zero evidence to suggest he was underrated in his time.

2. Just because you are the best player at your position doesn't mean you are MVP caliber. The best Center in the league today is not a top 5 MVP candidate. Stockton could have been the best PG and not an MVP level player, they are not mutually exclusive.

3. Top 15 in MVP voting does not mean you were MVP caliber. MVP caliber to me, means a serious shot at winning the award. Stockton finished Top 10 3 times in his entire career and his highest finish was 7th. He received 1 first place vote his entire career (in 1995).

4. As for your second bolded, that's why I specifically asked if there was a modern era in which Stockton would have been considered MVP caliber, because it's doubtful he would have been MVP caliber when CP3 was coming in 2nd for the award.

5. I know he's got the record for most assists, and steals. But that's longevity. As I posed in other threads, if you were picking between 2 players to play a game, or a series, or a season, would you care that one could player well for 20 years if the other player was flat out better? No, you are going to take the flat out better player for the shorter duration.

If we're talking Top 5 greatest PGs, he is easily one of the Top 5. If we're talking the top 5 best PGs as in who would you take in a game vs the other PGs? Does anyone think he'd outplay some of the guys that go below him all-time?

He played at a very good level for a very long time, but my point is there were PGs who, if only for brief points, played better than Stockton did. They aren't considered as great and won't be as high on lists because they couldn't sustain that level.

When Tim Hardaway was doing his thing, I don’t see anyone taking Stockton over Hardaway. I surely would not but Tim is one of my favorite players.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BWzgKSWlF_Q

mightybosstone
01-10-2018, 11:06 AM
Paul is going to have his advantages, but Beast Curry is scarier than Paul, and that’s that. His 3 is 3x the game changer of any outlet of things that Paul has over him.

I don't disagree with that. But I also don't think that can be the only barometer by which you judge players. In a traditional all-time discussion, longevity and consistency have to be taken into account, and Paul has had the better overall career up to this point. In 5-10 years, maybe it's a different discussion. But, right now, I'm taking Chris Paul.

mightybosstone
01-10-2018, 11:07 AM
Stockton was no Nash man.

You're right. Stockton played defense.

lol, please
01-10-2018, 12:42 PM
You're right. Stockton played defense.Checkmate

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

tredigs
01-10-2018, 05:11 PM
They are not in GOAT realm though, they are easily the GOAT team. Before Durant, they were just in the realm, but Bron beat them with what no one would call a GOAT team. Curry’s lack of physicality is his biggest weakness and it’s easy to exploit. He is awfully lucky he is sourrounded by shooters because they protect his lil —- just as much as he helps them.

Lol uh huh. Without those shooters what would happen, exactly? He's played with all types of casts, and nobody has been able to consistently stop him when healthy. D Lee was his 2nd best player for a time, and when Curry was healthy [and not nearly as fully formed of a player as he is now], he still crushed. After Xmas in 2012 (following the ankle surgery] he was putting up 25/4/7 on 47/47/90 and CARRRYING that team to 12 games over .500 + an upset first round win and lost a hard-fought 6 game series to the Spurs [who had swept their 1st round, went on to sweep the Conference Finals, and finally lost to Ray Allen's buzzer beater in G7]. Klay was a young gunner who had 0 dribbling/playmaking ability and sucked on D. Draymond was a 10-15 mpg rookie who did not play with Curry.

At some point you just have to come to the reality that HE is the dominant one in the equation, regardless of who is next to him. And if you transported this iteration of Curry to that season, I bet they even upset San Antonio and are playing the Heat in the Finals.

lol, please
01-10-2018, 05:32 PM
Lol uh huh. Without those shooters what would happen, exactly? He's played with all types of casts, and nobody has been able to consistently stop him when healthy. D Lee was his 2nd best player for a time, and when Curry was healthy [and not nearly as fully formed of a player as he is now], he still crushed. After Xmas in 2012 (following the ankle surgery] he was putting up 25/4/7 on 47/47/90 and CARRRYING that team to 12 games over .500 + an upset first round win and lost a hard-fought 6 game series to the Spurs [who had swept their 1st round, went on to sweep the Conference Finals, and finally lost to Ray Allen's buzzer beater in G7]. Klay was a young gunner who had 0 dribbling/playmaking ability and sucked on D. Draymond was a 10-15 mpg rookie who did not play with Curry.

At some point you just have to come to the reality that HE is the dominant one in the equation, regardless of who is next to him. And if you transported this iteration of Curry to that season, I bet they even upset San Antonio and are playing the Heat in the Finals.Well said. We probably do it anyway if Bogut/Lee are healthy but this team was always built around Steph. It's been awesome to watch the growth of our core even including Barnes.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Chronz
01-10-2018, 07:18 PM
Checkmate

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

+1

belikemike23
01-12-2018, 05:07 AM
1. magic
2. Iverson
3. Nash
4. Curry
5. Kidd

lol, please
01-12-2018, 10:07 PM
1. magic
2. Iverson
3. Nash
4. Curry
5. Kidd

Iverson over Nash and Curry?

:confused:

Jamiecballer
01-12-2018, 10:11 PM
1. magic
2. Iverson
3. Nash
4. Curry
5. KiddThat is a very interesting list, made moreso by the fact that you've got 4 extremely unselfish guys sandwhich around the poster child for playground ball.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk