Do ppl still think peak Reggie Miller, Ray Allen and Nash are on Currys level?

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Steph is clearly better than them. i remember nikkas on here sayin last year Steph wasnt on that level..........:no: :no:

[Inferno]

Nope

[Andrew Wiggins]

who's "nikkas"?

[PsychoBe]

they're all better shooters than curry :facepalm

[Smoke117]

To be fair to someone like Ray...he was pretty much reaching the end of his prime when the rules changed that made it easier for guards. Steph has had the advantage of this his entire career. Ray was 30 when the rules changed. Look what he did in his prime on the Bucks...basically averaged 43% from 3pt land taking 6.5 or so 3pters a game vs tougher defense than Steph is facing.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Yes absolutely. Curry is amazing but he's still just as bad at defense and turns it over a lot. It's not like it's an insult to be those guys in their prime. I mean seriously, do you even remember how good prime Allen and Nash were?

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Yes absolutely. Curry is amazing but he's still just as bad at defense and turns it over a lot. It's not like it's an insult to be those guys in their prime. I mean seriously, do you even remember how good prime Allen and Nash were?
Steph is a MUCH better defender than Nash.........hes improved his defense this season. Hes a better playmaker and shooter than Ray or Reggie.......he had the best 3pt shooting season of all time and hes an MVP caliber player now. Not faux MVP system made like Nash either

[J Shuttlesworth]

I think people forget how good Ray Allen was in his prime. He was far from just a 3 point shooter. Curry's skill set is more than just 3's too, but it's not like he's far ahead prime Ray Allen or anything. Prime Ray was something like 26/4/4 shooting over 40% from 3. He was also pretty good on defense too. Curry's great, but I think Ray Allen was playing against tougher defenses too. I'm sure curry will be > ray by the time he retires though

[navy]

Are we talking about shooting or overall?

[TaLvsCuaL]

Ignoring the topic I feel that these last few years have made people underestimate Nash too much. Curry can be better or worse player but Nash is not treated justly.

[PsychoBe]

Steph is a MUCH better defender than Nash.........hes improved his defense this season. Hes a better playmaker and shooter than Ray or Reggie.......he had the best 3pt shooting season of all time and hes an MVP caliber player now. Not faux MVP system made like Nash either

he's not a better shooter than ray or reggie or nash :facepalm

nash multiple 50/40/90 seasons. curry has none.

ray and reggie were bonafide shooters during a time when the 3pt was not widely used like it is in curry's time, so we're talking apples and oranges a bit here.

still, during his hay-day ray was a scorer that could shoot, not a shooter that could score. he put the ball on the floor and went to work during times when again, the 3pt shot just wasn't utilized as much, especially in the rugged eastern conference which sought to take that shot away. his numbers ballooned when he went to seattle.

reggie was much more clutch obviously, and the thing was the offense wasn't even ran through him. it ran through rik smits. he was almost purely an off-ball player spot-up shooter who ran off screens and he was arguably the best ever at it.

[ProfessorMurder]

Uh all those guys got their teams to at least the conference finals as the best player on the team... Curry hasn't.

[SyRyanYang]

Yes absolutely. Curry is amazing but he's still just as bad at defense and turns it over a lot. It's not like it's an insult to be those guys in their prime. I mean seriously, do you even remember how good prime Allen and Nash were?

Oh please, the only one plays below-average defense in this bunch is Steve Nash.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

he's not a better shooter than ray or reggie or nash :facepalm

nash multiple 50/40/90 seasons. curry has none.

ray and reggie were bonafide shooters during a time when the 3pt was not widely used like it is in curry's time, so we're talking apples and oranges a bit here.

still, during his hay-day ray was a scorer that could shoot, not a shooter that could score. he put the ball on the floor and went to work during times when again, the 3pt shot just wasn't utilized as much, especially in the rugged eastern conference which sought to take that shot away. his numbers ballooned when he went to seattle.

reggie was much more clutch obviously, and the thing was the offense wasn't even ran through him. it ran through rik smits. he was almost purely an off-ball player spot-up shooter who ran off screens and he was arguably the best ever at it.
if steph was shooting a low volume like Nash he wouldve easily had 50/40/90s
Steph is a better overall player than all 3

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Oh please, the only one plays above-average defense in this bunch is Steve Nash.
:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:
Nash is easily the worst defender here are u retarded:biggums:

[PsychoBe]

if steph was shooting a low volume like Nash he wouldve easily had 50/40/90s
Steph is a better overall player than all 3

no he wouldn't. i don't think you understand how great of an all-around shooter you have to be to sustain those numbers for an entire season. if curry took 11-12 shots per game (8 jump shots) for an entire season he probably wouldn't remotely come close.

and as for the "better player" that remains to be seen. reggie, nash, and ray have all been past the second round and have done it multiple times.

[iamgine]

Nash was better.

[plowking]

To be fair to someone like Ray...he was pretty much reaching the end of his prime when the rules changed that made it easier for guards. Steph has had the advantage of this his entire career. Ray was 30 when the rules changed. Look what he did in his prime on the Bucks...basically averaged 43% from 3pt land taking 6.5 or so 3pters a game vs tougher defense than Steph is facing.

Who in the world prior to the rule change is stopping Curry? He'd probably have an even bigger field day and shoot even more 3's.

[JohnFreeman]

Prime Ray Allen doe :eek:

[PsychoBe]

Who in the world prior to the rule change is stopping Curry? He'd probably have an even bigger field day and shoot even more 3's.

no he wouldn't :facepalm

the game wasn't played the same, plain and simple. he'd work a lot more on his mid-range game and would probably have to play a lot more off the ball too depending on the team he's on.

[Reggie43]

Better and more skilled player? I'd go with Steve Nash.

[Kblaze8855]

If all of these guys are in their prime in the same league....the only one you couldnt possibly trade for any of the others is Reggie. You call and offer peak Ray for Peak Nash...the team with Nash probably says no. But they take the call. They listen.

Im not sure the team with Nash and Steph take Reggie srious unless they have a really great backup point. Like...too good to bench. Im talking Terrell Brandon when he was behind Mark Price.

Maybe a team with prime Ray listen to prime Reggie...but they wouldnt do it in the end.

Reggie was ranked behind worse players than Steph Curry in his day.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

If all of these guys are in their prime in the same league....the only one you couldnt possibly trade for any of the others is Reggie. You call and offer peak Ray for Peak Nash...the team with Nash probably says no. But they take the call. They listen.

Im not sure the team with Nash and Steph take Reggie srious unless they have a really great backup point. Like...too good to bench. Im talking Terrell Brandon when he was behind Mark Price.

Maybe a team with prime Ray listen to prime Reggie...but they wouldnt do it in the end.

Reggie was ranked behind worse players than Steph Curry in his day.
How would u rank the 4 :confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:

[Reggie43]

If all of these guys are in their prime in the same league....the only one you couldnt possibly trade for any of the others is Reggie. You call and offer peak Ray for Peak Nash...the team with Nash probably says no. But they take the call. They listen.

Im not sure the team with Nash and Steph take Reggie srious unless they have a really great backup point. Like...too good to bench. Im talking Terrell Brandon when he was behind Mark Price.

Maybe a team with prime Ray listen to prime Reggie...but they wouldnt do it in the end.

Reggie was ranked behind worse players than Steph Curry in his day.

Would they consider the trade if they saw how an old Reggie beat/outperformed a prime Ray in the playoffs? Who knows what Miller would have done to him if they battled prime for prime.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Oh please, the only one plays below-average defense in this bunch is Steve Nash.
If you say so. Do you think steals/blocks = good defense? Because if so that makes sense for your assessment curry. Seriously it's not a knock on the guy to be equal to prime Ray and Nash. They were INSANE. He's definitely better than Reggie, but I'd still want Reggie taking my last shot.

There's still no mention on here about his TOs.

[tontoz]

Strange comparison since they played different positions. Reggie and Ray were both 2s who scored more off the ball. They both averaged 18-19 for their careers with Reggie having better scoring efficiency. Reggie shot 3% better inside the arc and got to the foul line more.

Nash was a very efficient scorer but not a go to scorer like Curry. Curry can create his own shot off the dribble better than any of these guys. Nash was the better playmaker though. And he wasn't as bad a defender as people make him out to be. His defensive +/- was pretty much average in his prime.

I think which one you pick depends on what kind of team you have.

[Kblaze8855]

There might be a couple GMs dumb enough to let a 24/2/2 on 46%(28% from 3) series win change their opinions...but not many. Reggie had 2 big games(34 and 41 points) and was 5-18(21 points), 4 of 12(10 points), and 5 of 9(15 points) in the 3 others.

Lets not act like we are talking an epic series. None of those games would be unusual for Ray Allen. Ray topped Reggies career playoff high(that 41) a few times. Hell he did it the next year vs one of the best defenses of that or any era. Reggie dropping 40 past his prime supposed to mean more than Ray dropping 50+ past his prime in the playoffs vs the Bulls? 40 something on the Kings? 76ers? Big games on the Spurs? Absurdly clutch shots as big and in some cases bigger than Reggie ever hit?

There were coach/gms who ranked Reggie behind people many consider role players. You know it...because we have gone over this and ive shown you the quotes and articles.

Reggie just was not as highly regarded as you want to suggest in retrospect.

When multiple HOF coaches think he wasnt the best player on a team that didnt really have any stars im gonna assume they sanction trading prime superstars for him?

[tontoz]

There might be a couple GMs dumb enough to let a 24/2/2 on 46%(28% from 3) series win change their opinions...but not many. Reggie had 2 big games(34 and 41 points) and was 5-18(21 points), 4 of 12(10 points), and 5 of 9(15 points) in the 3 others.

Lets not act like we are talking an epic series. None of those games would be unusual for Ray Allen. Ray topped Reggies career playoff high(that 41) a few times. Hell he did it the next year vs one of the best defenses of that or any era. Reggie dropping 40 past his prime supposed to mean more than Ray dropping 50+ past his prime in the playoffs vs the Bulls? 40 something on the Kings? 76ers? Big games on the Spurs? Absurdly clutch shots as big and in some cases bigger than Reggie ever hit?

There were coach/gms who ranked Reggie behind people many consider role players. You know it...because we have gone over this and ive shown you the quotes and articles.

Reggie just was not as highly regarded as you want to suggest in retrospect.

When multiple HOF coaches think he wasnt the best player on a team that didnt really have any stars im gonna assume they sanction trading prime superstars for him?



IN the playoffs Reggie averaged 20.6 ppg compared to Ray's 16.1, and Reggie also had better efficiency.

In the regular season their 3 point shooting was comparable but Reggie shot 51.6% on 2s compared to 48.5% for Ray.

[Kblaze8855]

Im gonna go on and not factor in time on the Heat and so on when asked about Rays peak.

There are few players whos career numbers tell the real story.

Neither Ray or Reggie are what their career numbers say.

[tontoz]

Im gonna go on and not factor in time on the Heat and so on when asked about Rays peak.

There are few players whos career numbers tell the real story.

Neither Ray or Reggie are what their career numbers say.

:roll:

What a bunch of nonsense. Reggie actually played a year longer than Ray and he didn't have a couple of stars to carry him, yet still scored with higher efficiency than Ray in the regular season and the playoffs.

You just don't like the numbers because they don't agree with your obvious bias.

Ray never in his entire career had a year as good as Reggie's 3rd season. Reggie scored 24.6 ppg shooting 55.2% from 2 and 41.4% from 3. He also got to the line 7.6 times per game. Ray can't touch that.

[Reggie43]

There might be a couple GMs dumb enough to let a 24/2/2 on 46%(28% from 3) series win change their opinions...but not many. Reggie had 2 big games(34 and 41 points) and was 5-18(21 points), 4 of 12(10 points), and 5 of 9(15 points) in the 3 others.

Lets not act like we are talking an epic series. None of those games would be unusual for Ray Allen. Ray topped Reggies career playoff high(that 41) a few times. Hell he did it the next year vs one of the best defenses of that or any era. Reggie dropping 40 past his prime supposed to mean more than Ray dropping 50+ past his prime in the playoffs vs the Bulls? 40 something on the Kings? 76ers? Big games on the Spurs? Absurdly clutch shots as big and in some cases bigger than Reggie ever hit?

There were coach/gms who ranked Reggie behind people many consider role players. You know it...because we have gone over this and ive shown you the quotes and articles.

Reggie just was not as highly regarded as you want to suggest in retrospect.

When multiple HOF coaches think he wasnt the best player on a team that didnt really have any stars im gonna assume they sanction trading prime superstars for him?

Sixers one of the best defenses of any era? Would they even crack your top 10 best defenses ever. 50pts is impressive but that was against the 41-41 Bulls. 40 on the Webber less kings that played no defense is impressive? And do you really think that Ray hitting his clutch shots as a 3rd/4th option and even making Horry/Fisher type contributions on the Heat make him a much better clutch player? Has a Ray Allen led team even beat teams comparable to the likes of Shaq/Penny, Ewing Starks, Iversons Sixers etc which Miller had very good games that are too many to mention and as the best player on his team.

Sure Miller wasn't highly regarded in the regular season but when playoff time came around he was universally praised by the same gm/coaches you are talking about. You gave me those quotes and articles but Im pretty sure there are a ton more saying the opposite about him players, coaches and gms alike.

[Kblaze8855]

:roll:

What a bunch of nonsense. Reggie actually played a year longer than Ray and he didn't have a couple of stars to carry him, yet still scored with higher efficiency than Ray in the regular season and the playoffs.

You just don't like the numbers because they don't agree with your obvious bias.

Ray never in his entire career had a year as good as Reggie's 3rd season. Reggie scored 24.6 ppg shooting 55.2% from 2 and 41.4% from 3. He also got to the line 7.6 times per game. Ray can't touch that.


You have never seem me talk about career numbers. Especially when the question is peak Ray...as the title says. What do career numbers have to do with the peak of anyone?

[Kblaze8855]

Sixers one of the best defenses of any era? Would they even crack your top 10 best defenses ever. 50pts is impressive but that was against the 41-41 Bulls. 40 on the Webber less kings that played no defense is impressive? And do you really think that Ray hitting his clutch shots as a 3rd/4th option and even making Horry/Fisher type contributions on the Heat make him a much better clutch player? Has a Ray Allen led team even beat teams comparable to the likes of Shaq/Penny, Ewing Starks, Iversons Sixers etc which Miller had very good games that are too many to mention and as the best player on his team.

Sure Miller wasn't highly regarded in the regular season but when playoff time came around he was universally praised by the same gm/coaches you are talking about. You gave me those quotes and articles but Im pretty sure there are a ton more saying the opposite about him players, coaches and gms alike.

People have to stop acting like playoff numbers from a week or two makes a player what he is. And that goes for my favorite players too. Reading 3ball on his "Yea but in the playoffs Jordan shot ___ from 3" shit was cringe inducing.

You are as good as you are vs the NBA....not how good you are vs a single matchup for a week playing outside the usual gameplan forcing the issue.

Not that that has much to do with Reggie. Hes one of those lowered standards stars people make a big deal out of 24-26ppg about as if thats outstanding for someone who does nothing but score.

You really want another 10 page thing where you prop up ECF losses and 24ppg runs that didnt matter and I list 30 obscure players modern fans dont know who did significantly more impressive things?

Want that for your monday? I'll do it...but im not too excited to. We dont need a gang of articles from 1993 with coaches saying Detlef is better than Reggie while you point out some insignificant but dramatic 30 point game in a series that meant nothing.

ITs been done.

Pointing it all out again isnt gonna change much. I'll leave it at this...

when Reggies own coach tells me hes not a leader at all and not what people think he is....im not assuming he tells the GM not to trade him for some MVPs and all NBA types. Reggies trade value would be at best 3rd of the 4 people in question...more likely 4th.

You telling me numbers from games I saw live(in some cases...attended) gives me little to change that assumption.

[DMAVS41]

I'd rank them as:

1. Curry
2. Nash
3. Ray
4. Reggie


Reggie is clearly the worst player of the 4 in my opinion.

[Jailblazers7]

I'd rank them as:

1. Curry
2. Nash
3. Ray
4. Reggie


Reggie is clearly the worst player of the 4 in my opinion.

I'd prob put Ray higher but I agree. I think Reggie is def overrated.

[BIZARRO]

You have never seem me talk about career numbers. Especially when the question is peak Ray...as the title says. What do career numbers have to do with the peak of anyone?

Ray had 8, count' 'em 8, straight seasons avg. 21.8 ppg, or over....Reggie had 2 in his whole career. Somewhere in that peak, Ray's absolute peak beats Reggie.

Reggie's higher shooting % to me is balanced by that Ray was the better all around player, higher boards, assists, etc..

I was around during Reggie's time and he wasn't that highly regarded. Always have felt that people overrate Reggie these days for sure.

All said, Ray vs. Reggie absolute peak is actually pretty close, but I feel like almost all GM's at the time would have taken Ray.

[Reggie43]

People have to stop acting like playoff numbers from a week or two makes a player what he is. And that goes for my favorite players too. Reading 3ball on his "Yea but in the playoffs Jordan shot ___ from 3" shit was cringe inducing.

You are as good as you are vs the NBA....not how good you are vs a single matchup for a week playing outside the usual gameplan forcing the issue.

Not that that has much to do with Reggie. Hes one of those lowered standards stars people make a big deal out of 24-26ppg about as if thats outstanding for someone who does nothing but score.

You really want another 10 page thing where you prop up ECF losses and 24ppg runs that didnt matter and I list 30 obscure players modern fans dont know who did significantly more impressive things?

Want that for your monday?

Yeah we both have our own bias and I wouldnt want another 10 page thing:D
But I have to disagree with this irregardless on who the players are.


People have to stop acting like playoff numbers from a week or two makes a player what he is. And that goes for my favorite players too. Reading 3ball on his "Yea but in the playoffs Jordan shot ___ from 3" shit was cringe inducing.

You are as good as you are vs the NBA....not how good you are vs a single matchup for a week playing outside the usual gameplan forcing the issue.


Playoffs are where real stars are made and the defenses focus much more and also where the top teams are playing rather than a meaningless regular season game early in the season where you get high numbers on some random bad team hence the reason why too many stars get "exposed" when playoff time comes around.

[DMAVS41]

As for the playoff thing.

I agree with Kblaze that one series or one year don't really mean a lot...however...when looking at like 10 years of prime/peak playoff play...those games matter a whole lot more than the meaningless regular season games playing teams that aren't trying...aren't prepared...are tired...aren't good...etc.

The game changes in the playoffs...it just does. How these guys play against the best teams/players when the games matter the most is of the utmost importance in my opinion.

[Reggie43]

As for the playoff thing.

I agree with Kblaze that one series or one year don't really mean a lot...however...when looking at like 10 years of prime/peak playoff play...those games matter a whole lot more than the meaningless regular season games playing teams that aren't trying...aren't prepared...are tired...aren't good...etc.

The game changes in the playoffs...it just does. How these guys play against the best teams/players when the games matter the most is of the utmost importance in my opinion.

Agreed with this, was about to post something similar wherein you had have atleast close to a seasons worth of playoff games for those numbers to really matter and not appear as a fluke or a lucky stretch.

[KyrieTheFuture]

:roll:

What a bunch of nonsense. Reggie actually played a year longer than Ray and he didn't have a couple of stars to carry him, yet still scored with higher efficiency than Ray in the regular season and the playoffs.

You just don't like the numbers because they don't agree with your obvious bias.

Ray never in his entire career had a year as good as Reggie's 3rd season. Reggie scored 24.6 ppg shooting 55.2% from 2 and 41.4% from 3. He also got to the line 7.6 times per game. Ray can't touch that.
05-07 Ray getting underrated

[TheBigVeto]

They are not on the same level.
They are much better than Curry in their respective primes.

[Kblaze8855]

On the playoff thing....there are an awful lot of cliches thrown around that have always ignored the most important aspects to me.

Im not watching someone 140 times and deciding how good a player they are using 6-15 of them facing 1-2 defensive schemes.

The playoffs is where the good coaches are separated more than the good players to me.

A player is what he is...you play Dennis rodman in the regular season...hes not going easy on you. Or Jordan. Or Pippen. Blaylock...Payton...Stockton. Any great defender....nor any great defensive team. You play a bad D...bad defenders/poor coaching...its poor in the playoffs too.

What playing the same team 5 times straight does is show how the coaches adjust to eachothers gameplans.

Im not judging one guy on his playoff performance vs a fortunate matchup and acting like hes that good....vs the NBA. Hes that good vs that matchup with those coaches.

Im not watching Baron Davis take the Mavs soul and assuming hes the Point God....nor am I watching Stockton or Tim Hardaway with Gary Payton and Nate Mcmillian in their jersey for 6 games and concluding they are how they perform for that week.

Im not watching Deng abuse an older roster playing a defense he could exploit on his way to like 27ppg then assuming hes a super playoff performer when he cant do it minus the circumstances that allowed it.

Dirk was not the player he appeared to be for 6 games vs the Mavs. The other coach knew him better than he knew himself....

Dirk was as good as he was vs the NBA. Not as good as he was scoring 11 getting knocked out on 2-11 or 2-13 shooting(whatever it was).

He didnt play poorly because it was the playoffs and the warriors were...trying. He played poorly because of an excellent gameplan to slow him and the right personnel to bother him.

They draw someone else he isnt better at basketball. Hes playing a different matchup.

You play a team every couple days for a week the coaches ability to adapt and keep you in position to flourish shows itself more than your individual talent....at least compared to hundreds of games already played.

I just cant in all honesty watch a guy play 29 other teams...with 29 different game plans...29-60 different assigned defenders...bigger...smaller...quicker...slower... stronger...zones...man to man..traps..different decisions on hedging...where to force him..big shots...overtimes...watch him guard 60-70 guys....I cant watch a guy face the gauntlet of matchups and approaches to slowing him for a year...years...and then act like I got more information out of him playing only one style with 1-2 defenders for a week. No matter how well or poorly he plays....I learned more about him playing the NBA...than I learn when he plays one team. Even if its a good team.

Just isnt me.

Its both cliche and correct to say the playoffs are a different game.

But the main difference shows itself in coaching to me.

Guys might perform better or worse....but they dont get better or worse. Awful lot of factors beyond being...that time of year.

[Reggie43]

On the playoff thing....there are an awful lot of cliches thrown around that have always ignored the most important aspects to me.

Im not watching someone 140 times and deciding how good a player they are using 6-15 of them facing 1-2 defensive schemes.

The playoffs is where the good coaches are separated more than the good players to me.

A player is what he is...you play Dennis rodman in the regular season...hes not going easy on you. Or Jordan. Or Pippen. Blaylock...Payton...Stockton. Any great defender....nor any great defensive team. You play a bad D...bad defenders/poor coaching...its poor in the playoffs too.

What playing the same team 5 times straight does is show how the coaches adjust to eachothers gameplans.

Im not judging one guy on his playoff performance vs a fortunate matchup and acting like hes that good....vs the NBA. Hes that good vs that matchup with those coaches.

Im not watching Baron Davis take the Mavs soul and assuming hes the Point God....nor am I watching Stockton or Tim Hardaway with Gary Payton and Nate Mcmillian in their jersey for 6 games and concluding they are how they perform for that week.

Im not watching Deng abuse an older roster playing a defense he could exploit on his way to like 27ppg then assuming hes a super playoff performer when he cant do it minus the circumstances that allowed it.

Dirk was not the player he appeared to be for 6 games vs the Mavs. The other coach knew him better than he knew himself....

Dirk was as good as he was vs the NBA. Not as good as he was scoring 11 getting knocked out on 2-11 or 2-13 shooting(whatever it was).

He didnt play poorly because it was the playoffs and the warriors were...trying. He played poorly because of an excellent gameplan to slow him and the right personnel to bother him.

They draw someone else he isnt better at basketball. Hes playing a different matchup.

You play a team every couple days for a week the coaches ability to adapt and keep you in position to flourish shows itself more than your individual talent....at least compared to hundreds of games already played.

I just cant in all honesty watch a guy play 29 other teams...with 29 different game plans...29-60 different assigned defenders...bigger...smaller...quicker...slower... stronger...zones...man to man..traps..different decisions on hedging...where to force him..big shots...overtimes...watch him guard 60-70 guys....I cant watch a guy face the gauntlet of matchups and approaches to slowing him for a year...years...and then act like I got more information out of him playing only one style with 1-2 defenders for a week. No matter how well or poorly he plays....I learned more about him playing the NBA...than I learn when he plays one team. Even if its a good team.

Just isnt me.

Its both cliche and correct to say the playoffs are a different game.

But the main difference shows itself in coaching to me.

Guys might perform better or worse....but they dont get better or worse. Awful lot of factors beyond being...that time of year.

If you bothered to read a few posts back we were talking about how a careers worth of playoffs games is a better indicative of your true worth as a player rather than random regular season games or a playoff matchup for a single series.

[Kblaze8855]

Just doesnt hold up to me. Reggie Miller forcing extra shots in a loss because its the playoffs doesnt mean hes better than he is in the regular season. Reggie never played 40 minutes in a regular season. Did in 5 or 6 playoff runs. Reggie takes 20 shots 3 times in the 3 months leading to the playoffs...takes over 20 every game of the playoffs....including his season high while playing 46 minutes. So he scores 30 a game while losing.

Playing 45 minutes a game and shooting more does not show your true value.

You know what does? Your usual performance.

The playoffs skews numbers all over. Guys like AI played 45 minutes a game over 70+ playoff games. So he shoots 27 times a game in the playoffs as opposed to 22 normally. So he scores under 27 a game for his career but 30 in the playoffs.

There have been guys who didnt sit down....for an entire series. A lot of them.

You run stars into the ground, they shoot more than usual(both due to minutes and because stars are often asked to sore more), and often force shots on their way to being knocked out(stars have often shot more in losses than wins...close losses especially).

It isnt a more accurate representation of how they play than....their normal play.

Guys....stars especially...dont play normally in the playoffs.

Forcing it doesnt show who you really are.

You are your general level of play. Playoffs and regular season.

I wouldnt need a number of any kind to know what Reggie Miller was. I dont think you would either.

[Reggie43]

Just doesnt hold up to me. Reggie Miller forcing extra shots in a loss because its the playoffs doesnt mean hes better than he is in the regular season. Reggie never played 40 minutes in a regular season. Did in 5 or 6 playoff runs. Reggie takes 20 shots 3 times in the 3 months leading to the playoffs...takes over 20 every game of the playoffs....including his season high while playing 46 minutes. So he scores 30 a game while losing.

Playing 45 minutes a game and shooting more does not show your true value.

You know what does? Your usual performance.

The playoffs skews numbers all over. Guys like AI played 45 minutes a game over 70+ playoff games. So he shoots 27 times a game in the playoffs as opposed to 22 normally. So he scores under 27 a game for his career but 30 in the playoffs.

There have been guys who didnt sit down....for an entire series. A lot of them.

You run stars into the ground, they shoot more than usual, and often force shots on their way to being knocked out.

It isnt a more accurate representation of how they play than....their normal play.

Guys....stars especially...dont play normally in the playoffs.

Forcing it doesnt show who you really are.

You are your general level of play. Playoffs and regular season.

I wouldnt need a number of any kind to know what Reggie Miller was. I dont think you would either.

How about forgetting about Reggie Miller and looking at it in general? Fact of the matter is that players try more in the playoffs and you cant refute that. They focus more when playoff time comes around.

[iamgine]

Strange comparison since they played different positions. Reggie and Ray were both 2s who scored more off the ball. They both averaged 18-19 for their careers with Reggie having better scoring efficiency. Reggie shot 3% better inside the arc and got to the foul line more.

Nash was a very efficient scorer but not a go to scorer like Curry. Curry can create his own shot off the dribble better than any of these guys. Nash was the better playmaker though. And he wasn't as bad a defender as people make him out to be. His defensive +/- was pretty much average in his prime.

I think which one you pick depends on what kind of team you have.
Nash was not big on scoring, that part is true. But what Nash did was wrecking defenses. At his best, he picked apart defenses by himself and left it in ruin for his teammates to score. I refuse to believe that Nash couldn't be more of a go to scorer if he wanted to. He absolutely could and would be a great one had the team needed him to.

[pauk]

Dunno about Ray Allen & Nash.... but Curry was not on Reggie's level indeed...

[Milbuck]

but Curry was not on Reggie's level indeed...
Agreed, he's far better.

[FKAri]

Nash > Curry so far. Nash was a great leader who really got the most out of his team.

[bizil]

I will go by process of elimination by position. I would take Ray over Miller all day long. Ray Ray was much more complete a player in addition to being one of the top five shooters of all time. Curry vs. Nash is a tough comparison. Nash is a better dime dropper while Curry is a better scorer. In the grand scheme, I would take Curry. Curry hasn't even PEAKED yet and he's turned into a great passer, even though shooting is what he does best. So it comes down to Curry vs. Ray Ray. Two different positions and it likely depends on what u would need. It will come down to Ray being bigger and more versatile to Steph's better passing ability. Between the two, I can't really decide. If I gotta choose, give me Steph. I wouldn't have said that three years ago, but Steph's has gotten better and more dynamic each year.

[LeBird]

With Kblaze on this. Reggie is one overrated mofo.

[hahaitme]

Nash > Curry > Ray > Reggie

Although take that with a grain of salt because I hate some unexplainable hate for Reggie Miller so he's going to the bottom of every list.

We're comparing 1's to 2's though.

[Kvnzhangyay]

Reggie is honestly really overrated now by people that just watch his career highlights

[Kblaze8855]

How about forgetting about Reggie Miller and looking at it in general? Fact of the matter is that players try more in the playoffs and you cant refute that. They focus more when playoff time comes around.

I was forgetting about it being Reggie. What I said goes for reggie, Wilt, Jordan, Lebron, Karl Malone, Barkley, and anyone else.

This particular issue has nothing to do with Reggie. I just never liked the idea of people pretending the playoffs shows you what a guy is...when he isnt playing his normal game.

Star guards.....scorers? Its probably most obvious.

How am I gonna watch Reggie for 20 years...play 34-35 minutes and play in the flow of the game often being unselfish t oa fault and then say judge him by two weeks when hes not playing his usual game? When hes forcing shots, shooting worse, and playing 42-45 minutes?

Guys like him...you cant say evaluate them on the playoffs....because the playoffs is NOT how they usually play.

Again I must ask....how are you better because you play 3-6 more minutes and shoot more?

You just scored more points. You arent better at basketball.

I remember being told once that Dirk is a great rebounder because he gets 10 a game in the playoffs. Dirk plays under 36 minutes a game for his career. But OVER 41 in the playoffs. He was playing 43 minutes a game in the playoffs till he was 28. Of course he gets more rebounds....

I just...dont get it. Im judging a guys normal performance.

I think thats fair.

[tontoz]

You have never seem me talk about career numbers. Especially when the question is peak Ray...as the title says. What do career numbers have to do with the peak of anyone?


Nice dodge. When did Ray ever have a season comparable to Reggie's 3rd season?

Answer: Never

[Uncle Drew]

Ray Allen was this close to making it to the finals in '01 and went toe to toe with the great AI.

[tontoz]

Nash was not big on scoring, that part is true. But what Nash did was wrecking defenses. At his best, he picked apart defenses by himself and left it in ruin for his teammates to score. I refuse to believe that Nash couldn't be more of a go to scorer if he wanted to. He absolutely could and would be a great one had the team needed him to.

I agree that Nash could have scored more if asked. However he didn't have Curry's quick release. I don't see Nash getting off over 7 3 pointers per game.

But like i said, which one you choose depends on personal preference/what type of team you have. Nash was obviously the better playmaker but i don't think he could be the go to scorer that Curry is.

[Reggie43]

I was forgetting about it being Reggie. What I said goes for reggie, Wilt, Jordan, Lebron, Karl Malone, Barkley, and anyone else.

This particular issue has nothing to do with Reggie. I just never liked the idea of people pretending the playoffs shows you what a guy is...when he isnt playing his normal game.

Star guards.....scorers? Its probably most obvious.

How am I gonna watch Reggie for 20 years...play 34-35 minutes and play in the flow of the game often being unselfish t oa fault and then say judge him by two weeks when hes not playing his usual game? When hes forcing shots, shooting worse, and playing 42-45 minutes?

Guys like him...you cant say evaluate them on the playoffs....because the playoffs is NOT how they usually play.

Again I must ask....how are you better because you play 3-6 more minutes and shoot more?

You just scored more points. You arent better at basketball.

I remember being told once that Dirk is a great rebounder because he gets 10 a game in the playoffs. Dirk plays under 36 minutes a game for his career. But OVER 41 in the playoffs. He was playing 43 minutes a game in the playoffs till he was 28. Of course he gets more rebounds....

I just...dont get it. Im judging a guys normal performance.

I think thats fair.

Pretty sure I cant change your views about playoff scoring and we can agree to disagree but how about about defensively then? Are you telling me that a player like Rodman, Pippen, Payton, Artest, Bowen etc.. never plays harder to shut down their man in the playoffs as opposed to the regular season?

[Kblaze8855]

Nice dodge. When did Ray ever have a season comparable to Reggie's 3rd season?

Answer: Never

You've never made a point I need to dodge. Ray Allen from roughly 2000 to probably 2007 was simply a better basketball player than Reggie Miller ever was regardless of the fluctuations in either of their scoring over long periods of time. it's largely an issue of circumstance and what they are being asked to do at the moment not a changing of ability.

That said I have often said Reggie was better in his early career though several Reggie supporters acted like I was out of line to say so.

I watched young Reggie live and he was simply more involved than he was later when he became more famous.

Though part of that was Larry Brown believing Reggie was not the kind of player who could carry a good team that way.

I'll give Reggie credit for accepting it and doing what was asked of him. There is no question he could have scored more than he generally did in his mid to late Prime

[tontoz]

You've never made a point I need to dodge. Ray Allen from roughly 2000 to probably 2007 was simply a better basketball player than Reggie Miller ever was regardless of the fluctuations in either of their scoring over long periods of time. it's largely an issue of circumstance and what they are being asked to do at the moment not a changing of ability.

That said I have often said Reggie was better in his early career though several Reggie supporters acted like I was out of line to say so.

I watched young Reggie live and he was simply more involved than he was later when he became more famous.

Though part of that was Larry Brown believing Reggie was not the kind of player who could carry a good team that way.

I'll give Reggie credit for accepting it and doing what was asked of him. There is no question he could have scored more than he generally did in his mid to late Prime


So Ray was better just because you say so? Just because you dont like Reggie doesn't make Ray better.

Ray never had a season as good as Reggie's 3rd year. In fact he never got close.

Ray never got to the line like Reggie did and wasn't as good inside the 3 point line. And let's not forget that Ray benefited from the rules changes making it easier for perimeter players. It is no coincidence that Ray's best scoring years came after the rules change.

[dannywpt]

who's "nikkas"?

Black people

[tmacattack33]

Nash had a very different game than the other two. Strange comparison.

[unbreakable]

LOL

as bad as Nash was on defense, hes still BETTER than Curry by a MILE lolol

curry one of the most overrated players of all time.. GSW never going anywhere with him as their leader :oldlol:

[Duggrr]

Curry > Miller
Curry < Allen
Curry < Nash

[Myth]

Well, for now Reggie is the only one to lead his team to the Finals as "the man." Ray has been there a few times and has a couple rings, but he was always 3rd fiddle or worse on those teams.

[DMAVS41]

Just doesnt hold up to me. Reggie Miller forcing extra shots in a loss because its the playoffs doesnt mean hes better than he is in the regular season. Reggie never played 40 minutes in a regular season. Did in 5 or 6 playoff runs. Reggie takes 20 shots 3 times in the 3 months leading to the playoffs...takes over 20 every game of the playoffs....including his season high while playing 46 minutes. So he scores 30 a game while losing.

Playing 45 minutes a game and shooting more does not show your true value.

You know what does? Your usual performance.

The playoffs skews numbers all over. Guys like AI played 45 minutes a game over 70+ playoff games. So he shoots 27 times a game in the playoffs as opposed to 22 normally. So he scores under 27 a game for his career but 30 in the playoffs.

There have been guys who didnt sit down....for an entire series. A lot of them.

You run stars into the ground, they shoot more than usual(both due to minutes and because stars are often asked to sore more), and often force shots on their way to being knocked out(stars have often shot more in losses than wins...close losses especially).

It isnt a more accurate representation of how they play than....their normal play.

Guys....stars especially...dont play normally in the playoffs.

Forcing it doesnt show who you really are.

You are your general level of play. Playoffs and regular season.

I wouldnt need a number of any kind to know what Reggie Miller was. I dont think you would either.


I don't think you completely discount the regular season, but man...really disagree with your general take.

You clearly know the nightly competition level in the NBA is very poor in a broad sense. I just don't see what is truly learned about guys playing the 76ers on a 2nd night of a back to back. Or playing a regular season game in crunch time when there is no real penalty for losing. Or when the opposing team is going like 80% in a sense of which players they are playing because they aren't truly giving it their all to win for tanking purposes.

The problem with the regular season is that generally the margin of error is huge and too many teams just kind of suck...especially defensively.

So I'm the exact opposite here...I don't think the regular season shows you who guys really are. It's the playoffs. Too many guys can't produce like they do in the regular season when the games really matter.

Now...the caveat here is I'm assuming we all agree that the goal of these guys and teams is to win the title. That we are comparing them in a sense of how likely they are to play in such a way that leads to winning when the games truly matter.

If we are giving guys extra points for being able to drop 50 on the 2006 Raptors....then well...that is a different conversation and one I'm not interested in at all quite frankly.

I want to know what these guys do when the pressure is really there....when teams are rested and focused and locked in....playing against the best teams and players and coaches. That to me gives you a far better idea of what a player truly can do (again...over the course of a 10 year sample) than these regular season games against the likes of the bottom feeders in the league.

[DMAVS41]

I was forgetting about it being Reggie. What I said goes for reggie, Wilt, Jordan, Lebron, Karl Malone, Barkley, and anyone else.

This particular issue has nothing to do with Reggie. I just never liked the idea of people pretending the playoffs shows you what a guy is...when he isnt playing his normal game.

Star guards.....scorers? Its probably most obvious.

How am I gonna watch Reggie for 20 years...play 34-35 minutes and play in the flow of the game often being unselfish t oa fault and then say judge him by two weeks when hes not playing his usual game? When hes forcing shots, shooting worse, and playing 42-45 minutes?

Guys like him...you cant say evaluate them on the playoffs....because the playoffs is NOT how they usually play.

Again I must ask....how are you better because you play 3-6 more minutes and shoot more?

You just scored more points. You arent better at basketball.

I remember being told once that Dirk is a great rebounder because he gets 10 a game in the playoffs. Dirk plays under 36 minutes a game for his career. But OVER 41 in the playoffs. He was playing 43 minutes a game in the playoffs till he was 28. Of course he gets more rebounds....

I just...dont get it. Im judging a guys normal performance.

I think thats fair.

Meh...part of being a great player is being able to play 40 plus minutes in a tough playoff series. To discount that is just absurd.

Again...why would the regular season tell you more here? It's not how they would play if they really had to win the games. If a team really has to win a game...they play a certain way. And that is the way that tells you the most about teams and players.

As for the Dirk stuff. Well, most guys play more minutes. But I don't see the point.

Dirk from 02 through 09 (8 years) in the playoffs (rebounding/minutes):

42 minutes per game and 11.4 rebounds

KG from 98 through 08 (8 years) in the playoffs (rebounding/minutes)

41 minutes per game and 12.4 rebounds


I wouldn't ever call Dirk a great rebounder, but you judging him on his regular season seems silly. You are doing the same thing in reverse you are bitching about. Dirk plays less minutes in the regular season than a lot of other stars.

KG and Kobe, for example, play about 2 more minutes per game prime vs prime.

So why does the regular season tell you more?

Also, you are just wrong about the minutes telling the story here:

Dirk's regular season rebounding rate from 02 through 09 was 13.8%
Dirk's playoffs rebounding rate from 02 through 09 was 15.3%.

That has nothing to do with minutes. In fact, having a higher rebounding rate while playing more minutes is super impressive.

Playoffs matter more. They matter more to players, coaches, fans...everyone involved.

Once you have a good enough sample...those games should carry way more weight than what Carmelo Anthony does against the bottom feeders in the league each year.

[DMAVS41]

The following really should matter when talking about players:

For players primes as best I can judge: (I'm only talking about scoring efficiency to make a point...I'm not saying anything overall here)

1. Regular season
2. Playoffs

Dirk 24 points on 58.4% TS
Dirk 26 points on 58.4% TS

Kobe 28 points on 55.7% TS
Kobe 28 points on 54.5% TS

Lebron 28 points on 59.4% TS
Lebron 28 points on 57.8% TS


Look at those three guys....Dirk scores more and stays the same on efficiency. Kobe scores the same and dips slightly...same thing with Lebron.

Now Melo:

Melo 26 points on 55.4% TS
Melo 26 points on 51.6% TS

That matters to me. Of course it's not all on Melo...he's had less help than those guys. But in the playoffs...when bail out calls just aren't there as often, plays better defenders, better teams, rested teams..etc....Melo just doesn't score the ball in the same way as he does in the regular season.

To me...if I'm talking about those guys for the games that really matter. This first thing I worry about with Melo is whether or not he'll be able to get his points on a high enough efficiency to win games in the playoffs...and rightfully so.

Because if Melo could get 26 a game on 57% TS....he'd just be an objectively for better player.

[iamgine]

I agree that Nash could have scored more if asked. However he didn't have Curry's quick release. I don't see Nash getting off over 7 3 pointers per game.

But like i said, which one you choose depends on personal preference/what type of team you have. Nash was obviously the better playmaker but i don't think he could be the go to scorer that Curry is.
Well no one in NBA history have Curry's release or shooting. But that's no reason why they can't be an equal or better go to scorer. Nash certainly could if he was asked to, as he proved in many games.

[Optimus Prime]

OP gotta be a troll, 12 years old, or both. :facepalm

[Mrofir]

I think Eddy Curry definitely has the strongest interior presence out of all players mentioned

[Kblaze8855]

First...Dirks scoring rises in the playoffs largely because of far more minutes. Scoring per minute...he actually scores less in the playoffs than the regular season. More rebounds...less points. Not that it matters.

So much of this utterly disregards why and how points are scored that there is just no way we can see eye to eye on this.

We watch guys like Melo go down shooting like 30-35 shots outmatched in the playoffs all the time. Teams that heavily lean on one scorer...that guy often forces things even more in the playoffs. Why? A number of reasons...

One...stars shoot more when they lose. Especially close games.

You are more likely to lose vs a better team.

So guys like Melo end up shooting more.

More shots outside the offense...trying to comeback or stay within reach in a game they shouldnt win...why wouldnt he shoot worse?

He doesnt lose because he shoots poorly. He shoots poorly because his teams are losing.

Its fairly similar to Kobe now....

It requires a closer look than the stats can give.

As far as why a much wider sample tells me more....

If I 1000 games to judge you by....im just never picking out 100 to use instead. Especially using the averages...

When you matchup against dennis rodman in the regular season and later play Rasheed wallace in the playoffs...there is no reason to assume its easier to get a rebound Rodman wants in March than one Rasheed wants in April.

The larger sample size gives me more information because I get to see you in very different settings doing things vs different competition.

How do I watch you matchup with David west for 5 games in the playoffs and learn more about you than watching you play Duncan, Lamarcus, Randolph, KG, Gasol, Blake, Tyrus Thomas, and so on?

A guy like Dirk...since he seems to be the issue....back when he was young? when I didnt know his game so well...

I hear we have a 7 foot shooter. I think oh....like a spot up shooter? Sabonis? Rik Smits?

I see him...hes like nothing ive seen.

So I ask....how do you guard him?

I get to see over the years....teams zone him, play him with swingmen, jumping jack lanky tweeners, crowd him from the blindside when he goes to do that big pivot where he holds the ball over his head...

I get to watch KG, Rasheed, Jermaine Oneal, Duncan, Ben Wallace, Webber, and even guys like Bruce Bowen, Marion, and old blazers Pippen defend him.

I see what bugs him...what doesnt. How he adjusts.

I see him adjust to whatever is thrown at him....and I learn his game.

How do I learn more....watching him play 2 teams with only 2 systems instead of 29 teams with 29 approaches to the Dirk problem?

Because in the playoffs Bruce Bowen plays harder?

You might not see it this way...but im not sure I ever saw Bruce Bowen slacking on D....

The games matter more. But im not watching Dirk in the pinch post with Lamar Odom guarding him in May and learning anything about his game I dont already know from 900 games past 200 or so I watched.

The game mattering more doesnt mean Dirk doesnt seal him off and wet that fallaway at a lower rate.

It means you play the same team 4-7 times and your respective coaches play chess. Don Nelson took Dirk apart in 2007....it wasnt because Dirk folded under pressure(I was here saying at the time that Dirk is not a choker...I believe I showed you a topic with me saying it). It was because his team got out coached and faced a bad matchup.

Rick Carlisle is one of the best and most aggressive play designers in NBA history. Ive heard stories on him giving a point the play to run the next 6-7 times down...not letting his own point call a play.

I gotta believe he makes adjustments Avery did not.

That mean they win? No.

But there are so many factors beyond....playoff fairydust and....people trying harder.

The longer I watch the clearer it becomes to me that great players in the playoffs are what they are in the regular season....plus what their teams and coaches help them to be when it becomes a chess match.

I learn your game every time you play...playoffs or regular season. If I can watch you 100 times and not know your game till you play the Raptors in the playoffs....of what use was the 100 games I watched?

How blind must I be to see someone play 3 dozen times and not know their game until its vs one team 5 times in a row?

Just never made sense to me.

[Mass Debator]

So Ray was better just because you say so? Just because you dont like Reggie doesn't make Ray better.

Ray never had a season as good as Reggie's 3rd year. In fact he never got close.

Ray never got to the line like Reggie did and wasn't as good inside the 3 point line. And let's not forget that Ray benefited from the rules changes making it easier for perimeter players. It is no coincidence that Ray's best scoring years came after the rules change.
Ray Allen never got close to Reggie's 3rd year? Even Reggie himself couldn't reach those numbers in his prime. Based on PER alone, they both were within 0.2 of each other at age 24, Reggie's 3rd year. And at age 25, Reggie has never been as productive as Ray averaging 22/5/5 on 48/43/89.

I believe Reggie was only a top 10 scorer once in his entire career. Ray did it multiple times and was one even before the rule changes. Since the age of 24 (his fourth year), Ray Ray averaged basically 22/5/4 before 05 and never averaged less than 21. He was more of an all-around individual player and team player. Scored almost as good as Reggie, handled the rock better, better court vision, better team defender, and better rebounder.

At age 30, Ray averaged 25 ppg. Out of every star, he's probably the one who would benefited the least. But these are just stats so they could be meaningless so...

Ray Allen and Reggie Miller were on the same tier as impact players. 2nd fiddle type of guys who were clutch. Being a shooting guard fan and watching basketball only during Reggie's later years (1996ish), I can say he was my favorite player after Jordan (with maybe Mitch Richmond and Tim Hardaway). He was tough and cold blooded and out of the two, Reggie would be a better #1 than Allen based on mentality alone. But man...watching Ray was a pleasure too. He could blow by you with his athleticism and ball handling. Even though he was shorter, his shooting mechanics allowed him to get off a shot over a defender quicker...and last but not least, he wasn't afraid to dunk on you. I loved Reggie's swagger (and story) way better but Allen was a slightly better basketball player to me.

[DMAVS41]

You completely ignored the rebounding rate comparison. Which was in response to your assertion that the only reason Dirk gets more rebounds was minutes played.

Which is false.

Nobody...well...nobody that knows the game cares about the per game metrics like it really matters that player x scores 2 more points per game in 5 more minutes.

It's always about efficiency and rate.

It doesn't matter that Dirk scores 2 more points. It's that he's been able to keep his efficiency at the same rate both in the regular season and playoffs. I don't understand how one could say that doesn't matter.

You seem to ignore that a huge part of how great a NBA player is...is his ability to go through an 82 game regular season while playing a majority of games well enough to get his team to the playoffs...and then have enough left in the tank to play 40 plus minutes a night in the playoffs and not see a noticeable drop off in play while playing the best teams in the league.

It matters that, for example, that a guy can't score efficiently when he's the focus of the defense. It matters because others can. It matters because these margins are so slim in the playoffs...and the difference between playing 10% worse than "normal" (according to your regular season) and 10% better could be the difference in a championship for a first round exit.

Again...what are you really learning in the regular season when those guys go against each other and they are all holding something back like 9 out of 10 times. You really think Duncan is going as hard or is as locked in...in game 28 of the regular season against the Mavs as he was in game 7 of the playoffs last year?

Total non sense and there is no ****ing way you actually believe that. And the second you concede that...it makes our point and ends this.

So many players can do stuff in the regular season on bad teams...on average teams...and even on good teams. Very few can do real shit in the playoffs...especially in deep runs...against the best teams.

There is a huge difference here.


Derrick Rose in 2011 plays like his regular season self in the conference finals? They are in the finals and possibly win the title. Who is the real Rose? The guy that shot 49.8% TS in the 10 and 11 playoffs combined? Or the guy that shot 54.2% TS in the 10 and 11 regular seasons combined? That matters...I mean...did you expect Rose to do that? Did you expect him to shoot that poorly for the entire playoffs? I mean...the sample is small so it's a bit hard, but my best guess would be that Rose back then was around a 50% TS player once you really put playoff pressure and defense and preparation into this mix. I'd say that is really who he was if someone made me pick....even though we have far more regular season games.

They are just so different.

[Optimus Prime]

Wait...people are seriously arguing that Steph Curry is better than Reggie Miller? :facepalm

Steph Curry is in his 6th season. He has a ton of potential but really hasn't done anything meaningful yet.

Reggie Miller is a Hall of Famer.

Come on now.

:kobe:

[RidonKs]

The playoffs is where the good coaches are separated more than the good players to me.
:applause:

[DMAVS41]

Also...you have created two straw men already.

1. Nobody is arguing that the regular season is completely meaningless. Nobody. I've yet to hear that. It of course matters.

2. Nobody is arguing that one playoff series or even a deep playoff run better encapsulates a player than 1000 regular season games.

Stop arguing those two points. Nobody has even tried that.


The argument is over how much the regular season really gives you insight into the true value of players vs the playoffs.

It's not that Dirk's Warriors series is more indicative of him as the player than the rest of his career. That's silly and nobody even went there.

[DMAVS41]

Wait...people are seriously arguing that Steph Curry is better than Reggie Miller? :facepalm

Steph Curry is in his 6th season. He has a ton of potential but really hasn't done anything meaningful yet.

Reggie Miller is a Hall of Famer.

Come on now.

:kobe:

I believe that the argument was essentially all the players at their best. That is the only way it can be had...if we were arguing careers with Curry it would be pointless at this point.

But if you just asked me who I'm taking as a player at their best? Yea...Reggie is clearly last for me here. He's getting really over-rated here right now.

[DMAVS41]

You are really high on Kevin Love for example.

But before I really feel like I can get to know a player...I need to see some playoff play. He's never played a playoff game...he's been on shit teams his entire career and he's produced like a monster, but so many guys can do that. Not all the numbers he has, but you get my point.

Here is our difference. You think you know exactly who Kevin Love is as a player based on what you've seen.

I think I have like only 70% of the data needed to really talk about what kind of player Love actually is.

I need to see him go through a winning regular season, go through playoff series, play in big moments with his back against the wall, play 43 minutes in 5 straight playoff games...etc. Those things are unknowns to me so far with him.

Yea, we know who he is playing exhibition ball essentially...I maintain we really don't know who he is playing when it's all on the line.

That is the big difference between us.

[Kblaze8855]

You are doing more of the ____ is why ___ lost instead of seeing how often players ____ because...they are likely to lose.

You ask if I expected Rose to shoot poorly...

If told in advance we would be fighting in really close games...and losing....would Rose attempt to take over and likely shoot worse as a result?

Id assume he would.

If ___ did ____ they would have won is just so simplistic to me.

If ____ were winning...they usually play a very different game. I gotta believe you see that chicken and the egg factor here.

But you seem to want to look back and go hypothetical a lot. I see how it unfolds and why....

We are just coming from very different places.

I dont watch Melo take 11 shots missing 8 in the 4th down 12 vs a better team and say if he could have shot better they won.

I see that they were gonna lose...and he tried to take over in the only way hes capable.

Ive always cared more about why something happened...than the resulting stat.

Which is why some people think im so anti stat.

Im not anti stat...im pro reason. And stats so often let people ignore the reason they come out the way they do.

Im just not into that.

[DMAVS41]

You are doing more of the ____ is why ___ lost instead of seeing how often players ____ because...they are likely to lose.

You ask if I expected Rose to shoot poorly...

If told in advance we would be fighting in really close games...and losing....would Rose attempt to take over and likely shoot worse as a result?

Id assume he would.

If ___ did ____ they would have won is just so simplistic to me.

If ____ were winning...they usually play a very different game. I gotta believe you see that chicken and the egg factor here.

But you seem to want to look back and go hypothetical a lot. I see how it unfolds and why....

We are just coming from very different places.

I dont watch Melo take 11 shots missing 8 in the 4th down 12 vs a better team and say if he could have shot better they won.

I see that they were gonna lose...and he tried to take over in the only way hes capable.

Ive always cared more about why something happened...than the resulting stat.

Which is why some people think im so anti stat.

Im not anti stat...im pro reason. And stats so often let people ignore the reason they come out the way they do.

Im just not into that.

The reasoning is of course important. But how these players react is important.

You are jumping here so much.

You are watching these guys play essentially exhibition games in the regular season and then jumping to conclusions and expectations in games that are simply different.

Like you said...they will play more, they will be the main focus of a defense, the opponent will be better, the opposing coach will be better likely, they will have wear and tear on their bodies after a long season, there is more pressure, more media scrutiny...etc.

All those things impact what happens on the court. I think you would concede that.

And if not...why not?

Because once you concede that...then I'm not sure what you are arguing.

[Kblaze8855]

You are really high on Kevin Love for example.

You dont seem to know my opinions well at all considering how long we have been doing this.

Wasnt long ago people were telling me I hated Love. Though...at some point people think I hate everyone.

I dont love Kevin Love....but ive seen him play dozens of times. He has nothing new to show me.

What he does in the playoffs will largely be an issue of the circumstances.

Now that hes on a team that would be good without him(we all know the Cavs will be good eventually) I dont even much care what he does in the playoffs. I care less than I would if he made it in Minnesota.

Hes his teams second best player....but third option.

Hes not facing franchise player issues right now. Nothing he does is gonna prove anything to me.

[DMAVS41]

You dont seem to know my opinions well at all considering how long we have been doing this.

Wasnt long ago people were telling me I hated Love. Though...at some point people think I hate everyone.

I dont love Kevin Love....but ive seen him play dozens of times. He has nothing new to show me.

What he does in the playoffs will largely be an issue of the circumstances.

Now that hes on a team that would be good without him(we all know the Cavs will be good eventually) I dont even much care what he does in the playoffs. I care less than I would if he made it in Minnesota.

Hes his teams second best player....but third option.

Hes not facing franchise player issues right now. Nothing he does is gonna prove anything to me.

Forget how high you are on him then...you seemed high on him considering your opinions on the trade.

But that isn't the point.

The point is the circumstances...of course it's the circumstances. It's the playoffs...those are the circumstances.

You simply have no idea how Kevin Love will play after a grueling regular season in which his team is actually winning games. How much will he have left in the tank playing x number of more competitive minutes in the regular season? How will he react to playing quality teams night in night out in the playoffs? Will he be able to be effective late in a playoff series? Will he handle the media scrutiny and added pressure well...along with more minutes? How about playing better defenders that might key on him a bit more than normal...etc.

You don't have the answer to those things.

Because all you look at is what is right in front of you in essentially exhibitions games that don't really count for much in the grand scheme of things.

And that is fine...it's important to evaluate the skill sets of players and what the can and can't do in basketball terms.

But you are missing this other big piece of the puzzle and I'm not sure for what. To argue that you know as much about Kevin Love the player as we do about Dirk? Nonsense...and you know it.

[Milbuck]

Wait...people are seriously arguing that Steph Curry is better than Reggie Miller? :facepalm

Steph Curry is in his 6th season. He has a ton of potential but really hasn't done anything meaningful yet.

Reggie Miller is a Hall of Famer.

Come on now.

:kobe:
It doesn't matter what Reggie did in his career. We're talking about level, not greatness.

And Steph last year was better than Reggie ever was. Both as a shooter, and as an overall impact player. This year and for the next few years he's just gonna widen the gap.

[SHAQisGOAT]

I'd rather have peak Nash than any version of Curry (so far)... Ray (who's peak is overlooked) and Reggie (who gets overrated many times) is a different story but... Curry has to show me more, still. So, at this point, I would take the other 3.

[DMAVS41]

You keep saying circumstances.

Have you ever considered that part of those circumstances is a players' inability to play certain roles well? Or handle pressure on and off the court well? Or be able to grind out tough minutes over and over again while still maintaining a similar level of play in the playoffs and regular season?

You have no idea what Love will do in those situations...well, we have educated guesses, but that is just playing fortune teller. To really accurately assess a player...you need way more data than you are letting on.

[tontoz]

It doesn't matter what Reggie did in his career. We're talking about level, not greatness.

And Steph last year was better than Reggie ever was. Both as a shooter, and as an overall impact player. This year and for the next few years he's just gonna widen the gap.


Wrong. Reggie scored 24.6 ppg with a TS of 64.5%. Steph hasn't been that high in points or efficiency.

Obviously Steph is a better playmaker but they play different positions so a direct comparison is difficult.

[tontoz]

Ray Allen never got close to Reggie's 3rd year? Even Reggie himself couldn't reach those numbers in his prime.


Are you serious? Are you really trying to say that Reggie's best year wasn't his prime?:facepalm

Ray Allen only got to the line over 5 times per game only two seasons in his career. Reggies career average was 5.1 attempts per game.

Reggie was also the better shooter inside the arc. Before he went to Boston Ray only had 1 season shooting over 50% on 2s. Reggie did it 7 years in a row.

Of course Reggie didn't have the benefit of stat padding on bad teams. He also didn't have the benefit of the rules changes which made it easier for perimeter players to score.

[Milbuck]

Wrong. Reggie scored 24.6 ppg with a TS of 64.5%. Steph hasn't been that high in points or efficiency.

Obviously Steph is a better playmaker but they play different positions so a direct comparison is difficult.
No, it's really not. It's not difficult to see that Steph is scoring at a comparable rate, while also being the primary ball handler and playmaker for his team. Steph last year gave you 24 ppg on 61% TS, which is pretty damn close to 24.6 ppg on 64.5% TS...but he also gives you literally twice the assists plus another one, on a vastly better AST/TO ratio.

It's not even that comparable statistically, really. Steph is just on another level as an offensive weapon.

[tontoz]

No, it's really not. It's not difficult to see that Steph is scoring at a comparable rate, while also being the primary ball handler and playmaker for his team. Steph last year gave you 24 ppg on 61% TS, which is pretty damn close to 24.6 ppg on 64.5% TS...but he also gives you literally twice the assists plus another one, on a vastly better AST/TO ratio.

It's not even that comparable statistically, really. Steph is just on another level as an offensive weapon.


Apparently you can't even remember your own posts. You said Steph was a better shooter, that Reggie was never as good as Steph last year.

In fact Reggie had a TS 3.5% higher. So how exactly was Steph the better shooter?

A pg is automatically going to get more assists than a 2. They have the ball more.

[SugarHill]

Apparently you can't even remember your own posts. You said Steph was a better shooter, that Reggie was never as good as Steph last year.

In fact Reggie had a TS 3.5% higher. So how exactly was Steph the better shooter?

A pg is automatically going to get more assists than a 2. They have the ball more.
If their scoring is comparable but their playmaking isn't, how are they close as offensive players? :biggums:

[oarabbus]

Apparently you can't even remember your own posts. You said Steph was a better shooter, that Reggie was never as good as Steph last year.

In fact Reggie had a TS 3.5% higher. So how exactly was Steph the better shooter?

A pg is automatically going to get more assists than a 2. They have the ball more.


:rolleyes:

That's like saying Kevin Martin and Evan Fournier are better than Serge Ibaka because "a 4 is automatically going to get more rebounds and blocks doe!!!!"

[tontoz]

:rolleyes:

That's like saying Kevin Martin and Evan Fournier are better than Serge Ibaka because "a 4 is automatically going to get more rebounds and blocks doe!!!!"


I never said Miller was better than Curry. It is an awkward comparison because they were so different.

I can see comparing Miller-Allen. I can see comparing Nash-Curry. But when you start trying to compare guys at different positions it is pretty pointless.

[tontoz]

If their scoring is comparable but their playmaking isn't, how are they close as offensive players? :biggums:


RIF

Someone said Curry was a better shooter last year than Reggie ever was. When i pointed out the fallacy then he tried to move the goalposts.

Reggie averaged 24.6 ppg with a TS of 64.5%. Curry has never had a TS that high.

Like i said from the start i don't like comparing guys who play different positions because they have very different roles.

I could just as easily say Miller is far better running around screens, forcing the defense to adjust to him when he doesn't have the ball. Curry wasn't asked to do that much so i don't bother bringing it up.

[bizil]

I think one thing people sleep on with Nash is his alpha dog scoring ability. I think he's a pass first PG with alpha dog shit in his game. He's a more dangerous scorer than guys like Stockton, Rondo, Mark Jackson, Kidd, Cheeks, etc. But he's not as devastating scoring as other pass first PG's such as Magic, Big O, or Isiah. But I think Nash showed he would take a game by the throat scoring enough to be considered deadly in that department when it was time. One of the FEW guys who is a great shooter, great ball handler, and great slasher in one. But with that said, I would take Curry over Nash. If I'm looking at guys who could come the closest to leading the league in points and assists in the same season, I think Bron and Curry come the closest.

[Milbuck]

Pointing out the obvious, generic fact that "they play different positions" doesn't magically erase the monumental difference in playmaking, ball handling, etc. No shit Reggie wasn't a PG, but he still a guard, and that hasn't stopped other guards like Wade, Ginobili, etc from being fantastic, PG-like playmakers for their position. Hell even Kobe, for as selfish as he can be, blows Reggie out of the water in terms of vision/playmaking.

Also LOL at TS% being the absolute judgement of how good someone is as a shooter. I didn't respond to that point because it's so obviously simplistic I didn't think it warranted a drawn out response.

I guess Lebron James last year was a better shooter than Ray Allen, Dirk Nowitzki, Larry Bird ever were :oldlol:


Seriously though, Steph has averaged 267 3s made on 44% from 3 the last two seasons, and right now even starting off the season slow (in terms of shooting efficiency), he's on pace to hit about 240 on 39-40% from 3...again, that's if we assume his efficiency doesn't line up to his normal standards, which it almost certainly will after another 70 games.

Reggie has literally just one season in his career where he cracks 200, and in that season he shot worse than Curry's peak from 3.

We only have shooting data for Reggie post-2000, which I'm sure negatively skews his %s from different ranges, but even then it's not even close to Steph in recent years...Steph has been shooting 50% from 10-16, 45% from 16-23, and 44% from 3 the past 2 seasons...that just clearly better than anything Reggie did from 2000-2004 in the shooting data we have, and should be very close to what Reggie did in his prime...however we're ignoring something pretty important here:

The degree of difficulty on Curry's shots are visibly higher. The dude isn't playing off the ball for a giant chunk of his scoring..as an elite primary ball handler and playmaker, he draws a level of direct defensive attention that Reggie just does not. Looking at the way they're getting their shots...Reggie was getting assisted on literally 90% of his 3s. Curry...54% the past 2 seasons. He's creating not only for others but for himself consistently, taking some of the most difficult shots imaginable at a huge volume and still draining them at an elite rate.

Curry > Reggie.

[DoodleDa]

Pointing out the obvious, generic fact that "they play different positions" doesn't magically erase the monumental difference in playmaking, ball handling, etc. No shit Reggie wasn't a PG, but he still a guard, and that hasn't stopped other guards like Wade, Ginobili, etc from being fantastic, PG-like playmakers for their position. Hell even Kobe, for as selfish as he can be, blows Reggie out of the water in terms of vision/playmaking.

Also LOL at TS% being the absolute judgement of how good someone is as a shooter. I didn't respond to that point because it's so obviously simplistic I didn't think it warranted a drawn out response.

I guess Lebron James last year was a better shooter than Ray Allen, Dirk Nowitzki, Larry Bird ever were :oldlol:


Seriously though, Steph has averaged 267 3s made on 44% from 3 the last two seasons, and right now even starting off the season slow (in terms of shooting efficiency), he's on pace to hit about 240 on 39-40% from 3...again, that's if we assume his efficiency doesn't line up to his normal standards, which it almost certainly will after another 70 games.

Reggie has literally just one season in his career where he cracks 200, and in that season he shot worse than Curry's peak from 3.

We only have shooting data for Reggie post-2000, which I'm sure negatively skews his %s from different ranges, but even then it's not even close to Steph in recent years...Steph has been shooting 50% from 10-16, 45% from 16-23, and 44% from 3 the past 2 seasons...that just clearly better than anything Reggie did from 2000-2004 in the shooting data we have, and should be very close to what Reggie did in his prime...however we're ignoring something pretty important here:

The degree of difficulty on Curry's shots are visibly higher. The dude isn't playing off the ball for a giant chunk of his scoring..as an elite primary ball handler and playmaker, he draws a level of direct defensive attention that Reggie just does not. Looking at the way they're getting their shots...Reggie was getting assisted on literally 90% of his 3s. Curry...54% the past 2 seasons. He's creating not only for others but for himself consistently, taking some of the most difficult shots imaginable at a huge volume and still draining them at an elite rate.

Curry > Reggie.

:applause: Very well said. I know it's sad to have to admit that guys like Ray and Reggie aren't the best anymore, but Curry is simply blowing them out of the water.

[tontoz]

LOL @ degree of difficulty. So we are grading on a curve now? Let Curry run around screens all day and see how well he shoots on tired legs.

I remember Steve Smith being interviewed and he was asked who the toughest guy to guard was and he said Miller. Keep in mind that he was going against MJ, but he hated guarding Miller because he had to constantly chase him around screens.

Miller shot 51.6% on 2 point shots for his career, toping out at 57.5%. Curry shot 50.9% last year. And it isn't like Miller could bull his way to the basket like Lebron.

[Kblaze8855]

Of course you consider ability to make more difficult shots when the issue is best shooter. Kyle Korver can and has taken almost 400 threes and shot 47%. But he isnt in the conversation with Reggie or Steph because he isnt about to:

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/859/715/b7d9a4f0604bcafb11e318045815e0da_original.gif?1368 427717


Or


http://ionegiantmag.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/p86dlpa.gif?w=660

Curry does things off the dribble ive never seen anyone do. Hes probably the most "My god..." inducing player outside the arc in history. He hits pullup 28 footers like most good guards hit from 15 feet.

Anyway.....

Im making dinner and trying to setup my moms Roku(get your mom one) so im not doing a whole...thing at the moment. But I thought id mention the following...

Believe it or not ive been working on a video that will end up being on either Dirk...or Reggie Miller. Ive recently gotten into a lot of classic rock and the song "When the Levee Breaks" by Led Zepplin is demanding I make a video on a great shooter.

Because of it I currently have a folder with 7GB of random Reggie Miller highlights...but only from before he changed his game. Its pre Knicks fame Reggie...the Reggie ive always talked about.

But halfway through it....I felt like young Dirk would be a better choice. So I searched through my footage and I have 16gb of Dirk files.

Now I cant decide.


If you are bored listen to the first couple minutes of this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbrjRKB586s


Every time I play it I envision Reggie or Dirk raining long jumpers. I bet I never finish either one.

[Mass Debator]

Are you serious? Are you really trying to say that Reggie's best year wasn't his prime?:facepalm

Ray Allen only got to the line over 5 times per game only two seasons in his career. Reggies career average was 5.1 attempts per game.

Reggie was also the better shooter inside the arc. Before he went to Boston Ray only had 1 season shooting over 50% on 2s. Reggie did it 7 years in a row.

Of course Reggie didn't have the benefit of stat padding on bad teams. He also didn't have the benefit of the rules changes which made it easier for perimeter players to score.
Let me clarify that Reggie since then haven't reach those numbers in his prime.

What does going to the line have anything to do with who was the better? Reggie used a lot more fakes and drew contact (also flops) and went to the free throw line like once more per game. No one is arguing that even though Reggie was famous for his illegal leg kick to draw contact and get it his way.

I don't care about who shot better from 2 based on percentages. I'm not arguing who was the better shooter. They're all-time great shooters if not the best two. You said Ray never had a season that was on Reggie's level and even went a step further and said it wasn't even close; you're wrong. Ray was more often not more productive. Did he ever had a season better than Reggie's 3rd year? Maybe maybe not. Was it close? Definitely. Ray doubles Reggie's all-star appearances and that says a lot no matter which way you slice it. Oh and by the way, Ray Allen shot 44% and 45% from 3. Reggie never did such feat. Ray even shot 95% from the line one year. lol Come on man, how can you not put Ray on Reggie's level.

Ray Allen was already great before the rule changes and lol at stat pad. Ray led a Sonic team to a 50+ record with Rashard Lewis, Ridnour, and Radmanovic as his best players. lol...Reggie basically always had a solid core around him in throughout his prime all the way until he retired with a prime 24 ppg Jermaine Oneal and 25 ppg Ron Artest.

So yeah, you're simply hating on the dude. Ray Allen was better than if not the same level overall player. Mitch Richmond was too. Joe Dumars also. Reggie however, was more popular than the rest because of his personality and big game Knicks and Bulls games. He's right there with them, but so is Ginobili, Brandon Roy, and even Joe Johnson at the tail end.

[tontoz]

Let me clarify that Reggie since then haven't reach those numbers in his prime.

What does going to the line have anything to do with who was the better? Reggie used a lot more fakes and drew contact (also flops) and went to the free throw line like once more per game. No one is arguing that even though Reggie was famous for his illegal leg kick to draw contact and get it his way.

I don't care about who shot better from 2 based on percentages. I'm not arguing who was the better shooter. They're all-time great shooters if not the best two. You said Ray never had a season that was on Reggie's level and even went a step further and said it wasn't even close; you're wrong. Ray was more often not more productive. Did he ever had a season better than Reggie's 3rd year? Maybe maybe not. Was it close? Definitely. Ray doubles Reggie's all-star appearances and that says a lot no matter which way you slice it. Oh and by the way, Ray Allen shot 44% and 45% from 3. Reggie never did such feat. Ray even shot 95% from the line one year. lol Come on man, how can you not put Ray on Reggie's level.

Ray Allen was already great before the rule changes and lol at stat pad. Ray led a Sonic team to a 50+ record with Rashard Lewis, Ridnour, and Radmanovic as his best players. lol...Reggie basically always had a solid core around him in throughout his prime all the way until he retired with a prime 24 ppg Jermaine Oneal and 25 ppg Ron Artest.

So yeah, you're simply hating on the dude. Ray Allen was better than if not the same level overall player. Mitch Richmond was too. Joe Dumars also. Reggie however, was more popular than the rest because of his personality and big game Knicks and Bulls games. He's right there with them, but so is Ginobili, Brandon Roy, and even Joe Johnson at the tail end.

What does getting to the line have to do with who was better? Is this a joke? When a guy is making 85-90% from the line it matters a lot. Foul shots are points. Reggie had back to back seasons getting to the line over 7 times a game, and that was under the old rules.

And you also don't care about 2s? Do they not count as points? Reggie had more variety to his game than Ray did. Put him on a bad team and he could have put up big numbers with his more varied skills.

How about the rules changes that eliminated the hand check? How about the rules change that made it a foul to touch a player after they released a jumper? Ray had the benefit of those rules. Reggie didn't. Perimeter players increased their numbers across the board. Ray put up his career numbers right after the change just like Kobe and Iverson did.

And Ray was able to get his numbers on teams that simply weren't very good. He maybe had 1 or 2 winning seasons with the Bucks/Sonics. When he went from the Sonics to the Celtics his ppg dropped by 9 points. He had to sacrifice shots for the better of the team. Reggie, by choice or due to coaches instructions, had been doing the same thing. I dont see how people can hold that against him.

In my very first post in the thread i said which one among the 4 you pick depends on the team you have. That is pretty far from hating.

[tontoz]

Also from my first post of the thread:




Nash was a very efficient scorer but not a go to scorer like Curry. Curry can create his own shot off the dribble better than any of these guys.

So is this hating on Curry? The hating tag is just a copout from people who can't make a coherent argument.

[Reggie43]

To anyone who cares here's a video of Miller playing against the great Drazen Petrovic. This is a good example of how Miller played pre-Larry Brown as Kblaze was pointing out. Credits to the youtube uploader Crohoops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00yi-szLESo

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Bump

[Legends66NBA7]

I thought it was obvious at the time that Steph was over Ray and Reggie. The debate was between Steph and Nash, and with these playoffs ? Definitely Steph is the best of the bunch, Nash didn't reach this level either.

[bobeticus]

To be fair to someone like Ray...he was pretty much reaching the end of his prime when the rules changed that made it easier for guards. Steph has had the advantage of this his entire career. Ray was 30 when the rules changed. Look what he did in his prime on the Bucks...basically averaged 43% from 3pt land taking 6.5 or so 3pters a game vs tougher defense than Steph is facing.

This. Today's rule are soft...

[warriorfan]

This. Today's rule are soft...

Curry has been getting hit hard and grabbed while he has been playing off ball this post season and his numbers haven't gone down in fact they have gone up.

[bobeticus]

Curry has been getting hit hard and grabbed while he has been playing off ball this post season and his numbers haven't gone down in fact they have gone up.

no bleed no foul... :no:

[iamgine]

Steph is clearly better than them. i remember nikkas on here sayin last year Steph wasnt on that level..........:no: :no:
Curry might be better than Ray Allen/Reggie Miller but Nash was clearly better than Curry.

[Rose'sACL]

I'd take curry over every one else in this discussion. When you can shoot the 3 the way he shoots while having the ball in his hand, you create so many headaches for defense. His volume from 3 plus his efficiency is just mind blowing.

[Bernkastel]

Living in the moment.