How overrated has Klay Thompson become?

[tpols]

His playoff ORTG is 107.

Ray Allen who plays the exact same way... 115.

Reggie Miller who plays the exact same way... 120+.

I admit he's clutch... but so were they!

Ray and Reggie have more GOAT clutch moments than Klay.

[TommyGriffin]

Klay is a far better defender than both.

[tpols]

Far better?

Nah...

Klay is only a man defender. He's not a shot blocker or a steal hawk.

Reggie and Ray were actually plus man defenders. Especially Ray... he was a very good defensive player 1v1.

[1987_Lakers]

Greatest 3 & D player in NBA history. Not only was he a better defender than Reggie & Ray by a good margin, but his 3pt% is also higher than both.

[TommyGriffin]

Far better?

Nah...

Klay is only a man defender. He's not a shot blocker or a steal hawk.

Reggie and Ray were actually plus man defenders. Especially Ray... he was a very good defensive player 1v1.

He's not just a man-defender, he's one of the league's premier man-defenders.

Klay is always tasked with guarding the opponents best guard/perimeter threat, along with making up for whatever Steph is lacking defensively at the 1. Reggie or Ray were never given such defensive duties.

[Roundball_Rock]

Greatest 3 & D player in NBA history. Not only was he a better defender than Reggie & Ray by a good margin, but his 3pt% is also higher than both.

Agreed. Klay will go down as the better player when it is all said and done, if he stays healthy.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

He outplayed Curry in the 2019 finals. That's funny, Curry would of lost out on finals MVP again if Warriors held on to the title.

[tpols]

Greatest 3 & D player in NBA history. Not only was he a better defender than Reggie & Ray by a good margin, but his 3pt% is also higher than both.

Ray Allen was easily a greater 3&D player.

It's not too close either.

[1987_Lakers]

Ray Allen was easily a greater 3&D player.

It's not too close either.

In what world was Ray a better defender than Klay? :oldlol:

[theballerFKA Ace]

I wouldn't want Klay or Ray to lead my team, MAYBE Reggie depending on how the team is built because of his length, never give up attitude and playoff turnover.

I'm still taking Klay almost every time over these 2 if I'm building a team. His ability to move off the ball is equal to the other 2, so he's going to demand attention at all times plus has the size and strength to defend 3 positions(4 these days). I'd take him over Kyrie if the 2011 draft were today. The Cavs would have been a dynasty if they had either of the 2 KKK in 2011 and got Lebron back

[dbugz]

Will trade Jaylen and Hayward for Klay.

[tpols]

In what world was Ray a better defender than Klay? :oldlol:

Where did i say he was a better defender?

School must be out lol.

[1987_Lakers]

Where did i say he was a better defender?

School must be out lol.

Considering Klay has a higher 3pt%, I assumed you implied that. Even when Ray was playing with great teammates to draw some attention away from him in Boston & Miami he was 41% 3 point shooter, Klay for his career is 42% from 3, has yet to have a season where he shot under 40%. With the numbers being pretty close from 3, you can call it a wash if you want, but then you talk about defense and the discussion is over there, Klay was a superior defender, I've never seen anyone put Ray ahead of Klay in the 3 & D department.

[Rico2016]

Didn't Klay drop 60 points in 3 quarters. I mean, that shows his capabilities to an extent.

[tpols]

that's fair. Although we're literally splitting hairs at 1% difference.

What that means though is reggie and klay were much better midrange shooters and scorers.

And the numbers bear that out dramatically.

[tpols]

Didn't Klay drop 60 points in 3 quarters. I mean, that shows his capabilities to an extent.

that was one of kblaze's main criticisms on reggie... he would burst, and do "nothing" for a long time.

Reggie, Ray and Klay played the exact same way.

But what they actually produced is totally different.

[Rico2016]

Well let's see here, this should be easy...

Finals
2019 Klay:
26-5-3 on 54% fg, 59% 3p, 88% ft (19.5 Gm Sc)

2000 Reggie:
24-3-4 on 41% fg, 38% 3p, 98% fg (17.6 Gm Sc)

2008 Ray:
20-5-3 on 51% fg, 52% 3p, 87% fg (16.7 Gm Sc)

1997 Hornacek:
12-4-2 on 38% fg%, 38% 3p, 85% ft (7.1 Gm Sc) *His 1998 was even worse, I wont embarrass him further

[tpols]

One shortened series vs whole career comparisons?

The IQ on this board has to be in the 80s.

[1987_Lakers]

One shortened series vs whole career comparisons?

The IQ on this board has to be in the 80s.

While I agree Reggie was overall a better playoff performer than Klay, Reggie is much closer to Klay's level as he is to Curry's level, something 3ball implied in the other thread, which is simply ridiculous. As far as basketball players overall, Reggie & Klay are in the same category.

[Lebron23]

They are basically the same level of players. Thompson would be rank higher than Miller because of his 3 nba titles

[Lion's pride]

I like Klay over the other 2, but would like his extremely contested rushed 3 pointers that he would get away with ONLY on GS IMO..

[Rico2016]

One shortened series vs whole career comparisons?

The IQ on this board has to be in the 80s.

So the Finals aren't important anymore? I mean, sheesh, what is going on? Full playoffs comparisons then. Here it goes:

Klay
19-4-2-1 on 44/42/84

Reggie
21-3-3 on 45/39/89

Allen
16-4-3 on 44/40/88

[Soundwave]

Klay and Draymond are both overrated, playing on a glamour team gives second/third options a boost in exposure though, unless they were previously All-Stars on their own.

Golden State's so-called "defence" was also always a joke, they're a team that plays maybe 10 minutes of D for an entire game, they win on playing run n' gun offence, plain and simple, they really have never been able to shut down opponents.

This is why they were prone to embarrassing melt downs from time to time, because they couldn't actually play the D they were billed at. Once they got Durant it just didn't matter, they could just outscore anyone.

[Kblaze8855]

Ray Allen didn’t play that much like either Klay or Reggie Miller.....

[r0drig0lac]

Ray Allen didn’t play that much like either Klay or Reggie Miller.....
this x1000
Ray comparison is more like Bradley Beal and .... Klay Thompson is not on the level of Miller or Ray as a basketball player

[tpols]

Ray Allen didn’t play that much like either Klay or Reggie Miller.....

celtic and heat ray did.

[Phoenix]

Ray Allen didn’t play that much like either Klay or Reggie Miller.....

As I said in your highlights that best or worst show a player thread from earlier:




Ray Allen seems often depicted as a jumpshooter( and being the leader in 3s perpetrates that further) but he was much more of a ball handler,slasher and dunker in his prime than his highlights( at least his most famous ones) represented.



I'm guessing a good portion of the board doesn't remember UConn/Bucks/Sonics Ray. Ray had like 10 times the handle of Klay and Reggie and was considerably more explosive athletically:


https://youtu.be/OyzNlTL6BrM

[Lebron23]

3 rings is better than zero.

[dbugz]

^the irony

:oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

Finals
2019 Klay:
26-5-3 on 54% fg, 59% 3p, 88% ft (19.5 Gm Sc)

2000 Reggie:
24-3-4 on 41% fg, 38% 3p, 98% fg (17.6 Gm Sc)

2008 Ray:
20-5-3 on 51% fg, 52% 3p, 87% fg (16.7 Gm Sc)

1997 Hornacek:
12-4-2 on 38% fg%, 38% 3p, 85% ft (7.1 Gm Sc) *His 1998 was even worse, I wont embarrass him further

Miller needed 41.9 MPG to get that while Klay did it in 37.6.


While I agree Reggie was overall a better playoff performer than Klay,

The gap isn't as big as people think. Reggie overall has better performances but in big games Klay has shown up more often:

Miller

Game 6 94' ECF: 27/4/4 on 38% (with a trip to the finals on the line)
Game 7 94' ECF: 25/2/0 on 41%

Game 7 95' ECSF: 29/1/3 on 56%
Game 6 95' ECF: 36/7/2 on 68% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 95' ECF: 12/4/0 on 39%

Game 6 98' ECF: 8/2/0 on 15% (elimination game)
Game 7 98' ECF: 22/0/4 on 54%

Game 6 99' ECF: 8/3/4 on 17% (Pacers eliminated)

Game 5 00' Finals: 25/4/6 on 58% (elimination game)
Game 6 00' Finals: 25/1/3 on 42%

A lot of flops in big games. Again, his reputation runs ahead of his record. He is only a scorer so when his shot is off he can't contribute in any other way like the more well-rounded players who rank ahead of him all-time could do.

Thompson


Game 7 16' WCF: 21/5/0 on 37%
Game 5 16' Finals: 37/3/1 on 55% (GS wins the chip if they win the game)
Game 6 16' Finals: 25/3/1 on 43%
Game 7 16' Finals: 14/2/2 on 35%

Game 6 18' WCF: 35/6/2 on 57% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 18' WCF: 19/3/1 on 62%

Game 6 19' WCF: 27/2/2 on 50% (Durant injured)
Game 5 19' Finals: 26/6/4 on 43% (to stave off elimination)
Game 6 19' Finals: 30/5/0 on 67% (injured but 30 points in 32 minutes)

Thompson has a pretty good clutch track record. Moreover, he can play defense which stats don't capture, although he gives you nothing as a playmaker either.

[AlternativeAcc.]

OP getting destroyed and failing to make a coherent point per usual.

Damn this guy sucks lol, nobody takes him seriously and rightfully so

[Monta Ellis MVP]

Reggie is a better clutch performer than Klay Thompson.

[Phoenix]

^ Bye.

[tpols]

Blaze please clean my thread of the spams and trolls on this page.

I swear i wont argue with you anymore if you do.

it's gotten out of hand.

[ArbitraryWater]

In a few yrs tpols will declare Klay an ordinary sidekick for Curry purposes

[light]

His playoff ORTG is 107.

Ray Allen who plays the exact same way... 115.

Reggie Miller who plays the exact same way... 120+.

I admit he's clutch... but so were they!

Ray and Reggie have more GOAT clutch moments than Klay.

Here's the thing...

Highest Career Playoff ORTGs:

Horace Grant - 122
Magic Johnson - 122
Kevin McHale - 122
Steve Kerr - 121
Terry Porter - 119
Reggie Miller - 119
John Paxson - 119
John Salley - 118
A.C. Green - 118
Michael Jordan - 118

I don't really think it means that much.

[Roundball_Rock]

Here's the thing...

Highest Career Playoff ORTGs:

Horace Grant - 122
Magic Johnson - 122
Kevin McHale - 122
Steve Kerr - 121
Terry Porter - 119
Reggie Miller - 119
John Paxson - 119
John Salley - 118
A.C. Green - 118
Michael Jordan - 118

I don't really think it means that much.

Horace Grant is the GOAT then! :bowdown:

[Reggie43]

Second and third option types tend to get overrated because the gravity of the defense will always go to the main guy making them look better on mostly single coverage defense.

Kyrie thinking he will have the same impact after Lebron is an example. Having the pressure of the franchise in his shoulders didnt really turn out well. Another one is Draymond wherein everyone expected a huge season from him considering that the best players on the team got injured but we all know what happened.

Defense is not that big of a gap when comparing Klay, Ray and Reggie. Ray when he came to boston became a better defender and did a decent job on kobe while Miller did have the good Jordan defender rep with their many battles on the 90s. Mj even acknowledge him as the one he hated playing against on both ends of the floor.

Miller is better because he has lead his own teams to deep playoff runs without having alltime great talents on his team. He did not "carry" them but he was their unquestioned leader and best player.

You could nitpick all his bad games all you want (every player has them) but you cant rewrite him leading the Pacers to 5 conference finals and a finals berth as the franchise player of the Pacers.

[Goalgoalabc]

I don't think he is a super star, so there is not any overrated

[FKAri]

One of the greatest shooting guards of all time; dare I say, The Greatest.

[Kblaze8855]

Miller is better because he has lead his own teams to deep playoff runs without having alltime great talents on his team.


Nobody is better than anyone else because of anything that isn’t an aspect of playing a game. You can have a greater career but that isn’t what “better” means.

[Soundwave]

Klay balled out in 2019, but his other Finals are somewhat mediocre, even before Durant got there.

[1987_Lakers]

Here's the thing...

Highest Career Playoff ORTGs:

Horace Grant - 122
Magic Johnson - 122
Kevin McHale - 122
Steve Kerr - 121
Terry Porter - 119
Reggie Miller - 119
John Paxson - 119
John Salley - 118
A.C. Green - 118
Michael Jordan - 118

I don't really think it means that much.

It's a very flawed stat, the stat nerds will say you need to use "usage" along with "ORTG", but even that is flawed.

For example, '94 postseason Grant had a an ORTG of 126 and usage of 18.

In the '09 postseason, Gasol had a 124 ORTG with a usuage of 18.8.

Was Grant a better offensive player than Gasol during that time? Hell no, Grant averaged 16/7/3 in that postseason compared to Gasol's 18/11/3, on the eye test alone we know Gasol could actually create for himself in the post on a consistent basis and was a very good passer, Grant was never as skilled as Gasol.

[Rico2016]

It's a very flawed stat, the stat nerds will say you need to use "usage" along with "ORTG", but even that is flawed.

For example, '94 postseason Grant had a an ORTG of 126 and usage of 18.

In the '09 postseason, Gasol had a 124 ORTG with a usuage of 18.8.

Was Grant a better offensive player than Gasol during that time? Hell no, Grant averaged 16/7/3 in that postseason compared to Gasol's 18/11/3, on the eye test alone we know Gasol could actually create for himself in the post on a consistent basis and was a very good passer, Grant was never as skilled as Gasol.

Exactly. If you compare options to options, and look at defense, then it makes more sense.

[Rico2016]

Reggie is a better clutch performer than Klay Thompson.

Straight from WelfareFans alt. Ouch. Arent you a Warriors fan.

[LostCause]

The exact same metrics that people swear by to say Player A is better than Player B almost all show Miller is a better player than Thompson, but agendas beat consistent arguments here

I don’t think Klay is overrated. As someone did he’s probably the GOAT 3 & D player. I also agree with 1987 that Thompson is closer to Miller’s level than Miller is to Curry. Don’t know who’d say Reggie is on Currys level but that’s ridiculous. It’s not blasphemous to prefer Thompson over Miller either as he’s much better defensively

[Reggie43]

Nobody is better than anyone else because of anything that isn’t an aspect of playing a game. You can have a greater career but that isn’t what “better” means.

You cant really have a discussion about Miller and not talk about the intangible parts if his game like mental toughness, leadership, being liked by teammates, being coachable, being a good clutch player etc.

If its all about tangible skills I have Sprewell, E. Jones, Richmond, Ray and some others being better than him because they are talented all around if thats whats your criteria is for being "better"

Miller outperforming the more skilled and "better" player matters for me especially in the playoffs. Those allaround skills wont matter if you get beat by the more "effective" player in a playoff series.

[TommyGriffin]

Reggie is a better clutch performer than Klay Thompson.

You seem to be vastly underrating Klay's ability in the clutch, Monta.

[tpols]

It's a very flawed stat


ORTG is literally your FG%, your FT%, your 3 pt%, and your # of TO's rolled into one number.

Specifically, it illustrates exactly how many points you produce per opportunity.

It is literally the most basic of all offensive stats cumulative number.

There's no craziness to it lol.

You're done.

https://media.giphy.com/media/kuLuAVBxOsQyk/200.gif

[LoneyROY7]

tpols discovered ORTG yesterday and got really excited. :oldlol: :oldlol:

[Turbo Slayer]

ORTG is literally your FG%, your FT%, your 3 pt%, and your # of TO's rolled into one number.

Specifically, it illustrates exactly how many points you produce per opportunity.

It is literally the most basic of all offensive stats cumulative number.

There's no craziness to it lol.

You're done.

https://media.giphy.com/media/kuLuAVBxOsQyk/200.gif Ok.

[1987_Lakers]

ORTG is literally your FG%, your FT%, your 3 pt%, and your # of TO's rolled into one number.

Specifically, it illustrates exactly how many points you produce per opportunity.

It is literally the most basic of all offensive stats cumulative number.

There's no craziness to it lol.

You're done.

https://media.giphy.com/media/kuLuAVBxOsQyk/200.gif

Kiki Vandeweghe career ORTG: 119
Larry Bird career ORTG: 115

Kiki career usage: 24
Bird career usage: 26.5

So Kiki is a better offensive player than Bird now?

Admit it, it's a retarded stat.

You're done.

https://media.giphy.com/media/kYsBThMhhalLG/giphy.gif

[AlternativeAcc.]

tpols discovered ORTG yesterday and got really excited. :oldlol: :oldlol:
:roll::roll:

[Axe]

If you think klay is overrated, then curry is way more overrated than him.

[RRR3]

Kiki Vandeweghe career ORTG: 119
Larry Bird career ORTG: 115

Kiki career usage: 24
Bird career usage: 26.5

So Kiki is a better offensive player than Bird now?

Admit it, it's a retarded stat.

You're done.

https://media.giphy.com/media/kYsBThMhhalLG/giphy.gif
I'd like to see him try to explain how LeBron destroys Kobe in ORTG. Just to see him move the goalposts.

[Kblaze8855]

You cant really have a discussion about Miller and not talk about the intangible parts if his game like mental toughness, leadership, being liked by teammates, being coachable, being a good clutch player etc.

If its all about tangible skills I have Sprewell, E. Jones, Richmond, Ray and some others being better than him because they are talented all around if thats whats your criteria is for being "better"

Miller outperforming the more skilled and "better" player matters for me especially in the playoffs. Those allaround skills wont matter if you get beat by the more "effective" player in a playoff series.

Stars dont personally beat teams. Reggie can be made to appear to in espn specials but hes not a do it all type who just drives his team on any kinda regular basis. He like dozens of others win games over better players because thats how team sports work. If it didnt happen all the time guys like Jordan, Wilt, and Kareem would combine for like 45 rings. It wouldnt have taken many changes for the Pacers to have defeated the Bulls in 98. Which would mean absolutely nothing in a Jordan/Miller discussion.

And if this were a reasonable argument to use it wouldnt be for someone who lost every year for almost 2 decades. Its something to use for players many many many tiers down because the worse the player the less they have to do to be praised. Karl Malone won more games than Reggie and made 6 WCF and 3 finals and has been considered a loser for 25+ years. Reggie is a "winner" while Karl is a "loser" because Karl gets true great player status which makes the standard higher.

Reggie never actually did anything that is considered winning for a historically great player. He did things considered winning for like.....Lou Hudson or Alex English. He won by Donovan Mcnaab standards no the standards of people who will be remembered as winners. I will listen a little to "But he wins....he beats people" if their seasons actually end in wins and not losses. Im only giving so much "But...he wins" credit to people who dont actually win anything.

It doesnt actually matter to a basketball argument that Reggies team beat Shaqs in 94 any more than Baron Davis beating Dirk. There is no comparison player wise so in the end its just trivia.

[ArbitraryWater]

tpols discovered ORTG yesterday and got really excited. :oldlol: :oldlol:

thats what it looks like to me


its a very basic stat

never seen him use it this aggressively before

[Reggie43]

Stars dont personally beat teams. Reggie can be made to appear to in espn specials but hes not a do it all type who just drives his team on any kinda regular basis. He like dozens of others win games over better players because thats how team sports work. If it didnt happen all the time guys like Jordan, Wilt, and Kareem would combine for like 45 rings. It wouldnt have taken many changes for the Pacers to have defeated the Bulls in 98. Which would mean absolutely nothing in a Jordan/Miller discussion.

And if this were a reasonable argument to use it wouldnt be for someone who lost every year for almost 2 decades. Its something to use for players many many many tiers down because the worse the player the less they have to do to be praised. Karl Malone won more games than Reggie and made 6 WCF and 3 finals and has been considered a loser for 25+ years. Reggie is a "winner" while Karl is a "loser" because Karl gets true great player status which makes the standard higher.

Reggie never actually did anything that is considered winning for a historically great player. He did things considered winning for like.....Lou Hudson or Alex English. He won by Donovan Mcnaab standards no the standards of people who will be remembered as winners. I will listen a little to "But he wins....he beats people" if their seasons actually end in wins and not losses. Im only giving so much "But...he wins" credit to people who dont actually win anything.

It doesnt actually matter to a basketball argument that Reggies team beat Shaqs in 94 any more than Baron Davis beating Dirk. There is no comparison player wise so in the end its just trivia.

The problem with our discussions is I compare him to his peers aka people on the same tier like ray, klay, spree, manu etc yet you will always voice your opinion about how bad he was compared to other all time greats.

Another point is he had his playoff resume without playing with anyone of note, Shaq had Penny, Jordan had Pip, Malone/Stockton etc. Would Lebron have won his rings with a slightly better peak Ilgauskas(Smits) Mo Williams(Mark Jackson) and a few good/borderline allstar role players that is closer in talent to a Varejao compared to being true allstars (Davis bros, Mckey etc)

[aceman]

His playoff ORTG is 107.

Ray Allen who plays the exact same way... 115.

Reggie Miller who plays the exact same way... 120+.

I admit he's clutch... but so were they!

Ray and Reggie have more GOAT clutch moments than Klay.

What are you forgetting? Ah, that's right DEFENSE!
One of the best two way players in game

[Kblaze8855]

The problem with our discussions is I compare him to his peers aka people on the same tier like ray, klay, spree, manu etc yet you will always voice your opinion about how bad he was compared to other all time greats.

Another point is he had his playoff resume without playing with anyone of note, Shaq had Penny, Jordan had Pip, Malone/Stockton etc. Would Lebron have won his rings with a slightly better peak Ilgauskas(Smits) Mo Williams(Mark Jackson) and a few good/borderline allstar role players that is closer in talent to a Varejao compared to being true allstars (Davis bros, Mckey etc)


If youre saying it doesnt matter if someone is "better" when he wins....how does that not apply to everyone he faced? We only throw out how good you think someone is when reggies team wins in select cases?

And you often seem to think im talking only Reggie in particular. Im against your entire line of thinking no matter who the players being compared are. We have people talking up playoff "runs" like it isnt just another word for losing. Nobody gives a damn how many conference finals the hawks lost in during the 60s(6 I think) or how many times the Suns lost in the conference finals in the 80s(4 I believe...one with Dennis Johnson, another in 84 and two with KJ). Nobody is counting such things unless they didnt actually win anything. The Suns made several conference finals and a finals in the 70s and not one person alive cares who Paul Westphal "beat" to do it. We start giving "But ____ beat ____" credit to people and act like they are then better than whoever was on the losing end regardless of the situation we can just throw the whole thing in the trash and start all sports rankings over and be ready for the final list to look pretty insane.

IF we are actually talking about winning...its one thing. Im not gonna throw out some guy winning 4-5 rings and powering his team to a couple of them personally.

I'll at least hear it out in a discussion on him or a rival who didnt do those things.

A first round win? A second?

Is that really supposed to make you a winner?

Winning makes you a winner.

Lacking winning...I feel a need to stick to basketball. I dont care who won a second round series then lost when the issue is who "wins".

The better player is the better player. If im gonna throw in success....let me see success. Not failure by a different margin. If Karl Malone losing in the finals 3 means nothing to me when the comparison is him or like....Barkley...why would I care if Reggie or Ray or whoever else made the most 3rd rounds when losing was the result either way?

[Kblaze8855]

I will admit for the record that I get where you would be coming from as a fan. I understand it from an emotional point of view it just doesnt match up with the logical side. Ive been there. You hear how _____ is better all year...or for years. And maybe they are. But when you play?

Thats a sweet moment there.

Like the 07 Bulls. Of course I know nobody on that team was better than even the washed up Shaq they had much less prime Wade. I heard Heat fans talking about how they wanted the Bulls matchup. That the record didnt matter. Their stars missed games. They are the champs and we should be paying respect. Remember Nocioni and others saying they wanted the heat and Zo was like "Careful what you wish for"?

And what happens? 4-0 sweep with Wade being outplayed not just by Deng but statistically by Ben Gordon too(look into it...Ben had more points and shot better overall, from 3, and the line...while getting more rebounds and slightly less assists). We get that classic Zo head shaking gif.

From a place of emotion you wanna ask some questions. Make some jokes. But logically...you know that isnt how it works.

Id feel the same way if Reggies team beat whoever and the general opinion is that they are better. But the rational side of my brain would know it isnt true hes better because he won....just funny to throw in peoples faces.

[Reggie43]

How about the fact that he is a winner compared to his peers?
You do realize that players and fans have different standards for having a succesful season?

When he beats Ray in a do or die game while outperforming him does that not matter because the better player is the better player? All the athletic advantages plus being to play multiple positions still make Ray better despite the loss?

Or are we just arguing about the word "better" meaning having more skills discounting the fact that a more effective player with the leadership and other intangibles could win against them and be more valuable?

Did I ever say he was better than a Ewing, Shaq/Penny, Iverson, etc just because he has wins against them?

[tpols]

thats what it looks like to me


its a very basic stat

never seen him use it this aggressively before


it's not like PER which is literally just a made up equation of a million jumbled different stats mashed together with random arbitrary coefficients tossed in.

ORTG is literally just how many shots you made, how many you missed, and how many turnovers you had.

It's the most basic total umbrella efficiency stat that exists.

it's beyond hilarious people trying to discredit it...

i could lay all the FT%, FG%, TO's down for each player and you would get the same result.

But I'm trying to be a nice guy and make it easy for you fellas by giving it to you in one number. :confusedshrug:

[Kblaze8855]

How about the fact that he is a winner compared to his peers?
You do realize that players and fans have different standards for having a succesful season?

When he beats Ray in a do or die game while outperforming him does that not matter because the better player is the better player? All the athletic advantages plus being to play multiple positions still make Ray better despite the loss?

Or are we just arguing about the word "better" meaning having more skills discounting the fact that a more effective player with the leadership and other intangibles could win against them and be more valuable?

Did I ever say he was better than a Ewing, Shaq/Penny, Iverson, etc just because he has wins against them?

When the question is who is better? Of course it doesnt much matter. We have been conditioned by soundbyte media making short and sweet points for reactions that basketball is that simple but an even halfway decent look shows you it almost never has been. Reggie "beating" ray means no more than MVP Kobe going for 22 points on 7-22 shooting and losing the title while Ray had 26 on 98% true shooting(yes...98 percent...he was 8/12, 7/9 from 3, and hit all his free throws...ortg if youre wondering? 173). It happened. Kobe gets eliminated and Ray gets a ring. Its no factor in the direct comparison. No more than Kobe going for 24 in a game 7 loss on 66% ts while Barbosa on the other side had 26 and 92%. Birds game 7 loss to the 76ers with Doc styling all over him doesnt settle that either. Not even for that season.

It doesnt matter to me when its close or when its no contest. Not really. It "matters" far as final career accolades and accomplishments but it doesnt make anyone better or worse than anyone else. If youre better youre better. Even if you shot worse last night. Or last week.

Players dont play eachother. They play the other team. The other defense. There will never be a truly even playing field and even if there were....we see the better player lose all the time. Regular season...playoffs...whatever. It happens way too often to even start giving examples.

If a team with Tim Duncan and 10 all stars can lose to Carlos Arroyo and scrubs and Manu and role players....who wins is obviously not as simple as who the best individual is. Not on any level.

[Reggie43]

When the question is who is better? Of course it doesnt much matter. We have been conditioned by soundbyte media making short and sweet points for reactions that basketball is that simple but an even halfway decent look shows you it almost never has been. Reggie "beating" ray means no more than MVP Kobe going 7-22 and losing the title while Ray had 26 on 98% true shooting(yes...98 percent...he was 8/12, 7/9 from 3, and hit all his free throws...ortg if youre wondering? 173). It happened. Kobe gets eliminated and Ray gets a ring. Its no factor in the direct comparison. No more than Kobe going for 24 in a game 7 loss on 66% ts while Barbosa on the other side had 26 and 92%. Birds game 7 loss to the 76ers with Doc styling all over him doesnt settle that either. Not even for that season.

It doesnt matter to me when its close or when its no contest. Not really. It "matters" far as final career accolades and accomplishments but it doesnt make anyone better or worse than anyone else. If youre better youre better. Even if you shot worse last night. Or last week.

Players dont play eachother. They play the other team. The other defense. There will never be a truly even playing field and even if there were....we see the better player lose all the time. Regular season...playoffs...whatever. It happens way too often to even start giving examples.

If a team with Tim Duncan and 10 all stars can lose to Carlos Arroyo and scrubs and Manu and role players....who wins is obviously not as simple as who the best individual is. Not on any level.

Is ray the same level as kobe? Thats the problem here, you try to compare him to alltime greats while I compare him to his peers/players on the same level.

Head to head he outperformed Iverson in the playoffs but do you see me proclaiming he was better? Miller 26.2ppg 4rb 3.1ast .8stl .485fg%
Iverson 27.9ppg 4.2rb 4.9ast 1.4 st .389fg% Playoff series wins 2-1 in favor of Miller. I understand the game and I know Iverson is in a diff tier, skill and talent level.

[RogueBorg]

Far better?

Nah...

Klay is only a man defender. He's not a shot blocker or a steal hawk.



You are right about that, he's neither.

[ArbitraryWater]

When the question is who is better? Of course it doesnt much matter. We have been conditioned by soundbyte media making short and sweet points for reactions that basketball is that simple but an even halfway decent look shows you it almost never has been. Reggie "beating" ray means no more than MVP Kobe going for 22 points on 7-22 shooting and losing the title while Ray had 26 on 98% true shooting(yes...98 percent...he was 8/12, 7/9 from 3, and hit all his free throws...ortg if youre wondering? 173). It happened. Kobe gets eliminated and Ray gets a ring. Its no factor in the direct comparison. No more than Kobe going for 24 in a game 7 loss on 66% ts while Barbosa on the other side had 26 and 92%. Birds game 7 loss to the 76ers with Doc styling all over him doesnt settle that either. Not even for that season.

It doesnt matter to me when its close or when its no contest. Not really. It "matters" far as final career accolades and accomplishments but it doesnt make anyone better or worse than anyone else. If youre better youre better. Even if you shot worse last night. Or last week.

Players dont play eachother. They play the other team. The other defense. There will never be a truly even playing field and even if there were....we see the better player lose all the time. Regular season...playoffs...whatever. It happens way too often to even start giving examples.

If a team with Tim Duncan and 10 all stars can lose to Carlos Arroyo and scrubs and Manu and role players....who wins is obviously not as simple as who the best individual is. Not on any level.

Basically, lets not hold anyone accountable, lets not factor in consistency, but go by a very rough "skillset" and 5-year window of how a player was perceived, and if he was better overall in that window, he can be outplayed as much as he wants to and not show up, he was still better, even when performing, well, worse...

this is how you make things simple for yourself.

[tpols]

Basically, lets not hold anyone accountable, lets not factor in consistency, but go by a very rough "skillset" and 5-year window of how a player was perceived, and if he was better overall in that window, he can be outplayed as much as he wants to and not show up, he was still better, even when performing, well, worse...

this is how you make things simple for yourself.

he keeps using one off series by one hit wonder type players...

Reggie Miller started in 144 playoff games. im not gonna look it up... but im guessing thats as much or more than anybody to ever play basketball.

Those are his averages for a massive playoff sample size. 120+ ORTG.

If Ben Gordon balled out in the playoffs every year for decades, he'd be much more acclaimed too and his production would mean something.

[ImKobe]

he keeps using one off series by one hit wonder type players...

Reggie Miller started in 144 playoff games. im not gonna look it up... but im guessing thats as much or more than anybody to ever play basketball.

Those are his averages for a massive playoff sample size. 120+ ORTG.

If Ben Gordon balled out in the playoffs every year for decades, he'd be much more acclaimed too and his production would mean something.

144 is decent, it's not close to the most all-time, but that's better than most. Reggie definitely is a very underrated offensive player. 2nd all-time behind CP3 in ORTG (121.48) 2 decades after his prime..

[RogueBorg]

Reggie Miller started in 144 playoff games. im not gonna look it up... but im guessing thats as much or more than anybody to ever play basketball.



Ever? 144 is not even close to the most.

[Kblaze8855]

Basically, lets not hold anyone accountable, lets not factor in consistency, but go by a very rough "skillset" and 5-year window of how a player was perceived, and if he was better overall in that window, he can be outplayed as much as he wants to and not show up, he was still better, even when performing, well, worse...

this is how you make things simple for yourself.


If you think "But who won?" is a more complex method for deciding who is better at a team sport than evaluating the players game there is really nothing for us to talk about.

The winner being the best is the argument pushed by every know nothing on every sports subject. Im not here to have arguments that can be made without ever watching a sport be played.

I dont need a basketball argument being settled by the same thing as a football one....or cricket....or nascar...

If your basketball argument isnt about basketball ability I dont really need to hear it.

[Kblaze8855]

Is ray the same level as kobe? Thats the problem here, you try to compare him to alltime greats while I compare him to his peers/players on the same level.

Head to head he outperformed Iverson in the playoffs but do you see me proclaiming he was better? Miller 26.2ppg 4rb 3.1ast .8stl .485fg%
Iverson 27.9ppg 4.2rb 4.9ast 1.4 st .389fg% Playoff series wins 2-1 in favor of Miller. I understand the game and I know Iverson is in a diff tier, skill and talent level.


This is the kinda thing like when people post some supposedly accurate "advanced" stat then say about its obvious wrong conclusions "No....dont use it in ways that makes it look stupid". You show me a list with a gang of players ranked then say to ignore where it ranks half of them....you gave me a shitty list. If the list makes ____ better than _____ but not ____ better than _____ its just bullshit that requires the original context that makes the list unnecessary to begin with.

Picking and choosing when your argument should apply means you likely have a hazy argument to begin with.

[Reggie43]

I get accused of picking and choosing when youre the one who mentioned the random 07 bulls series win and a single game of Ray and Kobe?

Comparing the same tier of players and looking at their head to head matchups and success as the teams best player is not that unreasonable. Its not as if Miller had the luxury of playing with Pippen and Rodman and having more help than the players I mentioned that he outplayed.

[Kblaze8855]

Of courseI’m picking in choosing because my entire point is that the things I’m picking and choosing don’t mean shit.

We are talking about players who in this case played a combined what....35 years? And you come to me acting like the deciding factor against the player you yourself otherwise consider better....is 12 days in one of those 35 years.

But that isn’t picking and choosing. That’s rational.

None of it is rational. Not your examples....not mine. Difference is I made mine for the express purpose of not making sense.

[Reggie43]

Of courseI’m picking in choosing because my entire point is that the things I’m picking and choosing don’t mean shit.

We are talking about players who in this case played a combined what....35 years? And you come to me acting like the deciding factor against the player you yourself otherwise consider better....is 12 days in one of those 35 years.

But that isn’t picking and choosing. That’s rational.

None of it is rational. Not your examples....not mine. Difference is I made mine for the express purpose of not making sense.

So basically you are implying that the Pacers just had a random series win (Bulls07) and not several (Five conference finals in 7 years capped with a finals berth)

Should we not value playoff games that much and give more weight to random regular season games. Do you think David Robinson is better than Olajuwon because he destroys him(30-12)head to head in the regular season? That 6 game playoff series is too small a sample size to matter compared to their other 42 games?

[Kblaze8855]

I’m saying that I don’t care how many conference finals Reggie made for the same reason I don’t care how many anyone else made. You’re talking to me about losing without using the word. Like all those Chris Paul haters talking about making it past the second round as if losing in the third round is winning. You just change the standard to still hate him. When I start ranking people on wins....I’d need wins. Lacking that we are talking degrees of failure. So let’s just talk basketball.

And of course a week of basketball didn’t make Hakeem better than David Robinson. Hakeem being more skilled on offense, a similar defender, and actually loving to compete at basketball made him better. David Robinson would tell you himself basketball wasn’t his priority. And while Hakeem was also godly it didn’t show In his approach. Hakeem was a fierce competitor. He wanted to prove something about how great he was personally. David would be too humble to think like that. Hakeem was always feeling slighted and was Jordan like in that he wanted to crush you personally. That’s why he kicked Davids ass after that mvp was handed out in front of him. David didn’t have the kinda mentality to fo that. He didn’t have the fire because he wasn’t trying to prove shit about basketball. He didn’t see it as his calling or anything that major to attach to his self worth. Hakeem was a maniac like a lot of self driven greats and that factors in on the floor in terms of effort and will to win.

You are right on point if you’re saying people decided Hakeem was suddenly better. That absolutely did happen.

But I don’t think you wanna build your case on the backs of morons.

[Monta Ellis MVP]

So people are discrediting Reggie because of some out of context quote from Larry Brown and the fact he didn’t chuck up tons of shots in the 90’s? He would have no problem getting more shots up today. Reggie was one of the best shooters ever and could handle the ball much better than a Klay Thompson type player or most other good shooters. He wasn’t a poor defender. He was very clutch. I understand he wasn’t as good as Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley but he is better than almost all of today’s shooting guards.


I’m saying that I don’t care how many conference finals Reggie made for the same reason I don’t care how many anyone else made. You’re talking to me about losing without using the word. Like all those Chris Paul haters talking about making it past the second round as if losing in the third round is winning. You just change the standard to still hate him. When I start ranking people on wins....I’d need wins. Lacking that we are talking degrees of failure. So let’s just talk basketball.

And of course a week of basketball didn’t make Hakeem better than David Robinson. Hakeem being more skilled on offense, a similar defender, and actually loving to compete at basketball made him better. David Robinson would tell you himself basketball wasn’t his priority. And while Hakeem was also godly it didn’t show In his approach. Hakeem was a fierce competitor. He wanted to prove something about how great he was personally. David would be too humble to think like that. Hakeem was always feeling slighted and was Jordan like in that he wanted to crush you personally. That’s why he kicked Davids ass after that mvp was handed out in front of him. David didn’t have the kinda mentality to fo that. He didn’t have the fire because he wasn’t trying to prove shit about basketball. He didn’t see it as his calling or anything that major to attach to his self worth. Hakeem was a maniac like a lot of self driven greats and that factors in on the floor in terms of effort and will to win.

You are right on point if you’re saying people decided Hakeem was suddenly better. That absolutely did happen.

But I don’t think you wanna build your case on the backs of morons.

Reggie making it to lots of conference Finals is something not to discredit. There’s not many players that would have been able to replace Reggie Miller on those teams and have the same type of success.

Do you think David Robinson is better than Hakeem Olajuwon?

[Reggie43]

I’m saying that I don’t care how many conference finals Reggie made for the same reason I don’t care how many anyone else made. You’re talking to me about losing without using the word. Like all those Chris Paul haters talking about making it past the second round as if losing in the third round is winning. You just change the standard to still hate him. When I start ranking people on wins....I’d need wins. Lacking that we are talking degrees of failure. So let’s just talk basketball.

And of course a week of basketball didn’t make Hakeem better than David Robinson. Hakeem being more skilled on offense, a similar defender, and actually loving to compete at basketball made him better. David Robinson would tell you himself basketball wasn’t his priority. And while Hakeem was also godly it didn’t show In his approach. Hakeem was a fierce competitor. He wanted to prove something about how great he was personally. David would be too humble to think like that. Hakeem was always feeling slighted and was Jordan like in that he wanted to crush you personally. That’s why he kicked Davids ass after that mvp was handed out in front of him. David didn’t have the kinda mentality to fo that. He didn’t have the fire because he wasn’t trying to prove shit about basketball. He didn’t see it as his calling or anything that major to attach to his self worth. Hakeem was a maniac like a lot of self driven greats and that factors in on the floor in terms of effort and will to win.

You are right on point if you’re saying people decided Hakeem was suddenly better. That absolutely did happen.

But I don’t think you wanna build your case on the backs of morons.

All those intangibles you said describing Olajuwon over Robinson I could use to defend picking Miller over Ray and Klay but you dismiss it as not being actual basketball skills. The mentality the fire, the competitiveness and everything but I guess it doesnt count because it gives Miller the edge?

[Bronbron23]

His playoff ORTG is 107.

Ray Allen who plays the exact same way... 115.

Reggie Miller who plays the exact same way... 120+.

I admit he's clutch... but so were they!

Ray and Reggie have more GOAT clutch moments than Klay.

I dont think klay is overrated but i agree hes not better than miller and ray Allen. A prime ray allen woukd be insane on that warriors squad.

[Roundball_Rock]

We still haven't gotten an explanation from Reggie "fans" that if he was this beast why didn't his coaches unleash him? If you have this beast why cap him at 14 FGA per game (more in the playoffs--but simply due to playing more minutes)?

The players he has been compared to lately on ISH, even Klay, have all shown they can operate at a higher volume than Miller despite Miller notionally being the #1 option on his offense (Klay as a #2, Pippen and Penny as a #2 all commanded more usage than Miller as a #1, as did Rik Smits and sometimes other Pacers as well).

[Monta Ellis MVP]

We still haven't gotten an explanation from Reggie "fans" that if he was this beast why didn't his coaches unleash him? If you have this beast why cap him at 14 FGA per game (more in the playoffs--but simply due to playing more minutes)?

The players he has been compared to lately on ISH, even Klay, have all shown they can operate at a higher volume than Miller despite Miller notionally being the #1 option on his offense (Klay as a #2, Pippen and Penny as a #2 all commanded more usage than Miller as a #1, as did Rik Smits and sometimes other Pacers as well).

He played within the offense and wasn’t a take over player on the level of a Michael Jordan where you give him the ball and get out of his way at the end of the game. Reggie is a lot better than Klay but he’s not Michael Jordan.

[Turbo Slayer]

He played within the offense and wasn’t a take over player on the level of a Michael Jordan where you give him the ball and get out of his way at the end of the game. Reggie is a lot better than Klay but he’s not Michael Jordan. Whats up warriorfan?

[tpols]

All those intangibles you said describing Olajuwon over Robinson I could use to defend picking Miller over Ray and Klay but you dismiss it as not being actual basketball skills. The mentality the fire, the competitiveness and everything but I guess it doesnt count because it gives Miller the edge?

it's in the video after the larry bird quote about reggie hitting more clutch shots than anybody.


"People say Michael Jordan played hard every game, reggie played just as hard."

-Robert Horry

Miller was a nasty competitor. Anti-david robinson.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntJbwHk0aWw&t=34s

He still doesnt like MJ.

Where as Jordan and Barkley were buddies, Reggie was not his friend lol.

Im telling you... his trash talk and competitiveness made people not like him.

But he backed it up. 120.

[Phoenix]

I dont think klay is overrated but i agree hes not better than miller and ray Allen. A prime ray allen woukd be insane on that warriors squad.

Prime Ray would be sick on any team today. Great 3point shooter even by 2020 standards coupled with slashing equal to some of the better drivers today?

[Kblaze8855]

All those intangibles you said describing Olajuwon over Robinson I could use to defend picking Miller over Ray and Klay but you dismiss it as not being actual basketball skills. The mentality the fire, the competitiveness and everything but I guess it doesnt count because it gives Miller the edge?

Being equal defenders with Hakeem more skilled on offense makes Hakeem better even aside from the other issues. It’s better player with a better approach. You’re talking worse player with better approach and even that.... not to the same extent. If at all. Hakeem had made two finals and won a ring before that even happened. We are taking tangible results. Actually winning. Not losing by less. It was a winner...who was more skilled on offense...a similar defender...with a better approach. Most of those don’t apply in the comparisons you’re making here.

[Roundball_Rock]

He played within the offense and wasn’t a take over player on the level of a Michael Jordan where you give him the ball and get out of his way at the end of the game. Reggie is a lot better than Klay but he’s not Michael Jordan.

Jordan isn't who Miller is being compared to. The various superstars we have seen him compared to in recent days on ISH are: Barkley, Pippen, Robinson, Drexler, and Iverson. It is unfair to Miller but this is how overrated Miller has become.

[Reggie43]

Being equal defenders with Hakeem more skilled on offense makes Hakeem better even aside from the other issues. It’s better player with a better approach. You’re talking worse player with better approach and even that.... not to the same extent. If at all. Hakeem had made two finals and won a ring before that even happened. We are taking tangible results. Actually winning. Not losing by less. It was a winner...who was more skilled on offense...a similar defender...with a better approach. Most of those don’t apply in the comparisons you’re making here.

As i have said it doesnt apply because it gives Miller the edge. Winning more compared to his peers as the franchise player should matter unless you consider a first round exit the same as losing in the Conference finals or even a Finals berth.

You get triggered by his fame but you forgot I never said he was a better winner compared to other alltime greats just that he had a better playoff resume than his peers as the main guy. Did the guy that got knocked out the first round the same as the one who lost by split decision?

[Lebron23]

Was watching the jazz vs blazers game 6 on youtube. Hornacek, stockton, and russell bricked a lot of 3 pointers by the end of the game. Makes you appreciate a shooter like Reggie Miller during his prime in the 1990's.

[Kblaze8855]

As i have said it doesnt apply because it gives Miller the edge. Winning more compared to his peers as the franchise player should matter unless you consider a first round exit the same as losing in the Conference finals or even a Finals berth.

You get triggered by his fame but you forgot I never said he was a better winner compared to other alltime greats just that he had a better playoff resume than his peers as the main guy. Did the guy that got knocked out the first round the same as the one who lost by split decision?

You can say it 4 more times. Still won’t make starting with the superior player then stacking characteristics you want on top the same thing as putting traits you won’t onto an inferior player.

Far as boxing.....

No. Joe Frazier being annihilated by Foreman does not make people who put up a fight better than Joe Frazier. It also doesn’t make Jimmy Young who beat prime Foreman better than Frazier.

As always....it just doesn’t work that way.

[Roundball_Rock]

So people are discrediting Reggie because of some out of context quote from Larry Brown and the fact he didn’t chuck up tons of shots in the 90’s?

It isn't out of context and the two are tied together: his own coaches didn't think he the superstar kids with calculators think he was 25 years after the fact.


He was very clutch

Except in Game 7's, apparently.


There’s not many players that would have been able to replace Reggie Miller on those teams and have the same type of success.


Any of the superstars he has been compared to recently would have done better than he did with those teams. Indiana would kill to trade Miller for Drexler, Pippen, Robinson, Barkley, or Iverson.


Winning more compared to his peers as the franchise player should matter unless you consider a first round exit the same as losing in the Conference finals or even a Finals berth.

He was a "franchise player" in the same sense Billups was in Detroit, not the superstar sense. Indiana would have loved to have one of those.

[Bronbron23]

Prime Ray would be sick on any team today. Great 3point shooter even by 2020 standards coupled with slashing equal to some of the better drivers today?

well yeah but his shooting to go along with his slashing and movement would be ideal on the warriors with how they play. His skill set wouldn't be maximized on a team that runs a ball dominant style system where hes basically camping out waiting for the ball. Hed still ne effective just not as much

[aceman]

Was watching the jazz vs blazers game 6 on youtube. Hornacek, stockton, and russell bricked a lot of 3 pointers by the end of the game. Makes you appreciate a shooter like Reggie Miller during his prime in the 1990's.

Was Miller's 3 pt % that much better?

[aceman]

Miller 3pt % career playoffs .39
Hornacek .433
Russell .369
Stockton .384

[Reggie43]

You can say it 4 more times. Still won’t make starting with the superior player then stacking characteristics you want on top the same thing as putting traits you won’t onto an inferior player.

Far as boxing.....

No. Joe Frazier being annihilated by Foreman does not make people who put up a fight better than Joe Frazier. It also doesn’t make Jimmy Young who beat prime Foreman better than Frazier.

As always....it just doesn’t work that way.

So lets say its Miller vs Ray you think that the latter is that much superior that the intangibles you gave on Olajuwon vs Robinson wont matter?

I guess I could say it an infinite number of times where I compare him to his peers/players on the same tier and you still wont accept his advantages.

Being driven being a fierce competitor that will do all it takes to win is only applicable for Olajuwon and not for Miller because you are trying to prove a point? or do they have to be equal defenders and similar on offense for those intangibles to matter which is kind of nitpicking because different players have different advantages/skillset that help their teams win.

[imdaman99]

Elite 3 and D, a very valuable commodity on every single team in the NBA. There's a reason him and Draymond were capable of winning playoff games and most of series without Curry while Curry was helpless in the regular season this year without him. The greatest system aka the Curry system wasn't functioning and letting everyone eat anymore without their most important player.

[CTbasketball92]

Klay has been a top 20 player in a vacuum since his prime started.

He's a top five or so shooter ever and he's incredible when it comes to man-to-man defense against elite point guards.

He's not as good as Ray Allen or Reggie Miller, who are both probably top 50 or so players ever. Klay isnt at that level, but he would fit on any team and what he's got is always needed.

[PoutinPippin]

They are basically the same level of players. Thompson would be rank higher than Miller because of his 3 nba titles
Agreed actually.

[bizil]

Klay is the greatest blend of pure shooting ability AND defense EVER in the NBA! Is a 6'7 sharpshooter good for 20+PPG every year like Reggie BUT is one of the best wing defenders on the league. He's too good of a scorer to call him a 3 and D guy. But FRANKLY he's the ultimate 3 and D type of player. For me, he's A LOCK for any US Olympic Team in his prime. He's not one of the top 12 players in the world IN GENERAL! But NOBODY combines shooting and defense like him.


Hell he could end up being a top 10 GOAT SG. Because his career resume will dictate it. He already has 3 rings, 5 All Star Games, 2 All NBA Teams, and All D Team under his belt. He has JUST AS MANY All Star Games as Reggie Miller. And has the rings on top of it. Plus frankly, he's a better player in general. Reggie is WIDELY considered a top 10 GOAT SG. So I don't see how Klay is overrated. UNLESS people are making the case he's a top 10 player in the league. Or that he's on the level of MJ-Kobe-Wade-T Mac-West at the SG spot on a peak-prime level.

[Roundball_Rock]

Indiana Usage Leaders 1990-2000

1990: 1) Person 2) Miller 3) Smits
1991: 1) Person 2) Miller 3) Smits
1992: 1) Smits 2) Person 3) Schrempf (Miller 4th)
1993: 1) Smits 2) Sealy 3) Miller
1994: 1) Scott 2) Sealy 3) Smits (Miller 4th)
1995: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Scott
1996: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Pierce
1997: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Johnson
1998: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Rose
1999: 1) Smits 2) Rose 3) Miller
2000: 1) Smits 2) Rose 3) Croshere (Miller 4th)

"Alpha, alpha first option" doe.

[tpols]

Klay is the greatest blend of pure shooting ability AND defense EVER in the NBA! Is a 6'7 sharpshooter good for 20+PPG every year like Reggie BUT is one of the best wing defenders on the league. He's too good of a scorer to call him a 3 and D guy. But FRANKLY he's the ultimate 3 and D type of player. For me, he's A LOCK for any US Olympic Team in his prime. He's not one of the top 12 players in the world IN GENERAL! But NOBODY combines shooting and defense like him.


Hell he could end up being a top 10 GOAT SG. Because his career resume will dictate it. He already has 3 rings, 5 All Star Games, 2 All NBA Teams, and All D Team under his belt. He has JUST AS MANY All Star Games as Reggie Miller. And has the rings on top of it. Plus frankly, he's a better player in general. Reggie is WIDELY considered a top 10 GOAT SG. So I don't see how Klay is overrated. UNLESS people are making the case he's a top 10 player in the league. Or that he's on the level of MJ-Kobe-Wade-T Mac-West at the SG spot on a peak-prime level.

Klay simply didnt bring it in the playoffs like reggie did.

A lot of us here have watched most of the warriors playoff games. i know i have. Klay is extremely, extremely inconsistent scoring in the playoffs.

He's also not an elite help defender, just a simple man defender. Im rewatching pacers defense in the 90s, and reggie was feisty as hell playing man defense.

Klays woeful offense by comparison doesnt even begin to bridge the small gap between what they do on defense.

[Reggie43]

Indiana Usage Leaders 1990-2000

1990: 1) Person 2) Miller 3) Smits
1991: 1) Person 2) Miller 3) Smits
1992: 1) Smits 2) Person 3) Schrempf (Miller 4th)
1993: 1) Smits 2) Sealy 3) Miller
1994: 1) Scott 2) Sealy 3) Smits (Miller 4th)
1995: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Scott
1996: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Pierce
1997: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Johnson
1998: 1) Smits 2) Miller 3) Rose
1999: 1) Smits 2) Rose 3) Miller
2000: 1) Smits 2) Rose 3) Croshere (Miller 4th)

"Alpha, alpha first option" doe.

This is probably the worst argument I have ever seen against Miller.

Do you not realize that one the best type of players a team could have is a high scoring low usage player because it gives a chance for others to have the ball make plays and contribute thus allowing for chemistry to develop?

Miller not shooting at a high volume is a choice. I remember reading an article wherein he was talking to Jordan that he would emerge in the 90s as "Hollywood Miller" opposite to Michael's "Air Jordan" with Mj saying it could happen but you have to shoot more. All off memory but somewhere along those lines.

His best years he was doing 24.6ppg .514fg% in 15.7 fga. Would fans, teammates and coaches respect him more if he goes "Jerry Stackhouse" on the team gunning for 30ppg? He could have done that but his efficiency would drop, chemistry would have been destroyed and they wont win as much.

Being an Alpha means you are the dominant personality or the Leader of the team.

Take for example the 1994 Dream Team that had great young stars in Shaq, Mourning, Kemp, Johnson and veterans like Dumars, Wilkins,Price etc but why was Miller assigned one of the co-captains of the team? He played the most minutes out of the group and his 17.1ppg was second only to Shaq's 18ppg and the next person with 12.6ppg.
Out of all the stars in that team he emerged as one of its leaders because he played the right way, had a positive personality and was coachable so Don Nelson trusted him.

[LostCause]

Imagine having so little understanding of the game that you cite Reggies usage rate as an argument against him, when in reality having the offensive impact he did on that usage shows how great he was

Stop entertaining these trash takes

[tpols]

Rick ****ing smits lol.

MJ had Pippen.

Malone had stockton.

Hakeem had clyde.

Shaq had Penny.

Reggie Miller had.... Rik smits.

:roll:

[Axe]

This is probably the worst argument I have ever seen against Miller.

Do you not realize that one the best type of players a team could have is a high scoring low usage player because it gives a chance for others to have the ball make plays and contribute thus allowing for chemistry to develop?
Of course not rofl

[Roundball_Rock]

Rick ****ing smits lol.

MJ had Pippen.

Malone had stockton.

Hakeem had clyde.

Shaq had Penny.

Reggie Miller had.... Rik smits.

:roll:

And "alpha alpha 'first option'" Miller ceded a ton of work to that Smits (as well as others)...you just confirmed why Miller is not on the level of the players you and others have been comparing him to lately. Iverson, Drexler, Pippen, Barkley, Robinson wouldn't be getting less usage than Rik Smits or Chuck Person. :lol

Miller may be the first "first option" to never lead his team in usage in his prime. He was not even top 3 on his own team in some seasons.

[tpols]

Miller ceded a ton of work to that Smits .

Yup... there's one ball that needs to be in somebody's hands at all times on offense.

Reggie Miller was an off ball player so that involved it not being in his hands 99% of the time despite leading his team in scoring by a big amount.

You and kblaze seemed to get a kick out of that and think it's a detraction. When in reality it's a positive. He allowed his teammates to thrive and provided decoy action to help further.

In addition, he scored the most points, hit all the biggest shots, and demoralized opponents with his words. (shout out Larry)

That's just how it was.

[LostCause]

I notice folks use Backpicks in other threads but want to pretend the Miller page doesn't exist. Let's see:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Miller-v-90s-guards-APM-and-BPM.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Miller-Big-4-PS.png

Oh and this bit:


Miller’s three-year peak scoring is a level below Allen Iverson and George Gervin, but their efficiency pales in comparison to Reggie’s. Fittingly, Ray Allen, the player most historically linked with Miller, matches Miller’s efficiency with nearly an identical shape.

However, something remarkable happened in the playoffs. In the Second Season, most stars see a slight decline in their numbers, the result of facing harder defenses that game plan for them. But Miller shows (perhaps) the greatest improvement from regular season to postseason of any notable player in history. His scoring spikes with no drop in his efficiency. So, despite more modest regular season numbers, Miller’s prime scoring rates in the playoffs were in the 97th percentile, comparable to rates from prime Kareem Adbul-Jabbar, Julius Erving and Larry Bird, all while maintaining his elite efficiency

But sure lets throw all that out cuz "usage" lol

[Roundball_Rock]

You and kblaze seemed to get a kick out of that

Out of reaching the same conclusion his own coaches reached? :lol They realized he was not a superstar and worked around his limits. According to people 25 years later, he should have taken 21 shots a game and averaged 30 PPG if only those dummies unleashed him.

His coaches knew he couldn't scale up to a real #1 option workload. The only evidence we have been presented to suggest otherwise is Miller playing 40+ (as much as 44 MPG) in some playoff years. He was still doing the same thing as in the RS--the minutes inflate the totals but not what his per minute role was. He wasn't suddenly taking on a ton more shots because he couldn't create his own shot, beat people off the dribble, was reliant on screens to get open, etc.


Reggie Miller was an off ball player so that involved it not being in his hands 99% of the time despite leading his team in scoring by a big amount.

What big amounts?

1990: Miller 25, Person 20, Schrempf/Smits 16
1991: Miller 23, Person 18, Scrempf 16
1992: Miller 21, Person 19, Schrempf 17
1993: Miller 21, Schrempf 19, Smits 14
1994: Miller 20, Smits 16, McKey 12
1995: Miller 20, Smits 18, McKey 13
1996: Miller 21, Smits 19, McKey 12
1997: Miller 22, Smits 17, Davis 11
1998: Miller 20, Smits 17, Mullin 11
1999: Miller 18, Smits 15, Rose 11
2000: Rose 18, Miller 18, Smits 13

The big amounts were back when the team sucked. As KBlaze pointed out, Larry Brown sat him down when he took over and explained what his role would need to be on a winning team...The second leading scorer was usually within 2-3 PPG of him from 1992-1999 and in 2000 Rose eclipsed him as the leading scorer. These numbers actually make it look better for Miller because Smits could not play the minutes Miller did due to foul trouble/stamina. He wasn't a typical "21 PPG" first option...

According to you elsewhere, scoring 20 PPG is not being a good scorer. Miller averaged 20.8 PPG for the 1990-2000 period. The reason this is at issue is it was the only thing he did of value on the court. He was a zero as a playmaker, defender, or rebounder. So if he is only at 20.8 at his one big skill that is a problem.

[tpols]

The funniest thing about that graph is AI's triangle. It's wide, but look at the upper and lower Y axis.

:roll:

It's completely stunted below everybody else to a retarded degree. Which is very bad.

And Reggie's?

The PEAK of the mountain.

:bowdown:

[Reggie43]

Atleast Kblaze was informative despite the contrast in opinions, while the other dude is :facepalm

[Monta Ellis MVP]

I don’t want to sound like a bully but Roundball Rock might be the worst poster on this forum.

[Axe]

I don’t want to sound like a bully but Roundball Rock might be the worst poster on this forum.
:lol

[bizil]

Klay simply didnt bring it in the playoffs like reggie did.

A lot of us here have watched most of the warriors playoff games. i know i have. Klay is extremely, extremely inconsistent scoring in the playoffs.

He's also not an elite help defender, just a simple man defender. Im rewatching pacers defense in the 90s, and reggie was feisty as hell playing man defense.

Klays woeful offense by comparison doesnt even begin to bridge the small gap between what they do on defense.

Bottom line is Klay EASILY is a better defender. He just made the All Defensive Team last season. And Klay is one of the GOAT marksmen like Miller. Who racks up 20 PPG seasons in his sleep.

For you to EVEN IMPLY Reggie is close to Klay's level as a defender is laughable. Being a fiesty defender AND AN ELITE defender is two different things. Just saying Klay is on Miller's level as a marksman. And a WAY SUPERIOR defender. Sure Reggie has had the more iconic playoff career. BUT Klay is deferring to guys like Steph Curry and KD. Guys who are among the top 15-20 GOAT!

[Monta Ellis MVP]

Bottom line is Klay EASILY is a better defender. He just made the All Defensive Team last season. And Klay is one of the GOAT marksmen like Miller. Who racks up 20 PPG seasons in his sleep.

For you to EVEN IMPLY Reggie is close to Klay's level as a defender is laughable. Being a fiesty defender AND AN ELITE defender is two different things. Just saying Klay is on Miller's level as a marksman. And a WAY SUPERIOR defender. Sure Reggie has had the more iconic playoff career. BUT Klay is deferring to guys like Steph Curry and KD. Guys who are among the top 15-20 GOAT!

The last sentence sums everything up nicely. Somehow with much better teammates, gameplans, and modern rules freeing up perimeter scoring; Klay Thompson still doesn’t have better scoring numbers than Reggie and is less efficient. Put Klay in Reggie Miller’s situation and you would get some very ugly numbers.

[NBAGOAT]

reggie is better. his foul drawing antics are unlikable but effective. 40%ftr for a shooter is an absurd historical outlier. He didnt win shit because his best teammate ever who was really a 3rd option on a contender(not even a super team). klay's in like in the bottom 20% of volume scorers as a foul drawer. Makes his efficiency just good instead of top tier even though he's an all time great shooter. perimeter defense granted very good perimeter defense isnt enough to make up the difference on offense imo

[bizil]

I get posters preferring Reg scoring wise. BUT if Reg was playing with Steph Curry, HE WOULD BE the 2nd option as well just like Klay. If it was Steph and KD, he would be the THIRD OPTION just like Klay was. Sorry scoring wise, I don't see this huge scoring gap between the two. The GAP BETWEEN THEM on defense is WAY LARGER than the gap scoring the rock.

[Monta Ellis MVP]

I get posters preferring Reg scoring wise. BUT if Reg was playing with Steph Curry, HE WOULD BE the 2nd option as well just like Klay. If it was Steph and KD, he would be the THIRD OPTION just like Klay was. Sorry scoring wise, I don't see this huge scoring gap between the two. The GAP BETWEEN THEM on defense is WAY LARGER than the gap scoring the rock.

Klay Thompson’s playoff OBPM and DBPM is 1.2 and -0.5 for a total of 0.7.

Reggie Miller’s playoff OBPM and DBPM is 5.0 and 0 for a total of 5.0.


Reggie’s playoff ppg 20.6

Klay Thompson’s playoff ppg 19.3

Reggie’s playoff TS% and Ortg .601 and 119

Klay’s playoff TS% and Ortg .560 and 107

I don’t see how Klay is even close to Reggie offensively even in a much easier offensive situation while playing for the Warriors’ Dynasty. The gap in defense isn’t what you are making it out to be either. Reggie Miller is on a different tier than Klay Thompson. These numbers also have games from Miller far past his prime that take down his averages.

[NBAGOAT]

I get posters preferring Reg scoring wise. BUT if Reg was playing with Steph Curry, HE WOULD BE the 2nd option as well just like Klay. If it was Steph and KD, he would be the THIRD OPTION just like Klay was. Sorry scoring wise, I don't see this huge scoring gap between the two. The GAP BETWEEN THEM on defense is WAY LARGER than the gap scoring the rock.

yea i just dont think perimeter man defense matters that much. as long as draymond tries, gs would be a top 10 defense even without klay. even if it was a sieve like jj reddick who can replace most of klay's offensive value. I'm one of the biggest cp3 fans here. He's a great offensive player in his own right, some years I think he was legitimately top 3. I'll even admit his great defense is not nearly enough to put his peak on the lvl of curry's because they're perimeter guys. Yes kg's defense could easily elevate his peak over barkley/malone or hakeem's defense could put him on the lvl of shaq but they're bigs who shot block or do everything.

The efficiency edge because of free throws really does matter. the mid 90's pacers are practically the only modern larry brown team to be good to above average on offense and a lot of that is because of miller's combo of volume/efficiency.

There's also more to offense than scoring, the 1.5apg seems small but is significant. klay oftens feels like a black hole on offense so he's mostly creating for teammates through gravity and it's a bit mitigated too on the warriors with curry.

[BigShotBob]

I get posters preferring Reg scoring wise. BUT if Reg was playing with Steph Curry, HE WOULD BE the 2nd option as well just like Klay. If it was Steph and KD, he would be the THIRD OPTION just like Klay was. Sorry scoring wise, I don't see this huge scoring gap between the two. The GAP BETWEEN THEM on defense is WAY LARGER than the gap scoring the rock.

Klay's all time "great shooting" disappears in the playoffs compared to Reggie, especially in the clutch when the game matters the most.

[GimmeThat]

extremely, since he's a shooting guard who can't organize an offense and can't play alongside any play makers that aren't primarily 3-pt shooters

[light]

Klay's all time "great shooting" disappears in the playoffs compared to Reggie, especially in the clutch when the game matters the most.

But Reggie has never won anything so he's failed plenty of times when things mattered.

In fact, he's never come through when the game matters the absolute most (meaning he could never prevent his elimination).

[Reggie43]

But Reggie has never won anything so he's failed plenty of times when things mattered.

In fact, he's never come through when the game matters the absolute most (meaning he could never prevent his elimination).

You could say the same with a lot of players even the better ones. Are Malone and Stockton lesser players compared to their peers because they could never prevent their elimination? Context and situation matters in these comparisons, you cant compare Klay's type of winning(arguably 3rd-4th most valuable player in the team) Miller's( Franchise player, played with good players but no one better than him)

[light]

You could say the same with a lot of players even the better ones. Are Malone and Stockton lesser players compared to their peers because they could never prevent their elimination? Context and situation matters in these comparisons, you cant compare Klay's type of winning(arguably 3rd-4th most valuable player in the team) Miller's( Franchise player, played with good players but no one better than him)

Klay's type of winning is actual winning. Reggie's type of winning was losing.

And you can't win with Reggie as your franchise player so why bring that up as if that helps his argument?

[Axe]

Klay's type of winning is actual winning. Reggie's type of winning was losing.

And you can't win with Reggie as your franchise player so why bring that up as if that helps his argument?
Why he brings him up?

Well, look at his profile.

[999Guy]

Klay's type of winning is actual winning. Reggie's type of winning was losing.

And you can't win with Reggie as your franchise player so why bring that up as if that helps his argument?
So just to be clear, where does Klay rank among the Malone, Barkey, CP3, Stockton, Ewing, Nash, Harden group?

[tpols]

I get posters preferring Reg scoring wise. BUT if Reg was playing with Steph Curry, HE WOULD BE the 2nd option as well just like Klay. If it was Steph and KD, he would be the THIRD OPTION just like Klay was. Sorry scoring wise, I don't see this huge scoring gap between the two. The GAP BETWEEN THEM on defense is WAY LARGER than the gap scoring the rock.

Dude... having curry should make klay's efficiency BETTER... not way worse.

He's not the main focus of the defense like reggie was. :facepalm

[r0drig0lac]

Dude... having curry should make klay's efficiency BETTER... not way worse.

He's not the main focus of the defense like reggie was. :facepalm

exactly, I don't really understand anyone who believes that Klay is at Reggie's level as a player, imagine Reggie's efficiency playing alongside Curry or Curry / Durant, just ridiculous

[Roundball_Rock]

Klay's type of winning is actual winning. Reggie's type of winning was losing.

Remember how "Winning Time" ended with the Pacers losing? :lol

Miller's career playoff PPG is propped up by scoring 25.7 PPG from the WNBA line. Klay never had that chance.


Klay's all time "great shooting" disappears in the playoffs compared to Reggie, especially in the clutch when the game matters the most.

This is a myth. Klay has shown up more often in big games.

Here is what the two players did in key games in the playoffs.

Miller

Game 6 94' ECF: 27/4/4 on 38% (with a trip to the finals on the line)
Game 7 94' ECF: 25/2/0 on 41%

Game 7 95' ECSF: 29/1/3 on 56%
Game 6 95' ECF: 36/7/2 on 68% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 95' ECF: 12/4/0 on 39%

Game 6 98' ECF: 8/2/0 on 15% (elimination game)
Game 7 98' ECF: 22/0/4 on 54%

Game 6 99' ECF: 8/3/4 on 17% (Pacers eliminated)

Game 5 00' Finals: 25/4/6 on 58%
Game 6 00' Finals: 25/1/3 on 42%

A lot of flops in big games. Again, his reputation runs ahead of his record. He is only a scorer so when his shot is off he can't contribute in any other way like the more well-rounded players who rank ahead of him all-time could do.

Thompson


Game 7 16' WCF: 21/5/0 on 37%
Game 5 16' Finals: 37/3/1 on 55% (GS wins the chip if they win the game)
Game 6 16' Finals: 25/3/1 on 43%
Game 7 16' Finals: 14/2/2 on 35%

Game 6 18' WCF: 35/6/2 on 57% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 18' WCF: 19/3/1 on 62%

Game 6 19' WCF: 27/2/2 on 50% (Durant injured)
Game 5 19' Finals: 26/6/4 on 43% (to stave off elimination)
Game 6 19' Finals: 30/5/0 on 67% (injured but 30 points in 32 minutes)

Thompson has a pretty good clutch track record. Moreover, he can play defense which stats don't capture, although he gives you nothing as a playmaker either.