Would DeMar Derozan lose to a 10 ppg #2 option?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14048379]Yeah nor the skill set to score 20 PPG. In theory I would say he would have been better with Price prime versus prime--but Stockton lasted a lot longer than Price. If they cash in with a chip with Price, then that trumps a few extra years of contending with Stockton.

People think Stockton propped up Malone's numbers but the limited data we have on that suggests that isn't the case. People talk about it like a Nash/Amare type situation.[/QUOTE]

Yeah it's a longevity vs peak argument. One difference between Stock and Price in a PnR is Price is more than willing to let it rip with an ounce of daylight. He's a decidedly more potent scorer in that situation and an added dimension to that attack. Stockton was way more inclined to pick his shooting spots which doesn't put nearly as much pressure on the defense.

[video=youtube_share;Sua9u318wGo]https://youtu.be/Sua9u318wGo[/video]

Stockton is obviously the more decorated and greater legacy player, but hypothetically I feel like a healthy Price and Malone in that PnR is a different animal.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14048388]Yeah it's a longevity vs peak argument. One difference between Stock and Price in a PnR is Price is more than willing to let it rip with an ounce of daylight. He's a decidedly more potent scorer in that situation and an added dimension to that attack. Stockton was way more inclined to pick his shooting spots which doesn't put nearly as much pressure on the defense.

[video=youtube_share;Sua9u318wGo]https://youtu.be/Sua9u318wGo[/video]

Stockton is obviously the more decorated and greater legacy player, but hypothetically I feel like a healthy Price and Malone in that PnR is a different animal.[/QUOTE]

Good stuff. Yeah, the lack of a real scoring threat from Stockton hurt Utah. They got away with it in the RS but when they faced the top teams in the PO it became a problem. With Price they don't have that issue.

With Malone/Price they have a window from 1989-1994 to cash in. Do they? Malone/Stockton had a long window from 1988-2000 but 2 NBA finals, 5 WCF later never got over the hump.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14048399]

With Malone/Price they have a window from 1989-1994 to cash in. Do they? Malone/Stockton had a long window from 1988-2000 but 2 NBA finals, 5 WCF later never got over the hump.[/QUOTE]

I dont think they overcome the Bulls in that time space but it's possible they get to the finals a couple times. Take 92 for example. Jazz lose in 6 in the WCFs. Particularly I recall Porter killing Stockton in that series. Now I dont know if Porter goes off 'less' against Price but I'm reasonably certain he offers more offensive resistance than Stockton did. Dont know if that switches the outcome of the series or a few others where Mailman needed a more potent 2nd or 3rd scorer. Price had a great transition game which would have served him well in the more open west. It's not out of the realm he's a 20ppg scorer in that setup. In his 89 to 94 window he was 18ppg on a Cavs team that typically had 5-6 double digit scorers (Utah had Mailman, Jeff Malone, Stockton and a revolving door of small forwards as the 4th scorer).

92' is interesting. Are the Jazz with Price better than the 92' Blazers? If so, maybe they do get over the hump. The Blazers nearly forced a Game 7. I think push come to shove, given how good MJ and Pippen were in 92' (a lot more athletic than they were in 97' or 98'), the Bulls find a way to win but it would be interesting.

93' and 94' would be their best shots. The 93' Bulls were the weakest of the first threepeat teams and had trouble with the Knicks (down 0-2, then win 4 in a row but Game 5 and Game 6 went down to the wire--5 being the "Charles Smith" game of course) and the Suns were a Paxson three from forcing a Game 7 in Phoenix. Similar to the 92' case, are the Jazz with Malone/Price better than the Suns were? 93' was Price's peak year--the one time he made 1st team all-NBA (or even 1st/2nd).

94' the Bulls were weakened and don't reach the finals. The Jazz got crushed in the WCF but the 94' and 95' Rockets weren't a juggernaut. The Suns took them to 7 in 94' and again in 95', the Knicks took them to 7 and the Jazz took them to 5 in the first round in 95' (first round being 5 games back then if a younger poster is wondering). That is four series where they went to the brink. By 94' they had Hornacek so it would be Malone/Price/Hornacek. That is a lot of shooting ability in the backcourt.

If I had to guess I would say they make the finals in 92', 93' but lose but win in 94'.

Entirely possible scenarios. Those western teams ( Phoenix, Utah, Houston, Seattle) were all pretty close and there are a few situations with the Jazz where a better scoring PG likely serves them better than the more conservative scoring from Stockton. They may have needed more of a 20/9 PG ( which I envision Price being in that 92-94 window on Utah) than the 15 and 11 they were getting from Stockton. Especially against the Rockets who relied a good bit on the 3ball around Dream, a backcourt of Hornacek and Price would have provided more effective spacing and overall shooting.

Agree--in theory it would work better. We just don't know how the chemistry would work but Price co-existed with Daughtery, Nance, Harper so I don't see why he couldn't co-exist with Malone and J.Malone/Hornacek being the only two other scorers.