Im gonna go ahead and assume I know what I meant better than you do. I gave you an answer and when you seemed to not get it I explained it better. All there is to it.
Printable View
Im gonna go ahead and assume I know what I meant better than you do. I gave you an answer and when you seemed to not get it I explained it better. All there is to it.
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Im gonna go ahead and assume I know what I meant better than you do. I gave you an answer and when you seemed to not get it I explained it better. All there is to it.[/QUOTE]
I didn't get it?
You said "Tossup". What is there not to get? But then later, you changed your answer and said ______ for career and peak is toss up.
Also I don't get one thing
[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]There is the "Who would I rather have" question and the "Who had the btter career" question. On one its a tossup and on the other the answer is clear. [/QUOTE]
First of all I don't know who you think has the clear edge and on where.
Also, I don't get how career can be so clear while peak/prime toss up. (If thats what you meant) Because, when comparing careers, last time I checked, most of career is determined by how good the player was in his peak and prime. Kevin Johnson isn't no Bill Walton either, so unless you HEAVILY weight longevity and injuries, I don't see how a "clear" edge can come from a toss up at peak, especially with KJ. Who has missed only 1 playoff game in his career, and had 9 prime years.
[QUOTE]Who has missed only 1 playoff game in his career, and had 9 prime years.[/QUOTE]
He also missed 25 games a year throughout that sparkling career. The guy is Marcus Camby lite.
Just sayin.
Glove:
You do realize that Western Conference PGs in the early to mid nineties had inflated stats when compared with every other era in history?
You do realize that the way the game was played in that conference at that time (high scoring, minimal defense, no zones) made the stats somewhat larger than they would be in other eras?
I admire your permawood for Payton and KJ, but it is all *******-ism of the highest standard if you dont take that into account.
[QUOTE=RidonKs]He also missed 25 games a year throughout that sparkling career. The guy is Marcus Camby lite.
Just sayin.[/QUOTE]
RidonK, if you don't know what you are talking about, don't interfere.
I am guessing you counted the last year 2000? Kevin Johnson only played in the end of the year because Jason Kidd hurt his ankle and had to sit out some games in the playoffs. So Kevin Johnson, comes OUT OF RETIREMENT, to play a couple of games in the end of the season, and play for Kidd in the playoffs at the end. Though he didn't make much of a difference, they got out of the 1st round with Kidd only playing 1 game in the 1st round series. And that was the only time Kidd got out of the first round in the West as well. (The other team's star player was also out)
I doubt you were old enough to remember all of that so you added 2000 as part of KJ's career, but he didn't even get injured that year, and came out of retirement just to help give his team a boost.
What makes KJ so much more underrated then another Phoenix great Paul Westphal?
Sure, 21 games per year. Which ever way you slice it, or try to avoid the issue by saying 'he never missed a playoff game', he was still injury prone. Very much so as a matter of fact. Broke the 80 game barriar once in his career, and only played 70+ games 33% of his career.
I'm not trying to 'interfere', I'm just making a point. A point that you don't really have to have seen Kevin Johnson play a lot to make. He was injury prone. That's a major career detriment.
Once again, just sayin.
But sure, feel free to continue to talk down to me as if I'm an infant. As long as it produces positive effects for youself, I see no reason for you to stop.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]What makes KJ so much more underrated then another Phoenix great Paul Westphal?[/QUOTE]
Whose underrating Westphal? He was never that good. I mean he was a great scorer and a solid passer, but how many of those are in the league today? Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Vince, are all on his level or better...
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Whose underrating Westphal? He was never that good. I mean he was a great scorer and a solid passer, but how many of those are in the league today? Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Vince, are all on his level or better...[/QUOTE]
Bad question, alright here goes another try.
Some peoples are putting KJ between the 25 - 40 range of All-Time greats, so comparing him to some players that might fit around those rankings, why Kevin Johnson over an Alex English, a Hal Greer or a Dominoque Wilkins?
[QUOTE=RidonKs]Sure, 21 games per year. Which ever way you slice it, or try to avoid the issue by saying 'he never missed a playoff game', he was still injury prone. Very much so as a matter of fact. Broke the 80 game barriar once in his career, and only played 70+ games 33% of his career.
I'm not trying to 'interfere', I'm just making a point. A point that you don't really have to have seen Kevin Johnson play a lot to make. He was injury prone. That's a major career detriment.
Once again, just sayin.
But sure, feel free to continue to talk down to me as if I'm an infant. As long as it produces positive effects for youself, I see no reason for you to stop.[/QUOTE]
:rollingeyes:
Once again, your off. People who can't do simple addition and division with a calculator or can't read deserve to be treated like infants.
He averaged a little more than 66 games per year.
Now I don't know where the mistake was, maybe in your addition, divison, or subtraction, or reading, but another stupid mistake. Two. Thats why I told you not to interfere, people like you can't do math with a calculator, and then come talk with facts. Or can't read.
[QUOTE=RidonK]Broke the 80 game barriar once in his career, and only played 70+ games 33% of his career.[/QUOTE]
It must've been a reading error.
He broke 80 twice, and he played 70+ games 55% of his career (not counting the last out of retirement season, and even counting that, its 50%, so your "WAY" off)
Maybe now you have learned your lesson, I mean, at least before you come, make sure you know what your talking about, or that you did simple math with a calculator right. Or that you "read" right....
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Bad question, alright here goes another try.
Some peoples are putting KJ between the 25 - 40 range of All-Time greats, so comparing him to some players that might fit around those rankings, why Kevin Johnson over an Alex English, a Hal Greer or a Dominoque Wilkins?[/QUOTE]
Come on...
How can you even argue Greer over a great like KJ?
Even in scoring, I'd take Kevin Johnson. Greer put like 22/45% in his prime, vs. KJ, 21/50% in his prime. Passing, no comments....
You get the point? Greer isn't even close to Kevin Johnson.
Kblaze came, he saw, he conquered! :banana:
[QUOTE=GOBB]Kblaze came, he saw, he conquered! :banana:[/QUOTE]
Saw what? Conquered what?
Right now he is afraid to say Kidd over Kevin Johnson career or peak/prime (which I've asked him about 5 times and he hasn't said Kidd over KJ directly, because he knows he will be proved wrong)
And ask KBlaze if he's made ANY argument against KJ being really good besides....
"He didn't get voted into Top 50"
An opinion of others, and GMAT responded with opinion of others as well.
And then KBlaze just said, "I don't believe in other opinions and the Top 50 list of opinion either"
And the other one, lol.
"KJ no way is that great" and he said that in 4 or 5 forms...:oldlol:
Bottom line, no real argument,
But don't worry, I'll start a Kidd vs. KJ thread soon....
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Come on...
How can you even argue Greer over a great like KJ?
Even in scoring, I'd take Kevin Johnson. Greer put like 22/45% in his prime, vs. KJ, 21/50% in his prime. Passing, no comments....
You get the point? Greer isn't even close to Kevin Johnson.[/QUOTE]
Kevin Johnson is just on a whole 'nother level then a top 50 Hall of Famer that was a 10 time All-Star and made 7 straight All-NBA 2nd teams?
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Kevin Johnson is just on a whole 'nother level then a top 50 Hall of Famer that was a 10 time All-Star and made 7 straight All-NBA 2nd teams?[/QUOTE]
Just tell me what he was better in. You think he was a better scorer? 21/50% >>> 22/45%.
And honestly, the edge in passing/playmaking is so great, that nothing can make it up.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Just tell me what he was better in. You think he was a better scorer? 21/50% >>> 22/45%.
And honestly, the edge in passing/playmaking is so great, that nothing can make it up.[/QUOTE]
KJ drove to the hoop much more then not only Hal but probally any guard during the 1960's. Hal Greer was a great jump shooter and probally most of his points were on jump shots.
KJ was a better palaymaker, because he was the point guard, Hal was a combo shooting guard/small foward like Sam Jones. His career high in assist is over 5 assist per. He was top ten in assist 3 times during his career's wich probally means he was a good passer.
He has a more accomplishments then KJ, 7 All-NBA 2nd teams to KJ's 4 and Ten All-Star games compared to his 3.
He was considered the 3rd best gurd of his era behind Oscar and West.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]KJ drove to the hoop much more then not only Hal but probally any guard during the 1960's. Hal Greer was a great jump shooter and probally most of his points were on jump shots.
KJ was a better palaymaker, because he was the point guard, Hal was a combo shooting guard/small foward like Sam Jones. His career high in assist is over 5 assist per. He was top ten in assist 3 times during his career's wich probally means he was a good passer.
He has a more accomplishments then KJ, 7 All-NBA 2nd teams to KJ's 4 and Ten All-Star games compared to his 3.
He was considered the 3rd best gurd of his era behind Oscar and West.[/QUOTE]
Well its not just that KJ drove in a lot, it was also that he was very good at driving in. Great penetrator and very quick and fast. He was better than Greer was or could be.
KJ also had a deadly mid-range jumper. Right there with Greer's.
But anyways, sure Greer has the longevity factor over Kevin Johnson, but thats really as far as its going to get.
And who cares if KJ drove in a lot? He was good at it so he did. That doesn't make him any less of a scorer. He was still a better scorer than Greer.
And yeah KJ was a PG, but the passing/playmaking edge stays for KJ.
And really, you still haven't shown one major area of their game where Greer was better. KJ obviously was the better player.
As for the All-NBA Teams, would Greer have made them if Jordan, Magic, Stockton, Drexler, Hardaway were all his rivals to make the All-NBA 2nd? And either way, KJ was underrated.
Greer has no advantage over Kevin Johnson besides longevity. Kevin Johnson was "easily" the better player.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Well its not just that KJ drove in a lot, it was also that he was very good at driving in. Great penetrator and very quick and fast. He was better than Greer was or could be.
KJ also had a deadly mid-range jumper. Right there with Greer's.
But anyways, sure Greer has the longevity factor over Kevin Johnson, but thats really as far as its going to get.
And who cares if KJ drove in a lot? He was good at it so he did. That doesn't make him any less of a scorer. He was still a better scorer than Greer.
And yeah KJ was a PG, but the passing/playmaking edge stays for KJ.
And really, you still haven't shown one major area of their game where Greer was better. KJ obviously was the better player.
As for the All-NBA Teams, would Greer have made them if Jordan, Magic, Stockton, Drexler, Hardaway were all his rivals to make the All-NBA 2nd? And either way, KJ was underrated.
Greer has no advantage over Kevin Johnson besides longevity. Kevin Johnson was "easily" the better player.[/QUOTE]
I'm not trying to take anything from KJ by saying he went to the basket more I wasjust stating that how his FG % was really high (like Tony Parker). I was saying that most guards back in the 60's didn't go to the hoop a lot a relied on their jump shot, witch Hal Greer had one of the best in the league.
[QUOTE]One of Greer's strong points was his jump shot. His favorite spot to hit from was inside the top of the key. His one-time coach, Alex Hannum, said Greer could sink that shot about 70 percent of the time and encouraged him to take it whenever he had the opportunity. "Hal's quickness enables him to free himself for the moment of daylight that he needs," Hannum said. "He's so good on his jumper that it startles you when he misses."[/QUOTE]
Hal was a better rebounder then Kev.
I wouldn't call Jordan and Magic KJ's rivals to makew the All-NBA second team and Hal hade some comp for 2nd place in Dave Bing and Peal Monre among others.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]I'm not trying to take anything from KJ by saying he went to the basket more I wasjust stating that how his FG % was really high (like Tony Parker). I was saying that most guards back in the 60's didn't go to the hoop a lot a relied on their jump shot, witch Hal Greer had one of the best in the league.
Hal was a better rebounder then Kev.
I wouldn't call Jordan and Magic KJ's rivals to makew the All-NBA second team and Hal hade some comp for 2nd place in Dave Bing and Peal Monre among others.[/QUOTE]
1. Yeah and whats wrong with talking it to the hoop to get a high FG%. That still makes you a better scorer...I'd rather have a player that takes it to the hoop and puts the same amount of points on a higher FG% than low FG% with same points becaue of jump shot...
Bottom line, takiing it to the hoop, and getting a better FG%, is better and more effective than what Greer has done on the scoring end, and the numbers prove it.
2. I think you haven't mentioned it yet, or acknowledged it, but Kevin Johnson also is an excellent shooter. Not only did you have to stop him from penetrating and creating offense, you also had to watch out for his mid-range jumper.
Here are some quotes GMAT posted....
[B][I]"The fact that he can shoot and drive presents a problem, You can't play him just one way. You can't say, `I'll play him back and make him shoot the jumper,' because that's what he likes to do. You've got to get up on him and play him as tough as possible."[/I][/B]
-Byron Scott
[I][B]Many players and coaches believe Kevin Johnson is the quickest player in the league, especially off the dribble. His uncanny ability to penetrate puts constant pressure on opposing defenses, and Johnson has also become an excellent outside shooter.[/B][/I]
-Sports Article (NY Times) in 1989
[B][I]
Many players and coaches believe Kevin Johnson is the quickest player in the league, especially off the dribble. His uncanny ability to penetrate puts constant pressure on opposing defenses, and [U]Johnson has also become an excellent outside shooter[/U][/I][/B]
-Same article (NY Times) in 1989
Bottom line, not only was he really quick, he could also shoot that mid-range jumper.
He was a better scorer than Hal Greer.
2. Ok Hal Greer was a better rebounder because of his size. And KJ was 100 times the passer. It doesn't matter if he is a PG, PGs are usually higher ranked because of that. He creates the whole offense for his team. Can't say the same for Greer. KJ not only scores very well, but he also sets up his teams. Greer only does the first mostly.
With the only advantage being reboudngin, I don't see how it is close.
3. Lastly, nice try, Greer was in the 60s. Bing and Monroe were in the 70s. They weren't really competetion for Greer for the All-NBA Teams. Maybe 1 year where they crossed, and "maybe" 1 year.
KJ routinly had to go against Stockton, Drexler, Hardaway, Price.
But seriously, a player that creates the offense and scores for it as well as KJ, is better than Greer.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]1. Yeah and whats wrong with talking it to the hoop to get a high FG%. That still makes you a better scorer...I'd rather have a player that takes it to the hoop and puts the same amount of points on a higher FG% than low FG% with same points becaue of jump shot...
Bottom line, takiing it to the hoop, and getting a better FG%, is better and more effective than what Greer has done on the scoring end, and the numbers prove it.
2. I think you haven't mentioned it yet, or acknowledged it, but Kevin Johnson also is an excellent shooter. Not only did you have to stop him from penetrating and creating offense, you also had to watch out for his mid-range jumper.
Here are some quotes GMAT posted....
[B][I]"The fact that he can shoot and drive presents a problem, You can't play him just one way. You can't say, `I'll play him back and make him shoot the jumper,' because that's what he likes to do. You've got to get up on him and play him as tough as possible."[/I][/B]
-Byron Scott
[I][B]Many players and coaches believe Kevin Johnson is the quickest player in the league, especially off the dribble. His uncanny ability to penetrate puts constant pressure on opposing defenses, and Johnson has also become an excellent outside shooter.[/B][/I]
-Sports Article (NY Times) in 1989
[B][I]
Many players and coaches believe Kevin Johnson is the quickest player in the league, especially off the dribble. His uncanny ability to penetrate puts constant pressure on opposing defenses, and [U]Johnson has also become an excellent outside shooter[/U][/I][/B]
-Same article (NY Times) in 1989
Bottom line, not only was he really quick, he could also shoot that mid-range jumper.
He was a better scorer than Hal Greer.
2. Ok Hal Greer was a better rebounder because of his size. And KJ was 100 times the passer. It doesn't matter if he is a PG, PGs are usually higher ranked because of that. He creates the whole offense for his team. Can't say the same for Greer. KJ not only scores very well, but he also sets up his teams. Greer only does the first mostly.
With the only advantage being reboudngin, I don't see how it is close.
3. Lastly, nice try, Greer was in the 60s. Bing and Monroe were in the 70s. They weren't really competetion for Greer for the All-NBA Teams. Maybe 1 year where they crossed, and "maybe" 1 year.
KJ routinly had to go against Stockton, Drexler, Hardaway, Price.
But seriously, a player that creates the offense and scores for it as well as KJ, is better than Greer.[/QUOTE]
There is nothing wrong at all with taking it too the hoop, but I' was sayng Greer didn't take it to the hoop as most guards in bis era didn't tke the ball to the rack. That's like saying Ray Allen was a better three point shooter then Pistol Pete, well Pete didn't take 3's because they didn't have the line and Hal didn't take it to the basket because guards then relied on their jumper more. Also, I know how good a jump shooter KJ was, I was a Rockets fan in the mid-90's.
Hal was only 6'2 to KJ's 6'1 so the height isn't really that big of a difference.
Also Greer actually set up his team really good, just because his's assist numbers aren't high doesn't mean he was a bad playmaker. Also assist numbers weren't that high in the 1960's as they were in the early 90's. I just picked a random year in the 60's; Jerry West was 3rd in assist in 1965 with [B]6.3 assist per game[/B]. He finished 7th, 8th and 10th in assist for 3 seasons (good for a shooting guard/small foward) back then.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]There is nothing wrong at all with taking it too the hoop, but I' was sayng Greer didn't take it to the hoop as most guards in bis era didn't tke the ball to the rack. That's like saying Ray Allen was a better three point shooter then Pistol Pete, well Pete didn't take 3's because they didn't have the line and Hal didn't take it to the basket because guards then relied on their jumper more. Also, I know how good a jump shooter KJ was, I was a Rockets fan in the mid-90's.
Hal was only 6'2 to KJ's 6'1 so the height isn't really that big of a difference.
Also Greer actually set up his team really good, just because his's assist numbers aren't high doesn't mean he was a bad playmaker. Also assist numbers weren't that high in the 1960's as they were in the early 90's. I just picked a random year in the 60's; Jerry West was 3rd in assist in 1965 with [B]6.3 assist per game[/B]. He finished 7th, 8th and 10th in assist for 3 seasons (good for a shooting guard/small foward) back then.[/QUOTE]
1. I mean even when he did take it in, his driving game wasn't nearly as good as KJ's. And you look at players like Tiny Archibald, they took it in quite a bit. And Archibald himself said KJ was quicker and a better shooter.
Greer was one of those players who took it in less than the average player even back then. He's like the Rip Hamilton of today. He stayed at jump shooting vs. driving more than the average player even bac kthen. It also explains his lack of injuries. And once again, KJ was a good jump shooter too.
Anyways, even if you make Greer's %, a little higher, he still isn't as good of a scorer as KJ. But Greer would be like Rip Hamilton today, he'd still shoot a lot of jumpers.
2. Although Greer is only a inch taller,
A. The pace was faster back then
B. His teammates and the whole league was shorter, so making him taller compared to the rest of the league vs. KJ
3. And come on, KJ has finished Top 3 in assists 4 times, and has put up 10+ apg 4 years in a row at one time.
KJ has "proven" to improve teammates.
Bring out the best of his teammates.
Things that "All-Time" greats do. He has been the captain and catalyst of the top offenses of his generation. And they were mostly that good because of him.
Its like the Steve Nash affect, KJ had it too.
We are really comparing Greer (All-Star Caliber player) to a KJ (Superstar)
There are so many things Kevin Johnson does that Greer can't.
Its like comparing Rip Hamilton to Steve Nash today.
KJ is a better scorer than Nash, and Greer is more all-around.
But you get what I am saying, why would you take Nash over Rip?
Because he gets the offense going, is an excellent passer, influences the team greatly, and improves teammates.
Same is the case with KJ, I understand Greer is a better playmaker than Rip, but KJ is a better scorer than Nash, so that cancels out.
KJ really is on another level or 2 higher than Greer.
I don't think Rip and Hal is a good comparison.
Also while reading up on Hal, I found this:
[QUOTE]But in his first season Greer already showed the skills that would eventually make him a star: a deadly jump shot, quick penetrations to the basket, and tenacious defense. He came off the bench for 11.1 ppgin 1958-59, shooting .454 from the field and .778 from the line. His field-goal percentage was the fourth-highest mark in the NBA that year.[/QUOTE]
Goin' by this, he apparently he was one of the top FG% shooters of his era. He was top 10 three times, (more then KJ as he was never top 10 period).
It also seems he penetrated to the basket more then we thought he did. That should erase the Hamilton comparisons. It does talk about his deadly jump shot (maybe were the Rip comparison comes from).
It also states he was a tenacious defender.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]I don't think Rip and Hal is a good comparison.
Also while reading up on Hal, I found this:
Goin' by this, he apparently he was one of the top FG% shooters of his era. He was top 10 three times, (more then KJ as he was never top 10 period).
It also seems he penetrated to the basket more then we thought he did. That should erase the Hamilton comparisons. It does talk about his deadly jump shot (maybe were the Rip comparison comes from).
It also states he was a tenacious defender.[/QUOTE]
You know, I was thinking with his FT attempts so high, he had to go in quite some...
Well back then Centers shot 40%, and Centers and Guards shot around the same. Today, you know that isn't true so its tough for a guard to finish high.
And starting in the 60s, when Big Men even became more important with guys like Chamberlain and Russell dominating, Greer never finished high in the FG% category.
But either way, even if you adjust Greer's FG% and make it a little higher, I would still take Kevin Johnson's scoring ability. Becaue he really was "unstoppable" at his Peak. If you guarded him tight, he would go right by you because he was so quick. If you gave him room, he would shoot the jumper on you. And in the playoffs he really showed how good he really was.
Scoring multiple 40pt games. And he still has the FG% advantage, which I think is enough to give him the overall edge, along with his "ability" which you had to see in his peak. But if you want, we can call scoring even.
But passing/playmaking is the biggest edge for Kevin Johnson. Magic, Stockton, and Cousy are the only passers/playmakers I can say are above KJ. Players like Nash are on par in terms of passing/playmaking with Kevin Johnson. All his teammates had career numbers while playing with him, and he has improved all of them. Not only that, the offense fails without him, and rises with him. These things are only what All-Time greats are supposed to do.
As for defense, Greer might've been solid there too, he was an All-Arounder, but KJ was also a solid to good defender. Not a lot of size, but was very quick.
The overall advantage still goes to Kevin Johnson. He was being compared to Magic Johnson by some in his Peak, and was considered better than Isiah Thomas. He also outperformed John Stockton routinely in his Peak, while Stockton was also in his peak. As you can see, KJ was "up" there. Greer, I don't think he was ever close to the Big O or West.
KJ was just a far too superior passer/playmaker vs. Greer. His teams had a high number of success and so did his teammates when they played with KJ. That really seperates them.
I'd still have to say Greer was the better scorer. He was top 10 in points 8 times compared to KJ's zero and finished top 5 one season with over 24.
Greer also made his teammates better as he played a major role in the 67 76ers team. KJ was the better playmaker though.
Also Hal Greer won more then KJ did. His teams made the Eastern conference finals 5 times (losing to Boston all 5) and won the title in 67. He made the playoffs all but his last two seasons when he wasn't an important factor.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]I'd still have to say Greer was the better scorer. He was top 10 in points 8 times compared to KJ's zero and finished top 5 one season with over 24.
Greer also made his teammates better as he played a major role in the 67 76ers team. KJ was the better playmaker though.
Also Hal Greer won more then KJ did. His teams made the Eastern conference finals 5 times (losing to Boston all 5) and won the title in 67. He made the playoffs all but his last two seasons when he wasn't an important factor.[/QUOTE]
Well then again, who was Greer's great competetion besides Oscar and West. He played in a weaker era. Sam Jones was the 4th best perimeter player of that era.
KJ played in maybe the toughest era, with Magic and Jordan both at their best. And Stockton, Drexler, Wilkins, Mullins, Hardaway, and many more great perimeter players back then.
And once again, even though Greer scored more, KJ still had higher %s.
How did Greer make his teammates better? KJ sure did.
Take 1 example, Tom Chambers:
1988: 44.8% 20.4ppg
Joins KJ
1989: 47.1% 25.7ppg
1990: 50.1% 27.2ppg
As you can see, his numbers went right up with KJ.
This is even a quote from Tom Chambers:
[B][I]In fact, Tom Chambers once called K.J. "the guy who made me the player I am," at Chambers' own Ring of Honor ceremony in 1999[/I][/B]
Also another example is Charles Barkley. When did Barkley win his MVP? When did he have his best season? Right when he played with Kevin Johnson. Kevin Johnson "really" improved his teammates. Its becaue he was a real leader. Something that only the greats are supposed to do. Greer did NOT improve his teammates on the level of Kevin Johnson.
KJ's 4 year run was one of the best in history. From 1989-1992, K.J. averaged 21.2 points, 11.1 assists, a .500 field goal percentage. How many in history have put those kind of numbers in NBA History? Magic Johnson is probably the only one EVER to do that. Oscar comes close. You listening, Magic, and Oscar, those are the players to do what KJ did. How many players have put 20/10 3 years in a row? Isiah Thomas and Oscar Roberstson are the only ones. How many players have put up 20/10/50% seasons, Magic and KJ are the only ones, and they both did it twice, with KJ missing a 3rd time by .001%.
You realize, that for a PG, scoring, and passing are the 2 most important categories. For normal players, its probably scoring and defense, but for a PG its scoring/passing. KJ and Magic are the only 2 combine both at a high efficient level of 20/10/50%.
I can name you countless amount of players who have put Greer type numbers. McGrady, Pierce, Wilkins, Drexler, Kobe, English, and more. Many have. While, for KJ, only players like Magic have put his numbers up.
And its just not the 4 year peak, you can beyond and look at the 9 years of KJ's prime. Putting up near 20/10/50% there as well. Only Magic, and Oscar are close to that mark over a 9 year period. Magic Johnson and Oscar Robertson are the only ones. They are the only other 2 to combine scoring efficiently and well with excellent passing.
Really, Greer was never on the level of Kevin Johnson. And I have shown why. The things Kevin Johnson did, only players like Magic and Oscar can match up to. The things Greer did, MANY players can match up to.
Not only that, KJ improved teammates, and ran offenses. He, as the number one player on his team, defeeated Magic, and took his team to 2 straight WCF in a tougher Era.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Well then again, who was Greer's great competetion besides Oscar and West. He played in a weaker era. Sam Jones was the 4th best perimeter player of that era.
KJ played in maybe the toughest era, with Magic and Jordan both at their best. And Stockton, Drexler, Wilkins, Mullins, Hardaway, and many more great perimeter players back then.
And once again, even though Greer scored more, KJ still had higher %s.
How did Greer make his teammates better? KJ sure did.
Take 1 example, Tom Chambers:
1988: 44.8% 20.4ppg
Joins KJ
1989: 47.1% 25.7ppg
1990: 50.1% 27.2ppg
As you can see, his numbers went right up with KJ.
This is even a quote from Tom Chambers:
[B][I]In fact, Tom Chambers once called K.J. "the guy who made me the player I am," at Chambers' own Ring of Honor ceremony in 1999[/I][/B]
Also another example is Charles Barkley. When did Barkley win his MVP? When did he have his best season? Right when he played with Kevin Johnson. Kevin Johnson "really" improved his teammates. Its becaue he was a real leader. Something that only the greats are supposed to do. Greer did NOT improve his teammates on the level of Kevin Johnson.
KJ's 4 year run was one of the best in history. From 1989-1992, K.J. averaged 21.2 points, 11.1 assists, a .500 field goal percentage. How many in history have put those kind of numbers in NBA History? Magic Johnson is probably the only one EVER to do that. Oscar comes close. You listening, Magic, and Oscar, those are the players to do what KJ did. How many players have put 20/10 3 years in a row? Isiah Thomas and Oscar Roberstson are the only ones. How many players have put up 20/10/50% seasons, Magic and KJ are the only ones, and they both did it twice, with KJ missing a 3rd time by .001%.
You realize, that for a PG, scoring, and passing are the 2 most important categories. For normal players, its probably scoring and defense, but for a PG its scoring/passing. KJ and Magic are the only 2 combine both at a high efficient level of 20/10/50%.
I can name you countless amount of players who have put Greer type numbers. McGrady, Pierce, Wilkins, Drexler, Kobe, English, and more. Many have. While, for KJ, only players like Magic have put his numbers up.
And its just not the 4 year peak, you can beyond and look at the 9 years of KJ's prime. Putting up near 20/10/50% there as well. Only Magic, and Oscar are close to that mark over a 9 year period. Magic Johnson and Oscar Robertson are the only ones. They are the only other 2 to combine scoring efficiently and well with excellent passing.
Really, Greer was never on the level of Kevin Johnson. And I have shown why. The things Kevin Johnson did, only players like Magic and Oscar can match up to. The things Greer did, MANY players can match up to.
Not only that, KJ improved teammates, and ran offenses. He, as the number one player on his team, defeeated Magic, and took his team to 2 straight WCF in a tougher Era.[/QUOTE]
Oscar and West wasn't his only comp. He had Cousy for about 4 seasons (just as KJ had Magic), Elgin Baylor, Johnny Green, Dave Bing, Havlicek, Lenny Wilkens, Gail Goodrich, "Super" Lou Hudson, Cliff Hagan, Pearl Monroe, Clyde Frazer and others, (most are Hall of Famers)
Was it just KJ who made them better (Chambers and Chuck) or was it the team (Phoenix) they went to. It's not like Charles went to a bad franchise KJ was playing on they magically made the finals once he came.
So KJ being in elite company with Magic and Oscar make him a top 25-40 player ever? Walt Bellamy is one of only 3 players to average over 31 and 19 during a season, does that make him a top 20 player along side Elgin and Wilt. Alex English is the top scorer of the 80's but what does that mean, nothing really as he wasn't even a top 5 player of the decade.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Oscar and West wasn't his only comp. He had Cousy for about 4 seasons (just as KJ had Magic), Elgin Baylor, Johnny Green, Dave Bing, Havlicek, Lenny Wilkens, Gail Goodrich, "Super" Lou Hudson, Cliff Hagan, Pearl Monroe, Clyde Frazer and others, (most are Hall of Famers)
Was it just KJ who made them better (Chambers and Chuck) or was it the team (Phoenix) they went to. It's not like Charles went to a bad franchise KJ was playing on they magically made the finals once he came.
So KJ being in elite company with Magic and Oscar make him a top 25-40 player ever? Walt Bellamy is one of only 3 players to average over 31 and 19 during a season, does that make him a top 20 player along side Elgin and Wilt. Alex English is the top scorer of the 80's but what does that mean, nothing really as he wasn't even a top 5 player of the decade.[/QUOTE]
1. Like I said, not all those players played with Greer's prime. Frazier was in the 70s, same with Monroe, Greer was already done before them....I don't know why you keep mentioning them
2. Of course it was KJ that improved them. It wasn't a coincidence that right when they met KJ they all hit their peaks. And come on, they even SAID KJ made them the player they were. What more do you want?
3. Bellamny, how many years did he do that? 1 year, thats what I thought. KJ did it for a [B]9 year span[/B], and only Magic and Oscar have met that statline. Not 1 year.
Not only that, it wasn't "any old" categories he did it in. Like I said, he did it with the most important categories for a PG. Scoring, and doing it efficiently, and passing. He met Magic and Oscar in the most important categories for a PG. And he met them for a 9 year Span, not just 1 year, how was Bellamy for 9 years?
To continue on, I thought this was KJ vs. Greer. Now its, "is this what makes KJ 25-40". At least your realizing, Greer was on a level less.
And to add more, not only was KJ able to match Magic and Oscar on the most important things for a PG, he was able to do other things that only legends and the very best are able to do. Improve teammates, have a strong offense, get many win seasons, and so on.
:applause:
He is trully underrated, and all great things he has done are forgotten. I mean, back in the day they did compare him to Magic Johnson, both players put similar stats, and both teams won around the same amount of games, KJ even knocked out Magic's team in 1990 I believe. He was better than Stockton in his peak, and Stockton was at his peak too, and now these days Stockton is considered better, and always was better. He was considered better than Isiah by a lot, at least ability/skillwise, but Isiah's titles always won the argument.
[QUOTE=Glove_20] He was better than Stockton in his peak, and Stockton was at his peak too, and now these days Stockton is considered better, and always was better.[/QUOTE]
I though Stockton was as good at the time, and now...
It was arguable....
Kevin was more of a scorer, and neglected to get his team involved some of the time. Great player and all... Fantastic offensive game for a guard, while still being able to get guys involved, but sometimes he got into ballhog mode.
I think you are starting to over-rate him a bit.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]1. Like I said, not all those players played with Greer's prime. Frazier was in the 70s, same with Monroe, Greer was already done before them....I don't know why you keep mentioning them
2. Of course it was KJ that improved them. It wasn't a coincidence that right when they met KJ they all hit their peaks. And come on, they even SAID KJ made them the player they were. What more do you want?
3. Bellamny, how many years did he do that? 1 year, thats what I thought. KJ did it for a [B]9 year span[/B], and only Magic and Oscar have met that statline. Not 1 year.
Not only that, it wasn't "any old" categories he did it in. Like I said, he did it with the most important categories for a PG. Scoring, and doing it efficiently, and passing. He met Magic and Oscar in the most important categories for a PG. And he met them for a 9 year Span, not just 1 year, how was Bellamy for 9 years?
To continue on, I thought this was KJ vs. Greer. Now its, "is this what makes KJ 25-40". At least your realizing, Greer was on a level less.
And to add more, not only was KJ able to match Magic and Oscar on the most important things for a PG, he was able to do other things that only legends and the very best are able to do. Improve teammates, have a strong offense, get many win seasons, and so on.
:applause:
He is trully underrated, and all great things he has done are forgotten. I mean, back in the day they did compare him to Magic Johnson, both players put similar stats, and both teams won around the same amount of games, KJ even knocked out Magic's team in 1990 I believe. He was better than Stockton in his peak, and Stockton was at his peak too, and now these days Stockton is considered better, and always was better. He was considered better than Isiah by a lot, at least ability/skillwise, but Isiah's titles always won the argument.[/QUOTE]
Monroe and Frazier were both drafted oin 67 so they played in Greers peak/prime for about 3 seasons as Greer was making All-Star teams untuil 1970.
Never said KJ didn't have a role in improving.
Well Bellamy over a span of four season put up over 27 ppg, 17 boards and 51%FG, not many over four years have done that, just Chamberlain I believe. That shouldn't make Walt Bellamy any better then he was. Hell, if wwe look hard enough we could find many players having similar stats over a long period time compared to other greats, that doesn't mean they're on that greats level or right below.
I'm pretty sure a not so great legend like a Spencer Haywood or someone put up some stats that are comparable with a Bob Pettit, Tim Duncan, Hakeem Olajuwon or something over a 5 year stretch but that doesn't mean that Spencer is on those players levels?
As I said many times, I'm with you on KJ being underrated but I think you are slightly overrating him.
[QUOTE=Chalkmaze]I though Stockton was as good at the time, and now...[/QUOTE]
They were about even at their Peaks...However, KJ domianted Stockton head to head...Just like Payton dominated Stockton defensively, KJ dominated Stockton offensively....And thats why I'd give the edge to KJ, he always got the better of Stockton Head to HEad
[QUOTE=Chalkmaze]
Kevin was more of a scorer, and neglected to get his team involved some of the time. Great player and all... Fantastic offensive game for a guard, while still being able to get guys involved, but sometimes he got into ballhog mode.
I think you are starting to over-rate him a bit.[/QUOTE]
Kevin Johnson and ballhog? I think you're confusing him with Tim Hardaway or someone.
How was he selfish? First time I heard someone shooting the ball 50+% and giving out 10-12apg called selfish. Thats Magic type numbers, and your calling him selfish? His teammates improved, and his teams posted winning numbers every year, thats selfish?
Here are his Shots to Assist Ratio. So how many times he shoots vs. gives an assist.
[B]K.J.: 1.36:1.00
Nash: 1.39:1.00
Kidd: 1.40:1.00[/b]
I don't think you can call KJ selfish based on this.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]They were about even at their Peaks...However, KJ domianted Stockton head to head...Just like Payton dominated Stockton defensively, KJ dominated Stockton offensively....And thats why I'd give the edge to KJ, he always got the better of Stockton Head to HEad[/QUOTE]
Stockton was always better at getting the rest of the team more involved... not just measured in assists either... he would set things up... get people in position etc... So I don't know about that... scoring wise... yeah Johnson was better... making the rest of the team better... Stockton almost always won that battle.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Monroe and Frazier were both drafted oin 67 so they played in Greers peak/prime for about 3 seasons as Greer was making All-Star teams untuil 1970.
Never said KJ didn't have a role in improving.
Well Bellamy over a span of four season put up over 27 ppg, 17 boards and 51%FG, not many over four years have done that, just Chamberlain I believe. That shouldn't make Walt Bellamy any better then he was. Hell, if wwe look hard enough we could find many players having similar stats over a long period time compared to other greats, that doesn't mean they're on that greats level or right below.
I'm pretty sure a not so great legend like a Spencer Haywood or someone put up some stats that are comparable with a Bob Pettit, Tim Duncan, Hakeem Olajuwon or something over a 5 year stretch but that doesn't mean that Spencer is on those players levels?
As I said many times, I'm with you on KJ being underrated but I think you are slightly overrating him.[/QUOTE]
[B]1.[/B] Walt Bellamy?
[B]A.[/B] First of all, he did it for 4 years, not 9 years. Magic is the only one who matches KJ's 4 years, and Oscar and Magic are the only ones who measure KJ's 9 years.
[B]B. [/B]Part of the reason no one could measure Bellamy is becaue of the Era he played in. No Center or PF is going to put 17 rebounds in today's league, so its unfair from the start.
[B]
C. [/B]Bellamy did that without making it to the playoffs most of the years. Like I have said before, its easier to put up great stats on a bad team that can't even make playoffs. And its even more impressive if you can put up great stats on a team that actually wins. KJ and Magic did, Bellamy didn't.
[B]D. [/B] Bob Pettit has done the same. Elgin Baylor has too. It also wasn't that hard for a Center to get that many rebounds in the 60s. It got tougher later on. Moses put on 30/15 over a some years, and that was in the late 70s to early 80s. That easily overrides Bellamy's performance. And you know there are a lot more who have done the same.
As you can see, those are 4 strong points to not look at Bellamy's performance too far.
[B]
2. [/B]Spencer Haywood has some of the same problems. He usually failed to make playoffs, and I can't tell you HOW many have put his statline throughout the years. And once again, 9 year span.
Those 4 points against Bellamy, can be made against Spencer.
However, against, KJ, he was the real deal so nothing can be said against him. You can try though. Remember, 9 years, playoffs every year, 20/10/50%, Oscar and Magic are the only ones in there. And not only that, we are talking about the most important stats for a PG. Scoring/Passing/Scoring efficiently. The most important characterists for a PG. Not just any old stats.
And Magic was the only one who compared with him on KJ's PEAK statline, not even Oscar
So yeah, Bellamy and Specner don't work...
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Kevin Johnson and ballhog? I think you're confusing him with Tim Hardaway or someone.
How was he selfish? First time I heard someone shooting the ball 50+% and giving out 10-12apg called selfish. Thats Magic type numbers, and your calling him selfish? His teammates improved, and his teams posted winning numbers every year, thats selfish?
Here are his Shots to Assist Ratio. So how many times he shoots vs. gives an assist.
[B]K.J.: 1.36:1.00
Nash: 1.39:1.00
Kidd: 1.40:1.00[/b]
I don't think you can call KJ selfish based on this.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how to explain what I saw... Perhaps the numbers would show that KJ was great at dishing assists the first 3 quarters and then had the ball 80% of the time in the fourth.. But I recall him holding the ball a lot, over-dribbling or something... I don't know how to describe it or make an argument for it. There's a formula out there somewhere that would explain it though.
I'm not calling him selfish exactly... But, when [B]comparing him to Stockton[/B] (You neglected to show his ratio btw), he did look like a ballhog. I mean... that was more his game, and suited his style, but I also felt that Stockton would have got all of Johnson's teammates more involved and made them better. KJ didn't set screen's anywhere near as good as Stockton did, for example.
Spencer and Bellamy didn't work but Alex English will.:oldlol:
Alex English over a [B]8 year span[/B] averaged over 26 ppg/5.5 rebounds/4.5assist and shot around 50% from the field. Denver went to the playoffs every season during those 9 seasons. Larry Bird and Julius Erving are the only players to put up such numbers.
I think you know what I'm tryin' to say, a great all-time player like (Alex English) can put up similar numbers to Legends like (Doc and Bird) over a long period of time the same way an all-time great like (Kevin Johnson) can put up similar stats to (Magic and Oscar). Those numbers don't make Alex English any better then he was and shouldn't make Kevin Johnson any better then he was.
[B]I told you if you look hard enough you could find a not so great legend (English) with similar stats to the best of the best (Julius and Bird).[/B]
I was gone, I am trying to decide to tackle which argument down first, I'll do the Stockton one first...
[QUOTE=Chalkmaze]Stockton was always better at getting the rest of the team more involved... not just measured in assists either... he would set things up... get people in position etc... So I don't know about that... scoring wise... yeah Johnson was better... making the rest of the team better... Stockton almost always won that battle.[/QUOTE]
KJ was great at setting up his teammates as well...He would do it by dribble penetration, which attracted attention to him, and opened up his teammate...And of course, KJ made his teammates better as well...Here are their Head to Head matchups over a period of time, and the reason why I gave KJ the edge...
[B]
All meetings from 1989-1993[/B]
Kevin Johnson
4/11 19pts 12ast Win
John Stockton
5/13 12pts 11ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
5/12 12pts 6ast Loss
John Stockton
6/9 19pts 17ast Win
Kevin Johnson
8/12 32pts 7ast Win
John Stockton
8/16 23pts 16ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
[U]12/21 34pts 14ast Win[/U]
John Stockton
8/10 20pts 16ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
6/17 29pts 13ast Win
John Stockton
7/16 18pts 21ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
[U]7/16 37pts 8ast Win [/U]
John Stockton
3/12 8pts 11ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
12/18 29pts 10ast Win
John Stockton
4/9 16pts 12ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
7/22 28pts 4ast Loss
John Stockton
5/11 15pts 4ast Win
Kevin Johnson
11/21 30pts 7ast Loss
John Stockton Win
5/12 22pts 15ast
Kevin Johnson
[U]13/21 37pts 20ast Win[/U]
John Stockton
12/16 28pts 10ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
[U]16/29 44pts 10ast Win[/U]
John Stockton
5/6 14pts 12ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
[U]8/16 28pts 18ast Loss[/U]
John Stockton
5/14 13pts 11ast Win
Kevin Johnson
[U]10/19 32pts 14ast Win[/U]
John Stockton
5/16 14pts 18ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
4/11 10pts 14ast Loss
John Stockton
8/14 17pts 13ast Win
Kevin Johnson
10/19 29pts 9ast Win
John Stockton
7/13 16pts 7ast Loss
Kevin Johnson
9/15 26pts 3ast Win
John Stockton
3/5 6pts 9ast Loss
[B]Totals:
Kevin Johnson
142/280 50.7% 28.5ppg 10.6apg 11-5
John Stockton
96/192 50.0% 16.3ppg 12.7apg 5-11[/B]
That is what "actually" happened between the two, not what we remember or anything.
As you can see, KJ dominated Stockton offensively. Putting up 28/11/50% shooting. Thats what I was talking about too. Stockton, was basically himself, but his FG% was actually lower than KJ's, which is not what you expect. The assist difference is only about 2.1apg as well, while the point total is around 12points. And even the win-loss column has huge edges.
Also look at some of the games for KJ, he had a 30/20 game, and also a 34/14 game.
Bottom line, at both of their peaks, I'd give KJ the edge, because they were close anyways, but Head to Head, KJ dominated Stockton on the offensive end.
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Spencer and Bellamy didn't work but Alex English will.:oldlol:
Alex English over a [B]8 year span[/B] averaged over 26 ppg/5.5 rebounds/4.5assist and shot around 50% from the field. Denver went to the playoffs every season during those 9 seasons. Larry Bird and Julius Erving are the only players to put up such numbers.
I think you know what I'm tryin' to say, a great all-time player like (Alex English) can put up similar numbers to Legends like (Doc and Bird) over a long period of time the same way an all-time great like (Kevin Johnson) can put up similar stats to (Magic and Oscar). Those numbers don't make Alex English any better then he was and shouldn't make Kevin Johnson any better then he was.
[B]I told you if you look hard enough you could find a not so great legend (English) with similar stats to the best of the best (Julius and Bird).[/B][/QUOTE]
I think your still off.
1. First of all, interesting how you used "5.5" and "4.5" instead of straight up...
2. I am guessing the years you were talking about were 81-88
English's numbers:
26.9ppg
5.9rpg
4.6apg
And there are many players who have done that as long as the players you mentioned...
[B]Larry Bird, Julius Erving, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Jordan, Jerry West, Wilt Chamberlain, Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, Elgin Baylor, and Rick Barry.[/B]
So yeah, you were off on how many players have done that...[b]10 others players beside Alex English[/b]
While with KJ, Oscar and Magic are the only 2. And MAGIC is the only who has exactly produced the 20/10/50% in peak, no one else. Oscar is right there too, because he produced similar. So really, its only MJ and KJ
3. Lastly, I just want to remind you. For PGs, passing is an important category. Scoring is too. SFs aren't like PGs where they have a category (passing) that they really have to produce well...So it would've been better if you used PGs only...or similar
Remember, I am talking about the most important categories, and this is PGs we are talking about, [B]you realize how important passing/efficiency is to PGs vs. rebounds/assists to SFs.[/B]
But yeah, English doesn't come close either. There are 10 other players who have done EXACTLY what he has. Magic is the only one who has done EXACTLY what KJ has done, and Oscar has come close
[QUOTE=Glove_20]KJ was great at setting up his teammates as well...He would do it by dribble penetration, which attracted attention to him, and opened up his teammate...And of course, KJ made his teammates better as well...Here are their Head to Head matchups over a period of time, and the reason why I gave KJ the edge...
As you can see, KJ dominated Stockton offensively. Putting up 28/11/50% shooting. Thats what I was talking about too. Stockton, was basically himself, but his FG% was actually lower than KJ's, which is not what you expect. The assist difference is only about 2.1apg as well, while the point total is around 12points. And even the win-loss column has huge edges.
Also look at some of the games for KJ, he had a 30/20 game, and also a 34/14 game.
Bottom line, at both of their peaks, I'd give KJ the edge, because they were close anyways, but Head to Head, KJ dominated Stockton on the offensive end.[/QUOTE]
What's this 89-93 bull?
You are being selective... why not compare KJ's whole career, at least up until 96-97??? Go ahead... let's see the truth. You show that KJ was better offensively, and the FG% was close enough to be a wash, Stockton dominated in Assists and steals, and like I said... John did more to help the player's around him besides assists.
You've helped prove that KJ was a bit of a ball hog, even though he had good efficiency... I wonder what percentage Stockton's team mates shot in comparison to KJ's also, because John would play the percentages as well as anyone ever has. So KJ might have shot 50% and John might have shot 50%, but KJ shoots 10 more shots a game at 50% where John might have chosen to get the ball to someone who could have thrown in inside to Malone, who's shooting 55%. Anyway, those are unexplained things that are noticed when you watch games versus look at stat sheets.
Johnson scored and did great and all... but he was always looking to score the whole game, and only when he didn't have a clear look did he pass it out. He held and dribbled the ball a lot, while looking to score, where John would be looking to run the offense. John was better at letting other people get involved, and it wasn't just measured in assists.
Now, I'm not knocking KJ exactly, not in the grand scheme of things... but when you say he dominated Stockton head to head, there are a lot of things not shown on the stat sheet that went on. Stockton's role was to get his team mates involved, to let them touch the ball and work it around, KJ was looking to score, and while his stats went up, a portion of his teammates stats went down some. Stockton also played a lot of help defense and things, and helped his team get buckets off of screens, got a lot of deflections that went to his team mates that didn't count as part of his steals etc.
I watched the games, and I remember people thinking John got smoked because KJ had 30 points or whatever, while John would have 15 points on the same night, but someone else on the team would usually make up the difference. KJ took more shots is what it boiled down to, John could have shot more and got more points, but he always felt it was important to get everyone involved. I don't know about you, but I hate to hustle my ass off, playing defense, and rebounding, and then have someone else hogging the ball all the time, I become a lot more interested in playing hard when I get to be involved offensively in some manner, and have guys setting picks for me, and it motivates me to be more involved on defense.
Different type players, and while I sometimes questioned KJ's scoring first mentality, he also used that threat to get his team mates shots, and you had to respect his speed, quickness, and shooting... He was a tough player indeed... But he was a shoot first type player, while Stockton was a pass first type player, and while KJ may have better scoring stats, Stockton had better stats in assists, steals, and getting his teammates involved, and even during KJ's prime, it was still a pretty even matchup in my eyes.
[QUOTE=Chalkmaze]What's this 89-93 bull?
You are being selective... why not compare KJ's whole career, at least up until 96-97??? Go ahead... let's see the truth. You show that KJ was better offensively, and the FG% was close enough to be a wash, Stockton dominated in Assists and steals, and like I said... John did more to help the player's around him besides assists.
You've helped prove that KJ was a bit of a ball hog, even though he had good efficiency... I wonder what percentage Stockton's team mates shot in comparison to KJ's also, because John would play the percentages as well as anyone ever has. So KJ might have shot 50% and John might have shot 50%, but KJ shoots 10 more shots a game at 50% where John might have chosen to get the ball to someone who could have thrown in inside to Malone, who's shooting 55%. Anyway, those are unexplained things that are noticed when you watch games versus look at stat sheets.
Johnson scored and did great and all... but he was always looking to score the whole game, and only when he didn't have a clear look did he pass it out. He held and dribbled the ball a lot, while looking to score, where John would be looking to run the offense. John was better at letting other people get involved, and it wasn't just measured in assists.
Now, I'm not knocking KJ exactly, not in the grand scheme of things... but when you say he dominated Stockton head to head, there are a lot of things not shown on the stat sheet that went on. Stockton's role was to get his team mates involved, to let them touch the ball and work it around, KJ was looking to score, and while his stats went up, a portion of his teammates stats went down some. Stockton also played a lot of help defense and things, and helped his team get buckets off of screens, got a lot of deflections that went to his team mates that didn't count as part of his steals etc.
I watched the games, and I remember people thinking John got smoked because KJ had 30 points or whatever, but while John would have 15 points on the same night, but someone else on the team would usually make up the difference. KJ took more shots is what it boiled down to, John could have shot more and got more points, but he always felt it was important to get everyone involved. I don't know about you, but I hate to hustle my ass off, playing defense, and rebounding, and then have someone else hogging the ball all the time, I become a lot more interested in playing hard when I get to be involved offensively in some manner, and have guys setting picks for me, and it motivates me to be more involved on defense.
Different type players, and while I sometimes questioned KJ's scoring first mentality, he also used that threat to get his team mates shots, and you had to respect his speed, quickness, and shooting... He was a tough player indeed... But he was a shoot first type player, while Stockton was a pass first type player, and while KJ may have better scoring stats, Stockton had better stats in assists, steals, and getting his teammates involved, and it was pretty even in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
1. ALmost every PG is shoot-first compared to John Stockton, thats what you were saying on the post before this one right? As you saw, KJ's Shot to Assist ratio is lower than Nash and Kidd's, meaining he shot less per assist.
So compared to Nash, yeah he is shoot first, but compared to others like Nash and Kidd, he is right there with them, and even shot less compared to every assist.
2. 1989-1993 was their Peaks. I said I'd compare thier Peaks.
3, You said a lot about Stockton setting up his teammates and passing instead of shooting and actually helping his team more.
Well first of all, there is no way in hell Stockton would average 28 at 50% against any team or player over a 4 year period. If he shot that much, his FG% and assists would drop rapidly.
2nd, well, if Stockton was passing instead of shooting as much, why'd he only get 2 more assists? Is that all he helped? Just getting 2 more assists?
And if you still think Stockton's helping was better....
KJ: 11-5
Stockton: 5-11
That goes into the things "not shown" in the box score. The WIN and the LOSS column still says KJ's game brought in more wins than Stocktons.
And its not suprise, honestly, putting 28/11/50% against a player is DOMINATION. Seriously, 28/11, read that.
Summary:
I don't know how much Stockton "helped" other teammates, and how much all the "extra" things he did, because in the end, 5-11 was his record. While KJ's domination led to a 11-5 record.
And most of the games were before Barkley was even there, so that is even more impressive in KJ's part, beating the Jazz with both Malone and Stockton.
[B]Head to Head Winner: Kevin Johnson....easily[/B]