Top 10 most overrated list which exists just to farm engagement.

It’s too all over the place to feel like there was a theme other than getting Internet reactions. Like having both Stockton and Iverson. It almost feels like you have to pick one. They shouldn’t both be on an overrated list.

But I’ll use it for the same purpose here so I can’t judge….


[IMG]https://www.hostpic.org/images/2311022153020333.jpeg[/IMG]

7 of those 10 were at least part-time point guards. 3 of 7 were pass-first. Not that there is any reason I can see for this without some kind of accompanying article but that's disproportionate.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14845499]7 of those 10 were at least part-time point guards. 3 of 7 were pass-first. Not that there is any reason I can see for this without some kind of accompanying article but that's disproportionate.[/QUOTE]

I’m wondering what aspect of basketball you are into to think Gary Payton is overrated. He’s scored. He was a good play maker. He was one of the best defenders at his position ever. Elite some really good teams even with the couple upsets.

He seems a weird guy to list. No one agenda or belief system would seem to justify it.

If anything Wilt, Magic, and Rondo are underrated. Wilt was an absolute monster and nobody talks about him anymore, Magic injected life into a soul-less Kareem led Lakers, and Rondo has always shown up in the playoffs when the stakes are highest earning the nick name playoff Rondo. How those guys are on the list is totally preposterous.

The only guys on that list that are overrated are derozan, rose, ja, and Iverson.

Imagine making this list and having Magic Johnson near the top and leaving out Russell Westbrook. Whoever compiled this needs to loaded into a space shuttle shot out to the deepest void in the universe.

Iverson is underrated if anything.

Big portion of fans today are stat nerds. They immediately see Iverson's FG% and write him off as a chucker....with minimal impact. :lol

Magic being THE most overrated player though is absurd. Whoever came up with this list couldn't care less about winning. Or intangibles

Some things just don’t make sense to me when people refer to them as overrated. A guy like DeRozan? You have never read five consecutive positive comments about DeMar DeRozan. He could have 68 points tonight. Hes still going to get criticized about playoff performances from years ago. If the consistent response to everything you do is to question the validity of whatever status the speaker thinks you have how can you be overrated?

2-3 of us he people you mentioned get way too much hate to be generally overrated.

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy;14845515]Iverson is underrated if anything.

Big portion of fans today are stat nerds. They immediately see Iverson's FG% and write him off as a chucker....with minimal impact. :lol

Magic being THE most overrated player though is absurd. Whoever came up with this list couldn't care less about winning. Or intangibles[/QUOTE]

Iverson was a low efficient gunner rather you're a stat nerd or not

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845517]Some things just don’t make sense to me when people refer to them as overrated. A guy like DeRozan? You have never read five consecutive positive comments about DeMar DeRozan. He could have 68 points tonight. Hes still going to get criticized about playoff performances from years ago. If the consistent response to everything you do is to question the validity of whatever status the speaker thinks you have how can you be overrated?

2-3 of us he people you mentioned get way too much hate to be generally overrated.[/QUOTE]

The sentiment comes from the fact his game falls off a cliff in the playoffs production wise.

I think a lot of it though comes down to reffing. In the regular season Derozan would get double digit FT averages in his prime. Basically superstar free throw allotment, but in the playoffs he gets nothing basically.

Ive never once seen derozan in a commercial or ad so his lack of corporate endorsement probably works against him when he faces the media darlings. Nobody is underrating his skill.

Iverson criticism is almost exclusively a stat nerd thing. Well, not so much a nerd, but definitely an analytical type who is fighting about it on the Internet. If you could find a way to measure the percentage of a persons haters who can’t actually play basketball? I’d have to imagine he will be really high on the list of people who see the game as a collection of numbers.

i’m not 100% certain I’ve ever heard verbal Iverson hate. I’ve known people who liked him less than others but the kind of shit you see online? I’ve never known it to come from a person I can verify isnt artificial intelligence. Strictly an Internet “nerd” kind of thing.

perhaps it’s a demographic issue, but I have never personally known anybody who talks about Allen Iverson with the term is used on the Internet. Nor do I really see it from people in the game. He might well be the all-time percentage leader far is how much of his criticism comes from people who can’t play basketball and are dying to type numbers at you that nobody who plays basketball cares about.

[QUOTE=tpols;14845519]The sentiment comes from the fact his game falls off a cliff in the playoffs production wise.

I think a lot of it though comes down to reffing. In the regular season Derozan would get double digit FT averages in his prime. Basically superstar free throw allotment, but in the playoffs he gets nothing basically.

Ive never once seen derozan in a commercial or ad so his lack of corporate endorsement probably works against him when he faces the media darlings. Nobody is underrating his skill.[/QUOTE]

what I’m saying is when the extreme majority of the basketball world says that how was he been overrated?

It’s like calling pissing yourself overrated.

It’s universally disliked.

Things have to be rated highly by people to be overrated don’t they?

Iverson should be number one, Reggie, Isiah & Kobe belong too.

No need one specific criteria. This guy just thinks all these guys are ranked too high on most all time lists or were viewed too highly in their primes

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845524]Iverson criticism is almost exclusively a stat nerd thing. Well, not so much a nerd, but definitely an analytical type who is fighting about it on the Internet. If you could find a way to measure the percentage of a persons haters who can’t actually play basketball? I’d have to imagine he will be really high on the list of people who see the game as a collection of numbers.

i’m not 100% certain I’ve ever heard verbal Iverson hate. I’ve known people who liked him less than others but the kind of shit you see online? I’ve never known it to come from a person I can verify isnt artificial intelligence. Strictly an Internet “nerd” kind of thing.

perhaps it’s a demographic issue, but I have never personally known anybody who talks about Allen Iverson with the term is used on the Internet. Nor do I really see it from people in the game. He might will be the all-time percentage leader far is how much of his criticism comes from people who can’t play basketball and are dying to type numbers at you that nobody who plays basketball cares about.[/QUOTE]

analytics weren't a thing in '96 and he was still a low iq, low efficiency player anyway you want to look at it. I can play basketball. I can't imagine playing basketball like Iverson or The Bum though

The overemphasis on analytics has caused guys like Kobe and Iverson to become underrated imo

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845524]Iverson criticism is almost exclusively a stat nerd thing. Well, not so much a nerd, but definitely an analytical type who is fighting about it on the Internet. If you could find a way to measure the percentage of a persons haters who can’t actually play basketball? I’d have to imagine he will be really high on the list of people who see the game as a collection of numbers.

i’m not 100% certain I’ve ever heard verbal Iverson hate. I’ve known people who liked him less than others but the kind of shit you see online? I’ve never known it to come from a person I can verify isnt artificial intelligence. Strictly an Internet “nerd” kind of thing.

perhaps it’s a demographic issue, but I have never personally known anybody who talks about Allen Iverson with the term is used on the Internet. Nor do I really see it from people in the game. He might will be the all-time percentage leader far is how much of his criticism comes from people who can’t play basketball and are dying to type numbers at you that nobody who plays basketball cares about.[/QUOTE]

Same. Neither in real time nor after the fact have I ever seen people, people who actually play, attack Iversonblike people do on the internet.

I also find it rich that giys like Xiao praise the shit out of Stockton while the criticize Iverson, Kidd et al for their efficiency.

What exactly has Stockton achieved? He played with a scoring machine from a young age. Neither Kidd nor Iverson played with a player as good for an extended period.

OT: While I praised him just a second ago I think Malone gets way more overrated than Stockton from those 80s/90s Jazz.

The list itself is totally wack and imo the most overrated player I've seen live is post retirement Reggie. Media and people act like he was some rival for Jordan and some really great scorer, while he was a passive off ball scorer, who didn't look to score half a game.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14845534]Same. Neither in real time nor after the fact have I ever seen people, people who actually play, attack Iversonblike people do on the internet.

I also find it rich that giys like Xiao praise the shit out of Stockton while the criticize Iverson, Kidd et al for their efficiency.

What exactly has Stockton achieved? He played with a scoring machine from a young age. Neither Kidd nor Iverson played with a player as good for an extended period.

OT: While I praised him just a second ago I think Malone gets way more overrated than Stockton from those 80s/90s Jazz.

The list itself is totally wack and imo the most overrated player I've seen live is post retirement Reggie. Media and people act like he was some rival for Jordan and some really great scorer, while he was a passive off ball scorer, who didn't look to score half a game.[/QUOTE]
Xiao has zero consistency. He tries to pretend his views on players are objective but they're not at all and just based off who he likes. He says he hates guys who don't play defense but he stanned George Niang and Adrian Dantley hard. He says he hates guys who don't play offense but he loves guys like Gobert. He says he hates low efficiency guys but he praises Anthony Edwards and says he's better than the much more efficient KAT. He says he loves guys who play elite d but he hates on Kidd, Eaton, and Rubio. He says he hates guys who don't pass but he loves Adrian Dantley like I said before. He says he loves elite two way players but he shits on AD and Embiid. Just a guy with favorites and zero objectivity.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845530]analytics weren't a thing in '96 and he was still a low iq, low efficiency player anyway you want to look at it. I can play basketball. I can't imagine playing basketball like Iverson or The Bum though[/QUOTE]

as has been shown time and time again, the extreme vast majority of even stars who play the way you think they should don’t get any better results. 100 Hall of Famer’s didn’t win shit Allen Iverson didn’t even though half of them played on teams with more Prime Star power than he ever had. A certain kind of person is just going to pick on players like Allen Iverson because they feeeeeeel a certain way that they don’t feel about several other people who can, and have been mobbed up on the same team at the same time and get no results.

people have been taking two other prime All-Star caliber guys and 54% shooting their way to 43 wins and a first round exit for 75 years. Guys like Iverson just rubbed certain people wrong.

let prime Allen Iverson have Dirk +3 other All-Stars on one team and lose in the first round. It would get mentioned so often we would have to delete the repeat topics like 3ball bullshit.

but we don’t talk about it with Nash or how they let him walk and gave his money to Eric Dampier and brought in Jason Terry and the team got better with less talent.

Certain numbers and play styles get stat nerd ******* wet, so they will overlook overwhelming evidence that pretty much every style of play is going to mostly lose and their hate is incredibly selective and turns a blind eye to most results.

Very little consistency in the arguments, despite consistency being one of the big talking points from that crowd.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14845534]Same. Neither in real time nor after the fact have I ever seen people, people who actually play, attack Iversonblike people do on the internet.

I also find it rich that giys like Xiao praise the shit out of Stockton while the criticize Iverson, Kidd et al for their efficiency.

What exactly has Stockton achieved? He played with a scoring machine from a young age. Neither Kidd nor Iverson played with a player as good for an extended period.

OT: While I praised him just a second ago I think Malone gets way more overrated than Stockton from those 80s/90s Jazz.

The list itself is totally wack and imo the most overrated player I've seen live is post retirement Reggie. Media and people act like he was some rival for Jordan and some really great scorer, while he was a passive off ball scorer, who didn't look to score half a game.[/QUOTE]

Stockton played the game it was supposed to be played as a team. It's not supposed to be played 1 on 5. I realize today's fans don't really get that with the emphasis on iso :cheers:

can't quit me!

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845542]Stockton played the game it was supposed to be played as a team. It's not supposed to be played 1 on 5. I realize today's fans don't really get that with the emphasis on iso :cheers:[/QUOTE]

What did his teams accomplish that AI's or Kidd's didn't?

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845542]Stockton played the game it was supposed to be played as a team. It's not supposed to be played 1 on 5. I realize today's fans don't really get that with the emphasis on iso :cheers:[/QUOTE]


To what effect?

What does “the right way” buy you when the other team scored more points than your team when it matters?

People really struggle getting their heads around the fact that the score board doesn’t give a **** how efficiently you score less points than the other team did. If you can play with an MVP caliber player for something like 14-15 years in a row with supporting casts including 20ppg sixth men, DPOYs, great shooting former all stars(plural) and so on…. And lose your entire life? Whatever you’re doing isn’t THAT effective. Out here losing in the first round with multiple 55+ win teams. One 60 win team I believe.

What is the real world game application of playing the right way on the way to the same couch the guy who supposedly plays the wrong way is going to watch the rest of the playoffs with you from?

It’s like having a beautiful form on a jumper that never goes in. Can your jumper be textbook and flawless when the ball consistently doesn’t go in the basket? If so….what use is the “textbook” form?

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14845534]Same. Neither in real time nor after the fact have I ever seen people, people who actually play, attack Iversonblike people do on the internet.

I also find it rich that giys like Xiao praise the shit out of Stockton while the criticize Iverson, Kidd et al for their efficiency.

What exactly has Stockton achieved? He played with a scoring machine from a young age. Neither Kidd nor Iverson played with a player as good for an extended period.

OT: While I praised him just a second ago I think Malone gets way more overrated than Stockton from those 80s/90s Jazz.

The list itself is totally wack and imo the most overrated player I've seen live is post retirement Reggie. Media and people act like he was some rival for Jordan and some really great scorer, while he was a passive off ball scorer, who didn't look to score half a game.[/QUOTE]


Kidd took one of the worst defenses in the league and made them #1 rank. He's by far the best defensive and rebounding PG of all time. Talking about a guy outrebounding prime Ben Wallace in playoff series. Great passer too.

His main weakness was his scoring ability. The thing about Iverson was the [I]only[/I] thing he was good at was scoring but he even did that inefficiently.

Jkidd probably won triple or quadruple the amount of playoff games Iverson won. I'm not gonna look it up... but it may be way more than that.

[QUOTE=tpols;14845551]Kidd took one of the worst defenses in the league and made them #1 rank. He's by far the best defensive and rebounding PG of all time. Talking about a guy outrebounding prime Ben Wallace in playoff series. Great passer too.

His main weakness was his scoring ability. The thing about Iverson was the [I]only[/I] thing he was good at was scoring but he even did that inefficiently.

Jkidd probably won triple or quadruple the amount of playoff games Iverson won. I'm not gonna look it up... but it may be way more than that.[/QUOTE]


off the top of my head as best player it’s nine series wins versus six. Kidd then won more as a lesser player on the Mavs.

through their primes it’s 9 to 6 and Kidd didn’t win a playoff series till he was like 29.

He went and shot 31% in the playoffs once and beat up his wife which along with I believe a DUI forced him out of Phoenix and it wasn’t even his worst playoff showing.

he shot 0-8 for 0 points in 42 minutes(7assists 5 rebounds) in a game seven loss of a series he shot 28% in at his peak.

kidd has statistically some of the ugliest performances in history. Not that I care. But some of you(selectively) do.

What Kidd did on the mavs counts. While Iverson was kicked out of the league because he could never assimilate as anything other than a shot jacker, Kidd was still playing a hugely important role assist leader and floor general on a championship team.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14845548]What did his teams accomplish that AI's or Kidd's didn't?[/QUOTE]

Who cares? The worst thing I can say about Stockton is was too unselfish and too loyal to the Jazz. You can have Kidd and Iverson. I'd want nothing to do with either

I don’t care what you are anybody wants to count I’ve been saying on here for 20 years when you ask me about a player I’m not talking about the declines version. You don’t see me talking about 2007 Tracy McGrady and you don’t see me judging Jason Kidd, by what he was when he was old. That said he was in fact, the coach killing malcontent criminal inefficient player a lot of people accuse Iversen of being. Jason Kidd organized a mutiny to get his college coach fired. Was in a love triangle with a teammates girlfriend that broke up a promising core in Dallas when he demanded a trade. Went to Phoenix and started beating up his wife in front of his kid(pled guilty) and drinking while driving. After things went bad on the nets he got at least one coach fired and later pools of James Harden and refused to play and ****ed over Lawrence Frank and demanded another trade.

Jason Kidd skated through the whole era as a cancerous, teammate alienating, coach killing, trade demanding, wife beating, drunk driving, inefficient, surly injury faking asshole.

and I love him. Wifebeating aside of course. And drunk driving.

Id take both he and Iverson on my franchise any time. It’s just hilarious the reputation he managed to keep because he rose and fell before social media.

I appreciate this list. Im sure they can make their arguments.

completely subjective obviously. you could argue these players to be underrated.

I would argue derozan is UNDERRATED because his stats dont do him justice. he owns the worst all-time worst playoff plus minus (had deep runs on young teams) - in reality he got a young franchise to its first conference finals as the first option


would have been a champion if he played as the second option as a contender. he never got the chance.


my personal most overrated of all time is


1. kobe
2. chris bosh
3. durant

underrated:

1. wade
2. kawhi
3. pierce

Most of what you said was off the court stuff. And acting like Iverson didn't beat his wife and throw her out on the front lawn.

I generally don't bring that stuff up though. I don't care what these guys did in their personal lives, a lot of them are on some power hungry scumbag shit.

On the court though? Kidd is by far the most elite defensive and rebounding player at his position and a brilliant passer. There's a reason he won way more basketball games than Iverson did.

It's kind of wierd Xiao hates him though. He wasn't a gunner and played elite defense. That seems to be his "type". But apparently not lol.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845555]Who cares? The worst thing I can say about Stockton is was too unselfish and too loyal to the Jazz. You can have Kidd and Iverson. I'd want nothing to do with either[/QUOTE]


The “who cares” kind of throws out the meat of the argument about what the right way is. If the supposed right way doesn’t lead to any more success, despite greater resources? The “rightness” is a bit questionable.

John Stockton wouldn’t do a single ****ing thing worth talking about if he were in the place of Jason Kidd. There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest it.

When being too unselfish brings about the same result as being too selfish, the difference doesn’t much matter.

Unselfishly watching your team score less than the opponent as you get knocked out of the playoffs isn’t the right way to play anymore than shooting your team out of the game is. You might prefer to play with the overly unselfish guy, but it’s the guy with a balance who is closer to playing the right way. And even he’s going to lose almost all the time as well.

A lot of this right way. Wrong way shit is just people keeping up for their favorite players regardless of what evidence they are use. People just like who they like. Do you like John Stockton. You don’t like Allen Iverson. I like both of them because I can appreciate pretty much any style of greatness.

Give me Stockton or Iverson or Kidd. I’m happy. And all 3 are probably gonna lose 15 years in a row.

[QUOTE=red1;14845558]1. kobe
2. chris bosh
3. durant

underrated:

1. wade
2. kawhi
3. pierce[/QUOTE]
my opinions:

kobe is top 7 some people have him top 3 or as their GOAT which IMO is overrating him. the real top 5 players are all big men or hyper athletes like lebron mj kareem wilt and shaq

bosh is a great player some people argue he was top 5 in the league which is overrating

durant is the best scorer of his era but brings zero leadership and little intangibles to his team



wade is the second best shooting guard ever IMO

kawhi is second best player of his era. yes - better than curry and kd.

pierce was a big game player. his stats and accolades dont do him justice. people used to argue that melo was better which I disagree with.

[QUOTE=tpols;14845564]Most of what you said was off the court stuff. And acting like Iverson didn't beat his wife and throw her out on the front lawn.

I generally don't bring that stuff up though. I don't care what these guys did in their personal lives, a lot of them are on some power hungry scumbag shit.

On the court though? Kidd is by far the most elite defensive and rebounding player at his position and a brilliant passer. There's a reason he won way more basketball games than Iverson did.

It's kind of wierd Xiao hates him though. He wasn't a gunner and played elite defense. That seems to be his "type". But apparently not lol.[/QUOTE]


I didn’t act like anything about Iverson. Iverson’s issues were heavily publicized. Kidd went around beating women drinking and driving, telling his teammates to ignore multiple coaches and getting them fired. Refusing to play and demanding trades more than anybody short of James Harden. He was just a bad person to have on your team outside the 48 minutes of the game and he would routinely go and shoot one for 12 or something in a close playoff loss. He was as a matter of fact, hugely inefficient, and did more cancerous activities than almost anybody who has the reputation for it.

he’s somewhat like Karl Malone, with obviously different transgressions. Somehow maintained a great reputation while being an absolute piece of shit. Far as I can, tell, malone wasn’t a bad teammate though. Jason Kidd ruined three teams, and demanded to be traded from two after refusing to play hard.

I knew all that even then. I’ve repped Jason Kidd and Iverson and John Stockton for the last 30 years. I don’t care about most of the things that a persons haters won’t let go of. I respect greatness in all its forms and pretty much everyones haters take it too far.

in their primes, they’re all pretty similarly accomplished, and Stockton is definitely the one who did the least with the most. But that isnt a way to seriously evaluate a player to me. It’s just funny how selective people are about it.

none of them really lead a team to true victory and Stockton is the only one who consistently had anyone who probably should have been able to do it with him.

I don’t think you could give Jason kidd Kevin Garnett, or Dirk for a 15 year prime and not win. I’d also imagine prime Kevin Garnett on the 76ers would’ve been quite helpful. Stockton had what neither of them did. An MVP caliber running mate for his entire professional career with a hugely respected coach and a rotation of good third players and decent If not great role players depending on the year.

his career great as it was really doesn’t do much to suggest there is one ultimately effective way to play. You figure a great defensive, tough as nails, 55% shooting point guard who has maybe two peers in basketball history as a floor general would get more done given arguably his ideal running mate for a healthy near 20 year run.

But as the old saying goes….that’s why they play the games.

Reggie Miller and Magic Johnson quite easily.

Not sure why Payton is on there. Or some of the current crop of players...

[QUOTE=tpols;14845564]Most of what you said was off the court stuff. And acting like Iverson didn't beat his wife and throw her out on the front lawn.

I generally don't bring that stuff up though. I don't care what these guys did in their personal lives, a lot of them are on some power hungry scumbag shit.

On the court though? Kidd is by far the most elite defensive and rebounding player at his position and a brilliant passer. There's a reason he won way more basketball games than Iverson did.

It's kind of wierd Xiao hates him though. He wasn't a gunner and played elite defense. That seems to be his "type". But apparently not lol.[/QUOTE]

Kidd took the most shots on his team despite not being able to shoot. He was hyped because of triple doubles. Getting a triple double while shooting 5-19 from the floor never did much for me. If you shot less than 40% and took a lot of shots you aren't my type

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845565]The “who cares” kind of throws out the meat of the argument about what the right way is. If the supposed right way doesn’t lead to any more success, despite greater resources? The “rightness” is a bit questionable.

John Stockton wouldn’t do a single ****ing thing worth talking about if he were in the place of Jason Kidd. There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest it.

When being too unselfish brings about the same result as being too selfish, the difference doesn’t much matter.

Unselfishly watching your team score less than the opponent as you get knocked out of the playoffs isn’t the right way to play anymore than shooting your team out of the game is. You might prefer to play with the overly unselfish guy, but it’s the guy with a balance who is closer to playing the right way. And even he’s going to lose almost all the time as well.

A lot of this right way. Wrong way shit is just people keeping up for their favorite players regardless of what evidence they are use. People just like who they like. Do you like John Stockton. You don’t like Allen Iverson. I like both of them because I can appreciate pretty much any style of greatness.

Give me Stockton or Iverson or Kidd. I’m happy. And all 3 are probably gonna lose 15 years in a row.[/QUOTE]

Stockton would have been the same player regardless of where he was. I can guarantee he wouldn't have shot under 40% under any circumstance. You can have your low IQ gunners. I'll take the other guys

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845572]I didn’t act like anything about Iverson. Iverson’s issues were heavily publicized. Kidd went around beating women drinking and driving, telling his teammates to ignore multiple coaches and getting them fired. Refusing to play and demanding trades more than anybody short of James Harden. He was just a bad person to have on your team outside the 48 minutes of the game and he would routinely go and shoot one for 12 or something in a close playoff loss. He was as a matter of fact, hugely inefficient, and did more cancerous activities than almost anybody who has the reputation for it.

he’s somewhat like Karl Malone, with obviously different transgressions. Somehow maintained a great reputation while being an absolute piece of shit. Far as I can, tell, malone wasn’t a bad teammate though. Jason Kidd ruined three teams, and demanded to be traded from two after refusing to play hard.

I knew all that even then. I’ve repped Jason Kidd and Iverson and John Stockton for the last 30 years. I don’t care about most of the things that a persons haters won’t let go of. I respect greatness in all its forms and pretty much everyones haters take it too far.

in their primes, they’re all pretty similarly accomplished, and Stockton is definitely the one who did the least with the most. But that isnt a way to seriously evaluate a player to me. It’s just funny how selective people are about it.

none of them really lead a team to true victory and Stockton is the only one who consistently had anyone who probably should have been able to do it with him.

I don’t think you could give Jason kidd Kevin Garnett, or Dirk for a 15 year prime and not win. I’d also imagine prime Kevin Garnett on the 76ers would’ve been quite helpful. Stockton had what neither of them did. An MVP caliber running mate for his entire professional career with a hugely respected coach and a rotation of good third players and decent If not great role players depending on the year.

his career great as it was really doesn’t do much to suggest there is one ultimately effective way to play. You figure a great defensive, tough as nails, 55% shooting point guard who has maybe two peers in basketball history as a floor general would get more done given arguably his ideal running mate for a healthy near 20 year run.

But as the old saying goes….that’s why they play the games.[/QUOTE]

A highly respected coach that went from 1st to 3rd in his division with two of the greats and again with the legendary Carlos Boozer. A team having loyalty towards you doesn't make you a great coach. They had a cheap owner. They were playing 4 on 5 at the offensive end with Eaton. There were always huge holes on their teams even when they won 60 games. Who were all these great role players they had other than Horny? I mean the ones that Sloan would actually play over the scrubs he often preferred? Jeff Malone? Bobby Hansen? Delaney Rudd? Jarron Collins? :roll:

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845587]Stockton would have been the same player regardless of where he was.[/QUOTE]

That's exactly the problem.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14845596]That's exactly the problem.[/QUOTE]

Being great in any era under any coach with any teammates is a problem?

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14845587]Stockton would have been the same player regardless of where he was. I can guarantee he wouldn't have shot under 40% under any circumstance. You can have your low IQ gunners. I'll take the other guys[/QUOTE]


That’s just a field goal percentage version of rooting for stats regardless of success. You rep guys with numbers you desire, and others are out for numbers they desire. Must’ve loved bum ass Jason Kapono, who absolutely stopped shooting, trying to maintain a record percentage toward the end of the season.

Percentages are all you seem to require as if shooting 54% with fewer points than the other team scored gives you a W. It doesn’t. It’s just a stat nerd approved L of no consequence.

Losing is losing.

Stockton shooting 55% doesn’t matter in a big loss any more than the more traditionally clowned empty stats do.

Just L after L regardless of how each of them get there.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14845610]That’s just a field goal percentage version of rooting for stats regardless of success. You rep guys with numbers you desire, and others are out for numbers they desire. Must’ve loved bum ass Jason Kapono, who absolutely stopped shooting, trying to maintain a record percentage toward the end of the season.

Percentages are all you seem to require as if shooting 54% with fewer points than the other team scored gives you a W. It doesn’t. It’s just a stat nerd approved L of no consequence.

Losing is losing.

Stockton shooting 55% doesn’t matter in a big loss any more than the more traditionally clowned empty stats do.

Just L after L regardless of how each of them get there.[/QUOTE]

% aren't everything I look at. I watch them play. Was a Stockton fan from day 1 when he was shooting 46%. BB IQ, playing both ends, playing unselfishlessly... Gunners, one way players, low IQ aren't for me