In their primes: Jerry Stackhouse or Gilbert Arenas?

[Rose]

I'd go with Arenas but he only had a couple of REAL good seasons.

This.

[ChrisKreager]

Arenas.

Stackhouse was very good at times, but he never gave you that feeling of 'yikes.'

Arenas had a boatload of 'OMG, he's en fuego' moments: dropping 60 on Kobe, 54 on the Suns, buzzer-beaters galore (including when he made one against Utah and turned around).

There were games before he got hurt when Arenas was flat-out scary.

[DaHeezy]

They are both black holes. Stackhouse was more of one. From what I can recall Stackhouse had one move and couldn't go left. So I'd say Arenas was the better scorer. But Stackhouse was fairly unstoppable with that one move

[Collie]

Stackhouse was hella overrated. Definition of good stats on a bad team. Amazingly inefficient. The year he averaged 30, he shot 40(!)% from the field and averaged 40 mpg.

Arenas wasn't much better, but he at least was the best player on a playoff team, and was fairly efficient (aboe 55% TS) for his prime. Decent passer as well.

[The_Yearning]

Stackhouse isn't overrated... he is rated correctly.

Arenas however, is damn overrated.

Choking against LBJ, letting the biggest choker in the NBA punking you at the free throw line in a must win NBA playoff game?

C'mon son.

[hennigplex]

Stack.

http://youtu.be/iQ2GVnJQ7QA

[jbryan1984]

In terms of consistent scoring over the years, it is Stack. But as far as being a prime superstar, it was Arenas, even if it was only for a few years. People forget that Arenas was once a top 10 player, imo at least. Stack never was.

[Solid Snake]

Umm, is this serious?

You guys realize that prime Arenas is 29ppg/6 assists/4 rebounds on 45% fg, 37% 3pt fg, All-NBA 2nd team, popular enough to START at the All-Star guard spot over Vince Carter, on the cover of NBA Live 08 when Live was still the #1 basketball game, all while leading a playoff team and hitting game winning shot after game winning shot.

Stackhouse made the All-Star team once, a fringe All-Star during his prime.

It's literally two different levels of a player.

Live hasn't been the number 1 basketball game since 2001 you dumb ****.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Nah I would go with Stackhouse. Bigger, tougher, goes to the rim harder and a former scoring champ.

He was #2 in scoring average, never higher, and he shot 40% on a terrible team. I have a psychological injunction against saying anything positive about Arenas but Stack wasn't a truly great scorer.

[ralph_i_el]

Hibatchi

actually got my #0 jersey on today

[SilkkTheShocker]

Give me Jerry. Arenas had the better prime, but Jerry was a better defender, more durable, and could come off the bench.

[Nash-tastic]

Gilbert Arenas.

But damn Stackhouse was unstoppable on the fast break

[Whoah10115]

Arenas was an overrated chucker.



But Jerry Stackhouse made a living out of scoring a lot of points on 2% shooting, on bad teams. Gilbert Arenas did step up in big moments, was the best player on a playoff team. And to be fair to him, if the coach has anything resembling testicles, he would have made him play the 2 and gotten some kind of PG.



Seriously, isn't Arenas like 6'4? Well built and not overly quick. Why was he playing the point? To have more license to shoot like an idiot, I guess.

[blablabla]

agent zero

[Lebron23]

Gilbert was the better playoffs performer.