How good was Mark Price

[andgar923]

I always thought hand checking was a bigger change than the defensive 3 seconds.

[COLOR="Red"]I started watching ball around 96[/COLOR], I might have noticed it more because it's not a rule here, but I just seem to remember a lot of illegal defense calls there in the late 90's.
Also checked a few block numbers and they blocked around the same ammount of shots that they do today. I'm not putting too much into this though.

I'd say the majority of centers today play as close to the hoop as centers always have. I've heard a lot here how the centers now are soft and want to shoot 3 pointers, but from the top of my head I couldn't mention a single center in the league right now who shoots 3's at any regularity.

The Jordan rules clip is a bit extreme, I've read one of PJs books and he talks about that series and on how ALL their defensive focus was on catching Jordan, Pistons on top of that was an excellent defensive team.
When I see that video I don't just see a lane that's blocked because those where the rules. I see a great defensive team hustling their ass to follow the game plan on how to guard a single very good player.

Another theory of mine is that players took more tough shots back then because there wasn't a culture of using the 3pt line like they do today.

And just to clarify I'm not saying the lane wasn't more packed then than now, just that I though the hand checking was a quite bigger part than the defensive 3 seconds.

.....

[ZenMaster]

.....

Sorry I'm not older and I'm sorry that league pass didn't exists back then

And don't get cocky, I've seen how you disect basketball, offense in several parts while defense is just defense. You couldn't even respond to my post, only a bunch of dots.

96 that's still a good 18 years of watching ball, the last 5 years extensively because I don't play anymore but coach.

[fandarko]

I use the comparison to Jameer in terms of style of play, not impact. There are too many comparisons to Nash which I don't agree with. I'm not knocking him at all. I realize he was an all-star. But does being an all-star dictate how good of a shooter you are?
And being one of the best shooters? I said he was great but not outstanding. I don't ever remember him hitting it at clip compared to guys like Kerr, Les, Hawkins or the great 3 point shooters of that time. He was good enough to keep his defender close, but didn't impact the game in those regards.

He was a four-time All Star mainly for his shooting.

Kerr was a bench warmer and a shooting specialist, nothing close to Price.

Hawkins, a great shooter in his own right, had nothing on Price.

I remember Price hitting six threes in one ASG in the 90's.

I'm not sure you've watched him in his prime (I'm 43)...

[tpols]

That is a bold statement. Considering in his era I don't think he was even top 5. By that definition players like KJ and Tim Hardaway would be the best pg's today, because I felt they were clearly better than Price.
Price was more on the tiers with Derek Harper, Mark Jackson, Alvin Robertson, Mookie Blaylock.....
I'll give you the toughness. He was also a silent competitor and very steady. But being realistic Price was never really outstanding at anything except for ft. He was never amongst the leaders in other major pg categories like steals, 3 point percentage, assists...
I think Price tends to get overrated due to not getting the recognition, but at the same time being one of the more likeable players and a true blue collar hero.
Like I said before he' s more like Jameer Nelson than Steve Nash.

Youre talking to one of the most nostalgia blinded poster on this site..


Price was a 4 time allstar huh? Well Steve nash was a two time MVP and prolly double the amount of all star selections... Comparing the two is a sin

[fandarko]

Youre talking to one of the most nostalgia blinded poster on this site..


Price was a 4 time allstar huh? Well Steve nash was a two time MVP and prolly double the amount of all star selections... Comparing the two is a sin

Nash was the better player, though he for sure was not a better shooter.

But comparing Price to Jameer Nelson or Mookie Blaylock is flat out hilarious.

[hateraid]

I love how on here things get misinterpreted to such huge degree.
First off I'm 37. I've watched as much basketball as you possibly can with as little means as any household would have to show the NBA. My house was a basketball household. My father played and followed, I played and followed, I attended many Sixers games including against the Cavs back in those days. Also one of my best friends in highschool was from Ohio so he was huge into the Cavs and a big Mark Price fan. So I got to hear first hand how amazing he is.
So let's get that old BS out the way when you don't agree with somebody question their age and/or if they've seen him play.

Second, let's get this part straight. I am not saying:
Mark Price = Jameer Nelson.
I am very aware and more than willing to testify Mark Price is by far the superior player. What I am am trying to say is Mark price is more similar in game style to Jameer Nelson than he is to Steve Nash. I am not a fan of that comparison because it's the obvious they are both white.
Also in that same context I did not say say Kerr or Hawkins are as good as players as Price. I was comparing their marksmanship. Price was not in the calibre of those players. And if you really dug into his 3 point shooting statistics, the more he shot, the worse he got. His highest percentage was at 2 per game. Shooting more put his around 40%. This is not to say he wasn't a great 3 point shooter, but like ISH fashion let's blow it out of context.
I will admit I mistaken about his statistics. But even in regards to that he was not consistently at that level for a prolonged period of time nor did he finish in a top 3 in those categories, if even top 5. Fat Lever posted the same type of gaudy numbers for a short period of time. Is he top 3 today?

The fact is he is being greatly overrated. Not that he wasn't great nor he didn't deserve 4 all star appearances. He wasn't on the level of the KJs, John Stocktons, Tim Hardaways, GPs, of his time. Maybe a tad under them. But you guys need to really put his career into perspective and not aver glorify the man.

Great PG yes, Steve Nash calibre? c'mon man!

[MiseryCityTexas]

Nash blossomed after the rule change....Price would easily be just as effective as Nash in this era. Freedom without being steered by handchecking is the main reason this is a era of point guard

Stop twisting the truth. Nash never played when the rules were different. He was basically just like Kobe in the mid to late 90s: unfairly riding the bench because another star veteran starter that plays the same position is on the team.

[hateraid]

Nash was the better player, though he for sure was not a better shooter.

But comparing Price to Jameer Nelson or Mookie Blaylock is flat out hilarious.

Just as hilarious as comparing Price to Nash.

And honestly, what's the point of asking how good is Price if you had no intention of being objective?

[Bird]

And how well would he fare in today's NBA?

I loved his game back in the late 80's.

He was one of the best shooters in history, granted, but he was an underrated passer and man leader.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sua9u318wGo

On this clip, he seems a tad quicker than everyone of the floor, splitting the pick and roll, penetrating and dishing at will. Not to mention the shooting.

Make him undergo advanced strength and conditioning programs of the 2000s and put him in a team where he doesn't have to feed Daugherty, Nance and Harper and I can easily see him be a perennial 20/8 player at least.

In the right team, I don't see who could contain him today when they weren't able to guard him in the handchecking era.

He was basically a quicker, less flashy Steve Nash. His explosiveness and dribbling quickness I think was severely underrated. Watch how he gets by defenders as if they didn't existed. Perhaps could be compared to a smaller Curry without the length and the fancy dribbling.

With a shoot-first mindset, he would kill it today...

Anybody remembers this guy? Of course, you need to be +40 to have really enjoyed his game...

Untrue.

Price retired after the 98 season. I'm 29 and remember watching him play very thoroughly (I also copied his playing style since I was and still am a short white guy with a very good 3 pt shot).

As to your question: Price was very good. I think he would be one of the 6 or 7 best PG's in the game. Better defensively than Nash was/is (probably his most comparable player since he retired and not just because they are both white), just as deadly a shooter and probably would have been just as successful being the engine of those run'n'gun Suns.

You wouldn't want him to be the #1 on your team, but I would LOVE to watch him PG for Clippers (better shooter than Paul), Indiana (which would make the Pacers absolutely terrifying), Dallas (that's my homer pick though) or in Oklahoma City (I think he would be better for KD than Westbrook, but think Westbrook, when healthy, would be a better PG than Price).

If I had to rank him, Paul, Curry, Westbrook, Wall, Lillard, Price, Kyrie, etc. Somewhere in the 5th or 6th area, depending on how you feel about Lillard and Kyrie.

[fandarko]

Just as hilarious as comparing Price to Nash.

And honestly, what's the point of asking how good is Price if you had no intention of being objective?

Well, I said Nash was better, didn't I?

It's not hilarious to compare them, since great white PG's are a rare bread.

Apart from Dragic, there isn't a single one in today's game.

[fandarko]

I love how on here things get misinterpreted to such huge degree.
First off I'm 37. I've watched as much basketball as you possibly can with as little means as any household would have to show the NBA. My house was a basketball household. My father played and followed, I played and followed, I attended many Sixers games including against the Cavs back in those days. Also one of my best friends in highschool was from Ohio so he was huge into the Cavs and a big Mark Price fan. So I got to hear first hand how amazing he is.
So let's get that old BS out the way when you don't agree with somebody question their age and/or if they've seen him play.

Second, let's get this part straight. I am not saying:
Mark Price = Jameer Nelson.
I am very aware and more than willing to testify Mark Price is by far the superior player. What I am am trying to say is Mark price is more similar in game style to Jameer Nelson than he is to Steve Nash. I am not a fan of that comparison because it's the obvious they are both white.
Also in that same context I did not say say Kerr or Hawkins are as good as players as Price. I was comparing their marksmanship. Price was not in the calibre of those players. And if you really dug into his 3 point shooting statistics, the more he shot, the worse he got. His highest percentage was at 2 per game. Shooting more put his around 40%. This is not to say he wasn't a great 3 point shooter, but like ISH fashion let's blow it out of context.
I will admit I mistaken about his statistics. But even in regards to that he was not consistently at that level for a prolonged period of time nor did he finish in a top 3 in those categories, if even top 5. Fat Lever posted the same type of gaudy numbers for a short period of time. Is he top 3 today?

The fact is he is being greatly overrated. Not that he wasn't great nor he didn't deserve 4 all star appearances. He wasn't on the level of the KJs, John Stocktons, Tim Hardaways, GPs, of his time. Maybe a tad under them. But you guys need to really put his career into perspective and not aver glorify the man.

Great PG yes, Steve Nash calibre? c'mon man!

I agree with everything in your post, apart from the marksmanship thing. Kerr couldn't touch Price on in-game shooting. Hawkins ok, but Kerr was a from-the-bench specialist, it's not the same league. You've got his overall standing just about right. No, he wasn't at the level of KJ, Stockton (he didn't have Malone, I believe that's more or less the only reason, skills wise, Stockton had nothing on Price) or prime Hardaway. Though Price is sometimes slightly overrated due to the combination of nostalgia/white factor, I still believe he would have been an all star calibre player today. And I don't agree that it's hilarious comparing him to Nash. Nash was better, but let's not make it sound he was another league compared to Price...