Reggie Miller > Steph Curry

[catzhernandez]

Fact

Discuss

[Nilocon165]

Reggie Miller Career Finals: 24.3 PPG on 41 Percent

Stephen Curry Career Finals: 24.1 PPG on 42 Percent


Reggie Highest Scoring Playoffs: 31.5 PPG

Steph Highest Scoring PLayoffs: 28.3 PPG

[OmniStrife]

Stop m[COLOR="Black"]astur[/COLOR]bating and get a job OP

[catzhernandez]

Reggie Miller: 432 career games with more than 4 made threes

Curry: 29 games with more than 4 made threes

Reggie: 31 game winning shots in the final three seconds

Curry: 2 game winning shots in the final three seconds

[stalkerforlife]

Reggie Miller: 432 career games with more than 4 made threes

Curry: 29 games with more than 4 made threes

Reggie: 31 game winning shots in the final three seconds

Curry: 2 game winning shots in the final three seconds

So lying is why you went to prison for so long?

[warriorfan]

Curry's Finals vs Reggie Miller's Finals



Reggie Miller TS%: 59%
Steph Curry TS%: 59%

[Kblaze8855]

Reggie Miller would quite possibly be the 7th man for the Warriors. 5th best player probably. But hes not starting and he wouldnt be more important than Iggy for many matchups.

[ClipperRevival]

Miller handled the physicality of playoff bball better. Curry can correct that as he has many long, playoff runs left but he's got a rep right now as a guy who can't handle physicality, and rightfully so.

Miller was great from the most basic, fundamental offensive position, the triple threat (quick first step, can drive, 1 and 2 dribble pull up) while Curry has NO game from the TT. And that is the primary reason why Miller was noticeably more effective against playoff physicality. Not to mention a great off ball, catch and shoot game. But Miller was superior to Curry at fighting through picks too. Not to mention, being 3-4 inches taller helped.

In a vacuum, Curry was better but add in playoff bball and physicality into the equation and you can argue Miller was better. His playoff stats, clutch play, etc don't lie.

[ClipperRevival]

Reggie Miller would quite possibly be the 7th man for the Warriors. 5th best player probably. But hes not starting and he wouldnt be more important than Iggy for many matchups.

If they replaced Curry with Miller in the 2016 finals, GSW wins a ring. Curry laid an egg. Some of it not his fault as he is only 6'3", weak and has no physical advantage to be able to impose his will on the game like every other great can. But you can't excuse his bad play simply on that fact alone. Miller seldom laid eggs in the playoffs as "the man."

[Rizko]

Reggie Miller would quite possibly be the 7th man for the Warriors. 5th best player probably. But hes not starting and he wouldnt be more important than Iggy for many matchups.

IDK dude I feel like it's at least a discussion between Reggie and Klay on whose better and more worthy of starting.

I've always felt that Klay was basically the modern Reggie, a lil more explosive f a scorer when hot but a lil more inconsistent over the aggregate. Klay is a lil bit better on D too. I've also kinda felt like the Warriors without Curry this year in the playoffs (the games he actually missed, not the no shows) were like an improved version of Reggie's Pacer teams.

Livingston = Jackson, Klay = Reggie, Iggy = Mckie, Draymond and i guess Barnes lol = Davis Bro's, Bogut = Smits.

Not a perfect comparison, but still a lot of overall similarities.

Overall I agree with your statement tho and your general assessment of Reggie being one of the most overrated players of all time.

Ray Allen >>> Reggie lol. I was never a huge fan of this constant comparison, Ray from 08 on is basically Reggie his whole career, pre-08 tho? Ray was like two tiers above what Reggie could touch in overall basketball abilities.

[Rizko]

If they replaced Curry with Miller in the 2016 finals, GSW wins a ring. Curry laid an egg. Some of it not his fault as he is only 6'3", weak and has no physical advantage to be able to impose his will on the game like every other great can. But you can't excuse his bad play simply on that fact alone. Miller seldom laid eggs in the playoffs as "the man."

If you replace Curry at the start of the season with Reggie tho they probably end up like the 3rd seed and have to beat both the Spurs and the Thunder, decreasing there finals chances a lot.

So, if the point I'm trying to make isnt clear, just because you feel Reggie would've done better in that specific instance doesn't make him better overall then Curry, or a better fit on the team. TBH he'd be really redundant on the team with Klay already there.

Also LOL at big upping Reggie's triple threat game in your other posts. Bruh Reggie was almost strictly an off-ball screen player. He could get one or two buckets in a game outta the triple threat on alright efficiency, but he's not "great" at it, like say Paul Pierce whose triple threat game was his bread and butter, more like passable considering how good off the ball he was.

[jstern]

Miller was very fundamentally sound. I think his play was better than his stats. I mean there's something to be said for a player that took his teams deep into the playoffs so many times as the man. It's like Tim Duncan, if you go on YouTube many young fans are outraged that so many sports people have him in the top ten list, because they really can't notice what made him so great.

Then you add the spacing, less physicality of this era, then Golden State probably would have won if you replaced Curry with Miller in the Finals. (Cant just plug a player into a team, but you know what I mean.)

[ClipperRevival]

If you replace Curry at the start of the season with Reggie tho they probably end up like the 3rd seed and have to beat both the Spurs and the Thunder, decreasing there finals chances a lot.

So, if the point I'm trying to make isnt clear, just because you feel Reggie would've done better in that specific instance doesn't make him better overall then Curry, or a better fit on the team. TBH he'd be really redundant on the team with Klay already there.

Also LOL at big upping Reggie's triple threat game in your other posts. Bruh Reggie was almost strictly an off-ball screen player. He could get one or two buckets in a game outta the triple threat on alright efficiency, but he's not "great" at it, like say Paul Pierce whose triple threat game was his bread and butter, more like passable considering how good off the ball he was.

Ok, "great" might be too strong a word but the fact is, Miller did score consistently from the TT position. He did have a good first step and had the 1 and 2 dribble pull up. Basic as it gets but crucial in the more physical game of playoff bball. Fighting through picks are tougher so you need to find other ways to score. Curry's game is too reliant on having space to operate. In the playoffs, Ds tighten up and players just aren't given the same freedom to operate offensively so you need other ways to score.

And I would disagree that Miller was overrated. The eye test confirms the dude was a natural leader, who gave his teammates confidence, played in like 6 ECF as "the man" and was clutch as hell.

[Rizko]

Ok, "great" might be too strong a word but the fact is, Miller did score consistently from the TT position. He did have a good first step and had the 1 and 2 dribble pull up. Basic as it gets but crucial in the more physical game of playoff bball. Fighting through picks are tougher so you need to find other ways to score. Curry's game is too reliant on having space to operate. In the playoffs, Ds tighten up and players just aren't given the same freedom to operate offensively so you need other ways to score.

And I would disagree that Miller was overrated. The eye test confirms the dude was a natural leader, who gave his teammates confidence, played in like 6 ECF as "the man" and was clutch as hell.

I agree with your opinions of the importance of the triple threat game overall. IMO it's the ultimate skill to have on offense, the skill that helps differentiate between superstar wing players and the rest of the pack, and if your master it you'll always have a place in the league.

Also completely agree with what you say about Curry. My biggest pet peeve about him.

Just disagree with how good Reggie was at the triple threat and disagree with your reasoning for why Reggie isn't overrated. In fact it's the very reason why I think he is.

I don't care about whose "the man" (and I know Larry Brown even called McKie the leader on the team at one point). I don't care how many ECF or finals you play in (win or lose). All I care about are the tangible skills I see a player display on the court. His game essentially. And as far as basketball skill goes Reggie was basically Boston Celtics Ray Allen or current Klay, both good players, but not top 50, or really even top 100 all time IMO (Ray Allen is in my top 100 due to his Buck's and Sonics years).

Like all that matters to me is what style of basketball you play, how good you are at it, how important are your on-court basketball skills are to winning in general, and how long you can sustain it. Because of longevity and the fact he filled his role perfectly, if I were to make it, I would probably end up having Reggie in my top 100, but just Reggie playing his best compared to every other legend playing there best? Reggie ranks right near the bottom on that list IMO.

[ClipperRevival]

I agree with your opinions of the importance of the triple threat game overall. IMO it's the ultimate skill to have on offense, the skill that helps differentiate between superstar wing players and the rest of the pack, and if your master it you'll always have a place in the league.

Also completely agree with what you say about Curry. My biggest pet peeve about him.

Just disagree with how good Reggie was at the triple threat and disagree with your reasoning for why Reggie isn't overrated. In fact it's the very reason why I think he is.

I don't care about whose "the man" (and I know Larry Brown even called McKie the leader on the team at one point). I don't care how many ECF or finals you play in (win or lose). All I care about are the tangible skills I see a player display on the court. His game essentially. And as far as basketball skill goes Reggie was basically Boston Celtics Ray Allen or current Klay, both good players, but not top 50, or really even top 100 all time IMO (Ray Allen is in my top 100 due to his Buck's and Sonics years).

Like all that matters to me is what style of basketball you play, how good you are at it, how important are your on-court basketball skills are to winning in general, and how long you can sustain it. Because of longevity and the fact he filled his role perfectly, if I were to make it, I would probably end up having Reggie in my top 100, but just Reggie playing his best compared to every other legend playing there best? Reggie ranks right near the bottom on that list IMO.

Disagree about Miller. He was the only constant in those Indiana teams from all those years. That was't coincidence. Some guys are just natural leaders who guys follow and I think Miller was one of them. The game isn't played by robots. You need good leaders to win imo. Miller was leading teams deep into the playoffs well into his late 30's. That carries weight to me. Winning carries weight (I know he didn't win a ring). Clutch matters to me so does leadership qualities. He passed my eye test. He wasn't afriad of the moment. Many guys are, he wasn't.