Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

[The15thunter]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

I don't mind that list, I just personally believe when comparing players across positions... you have to put Duncan/Kobe/Shaq all on the same tier. Just my personal opinion.


Since this sort of discussion [comparing players from different eras and different teams/systems] is all sort of unscientific, I tend to focus on skill sets.

All I can say is if you put Nash on that Utah team I think he would thrive just as well. The pick and roll with Malone would be just as devastating IMO and the team defense/personnel would mask Nash. Not even sure how Stock's defense ranked among PG's of his era, but I imagine it wasn't regarded as anything more than average.

Personally, I know Stockton from 1995 to his retirement. I really don't remember him before that...

I'm more making the argument that Nash is indeed a top 6 or 7 PG. Where do you rank him?

My list: Magic, Thomas, Kidd, Stockton, Payton, Nash. I don't count Cousy since he played too long ago. I don't consider Oscar to be a PG.

The other names out there: Strickland, Jackson, Cheeks.... I just don't put them ahead of Nash.

we can agree to disagree on the post jordan triumvirate of shaq/kobe/duncan. they're all all-timers, i'm just hard on shaq and big on duncan and kobe, so i can see how one would rank them differently.

as for your point guard list...
i give cousy the benefit of the doubt since he was pretty much a modern point guard in terms of ball-handling, creativity, fast breaking and passing, just without the athleticism and range. i gotta give him credit and put him in my top 5 or so list, even though if he faced today's athletes he would be eaten alive. of course, that begs the question, "if a player was before his time and then we place him amongst current players, do we then adjust his skills and still give him some 'before his time' abilities, since it's not his fault he was advanced?"

anyway, i think i'm your age (i'm 23), but you've left off some **** point guards from your list which may or may not change your rankings. earl monroe, walt frazier, tiny archibald, dennis johnson may need to be factored in, as well.

[ex carrabba fan]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

Yeah I know the names but never saw much of them even in highlights.... Can't comment on them

[HHHRVD55]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

stockton was really good for a really long time, but he was never great. however, his longevity and the fact that he was so efficient sets him apart. he's like the kareem abdul-jabbar of point guards, except instead of points he racked up assists. no personality to think of, not likable, but he just kept plugging along. for him, despite being a very good point guard, he never had a real peak season.

he was a solid scorer, and he racked up a lot of assists in part due to his system and also because he had one of the greatest finishers in nba history. was increasingly less good in the playoffs (aside from lighting up matt mahoney) and was devoured by dominant guards all of his career (magic johnson, isiah thomas, kevin johnson, gary payton, tim hardaway, etc.)

however, he just endured and survived while his contemporaries fell around him, and kept giving us 15 points and 11 assists every year. in the mid-90's, he's noticeably slower, but the game gets slowers (thanks knicks and heat for bastardizing the game), so he's still as useful as before, especially with no great point guards to exploit him.

my verdict - top 30 all-time. top 6 point guard (magic, cousy, isiah, kidd, nash). he's top 7 if you include oscar robertson as a point guard, but i like to think of him as a short small forward.

Gotta disagree with you here. Stockton had two peak years (89-90, 90-91), both of which are better than anything Kidd or Nash put out. He has a great personality, just watch his Hall of Fame speech. He was extremely likeable if you like your basketball players to go out there and just play basketball.

That's probably my favorite thing about Stockton. He was there just to play basketball. It was his job and he worked it nearly to perfection. He NEVER had any off-court issues that people knew about (besides refusing to sign autographs), he always came into the season in great shape, and he played everything full-bure. I wish more players were like him today.

Yes, he fell into a lucky spot when the Jazz drafted Malone. People will forever debate if those two made each other or if they would have been as good without each other. But, I can say the same thing about Kareem. If the Lakers didn't draft Magic (who they got thanks to the Jazz), would Kareem have played as long as he did?

Stockton is the best point guard to ever play the game. He was a pass-first, shoot extremely good when he did choose to shoot, played hard-nose defensive, and never gave up. People called him dirty but when you're 6'1" and 170 lbs, setting picks on guys five inches and more taller than you and that out weight you by at least 40 lbs, isn't easy. The only player that could give Stockton a run on the number one spot is Magic Johnson but he was so much taller than every other point guard. Yes, that's a lame argument but if Stockton, Nash, or Kidd had that height and still kept their skills, they would be better than Magic.

[Brother J.R.]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

Nash would have only played 40 games a year if he had to play as physical as Stockton did in the Utah offense. Nash has a bad back now and he has never set a screen in his life.....

John Stockton was my idol growing up.....despite the fact I rooted against the Jazz.

Stockton pre slow-down era was running the fast break as well as anyone. Plus Stockton was every bit as good a shooter as Nash is. He didn't have the same style/skill set as a scorer or creator but he was as efficient as Nash.

Nash is behind guys like Tiny Archibald, Walt Frazier, John Stockton, Isiah Thomas, Lenny Wilkens, Magic Johnson.

He is in the range with Kevin Johnson, Gary Payton, Dennis Johnson, Mark Jackson.

Stockton is a top 8 guy. Nash a 12 through 20 guy.

[The15thunter]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

Gotta disagree with you here. Stockton had two peak years (89-90, 90-91), both of which are better than anything Kidd or Nash put out. He has a great personality, just watch his Hall of Fame speech. He was extremely likeable if you like your basketball players to go out there and just play basketball.

That's probably my favorite thing about Stockton. He was there just to play basketball. It was his job and he worked it nearly to perfection. He NEVER had any off-court issues that people knew about (besides refusing to sign autographs), he always came into the season in great shape, and he played everything full-bure. I wish more players were like him today.

Yes, he fell into a lucky spot when the Jazz drafted Malone. People will forever debate if those two made each other or if they would have been as good without each other. But, I can say the same thing about Kareem. If the Lakers didn't draft Magic (who they got thanks to the Jazz), would Kareem have played as long as he did?

Stockton is the best point guard to ever play the game. He was a pass-first, shoot extremely good when he did choose to shoot, played hard-nose defensive, and never gave up. People called him dirty but when you're 6'1" and 170 lbs, setting picks on guys five inches and more taller than you and that out weight you by at least 40 lbs, isn't easy. The only player that could give Stockton a run on the number one spot is Magic Johnson but he was so much taller than every other point guard. Yes, that's a lame argument but if Stockton, Nash, or Kidd had that height and still kept their skills, they would be better than Magic.

stockton had two great statistical seasons, i agree. however, his assist totals don't ring true as completely accurate to me, when you consider that every team in the league that season (89-90), sans one, averaged over 100 points per game. it was an offensive swoon, and only two teams kept their opponents under 100 points, so it's not like he had much resistance to compiling statistics. the following season, only three teams failed to average over 100 points, and only two didn't give up at least 100. in this type of environment, it appears that piling up numbers is easier. i'm not discrediting his numbers because he still had more assists than his contemporaries, but we can't praise the numbers without context.

not that in matters, but in terms of personality, i think nash has proven to be morel likable and hasn't had any offseason issues, either.

stockton and malone were mutually beneficial, but malone would have had a better career without stockton than stockton would have had without malone.

john stockton is not the best point guard of all-time. to discredit magic because of his size is to lose focus on what made him special. of course if nash, stockton or kidd had magic's size, they would be great. that's the point, no one magic's size had ever had those type of skills and that type of game. you can't just beef up every other guard to make him magic, because only magic is magic.

[HHHRVD55]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

stockton had two great statistical seasons, i agree. however, his assist totals don't ring true as completely accurate to me, when you consider that every team in the league that season (89-90), sans one, averaged over 100 points per game. it was an offensive swoon, and only two teams kept their opponents under 100 points, so it's not like he had much resistance to compiling statistics. the following season, only three teams failed to average over 100 points, and only two didn't give up at least 100. in this type of environment, it appears that piling up numbers is easier. i'm not discrediting his numbers because he still had more assists than his contemporaries, but we can't praise the numbers without context.

Stockton had more than two great statistical seasons, the years I mentioned were just his two peak years. For the 89-90 season, he averaged 3 more assists per game than the second place player and he dished out 227 more assists total than the next closest. The numbers for the next year are closer but Stockton still had 1.5 APG and over 100 more total than Magic, who finished second both years. So, yes, while scoring was up both those years, Stockton excelled in it. Kinda like what Nash did in his MVP years, but in Stockton's day, players could play defensive.

[The15thunter]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

Stockton had more than two great statistical seasons, the years I mentioned were just his two peak years. For the 89-90 season, he averaged 3 more assists per game than the second place player and he dished out 227 more assists total than the next closest. The numbers for the next year are closer but Stockton still had 1.5 APG and over 100 more total than Magic, who finished second both years. So, yes, while scoring was up both those years, Stockton excelled in it. Kinda like what Nash did in his MVP years, but in Stockton's day, players could play defensive.

again, i'm not marginalizing his numbers, i'm placing them in context by showing that scoring was at a ridiculously high clip and defense was not. i'm not faulting stockton for compiling a lot of assists in that situation, he certainly did a hell of a job. also, are you saying that players today are poor defenders, or that the rules inhibit their ability?

[ajf14]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

Steve Nash: top 60 player

Shaq: One of the top centers in the league, top 12 player


Jason Kidd: Top 10 point guard

Ray Allen: maybe top 10 sg

Paul Pierce: Top 70

Kevin Garnett: Top 30 of all time, and top 5 pf's of all time

Tim Duncan: Best power forward ever

Kobe: Top 10

[Basketball GURU]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

I dont know if Nash is top 5, but he is probably top 10-20...Magic,Isiah,Kidd,Stockton,Payton i would put in front of him.

[HHHRVD55]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

again, i'm not marginalizing his numbers, i'm placing them in context by showing that scoring was at a ridiculously high clip and defense was not. i'm not faulting stockton for compiling a lot of assists in that situation, he certainly did a hell of a job. also, are you saying that players today are poor defenders, or that the rules inhibit their ability?

The rules inhibit their ability.

[The15thunter]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

The rules inhibit their ability.

so, if the scores are lower but the rules inhibit the defense, couldn't we either conclude that the players are superior defensively, or are the offensive players worse?

[HHHRVD55]

Re: Where will they end up in terms of "all time"

As far as I'm concerned, you can't conclude it either way. The pace of the game back then was much faster. Think of the Suns during Nash's MVP years and that's pretty much how every team played. They ran more, put up more shots, and scored more. The game has slowed down now, the rules have changed, but the players are just as good on both ends of the court.