What's new
By:
Filters

John Stockton’s dirty little secret

The only thing Bill Russell has on Greg Oden is longevity and playing with John Havlicek.

Dat longevity doe.
 
fishonjazz said:
It’s not just longevity though. Look at Stockton’s peak years and cp3 peak years. Who averaged more assists in those years? Who averaged more steals? Who shot better percentage from the field?
Stockton every time. Take longevity out of the equation. Stockton is the better passer, shooter, and defender still.

Longevity is simply icing on the cake. And durability/toughness/playing through injuries and staying good for a long time should absolutely have some sway in a discussion of who was the better player. (I realize that you said this in your post but I just wanted to hammer it home)
Click to expand...
This. CP3 is solidly in the top of the 2nd tier of NBA point guards. Tier one includes players like Stockton, Magic, Thomas, etc. CP3 is just not on that level.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Malone was clearly better than Stockton.

I think if Paul played with Malone for 19 years, he'd probably be the leader in assist. You could probably say that for a few different PGs. Stockton is a top PG for his longevity, not for actually being the best PG at any given time. You can say Stockton had a top 5 career as a PG, but I dont know if you can say he is a top 5 PG, if that makes sense.
Click to expand...

I personally think Malone benefited more then Stock from the relationship but that is obviously pure speculation and they clearly both benefited. However, I think that is always true. Name that greats that did not have another great with them that had a significant impact on what they accomplished. There are a few but it is a very short list. While you are at it, name the 5 all time PGs you put in front of Stock. Curious what your list is since you brought that up as the number. I put Magic and Oscar in front of him but not sure who else. I think his assist record will never be broken and his steals record will last quite some time.
 
gomretat said:
I personally think Malone benefited more then Stock from the relationship but that is obviously pure speculation and they clearly both benefited. However, I think that is always true. Name that greats that did not have another great with them that had a significant impact on what they accomplished. There are a few but it is a very short list. While you are at it, name the 5 all time PGs you put in front of Stock. Curious what your list is since you brought that up as the number. I put Magic and Oscar in front of him but not sure who else. I think his assist record will never be broken and his steals record will last quite some time.
Click to expand...
Oscar and Magic were great, but they were physically gifted athletes with a huge built in mismatch every time they stepped on the court, but in terms of pg play Stockton did it with as close to perfection as you can do it. Maybe Magic and Oscar were better all around players thanks to their size and athleticism, but pound for pound Stockton was the best ever to play in the nba period!!
 
fishonjazz said:
It’s not just longevity though. Look at Stockton’s peak years and cp3 peak years. Who averaged more assists in those years? Who averaged more steals? Who shot better percentage from the field?
Stockton every time. Take longevity out of the equation. Stockton is the better passer, shooter, and defender still.

Longevity is simply icing on the cake. And durability/toughness/playing through injuries and staying good for a long time should absolutely have some sway in a discussion of who was the better player. (I realize that you said this in your post but I just wanted to hammer it home)
Click to expand...
Here is the peak season for both players.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...kton&y2=1989&player_id2=stockjo01&idx=players

Cp3 at his peak was better than Stockton at his peak according to these stats.
 
Last edited:
fishonjazz said:
Yep Stockton > cp3 regardless of longevity. And I was more looking at peak years (plural). Stockton was/is simply better imo.
Click to expand...
I mean according to these CP3 was better at almost everything.

But I do agree Stockton was better.
 
Last edited:
Thee jazz fan said:
Different era’s and that wasn’t Stockton’s peak. The very next year was


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Okay, stats wise CP3 was still better than that year as well. I do agree it was a different era. Stockton also had a lot more talent on his team at that point than CP3 did. Those were some pretty solid Jazz teams that didnt do well in the playoffs. Stockton, Malone, Darrell Griffith, Mark Eaton, and Thurl Bailey.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...ct=John+Stockton&player_id2=stockjo01&y2=1990
 
Huh. Those stats seem to show that CP took more shots than Stockton, but Stockton shot a higher efg and had more assists, the only definitive advantage Paul had was in rebounds.
 
Zombie said:
Huh. Those stats seem to show that CP took more shots than Stockton, but Stockton shot a higher efg and had more assists, the only definitive advantage Paul had was in rebounds.
Click to expand...

It depends which year you are talking about. But either one he had a lot more advantages than just rebounds and scoring more points is kind of a big difference. The year thee claims is Stocktons best year CP3 has a better defensive rating, they had the same offensive rating, CP3 had less turnovers, scored more points per 100 possessions and overall, more steals, fouled less, much higher VORP, significantly higher PER, higher OWS and DWS, better OBPM and DBPM, much higher BPM, higher steal %, got the FT line more and shot better there.

The difference in shooting percentage is mostly that CP3 attempted more 3s. They basically shot the same percentage from 2 only a .003% difference. Stockton did have more assists and he did shoot better from 3 that year although on less than 1/2 the attempts. The assists % was in Stocktons favor but it was 57.4 vs 54.5.

I dont think CP3 is better than Stockton but the stats for their peak season are in CP3s favor. I am not sure how you could claim otherwise. It was a different era, they were playing with different rules, they had very different teammates and many other reasons but those stats are not in Stocktons favor from a numbers standpoint. I think Stockton is better personally but not because of these stats in their peak years.
 
They are showing shard wood classic game, jazz vs Spurs game from 1991. I just saw Stockton drive baseline for a layup, he went the entire way dribbling with his left hand.
 
Ron Mexico said:
For saying I think is Stockton better? Or for stating facts about the stats?
Click to expand...

Just like it’s true that you can’t believe everything you read on the internet, it’s equally true for stats. Had Stockton shot more threes the point difference would’ve been much closer. What isn’t close is assists and steals and fg%.

You’re every bit as bad as an espn analyst who don’t bother to watch games but only look at stats, and completely ignore the different era’s, lets not forget the rules of today are much more conducive to offense, no hand checking and less physical with more spacing. Just watching the two play, Stockton had the more diverse game. Stockton was a better shooter finisher passer and defender, and the most important category, he was a better winner and more clutch.

And you need to turn in your fan card, not because you idiotically think his stats are better but becauseyou deliberately chose the year before when Stockton had a lesser season, that’s why!!

And your anidiot because of your blind faith in pure stats, thread!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top