What's new
By:

Top 10 Best Jazz Players of All Time - Round 2 - Poll #2 of 2!!

Choose your TOP 10 from this list of 15!!

  • Total voters
    59
LogGrad98 said:
I actually think he is the opposite. I think he was fiercely competitive and wanted to win. Give him the modern training we get today and he'd be a force to be reckoned with.
Click to expand...

I would never call Clarkson uncompetitive (maybe that was some of Monta's problems), just that they (Pistol/Monta/Clarkson) have spent their lives perfecting one skill (scoring) and A) Didn't make it to the level of the best of the best scorers (eg Kevin Durant) B) can't really do anything else at a positive level on an NBA court.
 
**** AK. No way I can vote for that bum. Rip Don all you want. Dude at least works on his craft.
 
Eminence said:
I would never call Clarkson uncompetitive (maybe that was some of Monta's problems), just that they (Pistol/Monta/Clarkson) have spent their lives perfecting one skill (scoring) and A) Didn't make it to the level of the best of the best scorers (eg Kevin Durant) B) can't really do anything else at a positive level on an NBA court.
Click to expand...
You didn't know much about pistol Pete. He was the consummate scorer, ball handler, facilitator. He could score from anywhere on the court. He could get to the rim at will. Multiple high-level players at that time and after have said he was straight up the most skilled player they ever saw. Part of his flashy play and perceived lack of anything but was driven by the fact that when he played it was the norm to give the audience a show as much or more than try to play a winning game. He was a product of his era. But again, give him the modern game treatment and he would have easily have been something on the level of a harden or better.
 
LogGrad98 said:
You didn't know much about pistol Pete. He was the consummate scorer, ball handler, facilitator. He could score from anywhere on the court. He could get to the rim at will. Multiple high-level players at that time and after have said he was straight up the most skilled player they ever saw. Part of his flashy play and perceived lack of anything but was driven by the fact that when he played it was the norm to give the audience a show as much or more than try to play a winning game. He was a product of his era. But again, give him the modern game treatment and he would have easily have been something on the level of a harden or better.
Click to expand...

Harden is very generous, Kyrie maybe. He was simply too turnover prone and not efficient enough as a scorer to deserve comparison to MVP caliber guards.
 
Eminence said:
Harden is very generous, Kyrie maybe. He was simply too turnover prone and not efficient enough as a scorer to deserve comparison to MVP caliber guards.
Click to expand...
Most of his turnovers were due to showmanship. Again, put him in the modern game where they are less Harlem globetrotters and he would adapt. He'd be straight deadly in the modern game.
 
53 voters in poll #2.....50 in poll #1. Come on people, vote in both polls!!
 
This is getting really hard not voting for players I love.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top