What's new
By:

John Stockton’s dirty little secret

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.
 
Side note. I hate watching a game and not ever knowing the score or time in the game. They rarely ever showed either back in the day, so annoying
 
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
Back
Top