Top 10 PGs all-time per ESPN

[MikeSU02]

really good for a long time, never truly elite? One time making third team all NBA, 3 times on the second team. That sounds about right to me. Probably makes him one of the 20ish best PG of all time?

Checked Stockton because I was curious; 2 time first team all league, 6 times second team, 3 times third. Made one of the 3 teams 11 times in 12 years.

Interesting on Isiah, he made 3 first team all NBA; 84-86, before they were winning titles. (In all 3 years the back court was him and Magic) Second team in 83 and 87 (87 the all NBA back court was Magic and Michael, so have fun cracking that)

Tony has a Finals MVP, which has to definitely keep him in the top 20, I would think. Plus his longevity.

It's an interesting discussion.

BTW, here is a fun hot take, I thought Stockton was hideously overrated on defense.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

somewhere Michael Ray Richardson weeps

What could have been.
Imagine the Nets with MRR, Drazen and DC. Multiple rings.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Magic has spoken (I'm with him on this): http://news.yahoo.com/magic-johnson-criticzes-espns-time-215016007.html

 

[alphaorange]

Stockton was All-NBA 11 times compared to only five times for Isiah. Stockton was All-NBA Defense five times compared to zero for Isiah. And if the name is the game for a PG is distributing the ball, they aren't even close in terms of all-time assists. I know Stockton had the benefit of playing with Malone, but Isiah played with a number of stars as well.

Stockton played until he was 65 and Thomas retired in his prime. I don't like him but as a player he was amazing.

 

[alphaorange]

Clyde didn't put up the gaudy scoring or assist numbers of most on that list, and his greatest strength (his defense) was not as quantifiable in his day. West was also a tremendous defender. Hate seeing those guys become an afterthought in these kinds of conversations.

Not really. Walt had the curse of being on very balanced teams. How good he was could be seen in the playoff game against the Lakers and West. One of the best games by a point guard in the finals, ever. 36 points, 19 assists, 7 rebounds.

 

[alphaorange]

Bill Simmons in his book nailed the Isiah-Stockton argument.
Would you rather 12 seasons of A basketball or 19 season of A- basketball. Also Isiah retired before he just hung around for more years. He left with years left but didn't want to rehab and come back as a role player like Stockton was at the end of his career.

He used an analogy of s-ex in his argument. With Stockton you were getting some but with Isiah you were getting good stuff.

I would take Isiah all day long over Stockton. Stockton was a lot more dirty than he gets mentioned about.

Thomas retired rather than get traded to the Knicks.

 

[OrangeDW]

Top 10 shooting guards:
1. Jordan
2. Kobe
3. West
4. Wade
5. Drexler
6. Iverson
7. Gervin
8. Allen
9. Miller
10. Monroe

At least they didn't do something dumb this time like put Harden on here. Wade is a guy who is late enough in his career to include in my opinion.

My only real problem is I think Reggie Miller is overrated here. Great watching him move without the ball and run off screens. He's one of the best shooters ever coming off screens. Great to watch when he was hot, some great playoff heroics, and was a good-very good player for a long time. But Vince Carter was a better player. Tracy McGrady was a much better player if we're considering him a SG - which he was listed as for much of his career. Peak Mitch Richmond was probably a better player IMO. I think I'd go with Joe Dumars over Reggie too. And that's just from the late 80's to 00's.

 

[Delmar]

If Oscar played on TV, he might be no. 1 on this list. Averaged a triple double for an NBA season. Played on bad Cincinnati teams that were only competitive because he was on the team.

I will concede that Hal Greer isn't in the top 10, but I loved his game. He's one of my favorite players of all time. He anchored the great Sixers team in '67 that contends for one of the best of all time. And, of course, played in Syracuse.

 

[Toga]

If Oscar played on TV, he might be no. 1 on this list. Averaged a triple double for an NBA season. Played on bad Cincinnati teams that were only competitive because he was on the team.

I will concede that Hal Greer isn't in the top 10, but I loved his game. He's one of my favorite players of all time. He anchored the great Sixers team in '67 that contends for one of the best of all time. And, of course, played in Syracuse.

Greer was good for 20 every night. Every night.
http://www.nba.com/history/legends/hal-greer/index.html

 

[OrangeDW]

Just because I love PG's...my personal favorite PG's that don't belong on this list(some are close, some are nowhere close) but were still good-great, and fun, and I liked watching them list:

Nick Van Exel - so fun and at times crazy, and so clutch late in games - I really miss watching him.
Sherman Douglas - yes, as a pro too - he was really good and entertaining early on and even as an older guy, when he looked like a YMCA player, he still had a knack for getting it done.
Kevin Johnson - 4 straight 20-10 seasons - with a little more longevity he'd be here...I'm convinced prime KJ was better than Nash.
Tim Hardaway- pre-knee injury Warriors version - as a Laker fan, he was an absolute nightmare to stop. Just went by people at will.
Maurice Cheeks - solid as a rock on both ends.
Penny Hardaway - he actually would be on this list if he stayed healthy - just a great all around talent who could do it all, with dynamic athleticsm and skills and the fundamentals to match.
Mark Price - the precursor to both Nash and Curry in many ways - incredible shooter, faster than you'd think, a revolutionary in splitting the defenders on the pick and roll and shooting the floater.
Mike Conley - steady improvement early and now solid as a rock on both ends every season - he's like the new Mo Cheeks.
Kenny Anderson - early Kenny was just lightning with the ball -so fast with incredible handles.
Baron Davis - so dynamic - he had the strength of some PF's, great speed and quickness and athleticsm, with solid PG skills - a nightmare to stop when he had it going.

 

[Cowtown]

He had the ball in his hands a lot and racked up a lot of assists. Look at the guards on the teams he played on and tell me who were the point guards.

Walt Hazzard, Gail Goodrich, Keith Erickson, Jimmy King, just the ones I can think of. Now I'm gonna look at the rest of the thread and see how I did ...

 

[SWC75]

Bob Cousy basically invented the position. He was to point guard what Sammy Baugh was to quarterback.

 

[Cowtown]

Rick Barry would be an SG today, and would have to be on the list ahead of Curry who, I'm sorry, just hasn't played long enough yet. John Stockton's longevity is an incredible stat.

I also noticed (I think) no Guy Rodgers, Lenny Wilkins, Jeff Mullins, Dennis Johnson, John Havlicek, Sidney Moncrief, and worst of all, ... (wait for it) ... no Butch Komives!

Just some thoughts, that's all, for what the heck, even the A-minus players were pretty damn good

And I never saw a better guard than Oscar in his day, nor a better shooter than Jerry West (Kobe and MJ are awfully close) , and MJ is surely the best at both there ever was. His defense was top notch as well

 

[pulaski74]

He was a sensation who brought us great elation!

Stockton played until he was 65 and Thomas retired in his prime. I don't like him but as a player he was amazing.

Funny thing just happened, Anyone remember crazy jumpshot, Dick Barnett? I know its a little ot, but the guy had theee all time coolest jumpshot. Any oldtimers in this thread?

 

[MonsterGame]

Very subjective list. Consider that:

1) Some people equate best player with best scorer and the other stuff is at best, marginally important.

2) Some people think longevity matters, some don't

3) Championships are also weighed more heavily by some than others. (I believe championships matter, but what role did the player have in winning the championship and what was the competition like for that player's team's championship(s). )

4) One factor that is rarely brought up that I think should be factored in is the player's team's winning pct. over the life of the player.

My opinion is, I'd take Thomas for one season, I'd take Stockton in a draft over Thomas because of the career. So which one is better. It's really a toss up.

 

[MikeSU02]

Very subjective list. Consider that:

1) Some people equate best player with best scorer and the other stuff is at best, marginally important.

2) Some people think longevity matters, some don't

3) Championships are also weighed more heavily by some than others. (I believe championships matter, but what role did the player have in winning the championship and what was the competition like for that player's team's championship(s). )

4) One factor that is rarely brought up that I think should be factored in is the player's team's winning pct. over the life of the player.

My opinion is, I'd take Thomas for one season, I'd take Stockton in a draft over Thomas because of the career. So which one is better. It's really a toss up.

See, I think peak versus longevity matters more when the peaks are much shorter, like Bill Walton.

Fact is, Stockton never hit the level Zeke hit and Zeke played long enough to cement his legacy.

I think defense and efficiency are always downplayed when it comes to these rankings.

It's the same people that don't value Kawhi or Draymond as elite players now. That group is getting smaller, but it took a while for those guys to be truly recognized as elite.

 

[Cowtown]

Funny thing just happened, Anyone remember crazy jumpshot, Dick Barnett? I know its a little ot, but the guy had theee all time coolest jumpshot. Any oldtimers in this thread?

"Fall back, baby." The guy eventually earned a PhD and became a professor at Fordham.

 

[Alsacs]

Simmons book does a good job breaking down the Utah Jazz. They took advantage of the West blowing up and filling the hole.
Stockton and Malone were at the tail end of their primes and their teams started winning more games.
From 1988-1994 they won 47, 51, 54, 55, 55, 47, 53 games each year and never advanced beyond the conference finals 2 times.
From 1994-2000 they won 60, 55, 62, 64,37(of 50 games), 55 made 2 NBA finals, 3 more conference finals.

Stockton and Malone's biggest success happened in their mid 30's. They took filled a vacuum in the NBA West before the Lakers/Spurs.

Isiah won 2 titles during one of the most competitive ERAs in NBA history. Give me Isiah over Stockton. Isiah's upside was higher. Now if you are telling me my team has Michael Jordan on it I will take Stockton because he hated Isiah and had the juice to keep him off the 1992 Dream Team.

Isiah deserved to be on that team but his act pissed off Jordan and Bird/Magic were pissed at him as well. Once USA basketball knew those 3 were against him but mainly Jordan they took Stockton to be safe.

 

[Knicks411]

See, I think peak versus longevity matters more when the peaks are much shorter, like Bill Walton.

Fact is, Stockton never hit the level Zeke hit and Zeke played long enough to cement his legacy.

I think defense and efficiency are always downplayed when it comes to these rankings.

It's the same people that don't value Kawhi or Draymond as elite players now. That group is getting smaller, but it took a while for those guys to be truly recognized as elite.

Definitely agree with the second thing I bolded; Bill James often says as you get further away from a guy's career, his legacy becomes more just about his stats. So stuff like defense matters less.

Kinda disagree on the first part, but that's more just a difference of opinion. I would rather have the 18 years or whatever it was Stockton had over the 12 years Zeke had. But I get people who go the other way. Also, in basketball as opposed to baseball, I'm more likely to lean toward peak because a great player at his peak gets you a lot closer to a title in basketball than baseball.

Am I also a bitter Knicks fan? Maybe

 

[MikeSU02]

Definitely agree with the second thing I bolded; Bill James often says as you get further away from a guy's career, his legacy becomes more just about his stats. So stuff like defense matters less.

Kinda disagree on the first part, but that's more just a difference of opinion. I would rather have the 18 years or whatever it was Stockton had over the 12 years Zeke had. But I get people who go the other way. Also, in basketball as opposed to baseball, I'm more likely to lean toward peak because a great player at his peak gets you a lot closer to a title in basketball than baseball.

Am I also a bitter Knicks fan? Maybe

To be honest, I also think Stockton was overrated on the defensive end. That's another reason I downplay his legacy.

Zeke's peak was incredible. Plus, they were playing the showtime Lakers, big three Celtics and MJ's Bulls. The fact that they got two titles is amazing.

 

[Knicks411]

To be honest, I also think Stockton was overrated on the defensive end. That's another reason I downplay his legacy.

Zeke's peak was incredible. Plus, they were playing the showtime Lakers, big three Celtics and MJ's Bulls. The fact that they got two titles is amazing.

Just cause I kinda do hate Zeke...

The 89 Lakers were real good but it isn't like they were vintage showtime lakers. Kareem was 41. Scott didn't play in the entire series, and Magic hurt his hamstring in Game 2. I get it, they swept the series anyway, but games 2 and 3 were close. And the Celtics they beat in 89 won 42 games and didn't have Larry Bird. They did beat Jordan in back to back years though and he was pretty much at his height at those times.

I had to do that; 2 titles are still 2 titles.

 

[MikeSU02]

Just cause I kinda do hate Zeke...

The 89 Lakers were real good but it isn't like they were vintage showtime lakers. Kareem was 41. Scott didn't play in the entire series, and Magic hurt his hamstring in Game 2. I get it, they swept the series anyway, but games 2 and 3 were close. And the Celtics they beat in 89 won 42 games and didn't have Larry Bird. They did beat Jordan in back to back years though and he was pretty much at his height at those times.

I had to do that; 2 titles are still 2 titles.

Totally tangential to those teams... One of the biggest what ifs is what if the 80s Houston Rockets were able to keep it together.

They had an incredible team. Just rode a little too close to the sun.

 

[Alsacs]

Just cause I kinda do hate Zeke...

The 89 Lakers were real good but it isn't like they were vintage showtime lakers. Kareem was 41. Scott didn't play in the entire series, and Magic hurt his hamstring in Game 2. I get it, they swept the series anyway, but games 2 and 3 were close. And the Celtics they beat in 89 won 42 games and didn't have Larry Bird. They did beat Jordan in back to back years though and he was pretty much at his height at those times.

I had to do that; 2 titles are still 2 titles.

Beyond the Eddie Curry trade what bad did Isiah do as Knicks GM? I mean he wasn't going to get FAs. He drafted well David Lee, Channing Fyre.

I think Isiah accomplished more than Stockton and also I know you read Simmons book he showed in the Stockton secetion how from 1997-2000 their was a dearth of good athletic PGs which made it easier on Stockton to be good. He called Matt Maloney Stockton's dogwalker for how bad he abused him.

Gary Payton IMO was better than Stockton. Stockton was an A- for just a long time. I will take a player who was an A player and could carry a team. Now Payton became a role player after leaving Seattle but still Stockton was just consistent.

 

[Knicks411]

Totally tangential to those teams... One of the biggest what ifs is what if the 80s Houston Rockets were able to keep it together.

They had an incredible team. Just rode a little too close to the sun.

Back when Grantland was a thing, they did an oral history on that team

http://grantland.com/features/an-oral-history-hakeem-olajuwon-ralph-sampson-1980s-houston-rockets/

 

[Knicks411]

Beyond the Eddie Curry trade what bad did Isiah do as Knicks GM? I mean he wasn't going to get FAs. He drafted well David Lee, Channing Fyre.

I think Isiah accomplished more than Stockton and also I know you read Simmons book he showed in the Stockton secetion how from 1997-2000 their was a dearth of good athletic PGs which made it easier on Stockton to be good. He called Matt Maloney Stockton's dogwalker for how bad he abused him.

Gary Payton IMO was better than Stockton. Stockton was an A- for just a long time. I will take a player who was an A player and could carry a team. Now Payton became a role player after leaving Seattle but still Stockton was just consistent.

Like I said, just a difference of opinion.

Isiah signed Jerome James for 5/30 after one good playoff series. He traded a 20 year old Tevor Ariza (another good pick btw) for Steve Francis. I've tried to block a lot of that era out, but I seem to remember some pretty bad contracts for Howard Eisley and Shandon Anderson?