Chris Mullin or Ray Allen: Whose Better?

[Baseline Runner]

One is a SF and one is a SG but both had similar styles of player and had two of the deadliest jump shots the league has seen. Allen obviously had the longer and better career, but who do you think was the better player at their peak?

[JordansBulls]

Mullin for peak and prime, Allen for longevity

[Laimbeer]

Mullin for peak and prime, Allen for longevity

[tsherkin]

I'm not feeling the Mullin love here, personally.

The Run TMC Warriors were good, but apart from the fact that he scored a little more in an up-tempo system, Mullin didn't really do anything else better than Ray.

I'm going with Allen, by a slim margin because Mullin was still wicked, but even still.

[DR1983]

It's damned close. Two of the nastiest shooters to ever play the game. I'd give Mullin a minimal edge as a rebounder/passer. Shooting efficiency is pretty much a wash. The only thing that hurts Mullin in this comparison is that he lost sizable portions of 5 seasons due to excessive injury(s). When the man was healthy, he was unquestionably one of the top 10-15 players in the most stacked era in the game's history. I guess when answering this question I say to myself would I bump a healthy Chris Mullin off the original Dream Team for Ray Allen? The answer for me is no. Go give me Mullin barely.

[ronnymac2]

I'll take Ray Allen. I think he's an underrated playoff performer - before he got to Boston.

[Warspite]

I would rather have Mullin. I think hes a better shooter and very underrated on defense. His peak is just a bit higher and he also has more playoff success. His dismantling of the Jazz was more impressive than anything Ray did in Seattle.

[sunshinekids99]

I would rather have Mullin. I think hes a better shooter and very underrated on defense. His peak is just a bit higher and he also has more playoff success. His dismantling of the Jazz was more impressive than anything Ray did in Seattle.

Ray's 00-01 year with the Bucks was quite impressive.

As for the topic it is very very close. I might take Mullin, but you really can't go wrong either way.

[Laimbeer]

I'm not feeling the Mullin love here, personally.

The Run TMC Warriors were good, but apart from the fact that he scored a little more in an up-tempo system, Mullin didn't really do anything else better than Ray.

I'm going with Allen, by a slim margin because Mullin was still wicked, but even still.

He was a better passer and rebounder, too. The question is, what did Ray do better? Threes?

[singlepurposeac]

Allen by a clear margin.

Just to add to that. Mullin made 5 all-star teams and 4 all-NBA teams, and while the all-star teams aren't an unfair reflection of his talent, some of those all-NBA teams sure are. All-NBA first team in 92 over Pippen and Barkley? I know F was a weak position that year, but come on, Barkley was MVP the next year! A ridiculous honour. There were some really strange all-nba honours around this time, and Mullin was a beneficiary in a huge way. He made the 2nd team and 3rd team in 89 and 90 over D.Wilkins, who really was treated poorly by the voters for what were clearly superior seasons (Mullin didn't even shoot especially well from the 3PT line those years, and his teams were worse).

What did Mullin do to carry his teams like Ray Allen? His first big numbers season came in a 20 win season, his 2nd was for a GSW team who won 43 games, and wasn't exactly devoid of talent, among other things they had Mitch Richmond that year. The following year they posted 37 wins with even more talent. It was only when Hardaway (now hated by the population of SF for his idiotic anti-gay remarks) took off that the GSW began to win, posting 44 wins the next year, and then 55 wins. Mullin wasn't the driving force for those teams, Hardaway was.

Mullin had maybe a 6 year peak/prime before tailing off a bit, getting injured, and doing very little of anything for the Warriors as a significant player. Most years the Warriors were good it was dubious he was the best player on his team (he mostly wasn't).

Meanwhile Ray Allen had a better peak, better longevity, and was the driving force and star player behind more successful teams. For me it's Allen clearly.

[JordansBulls]

Allen by a clear margin.

In what sense? Prime Mullin beat Prime Malone and Stockton without HCA.

[singlepurposeac]

I forgot HCA was the only thing that mattered. How silly of me.

[rrravenred]

Allen's longevity gives him the edge, but I do really like Mullin's peak. I really want BBR to add team pace to their player season averages as this would really simplify discussions like this.

[DR1983]

Allen's longevity gives him the edge, but I do really like Mullin's peak. I really want BBR to add team pace to their player season averages as this would really simplify discussions like this.

Why? ORtg/TS% is just fine in evaluating offensive efficiency across eras. What would 'team pace' accomplish?

[DR1983]

Also, why does Allen get the longevity advantage? Mullin put up a 18.1 PER, .616 TS%, and a 117 ORtg at age 35. Allen, who's currently 35, is sporting a 17.3 PER, .620 TS% and 118 ORtg. Virtually identical. Now If Allen can produce a couple more seasons similar to this one then you can play that card. For now, you can't.

[singlepurposeac]

Because there are more stats than the ones you've arbitrarily pimped out? Because there's also a thing called context? Like Allen being on a deep and super successful team with a reduced role, compared to Mullin who did it for a much worse Pacers team he had a substantially smaller role with.

[JCWalters]

Allen by a clear margin.

+10000

The flaw of this comparison is the assumption that Mullin and Allen have a similar style of play. Mullin and Allen are very different players.

Being a GS guy, I hate to say it, but Mully is a 2nd option whereas Allen is a 1st option. Allen actually has a triple threat game; Ray can drive to the hoop and he can shoot off of the dribble. Mully had no dribble drive game at all or a very very limited one. And Mully's stop and pop game is nowhere near where his rep is. Mully was extraordinary on catch and shoots.

In other words, Allen can create more of his shots. Mullin had to rely on Tim or Mitch or whoever to draw defenders or break the d and get him some opening. I must say though that Mullin needed less of an opening than most catch and shoot guys. But Allen can create his own opening.

Best example of this is Mullin in the later playoff years. Against the Lakers one year and the Sonics another, you can see that opponents can effectively shut down or control Mully by single cover--eg. Mully could not get open on his own steam. No single coverage can stop Allen in his prime or even off prime. For Mullin, think what happened to Peja Stoj. against Hassell in the playoff against Minn.

[DR1983]

Because there are more stats than the ones you've arbitrarily pimped out? Because there's also a thing called context? Like Allen being on a deep and super successful team with a reduced role, compared to Mullin who did it for a much worse Pacers team he had a substantially smaller role with.

The Pacers were the 1 seed, though this was during the lock-out season, in '99. Safe to say they were a top 2 team in their conference. Allen averages a whopping 12.7 shots per game compared to Mullin's 11.3 PER 36. Not seeing at all where you're coming from here.

[DR1983]

Allen by a clear margin.

+10000

The flaw of this comparison is the assumption that Mullin and Allen have a similar style of play. Mullin and Allen are very different players.

Being a GS guy, I hate to say it, but Mully is a 2nd option whereas Allen is a 1st option. Allen actually has a triple threat game; Ray can drive to the hoop and he can shoot off of the dribble. Mully had no dribble drive game at all or a very very limited one. And Mully's stop and pop game is nowhere near where his rep is. Mully was extraordinary on catch and shoots.

In other words, Allen can create more of his shots. Mullin had to rely on Tim or Mitch or whoever to draw defenders or break the d and get him some opening. I must say though that Mullin needed less of an opening than most catch and shoot guys. But Allen can create his own opening.

Best example of this is Mullin in the later playoff years. Against the Lakers one year and the Sonics another, you can see that opponents can effectively shut down or control Mully by single cover--eg. Mully could not get open on his own steam. No single coverage can stop Allen in his prime or even off prime. For Mullin, think what happened to Peja Stoj. against Hassell in the playoff against Minn.

Please, Ray Allen had no playoff reputation or memorable moments outside of that one explosion against the Sixers in '01 until he hooked up with two hall of famers in '08. Ray Allen is good. But the difference between he and Mullin is minimal.

[LakerLegend]

Took the Sonics to 6 games in the 2nd round against the champ Spurs in 05 with luke ridnour as his 3rd best player.