Is Kyrie Irving the modern-day Pete Maravich?

[Goudelock]

I never saw Pistol Pete play so I cant give a good opinion, but can we please stop saying Kyrie is a 'bad' defender. He really improved last year and his Drtg was right at the league average. Is he Rajon Rondo on defense? No, but he is far from 'bad' anymore. He is a average defender. I dont want to see Kyrie develop into a solid defender as he gets older and people still say he is bad on defense because thats how he played when he was 20-21 years old in the NBA.

Sorry, pet peeve lol carry on

So Irving is a good defender now? I didn't know that.

PC, my advice to you is to avoid popping off without having actually read the entirety of what someone has written. Assumptions do you no favors, lad.

Sorry, that sounded a lot worse than I intended it to be. I was just honestly surprised that Kyrie Irving is a decent defensive player; it seems like he's usually one of the first names you hear when "Terrible Defensive Player" is mentioned. So apologies to LivingLegend.

[GYK]

a lot of wrong in this thread.
Why is Pete's playstyle being called out as if he didn't get traded(for a huge load) to an expansion team. Getting to play with an older Walt as an anchor and a scorer in Lou being a winning team wasn't a problem. He was doing Orlando TMac work with way less help.
anyway the comparison is ok I guess. So far back styles certainly aren't the same but I the surface crafty scorers work.

[BasketballFan7]

Kyrie is a decent one on one defender on PGs. Low versatility and gets caught on screens though.

[HeartBreakKid]

You can argue he was more talented than Kyrie, but much more talented? There is absolutely no way.

Kyrie's handling is sick and his finishing arround the rim is absolutely elite. What does Kyrie lack for you to say Pistol Pete was much more talented than him?

Pete had more potential than Irving did, and Pete was a higher rated prospect than Irving was in his time (Irving has overachieved tbh). Pete had handles that were far above his peers and he was bigger than Irving and probably a better athlete overall. Not to mention Pete had amazing passing ability (albeit extremely poor decision making) and could play in the post if needed too. I suppose it depends what one means by talent, but in terms of prospects I think Pete was probably a superior one by a decent amount.

Kyrie was a first overall pick and he drew comparisons to CP3 and Deron. He's actually been a disappointment IMO.

Wait, Irving was the first overall pick?!!?!?


I'm well aware he was the first overall pick . Not all overall #1 picks are equal as prospects. Pistol Pete was a higher rated prospect in his time and it isn't close.

Irving was the lowest rated #1 pick in several years when he was picked, and his draft class was weak as ****, compared to Pistol Pete's who went 3rd overall in one of the most stacked drafts of all time.

[LivingLegend]

Pete had more potential than Irving did, and Pete was a higher rated prospect than Irving was in his time (Irving has overachieved tbh). Pete had handles that were far above his peers and he was bigger than Irving and probably a better athlete overall. Not to mention Pete had amazing passing ability (albeit extremely poor decision making) and could play in the post if needed too. I suppose it depends what one means by talent, but in terms of prospects I think Pete was probably a superior one by a decent amount.

Kyrie was a first overall pick and he drew comparisons to CP3 and Deron. He's actually been a disappointment IMO.

Wait, Irving was the first overall pick?!!?!?


I'm well aware he was the first overall pick . Not all overall #1 picks are equal as prospects. Pistol Pete was a higher rated prospect in his time and it isn't close.

Irving was the lowest rated #1 pick in several years when he was picked, and his draft class was weak as ****, compared to Pistol Pete's who went 3rd overall in one of the most stacked drafts of all time.

Well, he developed into a top 5 player at his position in the NBA so I think it was a pick worth taken. I would also say in 3-4 years people will view Kyrie as a better player than Deron. Deron has a handful of really good years in UTA, but his career as a whole does not reflect that of the player we say 5-6 years ago in UTA.

IDK I guess I just dont get all of the Kyrie hate bashing on this board. IF you were to come in here as a random person, like me, you would assume that Kyrie Irving was a middle of the pack PG on par with a guy like Lou Williams. What is everybodies beef with him? He is a score first PG, people need to get over it and take him for what he is if thats their problem. He wont ever average 8+ assists a game, sorry, but he will be able to average 24+ points a game and is one of the best pure scorers in the NBA. That is not something to downplay just because he averages 5 or 6 assists a game and not 8 or 9.

[E-Balla]

Kyrie was a first overall pick and he drew comparisons to CP3 and Deron. He's actually been a disappointment IMO.

Wait, Irving was the first overall pick?!!?!?


I'm well aware he was the first overall pick . Not all overall #1 picks are equal as prospects. Pistol Pete was a higher rated prospect in his time and it isn't close.

Irving was the lowest rated #1 pick in several years when he was picked, and his draft class was weak as ****, compared to Pistol Pete's who went 3rd overall in one of the most stacked drafts of all time.

Well, he developed into a top 5 player at his position in the NBA so I think it was a pick worth taken. I would also say in 3-4 years people will view Kyrie as a better player than Deron. Deron has a handful of really good years in UTA, but his career as a whole does not reflect that of the player we say 5-6 years ago in UTA.

IDK I guess I just dont get all of the Kyrie hate bashing on this board. IF you were to come in here as a random person, like me, you would assume that Kyrie Irving was a middle of the pack PG on par with a guy like Lou Williams. What is everybodies beef with him? He is a score first PG, people need to get over it and take him for what he is if thats their problem. He wont ever average 8+ assists a game, sorry, but he will be able to average 24+ points a game and is one of the best pure scorers in the NBA. That is not something to downplay just because he averages 5 or 6 assists a game and not 8 or 9.

Heartbreak Kid:
Go read an old scouting report on Kyrie if you believe that. A common theme you'll notice in them is that they'll all say he has no weaknesses outside of his physicality and defense. Everything you'll read on Kyrie would say he played flawlessly in college. Pistol Pete was higher regarded coming out of college but he didn't only play 11 games and he played in a different era with different scouting techniques. Kyrie was no Wall (well actually I liked him more than Wall) or Rose but outside of those two what PGs have been seen as better prospects since CP3 in this PG heavy league?

Living Legend:
You'll notice around here that lead scorers are viscerally hated and when not hated just completely underrated. When they win it's not because of anything they did and when they lose it's their fault. I think Kyrie has been a good pick but isn't living up to his potential so far but he's still super young. I mean there's not many 22 year olds as good as Kyrie but unfortunately I haven't seen the development I expected anyway (even if he's finally learning to play winning ball). I still think he can be as good as Hibachi one day.

[Winsome Gerbil]

This is certainly not a comparison I ever expected to see made.

Manu is a good call for overall similarity, although if you were trying to catch the reckless showmanship even at the expense of winning you might splash in some Jason Williams.

[LivingLegend]

Wait, Irving was the first overall pick?!!?!?


I'm well aware he was the first overall pick . Not all overall #1 picks are equal as prospects. Pistol Pete was a higher rated prospect in his time and it isn't close.

Irving was the lowest rated #1 pick in several years when he was picked, and his draft class was weak as ****, compared to Pistol Pete's who went 3rd overall in one of the most stacked drafts of all time.

Well, he developed into a top 5 player at his position in the NBA so I think it was a pick worth taken. I would also say in 3-4 years people will view Kyrie as a better player than Deron. Deron has a handful of really good years in UTA, but his career as a whole does not reflect that of the player we say 5-6 years ago in UTA.

IDK I guess I just dont get all of the Kyrie hate bashing on this board. IF you were to come in here as a random person, like me, you would assume that Kyrie Irving was a middle of the pack PG on par with a guy like Lou Williams. What is everybodies beef with him? He is a score first PG, people need to get over it and take him for what he is if thats their problem. He wont ever average 8+ assists a game, sorry, but he will be able to average 24+ points a game and is one of the best pure scorers in the NBA. That is not something to downplay just because he averages 5 or 6 assists a game and not 8 or 9.

Heartbreak Kid:
Go read an old scouting report on Kyrie if you believe that. A common theme you'll notice in them is that they'll all say he has no weaknesses outside of his physicality and defense. Everything you'll read on Kyrie would say he played flawlessly in college. Pistol Pete was higher regarded coming out of college but he didn't only play 11 games and he played in a different era with different scouting techniques. Kyrie was no Wall (well actually I liked him more than Wall) or Rose but outside of those two what PGs have been seen as better prospects since CP3 in this PG heavy league?


Living Legend:
You'll notice around here that lead scorers are viscerally hated and when not hated just completely underrated. When they win it's not because of anything they did and when they lose it's their fault. I think Kyrie has been a good pick but isn't living up to his potential so far but he's still super young. I mean there's not many 22 year olds as good as Kyrie but unfortunately I haven't seen the development I expected anyway (even if he's finally learning to play winning ball). I still think he can be as good as Hibachi one day.

Yea I guess I just dont get it, I look at Kyrie and see a top 15 player in the NBA (10-15 range). The dude has won ASG MVPs and 3pt shooting contests (for whatever thats worth lol), he was the FIBA USA MVP and has excelled at every stage he has been put on. I get how people say that they havent seen Kyrie progress, I get it, but where he is at right now with minimal "progression" t him game is still pretty darn good and like I said, 10th-15th best player in the NBA good. He progressed A LOT last year in defense and like I said, now is a passable defender and not a liability. I guess like you stated, people hate him because he is a score first PG. Despite being one of the best pure scorers in the NBA that also contributes in other areas when needed. I dont get the hate I honestly dont.

[young_frogger]

Maravich was MUCH more talented both athleticaly and technicaly speaking. Also, Pete was bigger and not really PG.

You can argue he was more talented than Kyrie, but much more talented? There is absolutely no way.

Kyrie's handling is sick and his finishing arround the rim is absolutely elite. What does Kyrie lack for you to say Pistol Pete was much more talented than him?

Well Pete was probably as good ballhandler as Kyrie (with more strict palm rules) and was probably better shooter. Also he could post up, drive, shoot hooks, make impossible passes. He was whole package. But he played the game wrong way, thats why Kyrie right now is more valuable player than any version of Pete and he probably doesn't reach his peak yet.

I disagree with Pete being as good of a ball-handler, Kyrie is possibly the best we've ever seen in the NBA in this regard. He manages to pull of dazzlingly fancy but also effective moves WITHOUT palming, that's what makes him so special. Shooting they were more or less equal, but Kyrie has better range and is better shooting off the dribble. Of course Pete was taller and played against inferior defenses so he was able to launch more shots ala Kobe, but Kyrie is simply the more efficient scorer. The one thing I will give Pete was that he was able to pull off some dazzling passes, but at the expense of a high turnover count and as some in this thread have already established, he didn't really play the game the 'right way'.

[HeartBreakKid]

You can argue he was more talented than Kyrie, but much more talented? There is absolutely no way.

Kyrie's handling is sick and his finishing arround the rim is absolutely elite. What does Kyrie lack for you to say Pistol Pete was much more talented than him?

Well Pete was probably as good ballhandler as Kyrie (with more strict palm rules) and was probably better shooter. Also he could post up, drive, shoot hooks, make impossible passes. He was whole package. But he played the game wrong way, thats why Kyrie right now is more valuable player than any version of Pete and he probably doesn't reach his peak yet.

I disagree with Pete being as good of a ball-handler, Kyrie is possibly the best we've ever seen in the NBA in this regard. He manages to pull of dazzlingly fancy but also effective moves WITHOUT palming, that's what makes him so special. Shooting they were more or less equal, but Kyrie has better range and is better shooting off the dribble. Of course Pete was taller and played against inferior defenses so he was able to launch more shots ala Kobe, but Kyrie is simply the more efficient scorer. The one thing I will give Pete was that he was able to pull off some dazzling passes, but at the expense of a high turnover count and as some in this thread have already established, he didn't really play the game the 'right way'.

Chris Paul is a better ball handler than Kyrie Irving. Having fancy moves is hardly a criteria for having great handles.

[young_frogger]

Well Pete was probably as good ballhandler as Kyrie (with more strict palm rules) and was probably better shooter. Also he could post up, drive, shoot hooks, make impossible passes. He was whole package. But he played the game wrong way, thats why Kyrie right now is more valuable player than any version of Pete and he probably doesn't reach his peak yet.

I disagree with Pete being as good of a ball-handler, Kyrie is possibly the best we've ever seen in the NBA in this regard. He manages to pull of dazzlingly fancy but also effective moves WITHOUT palming, that's what makes him so special. Shooting they were more or less equal, but Kyrie has better range and is better shooting off the dribble. Of course Pete was taller and played against inferior defenses so he was able to launch more shots ala Kobe, but Kyrie is simply the more efficient scorer. The one thing I will give Pete was that he was able to pull off some dazzling passes, but at the expense of a high turnover count and as some in this thread have already established, he didn't really play the game the 'right way'.

Chris Paul is a better ball handler than Kyrie Irving. Having fancy moves is hardly a criteria for having great handles.

I think it is in a certain sense. Chris Paul is admittedly better at handling the ball and not turning it over, but what I like about Kyrie's 'fancy moves' is that they're actually very effective in getting him in positions to score. So while CP is better at handling the ball efficiently, Kyrie's ability to pull off dynamic moves is what makes him a more dynamic scorer than CP, and you need to have a terrific handle in order to do what kyrie does.

[Quotatious]

I think it is in a certain sense. Chris Paul is admittedly better at handling the ball and not turning it over, but what I like about Kyrie's 'fancy moves' is that they're actually very effective in getting him in positions to score. So while CP is better at handling the ball efficiently, Kyrie's ability to pull off dynamic moves is what makes him a more dynamic scorer than CP, and you need to have a terrific handle in order to do what kyrie does.

CP3 around 2008/2009 was every bit as good in terms of creating a shot for himself with his fancy handles. He plays more in-control and relies on his fundamentals more as a Clipper, but before 2010 in New Orleans, his ballhandling was really jaw-dropping.

[young_frogger]

I think it is in a certain sense. Chris Paul is admittedly better at handling the ball and not turning it over, but what I like about Kyrie's 'fancy moves' is that they're actually very effective in getting him in positions to score. So while CP is better at handling the ball efficiently, Kyrie's ability to pull off dynamic moves is what makes him a more dynamic scorer than CP, and you need to have a terrific handle in order to do what kyrie does.

CP3 around 2008/2009 was every bit as good in terms of creating a shot for himself with his fancy handles. He plays more in-control and relies on his fundamentals more as a Clipper, but before 2010 in New Orleans, his ballhandling was really jaw-dropping.

No argument there but I still feel Kyrie is better at doing more explosive and i suppose 'fancier' moves, his spin moves, shamgod, behind the backs, crossover etc are all more effective and he's better at doing them in conjunction with one another in order to create a shot seemingly out of nowhere. I felt like Paul being such a big assist threat with his crisp-passing really opened things up for his scoring. WIth that being said, I still of course take Paul as the better PG and player overall, he plays more under control, and is better at things like shifty dribbling, change of speed/direction, dribbling in traffic, and of course his passing/IQ are vastly superior. Overall, these are two of the best ball-handlers of the generation, and I think its difficult to say who is 'better' because they're both so good in different ways.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Stephen Curry is may be the best dribbler in the league as well as being the best shooter. Curry doesn't have good speed.

Maravich was a fancy dribbler. Sometimes Maravich was fancier than was useful. Even for a highly skilled player fancy showy tricky plays result in more turnovers so being unnecessarily fancy is bad. White chocolate Jason Williams was another player accused of being unnecessarily fancy.

Jamal Crawford has impressed me at times with his fancy ball handling but he tends to do what he needs to do and not be too unnecessarily fancy.

Kyrie is definitely a good ball handler but I don't know that he is an elite ball handler. Maybe I have not watched enough Kyrie.

Ball handling pairs well with speed and Kyrie has more speed than any of these other guys I have mentioned that I think are fancier and better ball handlers than Kyrie.

I don't know how Kyrie's shot selection is. I cut you players a break on bad shot selection but as they get older they better stopping shooting every time they get the chance and just shoot good shots. Crawford and Jason Williams had poor shot selection. Maravich had poor shot selection.

[70sFan]

Chris Paul is better dribbler than both Curry and Irving. Also I think Pete is on the same class with this guys. Remember that he was bigger (6'5 or 6'6). I don't think any player close to his size have such a great handles.

[LivingLegend]

So Irving is a good defender now? I didn't know that.

PC, my advice to you is to avoid popping off without having actually read the entirety of what someone has written. Assumptions do you no favors, lad.

Sorry, that sounded a lot worse than I intended it to be. I was just honestly surprised that Kyrie Irving is a decent defensive player; it seems like he's usually one of the first names you hear when "Terrible Defensive Player" is mentioned. So apologies to LivingLegend.

All good man, but yea he had a DEF rating that was right at league average this past season. I know what your talking about though with the used to hearing his name in terrible defensive player lists. I just hate when guys get labeled something this or that and no matter what they do they cant shake it. Kyrie improved drastically on defense from previous seasons where if it wasnt all Kyrie all the time on offense, the Cavs lose. Now that he doesnt have to drop 30+ ppg for the Cavs to win he can focus a lot more on his all around game and not just score score score score and it looked like (from last season at least) that he really focused on defense. I just wish the majority would realize it and try to put an end to the "Kyrie sucks at defense" thing because he doesnt anymore. He is solid, he is decent, he is a average defender.

[LivingLegend]

Well Pete was probably as good ballhandler as Kyrie (with more strict palm rules) and was probably better shooter. Also he could post up, drive, shoot hooks, make impossible passes. He was whole package. But he played the game wrong way, thats why Kyrie right now is more valuable player than any version of Pete and he probably doesn't reach his peak yet.

I disagree with Pete being as good of a ball-handler, Kyrie is possibly the best we've ever seen in the NBA in this regard. He manages to pull of dazzlingly fancy but also effective moves WITHOUT palming, that's what makes him so special. Shooting they were more or less equal, but Kyrie has better range and is better shooting off the dribble. Of course Pete was taller and played against inferior defenses so he was able to launch more shots ala Kobe, but Kyrie is simply the more efficient scorer. The one thing I will give Pete was that he was able to pull off some dazzling passes, but at the expense of a high turnover count and as some in this thread have already established, he didn't really play the game the 'right way'.

Chris Paul is a better ball handler than Kyrie Irving. Having fancy moves is hardly a criteria for having great handles.

lol woah. He uses his "fancy" dribble moves to create open driving lanes and get open shots. Its not like he is doing NBA streetball dribbles standing in place just to look cool lol If these below dont signify that he is a elite ball handler, I dont know what to tell ya. His ability to use his dribbling moves to sort of rock the defender off balance so he can then blow by them is crazy. Thats why he can literally get any shot he wants at any time and why he allllllways has open driving lanes.

[70sFan]

And most of this would be illegal in 1970s