John Stockton vs Chris Paul all time who you voting?

[garrick]

John Stockton because he does everything better than Chris Paul, except for rebounding (but Stockton didn't play in the 3-pointers era so didn't get long rebounds) and scoring (but Stockton was more of a pass-first PG, and could have scored more).

This is an oversimplification and also not accurate.

Chris Paul played his first 10 seasons with 3PA under 23 attempts. For example, the NBA in 05-06, 06-07 and 07-08 took 16, 16.9 and 18.1 3PA. The NBA in 94-95, 95-96 and 96-97 took 15.3, 16.0 and 16.8 3PA, Paul outrebounded Stockton all those season, so your hypothesis of 3PA doesn't actually work.

Chris Paul shoots better from everywhere while scoring more points, and pretty decidedly so in the post-season. And FT line is not affected by defense. He's certainly the better shooter on the floor, and Stockton was good too.

Playoffs:
Stockton: 13.4 ppg, 50.7 2PT%, 32.7 3PT%, 81.0 FT%

Paul: 20.0 ppg, 52.8 2PT%, 37.3 3PT%, 85.4 FT%

The Jazz needed him to score more many times and he wasn't able to come through, so I'm not sure this is a positive thing to say, "well he could have scored more, but just didn't". With shooting, Stockton also got 3 seasons with a shorter 3PT to boost percentages.

Stockton was a good but not amazing player that couldn't take over when you needed him to due to his lack of athleticism and size while CP3 was a much more dynamic player able to take over games.

I would much rather have prime CP3 than prime Stockton.

[Mephariel]

Paul is the better player. But Stockton was the perfect point guard for his team and for that era of basketball.

[SpreeS]

Paul peak was MVP in my eyes (2008). Stockton wasn't close to that level. Comparing careers is way close due Stockton availability. They both lost plenty PO series to weaker opponents, but for one most lost came due injuries for other due choking.

[bonita_the_frog]

Stockton was a good but not amazing player that couldn't take over when you needed him to due to his lack of athleticism and size while CP3 was a much more dynamic player able to take over games.

I would much rather have prime CP3 than prime Stockton.

When you look at footage of Stockton AND Paul in their prime, looks like Stockton has more speed AND acceleration.
On top of that Stockton is known for being physically tougher than nails, not able to be man-handled.
No surprise Stockton NEVER missed a game, the ultimate man that he is.

[antonac]

I have no problem with people putting Stockton over Paul in some sort of all-time list. However, it should definitely be clear it's for his longevity and career records, as well as a slightly more successful post season record. In their primes Paul was a substantially better player.

[Synciere]

Sometimes I wish these polls could be limited to people of a certain age and over. If you’re 30 you probably never saw Stockton play. I like Stockton as a player but half of his assists were dumping a pass to Malone on the block and Malone scoring. Malone is currently like third all time in points so that’s a ton of Stockton racking up assists he just stood around for. Watch the games; it was a different era of basketball. Offensively, in their peaks, it’s not close. Paul was/is the better player. Both the eye test and the numbers show this.

[The Master]

Sometimes I wish these polls could be limited to people of a certain age and over. If you’re 30 you probably never saw Stockton play. I like Stockton as a player but half of his assists were dumping a pass to Malone on the block and Malone scoring. Malone is currently like third all time in points so that’s a ton of Stockton racking up assists he just stood around for. Watch the games; it was a different era of basketball. Offensively, in their peaks, it’s not close. Paul was/is the better player. Both the eye test and the numbers show this.

Stockton was still an elite elite playmaker - that being said, yeah, his assists were inflated due to illegal defense rule, you could spam pick and roll without help defense and basically play 2v2, nowadays without being a scoring threat he wouldn't be as efficient. And even adjusted to his era - Stockton was like 7th in the MVP voting at best, CP3 was 8 times in top7 and five times in top5.

[Bergmaniac]

Stockton was a good but not amazing player that couldn't take over when you needed him to due to his lack of athleticism and size while CP3 was a much more dynamic player able to take over games.

I would much rather have prime CP3 than prime Stockton.

When you look at footage of Stockton AND Paul in their prime, looks like Stockton has more speed AND acceleration.

Definitely not true if we talking about Paul before his knee injury in 2010, he was one of the quickest guys in the league back then.

[bonita_the_frog]

Stockton was a good but not amazing player that couldn't take over when you needed him to due to his lack of athleticism and size while CP3 was a much more dynamic player able to take over games.

I would much rather have prime CP3 than prime Stockton.

When you look at footage of Stockton AND Paul in their prime, looks like Stockton has more speed AND acceleration.

Definitely not true if we talking about Paul before his knee injury in 2010, he was one of the quickest guys in the league back then.

Paul was as quick as Iverson, Rose and Westbrook? I don't get that impression at all...

Sometimes I wish these polls could be limited to people of a certain age and over. If you’re 30 you probably never saw Stockton play. I like Stockton as a player but half of his assists were dumping a pass to Malone on the block and Malone scoring. Malone is currently like third all time in points so that’s a ton of Stockton racking up assists he just stood around for. Watch the games; it was a different era of basketball. Offensively, in their peaks, it’s not close. Paul was/is the better player. Both the eye test and the numbers show this.

Everyone in the world has seen Stockton play because of youtube and in my case dvd collection handed down from generation to generation!

[dhsilv2]

Its close but ill take Stockton. Guy played all 82 16 seasons which is amazing. I also factor in the amount of success he had with Malone in Utah for over a decade. They had 11 seasons winning 50 plus games while Paul has bounced around the league. Paul might have a smal advantage in peak but ill still take Stockton.

About 150 games more played by stockton.

Regular season records:
Stockton 953-551 63.4%
Paul 861-493 63.6%

Playoff
Paul - 12-15 in series. 81-68 54.4%
Stockton 17-19 in series 89-93 48.9%

Weird to see Paul with the better playoff record. Also worth noting Stockton played a LOT of game 5's in the first round...like a LOT (11 in total).

So from a team success...honestly you could take either. Especially depending if you've taken the more modern view on some of the play by play data of old stockton and think perhaps he was more of the engine of the jazz than the popular opinion of the 90's and early 00's. If you're still a huge believer it was Malone driving it...I think you'd need to lean more to Paul.

Perfect example of posting random statistics without understanding random statistics.

Happy to explain the stats to you if you need.

For these the first number I listed it's wins. A team wins a basketball game by scoring more points than the other team. The second shows losses. A team loses a game by scoring less than the other team. The last is a win percentage. This is wins divided by total games. This shows us how often someone won a game.

Hope this helps so you can understand the stats.

[dhsilv2]

In terms of all-time Stockton may have the slight edge due to longevity and durability, he never missed a game..

No doubt Stockton was Durable and healthier. But longevity, we should note CP3 has now played 1 more season that Stockton and I assume is going to play year 21 next year.

More durable is an absolute term and there is more context to it.

You can argue the pace is much faster during CP3's career compared to Stockton's, yet CP3 also has had more advanced techniques in training, diet, therapies, etc. This is always a hard issue to compare players' longevity and durability from different eras.

However it IS a fact that CP3 broken down more often when he was needed the most whereas Stockton didn't. That's one constant.

1985-2003 pace was just over 95 and pace 2006-2025 was just over 95. The pace for their careers is virtually identical and who's was higher or lower would come down to having a data source with more decimals.

I don't think it's hard to compare a guy who never missed a key playoff game to a guy who missed a lot of them in terms of durability. There are some guys where era might play a role. Guys in the past didn't load manage but these aren't the two to require some advanced methods.

[TheGOATWill]

well done OP. maybe the most similar players from different eras in league history. gimme Stockton on sheer back screen proficiency and higher likelihood to claw somebody's face off.

[SlimShady83]

well done OP. maybe the most similar players from different eras in league history. gimme Stockton on sheer back screen proficiency and higher likelihood to claw somebody's face off.

Why thank you sir! Stay tuned I'm working on something.

[Anderson Hunt]

Prime Chris Paul is better than prime Stockton.

Agreed. In a vacuum, for one or two years, Paul is better. However, over the span of 5 years or an entire career, Stockton is better because he didn't miss games like Paul.

Paul should've won MVP over Kobe. He was an absolute supernova in New Orleans. He did things in New Orleans that Stockton could never dream of doing.

[Primedeion]

Prime Chris Paul is better than prime Stockton.

Agreed. In a vacuum, for one or two years, Paul is better. However, over the span of 5 years or an entire career, Stockton is better because he didn't miss games like Paul.

Paul should've won MVP over Kobe. He was an absolute supernova in New Orleans. He did things in New Orleans that Stockton could never dream of doing.

Kobe was better and more impactful on both ends of the floor, anchored a way better team with a weaker supporting cast, and destroyed him in the actual impact metrics (RAPM, APM). CP0 didn't deserve anything.

[og15]

Prime Chris Paul is better than prime Stockton.

Agreed. In a vacuum, for one or two years, Paul is better. However, over the span of 5 years or an entire career, Stockton is better because he didn't miss games like Paul.

Paul should've won MVP over Kobe. He was an absolute supernova in New Orleans. He did things in New Orleans that Stockton could never dream of doing.

Kobe was better and more impactful on both ends of the floor, anchored a way better team with a weaker supporting cast, and destroyed him in the actual impact metrics (RAPM, APM). CP0 didn't deserve anything.

Choosing Kobe, totally fine, but weaker supporting cast?

Lakers went 22-5 with Pau, technically 22-4 as he got injured in the start of one game. If they had the no Gasol pace, Kobe doesn't get MVP.

A supporting cast of Gasol, Odom, Fisher, Radman, Walton, Farmar is not really weaker Chandler, West, Peja, MoPete, Bonzi, and Pargo?

Gasol is the next best player there. If we compare it as him and West as second options, his far superior passing ability is the biggest difference, but then also better rebounder, rim protector, low post scorer and shot creator. Odom is a better player than Chandler, but you could argue Chandler's impact. Odom gives you the two way versatility, multi position ability and passing. Peja is better than VladRad/Walton, but of course this is also post back issues Peja, not Sacramento.

Fisher is far superior player to MoPete. They occupy sort of similar roles, but Fisher wins a the intangibles and of course gives you ball handling and passing support.

We can actually see one of the big issues here with the Hornets roster and why a journeyman and bubble NBA player in Pargo was a "critical piece". They had little to no strong ball handling and/or playmaking outside of Paul. The Lakers on the other hand had an abundance.

Looking at the rest of the guys, Bonzi was out of the league after that season, Pargo didn't get signed in 08-09 and bounced around as a bubble NBA guy after coming back in 09-10.

This was not a weaker supporting cast, lol. Lakers had a superior roster with things that are even more important in the playoffs, playmaking support, two way play and positional versatility. It's not even close in those things.

[Primedeion]

Agreed. In a vacuum, for one or two years, Paul is better. However, over the span of 5 years or an entire career, Stockton is better because he didn't miss games like Paul.

Paul should've won MVP over Kobe. He was an absolute supernova in New Orleans. He did things in New Orleans that Stockton could never dream of doing.

Kobe was better and more impactful on both ends of the floor, anchored a way better team with a weaker supporting cast, and destroyed him in the actual impact metrics (RAPM, APM). CP0 didn't deserve anything.

Choosing Kobe, totally fine, but weaker supporting cast?

Lakers went 22-5 with Pau, technically 22-4 as he got injured in the start of one game. If they had the no Gasol pace, Kobe doesn't get MVP.

A supporting cast of Gasol, Odom, Fisher, Radman, Walton, Farmar is not really weaker Chandler, West, Peja, MoPete, Bonzi, and Pargo?

Gasol is the next best player there. If we compare it as him and West as second options, his far superior passing ability is the biggest difference, but then also better rebounder, rim protector, low post scorer and shot creator. Odom is a better player than Chandler, but you could argue Chandler's impact. Odom gives you the two way versatility, multi position ability and passing. Peja is better than VladRad/Walton, but of course this is also post back issues Peja, not Sacramento.

Fisher is far superior player to MoPete. They occupy sort of similar roles, but Fisher wins a the intangibles and of course gives you ball handling and passing support.

We can actually see one of the big issues here with the Hornets roster and why a journeyman and bubble NBA player in Pargo was a "critical piece". They had little to no strong ball handling and/or playmaking outside of Paul. The Lakers on the other hand had an abundance.

Looking at the rest of the guys, Bonzi was out of the league after that season, Pargo didn't get signed in 08-09 and bounced around as a bubble NBA guy after coming back in 09-10.

This was not a weaker supporting cast, lol. Lakers had a superior roster with things that are even more important in the playoffs, playmaking support, two way play and positional versatility. It's not even close in those things.

Lmao. The Lakers with Pau/Odom bring VASTLY superior to Hornets with a fully healthy West/Chandler/Peja is a point in Kobe's favor. And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

27 games of Pau, 35 games of Bynum (and they never played together), and Odom is not better than 82 games of David West/Chandler and Peja. And Walton/Vlad are nowhere near as good as 08 Peja, who was still doing 16/4 with amazing efficiency and shooting 44% from three on 8 attempts before that stuff was popular.This is a ludicrous post.

And lol @ Derek freaking Fisher being "far" better than Peterson. The guy was a good role player. The hyperbole is insane.

I'm not going to even bother with some of the rest of this nonsense.

[og15]

Kobe was better and more impactful on both ends of the floor, anchored a way better team with a weaker supporting cast, and destroyed him in the actual impact metrics (RAPM, APM). CP0 didn't deserve anything.

Choosing Kobe, totally fine, but weaker supporting cast?

Lakers went 22-5 with Pau, technically 22-4 as he got injured in the start of one game. If they had the no Gasol pace, Kobe doesn't get MVP.

A supporting cast of Gasol, Odom, Fisher, Radman, Walton, Farmar is not really weaker Chandler, West, Peja, MoPete, Bonzi, and Pargo?

Gasol is the next best player there. If we compare it as him and West as second options, his far superior passing ability is the biggest difference, but then also better rebounder, rim protector, low post scorer and shot creator. Odom is a better player than Chandler, but you could argue Chandler's impact. Odom gives you the two way versatility, multi position ability and passing. Peja is better than VladRad/Walton, but of course this is also post back issues Peja, not Sacramento.

Fisher is far superior player to MoPete. They occupy sort of similar roles, but Fisher wins a the intangibles and of course gives you ball handling and passing support.

We can actually see one of the big issues here with the Hornets roster and why a journeyman and bubble NBA player in Pargo was a "critical piece". They had little to no strong ball handling and/or playmaking outside of Paul. The Lakers on the other hand had an abundance.

Looking at the rest of the guys, Bonzi was out of the league after that season, Pargo didn't get signed in 08-09 and bounced around as a bubble NBA guy after coming back in 09-10.

This was not a weaker supporting cast, lol. Lakers had a superior roster with things that are even more important in the playoffs, playmaking support, two way play and positional versatility. It's not even close in those things.

Lmao. The Lakers with Pau/Odom bring VASTLY superior to Hornets with a fully healthy West/Chandler/Peja is a point in Kobe's favor. And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

27 games of Pau, 35 games of Bynum (and they never played together), and Odom is not better than 82 games of David West/Chandler and Peja. And Walton/Vlad are nowhere near as good as 08 Peja, who was still doing 16/4 with amazing efficiency and shooting 44% from three on 8 attempts before that stuff was popular.This is a ludicrous post.

And lol @ Derek freaking Fisher being "far" better than Peterson. The guy was a good role player. The hyperbole is insane.

I'm not going to even bother with some of the rest of this nonsense.

There is a reason I did not mention Bynum, not sure what you're going on about in relation to Bynum/Pau/Odom not playing together, yea, that's why I did not mention Bynum at all in the comparison lol

Kobe does not win MVP if they don't add Gasol and go 22-5 in the games he played, 22-4 in non injured games. The Lakers without Gasol were not the better team, yes, 27 games of Gasol was huge because he's easily the best player outside of the two top guys and it's not even close.

Yes, and I said Peja was better, what's your point? We're talking about the whole roster construction.

What kind of player do you think MoPete was? Him and Fisher had a similar role, floor spacing, shooting, defense, but Fisher brought additional intangibles, ball handling and some playmaking. If that's not much better, not sure what is.

No, please, enlighten us on how cooked Bonzi Wells on his way out the league (34 year old cooked Bobby Jackson traded for), journeyman Pargo, 5 games of Chris Andersen, 51 games of Butler and all the other non rotation guys were better than Farmar, Turiaf, Walton and Vujacic.

You definitely shouldn't bother because there wouldn't be an argument

[Primedeion]

Choosing Kobe, totally fine, but weaker supporting cast?

Lakers went 22-5 with Pau, technically 22-4 as he got injured in the start of one game. If they had the no Gasol pace, Kobe doesn't get MVP.

A supporting cast of Gasol, Odom, Fisher, Radman, Walton, Farmar is not really weaker Chandler, West, Peja, MoPete, Bonzi, and Pargo?

Gasol is the next best player there. If we compare it as him and West as second options, his far superior passing ability is the biggest difference, but then also better rebounder, rim protector, low post scorer and shot creator. Odom is a better player than Chandler, but you could argue Chandler's impact. Odom gives you the two way versatility, multi position ability and passing. Peja is better than VladRad/Walton, but of course this is also post back issues Peja, not Sacramento.

Fisher is far superior player to MoPete. They occupy sort of similar roles, but Fisher wins a the intangibles and of course gives you ball handling and passing support.

We can actually see one of the big issues here with the Hornets roster and why a journeyman and bubble NBA player in Pargo was a "critical piece". They had little to no strong ball handling and/or playmaking outside of Paul. The Lakers on the other hand had an abundance.

Looking at the rest of the guys, Bonzi was out of the league after that season, Pargo didn't get signed in 08-09 and bounced around as a bubble NBA guy after coming back in 09-10.

This was not a weaker supporting cast, lol. Lakers had a superior roster with things that are even more important in the playoffs, playmaking support, two way play and positional versatility. It's not even close in those things.

Lmao. The Lakers with Pau/Odom bring VASTLY superior to Hornets with a fully healthy West/Chandler/Peja is a point in Kobe's favor. And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

27 games of Pau, 35 games of Bynum (and they never played together), and Odom is not better than 82 games of David West/Chandler and Peja. And Walton/Vlad are nowhere near as good as 08 Peja, who was still doing 16/4 with amazing efficiency and shooting 44% from three on 8 attempts before that stuff was popular.This is a ludicrous post.

And lol @ Derek freaking Fisher being "far" better than Peterson. The guy was a good role player. The hyperbole is insane.

I'm not going to even bother with some of the rest of this nonsense.

There is a reason I did not mention Bynum, not sure what you're going on about in relation to Bynum/Pau/Odom not playing together, yea, that's why I did not mention Bynum at all in the comparison lol

Kobe does not win MVP if they don't add Gasol and go 22-5 in the games he played, 22-4 in non injured games. The Lakers without Gasol were not the better team, yes, 27 games of Gasol was huge because he's easily the best player outside of the two top guys and it's not even close.

Yes, and I said Peja was better, what's your point? We're talking about the whole roster construction.

What kind of player do you think MoPete was? Him and Fisher had a similar role, floor spacing, shooting, defense, but Fisher brought additional intangibles, ball handling and some playmaking. If that's not much better, not sure what is.

No, please, enlighten us on how cooked Bonzi Wells on his way out the league (34 year old cooked Bobby Jackson traded for), journeyman Pargo, 5 games of Chris Andersen, 51 games of Butler and all the other non rotation guys were better than Farmar, Turiaf, Walton and Vujacic.

You definitely shouldn't bother because there wouldn't be an argument

There's not an argument that 27 games of Pau, 35 games of Bynum (again, literally NEVER played together), and Odom isn't better than 82 games of West (literally made
the All-star team), 82 games of Chandler, and 82 games of Peja (far better than whoever the #4 on the Lakers is).

Do you even hear yourself? And they were 30-15 with the #3 seed and a 5+ SRS (same as the Hornets ) BEFORE the trade, and that's with Bynum playing in only 35 games. The fact that they made immediately played at a level that's FAR superior to whatever the Hornets managed is not a point in CP0's favor. Pau was a one time All-star in seven seasons before the trade. Zero MVP votes. Zero All-NBA teams. Zero playoff wins. Wasn't even a consensus top five guy at his own position. He wasn't some superstar no matter how much you want to glaze him. And I never said he wasn't better than West, but it doesn't come remotely close to making up the difference in games played, and if you're going to whine about the 27 games with Pau, then you also have to consider that he had played 22 games with NEITHER Pau or Bynum. That's 22 games where he was stuck with Odom and a bunch of role players. Surely even you understand that CP0 didn't have anything even remotely close that bad at any stretch of the season.

Fisher averaged 12/3 lol. No, he's not "FaRz" better than Mo Peterson no matter how much you want to blather about his "intangibles" and completely non-existent playmaking.

I never denied the Lakers had a better bench, but the top end pieces are more important, and nobody with a brain thinks 27 games of Pau, 35 games of Bynum (NEVER played together), and Odom is better support than 82 games of David West, 82 games of Chandler, and 82 games of Peja. And if you're going to whine about Pau being the best top piece, then I'll point out that having no Bynum/Pau for 1/4 of the season is also a far lower low.

And Kobe STILL anchored a much better team. In fact, the Lakers 7.34 SRS tops ANY SRS that Paul EVER managed as the undisputed #1.

You're hilarious.

[jbk1234]

CP3 could've had the better career if he wasn't injured so often, but he was, especially in the postseason, and that matters.