Where would Stockton rank as a point guard today

[One_and_Done]

I feel it's unfortunate when people conflate having a different opinion with trolling. The NBA is tougher these days than it was in Stockton's day. The result of that is Stockton drops down from being a borderline top 15 player to being borderline top 25-30. Since only 24 guys make an all-star team, he drops out. This shouldn't be regarded as a particularly controversial opinion.

The OP wasn’t super specific about just plopping him out of nowhere via some magical mystery Time Machine. Why do some posters frame every argument like this? (Oh, I know exactly why, it’s a rhetorical question)

Why would he not similarly benefit from modern everything?

Not an all star? Asinine.

I rate guys based on how they actually played, not on how I imagine they might have played in different circumstances. If we rate players that way I can imagine Shaq hitting his FTs, KG as a 50% 3pt shooter, Sheed with a better attitude, Walton with full health thanks to modern medicine, Len Bias if he lived, etc. See the problem?

[bledredwine]

Threads like this actually make me chuckle out loud every time. It just shows you how clueless some people are about the past, aka talent of ATG players.

I forgot who, but there was a younger Jazz player who said that Stockton came in for two pickup games and dominated everyone on the team.

This was a few years ago.

[bkkrh]

To still give an example, Chris Paul has a lot of similar skills and a similar playstyle. He's kind of a mix of Isiah Thomas and John Stockton.

I dont see the Zeke much.

Paul is an excellent mid-range shooter and way better at protecting the ball. The PnR similarities to Stockton I see. About the only similarities with Isiah I see are height and, in contending years, sub-20 ppg.

Yeah, thinking about it, it's how I saw Chris Paul in New Orleans and it might be related to his high scoring output, that I had that correlation in my head. Since there weren't really many small scoring guards in the league until that point.

[hauntedcomputer]

Only on RealGm would one of the best point guards in history not even be a top 30 point guard and is basically TJ McConnell.

He shot 38 percent from 3 and on volume/greenlight/training he'd probably be hitting 40+ percent today. He'd be even better. The recency bias on this board is amusing.

[TFJava]

Top 10.

[jojo4341]

Easily top 5. Though not exactly the same, I like the Chris Paul comparison. I'm not going to argue who was better head to head since they come from different eras, but I will say that Stockton was the better passer and obviously a lot more physical and durable that CP3 ever was. You ask NBA players who actually played against Stockton...he was always relentless on defense, set the hardest screens for someone his size and was harder to defend that other elite scorers (see Gary Payton's assessment). He controlled the flow of the game on both ends in an era where the rules favored bigs.

I don't like to use hypotheticals, but this era would highly favor Stockton's playstyle. And if he was a little more selfish in scoring, he'd be a much bigger scoring threat. Oh, and he rarely (if ever) flops.

[One_and_Done]

CP3 was an MVP type player in a better league, Stockton was never a serious MVP candidate in his much weaker league. They are in different tiers completely.

[SlimShady83]

I feel it's unfortunate when people conflate having a different opinion with trolling.
Any chance you get and I mean any chance you get, you use the opurtunity to dethrown Kobe, that's fine no worries what ever, but when you do It every single thread/post that's needed. We get It, we all get It (you hate Kobe) that becomes trolling IMO... I'm Lebron Hater and with a passion and barly place him In my top 10... But I don't go around every single thread/post that's posted and complain about him heck his on the Lakers and I'm Laker fan, because of Kobe I don't go about bringing down Lebron, at least compared to you with Kobe :lol, you need to relax.

The NBA is tougher these days than it was in Stockton's day. The result of that is Stockton drops down from being a borderline top 15
player to being borderline top 25-30.

This Thread Is about and I Quote this as It's needed, Rank Stockton as a "Point Guard" not all time, so you really rank Stockton as a top 15 Point guard In today's game... You serious? LMAO, If so Trolling. Then enlightnine me and everyone else who are the other PG's of today's game you're ranking above Stockton - go on rank 15, 25,30 PG's as you say It who're better then Stoctkton In today's game, LOL

Since only 24 guys make an all-star team, he drops out.

WTF does this have to do with the allstar game?

OP Is asking, where do you rank Stockton "As a Point Guard" In today's game.

Peace Slim

[Luke]

Wouldn't even be an all-star given his lack of creation and pass first game, combined with a much stronger league.

He is basically the second GOAT point guard behind Magic ( Curry plays a different role IMHO, he is more a scorer than a passer, even if he can pass well too )

[12footrim]

Wouldn't even be an all-star given his lack of creation and pass first game, combined with a much stronger league.

He was still an above average starter at 40 in 02-03. That means Shaq & Kobe Lakers, Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Bowen Spurs, Nowitzki, Nash Finley Mavericks, Webber, Stojakovic, Bibby Kings to name a few teams.

He played against some of the best point guards in history (Magic, Isiah, Penny, Tim Hardaway, KJ, Mark Price, GP, JKidd and so on) and made the All Star team in 3 different decades. He is All time leader in Assists and Steals. He is 7th All time in Win Shares, 3rd All time in VORP and 8th all time in BPM.

What part of his game would not translate into today's NBA? In what area does he have skill gaps?

Stockton is one of the most incredible longevity guys in the game next to LeBron IMO. He was basically as productive per possesssion and and good at 40 as he was in his peak at 25 to 27. Peak PER was 23.9 at 27 and he was still at 21.0 at 40 and 21.9 at 39. You can't say that for any other player in NBA history.

Basically, he was pretty much the same player caliber of player playing 28 minutes a game for a 47 win team in an era where Kobe, Kidd, Nash, etc were stars. You see how long most of them played and were still good a decade later. He had the same type of game as Nash, and he was still an all star a decade later. Chris Paul was a super star that year, and he's still going with a similar type game today at nearly 40 too.

Stockton - Nash in 2003
Nash - CP3 in 2012
CP3 today

[One_and_Done]

I mean I don't see any argument for him to be a top 5 PG today, because guys like SGA, Luka, Curry, Brunson, Morant, even Lillard, Hali, etc, exist. Heck, I'd take Harden over him, even with how he's fallen off.

[Wingy]

I feel it's unfortunate when people conflate having a different opinion with trolling. The NBA is tougher these days than it was in Stockton's day. The result of that is Stockton drops down from being a borderline top 15 player to being borderline top 25-30. Since only 24 guys make an all-star team, he drops out. This shouldn't be regarded as a particularly controversial opinion.

The OP wasn’t super specific about just plopping him out of nowhere via some magical mystery Time Machine. Why do some posters frame every argument like this? (Oh, I know exactly why, it’s a rhetorical question)

Why would he not similarly benefit from modern everything?

Not an all star? Asinine.

I rate guys based on how they actually played, not on how I imagine they might have played in different circumstances. If we rate players that way I can imagine Shaq hitting his FTs, KG as a 50% 3pt shooter, Sheed with a better attitude, Walton with full health thanks to modern medicine, Len Bias if he lived, etc. See the problem?

Again, asinine.

You’re talking about deeply ingrained natural flaws of most of these particular players and ignoring what raises the current floor due to natural evolution of the game that comes from building on top of the previous generations you like to put down.

Benefits of training, load management, improved travel, skill development, rules, yes medicine. None of that is some crazy theoretical where it’s going to fail to benefit other players. Of course it doesn’t fix fatal flaws. Your examples are rubbish.

You act like we’re taking Joe Wolf and boom, modern stuff gonna put him up there with Embiid! No. We’re talking an already hall of fame, all time great at the position who’s the all time leader in steals and assists.

[One_and_Done]

The OP wasn’t super specific about just plopping him out of nowhere via some magical mystery Time Machine. Why do some posters frame every argument like this? (Oh, I know exactly why, it’s a rhetorical question)

Why would he not similarly benefit from modern everything?

Not an all star? Asinine.

I rate guys based on how they actually played, not on how I imagine they might have played in different circumstances. If we rate players that way I can imagine Shaq hitting his FTs, KG as a 50% 3pt shooter, Sheed with a better attitude, Walton with full health thanks to modern medicine, Len Bias if he lived, etc. See the problem?

Again, asinine.

You’re talking about deeply ingrained natural flaws of most of these particular players and ignoring what raises the current floor due to natural evolution of the game that comes from building on top of the previous generations you like to put down.

Benefits of training, load management, improved travel, skill development, rules, yes medicine. None of that is some crazy theoretical where it’s going to fail to benefit other players. Of course it doesn’t fix fatal flaws. Your examples are rubbish.

You act like we’re taking Joe Wolf and boom, modern stuff gonna put him up there with Embiid! No. We’re talking an already hall of fame, all time great at the position who’s the all time leader in steals and assists.

It's imagination in both cases, you just want one to be true and not the other. Demar is a great midrange shooter for eg, so on paper he should be able to hit 3s. In reality he never developed that skill. I guess he just needed to play in the 80s so we could assume he would do so.

[bkkrh]

Similarly, when your archetype is an all time historical outlier like Barkley or Shaq you're in trouble. Those guys are outliers for a reason.

So those players are historical outliers to you, but a player that has 5 of the 6 highest APG averages in NBA history isn't an historical outlier? Even if he had those averages in 5 successive seasons and lead the league twice in SPG during that period as well?

CP3 is a vastly better shooter and PnR player than Stockton, and frankly is a much better passer and defender too. McConnell was closer to the mark, bit he's a bench player. Your other modern comp, Conley, made exactly 1 all-star game as an injury replacement.

Stockton was in 11 of 18 seasons in the top 20 for FGA. He has the 93rd highest FGA in NBA and ABA history. There are only 2 guards that have an higher average. Magic Johnson, with a 0.04% higher average and funny enough currently TJ McConnell with a 0.003% higher average.

You asked for some examples of modern players similar to John Stockton, I named some. There are more but I won't go through the whole current NBA roster. Tyus Jones would be another one. If they have more or less success than Stockton doesn't matter, since they aren't Stockton. There is a difference between individiual skill level and similar playstyle. Clarence Weatherspoon got the nickname "Baby Barkley" because of his playstyle and being drafted by Philly as well. Never came close to Barkley's level, doesn't take anything from Barkley away.

Before you bring it up, yes John Stockton didn't have a lot of shot attempts. But that's more related to the time he played in. He definitely could score on a higher volume.

87-88 Playoffs: 19.5 PPG over 11 games, 50.7% FGA
88-89 Playoffs: 27.3 PPG over 3 games, 50.8% FGA, 75% 3PA
90-91 Playoffs 18.2 PPG over 9 games, 53.7 FGA, 40.7 3PA

Btw., in 87-88 and 90-91 the opposing Point Guards were Terry Porter, Magic and Kevin Johnson.

[Broadcaster]

CP3 was an MVP type player in a better league, Stockton was never a serious MVP candidate in his much weaker league. They are in different tiers completely.

You are out of touch.

[One_and_Done]

CP3 was an MVP type player in a better league, Stockton was never a serious MVP candidate in his much weaker league. They are in different tiers completely.

You are out of touch.

If the Jazz had 2 MVPs together for so long they really underachieved.

[SlimShady83]

I mean I don't see any argument for him to be a top 5 PG today, because guys like SGA, Luka, Curry, Brunson, Morant, even Lillard, Hali, etc, exist. Heck, I'd take Harden over him, even with how he's fallen off.

But ... But, you had him around the 15, 25-30 range right lmao

GG my friend

[druggas]

In my opinion, he would rank as high as when he was playing.

[SlimShady83]

Wouldn't even be an all-star given his lack of creation and pass first game, combined with a much stronger league.

Take a look at the West all-stars, and all the great players who don't make it. There's no chance Stockton is an all-star.

again not about the all stars, but ok. There no changing your mind on this.

Watch on YouTube

;t=5s

[Moose]

The dude was averaging 17 points and 14 assists per game for a few seasons

In this league today? He would probably be averaging 22 and 16 during lol

https://youtu.be/QJOYt5pkN4I?si=w8ldT1y9Lrp6uhYG