Winsome Gerbil wrote:...
Basketball people at the time weren't idiots....
You wouldn't say that if you'd been a Bullets/Wizards fan.
Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
Winsome Gerbil wrote:...
Basketball people at the time weren't idiots....
Well, best in their primes can really only be either Timmy>Price>Porter or Price>Timmy>Porter. Porter was clearly a step behind those guys at the time.
This is Tim, Mark, followed by Terry. It really isn't close.
I think Porter may get a bit underrated here.
This is insanely close. Porter was a bigger, better scoring, better playmaking version of Billups. He was fantastic in both of Portland's runs to the finals. Incredibly efficient player.
At the time, I would have said Price, Hardaway, Porter but time and hopefully a better understanding of the game has me moving Porter up the list too. He was the best defender of the 3
I think people are underestimating Terry Porters peak which was much shorter than the others but in my opinion was the best of the three.
NW BBALL wrote:Porter is being seriously under appreciated here. I would take peak Porter or Price easily over Hardaway. Hardaway was flashy but inefficient and streaky. Porter has more length and size and is a MUCH more efficient shooter. Tim’s 3pt efficiency is marginal at best and that was with a shortened 3pt line during his peaking chucking days in Miami.
lessthanjake wrote:Kyrie was extremely impactful without LeBron, and basically had zero impact whatsoever if LeBron was on the court.
lessthanjake wrote: By playing in a way that prevents Kyrie from getting much impact, LeBron ensures that controlling for Kyrie has limited effect…
Stan wrote:I would go with Price, he would be a poor man's Nash in this era.