Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway?

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

Who was the best player, in their primes?

Terry Porter
9
23%
Mark Price
14
36%
Tim Hardaway
16
41%
 
Total votes: 39

penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,301
And1: 9,865
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#21 » by penbeast0 » Tue Jul 18, 2023 4:53 pm

Winsome Gerbil wrote:...

Basketball people at the time weren't idiots....


You wouldn't say that if you'd been a Bullets/Wizards fan.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
kcktiny
Pro Prospect
Posts: 900
And1: 673
Joined: Aug 14, 2012

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#22 » by kcktiny » Tue Jul 18, 2023 7:00 pm

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.


Try evaluating defense. Not just scoring, shooting, assists.

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.


These are much closer to the truth.

1986-87 to 1992-93 (7 years) is when Porter played the bulk of his minutes with the Blazers, played the most minutes and the most games for them.

And during that time Portland won the 3rd most games in the league in the regular season (only the Lakers and Bulls won more), and as a team ranked 6th in the league in offensive efficiency (108.9 pts/100poss allowed) but 4th best in defensive efficiency (104.3 pts/100poss allowed). The only teams better defensively over all that time were the Jazz, Rockets, and Pistons.

And they were 4th in defense as a team despite having a worse than average to poor defensive starting C all that time in Kevin Duckworth (poor shot blocker, worse than average defensive rebounder for a C).

That backcourt of Porter and Drexler - who both played 19,000-20,000 minutes over that time - was likely the best defensive backcourt in the league over that 7 year stretch, and rarely got credit for it.

Porter did get the 3rd most votes among PGs for the all-defensive team in 1990-91 and 1991-92. In 90-91 Portland as a team was 2nd best in the league in defensive efficiency and was 1st in 1991-92.

Offensively speaking just look at Porter's 90-91 season. Scored just 17 pts/g with only 8 ast/g. Nothing special for that season, right? But his shooting was close to best in the league for a PG and his turnovers were low, so his offensive efficiency was quite high.

Add to that his excellent defense that year and I'd say that was the best single season among the three (Porter, Price, Hardaway).

As for peak performance (thinking this is a 5 year minimum) I'd go with Porter from 1988-89 to 1992-93.
NW BBALL
Sophomore
Posts: 166
And1: 146
Joined: Jun 27, 2016
   

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#23 » by NW BBALL » Tue Jul 18, 2023 7:31 pm

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.
User avatar
homecourtloss
RealGM
Posts: 11,375
And1: 18,774
Joined: Dec 29, 2012

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#24 » by homecourtloss » Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:37 pm

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.


Porter has widely been unappreciated as he has been an impact monster for the years we have data. What is really interesting about Tim Hardaway is that yes, he was average inefficiency and was a small guard, and most small guards are negatives on defense, but the data that we have for Tim Hardaway shows that he was actually an impact monster, especially relative to size. All three of these players are small guards, who held up extremely well as far as impact is concerned relative to the impact more small guards have.
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…
SHAQ32
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,550
And1: 3,230
Joined: Mar 21, 2013
 

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#25 » by SHAQ32 » Wed Jul 19, 2023 5:42 am

Billups vs Nash vs ???
SpreeS
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,748
And1: 4,119
Joined: Jul 26, 2012
 

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#26 » by SpreeS » Wed Jul 19, 2023 10:31 am

Peak?

Porter be far

PO 1992

.516/.474/.832 4.6r 6.7a 2.2t 21.4pts with way better defence than the rest two

RS 1991

TS .632 TS+ 118 PER 21.7 WS48 .235 BPM 7.4 VORP 6.2

Price and Tim isnt close to these numbers
Stan
Veteran
Posts: 2,648
And1: 4,032
Joined: Oct 11, 2019

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#27 » by Stan » Wed Jul 19, 2023 4:55 pm

I would go with Price, he would be a poor man's Nash in this era.
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 91,984
And1: 31,586
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#28 » by tsherkin » Wed Jul 19, 2023 8:25 pm

I'm not as impressed by Hardaway as some were, way back when ITT. He wasn't a particularly impressive scorer even with the advantage of Golden State's tempo under Don Nelson, and while he was a pile of fun to watch with his dirty crossover, I mostly see better results from Mark Price. And Porter, for that matter, though he played on teams with enough talent that it's hard to compare.
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,886
And1: 11,381
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: Terry Porter, Mark Price or Tim Hardaway? 

Post#29 » by Cavsfansince84 » Wed Jul 19, 2023 9:56 pm

Stan wrote:I would go with Price, he would be a poor man's Nash in this era.


I think he's more than a poor man's. I think he's at least 90-95% of the player Nash is in today's league. They were very different players though despite being similar in some ways. The Cavs played in very slowed down and controlled offenses while Nash was more up tempo and frenetic.

Return to Player Comparisons