How do the star wings of the 2000s stack up in current era

[migya]

How would the star wings of the 2000s decade stack up in the current era nba?

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, GHill, EJones, Finley, JRich, Hamilton, Stackhouse, Ginobili, Wade? Even Iverson, a scorer and SG more than anything?

They scored well in a much slower and tighter game style, it's much more free flowing nowadays. Could they score even more and be better than most wings today?

[tsherkin]

How would the star wings of the 2000s decade stack up in the current era nba?

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, GHill, EJones, Finley, JRich, Hamilton, Stackhouse, Ginobili, Wade? Even Iverson, a scorer and SG more than anything?

They scored well in a much slower and tighter game style, it's much more free flowing nowadays. Could they score even more and be better than most wings today?

Most of them would be very good in today's environment. Some of them, like Eddie Jones and Michael Finley and Jason Richardson, would simply scale their specific numbers to today's environment and be basically the same type of impact. Rip showed he could shoot the 3, and that he was willing to do so, which makes me envision him as someone who'd translate well. Stackhouse would produce volume but he wouldn't be any better today than he was then.

Kobe, Vince, McGrady, Pierce, Ray Ray, Hill, Ginobili, Wade and Iverson would all thrive in today's environment. Wade would perhaps have the toughest time scaling up due to the inconsistency of his jumper and his lack of a 3, but with his physical tools and how he already loved PnR? He'd figure it out, he'd be a nightmare to guard with today's spacing. Tempo increase would help all of them in terms of their raw numbers.

Ray Ray wouldn't be dynamic enough with the ball in his hand to really hit that first tier, though he showed in Seattle that it wasn't a hindrance. Manu would probably still be minutes-locked. Hill without a freak injury would be amazing in any era. AI still wouldn't have the shooting ability to be top tier, but his speed and handles would be a problem, and he showed even in his own career that he could produce better efficiency as spacing improved and so forth.

[rate_]

^^ I disagree with Wade. He would adjust the easiest, especially if you surround him with shooting. No one is staying in front of him 1 on 1

[tsherkin]

^^ I disagree with Wade. He would adjust the easiest, especially if you surround him with shooting. No one is staying in front of him 1 on 1

I don't think you're disagreeing with me, per se, if you read the rest of what I wrote.

[RCM88x]

One thing with Wade, is that not being the most durable star in his own era (where average durability was much higher) doesn't project every well to current times when star durability (and player durability in general) is quite low. Naturally there is a lot of randomness with injuries, but I still think he'd struggle to consistently string together healthy full seasons.

[tsherkin]

One thing with Wade, is that not being the most durable star in his own era (where average durability was much higher) doesn't project every well to current times when star durability (and player durability in general) is quite low. Naturally there is a lot of randomness with injuries, but I still think he'd struggle to consistently string together healthy full seasons.

He might still have issues, but I doubt he'd have MORE issues with a more open paint and more fastbreak opportunities, to be honest. I'd expect about the same, or perhaps a little healthier.

[clearlynotjesse]

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, Ginobili, Wade

These guys would all be great, especially if they bought in on defense. Ray shooting double digit threes would be good for the soul. Would want to be careful with Wade/TMac's minutes.

GHill, Iverson

Would need a creative coach/GM to work around their deficiencies, but could be really good.

EJones, Finley, JRich

Athletic guys who can shoot, would be fine. Eddie a step above because of defense. Contenders would trade a bunch of draft picks for him.

Hamilton, Stackhouse

High volume mid range shooters with no defense or playmaking upside? I dunno man.

[tsherkin]

GHill, Iverson

Iverson, I get, although as we saw in his own career, he was adapting at least reasonably well as pace and spacing improved.

Hill, though? Nasty slasher, excellent in transition, good short game. Showed in his actual career that he could develop a 3, and had a decent enough long 2.

What deficiencies are you worried about with him?

Hamilton, Stackhouse
High volume mid range shooters with no defense or playmaking upside? I dunno man.

Hamilton developed a 3 in his actual career and was a decent defender. He'd be useful, as he was to the Pistons. You just didn't want to build your team around him.

[parsnips33]

Stojakovic feels like a guy who would thrive today

[tsherkin]

Stojakovic feels like a guy who would thrive today

Hard to imagine him not scoring well. He didn't do very much else, but he could shoot like crazy and was 6'10, which would play well today in terms of his scoring.

[penbeast0]

How would the star wings of the 2000s decade stack up in the current era nba?

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, GHill, EJones, Finley, JRich, Hamilton, Stackhouse, Ginobili, Wade? Even Iverson, a scorer and SG more than anything?

They scored well in a much slower and tighter game style, it's much more free flowing nowadays. Could they score even more and be better than most wings today?

Most of them would be very good in today's environment. Some of them, like Eddie Jones and Michael Finley and Jason Richardson, would simply scale their specific numbers to today's environment and be basically the same type of impact. Rip showed he could shoot the 3, and that he was willing to do so, which makes me envision him as someone who'd translate well. Stackhouse would produce volume but he wouldn't be any better today than he was then.

Kobe, Vince, McGrady, Pierce, Ray Ray, Hill, Ginobili, Wade and Iverson would all thrive in today's environment. Wade would perhaps have the toughest time scaling up due to the inconsistency of his jumper and his lack of a 3, but with his physical tools and how he already loved PnR? He'd figure it out, he'd be a nightmare to guard with today's spacing. Tempo increase would help all of them in terms of their raw numbers.

Ray Ray wouldn't be dynamic enough with the ball in his hand to really hit that first tier, though he showed in Seattle that it wasn't a hindrance. Manu would probably still be minutes-locked. Hill without a freak injury would be amazing in any era. AI still wouldn't have the shooting ability to be top tier, but his speed and handles would be a problem, and he showed even in his own career that he could produce better efficiency as spacing improved and so forth.

AI and Kobe would be more efficient in purely numerical sense but with the greater ball movement and range in today's offenses producing superior leaguewide efficiency, I'm not sure either would be willing to change their game enough to be more efficient relative to other top 2 guards. Kobe was great in his day, would still be a great player today, just doubt that he'd be a better player relative to his peers in a modern setting. Same for AI though he wasn't as great a player when he actually played.

[tsherkin]

AI and Kobe would be more efficient in purely numerical sense but with the greater ball movement and range in today's offenses producing superior leaguewide efficiency, I'm not sure either would be willing to change their game enough to be more efficient relative to other top 2 guards. Kobe was great in his day, would still be a great player today, just doubt that he'd be a better player relative to his peers in a modern setting. Same for AI though he wasn't as great a player when he actually played.

Yeah, I'm inclined to largely agree with that, though I'd caution that Kobe outside of the triangle would look a little different and I suspect he'd take well to the helio style we see more today with a lot of POA PnR spam and DHOs and all that. I doubt he'd want to move OFF the ball too much, but any set that got him the ball in his hand would likely appeal, and so I can see him trading off somewhat lower-than-peer efficiency for improved passing output. And he was scaling up in efficiency before his body started to fail.

[clearlynotjesse]

GHill, Iverson

Iverson, I get, although as we saw in his own career, he was adapting at least reasonably well as pace and spacing improved.

Hill, though? Nasty slasher, excellent in transition, good short game. Showed in his actual career that he could develop a 3, and had a decent enough long 2.

What deficiencies are you worried about with him?

Mainly just shooting. He didn't develop a three until late in his career (even then on very low volume) and I'm just plopping him into today's game from his prime.

Hamilton, Stackhouse
High volume mid range shooters with no defense or playmaking upside? I dunno man.

Hamilton developed a 3 in his actual career and was a decent defender. He'd be useful, as he was to the Pistons. You just didn't want to build your team around him.

Same as Grant, he started shooting threes late in his career, so I'm not giving him credit for that in this case. Was decent but not a playmaker on defense. Too light to guard up a position, could guard some PGs but being a PoA defender in this era is different.

[tsherkin]

Mainly just shooting. He didn't develop a three until late in his career (even then on very low volume) and I'm just plopping him into today's game from his prime.

Hard to imagine he doesn't fast-track the development of that shot if he played today for more than a single season.

Same as Grant, he started shooting threes late in his career, so I'm not giving him credit for that in this case. Was decent but not a playmaker on defense. Too light to guard up a position, could guard some PGs but being a PoA defender in this era is different.

Same response, though. And no, he wasn't too light to guard, particularly inside a defensive scheme on a competent team. That wasn't how it broke down in his actual career and wouldn't be the case today. He'd be fine shading and showing and all that. And apart from Luka, there aren't that many worrisome power guards.

[migya]

How would the star wings of the 2000s decade stack up in the current era nba?

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, GHill, EJones, Finley, JRich, Hamilton, Stackhouse, Ginobili, Wade? Even Iverson, a scorer and SG more than anything?

They scored well in a much slower and tighter game style, it's much more free flowing nowadays. Could they score even more and be better than most wings today?

Most of them would be very good in today's environment. Some of them, like Eddie Jones and Michael Finley and Jason Richardson, would simply scale their specific numbers to today's environment and be basically the same type of impact. Rip showed he could shoot the 3, and that he was willing to do so, which makes me envision him as someone who'd translate well. Stackhouse would produce volume but he wouldn't be any better today than he was then.

Kobe, Vince, McGrady, Pierce, Ray Ray, Hill, Ginobili, Wade and Iverson would all thrive in today's environment. Wade would perhaps have the toughest time scaling up due to the inconsistency of his jumper and his lack of a 3, but with his physical tools and how he already loved PnR? He'd figure it out, he'd be a nightmare to guard with today's spacing. Tempo increase would help all of them in terms of their raw numbers.

Ray Ray wouldn't be dynamic enough with the ball in his hand to really hit that first tier, though he showed in Seattle that it wasn't a hindrance. Manu would probably still be minutes-locked. Hill without a freak injury would be amazing in any era. AI still wouldn't have the shooting ability to be top tier, but his speed and handles would be a problem, and he showed even in his own career that he could produce better efficiency as spacing improved and so forth.

Agree, especially VC and TMac would really let loose with the extra space and less contact. Reckon they'd have a few over 30pt seasons. GHill is the interesting one to me, more than all, and they are all interesting. Think he'd focus on his outside shot more but his driving ability and speed would carve up quite well nowadays. He's a good comparison to Doncic in that, though they play a bit different, they aim for the same in passing first mostly and penetrating.

[One_and_Done]

How would the star wings of the 2000s decade stack up in the current era nba?

Kobe, Carter, TMac, Pierce, RAllen, GHill, EJones, Finley, JRich, Hamilton, Stackhouse, Ginobili, Wade? Even Iverson, a scorer and SG more than anything?

They scored well in a much slower and tighter game style, it's much more free flowing nowadays. Could they score even more and be better than most wings today?

Some would be better, some worse, but not even the best of them would be a top 5 player today. Maybe T-Mac while healthy would be, and Wade could be top 7ish, but that's about it. Kobe would likely make the top 10.