How do you rank these 6 point guards all time? Kidd, Stockton, Paul, Nash,Isiah and Payton?

[Purch]

Give your reasons

Jason Kidd
John Stockton
Chris Paul
Steve Nash
Gary Payton
Isaiah Thomas

[Dutchball97]

1. Chris Paul - MVP level peak, incredible longevity.
2. John Stockton - Not as high of a peak as Paul but still very good for very long
3. Steve Nash - Higher peak than Stockton but I think it's closer than most have it, also didn't play at a high level for that long
4. Jason Kidd - Not a great scorer but a good floor general and defender. Played at a solid level for quite a while.
5. Gary Payton - Pretty similar to Kidd although a better scorer but with a shorter and less consistent prime.
6. Isiah Thomas - If his individual best seasons and his team success lined up more he could go up a couple spots but as is he's at the bottom for me.

[Stalwart]

Thomas/Stockton
Steve Nash
Chris Paul
Jason Kidd
Gary Payton

[jdzimme3]

Stockton - the ultimate iron man. Very similar game to Chris Paul but significantly more reliable.

Paul - great all around game but has consistently fallen short when it matters most.

Nash - lacks the defense and longevity of the first two

Payton - he and Kidd are close, could go either way. I will take Payton because I think he is more of a scoring threat

Kidd

Thomas I didn’t rank just because I don’t think I have a fully informed opinion.

[70sFan]

Chris Paul - the best combination of peak, prime and longevity

Steve Nash - worse longevity than Paul, hurt by his poor defense, probably peaked the highest though

John Stockton - the best longevity, but weaker peak than the two above him

Jason Kidd - similar to Stockton, except worse longevity, probably a bit worse peak as well

Gary Payton - decent peak, decent longevity, relatively close to Kidd but slightly less complete career overall

Isiah Thomas - hurt by longevity by massive amount, very short and inconsistent prime, decent peak but not good enough to overcome any of the rest

[Narigo]

Paul
Stockton
Kidd
Nash
Thomas
Payton

[Purch]

1. Chris Paul - MVP level peak, incredible longevity.
2. John Stockton - Not as high of a peak as Paul but still very good for very long
3. Steve Nash - Higher peak than Stockton but I think it's closer than most have it, also didn't play at a high level for that long
4. Jason Kidd - Not a great scorer but a good floor general and defender. Played at a solid level for quite a while.
5. Gary Payton - Pretty similar to Kidd although a better scorer but with a shorter and less consistent prime.
6. Isiah Thomas - If his individual best seasons and his team success lined up more he could go up a couple spots but as is he's at the bottom for me.

Would you consider Isiah a great post season performer, an underperformed or somewhere in the middle?

[Dutchball97]

1. Chris Paul - MVP level peak, incredible longevity.
2. John Stockton - Not as high of a peak as Paul but still very good for very long
3. Steve Nash - Higher peak than Stockton but I think it's closer than most have it, also didn't play at a high level for that long
4. Jason Kidd - Not a great scorer but a good floor general and defender. Played at a solid level for quite a while.
5. Gary Payton - Pretty similar to Kidd although a better scorer but with a shorter and less consistent prime.
6. Isiah Thomas - If his individual best seasons and his team success lined up more he could go up a couple spots but as is he's at the bottom for me.

Would you consider Isiah a great post season performer, an underperformed or somewhere in the middle?

He consistently stepped up in the play-offs although part of that is his sudden decline in the regular season in the mid-80s, while his play-off production remained consistent till 1990. He also wasn't as good in the post-season as for example David Robinson but because Isiah stepped up from a lower level, while Robinson stepped down from a higher level Isiah's performance is looked at more favorably. I'm not sure if that's a fair way to look at it. Overall he's definitely at least a good play-off performer though.

[Proxy]

Jason Kidd
John Stockton
Chris Paul
Steve Nash
Gary Payton
Isaiah Thomas

1. CP3 - Best peak/prime, great longevity

2. Nash - 2nd best peak/prime, decent, underrated longevity(All-Star level + for about a decade IMO)

3. Kidd - T4 ish best peak here and I don't find him TOO much weaker than Nash in the playoffs because of his defense, great longevity because the years outside of his prime were very valuable, might move him to 4th.
4. Stockton - I think he's a bottom 2 player here(not by too much) in his peak/prime but compared to the last 2 players his longevity advantage, where he genuinely is all-time in that area probably moves the needle.

5. Zeke - Also T4 ish peak here for me from bring one of the rare actual star playoff risers in his prime, pretty sub par longevity.
6. GP - Bottom 2 player here(again, not by TOO much), but solid longevity keeps him in the convo and might put him over Zeke, at least in the same range.

Honestly I don't have strong opinions for Zeke and GP rn because I haven't examined their careers in a long time. My explanations for those 2 are pretty lazy, i'll have to get back to them.

[Purch]

I didn't realize how bad Zeke"s longevity was compared to some of the others

[KobesScarf]

1. Kidd

2. Everyone else is kind of close

[wojoaderge]

give or take after Nash

Paul
Nash
Isiah
Stockton
Kidd
Payton

[cupcakesnake]

Paul
Nash
Stockton
Kidd
Payton
Zeke

The Nash vs. Paul argument is all about CP3's all-around perfection vs. Nash's status as one of the best offensive engines you can build a team around. I such a similar conversation to Nash vs. Stockton (an often contentious and popular discussion). I used to have Stockton and Nash above CP3, but then he added this whole extra chapter of strong all-NBA level seasons. Combining that longevity with his MVP quality peak just feels like Paul has pulled ahead. I think Stockton has a fair argument against Nash but have never gotten behind the idea of Stockton's scoring/playmaking value the way some of his fans have.

Kidd is the best defender here, and has better all-around game than everyone listed above him. But that massive shooting/scoring chasm prevents him from being the same level of impact player. I didn't get serious about basketball until the early 2000s, and I remember thinking Kidd was the best player in the NBA at the time. It's been a long slow road learning his strengths and weaknesses, despite them seeming glaringly obvious to me now!

I'm not a big fan of Payton or Isiah. I'm always unsure about how to weigh post-prime Isiah's impact on those Pistons runs. He's become an annoying topic of discussion because he's adored by so many old school fans, and people who didn't watch him play just assume that All-NBA Isiah and finals MVP Isiah all happened at the same time. I've never been high on Payton's defense (very good defender but not the all-time point god of defense that people think of him as). Offensively Payton is a less dynamic, more efficient player than Zeke, and still the better defender. Oh and he played 400 more games and 40 more playoff games. Zeke is just tough to stack up against all-time greats in that way,

[LAL1947]

1) Steve Nash: Probably peaked the highest and had a greater impact on his teams than the other 5. He should have led his team to 1 ring that Tim Duncan's Spurs robbed from him. So I think people need to ask where he would have been ranked in the All-Time list having won a ring by beating a dynastic Spurs team... then put him at that spot.

2) John Stockton: The best longevity but weaker peak than Nash. Could have had 2 titles except for MJ being in the league.

3) Isiah Thomas: Beat Bulls and Lakers en route to 2 titles. He had a shorter career compared to others but those titles should mean a lot.

4-5) Chris Paul = Jason Kidd

6) Gary Payton

[Stalwart]

I'm not a big fan of Payton or Isiah. I'm always unsure about how to weigh post-prime Isiah's impact on those Pistons runs. He's become an annoying topic of discussion because he's adored by so many old school fans, and people who didn't watch him play just assume that All-NBA Isiah and finals MVP Isiah all happened at the same time. I've never been high on Payton's defense (very good defender but not the all-time point god of defense that people think of him as). Offensively Payton is a less dynamic, more efficient player than Zeke, and still the better defender. Oh and he played 400 more games and 40 more playoff games. Zeke is just tough to stack up against all-time greats in that way,

Isiah was the same player the whole time. He just pulled back his own production to help facilitate the team's overall strengths. Given the results it should give him some major leadership & intangible points.

I think RealGm needs to decide what it is exactly that they want to reward. Is it individual statistical production or is impact and ability to help your team win? Isiah could have spent his career putting up crazy individual numbers. But he gave that up in order to become a champion. Little did he know future generations wouldnt respect that at all.

[Texas Chuck]

Kidd is the best defender here, and has better all-around game than everyone listed above him. But that massive shooting/scoring chasm prevents him from being the same level of impact player. I didn't get serious about basketball until the early 2000s, and I remember thinking Kidd was the best player in the NBA at the time. It's been a long slow road learning his strengths and weaknesses, despite them seeming glaringly obvious to me now!

It's interesting that Kidd made more than 300 more 3's than Nash, more than 400 more than Paul to date and well more than double Stockton. Obviously he wasn't nearly as good of a shooter over his career as those three guys, but he also never shot worse than 35% from 04-05 on, and had 3 seasons before that of shooting 37% or higher.

His shooting was less of a detriment than I think people make it out to be. Because even the first half of his career when his shooting was erratic, his on court impact simply cannot be denied.

I post this a lot, but it should never be forgotten:

He is drafted by a team than won less than 25 games combined the two years prior to his arrival--they then win over 35 games his rookie year. He gets traded to the Suns who immediately go from a .500 team to a 56 win team and they keeping winning 50 every year until they trade him--for another all-star mind you and they go totally into the tank.
Meanwhile his new team doubles their win total immediately, goes on to b2b Finals then trade him and fall into the tank.
His new team doesn't have the same RS win gain as he joined an already 50+ win team, but they do win their only title.
Heck even at 40 going to play one year for the Knicks they have their best season in forever.

He's unconventional as hell as a point guard. But its impossible for me to ignore that he turns franchises around in huge ways and does so repeatedly. I'm not at all sold his lack of shooting/scoring is the weakness its presented as.

I think Kidd struggles in part because of some off the court stuff makes him largely unlikeable. Now we've also seen him struggle as a head coach(prior to this year), engage in some ugly power struggles and I think that does shape perception of his playing career.

Popular players like Nash have lots of strong proponents. Kidd has kinda me and that's it.

[Owly]

I'm not a big fan of Payton or Isiah. I'm always unsure about how to weigh post-prime Isiah's impact on those Pistons runs. He's become an annoying topic of discussion because he's adored by so many old school fans, and people who didn't watch him play just assume that All-NBA Isiah and finals MVP Isiah all happened at the same time. I've never been high on Payton's defense (very good defender but not the all-time point god of defense that people think of him as). Offensively Payton is a less dynamic, more efficient player than Zeke, and still the better defender. Oh and he played 400 more games and 40 more playoff games. Zeke is just tough to stack up against all-time greats in that way,

Isiah was the same player the whole time. He just pulled back his own production to help facilitate the team's overall strengths. Given the results it should give him some major leadership & intangible points.

I think RealGm needs to decide what it is exactly that they want to reward. Is it individual statistical production or is impact and ability to help your team win? Isiah could have spent his career putting up crazy individual numbers. But he gave that up in order to become a champion. Little did he know future generations wouldnt respect that at all.

I've heard this line of thinking before but I'm not quite sure on what is meant. Sometimes it has been put as him sacrificing shots but that doesn't stack up. His box production apex is circa '84-'86. But his average usage for this span (24.6) is less than or equal to every single subsequent year. It's unclear exactly what he sacrificed.

I could see an argument that he focused more effort on D. But that would seem to be a tacit admission that his box peak overrated him and align with contemporary criticisms of his earlier career defense (or if something else, via the post above seems to suggest in some way that the earlier playstyle wasn't compatible with winning at a high level).

With regard to impact the tools we have are very crude. Fwiw though, whilst his prime WOWYR is very solid (4.6) but a little below that of peers Terry Cummings, Larry Nance and Paul Pressey (all 5.1) or fellow playoff riser Gus Williams (5.0). Meanwhile his career WOWYR is much more pedestrian (0.8) which would place him behind Kurt Thomas (1.9) and Kenny Thomas (1.3) but ahead of Tim Thomas (-0.3). As I say, a (very) crude tool, but perhaps the least worst in the impact family available presently, at least that I'm aware of. Fwiw, it's arguable too that at the peak of their powers (circa 88-90 and looking at the rotation beyond to '91 after which the rotation starts to disperse) Thomas's impact metrics would have been the most inflated due to being the only position without a quality backup (even after Mahorn goes, with some genuine positional fluidity their frontcourt is 2 deep at each position).

I'm also not sure about treating RealGM as a hive mind. Fwiw, I'd argue the average position here is substantially too high on him for a career not wildly dissimilar to Gus Williams with a bit better longevity. But this debate has been played out on here as another poster alluded too, so unless there's new information forthcoming I'm disinclined to follow this particular line of discussion further.

[penbeast0]

1. Stockton -- very close to Nash and Paul offensively, more assists, less scoring. Nash drops out of this trio due to significantly weaker defense. Paul due to more injuries and missed time.
--------------
2. Paul -- Least turnovers of the top point guards which to me is significant. Seemed to have more problems with his teammates due to his demanding personality.
--------------
3. Nash or Kidd -- does you team need more offensive help or more defense and rebounding? Very close but I have to go with Nash. Of these 5, he most consistently seems to push his team offenses to at or near best in league level.
4. Kidd -- most impactful PG defensively ever between his individual defensive impact and his rebounding. Poor shooting and his vaunted playmaking doesn't seem to carry over to great team impacts until his late career Dallas stint where he was more a 3&D roleplayer.
--------------
5. Payton -- Very close with Isiah. Defensive specialist, scored though not a big efficiency guy, weakest playmaker of the 6 but still a very good one.
6. Isiah -- I'm higher on Isiah's defense than most; he was an aggressive guy who didn't take off on that end. Lower on Isiah's scoring then most, he was not particularly efficient even in his best years, not terrible or anything but not Paul/Nash/Stockton level. His playmaking was very good but again, a cut below the likes of Stockton, Nash, Paul level. Probably still top 10 PG of all time but around the #10 level, not the #5 where the best of these 6 guys rank.

[Ancalagon]

Paul
Stockton

Kidd
Nash

Payton

Isiah

[Owly]

1. Stockton -- very close to Nash and Paul offensively, more assists, less scoring. Nash drops out of this trio due to significantly weaker defense. Paul due to more injuries and missed time.
--------------
2. Paul -- Least turnovers of the top point guards which to me is significant. Seemed to have more problems with his teammates due to his demanding personality.
--------------
3. Nash or Kidd -- does you team need more offensive help or more defense and rebounding? Very close but I have to go with Nash. Of these 5, he most consistently seems to push his team offenses to at or near best in league level.
4. Kidd -- most impactful PG defensively ever between his individual defensive impact and his rebounding. Poor shooting and his vaunted playmaking doesn't seem to carry over to great team impacts until his late career Dallas stint where he was more a 3&D roleplayer.
--------------
5. Payton -- Very close with Isiah. Defensive specialist, scored though not a big efficiency guy, weakest playmaker of the 6 but still a very good one.
6. Isiah -- I'm higher on Isiah's defense than most; he was an aggressive guy who didn't take off on that end. Lower on Isiah's scoring then most, he was not particularly efficient even in his best years, not terrible or anything but not Paul/Nash/Stockton level. His playmaking was very good but again, a cut below the likes of Stockton, Nash, Paul level. Probably still top 10 PG of all time but around the #10 level, not the #5 where the best of these 6 guys rank.

Could you clarify meaning on underlined? Didn't take plays off?


I would argue if you're raising personality stuff (and the following won't necessarily be comprehensive) you could knock all but Nash and Stockton (some might include Nash for adjacent issue of possible lack of commitment to conditioning etc in Dallas).

At a lower (than the following) level, Payton clashed with multiple coaches (Karl and Westphal notably, otoh), fought with Ricky Pierce.

Kidd has DWI, domestic violence (in Phoenix), three Js clashes, a reported trade demand in New Jersey. Post playing oddness with recruiting then immediately clashing with and minimizing Frank and "bump me".

Thomas (sucker?) punched Laimbeer in the back of the head in practice. Said to have frozen out Sean Elliott, nuking his value. Later, post-playing career, was a part of the whole Anucha Browne Sanders affair where he was found liable for sexual harrassment (though some sources say not "personally liable" but via aiding and abetting a culture - Sanders statement after suggest 6 of 7 jurors found him personally responsible and but for a settlement would have led to a retrial) and said that it's more okay for a black man to call a woman a b*tch then said that that was taken out of context. At very least ... prone to controversy ... (Bird - reporter racism hypothesis; Magic - said to have leaked gay rumors; Jordan: freeze-out ... if true, walk-out; Jordan-Johnson - said to have been involved in blocking lucrative one-one game). Multiple departures on poor terms: departed the Pistons on bad terms (possibly due to leaking confidential plans to give him a lifetime-type role), left Toronto after dispute, might be said to have abandoned the CBA.

I don't claim expertise on internal stuff (especially live - if it ends up in the books moreso) but I'd argue Kidd or Thomas could split a team or embarrass the franchise (and perhaps effectively force a trade which has been said was what happened in Phoenix).