RealGM

Who was better at his peak? Michael Finley or Michael Redd?

Michael Finley.

That's tough, Redd was the better scorer, with Finley being the better all-around player. Finley could throw it down...

Michael Finley for both peak and as a player.

Finley was a remarkably unimpressive scorer. Aesthetically pleasing, but not particularly effective. He was consistently a league-average scorer in terms of efficiency. Finished well at the rim, decent mid-range shooter, quality 3pt shooter, garbage at drawing fouls, not an elite 2pt shooter in general. Decent passer, decent rebounder, pretty good overall all around, right? But like, definitely dramatically inferior to Redd as a scoring threat and not elite enough in any respect to be more worthwhile than someone who was actually really good at one aspect of their role, IMHO.

A really nice #3, a "meh" to acceptable #2.

Bomb81 wrote:Michael Finley for both peak and as a player.

Redd had the better peak

tsherkin wrote:Finley was a remarkably unimpressive scorer. Aesthetically pleasing, but not particularly effective. He was consistently a league-average scorer in terms of efficiency. Finished well at the rim, decent mid-range shooter, quality 3pt shooter, garbage at drawing fouls, not an elite 2pt shooter in general. Decent passer, decent rebounder, pretty good overall all around, right? But like, definitely dramatically inferior to Redd as a scoring threat and not elite enough in any respect to be more worthwhile than someone who was actually really good at one aspect of their role, IMHO.

A really nice #3, a "meh" to acceptable #2.

I think the shame for Finley was he had to wait a couple years on Nash and Dirk. Because that guy who was playing 42 mpg for 82 games and doing a bit of everything as the 3rd guy is really quite intriguing. He would have to do less of the iso scoring that as you point out, he wasn't really suited to. By the time Nash/Dirk were really rolling he had morphed nearly exclusively into a jump shooter. And a really reliable 3-pt shooter--from 03-10 he never shot worse than 37% and on high volume(for the time).

Redd clearly the better offensive player. But if Finley had been able to switch into that spacing role sooner when he still had that elite athleticism/stamina, I think he would have been a more valuable overall player. But since we never got to see that, yeah Redd probably helps a team a bit more at his best than Fin did.

Love Fin though. He was frustrating a bit as a player, but as a human, nothing but pure class.

Texas Chuck wrote:I think the shame for Finley was he had to wait a couple years on Nash and Dirk. Because that guy who was playing 42 mpg for 82 games and doing a bit of everything as the 3rd guy is really quite intriguing.

He certainly had stamina and the broad skillset. And he could clearly move without the ball and stick the J. I can agree that he probably would have a very different rep if he'd enjoyed time with Nash and Dirk later on in their primacy while he himself was still more youthful. Dude wasn't bad, just deployed poorly due to roster constraints... which was unfortunately a common thread in the late 90s and early 2000s.

I think its close enough to be argued either way without a clear right or wrong answer. I'd go Redd by a bit.