RealGM

John Stockton vs Isiah Thomas, who you got?

We had this a while ago and it got really complicated and ugly.

Lets say you are taking both of them in their prime seasons...

If you want a someone who will take over your team, score a bunch, and be a superstar you take Isiah.

If you want someone who is going to be ultra consistent, ridiculously efficient, not make mistakes and be a very good defender you take Stockton.

Stockton was a better true PG, Isiah was more of your "typical superstar" who can score and take over a game with his ability to draw defenders.

Thomas no question. I don't think Stockton was ever on the same tier as him.

Stockton has become overrated post-retirement. That's what happens when you only look at numbers.

Give me Isiah Lord Thomas, and quite easily at that.

Edit: I mean it's an easy choice, but not that the difference between them is massive.

John Stockton

Thomas. Both all time pg's, but Isiah was a rare breed of point guard. He wanted to kill you, like MJ or Bird. And he could do it, too.

If there were a lifetime achievement award for longevity and excellence I'd give it to Stockton. The level he was able to play at or as long as he was able to do it was truly remarkable.

But if I need one guy to lead my team for 1 season, 1 series or 1 game I'm rolling with Zeke.

If you take all of Thomas's and Stockton's seasons and rank them by PER, here are the top 10:

Stockton 1990 23.9
Stockton 1991 23.4
Stockton 1995 23.3
Stockton 1988 23.2
Stockton 1989 22.9
Stockton 1992 22.8
Stockton 1994 22.5
Stockton 2000 22.4
Stockton 2001 22.3
Thomas 1985 22.2

Here's 11 through 20:

Stockton 1997 22.1
Stockton 1996 21.9
Stockton 1999 21.9
Stockton 2002 21.9
Stockton 1998 21.8
Stockton 1993 21.3
Thomas 1986 21.2
Stockton 2003 21.0
Thomas 1984 20.9
Stockton 1987 19.0

Of course PER is only one measurement. Isiah was a better scorer and won two titles, but Stockton was a much better point guard. I take Stockton.

Time for Change wrote:If you take all of Thomas's and Stockton's seasons and rank them by PER, here are the top 10:

Stockton 1990 23.9
Stockton 1991 23.4
Stockton 1995 23.3
Stockton 1988 23.2
Stockton 1989 22.9
Stockton 1992 22.8
Stockton 1994 22.5
Stockton 2000 22.4
Stockton 2001 22.3
Thomas 1985 22.2

Here's 11 through 20:

Stockton 1997 22.1
Stockton 1996 21.9
Stockton 1999 21.9
Stockton 2002 21.9
Stockton 1998 21.8
Stockton 1993 21.3
Thomas 1986 21.2
Stockton 2003 21.0
Thomas 1984 20.9
Stockton 1987 19.0

Of course PER is only one measurement. Isiah was a better scorer and won two titles, but Stockton was a much better point guard. I take Stockton.

I hate PER. It cannot replace looking at the game and how the player affects the game.

Now I like Stockton better to make a TEAM. Meaning I put pieces together around to compliment his style. I think he is an easier piece to fit on a team. I like his style for a PG.

However Isiah does have the higher ceiling and the ability to take the game over when needed. For the regular season I take Stockton, for the playoff's Isiah.....

Isiah was also something of a jerk and Stockton was not only a super tough games, he virtually never missed a game! I'd rather have Stockton's efficiency than Isiah's volume when it comes to scoring espcially on a championship contender, rather have Stockton's playmaking, rather have Isiah's defense (Stockton's steals overrate his defense), rather have Stockton's intangibles. Overall, I'd rather have Stockton . . . I said so then, I say so now.

penbeast0 wrote:Isiah was also something of a jerk and Stockton was not only a super tough games, he virtually never missed a game! I'd rather have Stockton's efficiency than Isiah's volume when it comes to scoring espcially on a championship contender, rather have Stockton's playmaking, rather have Isiah's defense (Stockton's steals overrate his defense), rather have Stockton's intangibles. Overall, I'd rather have Stockton . . . I said so then, I say so now.

so basically, you'd rather have Stockton as a #2 option, and neither as a #1 on your championship team?..

Yes, I believe that if you gave Stockton a team with Joe Dumars, Mark Aquirre, Dennis Rodman, Bill Laimbeer, Vinnie/Edwards/Salley that he would take it to at least two championships getting more scoring out of Aguirre to make up for Isiah's one advantage while providing better percentage shooting, passing, and defense.

Whereas Isiah with Karl Malone, Hornacek, and a bunch of mediocre role players like Ostertag, Russell, Antoine Carr, Eisley, and Shandon Anderson would still not be able to get past a Jordan/Pippen/Rodman or Grant Bulls team. The Jazz peaked later and ran into the Bulls buzzsaw, the second best team of all time, Detroit faced Jordan before his team jelled.

Isiah's teammates were better and his timing was luckier. The rings are a Isiah's main argument but Stockton was just a better player even peak . . . and much better career.

Normally I'd be arguing rationally, posting stats and accolades, and backing up my statements with facts.

But I'll make an exception in this case.

I HATED Isiah Thomas as a player, and I doubly hated him as a coach/GM.

I take Stockton.

G35 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I hate PER. It cannot replace looking at the game and how the player affects the game.

PER has its issues. But one when player's 19-year career average PER is about equal to another player's absolute peak career year PER, I think it shows something.

Let's compare some other stats:

Led league in assists per game:
Stockton 9 times
Thomas 1 time

Led league in turnovers:
Stockton 1 time
Thomas 2 times

Led league in steals:
Stockton 2 times
Thomas 0 times

Lead league in TS%:
Stockton 3 times
Thomas 0 times

Lead league in Assist %:
Stockton 15 times
Thomas 1 time

All-NBA 1st Team:
Thomas 3 times
Stockon 2 times

All-NBA 2nd Team:
Stockton 6 times
Thomas 2 times

All-NBA Defensive 1st:
Stockton 0 times
Thomas 0 times

All-NBA Defensive 2nd:
Stockton 5 times
Thomas 0 times

Basically Stockton blows Thomas away in every statistical measure. If I went to top 5s or top 10s instead of just league leaders it would be even more apparent. Essentially Stockton was top 5 for every point guard measure for nearly two decades, while Isiah had a 3 year peak where he was in the top 5, and the rest of the time he was good but not great.

When Isiah was "good" and not great he was beating MJs brains in and playing a team of 4 HoFers to 7 games. Then he won 2 rings and was thwarted from 5 by teammate and personal injuries.

The #1 reason you take Stockton is for the window of oppertunity he gives you. 19 yrs to win a title is a big window.

Personally, I think you've got to count the rings. Thomas wins 2-0. I don't think a team with Stockton as it's best player had a chance against the Jordan Bulls or Showtime Lakers.

give me Isiah Thomas

Isiah. He's one of the toughest mother f****** out there. And he won 2 rings.

Give me Isiah, scoring, defense, play making, I think he was better then Stockton. I think its pretty impressive for a player to put up 20,10,2 in a season.

Isiah, and I feel like if Isiah had disappeared into Eastern Washington after he retired, he would be doing better on this poll, and in any poll he is in, but too many people combine what he has done post playing days with his playing career when judging him, unfortunately.

Isiah-All star that you can build a championship team around.

Stockton-Role player for a championship level team that couldn't win a championship.