RealGM

Who was the better player?

It's close, but I think Schrempf was better. He was a much better shooter and a more efficient scorer. He was also a better rebounder. They were in the same ballpark defensively. Kukoc got a lot of credit for his passing, but I think Schrempf could have been almost as good in that role if he had been asked to play it. He averaged six assists per game in his final year in Indiana. Schrempf strikes me as a guy who went slightly underused for most of his career.

Kukoc in Chicago had that Ginobili advantage, where he got to come in after the other team had to deal with Pippen, Rodman, or Grant for a while. He also benefited from good teammates, with his scoring efficiency crumbling after the departure of Jordan and Pippen.

Detlef was a fukin BEAST. Detlef easily. In his beast season he nearly put up 20 PPG 10 RPG and 6 APG, nasty.

Yeah, Schrempf proved a lot more in the NBA. Now, in European competition, I understand Kukoc was the better player.

yeah kukok was known as euro-magic.

In the NBA, Schrempf without even blinking.

12/4/4 on 45/34//73 from Kukoc (and some choking) versus the two-time 6MOY who posted 14/6/3.4 and 10 seasons between 15 and 19.2 ppg? He had a 19/9/5/6.0 season, this is the guy they called Larry Bird Lite. 49/38/80 on his career, too. Schrempf was INCREDIBLY talented, much moreso than Kukoc.

Schrempf would be starting in today's NBA, whereas Kukoc would be coming off the bench.

Schrempf DID start in the NBA of yesteryear; for a half-dozen seasons, he was a starter in Seattle. He started nearly half the games in his career, 524/1,136 (46.1%).

EDIT: More to the point, he was a three-time All-Star FORWARD in the 90s.

Kukoc could start for a lot of teams. Have to remember he spent most of his prime years playing behind Scottie Pippen and providing a very complimentary role. Even so, ages 26-30, his PER is right there with Detlef. I think its closer than some are making out. Detlef held up his production a lot longer though.

Rerisen wrote:Kukoc could start for a lot of teams. Have to remember he spent most of his prime years playing behind Scottie Pippen and providing a very complimentary role. Even so, ages 26-30, his PER is right there with Detlef. I think its closer than some are making out. Detlef held up his production a lot longer though.

Detlef was a much better defender and rebounder, a better shooter and a comparable passer.

Their career PERs are comparable, yes, and Kukoc actually has more than one season with a PER of 20+, while Schrempf has only one.

Kukoc has five seasons (including those two) at 18+ PER.

Schrempf, however, has seven. As you note, he held up longer.

Again though, Schrempf has a career 3P% some 5% higher than Kukoc's and a FT% about 7% higher. There's also a 3% difference in career rebound rate that favors Schrempf (and 4% higher on the defensive end). His career ORTG is 9 points higher than Kukoc's and the difference in OWS is staggering, though that probably comes primarily from Schrempf being a starter who scored 15+ ppg in 10 consecutive seasons. There's also a +20 gap in DWS in Schrempf's favor. And, for similar reasons, there is also a pronounced difference in Win Shares Above Average favoring Schrempf.

There's a notable difference in eFG% (~2%) and TS% (5.4%), both favoring Schrempf.

Kukoc was a fine player; in those two peak seasons (95-96 and 96-97), he was a 13/4/3.5 and 13/4.6/4.5 player. He shot 49/40/77 and 47/33/77. Good years and in terms of PER, comparable to Schrempf's best season, but it's not the same.

In Schrempf's best seasons, he was a better defender, a more dangerous offensive threat, a better rebounder and a comparable passer... and a markedly more efficient player.

Definitely Schrempf.

Schrempf was third-team all-NBA in 1994-5. I don't recall Kukoc being close to that.

How good a defender was Schrempf? He was long, fluid, smart, and fairly fast, which usually makes for decent defense. But I don't recall super-quickness from him.