John Stockton vs. David Robinson

[ronnymac2]

Magic, Frazier, Isiah, and Oscar were clearly better players than Stockton. Kidd and Payton were better. Chris Paul and Deron Williams are better. One could argue Tiny Archibald was better. Possibly K.J. and Nash. If you count Penny as a point guard, he was better than Stockton.

This is why Stockton is the most underrated player on this board. Isiah clearly better? LOL! Magic and Oscar I'll give you. But for the rest, Stockton beats out Kidd, Payton, Deron, Nash, and K.J. Paul is fantastic and may surpass Stockton in time. Frazier and Archibald I can't speak from personal experience, but from the stats Stockton is better.

That said, for this poll, I have to vote Robinson as the winner.

You should pay attention. I said as peak players. As in, at their absolute best. Not ito of career. As peak players.

Isiah Thomas was clearly better than Stockton. Isiah could lead a team to victory because of his ability to score and will his team to victory against the toughest players and teams. He was just as competitive as Stockton and had MORE mental toughness. Isiah isn't afraid to take the last shots.

Frazier is arguably the second best pg ever after Magic. GOAT pg defender, fantastic leader like Isiah, could will his team to victory, better scorer and rebounder than stockton. Hell, he was probably better at stealing the ball, too. That isn't close.

Payton is similar to Frazier, but wasn't as good a scorer. GP was a better defender, rebounder, scorer, led his team as the best player, and was efficient with his passing/playmaking.

Kidd was just as good (at least) as a passer, playmaker, floor general. At least. He was a better defender and rebounder. He was the best player on his team a lot of years. He basically gives you Stockton's scoring, but less efficient.

Paul and Williams are better than Stockton ever was because they can create their own shot a lot more effectively while also showing tremendous decision making. Paul steals the ball just as well, and they have shown that they are big-game playoff performers (as number 1 options).

K.J. and Archibald...fine. I'll give you those, but they are close.

Don't look at the stats. You said you think Stockton was better than Walt Frazier based on stats. Would you like to know why Stockton has nicer looking stats? It's because Walt played with Red Holzman's system and a bunch of excellent passers. Frazier gave the ball up and let others set things up as well (as he should). He had Debusschere, Bradley, Lucas, Monroe, and Reed. These are excellent shooters/scorers/passers. Of course Frazier's numbers won't look good. It's not about numbers. It's about your play on the court. It's how you impact the game. No way is Stockton close to Frazier in that regard.

[NO-KG-AI]

I'm surprised that you have Isiah so high, but I see the trend, I think we just have a disagreement in how much we value the position apparently. I think peak Isiah was better, but I wouldn't take either Isiah or Stockton higher than Barkley, Malone, Robinson, Olajuwon, or even Ewing... a little torn on Drexler.

[TMACFORMVP]

This is why Stockton is the most underrated player on this board. Isiah clearly better? LOL! Magic and Oscar I'll give you. But for the rest, Stockton beats out Kidd, Payton, Deron, Nash, and K.J. Paul is fantastic and may surpass Stockton in time. Frazier and Archibald I can't speak from personal experience, but from the stats Stockton is better.

That said, for this poll, I have to vote Robinson as the winner.

I believe he's talking about "peak" play, thus the argument for Paul surpassing Stockton in time is irrelevant since what Paul has done the past season and this season is substantially greater than any other season Stockton has had. Payton was a more dominant scorer, one of the greatest defensive guards to have ever played, and superior at leading his team as the main man. I'd take Stock over Archibald though. Nash/KJ's best seasons are arguably just as good if not better than Stockton's best years. And guys like Frazier are in the same boat as Payton, dominant defensively, superior all rounded play and better at leading their team.

Edit- lol, ronny beat me to it.

[sp6r=underrated]

It seems like the opinions in this thread are pretty entrenched, and the views have been well stated by both sides. Stockton fans argument center on his stats. His critics, the camp to which I belong, argue that Stockton is a player whose value is overstated by his stats. They cite, MVP award and All-NBA selections, to support their view. Batronuj, has listed Malone, Barkley, Robinson, Pippen, Drexler, Ewing, as players that are comparable to Stockton. Looking at their careers will show otherwise.

Peak is more valuable than longevity, provided that the peak is long enough. Bill Walton, is the core example of a player with a phenomenal peak that isn't as valuable as players like a Stockton due to his inability to stay on the court. A peak period of about five years for me is what is necessary. This shows the player wasn't merely having a fluke season. It also gives a competent GM the time to build a roster around that player.

Stockton in the best five year stretch of his career:
4 All-NBA 2nd team
1 All-NBA 3rd team
Finished top 10 in MVP voting three times

Malone and Stockton

This is perhaps the most obvious selection. Malone had a far higher peak and had better longevity than Stockton. He made three more All-NBA teams. Received votes for the MVP in three more seasons than Stockton.

In peak performance its a blowout for Malone. He had a five year stretcb were his worst performance in MVP voting was seventh. The other years he was considered a top 3 player in the league. His performance in the regular season was right up there with a slightly past prime Jordan.

Malone had a better peak and more longevity by clear margins. Everyone knew at the time Malone was better. He's better now.

Barkley and Stockton,

Barkley at his peak was a much better player than Stockton. He won an MVP over a prime Jordan. He nearly beat out a prime Magic in another season. On the Dream Team he was the best player. In the best five year stretch of his career he was first team All--NBA four times (2nd the other year). In MVP voting he won the award and was top six four times during his best five year stretch in voting. His peak was world better than Stockton.

In his peak he lead a team to the finals, and played at a level of dominance that Stockton could only dream of.

For longevity purposes it should be noted Stockton made the exact same number of All-NBA teams.

Barkley had a much better peak and comparable longevity. On a side note, if someone told me in the late 80/early 90s they thought Stockton was better I would have considered him a fool.

Robinson and Stockton,

Already been addressed in this thread. Robinson peak destroys Stockton. I would also point out he had an immediate impact on the teams roster, making one of the worst teams in the NBA, into a 50 win team. Something Stockton was never capable of.

Pippen and Stockton,

Pippen during the best five year stretch of his career was top 10 in MVP voting,4 times. He also finished top 5 twice. He was ALL-NBA 1st team three times (1 2nd, 1 3rd team as well).

Pippen was a much more disruptive defensive player than Stockton and had more impact on offense as well. He was a much stronger on man defender than Stockton. His scoring ability was much stronger as well. In addition to being an underrated initiator on offense.

Finally in 93/94 Pippen led his team to a better record with a weaker roster than the Jazz. This provides some clear evidence that Scottie could have been an effective number one on a team. Stockton may have the edge in longevity, but Pippen was much better in his peak. Most teams would do better with Scottie as he was a more dominant single player and was perfect as a number two.

Drexler and Stockton,

Drexler is a player who has gotten a little overrated in my book. He is now considered to be a player clearly better than guys like Gervin and Nique, who I think are pretty close to him if not better.

Nonetheless he still has a stronger peak than a guy like Stockton. The best five year stretch of his career is clearly better than Stockton's was. Having finished top 6 three times.

This is to me the most arguable in favor of John. The blazers had a fairly deep roster, and in the regular season enjoyed comparable success without him. I would still take Drexler though.

Ewing and Stockton,

Ewing again had a much better peak than John. During the best five year stretch of his career he was top 5 in MVP voting 4 times. His impact on the game was much larger than John's. He was able to serve as an achor on the best defense in the league for a three year stretch. His teams enjoyed comparable success in comparison to Stockton, in spite of having nothing like a Karl Malone to play with (the Jazz real MVP). Again during their time a significant majority thought Ewing was better.

The players you listed as being on Stockton's level were clearly better in their primes.

[Baller 24]

To tell you the truth, honestly if I had to start a team I would probably take Robinson over Stockton.

I don't think Robinson was the better player, but I do think it's easier to win with a freak athlete who is 7'0 tall. The NBA has proven that talented Seven Footers win championships easier then average athletes who are 6'2.

But there is the real question, does that make him a better player then Stockton, being more naturally gifted with height.

The talent IMO, Robinson was one of the fastest centers for his height, an athletic beast, had pretty good footwork, amazing reflexes, and was a dominant two way player.....a very dominant two way player. The debate on who the best center was in the 90s wasn't decided until Hakeem took his game to another level during those 2 years. Robinson and Ewing were pretty much just as talented, both two-way dominant freaks, I'd take both of them over Stockton, and IMO they were pretty easily the better more talented players.

[NO-KG-AI]

^^Wow, you're still alive? Long time no see

I think a guy like Pippen might actually be Stockton's best non PG comparison, I think Stockton is a Pippen and not a dominant superstar.

[Baller 24]

^^Wow, you're still alive? Long time no see

I think a guy like Pippen might actually be Stockton's best non PG comparison, I think Stockton is a Pippen and not a dominant superstar.

IMO Pippen is underrated, without MJ he took his team to a 51 win season, came in 3rd in MVP voting, and overall had a fantastic season, was very close to being in the finals. Though that might be a valid comparison.

[sp6r=underrated]

Unexmployment = more time for realgm

[Time for Change]

I'm surprised that you have Isiah so high, but I see the trend, I think we just have a disagreement in how much we value the position apparently. I think peak Isiah was better, but I wouldn't take either Isiah or Stockton higher than Barkley, Malone, Robinson, Olajuwon, or even Ewing... a little torn on Drexler.

Well, Stockton had 9 seasons with a higher PER than Isiah's best. So I'm not sure how Isiah had a better peak.

For Payton it's closer. If you take their 5 peak seasons, the ranking goes:

Stockton,
Payton,
Stockton,
Stockton,
Stockton,
Payton,
Stockton,
Payton,
Payton,
Payton

I give the edge to Stockton. Of course PER doesn't count defense, so you could argue that for Payton, but then you've also got longevity for Stockton.

Let's do the same comparison with Steve Nash:

Stockton,
Nash,
Stockton,
Nash,
Stockton,
Stockton,
Stockton,
Nash,
Nash,
Nash

Actually limiting it to 5 season from each player helps Nash in this comparison. Stockton had 14 seasons better than Nash's 5th best.

[85star]

How about we go back to the orginal question? If it's between David and John who gets into the HOF?

The answer to that is easy, plenty of players have won an MVP. Plenty have won DPOY and plenty have won championships. Noone, absolutely noone will ever touch his Assist record. Sure that's over a career and while he does have the single season record also, the HOF is about your contribution to basketball, nowhere does it say for a single season, or for peak etc. etc.

As a PG his job is to lead the team and pass the ball.

“There is nobody that can distribute the ball, plus lead his team, like John Stockton,” said Magic Johnson. “He is the best at it.”

While Robinson is a great player, there are a lot of centers before him and after him that play the position better.

[NO-KG-AI]

How many guys have an MVP, a DPOY, and a title?

Sorry guys, this is Robinson easy, he was simply a more impactful player, that's why he got the awards, and that's why he has 2 rings to show for it.

[sp6r=underrated]

How about we go back to the orginal question? If it's between David and John who gets into the HOF?

The answer to that is easy, plenty of players have won an MVP. Plenty have won DPOY and plenty have won championships. Noone, absolutely noone will ever touch his Assist record. Sure that's over a career and while he does have the single season record also, the HOF is about your contribution to basketball, nowhere does it say for a single season, or for peak etc. etc.

As a PG his job is to lead the team and pass the ball.

“There is nobody that can distribute the ball, plus lead his team, like John Stockton,” said Magic Johnson. “He is the best at it.”

While Robinson is a great player, there are a lot of point guards before him and after him that play the position better.

For most of us, the question of who will get in the hall of fame necessitates answering who was the better player. There are other factors that go into a hall of fame selection, some strong while others poor, but the value of a player is the biggest component.

Finally, While Stockton was a great player, there are a lot of centers before him and after him that play the position better.

[NO-KG-AI]

All this "play the position better" stuff is garbage too, and it's a cop out argument. Just because guys could create shots for themselves a lot better than Stockton could doesn't make him a better passer, and no other elite PG got to play with a career 25 ppg(and more like a 28-31 ppg peak), 2 time MVP.

Sounds like the last argument left is that Stockton was a better pure PG because he wasn't as good of a scorer as some guys.

[sp6r=underrated]

All this "play the position better" stuff is garbage too, and it's a cop out argument. Just because guys could create shots for themselves a lot better than Stockton could doesn't make him a better passer, and no other elite PG got to play with a career 25 ppg(and more like a 28-31 ppg peak), 2 time MVP.

Sounds like the last argument left is that Stockton was a better pure PG because he wasn't as good of a scorer as some guys.

Correct, Magic isn't any less of a pure point in my mind because he could score when necessary.

[carrottop12]

How many guys have an MVP, a DPOY, and a title?

Sorry guys, this is Robinson easy, he was simply a more impactful player, that's why he got the awards, and that's why he has 2 rings to show for it.

More measureable player maybe, but Stockton did things that you guys don't understand as a player on the floor. He was an out of the box score guy that had all those intangibles that seperate the good from the great. He was the kind of guy that would go into the fourth quarter of a close game with 4 points and 12 assists and end with 18 points and 14 assists and in the box score, and for the season averages it looks like an average game, but it doesn't show the timing of his play making, his ability to control the game with out scoring 20 PPG, his clutchness etc. etc. You can't measure that by going back and looking at his stats which is what 90% of you are doing.

Ask anyone in the know who watched the Jazz through out the 90's, while Malone had some miraculous years statistically, Stockton was always the better player. Malone was the body of the operation, but Stockton was the genius behind all of it. Everyone here is getting to caught up in statistical comparison when the league is more mental then physical.

But whatever, stats are easier to point too, and can be used to "prove" anything, believe what you will. But remember, even with stats, Robinson never had any season's as unique or record breaking as Stockton, the only thing Robinson has over Stockton is 2 rings, and he got those from Duncan and everybody knows it.

[ronnymac2]

Stockton was better than Malone? Really?

[TMACFORMVP]

Didn't the Jazz get to the finals (experiencing their most success) and Malone win MVP when Stockton began his decline?

[sp6r=underrated]

How many guys have an MVP, a DPOY, and a title?

Sorry guys, this is Robinson easy, he was simply a more impactful player, that's why he got the awards, and that's why he has 2 rings to show for it.

More measureable player maybe, but Stockton did things that you guys don't understand as a player on the floor. He was an out of the box score guy that had all those intangibles that seperate the good from the great. He was the kind of guy that would go into the fourth quarter of a close game with 4 points and 12 assists and end with 18 points and 14 assists and in the box score, and for the season averages it looks like an average game, but it doesn't show the timing of his play making, his ability to control the game with out scoring 20 PPG, his clutchness etc. etc. You can't measure that by going back and looking at his stats which is what 90% of you are doing.

Ask anyone in the know who watched the Jazz through out the 90's, while Malone had some miraculous years statistically, Stockton was always the better player. Malone was the body of the operation, but Stockton was the genius behind all of it. Everyone here is getting to caught up in statistical comparison when the league is more mental then physical.

But whatever, stats are easier to point too, and can be used to "prove" anything, believe what you will. But remember, even with stats, Robinson never had any season's as unique or record breaking as Stockton, the only thing Robinson has over Stockton is 2 rings, and he got those from Duncan and everybody knows it.

This is a little arrogant. " Stockton did things that you guys don't understand as a player on the floor." This is a basketball forum. Most of us are huge NBA fans who understand basketball quite well. The criticism of Stockton has been well supported by examining his game which had substantially less impact than a player like Robinson and the way he was viewed during his time.

In fact it is the Stockton fans who have been trying to use his career totals as a sledgehammer to elevate him beyond his value.

[NO-KG-AI]

I'm pretty sure Robinson has an MVP and a DPOY. Stockton was never ranked higher than Malone in MVP voting. So basically every respected opinion, and every statistic pointed to Malone not only being the better player, but being noticeably better, dominant, and elite, while Stockton was looked at as a very good player.

Dunno, I remember them pretty vividly, and Stockton was never an ultra creator on offense who you just throw the ball to and say "go make a play." I'd say Stockton's assist numbers were a lot more due to Malone than vice versa.

[Baller 24]

Malone was the better player, pretty easily, he was regarded by spectators as the league wide superstar, and the player with the higher impact. If Stockton was as great as you say he was then he'd have a lot more recognition, because if that's the case then Stockton should be on Magic's level and definitely should have about a good 2-3 MVPs.