George Gervin vs Reggie Miller

Narigo · Post #1 » by **Narigo** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:40 am

Who's higher on your ATL??

70sFan · Post #2 » by **70sFan** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 7:19 am

I have them in similar tier and I can't decide which one should get the nod.

LukaTheGOAT · Post #3 » by **LukaTheGOAT** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 8:28 am

I think Reggie Miller is the guy here, because he has more longevity.

They are very similar in a lot of ways.

For example,

3-year playoff stretches above +2 in ScoreVal

Kareem 7x
Jordan 7x
Shaq 7x
Miller 7x
West 7x
.......
Gervin 2x

Reggie Miller in the Playoffs from 1990-99:
• 27.0 Points/75 on +11.3 rTS%

Heck, the Pacers offenses were also typically spectacular with Miller, as he is one of 3 people ever in history to play on two separate teams with five-year stretches of +5 playoff offenses (Magic and Kobe are the other 2).

Heck, in 1999 the Pacers were the best offense in the NBA (+6.5 rORTG) as well as the best in 2000 (+4.4 rORTG) This is at 33 and 34 years old and Reggie was the best offensive player on those teams.

Reggie Miller in the 2000s Finals against an all-nba talent in Kobe (whose ankle injury might have him perform worse than his averages):

• 24.2 PPG
• 4.5 REB
• 3.7 AST
• 0.8 STL
• 58.8 TS%
• 37% From 3
• 98% From the Line (45-46)

Kobe in the Finals in 2000 (Once again his ankle injury maybe made things significantly worse)

15.6 PPG
4.6 RPG
4.2 AST
1 Steal
41.1 TS%

Chasing Reggie around, probably was incredibly taxing for Kobe...

That's insanely impressive for a 34-year-old man. Reggie is the definition of consistency year after year.
The consistency for so long is just too much to pass over here.

Stan · Post #4 » by **Stan** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 8:01 pm

Just resume wise, Gervin BLOWS Reggie away lol. Reggie easily has the weakest resume of players I see put in the top 50 discussion.

kcktiny · Post #5 » by **kcktiny** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 10:37 pm

Just resume wise, Gervin BLOWS Reggie away lol.

Boy is this ever the truth.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that a prime Reggie Miller was a better player than a prime George Gervin. Gervin was all-NBA 1st team five years in a row (1977-78 to 1981-82). Miller was never all-NBA 1st nor all-NBA 2nd team in his career.

Miller never scored as much as 25 pts/g in a season, just twice over an 18 year career scored over 22 pts/g in a season. Yes he was a great shooter, but he was 6-7 and couldn't rebound and wasn't much of a defender.

In the late 70s/early 80s Gervin was the league's preeminent scorer, and one of the best shooting SGs.

He scored over 30 pts/g in a season not once but twice, lead the league in scoring 4 times, and over the 7 year period of 1977-78 to 1983-84 scored 2411 more points than anybody else in the league (15964, 28.8 pts/g) - that's like an entire 82 game season at 29 pts/g.

And only a couple of SGs that played at least 5 of those 7 seasons shot better from the floor than did Gervin.

Like Miller Gervin too was not much of a defender. But he was a much better rebounder, got steals at a higher rate, and was 3 times the shot blocker that Miller was.

prolific passer · Post #6 » by **prolific passer** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 10:42 pm

Gervin couldn't shoot 3s like Reggie.
I don't think Reggie had the offensive firepower overall like Gervin did and couldn't defend like Gervin who doesn't get enough credit for that.

Post #7 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:00 am

prolific passer wrote:Gervin couldn't shoot 3s like Reggie.
I don't think Reggie had the offensive firepower overall like Gervin did and couldn't defend like Gervin who doesn't get enough credit for that.

Gervin was a sick shooter, and a career 84.1% FT shooter. Odds are, if he had 3pt shooting as a focus, he'd have been fine. Not as good as Reggie, sure, but good enough, I suspect. Gervin was a nasty, nasty scorer and a high-end shooter in his day.

prolific passer · Post #8 » by **prolific passer** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:03 am

tsherkin wrote:
prolific passer wrote:Gervin couldn't shoot 3s like Reggie.
I don't think Reggie had the offensive firepower overall like Gervin did and couldn't defend like Gervin who doesn't get enough credit for that.

Gervin was a sick shooter, and a career 84.1% FT shooter. Odds are, if he had 3pt shooting as a focus, he'd have been fine. Not as good as Reggie, sure, but good enough, I suspect. Gervin was a nasty, nasty scorer and a high-end shooter in his day.

Gervin's finger roll doesn't get enough credit as one of the best moves in NBA history. Maybe if he won a championship it would be up there with the skyhook and dream shake.

Post #9 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:16 am

prolific passer wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
prolific passer wrote:Gervin couldn't shoot 3s like Reggie.
I don't think Reggie had the offensive firepower overall like Gervin did and couldn't defend like Gervin who doesn't get enough credit for that.

Gervin was a sick shooter, and a career 84.1% FT shooter. Odds are, if he had 3pt shooting as a focus, he'd have been fine. Not as good as Reggie, sure, but good enough, I suspect. Gervin was a nasty, nasty scorer and a high-end shooter in his day.

Gervin's finger roll doesn't get enough credit as one of the best moves in NBA history. Maybe if he won a championship it would be up there with the skyhook and dream shake.

Strictly speaking as a scorer, he's up there with the absolute best, for sure. He wasn't a staggering playmaker, or floor-raiser, so his overall offensive punch wasn't quite the same as some.... but certainly compared to Reggie, he has a puncher's chance in a comparison. And yeah, he was a nasty finisher. Dude shot 50.4% on jumpers and finger rolls without being a Lebron-like physique

HeartBreakKid · Post #10 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:45 am

tsherkin wrote:
prolific passer wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
Gervin was a sick shooter, and a career 84.1% FT shooter. Odds are, if he had 3pt shooting as a focus, he'd have been fine. Not as good as Reggie, sure, but good enough, I suspect. Gervin was a nasty, nasty scorer and a high-end shooter in his day.

Gervin's finger roll doesn't get enough credit as one of the best moves in NBA history. Maybe if he won a championship it would be up there with the skyhook and dream shake.

Strictly speaking as a scorer, he's up there with the absolute best, for sure. He wasn't a staggering playmaker, or floor-raiser, so his overall offensive punch wasn't quite the same as some.... but certainly compared to Reggie, he has a puncher's chance in a comparison. And yeah, he was a nasty finisher. Dude shot 50.4% on jumpers and finger rolls without being a Lebron-like physique

Isn't his NBA body comparable to Durant's who is also a great finisher? It's not like Lebron is exactly a blue print, more like an anomaly.

Post #11 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:50 am

HeartBreakKid wrote:Isn't his NBA body comparable to Durant's who is also a great finisher? It's not like Lebron is exactly a blue print, more like an anomaly.

In that he was tall for his position and skinny, sure, but KD was a lot taller and in no way similar to Lebron.

kcktiny · Post #12 » by **kcktiny** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 3:54 am

He wasn't a staggering playmaker, or floor-raiser, so his overall offensive punch wasn't quite the same as some

On the contrary - from 1977-78 to 1983-84 (7 years) when Gervin was in his prime the Spurs were the 2nd best team offensively (107.2 pts/100poss scored) in the league. Only the Lakers were better offensively.

And those 7 seasons Gervin alone scored close to 1/4 of the Spurs total points in the regular season (24%). He had more than 3 times as many FGM, and close to 3 times as many FTM, as any other Spurs player during that time.

San Antonio had the 7th best winning percentage over that time despite having the 8th worst team defense (105.0 pts/100poss allowed). I'd say Gervin's offense was a huge factor - likely the key factor - for that team's success over that time.

There were very very few players in the league during his prime years that had the offensive punch he did, and certainly no other SGs.

JordansBulls · Post #13 » by **JordansBulls** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:05 am

Comparing the ABA vs NBA makes things difficult because most of the times we aren't using ABA accolades/stats in the comparison.

Post #14 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:22 am

kcktiny wrote:
He wasn't a staggering playmaker, or floor-raiser, so his overall offensive punch wasn't quite the same as some

On the contrary - from 1977-78 to 1983-84 (7 years) when Gervin was in his prime the Spurs were the 2nd best team offensively (107.2 pts/100poss scored) in the league. Only the Lakers were better offensively.

Suuuuuuure, but in 1978, the league BEST offense was at 105.0 ORTG, you know what I mean? You can argue in-era relevance and such but ultimately it means only so much.

He was very good, but the portability of that value into more competent eras of the league is a little dubious.

migya · Post #15 » by **migya** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:33 am

kcktiny wrote:
Just resume wise, Gervin BLOWS Reggie away lol.

Boy is this ever the truth.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that a prime Reggie Miller was a better player than a prime George Gervin. Gervin was all-NBA 1st team five years in a row (1977-78 to 1981-82). Miller was never all-NBA 1st nor all-NBA 2nd team in his career.

Miller never scored as much as 25 pts/g in a season, just twice over an 18 year career scored over 22 pts/g in a season. Yes he was a great shooter, but he was 6-7 and couldn't rebound and wasn't much of a defender.

In the late 70s/early 80s Gervin was the league's preeminent scorer, and one of the best shooting SGs.

He scored over 30 pts/g in a season not once but twice, lead the league in scoring 4 times, and over the 7 year period of 1977-78 to 1983-84 scored 2411 more points than anybody else in the league (15964, 28.8 pts/g) - that's like an entire 82 game season at 29 pts/g.

And only a couple of SGs that played at least 5 of those 7 seasons shot better from the floor than did Gervin.

Like Miller Gervin too was not much of a defender. But he was a much better rebounder, got steals at a higher rate, and was 3 times the shot blocker that Miller was.

Most on here are enamored with outside shooting. Reggie was a great shooter and had some very good playoffs but truth is if the guy was really a great scorer, on a talented team that had a good level of everything else; playmaking and floor generalship of Mark Jackson, Rebounding and defense of the Davis' and Schrempf then McKey, the shooting and good offense of Smits and a pretty good bench, Reggie was in the right situation to flourish as a scorer and he just didn't. Mitch Richmond in that situation would have scored more and easier than he did on the Kings.

Post #16 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:36 am

migya wrote:
kcktiny wrote:
Just resume wise, Gervin BLOWS Reggie away lol.

Boy is this ever the truth.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that a prime Reggie Miller was a better player than a prime George Gervin. Gervin was all-NBA 1st team five years in a row (1977-78 to 1981-82). Miller was never all-NBA 1st nor all-NBA 2nd team in his career.

Miller never scored as much as 25 pts/g in a season, just twice over an 18 year career scored over 22 pts/g in a season. Yes he was a great shooter, but he was 6-7 and couldn't rebound and wasn't much of a defender.

In the late 70s/early 80s Gervin was the league's preeminent scorer, and one of the best shooting SGs.

He scored over 30 pts/g in a season not once but twice, lead the league in scoring 4 times, and over the 7 year period of 1977-78 to 1983-84 scored 2411 more points than anybody else in the league (15964, 28.8 pts/g) - that's like an entire 82 game season at 29 pts/g.

And only a couple of SGs that played at least 5 of those 7 seasons shot better from the floor than did Gervin.

Like Miller Gervin too was not much of a defender. But he was a much better rebounder, got steals at a higher rate, and was 3 times the shot blocker that Miller was.

Most on here are enamored with outside shooting. Reggie was a great shooter and had some very good playoffs but truth is if the guy was really a great scorer, on a talented team that had a good level of everything else; playmaking and floor generalship of Mark Jackson, Rebounding and defense of the Davis' and Schrempf then McKey, the shooting and good offense of Smits and a pretty good bench, Reggie was in the right situation to flourish as a scorer and he just didn't. Mitch Richmond in that situation would have scored more and easier than he did on the Kings.

Nothing about this post makes sense.

migya · Post #17 » by **migya** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:42 am

tsherkin wrote:
migya wrote:
kcktiny wrote:
Boy is this ever the truth.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that a prime Reggie Miller was a better player than a prime George Gervin. Gervin was all-NBA 1st team five years in a row (1977-78 to 1981-82). Miller was never all-NBA 1st nor all-NBA 2nd team in his career.

Miller never scored as much as 25 pts/g in a season, just twice over an 18 year career scored over 22 pts/g in a season. Yes he was a great shooter, but he was 6-7 and couldn't rebound and wasn't much of a defender.

In the late 70s/early 80s Gervin was the league's preeminent scorer, and one of the best shooting SGs.

He scored over 30 pts/g in a season not once but twice, lead the league in scoring 4 times, and over the 7 year period of 1977-78 to 1983-84 scored 2411 more points than anybody else in the league (15964, 28.8 pts/g) - that's like an entire 82 game season at 29 pts/g.

And only a couple of SGs that played at least 5 of those 7 seasons shot better from the floor than did Gervin.

Like Miller Gervin too was not much of a defender. But he was a much better rebounder, got steals at a higher rate, and was 3 times the shot blocker that Miller was.

Most on here are enamored with outside shooting. Reggie was a great shooter and had some very good playoffs but truth is if the guy was really a great scorer, on a talented team that had a good level of everything else; playmaking and floor generalship of Mark Jackson, Rebounding and defense of the Davis' and Schrempf then McKey, the shooting and good offense of Smits and a pretty good bench, Reggie was in the right situation to flourish as a scorer and he just didn't. Mitch Richmond in that situation would have scored more and easier than he did on the Kings.

Nothing about this post makes sense.

You are one of the enamored.

Post #18 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:47 am

migya wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
migya wrote:

Most on here are enamored with outside shooting. Reggie was a great shooter and had some very good playoffs but truth is if the guy was really a great scorer, on a talented team that had a good level of everything else; playmaking and floor generalship of Mark Jackson, Rebounding and defense of the Davis' and Schrempf then McKey, the shooting and good offense of Smits and a pretty good bench, Reggie was in the right situation to flourish as a scorer and he just didn't. Mitch Richmond in that situation would have scored more and easier than he did on the Kings.

Nothing about this post makes sense.

You are one of the enamored.

No, you just don't know how to appreciate the value of 3pt shooting and foul drawing, as well as the gravity Reggie produced with his off-ball movement

prolific passer · Post #19 » by **prolific passer** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:52 am

Gervin has one of the highest playoff averages in NBA history but I believe Reggie had the highest jump from regular season to playoffs from 88-2002 when he averaged 18 a game during the regular season and close to 24 in the playoffs in that span.

HeartBreakKid · Post #20 » by **HeartBreakKid** » Sat Nov 12, 2022 7:34 am

migya wrote:
kcktiny wrote:
Just resume wise, Gervin BLOWS Reggie away lol.

Boy is this ever the truth.

I can't imagine why anyone would think that a prime Reggie Miller was a better player than a prime George Gervin. Gervin was all-NBA 1st team five years in a row (1977-78 to 1981-82). Miller was never all-NBA 1st nor all-NBA 2nd team in his career.

Miller never scored as much as 25 pts/g in a season, just twice over an 18 year career scored over 22 pts/g in a season. Yes he was a great shooter, but he was 6-7 and couldn't rebound and wasn't much of a defender.

In the late 70s/early 80s Gervin was the league's preeminent scorer, and one of the best shooting SGs.

He scored over 30 pts/g in a season not once but twice, lead the league in scoring 4 times, and over the 7 year period of 1977-78 to 1983-84 scored 2411 more points than anybody else in the league (15964, 28.8 pts/g) - that's like an entire 82 game season at 29 pts/g.

And only a couple of SGs that played at least 5 of those 7 seasons shot better from the floor than did Gervin.

Like Miller Gervin too was not much of a defender. But he was a much better rebounder, got steals at a higher rate, and was 3 times the shot blocker that Miller was.

Most on here are enamored with outside shooting. Reggie was a great shooter and had some very good playoffs but truth is if the guy was really a great scorer, on a talented team that had a good level of everything else; playmaking and floor generalship of Mark Jackson, Rebounding and defense of the Davis' and Schrempf then McKey, the shooting and good offense of Smits and a pretty good bench, Reggie was in the right situation to flourish as a scorer and he just didn't. Mitch Richmond in that situation would have scored more and easier than he did on the Kings.

Reggie Miller certainly flourished and was a much better scorer than Mitch. Look at their playoff numbers.

Reggie Miller didn't have a few good playoffs, he was consistently better in the playoffs by an incredibly large amount. He is among the best playoff players of all time, it is irrelevant almost to mention his RS. You may as well say you are enamored with PPG because it's rather obvious that the reason why Miller averaged 18 PPG is for two reasons

- He didn't need to average more, but could if his team needed to (proof is in the pudding, look at his large PS sample size)

- He was not a ball dominant player

Also, why the heck are you mentioning a few of his teammates as if he didn't have an insanely long career with a variety of teammates? You're talking like he had Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant as his teammates - his team wasn't unfairly stacked and certainly wasn't the perfect offensive team.

Higher on Goat list???