Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Moderators: trex_8063, PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0
Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
- Grinditout
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,537
- And1: 2,575
- Joined: Aug 04, 2006
Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Who had the better NBA career?
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
- AEnigma
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,330
- And1: 5,035
- Joined: Jul 24, 2022
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Marbury had 11 real seasons, averaging 20/3/8 over 38.4 minutes a game, with slightly above average scoring efficiency. He made the all-star game twice and all-NBA twice.
Crawford had 18 meaningful seasons. During his 11 best seasons, he averaged 17/2.5/4 over 33.6 minutes a game, with slightly below average scoring efficiency.
It is a less facially objectionable comparison than my initial gut reaction, propelled by my personal affinity for Starbury. However, I still do not see it as especially close whether I would rather have eleven years of a good (but not at all great) playmaker than eighteen years of a functional relief scorer. And judging by their career earnings, front offices generally agree.
Crawford had 18 meaningful seasons. During his 11 best seasons, he averaged 17/2.5/4 over 33.6 minutes a game, with slightly below average scoring efficiency.
It is a less facially objectionable comparison than my initial gut reaction, propelled by my personal affinity for Starbury. However, I still do not see it as especially close whether I would rather have eleven years of a good (but not at all great) playmaker than eighteen years of a functional relief scorer. And judging by their career earnings, front offices generally agree.
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 81,739
- And1: 22,809
- Joined: Oct 14, 2003
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Steph for sure. Crawford was an exciting guy but largely a fairly bleh player outside of 2010.
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,415
- And1: 3,906
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
You can't compare a bench player to an all-star, even if his career did derail.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,602
- And1: 3,124
- Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Not looking closely, first glance response...
Wouldn't want to keep either on my roster long term. Both probably get paid more than they are worth. Marbury has some intangible issues.
But Marbury. He was overrated (massively overhyped by Slam). He was a poor defender. He wasn't, as I recall, always the best teammate. His playoff numbers look very poor relative to RS - there's some mitigation for it not all being prime stuff but even so. There's a possibility he didn't scale well as we didn't really see him much on good teams. Personally he was a little shoot-first for my taste.
So there's the caveats there. But 99-05, especially '05 he's productive. The surface level on-off is ... solid (if vacillating quite a lot), again with 05 looking strong). There's the caveats above but '05 could perhaps be a needle-mover for a good team. How many years of Crawford add up to '05 Marbury...
Haven't looked in detail but on the surface I'm not sure how much Crawford ever helps you win at a high level. Fwiw, depending somewhat on measure of choice, he doesn't look great in the playoffs either.
Wouldn't want to keep either on my roster long term. Both probably get paid more than they are worth. Marbury has some intangible issues.
But Marbury. He was overrated (massively overhyped by Slam). He was a poor defender. He wasn't, as I recall, always the best teammate. His playoff numbers look very poor relative to RS - there's some mitigation for it not all being prime stuff but even so. There's a possibility he didn't scale well as we didn't really see him much on good teams. Personally he was a little shoot-first for my taste.
So there's the caveats there. But 99-05, especially '05 he's productive. The surface level on-off is ... solid (if vacillating quite a lot), again with 05 looking strong). There's the caveats above but '05 could perhaps be a needle-mover for a good team. How many years of Crawford add up to '05 Marbury...
Haven't looked in detail but on the surface I'm not sure how much Crawford ever helps you win at a high level. Fwiw, depending somewhat on measure of choice, he doesn't look great in the playoffs either.
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
- Tracymcgoaty
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,239
- And1: 16,643
- Joined: Dec 21, 2015
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Jamal Crawford is the kind of guy when you watch his highlights you're like damn this dude must have been one of the greats. Then you actually watch him play and you realize he's probably up there as one of the most overrated players in the game.
Raul
“The other day I saw one of his games. He was running with the ball at a hundred per cent full speed, I don’t know how many touches he took, maybe five or six, but the ball was glued to his foot. It’s practically impossible.”
“The other day I saw one of his games. He was running with the ball at a hundred per cent full speed, I don’t know how many touches he took, maybe five or six, but the ball was glued to his foot. It’s practically impossible.”
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
- Dr Positivity
- RealGM
- Posts: 60,822
- And1: 15,811
- Joined: Apr 29, 2009
Re: Jamal Crawford V. Stephon Marbury
Starbury easily. Talent wise it's like comparing Morant to Herro (I guess I'd take Morant over Marbury though he also played in a more favorable guard era).
F statists