Where would Stockton rank as a point guard today

[MavsDirk41]

Top point guards today in no particular order:

Luka
Brunson
Haliburton
Harden
Curry
Trae Young
Ball
Fox
Morant
Maxey
Lilliard
Jamal Murray

Stockton is easily top 10 among this list if not top 5. Only point guards i would definitely take over him are Luka and Curry.

Stockton played 19 seasons in the nba. He played 82 games 16 of those 19 seasons. He was top 10 in mvp voting 5 years. Guy was incredible.

Leaving aside whether this list is accurate, the only one of those guys I'd definitely take Stockton over is Ball. Maybe Maxey too I guess, but I'm not sure about that.

The response i would expect from someone who only knows about Stockton from reading his stats off basketball reference lol….. troll on

[theonlyclutch]

I think he's referring to best TRUE PG...as in, pass first and running the offense, rather than score-first and reacting to the defense. CP3, Jason Kidd, Rondo, Steve Nash fit this mold.

'Pass-first' PGs as an archetype are obsolete in 2024 lol. In good teams there are often other playmakers who can do the job of scoring and playmaking at the same time. PGs that can't apply good scoring pressure in volume (and that's not Stockton and his career 13 ppg playoffs) just don't get to dominate the ball in a way that is necessary to rack up assist counts like they used to. The closest one is Haliburton and he's still a significantly more aggressive scorer, especially pre-injury.

I just don't think they are irrelevant. Mike Conley, Chris Paul, and Kyle Lowry have held on for a long, long time by being players of this archetype. That they are still relevant at their ages suggests that it still has value to teams - there just aren't many players of this archetype coming into the league. I would, however, agree with you if a guy is basically Eric Snow - someone with no offensive skill whatsoever.

Kyle Lowry during his prime (Toronto) consistently looked for his own shot and scored more than Stockton despite playing in a significantly slower league, as soon as he left Toronto and stopped being such a scorer the ball was taken off him in Miami and he stopped getting opportunities to generate assists.

Chris Paul...is just a bad comparison given he's a significantly better scorer, better playmaker, and plays like it, and even he stopped dominating the ball as much in Houston/OKC/PHX pared with other playmaking guards. His highest AST % seasons were in NOH over a decade and a half ago, did he somehow become a worst passer as he matured? No, teams just don't want small guards with the ball in their hands as much if they aren't high-end scorers.

Mike Conley is an apt comparison but also an illustrative one, he never had the opportunities to generate so much assists as he's not on ball nearly as much as Stockton was, given the playmakers he played with (Gasol in MEM, Mitchell in UTA, Edwards in MIN).

Heck, we see this with Stockton himself, as good as he was, the Jazz's best seasons in the playoffs ('94-'98) were with Jeff Hornacek (another playmaker) and Malone taking increased duties there, with less touches to Stockton as a result. And there's exponentially more talented playmakers at every position in the early-20ss than the late-90s, Coaches aren't gonna move Jokic/Luka/Lebron/Sabonis off-ball just so Stockton can pump his assist stats.

[bkkrh]

I'm pretty sure Lebron was a specialist at alot of skills. He had so many specialist skills that nobody thinks of him that way.

You're playing some 4D chess here, my friend .

[One_and_Done]

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Alot of people see someone like Draymond Green and say "here's the proof all-rounders have great value". The thing is, Green isn't just an all around good player with good skills. What makes prime Green so valuable is that he's an elite defensive player. Like, a DPOY type of defender. That is his specialist skill. He's a specialist who happens to have all around skills; which is obviously the best kind of player.

Of course you want a player to be good at everything, but a team starting 5 all-around good players will go nowhere. What makes the Celtics so good isn't just that they have 5 all around guys starting, it's that 1 is an MVP candidate based on his potent offensive abilities and the other star of the team might be even better than him in the playoffs. Even their 3rd to 5th best guys are kind of specialists. White and Jrue are elite defensive players, among the best in the league. Despite that, if you're choosing between White or Harden to build a team around you go Harden every time; and I love White. Harden sucking on D doesn't matter enough, his specialisation is still so potent you always build around him over the 'all around good' White.

The only time you consider White over prime Harden is if you're working out who fits better as your 4th best guy; and even then you'd often still take Harden. We also don't rate guys based on who'd be the best 4th man on a team.

That's not a specialist. A specialist is a player who is is very good at a certain thing, but lacks other skills. Think Duncan Robinson, very good at 3pt shooting, and not much else. Or Andre Drummond, very good at rebounding, and not much else. Or Al Jefferson, very good at post scoring, but not much else.

If they have multiple skills, they aren't a specialist. They're an All-Around player. Draymond Green is an All-Around player. Jrue Holiday and White are All-Around players. All very good defenders, but all of them are good on offense as well.


The definition of specialist

a person who concentrates primarily on a particular subject or activity; a person highly skilled in a specific and restricted field.

So players like the ones I mentioned above. They concentrate on a certain skill, and play roles within the team that need that certain skill.

jack of all trades

a person who can do many different types of work.

So players that are skilled at multiple different things.

James Harden is an All-around offensive player. He can shoot, pass, dribble etc. He's like (or used to be like) Steph, Jokic, Luka etc. Other All-Around offensive engines.

White and Jrue are also all-around players. They're good on defense, and on offense.

You simultaneously have too broad a definition of a specialist, to the point where basically every player in the league that is any good is a specialist. And are also capping what an all-around player can be, because if they're too good at anything they must be a specialist.

I went to see my friend, who is a doctor, the other day. She, like many doctors, is a specialist. It doesn't mean she lacks broad medical skills, or skills outside of medicine. We're obviously using different definitions here.

[Ol Roy]

The response i would expect from someone who only knows about Stockton from reading his stats off basketball reference lol….. troll on

No, that's not it.

His dogma requires automatically discounting players from the past based on his subjective view of their in-era competition. The further away from the present, the bigger the discount.

And to further handicap past players, he categorically rejects the notion that we can draw reasonable inferences on how they would play today...as long as it benefits the player. If it adds further demerits to the player, then project away.

It really isn't an internally consistent method of analysis. But even if it held up logically, it fails on the merits of sound analysis.

[One_and_Done]

No, that's not it.

His dogma requires automatically discounting players from the past based on his subjective view of their in-era competition. The further away from the present, the bigger the discount.

And to further handicap past players, he categorically rejects the notion that we can draw reasonable inferences on how they would play today...as long as it benefits the player. If it adds further demerits to the player, then project away.

It really isn't an internally consistent method of analysis. But even if it held up logically, it fails on the merits of sound analysis.

I have Kareem in my top 2-3 all-time, so that ain't it. I have Mailman in my top 15ish. He was the actual engine of those teams, not Stockton.

[falcolombardi]

Today as in 2024?, in general 2010's/2020's era?, career wise vs modern point guards career?

If the angle is how good would prime stockton be teleported into today's game with like, a previous adaptation year? I suppose in the top 10, prolly closer to top 5 albeit it would depend who is classified as point guard

He has no shot of being as good as luka, shai or current curry

I personally think he is worse than brunson/haliburton/portland lillard unless he adapts to become more of a scoring threath to a degree he never did in his career

[KGtabake]

Wouldn't even be an all-star given his lack of creation and pass first game, combined with a much stronger league.

I came here for a post like that one.

[Onlytimewilltel]

Wouldn't even be an all-star given his lack of creation and pass first game, combined with a much stronger league.

[Onlytimewilltel]

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Alot of people see someone like Draymond Green and say "here's the proof all-rounders have great value". The thing is, Green isn't just an all around good player with good skills. What makes prime Green so valuable is that he's an elite defensive player. Like, a DPOY type of defender. That is his specialist skill. He's a specialist who happens to have all around skills; which is obviously the best kind of player.

Of course you want a player to be good at everything, but a team starting 5 all-around good players will go nowhere. What makes the Celtics so good isn't just that they have 5 all around guys starting, it's that 1 is an MVP candidate based on his potent offensive abilities and the other star of the team might be even better than him in the playoffs. Even their 3rd to 5th best guys are kind of specialists. White and Jrue are elite defensive players, among the best in the league. Despite that, if you're choosing between White or Harden to build a team around you go Harden every time; and I love White. Harden sucking on D doesn't matter enough, his specialisation is still so potent you always build around him over the 'all around good' White.

The only time you consider White over prime Harden is if you're working out who fits better as your 4th best guy; and even then you'd often still take Harden. We also don't rate guys based on who'd be the best 4th man on a team.

That's not a specialist. A specialist is a player who is is very good at a certain thing, but lacks other skills. Think Duncan Robinson, very good at 3pt shooting, and not much else. Or Andre Drummond, very good at rebounding, and not much else. Or Al Jefferson, very good at post scoring, but not much else.

If they have multiple skills, they aren't a specialist. They're an All-Around player. Draymond Green is an All-Around player. Jrue Holiday and White are All-Around players. All very good defenders, but all of them are good on offense as well.


The definition of specialist

a person who concentrates primarily on a particular subject or activity; a person highly skilled in a specific and restricted field.

So players like the ones I mentioned above. They concentrate on a certain skill, and play roles within the team that need that certain skill.

jack of all trades

a person who can do many different types of work.

So players that are skilled at multiple different things.

James Harden is an All-around offensive player. He can shoot, pass, dribble etc. He's like (or used to be like) Steph, Jokic, Luka etc. Other All-Around offensive engines.

White and Jrue are also all-around players. They're good on defense, and on offense.

You simultaneously have too broad a definition of a specialist, to the point where basically every player in the league that is any good is a specialist. And are also capping what an all-around player can be, because if they're too good at anything they must be a specialist.

I went to see my friend, who is a doctor, the other day. She, like many doctors, is a specialist. It doesn't mean she lacks broad medical skills, or skills outside of medicine. We're obviously using different definitions here.

I’m glad you’re keeping your appointments with your doctor specialist. That’s great news. Make sure you go regularly and don’t miss any appointments as it’s healthy to see your doctor friend and keep your wits about you, feels me?

[LarsV8]

He would be a persistent afterthought, a boring player, completely unheralded, slotted in as the 15th-20th best player in the league, but talked about only as a courtesy, meanwhile his teams would quietly and consistently win 58 games a year and continually challenge for the top seeds in the conference, while people wonder, damn, how is this team always so good, and ultimately,probably, misattribute that success to some random undeserving coach.

[One_and_Done]

He would be a persistent afterthought, a boring player, completely unheralded, slotted in as the 15th-20th best player in the league, but talked about only as a courtesy, meanwhile his teams would quietly and consistently win 58 games a year and continually challenge for the top seeds in the conference, while people wonder, damn, how is this team always so good, and ultimately,probably, misattribute that success to some random undeserving coach.

That's why the Jazz won 58 games every year right? They must have won even more than that every year with Stockton, right? Because Stockton was teamed with an MVP forward and played in a weaker era. Odd that they didn't. But they only lost to great teams though right? Not bad teams like the 43 win Warriors, right?

[SelfishPlayer]

A jack of all trades is less valuable than a specialist.

That's just objectively not true. The best teams in the league all have versatile players who do multiple things well. Whereas some specialists, such as post-scoring centers and rebounding specialists, hardly even exist anymore.

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Alot of people see someone like Draymond Green and say "here's the proof all-rounders have great value". The thing is, Green isn't just an all around good player with good skills. What makes prime Green so valuable is that he's an elite defensive player. Like, a DPOY type of defender. That is his specialist skill. He's a specialist who happens to have all around skills; which is obviously the best kind of player.

Of course you want a player to be good at everything, but a team starting 5 all-around good players will go nowhere. What makes the Celtics so good isn't just that they have 5 all around guys starting, it's that 1 is an MVP candidate based on his potent offensive abilities and the other star of the team might be even better than him in the playoffs. Even their 3rd to 5th best guys are kind of specialists. White and Jrue are elite defensive players, among the best in the league. Despite that, if you're choosing between White or Harden to build a team around you go Harden every time; and I love White. Harden sucking on D doesn't matter enough, his specialisation is still so potent you always build around him over the 'all around good' White.

The only time you consider White over prime Harden is if you're working out who fits better as your 4th best guy; and even then you'd often still take Harden. We also don't rate guys based on who'd be the best 4th man on a team.

You call Derek White an elite defensive player. He is a two time All NBA defensive second team member. John Stockton is 5 TIME ALL NBA DEFENSIVE SEOND TEAM MEMBER AND ALL TIME LEADER IN STEALS! Pease suspend yourself from inclusion in all basketball conversations anywhere in reality.

[JRoy]

He would be a persistent afterthought, a boring player, completely unheralded, slotted in as the 15th-20th best player in the league, but talked about only as a courtesy, meanwhile his teams would quietly and consistently win 58 games a year and continually challenge for the top seeds in the conference, while people wonder, damn, how is this team always so good, and ultimately,probably, misattribute that success to some random undeserving coach.

That's why the Jazz won 58 games every year right? They must have won even more than that every year with Stockton, right? Because Stockton was teamed with an MVP forward and played in a weaker era. Odd that they didn't. But they only lost to great teams though right? Not bad teams like the 43 win Warriors, right?

Weaker era?

[OriAr]

Top 5 PG easily.
He'll probably have to shoot more but given that peak Stockton scored 18 points per game on ELITE efficiency (120 TS+ in his peak) he'd be just fine scaling up his scoring, and his passing would be even better in this PnR happy era.
And despite his size limitations, he was a scrapy defender who made life hard for everyone he guarded.
Put someone like Stockton next to Wemby or Embiid and you'd watch basketball masterclasses all year long.

[One_and_Done]

That's just objectively not true. The best teams in the league all have versatile players who do multiple things well. Whereas some specialists, such as post-scoring centers and rebounding specialists, hardly even exist anymore.

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Alot of people see someone like Draymond Green and say "here's the proof all-rounders have great value". The thing is, Green isn't just an all around good player with good skills. What makes prime Green so valuable is that he's an elite defensive player. Like, a DPOY type of defender. That is his specialist skill. He's a specialist who happens to have all around skills; which is obviously the best kind of player.

Of course you want a player to be good at everything, but a team starting 5 all-around good players will go nowhere. What makes the Celtics so good isn't just that they have 5 all around guys starting, it's that 1 is an MVP candidate based on his potent offensive abilities and the other star of the team might be even better than him in the playoffs. Even their 3rd to 5th best guys are kind of specialists. White and Jrue are elite defensive players, among the best in the league. Despite that, if you're choosing between White or Harden to build a team around you go Harden every time; and I love White. Harden sucking on D doesn't matter enough, his specialisation is still so potent you always build around him over the 'all around good' White.

The only time you consider White over prime Harden is if you're working out who fits better as your 4th best guy; and even then you'd often still take Harden. We also don't rate guys based on who'd be the best 4th man on a team.

You call Derek White an elite defensive player. He is a two time All NBA defensive second team member. John Stockton is 5 TIME ALL NBA DEFENSIVE SEOND TEAM MEMBER AND ALL TIME LEADER IN STEALS! Pease suspend yourself from inclusion in all basketball conversations anywhere in reality.

You'll be shocked to hear this, but all D teams are not a good indicator of who the best defenders are; see Kobe Bryant. Neither are steals btw.

[theonlyclutch]

He would be a persistent afterthought, a boring player, completely unheralded, slotted in as the 15th-20th best player in the league, but talked about only as a courtesy, meanwhile his teams would quietly and consistently win 58 games a year and continually challenge for the top seeds in the conference, while people wonder, damn, how is this team always so good, and ultimately,probably, misattribute that success to some random undeserving coach.

That's why the Jazz won 58 games every year right? They must have won even more than that every year with Stockton, right? Because Stockton was teamed with an MVP forward and played in a weaker era. Odd that they didn't. But they only lost to great teams though right? Not bad teams like the 43 win Warriors, right?

Weaker era?

Without taking a deep dive empirically, the presence of exponentially more international talent without a corresponding increase in teams to spread out such talent should point to the modern era being a stronger one, all things equal.

Luka and Shai have been mentioned frequently as top guards in this thread, where did they come from and were there any equivalents in the 80s-90s?

[SelfishPlayer]

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Alot of people see someone like Draymond Green and say "here's the proof all-rounders have great value". The thing is, Green isn't just an all around good player with good skills. What makes prime Green so valuable is that he's an elite defensive player. Like, a DPOY type of defender. That is his specialist skill. He's a specialist who happens to have all around skills; which is obviously the best kind of player.

Of course you want a player to be good at everything, but a team starting 5 all-around good players will go nowhere. What makes the Celtics so good isn't just that they have 5 all around guys starting, it's that 1 is an MVP candidate based on his potent offensive abilities and the other star of the team might be even better than him in the playoffs. Even their 3rd to 5th best guys are kind of specialists. White and Jrue are elite defensive players, among the best in the league. Despite that, if you're choosing between White or Harden to build a team around you go Harden every time; and I love White. Harden sucking on D doesn't matter enough, his specialisation is still so potent you always build around him over the 'all around good' White.

The only time you consider White over prime Harden is if you're working out who fits better as your 4th best guy; and even then you'd often still take Harden. We also don't rate guys based on who'd be the best 4th man on a team.

You call Derek White an elite defensive player. He is a two time All NBA defensive second team member. John Stockton is 5 TIME ALL NBA DEFENSIVE SEOND TEAM MEMBER AND ALL TIME LEADER IN STEALS! Pease suspend yourself from inclusion in all basketball conversations anywhere in reality.

You'll be shocked to hear this, but all D teams are not a good indicator of who the best defenders are; see Kobe Bryant. Neither are steals btw.

You're correct, it's not a good indicator it's a GREAT indicator it recognizes the Raja Bell, Bruce Bowen, Derrick McKey and Mookie Blaylock's of the world.

[SelfishPlayer]

That's why the Jazz won 58 games every year right? They must have won even more than that every year with Stockton, right? Because Stockton was teamed with an MVP forward and played in a weaker era. Odd that they didn't. But they only lost to great teams though right? Not bad teams like the 43 win Warriors, right?

Weaker era?

Without taking a deep dive empirically, the presence of exponentially more international talent without a corresponding increase in teams to spread out such talent should point to the modern era being a stronger one, all things equal.

Luka and Shai have been mentioned frequently as top guards in this thread, where did they come from and were there any equivalents in the 80s-90s?

Shai's career high in scoring is only 44 points. The game today is easier to play. Adam Silver at the All Star break last season told the refs to swallow the whistle as to decrease scoring and admitted publicly that he did that. The league today is an easier league to produce in. SGA career high is 44 and Luka just spent an entire post season including a Finals run where he didn't score 40 or more points a single time after scoring 73 points in a game against the Hawks BEFORE Adam Silver instructed the refs to swallow the whistle.

[One_and_Done]

You call Derek White an elite defensive player. He is a two time All NBA defensive second team member. John Stockton is 5 TIME ALL NBA DEFENSIVE SEOND TEAM MEMBER AND ALL TIME LEADER IN STEALS! Pease suspend yourself from inclusion in all basketball conversations anywhere in reality.

You'll be shocked to hear this, but all D teams are not a good indicator of who the best defenders are; see Kobe Bryant. Neither are steals btw.

You're correct, it's not a good indicator it's a GREAT indicator it recognizes the Raja Bell, Bruce Bowen, Derrick McKey and Mookie Blaylock's of the world.

Since Kobe made more than twice as many all-D teams as Stockton I guess you must think he was more than twice as good on D as Stockton.