Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,434
And1: 3,256
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#1 » by colts18 » Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:57 pm

A lot has been made of the fact that John Stockton has some of the best longevity in history. It's his main argument to be ranked high. The quality of his longevity is even more impressive based on one fact: NBA history has shown that small players age POORLY. Almost every example of a player touted for longevity has been a big man: Kareem, Malone, Duncan, KG, Mutombo, Parish, etc. It's rare for point guards to age gracefully. Most of the great PG's in history were washed up by age 33. Small players peak earlier then are washed up when they lose their speed to due to age.

I'm going to show that not only was John Stockton was an outlier in terms of playing into a late age, but that Stockton's aging pattern is superhuman compared to the rest of the NBA. The way I'm going to do that is to show the best seasons in NBA history for players for each age group who was 6' 5" or shorter. Tell me if you notice a pattern in each list.

Top Seasons by age, Min. 1,000 MP. 6' 5" or shorter

Age 32
Image


Age 33
Image

Age 34
Image

Age 35
Image

Age 36
Image


Age 37
Image

Age 38
Image

Age 39
Image

Age 40
Image

Note: Stockton is the only player who even played 1,000 minutes at age 40. In fact, there were only 2 other players who even played a single minute at age 40 (Jason Terry, John Long).


In EVERY single age from 32 and up, Stockton was the best player of that age group. 9 years in a row. Stockton's length of his career plus his level of play was unprecedented. No one was playing at that high of a level into their late 30's. As the age groups progress, Stockton's peers continually drop off in performance while Stockton stays the same.


Here is a list of the top seasons at age 33 or more for players who were 6' 5" or shorter.

Image

Stockton has the 7 best, and 8 out of top 9 best seasons for any player over the age 33. Stockton at age 39 was BETTER than any guard in history who was 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, or 40 years old. Stockton at age 40 was so good that he was better than any age 33+ Guard season in history outside of 1 Gary Payton season. As I mentioned above, Stockton was doing that at an age where only 2 players even played a single minute. Playing at age 40 is impressive feat. Doing that while outproducing all of the players who are 7 years younger than you is impressive on another level.

I was being very generous with the height filters from above. When you get to players of Stockton's height 6' 1" and shorter, it's only him and CP3 who played well past the age of 33. The next most productive guards at that height are Mark Jackson and Darrell Armstrong. The pickings get very slim when you reach Stockton's height. That's why CP3's current run is impressive too. 6 footers aren't supposed to age well in the NBA. When 7 footers age, they get slower. But, they make up for that with height since you can't get shorter. 6 footers who lose their speed have nothing left to provide.

Here are the ages of the last all-star seasons for some notable PG's

Rose 23
Penny 26
KJ 27
Price 29
Isiah 31
Magic 31
Hardaway 31
Oscar 33
Payton 34
Iverson 34
Kidd 36
Nash 37
Stockton 37

Most of those players peaked early and aged fast. Only Kidd and Nash can compare to Stockton in terms of longevity.
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,946
And1: 11,453
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#2 » by Cavsfansince84 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:05 am

It is in terms of age though it may have helped that he didn't start playing major minutes until he was 25. Also his ability to play pg with an absurdly low t/o% helped his metrics a lot.
Colbinii
RealGM
Posts: 34,243
And1: 21,854
Joined: Feb 13, 2013

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#3 » by Colbinii » Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:07 am

Why are you using BPM?
Do you think it is a good defensive statistic? Do you think it captures defensive impact or goodness or [insert any other word] as well as it does offensively?
Colbinii
RealGM
Posts: 34,243
And1: 21,854
Joined: Feb 13, 2013

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#4 » by Colbinii » Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:12 am

colts18 wrote:Here are the ages of the last all-star seasons for some notable PG's

Rose 23
Penny 26
KJ 27
Price 29
Isiah 31
Magic 31
Hardaway 31
Oscar 33
Payton 34
Iverson 34
Kidd 36
Nash 37
Stockton 37

Most of those players peaked early and aged fast. Only Kidd and Nash can compare to Stockton in terms of longevity.


And here are the ages of their first all-stars:

Rose 21
Penny 23
KJ 23
Price 24
Isiah 20
Magic 20
Hardaway 24
Oscar 22
Payton 25
Iverson 24
Kidd 22
Nash 27
Stockton 26

It seems like Kidd, Nash, Isiah, Magic and Oscar all have similar lengths of "First to Last" all-stars.

And where is Chris Paul? 22 to 35.
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,434
And1: 3,256
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#5 » by colts18 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:29 am

Colbinii wrote:Why are you using BPM?
Do you think it is a good defensive statistic? Do you think it captures defensive impact or goodness or [insert any other word] as well as it does offensively?

Because BPM is the best box score stat that correlates to impact. Of course its defensive component is not as reliable as its Offensive component. The overall BPM (Off + Def) is fairly reliable to overall impact which matters.

You can look at Win Shares and it will tell the same story. PER, a stat not built for Stockton, will tell a similar story too. No matter what stat you use, Stockton's longevity for his age is impressive.

Impact stats will tell the same story the advanced box score stats tell also. RAPM has Stockton as one of the best players in the league at an old age.

Best RAPM from 1997-2001:
1. MJ 9.9
2. Duncan 8.6
3. Carter 7.8
4. Shaq 7.7
T5. Stockton 7.2
T5. KG 7.2

https://public.tableau.com/profile/dsmok1#!/vizhome/PeriodRAPM/EraRAPM

Stockton still had a top 15 RAPM in 2002 and 2003, the seasons where he was age 39-41.
User avatar
homecourtloss
RealGM
Posts: 11,396
And1: 18,799
Joined: Dec 29, 2012

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#6 » by homecourtloss » Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:36 am

His impact (RAPM, on-off) as a small guard at ages 37-40 is ludicrous.
lessthanjake wrote:Kyrie was extremely impactful without LeBron, and basically had zero impact whatsoever if LeBron was on the court.

lessthanjake wrote: By playing in a way that prevents Kyrie from getting much impact, LeBron ensures that controlling for Kyrie has limited effect…
picko
Veteran
Posts: 2,579
And1: 3,692
Joined: May 17, 2018

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#7 » by picko » Wed Jul 14, 2021 1:19 am

Awfully hard to disagree with that. That level of longevity, at his height, is clearly absurd.
falcolombardi
General Manager
Posts: 9,510
And1: 7,112
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#8 » by falcolombardi » Wed Jul 14, 2021 3:16 am

wonder how chris paul aging will compare
Colbinii
RealGM
Posts: 34,243
And1: 21,854
Joined: Feb 13, 2013

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#9 » by Colbinii » Wed Jul 14, 2021 3:43 am

colts18 wrote:
Colbinii wrote:Why are you using BPM?
Do you think it is a good defensive statistic? Do you think it captures defensive impact or goodness or [insert any other word] as well as it does offensively?

Because BPM is the best box score stat that correlates to impact. Of course its defensive component is not as reliable as its Offensive component. The overall BPM (Off + Def) is fairly reliable to overall impact which matters.


The overall is only as reliable as the DBPM part though, correct?

If A+B = C, and 'B' is unreliable, then C is at least as unreliable as 'B' plus however unreliable 'A' is.

You can look at Win Shares and it will tell the same story. PER, a stat not built for Stockton, will tell a similar story too. No matter what stat you use, Stockton's longevity for his age is impressive.


I agree, Stockton is with very little company when it comes to his longevity.

Impact stats will tell the same story the advanced box score stats tell also. RAPM has Stockton as one of the best players in the league at an old age.

Best RAPM from 1997-2001:
1. MJ 9.9
2. Duncan 8.6
3. Carter 7.8
4. Shaq 7.7
T5. Stockton 7.2
T5. KG 7.2

https://public.tableau.com/profile/dsmok1#!/vizhome/PeriodRAPM/EraRAPM

Stockton still had a top 15 RAPM in 2002 and 2003, the seasons where he was age 39-41.


Yes his impact in his role was elite but he rarely branched out from that role, and ultimately that's the biggest knock on Stockton.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,327
And1: 9,886
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#10 » by penbeast0 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:33 am

colts18 wrote:A lot has been made of the fact that John Stockton has some of the best longevity in history. It's his main argument to be ranked high....



It's not his main claim to be ranked high. It's AC Green's and Ron Boone's main claim to be ranked high. Stockton's main claim to be ranked his is that he was the greatest assist generator in the history of the NBA . . . totals, per season, per game, per minute. Add that to his longevity and he has half again as many assists as #2 Magic Johnson. For LeBron to do that to Kareem, he'd have to play another 10 years at his current level. The fact that he was also an extremely efficient shooter, a strong defender particularly in generating steals, and someone who generated some top of the league offenses without top of the league supporting casts also are key factors but the main claim is his ability to create assists.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
feyki
Veteran
Posts: 2,876
And1: 449
Joined: Aug 08, 2016
     

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#11 » by feyki » Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:04 am

What about age 23?
Image
“The idea is not to block every shot. The idea is to make your opponent believe that you might block every shot.”
frica
Pro Prospect
Posts: 948
And1: 494
Joined: May 03, 2018

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#12 » by frica » Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:58 am

I think Stockton benefitted a lot from the fact that his minutes were (relatively) limited.

He was in the top 10 minutes per game only once in his career.
For the rest of the 90s he trailed rather far behind most other stars.

35 and 36 mpg is 3-4+ mpg behind most of the stars.

And in the late 90s his mpg went under 30. Which was an era where you could expect a star to play for 40-43 mpg. (Some years the top 10 mpg leaders didn't have a single player playing under 40 mpg)

It's not like the Utah Jazz had a good backup PG either, John Crotty and Howard Eisley weren't up the snuff.
There were a few other PGs through the years too, but they weren't good either.

So while I do think his longevity is a huge outlier, you also need to consider context.
He wasn't expected to play a huge amount of minutes, even when there were no real alternatives.
Colbinii
RealGM
Posts: 34,243
And1: 21,854
Joined: Feb 13, 2013

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#13 » by Colbinii » Wed Jul 14, 2021 1:22 pm

frica wrote:I think Stockton benefitted a lot from the fact that his minutes were (relatively) limited.

He was in the top 10 minutes per game only once in his career.
For the rest of the 90s he trailed rather far behind most other stars.

35 and 36 mpg is 3-4+ mpg behind most of the stars.

And in the late 90s his mpg went under 30. Which was an era where you could expect a star to play for 40-43 mpg. (Some years the top 10 mpg leaders didn't have a single player playing under 40 mpg)

It's not like the Utah Jazz had a good backup PG either, John Crotty and Howard Eisley weren't up the snuff.
There were a few other PGs through the years too, but they weren't good either.

So while I do think his longevity is a huge outlier, you also need to consider context.
He wasn't expected to play a huge amount of minutes, even when there were no real alternatives.


Stockton also was not a resilient playoff performer. If we quickly look at all the Point Guards mentioned above, we can compare their OBPM from regular season to post-season throughout their all-star seasons [Meaning first all-star through last all-star appearance.

Code: Select all

Name       RS OBPM  PS OBPM  Diff
Penny        5.1      6.1    +1.0
KJ           4.4      3.6    -0.8
Price        5.5      3.1    -2.4
Isiah        2.5      3.9    +1.4
Magic        6.0      6.1    +0.1
Hardaway     4.3      4.7    +0.4
Oscar               NO DATA
Payton       4.3      3.8    -0.5
Iverson      3.5      4.7    +1.2
Kidd         2.7      2.9    +0.2
Nash         5.4      5.1    -0.3
Stockton     5.7      4.7    -1.0
Paul         5.5      5.3    -0.2         
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,828
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#14 » by HeartBreakKid » Wed Jul 14, 2021 1:40 pm

Colbinii wrote:
frica wrote:I think Stockton benefitted a lot from the fact that his minutes were (relatively) limited.

He was in the top 10 minutes per game only once in his career.
For the rest of the 90s he trailed rather far behind most other stars.

35 and 36 mpg is 3-4+ mpg behind most of the stars.

And in the late 90s his mpg went under 30. Which was an era where you could expect a star to play for 40-43 mpg. (Some years the top 10 mpg leaders didn't have a single player playing under 40 mpg)

It's not like the Utah Jazz had a good backup PG either, John Crotty and Howard Eisley weren't up the snuff.
There were a few other PGs through the years too, but they weren't good either.

So while I do think his longevity is a huge outlier, you also need to consider context.
He wasn't expected to play a huge amount of minutes, even when there were no real alternatives.


Stockton also was not a resilient playoff performer. If we quickly look at all the Point Guards mentioned above, we can compare their OBPM from regular season to post-season throughout their all-star seasons [Meaning first all-star through last all-star appearance.

Code: Select all

Name       RS OBPM  PS OBPM  Diff
Penny        5.1      6.1    +1.0
KJ           4.4      3.6    -0.8
Price        5.5      3.1    -2.4
Isiah        2.5      3.9    +1.4
Magic        6.0      6.1    +0.1
Hardaway     4.3      4.7    +0.4
Oscar               NO DATA
Payton       4.3      3.8    -0.5
Iverson      3.5      4.7    +1.2
Kidd         2.7      2.9    +0.2
Nash         5.4      5.1    -0.3
Stockton     5.7      4.7    -1.0
Paul         5.5      5.3    -0.2         


Poor Price.
migya
General Manager
Posts: 8,126
And1: 1,492
Joined: Aug 13, 2005

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#15 » by migya » Wed Jul 14, 2021 2:05 pm

John Stockton is underrated. He was the brains behind a fairly untalented teams. Think of his assists feat this way; Magic got less assists average throughout their primes and had top 5 player Kareem, one of the best SFs of his era Worthy, Scott and the most talented team of his era. Stockton had Malone and eventually Hornacek, no other player to note at all.

Steals and defense among the best for PGs and shooting efficiency likely the best. No other PG ever could played his role as good.
User avatar
Jaivl
Head Coach
Posts: 7,052
And1: 6,714
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
Location: A Coruña, Spain
Contact:
   

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#16 » by Jaivl » Wed Jul 14, 2021 3:39 pm

No, it's not... Much respect to Stockton but, I mean, it's not even close.

His counting totals maybe, but his longevity is not thaaaaat much above the rest.
This place is a cesspool of mindless ineptitude, mental decrepitude, and intellectual lassitude. I refuse to be sucked any deeper into this whirlpool of groupthink sewage. My opinions have been expressed. I'm going to go take a shower.
User avatar
eminence
RealGM
Posts: 16,943
And1: 11,769
Joined: Mar 07, 2015

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#17 » by eminence » Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:28 pm

Colbinii wrote:The overall is only as reliable as the DBPM part though, correct?

If A+B = C, and 'B' is unreliable, then C is at least as unreliable as 'B' plus however unreliable 'A' is.


If you want some more on BPM and how/why some of the things are the way they are there's a great thread from Daniel over on the APBR board: http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9689
I bought a boat.
Cavsfansince84
RealGM
Posts: 14,946
And1: 11,453
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#18 » by Cavsfansince84 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:36 pm

Worth noting I think that Kareem made all nba 1st team at the age of 39 while Stockton made his last all nba team of any kind at the age of 36.
JN61
RealGM
Posts: 11,705
And1: 9,214
Joined: Jan 07, 2018
 

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#19 » by JN61 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:38 pm

One of the point guard gods.
Pennebaker wrote:And Bird did it while being a defensive liability. But he also made All-Defensive teams, which was another controversial issue regarding Bird and votes.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,622
And1: 3,139
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: Stockton's longevity is the Biggest Outlier in history 

Post#20 » by Owly » Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:42 pm

frica wrote:And in the late 90s his mpg went under 30. Which was an era where you could expect a star to play for 40-43 mpg. (Some years the top 10 mpg leaders didn't have a single player playing under 40 mpg)

At best you've misplaced a paragraph break here.

By the time Stockton played under 30mpg - 1998 - nobody played 43 minutes, nobody played 42 minutes and I would argue many of the guys at the top of the minutes list were not genuine "stars". Of the 7 guys at or over 40mpg and indeed the top 10mpg players one is in the top 10 in PER (a box composite skews friendly to conventional high scoring "stars") - Grant Hill at 10th. Of the top 30 PERs ... 2 are in the top 10 in minutes. Hill and Webber (14th in PER, 10th in minutes).

Eisley got far too big a contract based on the Jazz being good and I'd argue he was overrated at the time. Still "not up to snuff" for a backup point guard ... I'd be curious as to where you think he stood among backups (I haven't looked closely perhaps he is way below the norm). Crotty in his one rotation-ish year looks a passable reserve, at a glance.

Colbinii wrote:Stockton also was not a resilient playoff performer. If we quickly look at all the Point Guards mentioned above, we can compare their OBPM from regular season to post-season throughout their all-star seasons [Meaning first all-star through last all-star appearance.

Code: Select all

Name       RS OBPM  PS OBPM  Diff
Penny        5.1      6.1    +1.0
KJ           4.4      3.6    -0.8
Price        5.5      3.1    -2.4
Isiah        2.5      3.9    +1.4
Magic        6.0      6.1    +0.1
Hardaway     4.3      4.7    +0.4
Oscar               NO DATA
Payton       4.3      3.8    -0.5
Iverson      3.5      4.7    +1.2
Kidd         2.7      2.9    +0.2
Nash         5.4      5.1    -0.3
Stockton     5.7      4.7    -1.0
Paul         5.5      5.3    -0.2         

Granting that career versus playoff career comps will always have some unevenness about them ...
1) This framing screws Stockton out of two years where PER, WS/48 and BPM agree he was really good in the playoffs at the back end of his career (and one good run at the start as well as some lesser years).

2) Don't overlook that in absolute terms Stockton's OBPM is still higher than a bunch of those guys and that's before factoring in that several have lower career numbers.

Then too this is a measure missing his defense (a very significant area of impact for him - especially versus positional norms) and fwiw, without looking at all deep - (not beyond on-off) he stays at a pretty high on-off if we account for the high level of competition (limited to '97 and beyond) - not sure how much to trust that (raw numbers plus uneven samples in playoffs, possible collinearity issues).

I would say "not resilient" is, if not wrong, at least a harsh framing.

Return to Player Comparisons