malbaker86
Gators
This thread makes me miss a nig like Derrick McKey lol
Reggie was not a great athlete, he didn't rebound, he wasn't a great ball handler, didn't come up with a lot of steals/turnovers. He just didn't have the skillset to be a great transition scorer. I don't get the luxury term.luxury of scoring a larger portion of their points on the break, or on defensive breakdowns.
The fact it took Mitch Richmond, who was a 3x All-NBA SECOND Team player longer to get the call than Reggie says it all.Son is in the HoF as a 5x All-Star and 3x All-NBA Third Team.
I’ve seen people put him in their top 50’s. Miller very overrated because of his charisma and clutch moments that became part of the culture and lore of 90’s NBA. He was a very good player, but that’s it.
I never seen the innate PG skills from Curry that Nash had. Hardaway was an unstoppable 1v1 player due to his handles, agility and finishing skills which is similar to Curry. Curry and Hardaway were scoring guards. Nash is a playmaker true PGI got Nash because of shooting ability, similar size at 6’3, and insane core strength that allows them be elite finishers at the rim despite being below the rim players.
I don’t really see Hardaway
They haven't had better careers, but I think they're more talented basketball players than Miller.Hell naw...
Maybe they can be, but they haven't proven it yet...
I mean he’s probably somewhere 60-80Son is in the HoF as a 5x All-Star and 3x All-NBA Third Team.
I’ve seen people put him in their top 50’s. Miller very overrated because of his charisma and clutch moments that became part of the culture and lore of 90’s NBA. He was a very good player, but that’s it.
All facts.Son is in the HoF as a 5x All-Star and 3x All-NBA Third Team.
I’ve seen people put him in their top 50’s. Miller very overrated because of his charisma and clutch moments that became part of the culture and lore of 90’s NBA. He was a very good player, but that’s it.
In this guard and wing heavy NBA, I don’t see him making the ASG consistently. He didn’t do it often in the 90’s either.nikkas saying he overrated is tripping. Put Reggie in this era and he'd still be an All Star. Windshield wiper on offense, off them screens like Klay and Rip.
He also played in the 80's and early 90's which were high paced.I mean he’s probably somewhere 60-80
He was actually hurt by the era. Very slow and physical.
LeBron has 7 seasons of 60% TS% and another 3 of 59%. His best season was 65% in 2014, when his best sidekick was a washed, injured D-Wade who only played 50 games.
MJ only had 4 60% TS seasons total, none better than 61%, and if he wasn't a better free throw shooter than Bron he would have had zero.
Legit what do you think you're proving other than that Bron is only an average FT shooter?
Harsh realitiesAnd in 2000, he wasnt even the leader of that squad. It was Jalen Rose who was the leagues MIP. The Pacers FINALLY found a player in Jalen who could create his own shot. Maybe if Reggie had that ability in his one dimensional arsenal, the Pacers would have seen a finals appearance in the 90s.
Where do y'all think players like Buddy Hield and Klay Thompson stack up with Reggie in terms of skillsets?
I think both those guys have some dimensions to their game that Reggie didn't
My nikka Buddy breaking out
Yup, and he's also one of the top rebounders at his position.Hield can put the ball on the deck and he gets a lot of transitions Buckets. He also can finish around the basket. If he continues down this trajectory, he should he much better than Miller. Not to mention, his defense is decent due to his long arms and strength
He was the father of Ray Allen and Steph Curry's style. He was good but clearly a step behind Jordan. He was in the same category as Barkley, Gary Payton, Drexler, etc. The Pacers just didn't have enough firepower to match the Bulls and they definitely had no answer for Shaq. Had he had more help he could have won a ring or two. The eras were different so nikkas weren't ring chasing and creating superteams but, giving it some thought, Reggie would've been a good addition to the Spurs. Him and D-Rob would've been a good combo, and once Timmy came it would've been over.
Less hypothetical, and more so looking at how an offense functions. No different to saying any and every player could average more points if they wanted to, but at what cost?I don't give credit for hypotheticals.
In part, that's what made his scoring important because it wasn't scoring in conflict with offensive flow; he scored when his team typically needed him to, not when he wanted to. And again, that's not to say he couldn't have been more aggressive, or that I'm ranking him above players who averaged more points, it's just to say it's not as simple as taking the points he averaged, and valuing his play in accordance to that, in a vacuum (he also didn't have the luxury of getting transition/junk points like a lot of main ball-handlers do - he scored almost entirely in the halfcourt when defenses were set).Who cares if he could have scored more he didn't? If you admit him scoring more would've hurt the team how great was he really?
He created the majority of his looks with his off-ball movement - it was less design, and more his own ability.The point is even for his gravity and the way his shooting could open up the offense he also had the benefit of having an offense designed around getting him those looks.
Certainly not to the same degree as MJ, but he still could put the ball on the floor and create his own offense at a high level, he wasn't just catching and shooting: great at drawing contact, dribbling to create his own space, give-and-go actions, elbow/baseline action pull-ups. He made quick decisions whenever he got the ball (if there was no opening initially, he'd move the ball on and relocate; he had a quick-fire attack mentality that kept the defense on the back foot), which is why there's this perception he couldn't create his own offense, as he wasn't always trying to break down his defender in ISO like other high-volume scorers.He's not a player you could've gave the ball to and let him create his own offense.
Another common misconception.He was bad on D.
He wasn't a special playmaker, by any means, but he knew how to find the open man when he'd draw extra attention, and kept the ball moving if he wasn't going to do anything with it (which naturally led to making plays for his teammates) - that is more important than him holding onto the ball waiting for someone to get open.He could not create shots for others..
Kyle Korver? Really? Someone who never had to anchor an offense (let alone do it for well over a decade), or be depended on to carry the volume scoring is who you're comparing Reggie to?All that matters, otherwise we'd have been hyping Kyle Korver as one of the best players in the league as well.