Which nba star from the 90s or early 2000s do you think would be average in today's game?

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,342
Reputation
6,237
Daps
168,030
He didn't beast in his own era, so if you agree with that, what the fukk are you debating?
I don’t think you understand the premise of this thread. It’s about guys who shined in an era, whose skills and talents wouldn’t translate to today. Vince would average what he did in his prime today. He would do it in any era because his talent was that massive.
 

Gravity

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
18,826
Reputation
2,195
Daps
56,263
We can tell you ain't even reading the thread when I said already I've been a Blazer fan since 1987. We had numerous battles with the Malone/Stockton Jazz. :comeon:

How old were you when you were watching prime Stockton. 6 years old? And you think that gives you any authority in the conversation? :skip:


I haven't said one lie about his game yet. He was short, he was unathletic, he had trouble putting up points when it mattered, he couldn't finish athletically at the rim, he didn't have a lot of lift on his jump shot, and he rarely scored when defenders were in his grill. All that shyt is true.

Probably their most memorable matchup for me was 1992, his absolute prime, going up against the Blazers in the WCF. It was a high-pace era still (Blazers still relied on the fast break for a heavy percentage of their scoring) and Portland didn't have anyone special defensively. Stockton was guarded almost exclusively by Terry Porter, who was a completely average defender but taller than Stockton with long arms. He shut his ass down - Stockton only averaged 14ppg on 39.7% shooting for the series and 23% from three. In Game 6, the elimination Game, Stockton went 5-19 from the field, 1-8 from three, with 5 turnovers. Against Terry Porter defense. 'They`re too athletic and quick for us," said Jeff Malone after one of the games.
Im old enough to know that what you're saying is bullshyt. You're highlighting a playoff series where he didn't shoot the best and got outplayed by another good player and you think that discredits his entire career? You think that somehow invalidates his game and his ability to play in this softer much more finesse era? Again, you talk as if the league that Stockton played in was trash and that he couldn't make the necessary adjustments to play in this era and that's irrational. There's no need to take that dumb shyt you're posting seriously.
 

murksiderock

Superstar
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
14,953
Reputation
6,471
Daps
46,270
Reppin
SMF and LAX to VA and NC
I don’t think you understand the premise of this thread. It’s about guys who shined in an era, whose skills and talents wouldn’t translate to today. Vince would average what he did in his prime today. He would do it in any era because his talent was that massive.

We can agree to disagree on that and keep it moving...
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,702
Daps
203,932
Reppin
the ether
Im old enough to know that what you're saying is bullshyt. You're highlighting a playoff series where he didn't shoot the best and got outplayed by another good player and you think that discredits his entire career? You think that somehow invalidates his game and his ability to play in this softer much more finesse era? Again, you talk as if the league that Stockton played in was trash and that he couldn't make the necessary adjustments to play in this era and that's irrational. There's no need to take that dumb shyt you're posting seriously.

I can't find any online gametape of the Jazz/Blazers series (just highlights), but this is the very next series, Bulls vs. Blazers the same year. I posted this video of that scary "harder much more physical" era before.

Watch and tell me the first time you see a physical play that would be too tough for the current era:




If Stockton could make the adjustments to play in this era, then why can't any other short White Americans do it? Why is his entire player type an extinct species?

Claiming that every star of the 1990s could be a star in the 2010s is like claiming that every star of a 500-person school could be a star in a 3,000-person school. The talent pool is just MUCH bigger now, and not all the guys who could cut it then would be able to now. That's basic, indisputable logic. You can't just claim that every single big fish in a little pond would be a big fish in a big pond, it doesn't make no sense.
 

murksiderock

Superstar
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
14,953
Reputation
6,471
Daps
46,270
Reppin
SMF and LAX to VA and NC
There is agreeing to disagreeing and then there is not understanding what this thread is about. I think you didn’t understand the thread.

Bro shut the fukk up. You're outsmarting yourself, if you read my very first post then it's clear I know what the thread is about...

At this point you're talking just to talk and sound smart to whoever is listening. I said Vince would be a rotation player in this era if he was of this era, whereas he was a starter and a star for about 8 years in his era. You disagree with that, cool. There really is no reason to think Vince would be anything greater in this era than what he was in his own era...
 

TaxCollector13459

2018 Coli Rookie of the Year
Joined
Mar 30, 2018
Messages
8,247
Reputation
1,591
Daps
19,520
Vince Carter is clearly one of the most overrated players of all time...

Let's start with this, people talk about him as if he was a superstar, and for a full third (⅓ for you mathematically challenged muhfukkas out there); for a full third of his career, he hasn't even been a starter...

Give me another "superstar" from any era in NBA history who spent ⅓ of his career coming off the bench? I got time, I'll wait...

His last three years that he started (2009-2012, or Year 12 thru Year 14), he scored less than his career average of 17.2---->Years 13 and 14, he didn't even average more than 14 points points per game...

Now, someone might make an argument that Vince is a holdover from earlier eras where most stars were washed by Year 12 to 13. Okay, that would be a decent argument, if not for the fact that his primary era (the 2000s) also included guys like Pierce, Dirk, Kobe, Garnett, Parker, Duncan, etc...

Remember, you guys say Vince Carter was a superstar. A number of the big name guys of his era were more effective players down the stretch in their careers. Why was he washed in Year 12, certainly by Year 13 it was a wrap?

From Years 12 thru 14, the following guys averages: Kobe (27.4); Dirk (23.4); Garnett (19.3); Pierce (18.8); Parker (17.1); Duncan (16.9)...........Carter (13.8)...

So for 33% of his career, or 7 of his 21 seasons, he's come off the bench. His last two seasons as a starter he couldn't crack more than 14.0ppg, so for 9 of his 21 seasons (that's 42.8% of his career), he's been completely washed...

Find me another "superstar" from any era who spent 42% of their career as average rotation piece to washed bench guy? I got time, I'll wait...

But the biggest reason Vince is overrated is he wasn't much of an impact player in his prime. He was Hollow Man, game built off of athleticism and wow plays, but he didn't make his teammates better and he never did anything of significance outside of winning a dunk contest in Year 3...

He missed the playoffs in 3 of his 6 years in Toronto, getting bounced in the 1st Round twice. That was his ceiling as a #1...



Toronto was a new expansion team though.
 

TaxCollector13459

2018 Coli Rookie of the Year
Joined
Mar 30, 2018
Messages
8,247
Reputation
1,591
Daps
19,520
It's obvious some of y'all never seen a lot of these dudes ply, and are just throwing out names. I'm not even gonna get to the elite, but someone named Mark Price. Mark Price was the master of splitting the double and shooting right off-bat, or throwing up that floater. And he could finish with either hand. He'd go right through these soft help-switches and feast. someone named DC. DC played 3-4 & 5, could handle the ball post-up and shoot...even 3s. DC was just lazy and an alkie. He'd have a field day.

someone said Rodman. First off, Rodman was king at boxing out and hella athletic, quick, and long. This is a league with no bigs, and no rebounding bigs. He'd snag everything.

People really said Glide, like he wasn't quick and strong, didn't avg 6 & 6, and could always get to the rim...no matter how right-hand-heavy and often he dribbled with his head down. Patrick Ewing is probably the best jump-shooting C. Someone said Chuck, like Randle & Zion aren't Dollar Tree versions of him. No need to even say anything about Bird.

Those greats player through 2+ eras. They played through 80's pace, 80's physicality, 90's grind and 90's athleticism, but y'all think today's just shoot 3s and no one-on-one defense can stop them?




rod was snatching everything, being "undersized" for the position too
 

TaxCollector13459

2018 Coli Rookie of the Year
Joined
Mar 30, 2018
Messages
8,247
Reputation
1,591
Daps
19,520
Mark Price was the FIRST guy to split the double. No one had even thought of it before, that's how elementary it was. Now everyone can split the double. His first step wasn't anything where you'd convincing me that he'd be better at it now than everyone else.

I'd love to know how a 6'0" guy with no hops is finishing in today's NBA. He's not putting up acrobatic circus-layups like Kyrie (and Kyrie is both taller and far more athletic). So how is he getting the ball in the hoop?

This is what Mark Price's lack of athleticism looked like when he was trying to finish without an open path to the hoop:




Come on now. :beli:

And you know how I found that clip? I just typed "Mark Price playoffs" into youtube and that's the first video I clicked on. When you look outside of highlights clips you see plays like that right away. He'd still play in the league due to his court awareness and feel for the game but he ain't gonna be no 1st-team All-NBA or any sort of star at all at that height with that little athleticism.

Also notice that Price is playing next to Ehlo AND Kerr, who take turns guarding Petrovic. Danny Ferry and Chris Dudley on the court too. Six unathletic White Americans (wait 5, not Petro obviously) in the same playoff game. I'm supposed to believe that all of those guys could ball just as well in this era, but that White Americans...what, just stopped liking basketball or something?




Y'all WILDING now. This post exposed 90s stans more than anything else in the whole list.

Steph, CP3, Conley, and Lowry are all extremely athletic. MUCH, MUCH more athletic than John Stockton. The fact that you thought they weren't athletic just shows how accustomed you've become to the incredible all-around level of athleticism in today's NBA.

Conley's dad was an Olympic gold medalist in the triple-jump and a World Championships bronze medalist in the long jump. Conley was the fastest player in the combine, benched 185 pounds 13 times, and had a 40" running vertical. (36" standing). He is insanely athletic. In the 1990s he would have been a marvel. But in today's game, you fukking called him "unathletic".

Steph, CP3, and Lowry aren't Conley level but all three are very very good athletes too. Stockton is nowhere near their level.





Bullshyt. Stockton almost certainly couldn't jump even 30" at might bench 185lbs five times tops (if that). And he ain't quick. Saying that Stockton is as athletic as Conley is WILD shyt.:comeon:







Nearly 30 pounds heavier than Stockton because he's so much stronger, something like a 40" vertical, and a very quick first step. If he had anything like Stockton-level athleticism he never would have touched the league even with all his skill.



Remember his form on jump shots? He had to jump about two feet in the air to get that thing off.





Now watch Stockton. I time-stamped if for the layin because it's wack as hell. He NEEDS to get off the ground and he still barely jumps.





Then watch Stockton's jump shot. Again, he barely gets off the ground on it, the only reason it works is because the defender is giving him 4 feet of space and not challenging the shot. But that's how it worked in the 1990s - defenders didn't really challenge threes, especially not in the regular season, unless the game was going down to the wire.





You can watch plenty of clips of Stockton shooting and notice the same thing. He doesn't shoot when guarded closely, only when given space, because he doesn't have the height to shoot over guys and he doesn't have the first step or the hops to create separation.

So what would he do in today's era where three-point shooters are guarded tight and three-point shots are challenged? He'd still be able to run the point, but he wouldn't be a scorer at all, he wouldn't be a star. He'd be a 12 and 10 guy at best and there's a dozen other guards who would be making All-NBA and All-Star teams over him.




Tell me, what happened to IT's game the SECOND he lost just a bit of that athleticism? :sas1::sas2:

He still has all the skill in the world, but taking just a little bit off his quickness, and he fell so hard he's basically unplayable.

So it don't sound stupid at all to say that the 40" vert (and corresponding strength/quickness) was the only thing keeping him anywhere near star level. :comeon:




Price, Skiles, Stockton, Hornacek, Kerr, Paxson, and del Negro were all short White guards in the 1990s. (Nash and White Chocolate too if you count the end of the 1990s). Bobby Hurley was the #7 draft pick too then he got in the car accident. Then if you count 6'4"/6'5" guys you also had Chapman, Petrovic, Sura, Barry. All 15 of those guys were starters except for Kerr and Kerr was a vital 20-25 minute piece of multiple title teams. So get out of there with that "there were only 2 white point guards" bullshyt. When Stockton came up in the 1990s the league was still like 25% American White guys, that slowly diminished during the 1990s but he was only hanging on like a dinosaur.

Stockton could ball. But he wouldn't be a star in the game today. And 1990s white guys weren't drinking no magic juice back then that they suddenly forgot to bring to the 2010s.





damn what stock do to you
 

TaxCollector13459

2018 Coli Rookie of the Year
Joined
Mar 30, 2018
Messages
8,247
Reputation
1,591
Daps
19,520
gary says stock was a dog, only opinion that really matters these days honestly. Yours, mine..
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,342
Reputation
6,237
Daps
168,030
Bro shut the fukk up. You're outsmarting yourself, if you read my very first post then it's clear I know what the thread is about...
I’m not reading that because your first sentence is that he is the most overrated player of all time. That’s not what this thread is about yet you took it there because you didn’t understand this topic.

I said Vince would be a rotation player in this era if he was of this era, whereas he was a starter and a star for about 8 years in his era
Sorry, a 6’7” guy with super long arms and a 44 inch vertical who can shoot the lights out, and can create his own shot would not be a rotational player in this era or any era. :mjlol:

shyt, at 43, he is still a decent nba player.

Vince was an underachiever, but def not garbage.

You sound bitter about Vince, hence the titangraphs about him.
 

murksiderock

Superstar
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
14,953
Reputation
6,471
Daps
46,270
Reppin
SMF and LAX to VA and NC
Vince Carter wasn't even a superstar in his own era but for only a few years. In this era he'd have been what he's been in his twilight, in his prime. A rotation player, someone who I think could challenge for 6th man annually in his prime, but no respectable jumper and not a great defender...

Yao woulda had much less hype in this era. Shawn Marion probably wouldn't have made a single All-NBA team and maybe two All-Stars at best..

I’m not reading that because your first sentence is that he is the most overrated player of all time. That’s not what this thread is about yet you took it there because you didn’t understand this topic.


Sorry, a 6’7” guy with super long arms and a 44 inch vertical who can shoot the lights out, and can create his own shot would not be a rotational player in this era or any era. :mjlol:

shyt, at 43, he is still a decent nba player.

Vince was an underachiever, but def not garbage.

You sound bitter about Vince, hence the titangraphs about him.

Actually, that was my first statement on Vince, on Page 2. You missed it, so now you're arguing just to argue...
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,342
Reputation
6,237
Daps
168,030
Actually, that was my first statement on Vince, on Page 2. You missed it, so now you're arguing just to argue...
Your first sentence in response said he was the most overrated player ever.

And Vince Carter didn't have a respectable jumper? :dahell:

He shot around 40% from three-point range in the aughts on four-to-five attempts a game. A lot of people actually hated that he took so many jumpers. shyt, this era probably would have benefited cuz even more.

You are bitter breh. Vince was an all time talent.
 

Crude

Superstar
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
11,684
Reputation
2,787
Daps
56,389
Lol at guys like Ricky Rubio, Goran Dragic, and J.J. Barea eating good in today's game, but yall thinking Stockton and Mark Price who were deadly in the pick and roll and with their passing wouldn't feast in this era.

Guys are a lot more athletic in todays game, but no whether near as reliable with their mid range shot and floor vision.

A lot of those guys from yesteryear like Stockton, Mark Price, heck even Zeke were very crafty.

Outside of CP3, Kawhi, Derozen, Tatum, and a few others that mid-range jay is not utilized like that anymore.
 
Top