Jump to content

Top 5 shooting Guards of all time

Abro

By Abro,
in General NBA Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nitro Newbie

Nitro

Posted
Posted

1) Jordan

2) Kobe

3) West

4) Wade

5) Iverson

 

Gervin would be 6th, Drexler 7th, on my list.

 

 

Gervin and Iverson over Drexler? I'm curious as to what your reasoning is.

 

And Ray Allen deserves a ton of love, but he is nowhere near Wade/Drexler territory. Those two guys in their primes were all-time greats, and top 3 players in the league. Allen's never, ever been a top 5 player, and usually was borderline top 10 at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastCoastNiner Newbie

EastCoastNiner

Posted
Posted

Am I supposed to be overwhelming impressed with Wade's mediocre two first-team All-NBA selections and one scoring title? That's pretty poor for a player you want to put in your top five.

 

 

Kobe

Jordan

West

Iverson

Gervin

 

You can put Clyde there as well, but Wade's not sniffing that top five.

 

I'd love to hear you reasoning (there really isn't much) as to why you're putting Wade ahead of Gervin.

 

 

Gervin:

 

Better scorer: Check

More First-Team Selections: Check

More Titles: Check

 

 

There's nothing to suggest Wade deserves to be ranked higher than him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Owner
Real Deal Apprentice

Real Deal

Posted
  • Owner
Posted

Gervin and Iverson over Drexler? I'm curious as to what your reasoning is.

Nothing really stands out, aside from the efficiency, and back in the 80's and early 90's, guards were FAR more efficient than they have been since the zone became legal. I actually found 74 instances of it, in Jordan's era (well, from 1984-96), that a player averaged 15+ PPG and shot 50% or better from the floor...while it's not as common today.

 

Iverson wasn't a great defensive player, but he did show very solid defensive ratings (I know you like those) and he was a hell of a ball thief, and I'd say that AI was a better defender than Clyde (not by much, because I really don't care about the defensive ratings in their primes, think they were altered quite a bit by their teammates, but whatever).

 

So you have a better scorer, arguably better defender, and a guy that carried his team on his back much more. Iverson got to the line far more, and easier, than Drexler, and even passed the ball slightly better (although Clyde was an underrated passer, nobody gives him credit for it).

 

I really don't know about Gervin. To be honest, that's a coin flip to me...but the Iceman basically did everything that Clyde did, but scored the ball better. I'm sure Clyde had more range on his shot, but Gervin was the better defender. I don't know.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nitro Newbie

Nitro

Posted
Posted

I'd love to hear you reasoning (there really isn't much) as to why you're putting Wade ahead of Gervin.

 

 

Gervin:

 

Better scorer: Check

More First-Team Selections: Check

More Titles: Check

 

 

There's nothing to suggest Wade deserves to be ranked higher than him.

 

Gervin never won an NBA title, and I believe only made it out of the 2nd round only once in his career. Wade has two NBA titles, has been to 3 Finals, has a Finals MVP, and has made it past the 2nd round 4x.

 

Better scorer? Maybe, I'll give you that although it's pretty close. Rebounding is almost identical in terms of rebounding %, which adjusts for pace (since back in the '70's there were a lot more possessions/opportunities for rebounds, so raw RPG doesn't work as well). But in terms of passing/playmaking Wade has a HUGE advantage. Gervin wasn't a guy you could run your offense through because he didn't have the ballhandling or passing abiltiy to consistently make plays for his teammates, while Wade is one of the best swingmen of the last 20 years at doing so. And by everything I've heard, Gervin wasn't know for his great defense, while Wade has been on All-Defensive teams multiple times in his career.

 

FWIW, Wade's career PER is 25.7 to Gervin's 21.4. Wade's best season was a 30.4, while Gervin's was a 24.7. Wade's playoff PER is 24.1 to Gervin's 21.2.

 

You have to put the All-NBA selections in context. Gervin made his in one of the weakest era's in NBA history, especially for guards. When Wade didn't make it, he lost out to MVP's like Kobe and Nash. When Gervin made it, he was beating out guys like Dennis Johnson and Paul Westphal, and Gus Williams, who were great players, but not of the Kobe/Nash caliber. If Wade was around in those years, he would easily have the same number of 1st team selections.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nitro Newbie

Nitro

Posted
Posted

Nothing really stands out, aside from the efficiency, and back in the 80's and early 90's, guards were FAR more efficient than they have been since the zone became legal. I actually found 74 instances of it, in Jordan's era (well, from 1984-96), that a player averaged 15+ PPG and shot 50% or better from the floor...while it's not as common today.

 

Maybe so, although TS% tends to show a better picture. A big reason FG% took a dip into the '90's and '00's was because players were taking far more 3 pointers. It hurts FG%, but because 3's are so efficient, it tends to balance out in the form of a TS%.

 

Either way, Iverson was pretty much always grossly inefficient as a scorer in every form. Even if you want to call Drexler just average in that regard, it is still a step up from Iverson. I wouldn't call Drexler the better scorer, and maybe give AI the edge, though.

 

Iverson wasn't a great defensive player, but he did show very solid defensive ratings (I know you like those) and he was a hell of a ball thief, and I'd say that AI was a better defender than Clyde (not by much, because I really don't care about the defensive ratings in their primes, think they were altered quite a bit by their teammates, but whatever).

 

Drtg's are always altered by their teammates, although the truly elite defensive players tend to break that barrier (check out Dwight's Drtg's on the Magic, it's pretty ridiculous).

 

I'd say defense is a wash. Drexler was a hell of a ball thief as well in his prime, being up near 3SPG. However, what he had on AI was size, and wasn't consistently at a disadvantage physically like AI was.

 

And I deleted the part of your post about the passing, but AI's numbers aren't better...maybe his best seasons he has a slightly higer APG average, but Drexler always hovered around and below 3 TO's. AI was consistently over 4 TO's, which is awful.

 

So you have a better scorer, arguably better defender, and a guy that carried his team on his back much more. Iverson got to the line far more, and easier, than Drexler, and even passed the ball slightly better (although Clyde was an underrated passer, nobody gives him credit for it).

 

Carried the team on his back much more? I don't know about that. Drexler carried his team to the Finals as well, and did it twice. Besides the year Philly made the Finals, AI never sniffed the Conference Finals ever again.

 

And here's the difference between the two in my eyes...the issue with AI is he HAD to dominate the ball to be effective. He could not play off-ball, was badly inefficient as a scorer and primarly ball-handler, and couldn't do other things at an elite level to help his team get far. So, he was great at "carrying his team on his back," but could you blend him into a true championship contending team? From what we saw throughout his career, probably not. With Drexler, he showed he could carry a team at an elite level, as well as be a 2nd option on a championship team. He didn't have to get his points and assists off sheer volume like AI did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Owner
Real Deal Apprentice

Real Deal

Posted
  • Owner
Posted

Maybe so, although TS% tends to show a better picture. A big reason FG% took a dip into the '90's and '00's was because players were taking far more 3 pointers. It hurts FG%, but because 3's are so efficient, it tends to balance out in the form of a TS%.

 

Either way, Iverson was pretty much always grossly inefficient as a scorer in every form. Even if you want to call Drexler just average in that regard, it is still a step up from Iverson. I wouldn't call Drexler the better scorer, and maybe give AI the edge, though.

Teams took more threes a game (and generally, longer jumpers) because of the illegal defense change. Even Jason Kidd talked about this (he was on the only team in the pre-00's that took over 23 threes per game...the 1996 Mavericks), and logically, it makes perfect sense.

 

Because the zone defense basically targets players EXACTLY like Allen Iverson, you saw him suffer because, quite frankly, he never did have a legitimate, reliable, second scorer next to him until he found Carmelo Anthony in Denver (Stackhouse wasn't that reliable in Philly). At one point, Theo Ratliff and Matt Geiger were the next two leading scorers for the Sixers, and that's just sad. What happened when Iverson went to Denver? His FG% shot up to 45%, which was actually quite high for him.

 

Clyde had help. Kiki was there for what...4-5 seasons? After that, in the late 80's...he had Kersey (who was putting up pretty nice offensive numbers and was a defensive beast), Duckworth (two-time all-star in Portland) and Porter (two-time all-star in Portland that ran the offense).

 

Iverson NEVER had that. Aside from Mutombo and Ratliff (who were not even close to the offensive weapons Drexler had), Stackhouse playing good every three games for the Sixers...he didn't have a teammate that could genuinely give him rest in Philly.

 

And I deleted the part of your post about the passing, but AI's numbers aren't better...maybe his best seasons he has a slightly higer APG average, but Drexler always hovered around and below 3 TO's. AI was consistently over 4 TO's, which is awful.

Iverson was both the primary scorer and the facilitator. Drexler was fortunate to have Terry Porter by his side for most of his career as a Blazer, and also have guys like Kiki (who was putting up huge scoring numbers) and both Kersey (around 15-20 a night) and Duckworth (same as Kersey). Once the team started to break up, Cliff Robinson came in and put up 20 a night, and Rod Strickland was running the offense.

 

Against better defensive teams, and zone defenses at that...Iverson had the ball much more than Drexler AND was forced to do more with it. I can't believe I'm actually defending Iverson (never liked him, because my younger brother was shoving him down my throat and bashing Kobe at the same time back in the early 00's), but it's all true.

 

And I'm not saying that Iverson isn't at fault for some of those turnovers, but I put more weight on the defensive teams, and the role he was playing, if we're going to compare AI and Clyde.

 

 

Carried the team on his back much more? I don't know about that. Drexler carried his team to the Finals as well, and did it twice. Besides the year Philly made the Finals, AI never sniffed the Conference Finals ever again.

Kiki Vandeweghe, Jim Paxson, Mychal Thompson, Jerome Kersey, Kevin Duckworth, Terry Porter, Cliff Robinson, Rod Strickland...all of those guys averaged 18-19+ PPG alongside Drexler back in Portland.

 

Stackhouse (one season + 22 games, sophomore in the NBA), Coleman (for 116 games, injured, playing poorly), Iguodala, and a 32-year old Chris Webber...those are the players that reached 18+ PPG and that's what Iverson had in Philly.

 

Iverson may not have found his way to a championship ring behind Carmelo (like Drexler did behind Hakeem), and he didn't carry the Sixers to a second NBA Finals, but a big reason is because he didn't have a team to carry in the first place, much like McGrady didn't in Orlando.

 

And here's the difference between the two in my eyes...the issue with AI is he HAD to dominate the ball to be effective. He could not play off-ball, was badly inefficient as a scorer and primarly ball-handler, and couldn't do other things at an elite level to help his team get far. So, he was great at "carrying his team on his back," but could you blend him into a true championship contending team? From what we saw throughout his career, probably not. With Drexler, he showed he could carry a team at an elite level, as well as be a 2nd option on a championship team. He didn't have to get his points and assists off sheer volume like AI did.

I don't think Clyde would have been able to reach the Finals with the team that Iverson had in 2001, when you consider the teammates, the offense + the role he would have, and the defensive rule changes. I would bet my house on it.

 

Clyde didn't carry Portland to the Finals in 1990. That team had four 16+ PPG scorers on it, and none scoring 24 a night...with Porter running the offense. There was no doubt that Clyde was "the man" from that squad, but he didn't carry that team. The 1992 squad was more Clyde than the 1990 team, but he still had more help than Iverson did in 2001.

 

So, it's hard to say what you're posting because Iverson didn't have those opportunities. We see what it's like to team with Carmelo Anthony...and while people may have had high expectations, we know that wasn't going to work out like it did for LeBron/Wade (two similar players on the same team, in regards to their distinct roles). I'm still surprised when I go back and see the 2001 Sixers in the Finals, and shocked that they beat my Lakers one game in the series, ruining our perfect 15-0 in the playoffs (thanks to Iverson's 48). That team was ranked in the middle of the league on offense, and not even top three defensively...but Iverson averaged 33 or so a night, and over 46 minutes a game (both in the playoffs), to take his team to that destination, with Aaron McKie being the only scoring threat on the floor next to him...and shit, McKie shot almost as bad as Iverson did that postseason.

 

I like Clyde. I just can't say he's better than Iverson. More efficient, better rebounder and shot-blocker (of course), but that's all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flash Newbie

Flash

Posted
Posted

Gervin never won an NBA title, and I believe only made it out of the 2nd round only once in his career. Wade has two NBA titles, has been to 3 Finals, has a Finals MVP, and has made it past the 2nd round 4x.

 

Better scorer? Maybe, I'll give you that although it's pretty close. Rebounding is almost identical in terms of rebounding %, which adjusts for pace (since back in the '70's there were a lot more possessions/opportunities for rebounds, so raw RPG doesn't work as well). But in terms of passing/playmaking Wade has a HUGE advantage. Gervin wasn't a guy you could run your offense through because he didn't have the ballhandling or passing abiltiy to consistently make plays for his teammates, while Wade is one of the best swingmen of the last 20 years at doing so. And by everything I've heard, Gervin wasn't know for his great defense, while Wade has been on All-Defensive teams multiple times in his career.

 

FWIW, Wade's career PER is 25.7 to Gervin's 21.4. Wade's best season was a 30.4, while Gervin's was a 24.7. Wade's playoff PER is 24.1 to Gervin's 21.2.

 

You have to put the All-NBA selections in context. Gervin made his in one of the weakest era's in NBA history, especially for guards. When Wade didn't make it, he lost out to MVP's like Kobe and Nash. When Gervin made it, he was beating out guys like Dennis Johnson and Paul Westphal, and Gus Williams, who were great players, but not of the Kobe/Nash caliber. If Wade was around in those years, he would easily have the same number of 1st team selections.

 

Well that's that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nitro Newbie

Nitro

Posted
Posted

Teams took more threes a game (and generally, longer jumpers) because of the illegal defense change. Even Jason Kidd talked about this (he was on the only team in the pre-00's that took over 23 threes per game...the 1996 Mavericks), and logically, it makes perfect sense.

 

Because the zone defense basically targets players EXACTLY like Allen Iverson, you saw him suffer because, quite frankly, he never did have a legitimate, reliable, second scorer next to him until he found Carmelo Anthony in Denver (Stackhouse wasn't that reliable in Philly). At one point, Theo Ratliff and Matt Geiger were the next two leading scorers for the Sixers, and that's just sad. What happened when Iverson went to Denver? His FG% shot up to 45%, which was actually quite high for him.

 

Teams starting taking more 3's towards the late '90's/early '00's also because it was the first generation who grew up with the 3pt line, and that was also when the line got shortened.

 

Above all else, it is the most efficient weapon in the game next to layups/dunks. Which brings me back to the point that the higher overall FG% of the '80's is generally equivilent to the efficiency you see with lower FG%, but increase in 3pt attempts.

 

And you are right about him never having a 2nd reliable scorer, but neither did T-Mac in Orlando, LeBron in Cleveland, Wade in Miami '08-'10, or Kobe '04-'08. All of them had close to/their most efficient seasons during those years. There is no excuse for shooting below 40% in your prime twice.

 

Clyde had help. Kiki was there for what...4-5 seasons? After that, in the late 80's...he had Kersey (who was putting up pretty nice offensive numbers and was a defensive beast), Duckworth (two-time all-star in Portland) and Porter (two-time all-star in Portland that ran the offense).

 

Iverson NEVER had that. Aside from Mutombo and Ratliff (who were not even close to the offensive weapons Drexler had), Stackhouse playing good every three games for the Sixers...he didn't have a teammate that could genuinely give him rest in Philly.

 

Iverson's successful teams were ran by defense. He was an extremely inefficient volume scorer who turned the ball over at a historic pace. They needed his volume scoring, but I have no doubts there was at least 4-5 wing players and a few PG's at the time who would have made that Sixers offense better.

 

Iverson was both the primary scorer and the facilitator. Drexler was fortunate to have Terry Porter by his side for most of his career as a Blazer, and also have guys like Kiki (who was putting up huge scoring numbers) and both Kersey (around 15-20 a night) and Duckworth (same as Kersey). Once the team started to break up, Cliff Robinson came in and put up 20 a night, and Rod Strickland was running the offense.

 

Against better defensive teams, and zone defenses at that...Iverson had the ball much more than Drexler AND was forced to do more with it. I can't believe I'm actually defending Iverson (never liked him, because my younger brother was shoving him down my throat and bashing Kobe at the same time back in the early 00's), but it's all true.

 

And I'm not saying that Iverson isn't at fault for some of those turnovers, but I put more weight on the defensive teams, and the role he was playing, if we're going to compare AI and Clyde.

 

You do know during AI's best years (early '00's) he didn't even lead the team in assists, and was nearly doubled in assists per 36min? I didn't check past '00-'02, but McKie led the team in assists that first season, and nearly doubled AI in assists per 36min, and Snow led the team in assists the next season.

 

And keep in mind, AI had only one season, when the East was at its weakest point ever, where he got past the first round. He did have the DPOY, a HoF coach, and a solid cast of role players. Definitely no stars or variety of offensive weapons, but he did have some help. Obviously you know what happened with him and Melo.

 

I don't think Clyde would have been able to reach the Finals with the team that Iverson had in 2001, when you consider the teammates, the offense + the role he would have, and the defensive rule changes. I would bet my house on it.

 

Clyde didn't carry Portland to the Finals in 1990. That team had four 16+ PPG scorers on it, and none scoring 24 a night...with Porter running the offense. There was no doubt that Clyde was "the man" from that squad, but he didn't carry that team. The 1992 squad was more Clyde than the 1990 team, but he still had more help than Iverson did in 2001.

 

So, it's hard to say what you're posting because Iverson didn't have those opportunities. We see what it's like to team with Carmelo Anthony...and while people may have had high expectations, we know that wasn't going to work out like it did for LeBron/Wade (two similar players on the same team, in regards to their distinct roles). I'm still surprised when I go back and see the 2001 Sixers in the Finals, and shocked that they beat my Lakers one game in the series, ruining our perfect 15-0 in the playoffs (thanks to Iverson's 48). That team was ranked in the middle of the league on offense, and not even top three defensively...but Iverson averaged 33 or so a night, and over 46 minutes a game (both in the playoffs), to take his team to that destination, with Aaron McKie being the only scoring threat on the floor next to him...and shit, McKie shot almost as bad as Iverson did that postseason.

 

I like Clyde. I just can't say he's better than Iverson. More efficient, better rebounder and shot-blocker (of course), but that's all.

 

I just don't see how high volume scoring with awful efficiency, a nearly 1:1 AST:TO ratio in his prime, and only one season out of the 2nd round is better than Clyde's career. Clyde was generally way more efficient, was about the same level in terms of assists, obviously a better rebounder and shot blocker (the rebounding thing shouldn't be disgarded...it is a big advantage to have a 6-7RPG SG on your team), averaged the same amount of steals in his prime while having better size defensively, and he went to the Finals 3x and has a championship under his belt.

 

I just don't see the argument for AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Owner
Real Deal Apprentice

Real Deal

Posted
  • Owner
Posted

Replying to everything else just means I'm going to continue repeating what I said earlier, but this...

 

And you are right about him never having a 2nd reliable scorer, but neither did T-Mac in Orlando, LeBron in Cleveland, Wade in Miami '08-'10, or Kobe '04-'08. All of them had close to/their most efficient seasons during those years. There is no excuse for shooting below 40% in your prime twice.

Come on, dude. You are the guy that sits here and says that McGrady could have been better than Kobe...but if you sit him aside, all of those players are better than Iverson AND Drexler (and I know you'll argue for T-Mac...keep in mind that he was a shooter, far more range than Iverson and Clyde both, so I'm not surprised that his percentage was decent). Both don't even come close to Kobe and LeBron. We know what those guys were capable of, regardless of who was on their team...not necessarily regarding their team's success, but on an individual level. LeBron had shooters and defense lined up, and he was both the primary scorer and facilitator, penetrating and hitting all of his teammates much like Iverson was asked to do many times throughout his career...but to compare the two? No point in that, no reason to even bring LeBron up, because James is already the greater player (and better, overall).

 

And as far as leading the team in assists goes, that wasn't exactly my point. Snow and McKie were no Terry Porter...not even close, and I'm definitely not saying that Iverson would have won a championship with Porter in 2001, but damn, it would have at least helped throughout the years. Eric Snow was absolute trash without Iverson by his side, and McKie only had a good season or two in his career, anyway. Those guys fed off AI more than anything, and even with Snow out there throwing 5-7 assists a night (only happened in Philly, by the way), it was Iverson racking up his 6-7 as well (Snow and Iverson threw seven each in the 2003-04 season, and Iverson was at 5.5 APG the two previous seasons before that, Snow only one more per game).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...