Gary Payton has become insanely underrated

[gxL]

payton was the only guard besides jordan who won defensive player of the year. he also outplayed jordan in the finals several times.

WAR PAYTON!!

[GP_20]

No, it's really not any worse then putting GP next to Kobe. GP is no where near a top 30 all time player.
And it matters that at one point I said that.... why? Do I still say it? No. Do you still say Kobe isn't as good as Payton? Yes.

Payton is definately Top 30 All-Time. And the fact you ever said that really shows you've had some mental problems. The problem is they still haven't cleared up.

You make very little sense. Because he was the best point guard in the league, he had to be in his prime? And what player in 92 and 93 was a better point guard then him? I'll even say Payton was probably equal to him in 95, and better in 96, but He's not that terribly close to Stockton in 90 or 91.
And bolded is just retarded rambling that doesn't make any sense, not that I'd expect much better.

How doesn't it make sense? You stupid? English not your 1st language? Let me dumb it down.

You call 94 Stockton "out of prime". And he was the best PG in 94. You call 02 Stockton "out of prime". Do you think a 94 Stockton and 02 Stockton played at the same level? You give them the same label "out of prime"l after all. Please tell me there was a difference to you in making a comparison of the 94-97 Stockton and using that as an example between using the 00-02 Stockton and using that as an example.

For my definition, there is. 88-92 Stockton => Peak Stockton. 88-98 Stockton => Prime Stockton. 99-03 Stockton => Out of Prime Stockton.

See how everything is more complete. Do you not have any different lablel for the 93 Stockton and the 03 Stockton? Or any comparisons made to them are both invalid because "he was out of prime" in your case.

Well you're in the minority. Just because they're an all star doesn't mean they were prime. I guess by your definition Kareem in 87-89 was still in his prime

Don't worry, I understand you're just manipulating reality to try to make Payton sound better then he is, you don't really need to explain any more.

Of course there are exceptions. But I meant played at an "All-Star" caliber level. Kareem was just getting in the All-Star game even though he didn't deserve it. Maybe All-NBA should solidify "Prime".

No, there aren't any flaws. Just because there are a couple years that are arguable, doesn't mean that their is a flaw but your definition of a 15 year prime is still idiotic.

What's so idiotic? Prime is basically when that player was considered "good". Not at their very best. That is Peak. It's just hilariously stupid that "Peak" is ONE YEAR LONG for you, when they were just as good the year after or year before. It's not that "there are a couple of years that are arguable", it's that there is no significant drop, if any drop, for most players between their best and 2nd best year. And based on your stupid definition, one of those years is PEAK, the other PRIME.

So tell me, what was Stockton's PEAK year? I guess the year you don't name was his prime, and worse than his peak year? In other words, he was ACTUALLY a worse player? Nash? What was his Peak year and prime years? Was he actually a worse player in any year between 05-07 than he was at 1 of those years?

The reasons go on on how stupid your definition is. But I can't expect much out of you.

It's not really relevent because it's one series. Oh, I guess that Tony Parker is better then Steve Nash because he outplayed him in 2008, right? How about you look at their careers, where it's blatantly obvious Stockton is better. Or their peaks? Or their career head to heads?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...1&p2=stockjo01
Not very close, now is it?

He didn't just outplay Stockton. He DOMINATED him. Like I said, it's the PG version of Hakeem and Robinson. Payton's outplayed a lot of PGs in series before, but this was complete domination. Like I said, I don't think I've ever seen 2 HOF PGs go at it when they were both considered very good ("All-NBA 2nd") yet one gets just completely dominated as much as Stockton did against Payton.

[L.Kizzle]

payton was the only guard besides jordan who won defensive player of the year. he also outplayed jordan in the finals several times.

WAR PAYTON!!

Sidney Moncrief says hi, actually he says hi twice.

[SkyR#1fanCapCou]

Sidney Moncrief says hi, actually he says hi twice.

Michael Cooper as well. Plenty of of others if you look down the list.

[magnax1]

Payton is definately Top 30 All-Time. And the fact you ever said that really shows you've had some mental problems. The problem is they still haven't cleared up.

I think the fact that you think Payton and Kobe are equals, and he's top 30 all time is enough reason for me to quit arguing with you over the same one series, especially since you just continue to say the same thing, despite me agreeing that Stockton was outplayed. The only thing you've even said is that it was Stockton's prime because any year a player make the all star team, they're still in their prime.

How doesn't it make sense? You stupid? English not your 1st language? Let me dumb it down.

It doesn't make sense, in that it's stupid and unrelated to our argument. Because Stockton was better in 94 then 03 doesn't mean he's still in his prime in 94. You're pretty much the only person who thinks primes last 15 years.

[GP_20]

I think the fact that you think Payton and Kobe are equals, and he's top 30 all time is enough reason for me to quit arguing with you over the same one series, especially since you just continue to say the same thing, despite me agreeing that Stockton was outplayed. The only thing you've even said is that it was Stockton's prime because any year a player make the all star team, they're still in their prime.

1st of all I don't think they are equal All-Time or Career-Wise. Kobe is Top 10, Payton is Top 30. And please Stockton wasn't just outplayed, he was dominated. The fact you actually had Stockton on par with Magic Johnson a year ago shows you have some mental issues.

And I said if they play at an All-Star level they are still in their prime.

It doesn't make sense, in that it's stupid and unrelated to our argument. Because Stockton was better in 94 then 03 doesn't mean he's still in his prime in 94. You're pretty much the only person who thinks primes last 15 years.

I was just wondering what your label for the 94 season for Stockton was compared to the 03 season. I label 1 as a "Prime Stockton" and the other as a "Out of Prime" Stockton. Because there is a clear differnece between a 94 Stockton and a 03 Stockton.

At least in my book. But for you I guess they are both out of prime and about the same. Thus comparing the 94-97 Stockton is as invalid as comparing the 00-03 Stockton.


And I still can't understand how a Peak is only 1 year. this definition fails fast because it implies that one year you were better than all of your other years. However, for MANY players there is not 1 big year they had. In fact, what was Stockton's peak? What year was he clearly better than all of his other years? Can you really say that that was his "year". And it's not a RANGE of years (88-92) he played at about the same level, at the top of his game?

So many flaws in your definitions, from Peak to Prime.





But all that is irrelevant anyways. Bottomline is, Stockton was still at least "near his best" (not going to use "Prime") in 96, and so was Payton. Neither were at their best (Not using "Peak"), Stockton that was 88-92, Payton 98-02. Yet Payton absolutely DOMINATED Stockton in the series.


I think it would make a good discussion to if this was the most 1 Sided playoff battle between 2 HOF PGs "Near their best" (Not going to say Prime) or "Playing at a high level" (Not highest level)?


Ever?

Could it be?


And maybe this is the most 1 sided game?

Game 5:
John Stockton
1/6 4pts 6ast 4reb 2stl

Gary Payton
11/17 31pts 6ast 5reb 2stl

Honestly, that is total abuse on BOTH ENDS.

[magnax1]

Prime Shaq 98-03 peak 00
Prime Jordan 88-93 peak 89/90
Prime Nash 05-08 peak 07
Prime TMac 00-05 peak 03
That's how basically everyone does it. You're the exception, not me. Just because player's get worse after they leave their prime, does not mean that it doesn't make any sense. Except maybe to you, but once again you're the exception.

[GP_20]

Prime Shaq 98-03 peak 00
Prime Jordan 88-93 peak 89/90
Prime Nash 05-08 peak 07
Prime TMac 00-05 peak 03
That's how basically everyone does it. You're the exception, not me. Just because player's get worse after they leave their prime, does not mean that it doesn't make any sense. Except maybe to you, but once again you're the exception.

So clearly "you think" that Nash was "for sure" better in 07 than both of his 2 MVP years.

Read that statement carefully. There is no "arguable" written. It's what "you think" and you have already stated your choices. So you clearly think Nash was a better player in 07 than he has ever been.

And you named some easy player's peaks. How about Stockton which is who I asked about. Russell? Bird? I'd love to hear the "Peak" year for those players, the year which they FOR SURE were better than any other year "according to you".

And funny you couldn't name a year for Jordan. Hmmm...




Obviously, your definition has some major flaws. While my definition, it's smooth and ACCURATE.





I'm still waiting on the label you give 94-97 Stockton, and seeing if it's different from the 00-03 Stockton. Or were they both just "out of prime" lol? Is comparing 94 Stockton to a player just as invalid as comparing a 03 Stockton to a player?

[magnax1]

This is a really stupid thing to argue, and I'm arguing it with a guy who obviously can't understand what a consensus is. So really, GP_20, just stop.

[GP_20]

This is a really stupid thing to argue, and I'm arguing it with a guy who obviously can't understand what a consensus is. So really, GP_20, just stop.

I'm not really sure where you got this "consensus" anyways.

But yeah, there are multiple flaws with your definition that just aren't logical in the basketball world.




But you're right, all this is besides the point. Payton dominated Stockton at a time both were playing at a level "Near their best" and were still considered "Great" PGs.


And it was the biggest series of both of their lives

[D.J.]

Bump

[jbryan1984]

Not to me hasn't. I just think its this generation. They are not as familiar with what he did in Seattle and instead just remember seeing him coming off the bench for Miami for a ring.

[bizil]

I feel Magic is the best point guard of all time. But GP (along with Clyde Frazier) is the premier point guard of all time in terms of scoring, defense, and passing as a package. That's a hell of a statement! And on top of it, GP could defend PG, SG, and many SFs. GP is even the second leading PG scorer of all time with like 21,000 points, just trailing the Big O. U don't look for PG's to be great rebounders like Magic, Kidd, and Big O were. That's a bonus. But for all other facets as a package, GP is as good as it gets at PG.