I read in an article that John Stockton is probably one of the Top 50 players who have ever played in the NBA. But statistics show Gary Payton did just as well as John Stockton in his first 12 years. Gary Payton would do even better if he played as long as John Stockton. John Stockton also had a lot of help from Karl Malone. So who is better? Gary Payton or John Stockton? And will Gary Payton be traded or resigned by the struggling Seattle SuperSonics?
I think stockton is better, he is a team player and gets tons of assists each year on a constant basis, and him and karl established the pick n' roll really well.
Dang no edit option, also like to add, i am not a sonics fan or anything was in the fbb leauge on the board awhile back and i was the sonics, in case people might think i am going against the sonics when they think i am a sonics fan.
Give me Gary any day of the week. He is a much much better scorer, almost as good a passer, better rebounder and a much much better defensive player. Malone and Gary probably would have won atleast one championship.
Gary all the way. R0ckets03 is correct. Had Payton been on the Jazz, they would have won at least one championship.
Stockton could have scored more if he would have pushed the issue but rather he made everyone around him better with his passing. I mean why else would guys like blue "who the hell am I" edwards and the other no name chumps that make up the jazz be able to play well for the jazz and flat out suck for any other team. John made them better. Gary scores more because he shoots more, plain and simple. Gary has never had a season with more than 10 assists. Stockton has done that 10 seasons in a row at one point. I mean I am no fan of the Jazz but even I can see that Stockton is the better player. Dont forget Gary was surounded by some great players his whole career. A young Kemp, Detlef, Ewing and Baker. . . okay those last two are a joke, but all Stockton has had is Malone. well maybe Hornacek, but he isnt really a player Also compare there Fg% Stockton is always around .500 thats freakish for a point gaurd
I hate Stockton, but I would take him in his prime over everyone else as a PG. He makes everyone around him better which is the main job of a PG.
Look at the teams Stockton took to the finals. Besides Malone, Hornacek, and Russell (sort of), all their players were crap: Starting line: John Stockton Jeff Hornacek Bryon Russell Karl Malone Greg Ostertag Backup line: Howard Eisley Shandon Anderson Adam Keefe Antoine Carr Greg Foster 11th/12th men Jacque Vaugn Chris Morris I mean, c'mon. That team SUCKS. But they made it to the finals 2 years in a row because Stockton has the highest B-ball IQ of any player ever. He's Mr. Fundamental at PG.
You know, they're both absolutely amazing but I have to go with Stockton. I agree with most of what's said here. He has an insane career field goal percentage. He averaged over 10 assists for over 10 years and there is a reason that Shandon Anderson, Byron Russell, Howard Eisley, Donyell Marshall and to some extent even Greg Foster left that team as very sought after to somewhat sought after free agents. Stock made them all look better than they are. I mean does anybody remember Hornacek tearing it up before he got to Utah? They knew how to really utilize his talents there. I don't know if Jerry Sloan doesn't deserve some of this credit but even if that is the case, John Stockton is the floor general that carries out his orders with out flaw. All of that said, Gary Payton is still absolutely phenomenal and i'm constantly in awe of him.
was about to start a new thread, but i'll post here: anybody else find it amazing that stockton, at 40, lead his team in scoring and to victory against jason kidd and the nets last night? could that guy play effectively at 50?
Not to mention he played 40 minutes. Payton is a more talented player than Stockton, and I love to watch Gary play, but Stockton makes everyone around him a better player, and I don't know if you can say that about Payton.
My vote is for Payton. Stockton is a great PG because he plays smart. In that category, Payton is only a half step behind, and yet is 5 steps ahead in speed, athleticism, defense, scoring, and just about every other category one can think of. I think a good argument has been made for Stockton being the floor general that maximizes everyone's talents. I think I probably give more of that credit than most to Sloan. Would Stockton have been as successful as he was on any other team? I rather doubt it. I think the Jazz have done a great job of recognizing what Stockton and Malone bring and built the team to maximize their contributions and cover their weaknesses. If Stockton was a Sonic, I think he'd get lost in the shuffle, distrusted because his amazing abilities as a PG are obscured by some of his deficiencies.
I vote for Stockton too but I don't think that this Jazz team was that bad. It had stars in Malone, Sockton, Hornacek (All-star team one year) and several good role players. This team minus Malone, Stockton, Hornacek is no worse than: the championship Lakers minus Shaq and Kobe the championship Bulls minus Jordan, Pippen, Grant/Rodman
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/stati...lit=0&season=2003&seasontype=2&avg=48&pos=all Notice the two players at the top of this list. Damn that's funny, that both of them are still doing that. Gawd. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/stati...n=2003&seasontype=2&avg=pg&order=true&split=0 Utah's also been doing this for a long time.
John Stockton should die and rot in hell... Just kidding Im not sure who is better but I would rather hang out with Gary Payton.
I think Payton is definately the better individual player -- he's got great defense, he scores, he passes, he just does everything, and he does it well. On the other hand, Stockton's team hasn't missed the playoffs since he was drafted in 1984/1985, and I think it's fair to argue that a majority of the credit for that goes to Stockton's ability to get other people involved in the game. Of course, having Malone doesn't hurt either. The Sonics have missed the playoffs twice since GP was drafted. Ultimately, I think it depends on what you think your team needs -- If your primary goal is to have the very best player on the field, then GP is it. If your primary goal is to have a player who makes everyone on the court a threat, then Stockton is your man. Put another way -- who would you rather have? Gary Paton or Jason Kidd?
If some player was dropped out of the top 50 for gambling on NBA games, Payton would be the next in line to fill the position. I imagine if they made a top 50 today, he would definitely be in it.
It's a tough call. One on one, I'd give the nod to Payton but over a full season, year in, year out, Stockton is the better PG overall. No doubt. He is the all-time assist and steals leader while shooting over 50% from the field when today's "players" struggle to shoot 40%. That 1984 class of draftees was arguably the best draft of all time. As for scoring, John did not need to when you have the second-leading scorer of all time as your running mate. I'd rather rack up 20 assist and win than score 50 and lost the game. Defense, I'd give the edge to Payton as I personally detest the ref-baiting that Stockton uses frequently (but it was effective). Just as Hakeem was a unique phenom (a 6-10 small forward who had guard skills and played centre), Stockton is in the same class. You could form an all-time team based solely on that 84 class: Pg- Stockton Sg- Jordan C- Dream SF- anybody else in the 84 draft PF- Barkley
The thing to remember is that we've never seen Stockton play on a team without Karla (besides his first year in the league?). Having a consistent scoring threat like that makes the game easier for the PG.
