Things that are overrated in the NBA.

1. John Stockton is fairly rated at worse, and at best is pretty overrated.

People often say he was or is disrespected as a point guard. They say millennials and stat nerds don't value him, because he doesn't have flashy numbers or his numbers are undervalued.

-He's exalted strictly for his numbers and individual accomplishments. He was a good HOF player, but he is not the greatest point guard ever or I'll argue a top 30 player ever. His playoff success in his peak year with another highly-touted HOF (Karl Malone), ended with them losing in the 1st Round, six times in ten years. They are point guards, such as CP3, Oscar Robertson, Steve Nash, Jason Kidd, and a few others who did not have any players on the caliber of Karl Malone, nor the coaching of Jerry Sloan, but experienced more playoff success. Another strike is in many of these series, Utah also had home-field advantage in most of them. They were favored to win alot of the series (by NBA analyst, media writers, and Vegas odds) and they didn't.

The myth that Michael Jordan kept them from the championship needs to stop, because it looks like a quite a few teams kept them from winning a title. 1993-95 Houston Rockets, 1990-92/1998-2000 Portland Trailblazers, Seattle Supersonics, weaker GSW teams, and the Showtime Lakers seem to have done as much. I'd say the Rockets, Trailblazers, Supersonics, and Showtime were much instrumental in keeping Utah titleless, along with their namesake, locale, and general unlikableness.

1B. Pure Point guard thing, I know this has been busted so many times, it's not even funny. It's nice if a team has pure point guard, the problem is ... you know what's more valuable than a pure point guard?" A guy who can get tough buckets and make plays, by both scoring and passing. I'm talking guys, like Steph Curry, Derrick Rose, Russell Westbrook, Kyrie Irving, Ja Morant, or Trae Young. Are they better players than Stockton? People will argue, all day and night about that, especially Jazz fans and oldheads, where both sides present convincing arguments. Though, I lean to the side against Stockton, because I feel like a player, like Curry, Young, or Rose are vastly more essential to a team's success than a Stockton type player. A Stockton type player, now, and even then, would essentially be a utility player (against modern defenses, I'll bring this up in a second).

Even in Stockton's own time, he was not as valued as people, like to think, and he himself laughed at how people in Barcelona didn't know who he was. Critics often jumped to people were uneducated about basketball and what makes a team great in it, while Stockton, Utah, and 90s fans says people know nothing about real basketball. All that maybe true and affirmative, yet it doesn't improve Stockton's case. Utah hadn't even reach the NBA Finals, yet, while they couldn't even get out of the first round of the playoffs. It's something alot of critics hold against players, like Dominique Wilkins, Tracy McGrady, Carmelo Anthony, and Alex English. But, to be fair, most of those guys never played with anyone as good as Karl Malone (2x MVP and almost 10+ year top 5/10 scoring leader). The only one I could argue is McGrady with Yao, but Yao, like Grant Hill was often injured and inactive in playoffs. Stockton falls closer to this category, where he fairly belongs.

He's respected as a highly level top 10 point guard, but there's no way I'd put him the likes with Magic, Oscar Robertson, West, and now Steph Curry. Those guys are complete on another planet. Even, players, like CP3, Kidd, and Frazier have more desirable playoff outcomes than Stockton. Players, like Nash, Payton, and Kidd had those fantastic playmaking elements that could make them deadly in any series with any type of teammates. You couldn't do that with Stockton or a similar player. You guys already know the stories about him and Isiah Thomas.

Also, another highly coveted player from Stockton's time that got more press and was considered more of a "threat" ... a healthy, Anfernee "Penny" Hardaway. He started to receive pub to enter into that conversation with MJ and Magic, because he was a fantastic playmaker. There was nothing he was lacking, he could score alot of points, shoot 3s, play defense, and had all of the dazzling moves. He could also play point guard to level of Stockton, but in better in many different areas. The only thing that held him back was health. If he stayed healthy for a good 7-8 years, he would've been considered a greater point guard than Stockton. Especially, with him being a point guard who could play to level of say a Vince Carter or Tracy McGrady.

3. The "illegal" defense change had a bigger impact on the league than the hand-checking rules. The hand-checking rules are sometimes overrated.

People know keep pointing to the hand-checking rules for being why scorers now can do score so many points and are practically untouched on defense. Even though, the rules, themselves never really changed the league, very much from the time of its inception to five - ten years later. Another thing, many fans from the 90s don't mention is that hand-checking rules were already being changed, during that era. The actual rule NBA players complained about ... "illegal/zone defenses" being implemented. Pretty, much Tim Duncan, Tracy McGrady, Allen Iverson, and yes, even Michael Jordan did and have complained about this rule. Under older rules, where teams had to commit one player to each player, commit fully to one ballhandler. The illegal defensive rules are more akin to the type of defenses that you would see in football, like in high school, NCAA, or the NFL. The defense can pretty much align their coverages and commitments how ever they choose. Where they can use blanket coverages, double on non-ballhandlers, front with multiple/different defenders, or go to brief double/triple teams back to zero coverage. How ever the defense decides they can utilize any type of defense they think is necessary.

Even with the expanded hand-checking rules (2004), which happened due to what the league and *cough* fans wanted, because fans specifically said they hated low scoring games. Between 2005-2021, the NBA has still produced a good number of teams who could be considered one of if not the greatest defensive squads ever. 2008 Celtics, mid 2000s Pistons and Spurs, Mid 2010 Spurs and Heat, the modern day Warriors, grind and grit Grizzlies, and our own Rockets. There are a few more teams who could be considered defensive monsters in any era, and even have numbers and metrics that are comparable to or better than teams who had lesser or no hand-checking rules.