Vince Carter is one of, if not the greatest, athlete to ever play in the league. IMO he is the best dunker the league has ever seen, he also has all the skills you want from a 2 guard. Vince's main problem as a ball player was that if you fouled him hard on his drives, he became a jump shooter and stopped challenging the defense. What if Vince had come into the league in 2008 instead of 1998? He would be hyped as much as Lebron and protected by the league's new rules. Those hard fouls guys gave him would turn into flagrants, touch fouls would be called left and right. Throw in the fact that there are just not many guys now who commit hard fouls, wouldn't young Vince rule the league with his athleticism? I think his career would at least go up one level and he'd be in the running for greatest shooting guard of all time.
He has pretty good handles for a 2 guard. I think there is no one more physically talented than him not even kobe.
There are a LOT of people more talented than him. VC plays at their level in contract years... and that's pretty much it. He doesn't have HEART. Now, what if Iverson had started in 2008? THAT'S a guy we'd be talking about at the Durant/Lebron/Kobe level. Faster league, less hard fouling... he would OWN.
They are definitely good. But what sets Jordan, Kobe, Wade, James, (and a young McGrady) apart is the elite ball-handling. They were basically point guards. Carter isn't Von Wafer or anything but he's a notch below and at that level, that's what separates the cream from the rest of the crop. IMHO.
He's not Chris Paul, slightly worse than Kobe, but he's right there handle wise with Lebron and Melo and Pierce.
And that's why I think Pierce and Melo, the class where Vince fits in, are a tier below Jordan, Kobe, Wade, James. The handles.
Agreed, especially in comparison to a Wade, or Kobe. A comparison to James is just unfair. Lebron is 2 inches taller, 30 pounds heavier, yet faster, more athletic a better ballhandler. Comparing anybody to LBJ, though, is kind of unfair. I think Vince would be in today's NBA what he's been the last 10 years. A really really really good player, but not in the top 5-10 on a consistent basis. Looking at his career numbers, they are very good. He's been a fairly efficient scorer, though not superstar type efficiencies. For example, his career Points Per Shot average is 1.22. This is pretty solid...for every shot he takes, he scores 1.22 points. But compared to Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Pierce, Carmelo, Jordan, they're all 1.3 or above. Wade tops the list at 1.38...which as we know is because he drives to the hole and gets fouled so often. On the other hand, it is better than his cousin, T-Mac's...and, surprisingly about the same as AI. (In case anyone is interested, Yao's career number is at 1.44, Shaq 1.47...if only he could hit free throws!). So he's not exactly a volume shooter, but he's not exactly mister efficient. He's been a solid rebound and assist man over the years, but not on the levels of some of the other greats mentioned in this thread. I do think the stuff about his "HEART" has been blown out of proportion a bit. Heart seems to come all of a sudden when you're not injured and you win. As it turns out, he's been fairly healthy the last few years and has played in about the same % of possible games throughout his career as Wade has thus far. So if Vince goes to and/or wins the Finals next year with the Magic, hits a clutch shot or two, stays healthy, does that all of a sudden mean he has "heart". That said, I do think, like his cousin T-Mac, when he was legitimately injured in Toronto, he handled the situation very poorly.
Wtf. What does handles have to do with being a good player.. this isn't And1 streetball. LeBron is not one-tier above VC because of handles.. it's because of everything else. VC actually has decent handles if you would actually watch his games. It's no worse than McGrady. Yeah he doesn't bring up the ball, but he can make moves off the dribble and that's all that matters.
See, I don't think it's the handles. I'd say Jordan and probably Wade have better handles than the rest but the main difference is the decision making. It's not necessarily about the assists but feel for the game - understanding when to change direction, spin, crossover, stutter step, etc. If placed in a skills drill where the player was asked to complete some specific moves, I think Carter would complete the drill in around the same time as Kobe or a young Mcgrady. Watching Vince Carter, especially when he was younger, you could see the difference. A lot of times you could see him get by his man and immediately start trying to score on the help defense where as Kobe would do a spin fake to the other side of the rim (using it to protect from getting blocked) and lay the ball in, and possibly get the and 1 foul.
Sigh. You're probably one of the people that thinks Trevor Ariza can develop into Tracy McGrady. Once again the sad, misguided assumption that handles = AND1 buffoonery rears its head.
I never said handles = and1. I'm saying superb handles is not a significant factor in how good a player is. Yes, the player must have decent handles (part of their offensive arsenal) BUT they don't need amazing elite-level ones. No, I do not think Ariza will become the next McGrady. He doesn't have the offensive arsenal that McGrady does. His only offensive move consists of spotting up and the pump fake and drive right. However, he can still improve. I understand your point of view.. it's just I don't think handles should be the first priority in decided whether a player is on an elite level or not. Dirk doesn't have great handles, Hedo, Artest, Carmelo only dribbles when he's initiating an offensive move... but are they worse than players who can dribble better than them like Sebastian Telfair, Rafer?
if that is the case, we can take this discussion farther by saying that kobe bryant would have been the best basketball player for the next two decade...hahaha..kobe enters the league before carter...went through all that "hard fouls" stuff...and yet here he is...the best player in the world..where's vince and t-mac?...lol it's all about the heart and determination of a champion..
You are one of the only people on the board who thinks Kobe is the best player in the nba right now, most people think Lebron and Paul are ahead of him. We've seen what Kobe can do with all these rules advantages, and he's no better than Jordan was against all the tough defenses, probably worse since Jordan played great defense as well.
You're misunderstanding my argument. I am not contesting that they are the first priority - I am saying that they are the difference maker when all other things are equal. All of the guys mentioned (Jordan, Bryant, McGrady, Wade, James, Pierce, Carter, Anthony) have the size, athleticism, offensive arsenal etc. that are necessary components to greatness at the wing position. But in my opinion, what sets the former 5 apart from the latter 3 is the ELITE ball-handling. (As pointed out by someone earlier, James probably shouldn't be included in any comparative discussion because he is just a freak.) As far as the guys you mentioned: Dirk is a power forward so isn't relevant to the discussion. Artest doesn't have the athleticism or even basic skillset. Hedo doesn't have the athleticism. As far as Telfair and Rafer, again you are misunderstanding the argument. I never said ball-handling was a sufficient component to greatness. I said it was a necessary component. That is also besides the fact that those two are point guards who aren't relevant to the discussion of elite wings.
Lets take Jordan out of the discussion as well, I have a hard time comparing Jordan to any of these guys. One thing I will say about carter is that his athleticism trumps all of these the other guys. Young Vince was on a different level athletically from Pierce, Melo and even Kobe.
You could replace the three peet lakers with any top tier wingman and they could have had a good shot to win those three championships including VC. Shaq was avg 35 and 14. He was just too good at that point to be stopped. I think While Kobe is great, luck had a good deal to do with it. Suppose the hornets decide not to trade Kobe, what real options did he have? Would he really have just sat out? Suppose he played in Charlotte, would he be revered as he is now, or would he be considered a malcontent?
Now that is an interesting question. I think he would have played out his rookie deal and bolted for a bigger market/better team. I think his development might actually have been hastened if he was on Charlotte rather than LA. He might even benefit from spending his formative years carrying a bad team, learning to appreciate good teammates and wanting rings instead of stats. He probably wouldn't have 4 rings, but he would be just as good a player because of his drive, and he'd have better overall career stats.
Oh alright.. now I understand. I agree with you then. But wouldn't that be obvious... I mean when all other things are equal.. of course if a player has better handles hes better. Just like if all things were equal, but a player had a better jumpshot of course he would be more "elite". (see early LeBron vs other superstars when LeBron didn't have a jumpshot)
