A Look Back: 1996 NBA Draft

1984 - Hakeem, Jordan, Barkley, Stockton, Robertson, Thorpe, Willis

2003 - Lebron, Wade, Melo, Bosh, Hinrich, TJ Ford, Diaw, Travis Outlaw, Barbosa, Josh Howard

Some pretty deep drafts right there

 

I think Walker is better Shareef.

 

I always catch flack for this. But IMO the 96 draft is better than 84 having an array of franchise quality players. Yes the expanded league and watered down depth has something to do with it. But still.

Also in 84 draft, Alvin Robertson and Willis. Thorpe too I think.

A lot of those 96 guys faded quick and hard. But in their primes were something to be reckoned with.

 

96 was amazing... slam did a piece on this a few years back- shareef is better than walker IMO, we still gotta wait for 03. 84 obviously has some of the 50 greatest players, and also is the year the GOAT was drafted.

 

I disagree. the 96 draft may be deeper. But the 84 draft produced FOUR all time greats.

Look at the top 4 guys by positions:
Stockton > Nash
Jordan > Kobe
Barkley > J O'Neal
Hakeem > no center only two SGs Iverson and Allen

 

Although Shareef has always been one of my favorite player, I think Walker is both a better player (marginally) and more successful. At least he has a ring to go with the stats and money.

 

Sorry, I'd take Nash over Stockton any day.. no doubt stockton was one hell of a player though.. Nash is a two should be three time mvp

Kobe and Nash will go down as 'all time greats' at one point.

 

the is the defining debate of that draft.

SAR vs Antoine Walker!

 

Also drafted in '96:
-Kerry Kittles
-Jeff McCinnis
-Jerome Williams

Ex-Rockets
-Shandon Anderson
-our man Moochie Norris

Samaki Walker is way more a bust than Lorenzen Wright.

 

Fatoine the Chucker won on both levels for whatever reason. That's more than SAR can say considering he's made the playoffs once in 13 seasons.

Historic debate settled.

 

Shareef
1x ALL-STAR
All-Rookie 1st Team
2000 Olympic Gold Medalist

Best Season: (02-03) 19.9PPG(TS%.566), 8.4Reb, 3Ast, 1.1Stl, 2.6T.o.
Career Avg: 18.1PPG(TS%.549), 7.5Reb, 2.5Ast, 1Stl, .8Blks, 2.6T.o.




Antoine
3x ALL-STAR
All-Rookie 1st Team
2006 NBA Champion

Best Season: (00-01) 23.4PPG(TS%.490), 8.9Reb, 5.5Ast, 1.7Stl, 3.7T.o.
Career Avg: 17.7PPG(TS%.485), 7.8Reb, 3.6Ast, 1.2Stl, .5Blks, 2.8T.o.​

 

Give me Shareef any day, Toine was just an overrated chucker who shouldve never been an all-star, Shareef had skills but was forced into being a number 1 option.

Antoine had some playoff games where he showed amazing heart but Shareef's teams were never good enough to make the playoffs, well most werent.

 

Come on people. No draft comes close to 1984.

Assuming everyone's in their prime, here it is by position:

PG-Stockton vs. Nash. In the best hopes for the 1996 fans this is a wash. However, I don't see Nash being as crafty and crooked as Stockton.

Slight advantage 1984

SG-MJ Vs. Kobe. Similar talents but MJ would be in Kobe's head the whole game and Kobe would want to match MJ so he'd take enough ill-advised shots to counter his contributions. MJ is also more clutch.

Advantage 1984

SF-Barkley vs. Stojakovic. Barkley has to play here because 1984 is so deep in 4s. As to the comparison... please. The same would apply to SAR or Walker. All decent players but not on the Chucksters level. The reason I put Peja here is he would run a lot and take CB away from the basket a bit more.

Advantage 1984

PF-Thorpe vs. O'Neal. You could go Willis here easily... even Cage... but Thorpe's an ex-Rocket so he gets the nod. O'Neal's a good talent, more talented offensively than any of the 1984 PFs... but he also cedes strength and toughness to 1984.

Advantage 1996

C-Dream vs. Camby. Wipeout.

Huge advantage 1984. If 1996 moves O'Neal to C that narrows it slightly but takes away their advantage at PF. No player on 1996 scores consistently against Dream and on offense he goes through O'Neal, around Z, and over everyone else. Worse for 1996, if he's playing Camby or Z he can cheat and be more effective at help D in the lane.

OK, so definite advantage to 1984 with four of the top players ever at 4 different positions. But what about the bench?

Frontcourt:

1984: Sam Perkins, Kevin Willis, Michael Cage, Jerome Kersey

1996: SAR, Walker, Z

Big advantage 1984. Willis and Cage lay the lumber, Perkins poses match-up problems for any of the 1996 bench and Kersey flies around the perimeter.

Backcourt:

1984: Alvin Robertson, Vern Fleming, Tony Campbell

1996: Iverson, Allen, Marbury, Fisher

Advantage: 1996. On sheer talent, this is the only category that 1996 easily wins. Still, 1984 has one of the best ever defensive guards and if I was coaching 1984 I'd put Alvin on Allen and take my chances with the 1996 quick guards taking jump shots. Under that scenario, the only player I'd fear is AI because the 1984 frontcourt should be able to stop stop or pound most penetrations but AI is fearless. Even though 1996 wins this category I don't think it's by near enough to counter the overall talent advantages of 1984.

Tactics: 1984 is well rounded. Scoring can come from all 5 positions and several backups. 3 great 1-on-1 defenders and several bruisers in the paint. For their size, 1984 is surprisingly quick with Thorpe and Willis running the floor well for 4s and Dream being the fastest 5 ever. I see them playing a conventional offense with Stockton distributing to great scorers at the 2, 3, and 5 and allowing the 4 to crash and cleanup any messes. On D, the guards play aggressive (particularly when Alvin and MJ are on the court) knowing they have a great shot-blocker who's not too concerned about the offensive threat of the guy he's guarding. Needless to say, 1984 owns the boards.

The strength of 1996 is in their guard play and I'd probably move Kobe to 3 and play Nash and AI together hoping to create mismatches and outquick 1984 and tire their 3 main guards out. Of course, that's puts tremendous pressure on Nash to keep everyone happy, but it's really the only option they have as they won't be able to score consistently on 1984 post defense. This might force Kersey to take a few minutes guarding Allen and Kobe so 1984 wouldn't have to play Fleming and Campbell. On D, they'd have to press and gamble in the backcourt to prevent the entry pass. There's really nobody on 1984 you can leave open to double team Dream or MJ or Barkley.

Ultimate advantage: 1984

 

I was at that draft in Vancouver and am still disappointed that they didn't make a move on Nash (would have probably skyrocketed local interest). I know he wouldn't have gone at 3 at the time, but Grizzlies should have traded down.

 

Me too. I would take Nash any day of the week over John Stockton.

Nash is a cold blooded killer. Stockton was a great player but was aided that Karl Malone never missed any games.

I don't think Stockton ever had a triple double and his high for points is only like 33.

Nash can kill you scoring or by setting up teamates and usually does both. Three years ago when the Suns beats Mavs in the playoffs he had 48 points in game 5 and then followed that up in game 6 by having 39 points 12 assists and 9 rebounds in the series clinching victory. I don't think Stockton has ever had games like that.
I would have loved to see if John Stockton could take the Jazz to the Western Conference Finals if they lost Karl Malone for the whole year.


People tend to revere players from the past, but Steve Nash is a superior basketball player to John Stockton.

 

Big Country and Nash? Thats just cheating.

 

Give me 84 hands down. No one can stop MJ or Hakeem from scoring. It would be illegial just to put those two on the same team in general. If 84 had a HOF big then maybe we could talk, but they are heavy at guard instead.

Also, who is going to score easily on MJ and Hakeem? You mean I actually have Stockton to set both of those dudes up? You are going to double and give Stockton open looks? I actually have Barkley to gobble up all the rebounds since you surely can't go solo on MJ or Hakeem? What....Stockton actually plays D too, and I can also use Alvin Robertson as a stopper?

Man please.........

 

Nash's high marks for each category:

PPG: 18.8 (05-06) (14.1 PPG for career)
APG: 12.1 (07-08) (7.8 APG for career)
SPG: 1.0 (3 seasons) (0.8 SPG for career)
RPG: 4.2 (05-06) (2.9 RPG for career)

Stockton's:

PPG: 17.2 (2 seasons) (13.1 PPG for career)
APG: 14.5 (89-90) (10.5 APG for career--Stockton has 7 seasons with greater APG than Nash's best year)
SPG: 3.2 (88-89) (2.2 SPG for career--Stockton has 19 seasons with more SPG than Nash's best)
RPG: 3.3 (2.7 RPG for career)

 

And what if Stockton was in Dantoni's system? He prolly would have had similar numbers. I concede that Nash is a better shooter then Stockton. But Stockton was a way better defensive player.

And Nash's supporting cast in the Suns were better then Stockton's Jazz outside of Malone. When Suns lost Amare for the year Marion just stepped in and filled what they were missing from Amare.

I remember Nash's numbers skyrocketing when he became a Sun under Dantoni's system. Otherwise he was just another good pg up until that point.