Reggie Miller is better than Steph Curry

[Lefty2one]

I’m not sure there’s a single thing Reggie was better at than Curry.

Some analytics love Reggie but all of those stats have to be taken in context.

Reggie is an OWS darling. In 1993-94 he finished 4th. This was Hakeem Olajuwon's MVP season. Hakeem is generally considered the second-best player of the 90s after MJ. The Dream finished 10th in OWS. You know who finished one spot ahead of him? AC Green.

ORtg is another one. Reggie led the league with an ORtg of 122.8 in 1993-94. Hakeem didn't even finish in the Top 20 but do you know who did? Dennis Rodman, who averaged 4.7 ppg. Steve Kerr finished 4th that year.

None of these stats can be used as a singular thing to point to who is/was a better player. You can't say "Player X is better than Player Y because of this one advanced stat" but man do a lot of younger people try these days.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Two things.....

1) The difference in comparing the players from different eras is....older people have actually seen the careers of both in real time. I wonder how many posters taking Curry's side actually even saw Reggie live once. I used to stay up late in college watching him with Pooh Richardson at PG.

Many of us never watched Ted Williams play. Does that mean we have no recourse to judge his greatness against current players?

This is the absolute saddest argument ever. We record wins/losses and compile stats for a reason.

 

[UConn990411]

Some analytics love Reggie but all of those stats have to be taken in context.

Reggie is an OWS darling. In 1993-94 he finished 4th. This was Hakeem Olajuwon's MVP season. Hakeem is generally considered the second-best player of the 90s after MJ. The Dream finished 10th in OWS. You know who finished one spot ahead of him? AC Green.

ORtg is another one. Reggie led the league with an ORtg of 122.8 in 1993-94. Hakeem didn't even finish in the Top 20 but do you know who did? Dennis Rodman, who averaged 4.7 ppg. Steve Kerr finished 4th that year.

None of these stats can be used as a singular thing to point to who is/was a better player. You can't say "Player X is better than Player Y because of this one advanced stat" but man do a lot of younger people try these days.

Yup, stats always need context around them. I know some of the advanced stats like PER are designed to give us a snapshot of how good a player was, but even advanced stats are more effective when they’re accompanied by the proper context.

The problem for Reggie is that adding context to his numbers makes him look worse, not better. He was a pretty one-dimensional player, and Curry has him beat in that one dimension.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

You say it's a ridiculous argument....then your counterpoint is who you'd take in a pickup game?

It's not a counterpoint, so much as an additional ridiculous argument.

 

[UofCT]

A) If they both played during Miller's prime, I think Miller would have been the better player. If you look at games played, Miller played 79+ games in 13 different seasons. He was more durable, tougher physically and for the game on the floor at that time? No different. Curry's body is already showing signs of breaking down somewhat.

B) If they both played in Curry's prime, I think Miller would be equal to him in every regard. Miller was a great catch and shooter, came off screens and would have NO problem assimilating into today's drive and kick 3 game.

No doubt history will likely crown Curry as the best 3 pt shooter ever and that's a hard argument to discredit. But the timing of Miller's career and his overall game makes it an interesting debate.

I agree 1000%

 

[UofCT]

Also, even just statistically, Steph is a better 3PT shooter on much greater volume while taking far more difficult shots than Reggie did.

Read into the hand check rule.

 

[EBonz30]

Reggie Miller is one of my favorite players of all-time & I don’t like Curry.

With that said, this is silly Curry is by far the better player, not even close.

Now if you want to argue that the ESPN Top 74 players post from last week in where they put Curry at number 13 all-time was a bit of a stretch- I am with you on that one.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

I agree 1000%

Why? What empirical evidence exists that could possibly support his point (B), which is that if Reggie Miller played in today's era he'd miraculously become a completely different player than he was?

 

[Deepster]

Why? What empirical evidence exists that could possibly support his point (B), which is that if Reggie Miller played in today's era he'd miraculously become a completely different player than he was?

You mean, instead of taking a handful of 3's a game and playing against the Knicks, Bulls and Pistons in brutally physical sub-100 pt games......that he had open license to shoot as many 3's as he wanted in a wide open offense with 135-133 type games? Sure. Why would he be any different?

 

[huskyinfl]

Shooting a ton of 3's used to be viewed as taboo and selfish. It wasn't done.

Just like in the Jordan documentary those guys calling each other soft in the 80s and 90s. Curry isn't hitting those shots when he's getting punched in the face

 

[UofCT]

Why? What empirical evidence exists that could possibly support his point (B), which is that if Reggie Miller played in today's era he'd miraculously become a completely different player than he was?

For the majority of Reggie Millers career he played in an era when it was legal for defenders to hand check at the perimeter. Reggie's numbers would have improved monumentally if he had the same freedom that Ray, Steph, Klay, etc had.

 

[husky429]

You mean, instead of taking a handful of 3's a game and playing against the Knicks, Bulls and Pistons in brutally physical sub-100 pt games......that he had open license to shoot as many 3's as he wanted in a wide open offense with 135-133 type games? Sure. Why would he be any different?

You keep saying that the NBA has 135pt games. Have you actually looked up the stats? Because that's rare. Most teams are not the Wizards or Rockets.

Average team points per game in Reggie's first 11 seasons: 103.3PPG
Average team points per game in Steph's first 11 seasons: 103.7PPG

Interesting argument. But let's not make things up to try to win it.

Reggie era pace: 95.4
Steph era pace: 95.1

It isn't until the last couple years that PPG and pace has skyrocketed. Early 80s basketball (before Reggie) was high scoring and fast. As you'd expect both plummeted in the late 90s/early 2000s iso-era.

 

[Lefty2one]

For the majority of Reggie Millers career he played in an era when it was legal for defenders to hand check at the perimeter. Reggie's numbers would have improved monumentally if he had the same freedom that Ray, Steph, Klay, etc had.

Reggie's main offense was as a catch-and-shoot guy. Hand checking didn't have a huge impact on those guys, it primarily hindered guys whose game was built around penetration. Sure, he'd be able to penetrate more in today's game because every and their mother can. Players in today's league have the red carpet into the paint.

Ray Allen played 8 seasons in the NBA before hand-checking was outlawed.

But hey, thanks for telling me to read into the rule.

 

[Lefty2one]

Why? What empirical evidence exists that could possibly support his point (B), which is that if Reggie Miller played in today's era he'd miraculously become a completely different player than he was?

Right. Reggie and Klay are stylistically very similar. Reggie dropped in today's game would be a better version of Klay but he wouldn't turn into Harden or Steph or any of these new age playmakers who handle the ball all night and run a thousand high PnRs.

I have no doubt that Reggie would be near the top 3PA every year (doubtful he'd out-chuck Harden) and get into the lane more frequently because it's so easy to do so but he's not going to magically morph into some totally new player.

 

[UofCT]

Reggie's main offense was as a catch-and-shoot guy. Hand checking didn't have a huge impact on those guys, it primarily hindered guys whose game was built around penetration. Sure, he'd be able to penetrate more in today's game because every and their mother can. Players in today's league have the red carpet into the paint.

Ray Allen played 8 seasons in the NBA before hand-checking was outlawed.

But hey, thanks for telling me to read into the rule.

the 8 season in Milwaukee and Seattle when he had minimal success and in the other thread you said he was overlooked.

 

[Lefty2one]

the 8 season in Milwaukee and Seattle when he had minimal success and in the other thread you said he was overlooked.

He led MIL to Game 7 of the ECF (he had a helluva series too) and was then traded away to a loaded West. Individually he was a beast all along but played in two small markets that never had the spotlight in the big moment (TV ratings were already going in the toilet in 2001).

If Reggie Miller would be better than Steph in today's NBA then prime Ray Allen would win MVP every single year.

 

[UofCT]

He led MIL to Game 7 of the ECF (he had a helluva series too) and was then traded away to a loaded West. Individually he was a beast all along but played in two small markets that never had the spotlight in the big moment (TV ratings were already going in the toilet in 2001).

If Reggie Miller would be better than Steph in today's NBA then prime Ray Allen would win MVP every single year.

So now all of a sudden losing in the ECF is an accomplishment to you? You’re remarkable. You contradict yourself each time you post.

 

[Spaceman213J]

I think it's comparing apples/oranges. I think Steph is better, but it is not by the margin that a lot of the pro-Steph-ers think. The two eras are completely different. Reggie would have scored more in today's game because of the freedom of movement. People want to talk about Steph dribbling and getting off his own shot. If he played in the 90's Steph would have been knocked around a lot more. The league was a lot more physical.
I'm not saying Steph or today's players are soft, it's just the game has changed. It's guard oriented. Reggie played in the day of the dominant center.
Regardless, what I'd pay to see if it were possible would be Steph vs. 'The Answer'. As good as Steph is, I think AI would eat him for lunch if both are in their primes. AI was a defensive and offensive nightmare for the opposing players.

 

[KingAG]

I think it's comparing apples/oranges. I think Steph is better, but it is not by the margin that a lot of the pro-Steph-ers think. The two eras are completely different. Reggie would have scored more in today's game because of the freedom of movement. People want to talk about Steph dribbling and getting off his own shot. If he played in the 90's Steph would have been knocked around a lot more. The league was a lot more physical.
I'm not saying Steph or today's players are soft, it's just the game has changed. It's guard oriented. Reggie played in the day of the dominant center.
Regardless, what I'd pay to see if it were possible would be Steph vs. 'The Answer'. As good as Steph is, I think AI would eat him for lunch if both are in their primes. AI was a defensive and offensive nightmare for the opposing players.

Steph is significantly better than Reggie. If Steph was more selfish he could easily average over 30 imo

 

[Lefty2one]

So now all of a sudden losing in the ECF is an accomplishment to you? You’re remarkable. You contradict yourself each time you post.

Nope, I just wouldn't categorize it as "minimal success". Try again, Mr. Strawman.

 

[UofCT]

Nope, I just wouldn't categorize it as "minimal success". Try again, Mr. Strawman.

round and round and round you go.

 

[tzznandrew]

Right. Reggie and Klay are stylistically very similar. Reggie dropped in today's game would be a better version of Klay but he wouldn't turn into Harden or Steph or any of these new age playmakers who handle the ball all night and run a thousand high PnRs.

He wouldn't be a better version of Klay because Klay is a better defender. But other than that, I think that's actually the right comparison.

 

[Lefty2one]

I think it's comparing apples/oranges. I think Steph is better, but it is not by the margin that a lot of the pro-Steph-ers think. The two eras are completely different. Reggie would have scored more in today's game because of the freedom of movement. People want to talk about Steph dribbling and getting off his own shot. If he played in the 90's Steph would have been knocked around a lot more. The league was a lot more physical.
I'm not saying Steph or today's players are soft, it's just the game has changed. It's guard oriented. Reggie played in the day of the dominant center.
Regardless, what I'd pay to see if it were possible would be Steph vs. 'The Answer'. As good as Steph is, I think AI would eat him for lunch if both are in their primes. AI was a defensive and offensive nightmare for the opposing players.

Steph is easily the most questionable modern star when you ask "how would this player do in the 90s?". KD, LeBron, Giannis, etc would all be fine. There are some real questions there for Steph. Hand-checking would bother him and he wouldn't be nearly as effective of a player if he couldn't penetrate as much.

The main debate in here has been how Reggie would do today. I can get behind Steph being worse in the 90s, I just can't see Reggie going from 3rd team All-NBA in the 90s to MVP in 2016. You're telling me prime Reggie Miller in 2016 would be so good that he'd beat out LeBron and Kawhi for MVP? Oof.

 

[Lefty2one]

He wouldn't be a better version of Klay because Klay is a better defender. But other than that, I think that's actually the right comparison.

I've gone back and forth on it. Klay is undoubtedly the better defender, by a pretty wide margin. He gets insanely hot at times, just like Reggie. Reggie has to get more credit for being the #1 on a team that reached five conference finals and made a trip to the Finals. Klay has never been the #1 guy. Everything changes when the opposing team's main goal is stopping you.

 

[tzznandrew]

I just can't see Reggie going from 3rd team All-NBA.

Three times. His whole career. One of which he only made because Jordan played 17 games.

 

[UofCT]

Three times. His whole career. One of which he only made because Jordan played 17 games.

Reggie not getting all NBA in 94 and 97 was ridiculous. He lost out to guys like Mark Price, Mitch Richmond, Kevin Johnson, and Latrell Sprewell. Reggie was better and Pacers were better.

In 1999 when Pacers were the #2 seed in East and went to ECF, Reggie didn’t get in and in 2000 when Reggie led his team to the finals he didn’t make a team. Nobody on the Pacers made it. Sad.

 

[Spaceman213J]

I also think a supporting cast of Klay, Green, Igoudala, Barnes, briefly Durant, Livingston... is better than Smits, Jackson, McKey, an aged Chris Mullin and Fred Hoiberg

 

[BlueMAB]

I also think a supporting cast of Klay, Green, Igoudala, Barnes, briefly Durant, Livingston... is better than Smits, Jackson, McKey, an aged Chris Mullin and Fred Hoiberg

All Reggie had to do was run off picks, catch and shoot. What does Chris Mullin's age have to do with it?

So what Curry plays on a better team? He had more responsibilities than Miller. He has to distribute, score, and handle the ball.

You'd expect a PG to have more assists than a SG. He does.

But he also shoots at a higher percentage than that SG. On top of that, despite the height disadvantage, he grabs more rebounds, and just for good measure he grabs more steals.

So seeing Steph come out better in just about every individual category, please tell me why it matters that Chris Mullin was on the back end of his career?

 

[Deepster]

All Reggie had to do was run off picks, catch and shoot. What does Chris Mullin's age have to do with it?

So what Curry plays on a better team? He had more responsibilities than Miller. He has to distribute, score, and handle the ball.

Yeah. "Distribute". Does that include the times he dribbles, passes it to Kevin Durant and watches the best scorer in the game put up 35?

 

[BlueMAB]

Yeah. "Distribute". Does that include the times he dribbles, passes it to Kevin Durant and watches the best scorer in the game put up 35?

The point is Steph is a better ball-handler and passer.

It's telling that in order to "prove" Reggie is better, you have to stay away from individual comparisons, and talk about their teammates.

It's even more telling that in your response to me, you didn't bother to quote or address the part showing Steph is a better defender and rebounder.

Ignore the assists.... Steph still averaged more, shot better, rebounded better, and got more steals.