RollWithEm

Regarding KJ being a hall-of-famer, I think some people on this board forget some of the players who are in the hall. In that vein, I’ll start with a statistical analysis. Here’s a partial list of the hall-of-fame (and future hall-of-fame) point men that KJ’s prime PER is better than: Steve Nash, Bob Cousy, Walt Frazier, Isaiah Thomas, Jason Kidd, Lenny Wilkens, Calvin Murphy, Dick McGuire, and Dennis Johnson.

You should also keep in mind that Kevin had a long prime (9 years) for a guard. The list of PGs who had at least as long or longer primes goes like this: Stockton (15 years), Jerry West (13 years), Magic (11 years), and Gary Payton (11 years). I’d say he’s in pretty elite company, there.

Another stat that I’ve always considered incredibly important when evaluating point guards historically is assist-to-turnover ratio. How does KJ stack up? He’s 4th behind Stockton, Mark Jackson, and Mo Cheeks. That makes him better than Magic, Kidd, Nash, Isaiah, Tiny, DJ, and Calvin Murphy in that category. Keep in mind that accurate turnover stats are not available for the entirety of the careers of West, Robertson, Frazier, Wilkens, and Cousy.

I also think that scoring at the PG spot is less important than shooting efficiency. With that in mind, where does KJ rank among PGs in True Shooting Percentage? He’s actually 5th all-time behind Magic, Stockton, Nash, and Mark Price. That puts him ahead of some extremely efficient PG scorers like Terry Porter, Chauncey Billups, Jerry West, Tiny Archibald, and everyone else to ever play the position.

In terms of individual accomplishments, KJ was named to 5 all-NBA teams in his career. The only PG ever selected as many times that is not in (or will not be in) the hall-of-fame is Tim Hardaway.

KJ made the playoffs in 11 of his 12 years in the league, and his playoff numbers are at or above his regular season numbers in every major statistical category other than assists (career 9.1 per, playoffs 8.9 per). I personally think that KJ deserves a spot in the hall more than Calvin Murphy, Lenny Wilkens (as a player), and/or Earl Monroe – among others.

__________________
But that's just me.

Najee

Not that PER is the sole component for determing whether a player is hall-of-famer worthy (Steve Nash's 2006-07 PER was higher than Kevin Johnson's best season, 1990-91, according to www.basketball-reference.com), but of the players you named with whom I am familiar I would say most hold advantages over KJ.

Walt Frazier was an infinitely better defender than KJ while being similarly productive on offense. Clyde arguably was the best player on the '73 Knicks championship team and the second-best player on the '70 titlists. Frazier and Bob Cousy (a former league MVP) are considered two of the best five or six point guards in NBA history.

Lenny Wilkens had a more productive career than KJ, finishing in the NBA's top 10 in assists 12 straight seasons. Wilkens was also more reliable than KJ, who came injury-riddled starting in 1992-93 and arguably disinterested in developing his game, according to some critics.

Isiah Thomas was much more of a leader than KJ ever was, both demonstrably, performance and team results. Zeke could score and pass as much as KJ and unlike KJ had a killer instinct in the big games. KJ had never been part of a titlist on the collegiate or NBA level.

Calvin Murphy is in the Basketball Hall of Fame arguably more for his collegiate career (where he generally is considered one of the very best players ever) than an above-average NBA career.

Dennis Johnson is not in the Basketball Hall of Fame, but DJ was arguably the most well-rounded player on a balanced Seattle team that won the '79 title and was the quarterback on the Celtics teams in the mid-80s that was a perennial title contender and winner. Not to mention DJ was a top-level defender.

Jason Kidd is not the scorer KJ was, but what he gives you in defense and rebounding (an extraordinarily strong benefit for a point guard) more than offsets the low field-goal percentage.

Steve Nash is a terrible defender, but arguably is a better shooter with better range and accuracy than KJ. Also, Nash (who has played in at least 70 games each of the past eight seasons) has been a more durable and reliable player than KJ. And fair or not, the league MVPs will play a factor.

That's a stretch, IMO. KJ's prime was from 1988-89 (his breakout first full season in Phoenix) through 1991-92; for the rest of his career, he was injury-prone and seemingly disinterested. From 1992-93 through 1994-95 he missed the equivalent of one NBA season (83 games). In his final six full NBA seasons, he played in at least 70 games once.

Because of the hamstring issues, KJ still was effective but he clearly was not as effective as he was in his first four full seasons in Phoenix. Keep in mind, this started happening when KJ was 26 and by that time KJ seemingly stopped expanding and improving his game.

If KJ put up several more seasons (I would say at least three or four) like he did in 1988-89 through 1991-92 he would get consideration for the Basketball Hall of Fame. But in reality he's not going in as a player who only had four or five seasons of consistent, strong play.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

RollWithEm

I regard Steve Nash’s prime as the last eight seasons (including the 2007-08 season). Over that time period, Nash’s cumulative PER was 21.4. I regard KJ’s prime as the 1988-89 season thru the 1996-97 season. Over that time, Johnson’s PER was 21.5. It is very, very close between those two in that one area. My point isn’t necessarily that KJ is better than Nash. I was just trying to establish the framework for a discussion of KJ’s HOF candidacy since so many other posters categorically dismissed him.

I think you’re on the money, here. I don’t think KJ was in their class. I just wanted to show some uniformed people how favorably he stacks up statistically with some of the all time greats.

This will depend on how you define productivity and how you define reliability. In terms of productivity, I prefer Ast:TO ratio to assist totals and APG. In that context, we cannot really compare the two since TOs weren’t charted during Wilkens’ career. That being said, KJ was one of the best all-time in that stat. We’ll also have a tough time comparing Assist Rates since per possession stats are hard to come by in the 60’s as well. With this in mind, KJ was actually top 10 in assists 7 times in his career and still ranks 6th all-time in APG. Which one was more productive? I think it’s at the very least debatable.

In terms of reliability, Wilkens definitely played in a higher percentage of his teams’ games than did Johnson. In terms of playoff consistency, KJ went to the playoffs in 11 of 12 seasons and performed at or above his regular production consistently. Wilkens-led teams went to the playoffs in 7 of his 15 years, and Lenny’s playoff stats actually declined in every major category other than rebounds. Which one was more reliable? That depends on perception.

I won’t argue which player was a better leader. I hate that conversation on principle. I don’t think anyone who is not present in a team’s locker room, at a team’s practices, or in a team’s meetings can really purport to measure leadership accurately.

The perception certainly exists that Zeke was a great winner, but to what extent the talent and coaching he was surrounded by influenced his success is certainly in question.

Do you think Christian Laettner is a hall-of-famer?

Is that enough to make you think he was better than KJ? You didn’t really say.

I agree with you, here. I think Kidd has a good case for the hall-of-fame. I was just trying to point out that KJ was in the same conversation as Kidd.

Again, I don’t begrudge Nash the spot in the hall that he will eventually get. I simply think that if you consider guys like DJ, Nash, Kidd, Murphy, Wilkens, and Pearl Monroe, you have to consider KJ as being at least in the same class as those players.

__________________
But that's just me.

Najee

IMO, you're misunderstanding what I and said. No one is disputing Kevin Johnson's ability and production when he played; I said for years based on talent KJ was arguably the second-best player in the '87 class (after David Robinson). His length of time playing at an all-star level is what will not get him inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame.

KJ's prime, IMO, was only four seasons (1988-89 through 1991-92). The final six full seasons in Phoenix saw KJ missing lots of time (153 games) largely over hamstring injuries (which is usually associated with lack of conditioning). That went into the criticism that KJ was too involved with his community service work in Sacramento that he spent little time in the offseason working on his game. Moreover, he never adjusted his playing style or his approach to compensate for his situation.

KJ was an all-star-caliber at his best (NOTE: he only played in three All-Star Games), but given his short stay at that level and not enough major team accomplishments (and the majority of those came with KJ playing second fiddle to Tim Chambers and later Charles Barkley) he falls short. At least guys like Bernard King and Grant Hill can point to periods where they were the best player in the league at their position (and King in 1984-85 arguably was the best player in the NBA), and their careers were derailed by much more serious injuries.

KJ's career is more comparable to Marques Johnson's, another all-star-caliber player who didn't play long enough at that level and wasn't quite dominant enough to merit hall of fame status. And at least Marques Johnson's career was affected somewhat by a very severe neck injury.

In fact, I don't feel KJ has a more compelling case than Tim Hardaway, who at worst was as good as KJ in the early '90s, suffered a serious knee injury, reshaped his game and worked his way back to such level later in Miami. Once KJ started having the hamstring injuries the setbacks continued and it seemed like he never adjusted to overcome it.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

Najee

I'm sure you can count on one hand the number of teams that won NBA titles with a small point guard as its focal point, which is something Isiah Thomas has in spades over Kevin Johnson. The Bad Boys Pistons had some other talented players, but Zeke typically was the team's leading scorer and the one who set up the other players. In fact, it was drafting Zeke that eventually led to the transformation from one of the worst teams in the early '80s to a titlist at the end of the decade.

The Pistons teammates considered Isiah the leader, so it's not just hearsay or speculation. Unlike KJ (whose best team accomplishments came clearly as the No. 2 man to Tom Chambers and later Charles Barkley), Isiah was the one who scored 25 points in the third quarter of Game 6 of the '88 Finals. In fact, had Zeke not suffered a sprained ankle that affected his play in Game 7 the Pistons may have scored a three-peat. That's on top of being the 1990 Finals MVP.

The ironic thing is you had no problem placing Bob Cousy and Walt Frazier ahead of KJ, when historically among NBA insiders Zeke is considered the greater between him, Cousy and Frazier. What's indisputable is that Zeke won in college and the NBA with teams built with him as the No. 1 man.

It's fair to say Isiah fully earned his reputation as a a feisty competitor who offered no quarter and possessed the skill and determination to take over a game at will. When the game is on the line, give me someone like Isiah over a No. 2 player who spent his final six full seasons nursing hamstring injuries.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

RollWithEm

I’m not trying to claim that KJ was the healthiest player in the league. He definitely missed his share of time. I simply think that you are downplaying his prime length and over-selling his “lack of conditioning” to prove your point.

If his prime ended in ‘91-‘92, he must’ve been pretty good post-prime to be named to the all-NBA second team two years after his prime ended. Also, KJ played 43 minutes per game and averaged 26.6 PPG, 9.6 APG, and 3.5 RPG on 46% shooting in the playoffs that season. The following year (when he was 3 years past his prime, in your estimation) KJ played 37 minutes per game in the playoffs and averaged 24.8 PPG, 9.3 APG, and 4.1 RPG on 57% shooting. Despite missing many regular season contests in the years you claim he was past his prime, he sure seemed to play well for his team when it mattered most.

Also, I think your assertion that he “never adjusted his playing style or approach” later in his career is erroneous. His offensive game was always based on his blow-by-ability. He thrived on penetration and finishing well (for his size) in the lane. He never completely lost that aspect of his game, but he definitely became more perimeter-oriented as he got older. In the 1996-97 season for example, he shot a career high 44% from the 3-point line on 202 attempts. For a little context, he took a total of 153 3-point shots and never shot over 30% in the 4 years that you’ve referred to as his prime. You should also keep in mind that his per 40 minute averages and his efficiency stats never tailed off as he aged. Despite losing some quickness, he continued to be extremely effective late into his career whenever he was on the floor.

Since all-stars are voted on at the halfway point of the season and since there are 24 all-stars every year, I think all-NBA team selections are a much more accurate gauge of how a player measured up to his peers. He was selected to 5 such teams.

IMO the term “derailed” can only be applied to one of these three players. Grant Hill never really regained his pre-injury production or efficiency after the 2000 season. He lost the burst and athleticism that made him great.

Bernard King, on the other hand, should be in the hall-of-fame partially because of what he was able to accomplish after his injury. While not as dominant as he was in his early years, Bernard from the Bullets was an effective player who showed he could accomplish with skill what he used to be able to accomplish with raw power and beastliness. To say his career was completely derailed by his injury does a great disservice to his later years.

I think KJ is more in Bernard’s class that Grant’s, in that respect. KJ’s productivity, when he was playing, never dropped off. In fact, 4 of his top 6 PER seasons occurred after you say his prime ended.

Saying that Timmy was “at worst as good as KJ in the early ‘90s” is sensationalizing. I would probably say prime Tim Hardaway was at best on KJ’s level. Also, Hardaway had some solid years early in his stint with Miami. After his first 2 and a half seasons there, however, his production and efficiency definitely dropped a notch. KJ never experienced such a fall-off. If the Christian Laettner of PGs (Calvin Murphy) is in the hall-of-fame, both of these guys should be in, IMO.

Before I start my discussion of Isiah vs. KJ, I want to make it very clear that I think Isiah had a better career with more success and that Isiah is a more deserving hall-of-famer than is Kevin Johnson. Now that I have that necessary disclaimer out of the way, I will continue.

Your first statement seems to be the start of a tactic that too many people use as a crutch. Just because someone was unique, doesn’t necessarily mean they were great. Shaq was not a great basketball player just because he was huge. He was a great player because he utilized his physical characteristics to their utmost. Isiah was not a great player because he was better than the other little guys. He was a great player based on his ability and production in the regular season and playoffs. His height should not influence that.

Saying the bad boy Pistons has some other talented players is a bit of an understatement. They might not have had an individual as dominant as Barkley, but they were extremely deep with perfectly melded pieces. Furthermore, It’s not like they had a nucleus in place, then dropped in Isiah, then started winning titles. They acquired Tripucka, the Microwave, and Laimbeer the same year they drafted Thomas. They didn’t get Dumars, Mahorn, Rodman, or Salley until years later. You seem to be painting a skewed picture of those Pistons teams.

I also have no problem placing Thomas ahead of KJ. I have a huge problem, however, placing him ahead of Cousy. Cousy only had 7 more all-NBA team selections, 4 more championships, and 1 more MVP than did Thomas. The Couze also ended his career as the all-time assist leader. The Zeke/Frazier debate is a tight one, though. My top point guard list basically has Oscar and Magic in tier one (unless you consider Jerry West a PG). Then, I’ve got Stockton and Cousy in that next group. Isiah falls in that next tier with Frazier and Gary Payton. This puts him two tiers ahead of KJ’s group. I don’t think I ever actually implied that Zeke was better than KJ, despite your need to overrate him.

__________________
But that's just me.

Najee

In all fairness, I felt Gary Payton should have gotten the nod over Kevin Johnson that season for second-team all-NBA. But 1993-94 was also one of KJ's two years in his final six full NBA seasons he played in at least 60 games (two of seven if you count his aborted comeback).

To me, a play who missed one-third of the final six seasons of his career is one I would call "past him prime." Moreover, KJ played four more seasons after 1993-94 without an All-Star berth or an all-NBA selection. So, you can say that at least a large portion of his career KJ was "past his prime." Especially when the issue of the missing time is in part because of hamstring injuries.

I think your history is a little erroneous, too. During the 1994–95, 1995–96, and 1996-97 seasons, the NBA shortened the overall distance of the 3-point line. Given that KJ was a strong shooter from 20 feet, it's no surprise he would make more 3-pointers in 1995-96 and 1996-97 than he ever did. I can't say KJ improved as a 3-point shooter as much as the line was moved in.

I'm also not seeing your argument on KJ vs. Isiah Thomas. The bottom line is that a team built around Thomas' talents won back-to-back titles and were a sprained ankle by Zeke from winning a three-peat. Conversely, KJ was typically the No. 2 man on some good Suns teams that made one Finals appearance. It's apparent you didn't see Zeke play in his prime and really only remember KJ in younger days, but Zeke played at an All-Star level longer than KJ.

No one is saying KJ was garbage ... just that his lack of years playing at a certain level preclude him from being a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame. Throwing out strawmen like Christian Laettner doesn't make his case stronger (I didn't address it because it had no relevance to the discussion, much less as an attempt to invalidate Calvin Murphy's selection).

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.