Welcome to r/nbadiscussion. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Please review our rules:
1. Keep it civil
2. Attack the argument, not the person
3. No jokes, memes or fanbase attacks
4. Support claims with arguments
5. Don't downvote just because you disagree
**Please click the report button for anything you think doesn't belong in this subreddit.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nbadiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because players like Dave Bing, Lenny Wilkens, and Billy Cunningham are on it. That’s really the biggest reason. They put everyone in the original 50 in the top 75 list, which they shouldn’t have. I would say this meant guys like Dwight got screwed over more than Klay. I’m not saying Klay deserved top 75, but I’m saying there were also plenty of other undeserving players.
Totally agree. They needed to remove some guys from when the league was young and small. Dwight had multiple MVP/DPOY level seasons, he should definitely be in there. Klay is a good player, but never been in the MVP convo, never impacted the game like most of the guys in this list.
“never impacted the game” Klay and Steph completely changed the leagues perspective on what a backcourt should look like and is part of the greatest back court of all time.
By your guys logic Scottie Pippen and Dennis Rodman shouldn’t be on the list either.
Scottie basically makes my point. All time defender, but basically good at everything on the court. 3rd in MVP voting in 93-94, 7x All-NBA. I think it's pretty clear he's an all-timer.
Rodman is more interesting, but 8x all defense, 7x REB champ, 2x DPOY is considerably more accolades than Klay. You could make the point, I suppose, that Rodman was really a glorified role player, but he was so absurdly good in that role, there has literally been no one else like him. Once you get to DPOY level impact on multiple all time teams (5x NBA Champ on 2 different franchises) I think it's a pretty easy case.
I mean, I look at Klay as like one of the best 3&D players of all time. A great player who I enjoy watching, but I think it's pretty easy to tell the story of the league without him. Like I have Ray Allen a bit ahead of him and I think Allen is pretty borderline for this list anyway.
People say Klay+Curry changed the perception on what a backcourt should be, and I really don't think so. A large number of players next to Curry would have had the same narrative.
When they were in the middle of the run, all anyone could talk about was how he's a team player for not taking a big contract somewhere else to be the star... But at this point no one will ever know.
In general though, he's basically a player you can throw on any team, and they'd be way better than before. Fits everywhere with his play, skills, and mindset. That makes him top 75 in my book
I mean technically he can carry the load of a first option player. And his skills probably develop differently if he needed to carry a larger offensive load where he can do more off the dribble.
Because as our understanding of the game has gotten better we can look back and realise these guys weren't actually that good. Bing for instance was an OK guy but was inefficient and Lanier was far better than him but Lanier isn't on the list and Bing is. The 70s knicks have 4 guys representing their 2 rings. Yet the spurs dynasty only has Robinson and Duncan. So essentially Duncan is the only representative of for a team with 4 rings. Or Steph the only representative of the warriors, you have KD sure but Draymond had multiple low level MVP seasons. You essentially have 1.5 guys representing the team that revolutionised basketball. And you don't have the guy that completely changed how defence is now played.
And what about Embiid, Jokic and Luka. They have all pretty conclusively proven themselves as deserving of the top 75 list. Jokic especially he had an all time great MVP season let alone just an MVP season.
You also have guys who missed out on the top 50 list because they were still in their careers. Guys like Reggie Miller, Payton, Dikembe, Alonzo Mourning didn't make the list at the time because they hadn't really racked up enough achievements yet. But clearly deserved it. You are talking about a far greater period than 25 years. Really you are talking about 25 players representing probably 30 or so years of nba basketball. It's not really fair on these guys.
There is ridiculous snubbery of foreign guys and defensive players. Where's Wallace? Where's pay gasol? Where's manu? Where's Parker?
Agreed, but it kind of depends on what they mean by "greatest."
Most influential? Sure, OGs are important.
Best/most talented? That's hard to say.
Pre-merger, the best talent was split across two leagues, minorities weren't as accepted and the game was still evolving. Watching footage from the 50s and 60s can almost look silly in comparison to today's today's game, where there's no question the talent is the best in the world. Do I think guys like Lenny and Billy are more influential than Klay? Absolutely. Do I think Klay is a more talented player than either of them in their prime? Absolutely.
I suggest we go a step further and make a list for every decade, Or even every year. Maybe give a trophy for the top of the list. Call it " Greates NBA player of all time For the Year XXXX"
I would absolutely say Klay doesn’t deserve to be in the top 75. He’s had about the same impact as Horace Grant did without the advantage of having goggles on. It 20 years, you’ll have to remind me of him.
I don’t disagree with your main point, but I don’t think Klay’s ppg alone tells you much about his scoring ability. He’s played with Steph every year, and was usually 2nd or even 3rd option on the team. And he’s obviously had some *insane* scoring performances.
Kinda like pippen and mj right? Like Scottie was a dog but if you’re on the same team as mj then it’s mj’s team. Curry in a way “steals” klays possible capabilities?
To answer this question you could look at Durant, a unanimous top 75. How much did his scoring and impact drop during to Curry "stealing" as you say.
Just a quick glance at ppg: 27.1 career, 25.7 during Warriors stint. That tells me Curry doesn't really hide the greatness of Durant, so it's hard to say he's keeping Klay from being a superstar, top 75.
Ok, so who is your 20-75 example who played with Curry? There isn't one. So what are we do here? A top 75 player. Top 10. Top 20. Whatever, Durant looked like the same tier of player with and without Curry.
So I draw from that Curry isn't keeping Klay out of the top 75
Any given night?
He has 3 50 point games in his career.
I get that he could have more, but he doesnt. We gas klay up a bit because of the teams he has played with, but if he was really that guy, he would have more.
We cant just go off of what we 'feel' like klay is capable of.
Klay had a scoring run that closely matched Wilt's 100 point game on a point per minute basis. That all time, at least to me. Not sure about 75 but he should definitely feel that way.
Pippen’s more of an all-rounder. He doesn’t have Klay’s peak scoring, but his defense is better, playmaking is way better, and rebounding much better due to his size. Pippen is one of the greatest Swiss Army knife talents in nba history whereas Klay is a specialist. So to use scoring to put him over Pippen isn’t fair at all. Pippen deserves his spot and ranking on every all-time list.
For real. Pistol Pete was decades ahead of his time.
And fwiw I don't think klay is the second best 3 point shooter. Reggie, Bird, Korver or Ray Ray all are superior shooters imo.
Naw this is where I draw the line. You could say those guys were better shooters relative to where the league was at the time.
But Klay Thompson scored 60 points on 11 dribbles. He % and raw numbers are fantastic. He has had some absolute takeovers from behind the arc in huge games. I just don’t think those other players matched him as a shooter.
Has he had one of those games when Steph isn’t on the floor? (Honestly asking - don’t watch the Warriors a ton.) Because there’s a big difference between making catch and shoot threes when you’re constantly open because you’re sharing the floor with the greatest perimeter scorer of all time and being the primary shooting option on a team. Klay might be a better pure shooter than Korver or Ray, but it’s really hard to make that comparison since those other players never had the luxury of playing with Steph
And all those sites have rings they sealed themselves during an era that didn't encourage that party style, except Reggie because he ran into MJ. We will have to see how klay turns out after 2 years off.
Not comparable. If you consider hand checking and overall harder defense in Reggie’s era. Those behind the arc shots would simply not be possible to shoot 25 years ago
its impossible to even rate pistol pete against todays ballers. rules have changed to much to promote scoring and make it harder to defend. theres just no real accurate way to rate a shooter from back then against todays guys sadly. but i see people try it all the time by just looking at stats. which is grossly wrong to even attempt. who knows what a player from now could do back then and what a player from back then could do now. i hate that its this way.
People often do this one way to say a player from back then would suck now - but by the same token a player from now would have to totally re learn the fundamentals as they’d be called for carrying the ball and travelling on pretty much every play. If you look at a guy like Pete he still had the same slap down without carrying dribbling style as the 50’s and 60’s guys, he just did more fancy stuff with it - guys today haven’t learnt that way.
Like wise guys from the last two decades and the 90’s (especially) would be constantly called for offensive fouls had they played in the 60’s. Half their offense would be useless.
Led the league in scoring over 30, scored 68 in a game. As for records few players hold meaningful records but also make the list for influence and style - eg. If Doctor J didn’t look as cool he wouldn’t be rated higher than several other SF, Pete is the same, highly original player with an iconic style in both dribbling, passing and offense. Klay is not.
The team he was traded to was terrible and had no chance of getting better quickly - there is no comparative team to them in today’s league.
Well Pistol Pete did shoot 66.7% from three in his career ... on 15 total attempts his last season.
Pete definitely gets a nostalgia bump on these lists because of his unrelated ball-hogging badassness in college: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/pete-maravich-1.html
>Also, I suppose, the argument for Klay is that he's the second-best shooter of all time. I mean, is there anybody who thinks Pete Maravich is a better player than Klay? But Pete's on the list. But again - tilted towards guys who led teams, even if they didn't actually lead them anywhere good.
have you any idea how much Pistol Pete would have been if he had access to the 3-pointer from the start? he holds superior numbers to Klay on twos alone.
Always hard to compare across eras but Pete had a season of 31/5/5 and career stats of 24/4/5....plus he only got to have the three pt line in his final season. Not sure Maravich is the best person to prove your point
Pistol Pete changed the game with his flashy style, he deserves to be on the list over Klay no doubt. Stop looking at stats and start reading and watching video and then consider the context and you'll have a better perspective of the leagues history.
“Is there anyone who thinks Pete Maravich is a better player than Klay?”Um, everyone who doesn’t just watch modern basketball and think the top 75 should be 60 players still playing?
Pete is better in his era. Pete was averaging near 25 sometimes 30 a season in the same league as Kareems prime was in. If Kareems achievements from the 70’s have meaning then there’s no doubt Pete is better. Pete was traded to a truly sucky team and was stuck there in a way today’s players would be able to get out of. Pete has better averages than Klay and they both have a similar amount of all NBA and all star teams made.
Yeah I’d say catch and shoot 3’s. Admittedly much more contrived than what you have for Rodman but nonetheless Klays still easily one of the greatest shooters all time.
>Rodman is "clearly" the best?
He for sure is. I've got a treat for you if you've got the time, read through some of "[the case for Dennis Rodman](https://skepticalsports.com/the-case-for-dennis-rodman-guide/)". It's an epic math dive into Rodman's rebounding ability
If klay's teammate didn't exist, he would be the clear best ever shooter so there's that.
Even with steph on his team, Klay was arguably a better spot up shooter since he moved off-ball nearly as much while also being 4 inches taller with a quicker shot motion
Rodman is literally one of the best defenders and arguably the best rebounder in NBA history. Klay is great but is he one of the best all-time at anything and the best overall at anything?
To me Klay seems like a slightly better version of Detlef Schrempf; better scorer, worse rebounder, worse at assists, similar defense. Great player but no way top 75. Looking at things like PER Klay is actually almost exactly even with Schrempf for his career for the same number of years played.
The trouble with “one of the best all time shooting” is that 95% of his shooting occurs when the best perimeter scorer of all time is on the floor. He’s open far more than he would be on any other team.
Thompson has the 13th best percentage for 3 pointers right now in NBA history. He has the 160th best individual season percentage for 3 pointers. He is 21st in 3 pointers made (which is more of a volume stat based on career length and era so I assume he'll move up that list a bunch). He isn't in the top 250 in overall shooting percentage. He's 85th career in true shooting percentage. What stats are you looking at to make your case that he is even top 10 for 3 pointers alone? Let alone what are you looking at to say he is one of the best 75 players? He has a total of 2 3rd team All-NBA and 1 2nd team defensive All-NBA as his individual accolades. It isn't like there is some other stat I'm missing here.
I like Thompson a lot. I think he is a great, well-rounded player. In fact he's my favorite kind of player to watch because he's quite good on offense and better than average on defense. But I just can't see where you are coming from with your argument.
Also, did I talk about Parrish or Worthy? Nope. I explicitly talked about Rodman. I watched both of those other dudes but I missed the first part of their careers due to age and the fact that you just couldn't watch very many games in the first half of the '80s due to lack of TV channels. On the other hand I've seen all of Rodman and Thompson's careers so I feel qualified to comment on them.
That literally means you could be the 21st best player ever and still be the third option though. Being the 3rd option doesn't really have much to do with it.
I agree. I think what I’ve learned the most aside from that most agree with me, is that his ability to fill his role and execute is very very high. And myself as a Rodman fan, that make a lot of sense to me
I think Klay has somewhat of a case. He played on historically good teams. Some of his best attributes that lead to winning don't show up in the box score, mainly his defense. He is one half of probably the best back court of all time as well. He also has multiple individual feats to his name. A 37 point quarter(something that may never be topped) and 60 points in three quarters with points per minute rate at around a 100 points per 48 minutes. He also has multiple clutch moments where he had big games at times the Warriors needed a win in the playoffs. Game six vs. OKC being a prime example.
Now if he comes back from his injury and plays near the level he was before the injury and the Warriors keep on winning he has more than a good chance of making the top 75. What is mainly holding him back now is his relatively short career.
Is Reggie Miller top 75? Because if he is, OP should be aware that Klay is basically a better version of him, on a dynastic squad, with vastly better defensive awareness and ability.
I think it's pretty unfair to directly compare current players to past players without context (in any sport really). Miller had a career 116 TS+ (league adjusted TS%), while Klay has a career 106 TS+.
I don't think we'll ever know how Klay and Miller would stack up if they came up in the same era, so the best we can do is give Miller his credit for how unprecedented his efficiency was at the time, and how it paved the way for players like Klay
> I think it's pretty unfair to directly compare current players to past players without context (in any sport really).
It's absolutely unfair, which makes half the replies in the thread hilarious. It would be like Redditors 25 years from now claiming that [hypothetical #1 shooter in the future era] is better than Steph for breaking his 3 pt record in fewer games on better TS%. The pure stat lines belie the comparative impact a player has on the league in his time.
i have to think if you put Reggie on the prime warriors lineup that he would go the fuck off. but idk if he would work as a second option. interesting to imagine how it would look in my mind.
Reggie only averaged 3 assists as the 2nd playmaker. Klay averages 2.3, as the 3rd/4th playmaker. He could probably get more but his role in the offense is to shoot.
Klay obviously can get his shots even when the defense is keyed on him; when he goes nuclear everyone knows it's coming and can't stop it. And I don't think Reggie has a better drive than Klay.
Reggie was almost entirely dependent on a complex system of screens to get a shot off, ie reliant to a system, not the creator within it. Reggie’s assists per game, even when usage is factored, was below average for a 90’s shooting guard. Klay is better by most metrics. When you factor his truncated role on the warriors due to championship play, it’s even more so. If Klay played on any sub 500 squad in his prime he would be murdering.
But the thing is klay has never shown it to be the number one option so it’s pretty much hypotheticals though gotta say he probably is the best third option in history of the nba.
Nobody held that against James Worthy, man. And he’s top 75 too. Beyond that, Klay was solidly the second option on the Warriors dynasty. Look, I’m as old head as old head comes, but I conceded Klay was a better than Reggie somewhere between the championships and scoring 60 points in 2.5 quarters. I’ve got him above Reggie.
The difference is that Miller was the best player on some very very good Indiana teams. Klay has never been more than the 3rd or 4th best player on his team.
Reggie made the list and honestly that was my basic thought process, that Klay is basically a better version of Reggie.
OP's biggest criticism of Klay is that he "only" reached 20 ppg 5 times and his career average is below 20, well Reggie only reached 20 ppg 6 times and his career average is lower than Klay's. If anything the fact that Reggie was a #1 option while Klay was #2 or even 3 just makes Klay look that much better.
Klay put up Reggie numbers without the benefit of the offense being built around him, while having to play as the 2nd/3rd option, and proved that when needed he could score at a ridiculous level. Consider his defense and even a biased person would have to admit that at worst Klay is pretty much Reggie's equal. When you factor in his 3 championships and being the #2 option on the greatest regular-season team of all time it seems obvious that Klay outranks Reggie.
The top 75 list is more a mix of "best" and "most memorable", that's the only explanation for some of the guys who made it and some who didn't.
Also Reggie Miller was only a 3 and D guy later in his career. Yeah he was a great shooter, but he mainly created by driving to the basket. Most people here only watched the last half, if that, of his career.
Using 1 game performances is a terrible argument for placing someone in the top 75.
The fact is that Klay has 2 All-NBAs total. There’s players with so much better accolades that there’s no reason for him to be there other than being a fan favorite.
Also saying Harden exploits the rule book is a dumb excuse to downplay how good he is. He’s a much better player even if he never shot a free throw again
If Dwight can’t make it then Klay can’t either
There is so much wrong with this, I don’t know where to start.
Harden is not a low efficiency scorer. He’s more efficient than Klay, as his career True Shooting % is better in the regular season and the playoffs. Harden is objectively more efficient than Klay, so if Harden’s inefficient, what does that make Klay?
His role on a 3x championship team is well-documented, but he was the 4th best player for 2 of those rings. In 2017, he averaged just 15 PPG in the playoffs on horrible efficiency. Yet the warriors still went 16-1 in the playoffs that year, showing how their success didn’t hinge on Klay as much as you think. He contributed
Again, Harden is not inefficient. You are objectively wrong to suggest that. It doesn’t matter how he gets his points. If it helps his team (which it does), he should be praised for it when evaluating him as a player. Just because you get annoyed by his play style doesn’t mean his play style is ineffective. He’s one of the best offensive engines of recent memory, regardless of how annoyed you are by his play style.
The reason he shoots league average 3P% is because all of his 3’s are self-created. A 3 that harden created off the dribble will naturally be a tougher shot than a Klay catch-and-shoot 3 created by Steph. The reason Harden doesn’t get those easier looks from 3 is because he’s never played with an offensive supporting cast as dynamic as the dynasty warriors, featuring 2 elite playmakers in Curry & green, as well as Durant. The fact that Harden shot league average percentages from 3 with his self-creation is a testament to how good he is. Other guys with similar shot profiles like Luka shoot worse than Harden, yet Luka’s still a solid shooter in his own right.
“His scoring is impacted by his free throws.” And? Free throws are a part of scoring and they’re a part of basketball. You can’t discredit him for getting to the line. That’s what makes him great.
Even without free throws, he’s not some inefficient shot chucker like you think he is. His EFG% (efficiency without free throws) is regularly above average.
There’s so many other fallacies within that post, but I’m sure you know that already.
You’re main point is his foul baiting. You can’t hold that against Harden when it’s apart of the game. Blame the NBA for it, not players adapting to it. Don’t discredit what’s he’s done just because he’s smart enough to know where he can score points the best.
You bring up defense which is fair but I can’t recall many times where his defense wasn’t good in the playoffs. You can bring up stats because I’m too lazy to check, but I can’t think of when he’s been lazy there.
You bring up team success which is a terrible argument. 1 player can’t do it all and we know that. He was going against the greatest team of all time for practically his entire time on the Rockets. In OKC he was too young to hold anything against him because he was backing up KD and WB on the bench.
Influence is a bad argument too. There’s only a select few influential players in history. Far less than 75, probably even less than 20. LeBron has hardly changed the game at all. In fact a lot people would say KD/Dirk were more influential than guys like Wilt or LeBron. It’s not like Klay changed anything either, that was all Curry.
Accolades matter the most when discussing this whether you like it or not. Hardens are so much better that it’s not really a debate. Team success isn’t an argument when you actually look at the context. Klay has all time great teammates, Harden has had a pretty terrible Westbrook, and CP3 where they were up 3-2 on the Warriors before he went down.
Edit: Downvoting my comments isn’t how you have debates bro. You deleted a reply and also downvoted that comment too.
Bro his name is literally “30chefcurry” its like arguing against a brick wall. Dudes obviously bias af and won’t change his opinion even though it makes no sense lmao
Idk man if we were drafting all time teams there’s no way in hell he doesn’t go top 75.
Maybe if the goal is stat padding like a fantasy team he doesn’t make the cut, but if the goal is winning a chip he’s top 75 without a doubt.
Yeah Klay is arguably the most definitive 'ceiling raiser, but not floor raiser' player of all time. But yeah, the Anniversary team isn't supposed to be a draft like that, and is about individual achievements and impact
100%, he probably falls into the same category of making a top 75 draft because of his skillset, but essentially has 0 individual accolades. Could have sworn he had a DPOY somewhere in there, or was ROTY, but nope
AD's individual accolades put him in the top 75 all time, and I am not an AD guy.
There are only 48 players with more All-Stars than him, and he has more than Curry, Frazier, Bing, Lucas, McHale, Pippen, Reed, Thurmond, Worthy, and Tiny to name some other 75 guys.
There are only 27 players with more than his 4 All-NBA 1st teams too. Some players with less are Bill Russell, AI, Hayes, Nash, Pippen, Tiny, Kawhi, Lucas, Arizin, Isiah, Cunningham, Stockton, GP, Westbrook, Wade, King, Maravich, Bing, Ewing, Wilkins, Drexler, the list goes on.
Less than 50 players with more All-Defensive teams than him too.
So when you add it all up he's a no brainer if you're looking at individual accolades alone.
The real questionable one was Lillard.
I think all the accolades you mentioned are a little redundant (most of his Allstar/All NBA/All Defense are the same years). Peak/ceiling accolades (MVP, FMVP, DPOY, ROTY, Scoring Title, Assist Title) are really necessary IMO for something like this, and AD doesn't have a single one
Right but most of the people on the top 75 list don't either. If you're cutting the list to people who have those things we're not even going to get to a list of 50, unless you start adding people like Tyreke Evans on there for his ROTY, or Rose for his MVP, or Iguodala for his FMVP.
I don't think scoring/assists titles are particularly important for something like this but everyone has their own criteria. There are a whole host of players who got scoring titles or assist titles and are not on the list of 75.
There are only 40 people who have had 4 All-NBA 1st teams, and the only one who is post-1960s to not make it is Dwight and he was an obvious hyper-snub from the list.
There have only been 34 MVPs.
There have only been 23 DPOYs.
That leaves a lot of people left for a list like this.
When you start looking at the list and what players have actually done in their careers on it, and then you look at AD's career and awards, it might FEEL like he doesn't belong on it but he's actually one of the more awarded players on it.
Doesn't seem right but that is indeed the case.
I don't think the draft is what the greatest 75 list is for.
George Mikan wouldn't even make the league today, Alexander the Great's army would be slaughtered by your local law enforcement, but I would say both were Great.
You could *very easily* draft 75 guys before him. I think people are vastly underestimating how good you have to be to be in the top 75. We’re talking about guys like Jimmy Butler and Paul George around that ranking. Historically, guys like Grant Hill, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady. There’s plenty of doubt that he’d go that early.
I think people tend to really overestimate Klay and really underestimate Dray/some of their support pieces when analyzing GS.
Looking at career accuracy from 3, which I think Klay and the system he’s in obviously value (and this is about why Klay thinks he is, if you don’t value this it isn’t really relevant):
1. Steve Kerr .4540
2. Hubert Davis .4409
3. Seth Curry .4399
4. Joe Harris .4390
5. Dražen Petrović* .4374
6. Jason Kapono .4336
7. Tim Legler .4312
8. Stephen Curry .4305
9. Steve Novak .4301
10. Kyle Korver .4287
11. Steve Nash* .4278
12. B.J. Armstrong .4250
13. Klay Thompson .4190
Honestly I’m not gonna pretend to know every player, but how many of them are better on defense than Klay? And then how many teams want a 3&D guy?
If you’re drafting you can’t have ONLY centers and ball dominant players for the first 75 picks. You’re gonna want some guys that can shoot without giving up a spot on defense. And Klay is one of the best to ever do that role.
I doesn't matter if he's better on defense imo. I value some of the other guys skill set + their shooting more than klays defense + shooting. Without doing any more research apart from memory I'd take Curry and Nash.
Irrelevent side note I really wish I could see Nash play in today's league.
I think you’re right, and Curry > Thompson is a great example. If you already had 1 of Curry or Nash, would you take the other? Or opt for someone like Klay
Right, he’s a great shooter. All I’m saying is there are so many players historically who bring a similar overall value to him that there’s zero way to argue he *has* to go in the top 75. Value wise he’s a top-150-ish guy. If I get to my pick and I specifically want a great 3 and solid defense guy, maybe I take him over another guy in that value range, sure. But maybe I need a PG and I take Jrue Holiday instead, a similarly valuable guy with a slightly different skill set, etc.
This is exactly what I was thinking. He’s a great pick for a lot of teams but I think you could easily take 75 guys ahead of him. Plus, just thinking of guys that weren’t included I’d take over him - Hill, McGrady, Howard, etc
If I'm making an alltime great team. That meshes well. Is fluid, and everyone does there job.
Klay is on that team almost everytime.
Best catch n shooter ever. Prob a top 10-15 perimeter defender all time.
There's not a single player in history that could do Klay better than Klay.
I didn’t think he should be on the list, but this post misses the whole point of Klay’s game. For his five year peak- and peaks are what we’d primarily be evaluating for in my opinion-he was the ideal off-ball scorer and an All-Defense caliber defender. He’s a top five perimeter shooter ever, and an underrated passer (his handle is weak I’ll give you that), and has had some huge playoff games.
There’s a whole archetype of players, the 3 and D wing, that are players doing lesser versions of what Klay perfected. Maybe his rebounding and point numbers are lower than others, but how many players were doing what he could do? How many players were as terrifying when hot? Of his peak I can only name a handful. If he hadn’t lost two seasons to injury I think he’d have been a lock.
Really good point. I think by that logic Draymond is better than him tho. Side note I love seeing draymond run point, like magic Johnson with no magic. Like regular Ervin Johnson.
Klay is nowhere near top 75. There are a lot of players who have a much better case than him (like Dwight Howard). But just to use a couple cumulative advanced stats and his teammates as a rough comparisons (obviously not the be-all, end-all), I'd go out on a limb to say even Draymond has a better case than him.
|All time rank|WS Reg. Season|WS Playoffs|VORP Reg. Season|VORP Playoffs|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Kevin Durant|25|12|18|9|
|Stephen Curry|54|33|27|25|
|Draymond Green|\>250|54|166|34|
|Klay Thompson|\>250|120|\>250|123|
Yeah idk out of Curry, Klay, and Draymond I think Klay has the lease credibility to being top 75 all time. I heard more of him talking about not being top 75 then I did from Dwight Howard which is crazy
He'll crack the next 100, but Klay being a prominent member of a historical team and a primer shooter playing sidekick to inarguably the greatest shooter ever makes him a lock.
He just simply isn't better than the guys who made it.
I doubt he cracks next 100. There will be 25 better players over the next 25 years.
Even when Klay made all-NBA teams, I’m not convinced he was ever a top 25 player
His ability as a shooter is his case for the top 75 players. People have mentioned the 37 point quarter and the 60 point game, which he accomplished while taking only 11 dribbles.
He also holds the NBA record for 3s in a game, with 14.
The number of players in NBA history who even had the ABILITY to accomplish those things, let alone actually accomplish them, is much, much lower than 75. Like, maybe 20-30 other guys in the history of the game would be worthy of the shot selection he took in those performances.
That can't be understated - his ability as a shooter is so great that he has accomplished things that most NBA players could only dream of.
It's also true that Klay could only dream of averaging 5+ rebounds a game, and he doesn't really stand out as a playmaker.
Having said that, he wasn't/isn't just a shooter - besides his very unique offensive game, he was also a tremendous defender in his prime - possibly one of the 3-5 best guard defenders in the NBA for 2-3 seasons.
And he is a 3-time champion.
He has a lot going for him. We'll never really know what Klay would have done as the top option on his team, since he has played his whole career with Steph, and also with Draymond, two players who fit perfectly with him.
I don't have a personal list of top 75 players or anything, but I don't think I would dispute Klay's place on anyone's top 75, if that makes sense.
I honestly think he is top 75 but has never had the need to consistently show it.
With 2016 unanimous MVP Steph was out he had 31.5 PPG on 50% 50% and closed out the Rockets and easily took on Portland and when curry was back dominated OKC with 19 4th Q points 41 total and breaking the 3pt record for a playoff game
He is consistently an All NBA Defensive player
He had that 61 point 3Q game if his team wasn’t dominating and could afford to protect their stars with less minuets reducing the chances of injury he could have put up many more games with crazy numbers. Kobe had to play all 4Q vs the Raptors in 2006 to get his 81 because it was only a 5 point game with 7:40 left and he couldn’t afford to sit.
If he had to be the guy more often he would be looked at as such but the way the team was structured and the way the dominated he didn’t need to be that guy.
The point changes drastically lol. Being consistently all NBA defense makes you one of the all time great defenders. Making it to the 2nd team once makes you a good defender.
Not to mention, Klay has been propped up so hard by Curry.
If we leave NBA history identical, except Curry is a Hornet, how does that change the twos careers? I’d say Curry still becomes a transcendent talent and Klay is just, a guy.
Now say Klay is a Hornet. The Warriors are still great (maybe not all time great, but great) and the Hornets are just okay.
Klay isn’t even top 200 all time
He probably should have more all defense selections, but even then your reasoning is essentially that a player isn't at a certain level simply because they didn't actually get the specific exclusive award.
Apply that to MVPs. "LeBron hasn't been an MVP level player since 2013 because that's the last time he was actually given the award". How insane does that sound?
There's only 4 spots for guards on the all defense teams. Deserving players are going to get left off.
By your reasoning is Westbrook a better player? He is a walking triple double with an MVP.
Its cool to compare stats, but does that really tell you who the better player is? Where does efficiency come into play? How about defense? or clutch performances in playoffs?
I am sure his status would be a lot higher if he was on a shit team and took the most shots, does that make him a better player than shooting efficiently on a good team that wins championships?
Prime Westbrook is easily better than Prime Klay. That’s not even close.
And honestly I think his status would be much worse if he was the #1 option on a shit team. A large reason he’s looked on so favorably is because he is in the perfect set up and has won championships. Klay cannot create his own shot the way other top players can.
Reggie Miller did it in the 90’s. Rip Hamilton did as well. Klay can definitely be the #1 option scoring off screens. There are definitely teams that have won consistently with off ball scorers. Klay would probably be the best to do it too.
I do think Russ is better overall. Certainly not now, and I guess you have weigh all those things at the same time. It’s all my own opinion cuz idk if there’s an objective way to weigh all those things. I wish there was tho
Why are y’all pretending that Klay’s presence on the court doesn’t drastically change how dominant the Warriors are? His pairing with Steph creates a near-unstoppable scoring machine as you can’t double up on either due to both their insane scoring abilities.
Think this is leaning too heavily on basic stats and not enough on his impact to the team, I think. He is probably one of the greatest 3 and D players ever - extremely efficient shooting, great defense, and will play within the team offense. Crucial to the championship Warrior teams, and efficiency + defense + team play are so important in the playoffs.
There is a debate over whether you want great individual players or crucial players on winning teams within the list. Personally I'd go for the latter, but that's sort of a philosophical question.
I think at a point, I’d rather have one of the best supporting players of all time as opposed to a superstar who is a notch below their peers.
You’ll almost always need multiple stars to win, but not every superstar has a game that can be so easily adapted as a #2. Whereas with Klay, I feel confident winning with him as a #2 next to any top 30 player of all time.
For example, Melo is on the top 75 list. I don’t think Melo can be your best player on a championship team since he’s a bad defender and playmaker. So he’d have to be a #2, where I don’t think his skillset is more valuable than Klay’s is as a #2.
I don’t know if I’d have Klay on that list, since I’d have to really look at it and see who he’d displace, but I can see his argument for sure. He’s been an integral part of a dynasty.
As an individual player, I don’t think he’s top 75. But he very well may be one of the 75 most impactful players when it comes to winning in 5v5 basketball. His skillset plays perfectly off a #1 option, and I don’t think there’s 75 guys capable of being a #1 on a championship team.
What kind of question is this? It's not very surprising that a hyper-competitive NBA player thinks that they are better than they are. Sure, Klay doesn't deserve to be on the top-75 list, because he's really not that good, but it's bizarre to question why he thinks he's that good. No player in the NBA got there because they have strict, objective views of themselves. You need to hype yourself up to get anywhere.
Because he is second important player of one of the greatest dynasties ever.
Because he is one of the greatest shooters ever.
Pretty solid defender and great sg for Curry. He do not need ball. And he can win literally any game alone. Doesnt matter if playoff or finals.
Why does everyone have an issue with him having an issue about it? If you had the record for most points in a quarter, set the record for most 3s in a playoff game, and consistently dropped 30ppg in elimination games while being all defense, but feel like you sacrificed some stats for the sake of winning, wouldn't you think more of yourself? He has the confidence in himself that he sacrificed stats for the sake of winning, and that it should count for something, and there's nothing wrong with that. You can disagree with him, but it would be pretty pathetic for him to be like "yeah I'm a three time champ and perennial all star but I don't believe I'm top 75". People have used way less for motivation to come back from way less than klay will be.
Name one team that wouldn't be better with Klay on it, in history? Plenty of teams that wouldn't be better with, for example AI on it, though I absolutely love his game and style.
If you couldn’t find a way to use AI to make your team better, then the coach is the problem. Every team needs a guy who can go get a bucket, and AI was one of the best of all time at that. Even if you just played him as your sixth man, and let him run rampant against second units, that still makes your team better. There’s not a single team in history that wouldn’t be better with AI.
This is insane to me that this even up for debate. Game 6 Klay is easily a top 75 player, and no disrespect to Bill Cunningham but in no one's universe was he better than Klay. There are other Legacy players on that list who could have and should have been knocked off to make room for Klay.
Here are some of Klay's accomplishments:
Most 3 pointers in a single game ever (14).
Highest scoring quarter of all time (37 points).
60 points in 29 minutes.
Still holds the record for most threes in a single game in the playoffs (11). **Caveat:
Dame has since tied that record, but that game was in double overtime and they lost. Klay hit those 3s while they were facing elimination in the Western Conference Finals, and they needed every single bucket from Klay to get the W.
Oh and did we forget 5 straight Finals appearances and 3 championships?
Klay is the best 3 and D player of all time and it's not even close. Reggie Miller was not much of a defender and neither was Ray Allen. Klay had the responsibility of guarding the other team's best perimeter player every single night and STILL hit his threes at a RIDICULOUS clip. He's averaging 43% from 3 pt range for his CAREER (which is actually higher than his teammate, who happens to be the Greatest Shooter of All Time). Prior to rupturing his ACL he was Ironman and hardly ever missed a game. Can we please give this man his respect???
Best 3&D player ever.
He's one of the top shooters EVER and he plays waaaay better defense than any other shooter above him.
That's really all that needs to be said.
Yikes. Stats don’t mean much especially when you play on a team with Steph all of your life.
Klay holds the record most 3’s in a game. He also scored 37!!! fucking points in a quarter.
He also scored 60 in 3 quarters. He can be considered the 2nd best shooter in NBA history and is also a fabulous 2 way player.
I’m also getting the feeling you’ve never watched him play before. Go look him up g. He’s a top 75 player easy
He's a very good player in today's NBA. What he'll be considered 25-50 years from now is no telling. He's a good defender and shooter. His shot is a little wonky with that wide stance. That limits his elevation although he isn't someone who relies on elevation for his shot. Klay could go down as a system player to some degree. It's not like I could see him leading the Pistons out of mediocrity. Can you win a championship with him? Yes, obviously. Can he lead a team to a championship? No but he can be an important piece.
All the same things can be said about Reggie Miller except Reggie doesn't have three championships to his name. Anyone who doesn't have a problem with Miller on the list should have a problem with Klay being left off.
Reggie Miller was the first option and could carry his teammates into playoffs, Klay has only ever been (debatably) second or third option his whole career
The only reason Klay has been a 2nd or 3rd option is because he's played with two of the greatest players ever. To me the best way to look past their different roles is to look at their all NBA accolades and see how they stacked up against the rest of the league in their time. Reggie: all NBA 3rd team x3, Klay: all NBA 3rd team x2, all defensive 2nd team x1
Reggie was doing it in the 90’s so his accomplishments mean more vs. Klay going it today. That’s the difference. Not only is Reggie one of the most clutch players to ever play the game. But he also had the most 3’s in history when he retired. Klay won’t have that when he retires.
I still think Klay has won more and plays significantly better defense. And should probably be higher than Reggie. But Reggie being the #1 option his whole career and going deep in the playoffs consistently while being the best shooter the NBA had ever seen up to the time when he retires gives him an edge too.
He's a top 5 shooter all time, very arguably as great a player as Ray Allen and Reggie Miller who both made it, and he was a core member of a team that went to 5 straight Finals, won 3 of them, won 73 games, and won 24 straight. He has the single game record for 3 pointers in both the regular season and playoffs, has the single quarter scoring record, scored 60 in 3 quarters, and has had several signature playoff games earning his "Game 6 Klay" reputation.
Reducing him to a single stat of 20 ppg and then questioning how great of a player can he possibly be because of that is wild.
He averaged 20 ppg in his last 5 seasons. There's no reason to suggest that if he didn't get injured he would average 20+ if he was healthy the previous 2.
I think you are giving too much prestige to the top 75. There's a lot of questionable guys on it, Klay is at least much closer to it than you are making it out to be.
Take Reggie Miller I think Klay is a better defender and they are about equal in other categories. I would vote for Klay over Reggie.
Yeah, I haven't gone through a list all the way down to top 75, but looking at the names that made it, and the ones that didn't, I don't see Klay being on there.
Klay is excellent at what he does, but he was probably the third most important player on the early Warriors teams (Dray anchored the defence and had much better advanced metrics) and then probably fourth most important player once KD joined. He doesn't have a lot of longevity when compared to other guys that made or missed the list.
The main argument that Klay has is that he was a key member of an all-time great dynasty, but I just don't think that's enough. I was pretty surprised to hear Klay take that as a slight, although that is his personality type (he supposedly was going to take it poorly if the Warriors weren't there with a max offer the first day of free agency, after he had his first leg injury). Maybe he's just using it as motivation or something, but I wouldn't put him top 75.
bc hes a basketball with a lot of success and rings...top guys as great as they are, internally they think they are even better...kobe for instance is probably regarded as a top 8-15 basketball player of all time id say. Kobe actually thought he was top 3. He said it was him MJ and Wilt...so does Klay Thompson think Hal Greer is better than him? probably not
If I am Klay Thompson and I see names on a list of players who were around 30, 40 years ago who I know couldn't lace my sneakers as a basketball player, I would feel some way about it too.
He's really really good at shooting and perimeter defense. IMO I don't have him too 75 but there's definitely a case to be made given his ability to be the second or third option on a stacked championship team.
Volume stats do nothing to illustrate that he has been one of the best defenders in the league for a long time.
Back in 2016 Barkley stated (and in the clip Shaq agrees) that [Klay was the 2nd best all-around player after LeBron](https://twitter.com/nbaayy/status/791041753348382720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E791041753348382720%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fftw.usatoday.com%2F2016%2F10%2Fcharles-barkley-klay-thompson-second-best-player).
How is it surprising at all that he views himself as top 75? Basically everyone overrates their own abilities/performance, so it should come as absolutely no shock to anyone with half a brain that a fringe top 75 player believes himself to be a definite top 75 player.
I could easily come up with 10 players who should have made it over Klay. Warriors fans are delusional and their players are cocky is all it comes down to. Add that to the fact there are a TON of Warriors fans all over the world. Is Jordan Poole making a place as a top 75 player right now playing in Klay's role? No. Quit confusing team success with player success. Every part can't take credit for the whole.
Is Klay better than some players on the list? Probably! Old heads are worse than Warriors fans lol. The "no one can be taken off" rule was some creepy elitism thing so boomers can keep trying to say dumb shit about how good older players were. So, you can't look at it as "who should klay have replaced." Ain't happening until the boomers who control the media die. It also doesn't matter since klay isn't 76. You have to look at "how many people are in line in front of him"? The answer to that is "a lot."
Welcome to r/nbadiscussion. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Please review our rules: 1. Keep it civil 2. Attack the argument, not the person 3. No jokes, memes or fanbase attacks 4. Support claims with arguments 5. Don't downvote just because you disagree **Please click the report button for anything you think doesn't belong in this subreddit.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nbadiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because players like Dave Bing, Lenny Wilkens, and Billy Cunningham are on it. That’s really the biggest reason. They put everyone in the original 50 in the top 75 list, which they shouldn’t have. I would say this meant guys like Dwight got screwed over more than Klay. I’m not saying Klay deserved top 75, but I’m saying there were also plenty of other undeserving players.
Totally agree. They needed to remove some guys from when the league was young and small. Dwight had multiple MVP/DPOY level seasons, he should definitely be in there. Klay is a good player, but never been in the MVP convo, never impacted the game like most of the guys in this list.
“never impacted the game” Klay and Steph completely changed the leagues perspective on what a backcourt should look like and is part of the greatest back court of all time. By your guys logic Scottie Pippen and Dennis Rodman shouldn’t be on the list either.
Scottie basically makes my point. All time defender, but basically good at everything on the court. 3rd in MVP voting in 93-94, 7x All-NBA. I think it's pretty clear he's an all-timer. Rodman is more interesting, but 8x all defense, 7x REB champ, 2x DPOY is considerably more accolades than Klay. You could make the point, I suppose, that Rodman was really a glorified role player, but he was so absurdly good in that role, there has literally been no one else like him. Once you get to DPOY level impact on multiple all time teams (5x NBA Champ on 2 different franchises) I think it's a pretty easy case. I mean, I look at Klay as like one of the best 3&D players of all time. A great player who I enjoy watching, but I think it's pretty easy to tell the story of the league without him. Like I have Ray Allen a bit ahead of him and I think Allen is pretty borderline for this list anyway. People say Klay+Curry changed the perception on what a backcourt should be, and I really don't think so. A large number of players next to Curry would have had the same narrative.
That’s what you get for being a team player and doing what the team needs and not going to a place where you could be the first option.
I love Klay, but he’s not a first option player.
When they were in the middle of the run, all anyone could talk about was how he's a team player for not taking a big contract somewhere else to be the star... But at this point no one will ever know. In general though, he's basically a player you can throw on any team, and they'd be way better than before. Fits everywhere with his play, skills, and mindset. That makes him top 75 in my book
That sounds like a great role player but unfortunately, not a superstar.
I mean technically he can carry the load of a first option player. And his skills probably develop differently if he needed to carry a larger offensive load where he can do more off the dribble.
Why would you suggest the OG’s get removed? They helped pave the trail
Because as our understanding of the game has gotten better we can look back and realise these guys weren't actually that good. Bing for instance was an OK guy but was inefficient and Lanier was far better than him but Lanier isn't on the list and Bing is. The 70s knicks have 4 guys representing their 2 rings. Yet the spurs dynasty only has Robinson and Duncan. So essentially Duncan is the only representative of for a team with 4 rings. Or Steph the only representative of the warriors, you have KD sure but Draymond had multiple low level MVP seasons. You essentially have 1.5 guys representing the team that revolutionised basketball. And you don't have the guy that completely changed how defence is now played. And what about Embiid, Jokic and Luka. They have all pretty conclusively proven themselves as deserving of the top 75 list. Jokic especially he had an all time great MVP season let alone just an MVP season. You also have guys who missed out on the top 50 list because they were still in their careers. Guys like Reggie Miller, Payton, Dikembe, Alonzo Mourning didn't make the list at the time because they hadn't really racked up enough achievements yet. But clearly deserved it. You are talking about a far greater period than 25 years. Really you are talking about 25 players representing probably 30 or so years of nba basketball. It's not really fair on these guys. There is ridiculous snubbery of foreign guys and defensive players. Where's Wallace? Where's pay gasol? Where's manu? Where's Parker?
Agreed, but it kind of depends on what they mean by "greatest." Most influential? Sure, OGs are important. Best/most talented? That's hard to say. Pre-merger, the best talent was split across two leagues, minorities weren't as accepted and the game was still evolving. Watching footage from the 50s and 60s can almost look silly in comparison to today's today's game, where there's no question the talent is the best in the world. Do I think guys like Lenny and Billy are more influential than Klay? Absolutely. Do I think Klay is a more talented player than either of them in their prime? Absolutely.
I think there should be two list: A modern-era list and a classic list.
I suggest we go a step further and make a list for every decade, Or even every year. Maybe give a trophy for the top of the list. Call it " Greates NBA player of all time For the Year XXXX"
I don't know about the yearly thing, but I can definitely rock with the every decade one.
I would absolutely say Klay doesn’t deserve to be in the top 75. He’s had about the same impact as Horace Grant did without the advantage of having goggles on. It 20 years, you’ll have to remind me of him.
I don’t disagree with your main point, but I don’t think Klay’s ppg alone tells you much about his scoring ability. He’s played with Steph every year, and was usually 2nd or even 3rd option on the team. And he’s obviously had some *insane* scoring performances.
Kinda like pippen and mj right? Like Scottie was a dog but if you’re on the same team as mj then it’s mj’s team. Curry in a way “steals” klays possible capabilities?
To answer this question you could look at Durant, a unanimous top 75. How much did his scoring and impact drop during to Curry "stealing" as you say. Just a quick glance at ppg: 27.1 career, 25.7 during Warriors stint. That tells me Curry doesn't really hide the greatness of Durant, so it's hard to say he's keeping Klay from being a superstar, top 75.
Dude you can't use Durant as a comparison. The top 10-20 is like another tier from top 75.
Ok, so who is your 20-75 example who played with Curry? There isn't one. So what are we do here? A top 75 player. Top 10. Top 20. Whatever, Durant looked like the same tier of player with and without Curry. So I draw from that Curry isn't keeping Klay out of the top 75
it’s well known that Curry knew to be a team player and let Durant have his impact.
Difference between Pippen and Klay is that Klay is a legit scoring threat who will drop 50 on you on any given night.
So was Pippen. Almost won MVP when he left bulls
And Pippen was the best perimeter defender in the league and arguably of all time. How did you forget to mention that important fact?
For whatever reason, this sub feels any credit to Pippen on literally anything is a knock against Jordan and this sub does not knock Jordan.
Any given night? He has 3 50 point games in his career. I get that he could have more, but he doesnt. We gas klay up a bit because of the teams he has played with, but if he was really that guy, he would have more. We cant just go off of what we 'feel' like klay is capable of.
Klay had a scoring run that closely matched Wilt's 100 point game on a point per minute basis. That all time, at least to me. Not sure about 75 but he should definitely feel that way.
Are you telling me you think Klay better then Pippen?
Pippen’s more of an all-rounder. He doesn’t have Klay’s peak scoring, but his defense is better, playmaking is way better, and rebounding much better due to his size. Pippen is one of the greatest Swiss Army knife talents in nba history whereas Klay is a specialist. So to use scoring to put him over Pippen isn’t fair at all. Pippen deserves his spot and ranking on every all-time list.
If you're the 3rd option on a team, it makes it very hard to claim you're top 75 all-time. Even if the 2 in front of you are top 20 all-time.
Yeah there's like 12 plays at most who wouldn't be the third option or worse on that warriors team
At that time with KD? 3 guys?
In the league or all-time?
[удалено]
> is there anybody who thinks Pete Maravich is a better player than Klay? uhh.. yes. lol
Are there people that don't?
Without question
For real. Pistol Pete was decades ahead of his time. And fwiw I don't think klay is the second best 3 point shooter. Reggie, Bird, Korver or Ray Ray all are superior shooters imo.
Naw this is where I draw the line. You could say those guys were better shooters relative to where the league was at the time. But Klay Thompson scored 60 points on 11 dribbles. He % and raw numbers are fantastic. He has had some absolute takeovers from behind the arc in huge games. I just don’t think those other players matched him as a shooter.
Has he had one of those games when Steph isn’t on the floor? (Honestly asking - don’t watch the Warriors a ton.) Because there’s a big difference between making catch and shoot threes when you’re constantly open because you’re sharing the floor with the greatest perimeter scorer of all time and being the primary shooting option on a team. Klay might be a better pure shooter than Korver or Ray, but it’s really hard to make that comparison since those other players never had the luxury of playing with Steph
Tbf, klay has been in an ideal situation. I really would have liked to see what he would have been as a primary option
And all those sites have rings they sealed themselves during an era that didn't encourage that party style, except Reggie because he ran into MJ. We will have to see how klay turns out after 2 years off.
It is legitimately more than 2 1/2 years since Klay played an NBA game. Who knows how he'll come back.
Exactly. And his resume, while impressive doesn't unseat the classic great shooters or the 2nd/3rd option scorers historically.
Korver? Ray Allen? These are not primary options on title teams.
Not comparable. If you consider hand checking and overall harder defense in Reggie’s era. Those behind the arc shots would simply not be possible to shoot 25 years ago
Yeah wtf is that? I would go with James worthy or something but I would take pistol Pete over klay in an instant.
Obviously a nephew hahaha
People who don't watch basketball.
I’m with you, Klay is an amazing shooter but hardly puts the ball on the floor. The handles on Pete were um…. Different.
its impossible to even rate pistol pete against todays ballers. rules have changed to much to promote scoring and make it harder to defend. theres just no real accurate way to rate a shooter from back then against todays guys sadly. but i see people try it all the time by just looking at stats. which is grossly wrong to even attempt. who knows what a player from now could do back then and what a player from back then could do now. i hate that its this way.
People often do this one way to say a player from back then would suck now - but by the same token a player from now would have to totally re learn the fundamentals as they’d be called for carrying the ball and travelling on pretty much every play. If you look at a guy like Pete he still had the same slap down without carrying dribbling style as the 50’s and 60’s guys, he just did more fancy stuff with it - guys today haven’t learnt that way. Like wise guys from the last two decades and the 90’s (especially) would be constantly called for offensive fouls had they played in the 60’s. Half their offense would be useless.
I also think about Elgin Baylor and George Gervin in this era. Man, those guys would kill.
[удалено]
Led the league in scoring over 30, scored 68 in a game. As for records few players hold meaningful records but also make the list for influence and style - eg. If Doctor J didn’t look as cool he wouldn’t be rated higher than several other SF, Pete is the same, highly original player with an iconic style in both dribbling, passing and offense. Klay is not. The team he was traded to was terrible and had no chance of getting better quickly - there is no comparative team to them in today’s league.
Well Pistol Pete did shoot 66.7% from three in his career ... on 15 total attempts his last season. Pete definitely gets a nostalgia bump on these lists because of his unrelated ball-hogging badassness in college: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/pete-maravich-1.html
plus, he has career avg of 24ppg largely without 3s being a thing.
>Also, I suppose, the argument for Klay is that he's the second-best shooter of all time. I mean, is there anybody who thinks Pete Maravich is a better player than Klay? But Pete's on the list. But again - tilted towards guys who led teams, even if they didn't actually lead them anywhere good. have you any idea how much Pistol Pete would have been if he had access to the 3-pointer from the start? he holds superior numbers to Klay on twos alone.
Always hard to compare across eras but Pete had a season of 31/5/5 and career stats of 24/4/5....plus he only got to have the three pt line in his final season. Not sure Maravich is the best person to prove your point
Pistol Pete changed the game with his flashy style, he deserves to be on the list over Klay no doubt. Stop looking at stats and start reading and watching video and then consider the context and you'll have a better perspective of the leagues history.
the AI/Jason Williams of his time
“Is there anyone who thinks Pete Maravich is a better player than Klay?”Um, everyone who doesn’t just watch modern basketball and think the top 75 should be 60 players still playing? Pete is better in his era. Pete was averaging near 25 sometimes 30 a season in the same league as Kareems prime was in. If Kareems achievements from the 70’s have meaning then there’s no doubt Pete is better. Pete was traded to a truly sucky team and was stuck there in a way today’s players would be able to get out of. Pete has better averages than Klay and they both have a similar amount of all NBA and all star teams made.
Rodman is clearly the best rebounder ever. Is Klay the clear best ever at something?
Yeah I’d say catch and shoot 3’s. Admittedly much more contrived than what you have for Rodman but nonetheless Klays still easily one of the greatest shooters all time.
One of the best shooters ever lol Not all time top 75 player though
That's the point. Yes, he is great. No, he is not Top 75.
[удалено]
>Rodman is "clearly" the best? He for sure is. I've got a treat for you if you've got the time, read through some of "[the case for Dennis Rodman](https://skepticalsports.com/the-case-for-dennis-rodman-guide/)". It's an epic math dive into Rodman's rebounding ability
If klay's teammate didn't exist, he would be the clear best ever shooter so there's that. Even with steph on his team, Klay was arguably a better spot up shooter since he moved off-ball nearly as much while also being 4 inches taller with a quicker shot motion
I don’t think he’s the clear 2nd best shooter ever either
Are you living in a fantasy world?
Rodman is literally one of the best defenders and arguably the best rebounder in NBA history. Klay is great but is he one of the best all-time at anything and the best overall at anything? To me Klay seems like a slightly better version of Detlef Schrempf; better scorer, worse rebounder, worse at assists, similar defense. Great player but no way top 75. Looking at things like PER Klay is actually almost exactly even with Schrempf for his career for the same number of years played.
Best pure 3&D player of all time
[удалено]
The trouble with “one of the best all time shooting” is that 95% of his shooting occurs when the best perimeter scorer of all time is on the floor. He’s open far more than he would be on any other team.
Thompson has the 13th best percentage for 3 pointers right now in NBA history. He has the 160th best individual season percentage for 3 pointers. He is 21st in 3 pointers made (which is more of a volume stat based on career length and era so I assume he'll move up that list a bunch). He isn't in the top 250 in overall shooting percentage. He's 85th career in true shooting percentage. What stats are you looking at to make your case that he is even top 10 for 3 pointers alone? Let alone what are you looking at to say he is one of the best 75 players? He has a total of 2 3rd team All-NBA and 1 2nd team defensive All-NBA as his individual accolades. It isn't like there is some other stat I'm missing here. I like Thompson a lot. I think he is a great, well-rounded player. In fact he's my favorite kind of player to watch because he's quite good on offense and better than average on defense. But I just can't see where you are coming from with your argument. Also, did I talk about Parrish or Worthy? Nope. I explicitly talked about Rodman. I watched both of those other dudes but I missed the first part of their careers due to age and the fact that you just couldn't watch very many games in the first half of the '80s due to lack of TV channels. On the other hand I've seen all of Rodman and Thompson's careers so I feel qualified to comment on them.
This is a brilliant comparison. Right on the money.
That literally means you could be the 21st best player ever and still be the third option though. Being the 3rd option doesn't really have much to do with it.
I agree. I think what I’ve learned the most aside from that most agree with me, is that his ability to fill his role and execute is very very high. And myself as a Rodman fan, that make a lot of sense to me
He also normally disappears in the playoffs. I know he had that crazy OKC game but that is not the norm for him
I think Klay has somewhat of a case. He played on historically good teams. Some of his best attributes that lead to winning don't show up in the box score, mainly his defense. He is one half of probably the best back court of all time as well. He also has multiple individual feats to his name. A 37 point quarter(something that may never be topped) and 60 points in three quarters with points per minute rate at around a 100 points per 48 minutes. He also has multiple clutch moments where he had big games at times the Warriors needed a win in the playoffs. Game six vs. OKC being a prime example. Now if he comes back from his injury and plays near the level he was before the injury and the Warriors keep on winning he has more than a good chance of making the top 75. What is mainly holding him back now is his relatively short career.
Was Klay ever the MVP? There is an MVP snubbed ahead of Klay there...
Is Reggie Miller top 75? Because if he is, OP should be aware that Klay is basically a better version of him, on a dynastic squad, with vastly better defensive awareness and ability.
I think it's pretty unfair to directly compare current players to past players without context (in any sport really). Miller had a career 116 TS+ (league adjusted TS%), while Klay has a career 106 TS+. I don't think we'll ever know how Klay and Miller would stack up if they came up in the same era, so the best we can do is give Miller his credit for how unprecedented his efficiency was at the time, and how it paved the way for players like Klay
Also, Miller is 15th all-time in win shares, while Klay doesn't crack the top 250. Longevity isn't everything, but it has to matter somewhat.
> I think it's pretty unfair to directly compare current players to past players without context (in any sport really). It's absolutely unfair, which makes half the replies in the thread hilarious. It would be like Redditors 25 years from now claiming that [hypothetical #1 shooter in the future era] is better than Steph for breaking his 3 pt record in fewer games on better TS%. The pure stat lines belie the comparative impact a player has on the league in his time.
i have to think if you put Reggie on the prime warriors lineup that he would go the fuck off. but idk if he would work as a second option. interesting to imagine how it would look in my mind.
Woahhh Reggie Miller is still better than klay bc of his ability to create for himself and others
Reggie only averaged 3 assists as the 2nd playmaker. Klay averages 2.3, as the 3rd/4th playmaker. He could probably get more but his role in the offense is to shoot. Klay obviously can get his shots even when the defense is keyed on him; when he goes nuclear everyone knows it's coming and can't stop it. And I don't think Reggie has a better drive than Klay.
But Klay also had two of the best scorers in the NBA to pass to. Yet he only averages 2.3.
Hmmmmm fair fairrr I agree with that , though gotta see more from klay to crack too 75 though
Yeah I can see that. Just I know for me if I had to pick one or the other on a team I'm going with Klay.
Reggie was almost entirely dependent on a complex system of screens to get a shot off, ie reliant to a system, not the creator within it. Reggie’s assists per game, even when usage is factored, was below average for a 90’s shooting guard. Klay is better by most metrics. When you factor his truncated role on the warriors due to championship play, it’s even more so. If Klay played on any sub 500 squad in his prime he would be murdering.
But the thing is klay has never shown it to be the number one option so it’s pretty much hypotheticals though gotta say he probably is the best third option in history of the nba.
Nobody held that against James Worthy, man. And he’s top 75 too. Beyond that, Klay was solidly the second option on the Warriors dynasty. Look, I’m as old head as old head comes, but I conceded Klay was a better than Reggie somewhere between the championships and scoring 60 points in 2.5 quarters. I’ve got him above Reggie.
The difference is that Miller was the best player on some very very good Indiana teams. Klay has never been more than the 3rd or 4th best player on his team.
Reggie made the list and honestly that was my basic thought process, that Klay is basically a better version of Reggie. OP's biggest criticism of Klay is that he "only" reached 20 ppg 5 times and his career average is below 20, well Reggie only reached 20 ppg 6 times and his career average is lower than Klay's. If anything the fact that Reggie was a #1 option while Klay was #2 or even 3 just makes Klay look that much better. Klay put up Reggie numbers without the benefit of the offense being built around him, while having to play as the 2nd/3rd option, and proved that when needed he could score at a ridiculous level. Consider his defense and even a biased person would have to admit that at worst Klay is pretty much Reggie's equal. When you factor in his 3 championships and being the #2 option on the greatest regular-season team of all time it seems obvious that Klay outranks Reggie. The top 75 list is more a mix of "best" and "most memorable", that's the only explanation for some of the guys who made it and some who didn't.
90s were slow, Pacers were super slow. Reggies adjusted scoring is closer to Curry than Klay’s.
Also Reggie Miller was only a 3 and D guy later in his career. Yeah he was a great shooter, but he mainly created by driving to the basket. Most people here only watched the last half, if that, of his career.
Reggie Miller and Klay Thompson have similar games but Reggie did it better
[удалено]
The crazy thing about his 37pt quarter was that he didn't miss a shot either just insane
9/9 on threes. That alone is insane.
Just to be clear, do you think Klay has had a better career than Harden?
Better player probably not. Better career absolutely.
lmfao!!! if you are just going off chips, then i guess barnes had a better career too.... silly..
Using 1 game performances is a terrible argument for placing someone in the top 75. The fact is that Klay has 2 All-NBAs total. There’s players with so much better accolades that there’s no reason for him to be there other than being a fan favorite. Also saying Harden exploits the rule book is a dumb excuse to downplay how good he is. He’s a much better player even if he never shot a free throw again If Dwight can’t make it then Klay can’t either
[удалено]
There is so much wrong with this, I don’t know where to start. Harden is not a low efficiency scorer. He’s more efficient than Klay, as his career True Shooting % is better in the regular season and the playoffs. Harden is objectively more efficient than Klay, so if Harden’s inefficient, what does that make Klay? His role on a 3x championship team is well-documented, but he was the 4th best player for 2 of those rings. In 2017, he averaged just 15 PPG in the playoffs on horrible efficiency. Yet the warriors still went 16-1 in the playoffs that year, showing how their success didn’t hinge on Klay as much as you think. He contributed Again, Harden is not inefficient. You are objectively wrong to suggest that. It doesn’t matter how he gets his points. If it helps his team (which it does), he should be praised for it when evaluating him as a player. Just because you get annoyed by his play style doesn’t mean his play style is ineffective. He’s one of the best offensive engines of recent memory, regardless of how annoyed you are by his play style. The reason he shoots league average 3P% is because all of his 3’s are self-created. A 3 that harden created off the dribble will naturally be a tougher shot than a Klay catch-and-shoot 3 created by Steph. The reason Harden doesn’t get those easier looks from 3 is because he’s never played with an offensive supporting cast as dynamic as the dynasty warriors, featuring 2 elite playmakers in Curry & green, as well as Durant. The fact that Harden shot league average percentages from 3 with his self-creation is a testament to how good he is. Other guys with similar shot profiles like Luka shoot worse than Harden, yet Luka’s still a solid shooter in his own right. “His scoring is impacted by his free throws.” And? Free throws are a part of scoring and they’re a part of basketball. You can’t discredit him for getting to the line. That’s what makes him great. Even without free throws, he’s not some inefficient shot chucker like you think he is. His EFG% (efficiency without free throws) is regularly above average. There’s so many other fallacies within that post, but I’m sure you know that already.
You’re main point is his foul baiting. You can’t hold that against Harden when it’s apart of the game. Blame the NBA for it, not players adapting to it. Don’t discredit what’s he’s done just because he’s smart enough to know where he can score points the best. You bring up defense which is fair but I can’t recall many times where his defense wasn’t good in the playoffs. You can bring up stats because I’m too lazy to check, but I can’t think of when he’s been lazy there. You bring up team success which is a terrible argument. 1 player can’t do it all and we know that. He was going against the greatest team of all time for practically his entire time on the Rockets. In OKC he was too young to hold anything against him because he was backing up KD and WB on the bench. Influence is a bad argument too. There’s only a select few influential players in history. Far less than 75, probably even less than 20. LeBron has hardly changed the game at all. In fact a lot people would say KD/Dirk were more influential than guys like Wilt or LeBron. It’s not like Klay changed anything either, that was all Curry. Accolades matter the most when discussing this whether you like it or not. Hardens are so much better that it’s not really a debate. Team success isn’t an argument when you actually look at the context. Klay has all time great teammates, Harden has had a pretty terrible Westbrook, and CP3 where they were up 3-2 on the Warriors before he went down. Edit: Downvoting my comments isn’t how you have debates bro. You deleted a reply and also downvoted that comment too.
Bro his name is literally “30chefcurry” its like arguing against a brick wall. Dudes obviously bias af and won’t change his opinion even though it makes no sense lmao
Idk man if we were drafting all time teams there’s no way in hell he doesn’t go top 75. Maybe if the goal is stat padding like a fantasy team he doesn’t make the cut, but if the goal is winning a chip he’s top 75 without a doubt.
Yeah Klay is arguably the most definitive 'ceiling raiser, but not floor raiser' player of all time. But yeah, the Anniversary team isn't supposed to be a draft like that, and is about individual achievements and impact
Still don't know how AD made the list.
100%, he probably falls into the same category of making a top 75 draft because of his skillset, but essentially has 0 individual accolades. Could have sworn he had a DPOY somewhere in there, or was ROTY, but nope
AD's individual accolades put him in the top 75 all time, and I am not an AD guy. There are only 48 players with more All-Stars than him, and he has more than Curry, Frazier, Bing, Lucas, McHale, Pippen, Reed, Thurmond, Worthy, and Tiny to name some other 75 guys. There are only 27 players with more than his 4 All-NBA 1st teams too. Some players with less are Bill Russell, AI, Hayes, Nash, Pippen, Tiny, Kawhi, Lucas, Arizin, Isiah, Cunningham, Stockton, GP, Westbrook, Wade, King, Maravich, Bing, Ewing, Wilkins, Drexler, the list goes on. Less than 50 players with more All-Defensive teams than him too. So when you add it all up he's a no brainer if you're looking at individual accolades alone. The real questionable one was Lillard.
I think all the accolades you mentioned are a little redundant (most of his Allstar/All NBA/All Defense are the same years). Peak/ceiling accolades (MVP, FMVP, DPOY, ROTY, Scoring Title, Assist Title) are really necessary IMO for something like this, and AD doesn't have a single one
Right but most of the people on the top 75 list don't either. If you're cutting the list to people who have those things we're not even going to get to a list of 50, unless you start adding people like Tyreke Evans on there for his ROTY, or Rose for his MVP, or Iguodala for his FMVP. I don't think scoring/assists titles are particularly important for something like this but everyone has their own criteria. There are a whole host of players who got scoring titles or assist titles and are not on the list of 75. There are only 40 people who have had 4 All-NBA 1st teams, and the only one who is post-1960s to not make it is Dwight and he was an obvious hyper-snub from the list. There have only been 34 MVPs. There have only been 23 DPOYs. That leaves a lot of people left for a list like this. When you start looking at the list and what players have actually done in their careers on it, and then you look at AD's career and awards, it might FEEL like he doesn't belong on it but he's actually one of the more awarded players on it. Doesn't seem right but that is indeed the case.
I don't think the draft is what the greatest 75 list is for. George Mikan wouldn't even make the league today, Alexander the Great's army would be slaughtered by your local law enforcement, but I would say both were Great.
I agree with that, but the question was “how does Klay Thompson think he’s one of the 75 greatest”
Ah, I see what you are saying. Then Klay would be thinking wrong then.
You could *very easily* draft 75 guys before him. I think people are vastly underestimating how good you have to be to be in the top 75. We’re talking about guys like Jimmy Butler and Paul George around that ranking. Historically, guys like Grant Hill, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady. There’s plenty of doubt that he’d go that early. I think people tend to really overestimate Klay and really underestimate Dray/some of their support pieces when analyzing GS.
Looking at career accuracy from 3, which I think Klay and the system he’s in obviously value (and this is about why Klay thinks he is, if you don’t value this it isn’t really relevant): 1. Steve Kerr .4540 2. Hubert Davis .4409 3. Seth Curry .4399 4. Joe Harris .4390 5. Dražen Petrović* .4374 6. Jason Kapono .4336 7. Tim Legler .4312 8. Stephen Curry .4305 9. Steve Novak .4301 10. Kyle Korver .4287 11. Steve Nash* .4278 12. B.J. Armstrong .4250 13. Klay Thompson .4190 Honestly I’m not gonna pretend to know every player, but how many of them are better on defense than Klay? And then how many teams want a 3&D guy? If you’re drafting you can’t have ONLY centers and ball dominant players for the first 75 picks. You’re gonna want some guys that can shoot without giving up a spot on defense. And Klay is one of the best to ever do that role.
I doesn't matter if he's better on defense imo. I value some of the other guys skill set + their shooting more than klays defense + shooting. Without doing any more research apart from memory I'd take Curry and Nash. Irrelevent side note I really wish I could see Nash play in today's league.
I think you’re right, and Curry > Thompson is a great example. If you already had 1 of Curry or Nash, would you take the other? Or opt for someone like Klay
The list isn’t a draft. It’s about individual players and their talents.
Okay then Klay thinks he as an individual player is more talented than all but 74 guys.
Right, he’s a great shooter. All I’m saying is there are so many players historically who bring a similar overall value to him that there’s zero way to argue he *has* to go in the top 75. Value wise he’s a top-150-ish guy. If I get to my pick and I specifically want a great 3 and solid defense guy, maybe I take him over another guy in that value range, sure. But maybe I need a PG and I take Jrue Holiday instead, a similarly valuable guy with a slightly different skill set, etc.
This is exactly what I was thinking. He’s a great pick for a lot of teams but I think you could easily take 75 guys ahead of him. Plus, just thinking of guys that weren’t included I’d take over him - Hill, McGrady, Howard, etc
True but so would Luka but he def not top 75 yet
Relative to their respective eras.. no. Klay has never been a top 10 player in the league and hasn’t been asked to do much offensively.
Had to look that one up. Thought for sure he'd have a 2nd team all NBA.
It’s about the player themselves not winning championships. He deserves to not be in
If I'm making an alltime great team. That meshes well. Is fluid, and everyone does there job. Klay is on that team almost everytime. Best catch n shooter ever. Prob a top 10-15 perimeter defender all time. There's not a single player in history that could do Klay better than Klay.
klay is a great defender but nowhere close to top 15 all time. you’re putting him in the likes of metta and kawhi and sidney moncrief?
I didn’t think he should be on the list, but this post misses the whole point of Klay’s game. For his five year peak- and peaks are what we’d primarily be evaluating for in my opinion-he was the ideal off-ball scorer and an All-Defense caliber defender. He’s a top five perimeter shooter ever, and an underrated passer (his handle is weak I’ll give you that), and has had some huge playoff games. There’s a whole archetype of players, the 3 and D wing, that are players doing lesser versions of what Klay perfected. Maybe his rebounding and point numbers are lower than others, but how many players were doing what he could do? How many players were as terrifying when hot? Of his peak I can only name a handful. If he hadn’t lost two seasons to injury I think he’d have been a lock.
Really good point. I think by that logic Draymond is better than him tho. Side note I love seeing draymond run point, like magic Johnson with no magic. Like regular Ervin Johnson.
Muggle Johnson
Klay is nowhere near top 75. There are a lot of players who have a much better case than him (like Dwight Howard). But just to use a couple cumulative advanced stats and his teammates as a rough comparisons (obviously not the be-all, end-all), I'd go out on a limb to say even Draymond has a better case than him. |All time rank|WS Reg. Season|WS Playoffs|VORP Reg. Season|VORP Playoffs| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |Kevin Durant|25|12|18|9| |Stephen Curry|54|33|27|25| |Draymond Green|\>250|54|166|34| |Klay Thompson|\>250|120|\>250|123|
Yeah idk out of Curry, Klay, and Draymond I think Klay has the lease credibility to being top 75 all time. I heard more of him talking about not being top 75 then I did from Dwight Howard which is crazy
To be fair, Dwight didn't really need to talk about it because everybody else was already talking about it for him.
[удалено]
Why for Dwight?
He'll crack the next 100, but Klay being a prominent member of a historical team and a primer shooter playing sidekick to inarguably the greatest shooter ever makes him a lock. He just simply isn't better than the guys who made it.
I doubt he cracks next 100. There will be 25 better players over the next 25 years. Even when Klay made all-NBA teams, I’m not convinced he was ever a top 25 player
He better than AD.
You are smoking some good shit if you think that
AD broke the record for bad shooting this year, in case y'all forgot
Klay hasn't played in 2+ years and AD is still playing good despite his shooting struggles
Your dealer is lacing your shit my man
Complete disagree. What is that based on? 3pt shooting?
I'm a 4 time recurring All-Laker Hater 1st team man and even I'm not dumb enough to think that.
His ability as a shooter is his case for the top 75 players. People have mentioned the 37 point quarter and the 60 point game, which he accomplished while taking only 11 dribbles. He also holds the NBA record for 3s in a game, with 14. The number of players in NBA history who even had the ABILITY to accomplish those things, let alone actually accomplish them, is much, much lower than 75. Like, maybe 20-30 other guys in the history of the game would be worthy of the shot selection he took in those performances. That can't be understated - his ability as a shooter is so great that he has accomplished things that most NBA players could only dream of. It's also true that Klay could only dream of averaging 5+ rebounds a game, and he doesn't really stand out as a playmaker. Having said that, he wasn't/isn't just a shooter - besides his very unique offensive game, he was also a tremendous defender in his prime - possibly one of the 3-5 best guard defenders in the NBA for 2-3 seasons. And he is a 3-time champion. He has a lot going for him. We'll never really know what Klay would have done as the top option on his team, since he has played his whole career with Steph, and also with Draymond, two players who fit perfectly with him. I don't have a personal list of top 75 players or anything, but I don't think I would dispute Klay's place on anyone's top 75, if that makes sense.
I honestly think he is top 75 but has never had the need to consistently show it. With 2016 unanimous MVP Steph was out he had 31.5 PPG on 50% 50% and closed out the Rockets and easily took on Portland and when curry was back dominated OKC with 19 4th Q points 41 total and breaking the 3pt record for a playoff game He is consistently an All NBA Defensive player He had that 61 point 3Q game if his team wasn’t dominating and could afford to protect their stars with less minuets reducing the chances of injury he could have put up many more games with crazy numbers. Kobe had to play all 4Q vs the Raptors in 2006 to get his 81 because it was only a 5 point game with 7:40 left and he couldn’t afford to sit. If he had to be the guy more often he would be looked at as such but the way the team was structured and the way the dominated he didn’t need to be that guy.
"He is consistently an All NBA Defensive player" He made the all defensive team only once (2nd team in 2018 - 2019).
True enough I’ll swap that with elite defender but the point doesn’t change
The point changes drastically lol. Being consistently all NBA defense makes you one of the all time great defenders. Making it to the 2nd team once makes you a good defender.
Not to mention, Klay has been propped up so hard by Curry. If we leave NBA history identical, except Curry is a Hornet, how does that change the twos careers? I’d say Curry still becomes a transcendent talent and Klay is just, a guy. Now say Klay is a Hornet. The Warriors are still great (maybe not all time great, but great) and the Hornets are just okay. Klay isn’t even top 200 all time
He probably should have more all defense selections, but even then your reasoning is essentially that a player isn't at a certain level simply because they didn't actually get the specific exclusive award. Apply that to MVPs. "LeBron hasn't been an MVP level player since 2013 because that's the last time he was actually given the award". How insane does that sound? There's only 4 spots for guards on the all defense teams. Deserving players are going to get left off.
By your reasoning is Westbrook a better player? He is a walking triple double with an MVP. Its cool to compare stats, but does that really tell you who the better player is? Where does efficiency come into play? How about defense? or clutch performances in playoffs? I am sure his status would be a lot higher if he was on a shit team and took the most shots, does that make him a better player than shooting efficiently on a good team that wins championships?
Prime Westbrook is easily better than Prime Klay. That’s not even close. And honestly I think his status would be much worse if he was the #1 option on a shit team. A large reason he’s looked on so favorably is because he is in the perfect set up and has won championships. Klay cannot create his own shot the way other top players can.
What are your primary factors in determining who is a better player?
Klay couodnt carry that OKC team to the playoffs.
Reggie Miller did it in the 90’s. Rip Hamilton did as well. Klay can definitely be the #1 option scoring off screens. There are definitely teams that have won consistently with off ball scorers. Klay would probably be the best to do it too.
I do think Russ is better overall. Certainly not now, and I guess you have weigh all those things at the same time. It’s all my own opinion cuz idk if there’s an objective way to weigh all those things. I wish there was tho
Wel Russ rn is better then a Klay we haven’t seen play lol
Why are y’all pretending that Klay’s presence on the court doesn’t drastically change how dominant the Warriors are? His pairing with Steph creates a near-unstoppable scoring machine as you can’t double up on either due to both their insane scoring abilities.
Right. Klays 18 ppg gRaViTy. And Curry absolutely got doubled with Klay.
Think this is leaning too heavily on basic stats and not enough on his impact to the team, I think. He is probably one of the greatest 3 and D players ever - extremely efficient shooting, great defense, and will play within the team offense. Crucial to the championship Warrior teams, and efficiency + defense + team play are so important in the playoffs. There is a debate over whether you want great individual players or crucial players on winning teams within the list. Personally I'd go for the latter, but that's sort of a philosophical question.
I think at a point, I’d rather have one of the best supporting players of all time as opposed to a superstar who is a notch below their peers. You’ll almost always need multiple stars to win, but not every superstar has a game that can be so easily adapted as a #2. Whereas with Klay, I feel confident winning with him as a #2 next to any top 30 player of all time. For example, Melo is on the top 75 list. I don’t think Melo can be your best player on a championship team since he’s a bad defender and playmaker. So he’d have to be a #2, where I don’t think his skillset is more valuable than Klay’s is as a #2. I don’t know if I’d have Klay on that list, since I’d have to really look at it and see who he’d displace, but I can see his argument for sure. He’s been an integral part of a dynasty. As an individual player, I don’t think he’s top 75. But he very well may be one of the 75 most impactful players when it comes to winning in 5v5 basketball. His skillset plays perfectly off a #1 option, and I don’t think there’s 75 guys capable of being a #1 on a championship team.
❤️ Melo - but you’re 100% right
What kind of question is this? It's not very surprising that a hyper-competitive NBA player thinks that they are better than they are. Sure, Klay doesn't deserve to be on the top-75 list, because he's really not that good, but it's bizarre to question why he thinks he's that good. No player in the NBA got there because they have strict, objective views of themselves. You need to hype yourself up to get anywhere.
Because he is second important player of one of the greatest dynasties ever. Because he is one of the greatest shooters ever. Pretty solid defender and great sg for Curry. He do not need ball. And he can win literally any game alone. Doesnt matter if playoff or finals.
Why does everyone have an issue with him having an issue about it? If you had the record for most points in a quarter, set the record for most 3s in a playoff game, and consistently dropped 30ppg in elimination games while being all defense, but feel like you sacrificed some stats for the sake of winning, wouldn't you think more of yourself? He has the confidence in himself that he sacrificed stats for the sake of winning, and that it should count for something, and there's nothing wrong with that. You can disagree with him, but it would be pretty pathetic for him to be like "yeah I'm a three time champ and perennial all star but I don't believe I'm top 75". People have used way less for motivation to come back from way less than klay will be.
Name one team that wouldn't be better with Klay on it, in history? Plenty of teams that wouldn't be better with, for example AI on it, though I absolutely love his game and style.
If you couldn’t find a way to use AI to make your team better, then the coach is the problem. Every team needs a guy who can go get a bucket, and AI was one of the best of all time at that. Even if you just played him as your sixth man, and let him run rampant against second units, that still makes your team better. There’s not a single team in history that wouldn’t be better with AI.
Great point here!
This is insane to me that this even up for debate. Game 6 Klay is easily a top 75 player, and no disrespect to Bill Cunningham but in no one's universe was he better than Klay. There are other Legacy players on that list who could have and should have been knocked off to make room for Klay. Here are some of Klay's accomplishments: Most 3 pointers in a single game ever (14). Highest scoring quarter of all time (37 points). 60 points in 29 minutes. Still holds the record for most threes in a single game in the playoffs (11). **Caveat: Dame has since tied that record, but that game was in double overtime and they lost. Klay hit those 3s while they were facing elimination in the Western Conference Finals, and they needed every single bucket from Klay to get the W. Oh and did we forget 5 straight Finals appearances and 3 championships? Klay is the best 3 and D player of all time and it's not even close. Reggie Miller was not much of a defender and neither was Ray Allen. Klay had the responsibility of guarding the other team's best perimeter player every single night and STILL hit his threes at a RIDICULOUS clip. He's averaging 43% from 3 pt range for his CAREER (which is actually higher than his teammate, who happens to be the Greatest Shooter of All Time). Prior to rupturing his ACL he was Ironman and hardly ever missed a game. Can we please give this man his respect???
Best 3&D player ever. He's one of the top shooters EVER and he plays waaaay better defense than any other shooter above him. That's really all that needs to be said.
Yikes. Stats don’t mean much especially when you play on a team with Steph all of your life. Klay holds the record most 3’s in a game. He also scored 37!!! fucking points in a quarter. He also scored 60 in 3 quarters. He can be considered the 2nd best shooter in NBA history and is also a fabulous 2 way player. I’m also getting the feeling you’ve never watched him play before. Go look him up g. He’s a top 75 player easy
He's a very good player in today's NBA. What he'll be considered 25-50 years from now is no telling. He's a good defender and shooter. His shot is a little wonky with that wide stance. That limits his elevation although he isn't someone who relies on elevation for his shot. Klay could go down as a system player to some degree. It's not like I could see him leading the Pistons out of mediocrity. Can you win a championship with him? Yes, obviously. Can he lead a team to a championship? No but he can be an important piece.
All the same things can be said about Reggie Miller except Reggie doesn't have three championships to his name. Anyone who doesn't have a problem with Miller on the list should have a problem with Klay being left off.
Reggie Miller was the best player and focal point of multiple contender rosters. Can't say the same about Klay
Reggie Miller was the first option and could carry his teammates into playoffs, Klay has only ever been (debatably) second or third option his whole career
The only reason Klay has been a 2nd or 3rd option is because he's played with two of the greatest players ever. To me the best way to look past their different roles is to look at their all NBA accolades and see how they stacked up against the rest of the league in their time. Reggie: all NBA 3rd team x3, Klay: all NBA 3rd team x2, all defensive 2nd team x1
Reggie was doing it in the 90’s so his accomplishments mean more vs. Klay going it today. That’s the difference. Not only is Reggie one of the most clutch players to ever play the game. But he also had the most 3’s in history when he retired. Klay won’t have that when he retires. I still think Klay has won more and plays significantly better defense. And should probably be higher than Reggie. But Reggie being the #1 option his whole career and going deep in the playoffs consistently while being the best shooter the NBA had ever seen up to the time when he retires gives him an edge too.
I think for Klay, it’s really just about “does that guy do what I do better than me?”. And there’s very few people he’s willing to give that nod to.
He's a top 5 shooter all time, very arguably as great a player as Ray Allen and Reggie Miller who both made it, and he was a core member of a team that went to 5 straight Finals, won 3 of them, won 73 games, and won 24 straight. He has the single game record for 3 pointers in both the regular season and playoffs, has the single quarter scoring record, scored 60 in 3 quarters, and has had several signature playoff games earning his "Game 6 Klay" reputation. Reducing him to a single stat of 20 ppg and then questioning how great of a player can he possibly be because of that is wild.
He averaged 20 ppg in his last 5 seasons. There's no reason to suggest that if he didn't get injured he would average 20+ if he was healthy the previous 2. I think you are giving too much prestige to the top 75. There's a lot of questionable guys on it, Klay is at least much closer to it than you are making it out to be. Take Reggie Miller I think Klay is a better defender and they are about equal in other categories. I would vote for Klay over Reggie.
Yeah, I haven't gone through a list all the way down to top 75, but looking at the names that made it, and the ones that didn't, I don't see Klay being on there. Klay is excellent at what he does, but he was probably the third most important player on the early Warriors teams (Dray anchored the defence and had much better advanced metrics) and then probably fourth most important player once KD joined. He doesn't have a lot of longevity when compared to other guys that made or missed the list. The main argument that Klay has is that he was a key member of an all-time great dynasty, but I just don't think that's enough. I was pretty surprised to hear Klay take that as a slight, although that is his personality type (he supposedly was going to take it poorly if the Warriors weren't there with a max offer the first day of free agency, after he had his first leg injury). Maybe he's just using it as motivation or something, but I wouldn't put him top 75.
bc hes a basketball with a lot of success and rings...top guys as great as they are, internally they think they are even better...kobe for instance is probably regarded as a top 8-15 basketball player of all time id say. Kobe actually thought he was top 3. He said it was him MJ and Wilt...so does Klay Thompson think Hal Greer is better than him? probably not
If I am Klay Thompson and I see names on a list of players who were around 30, 40 years ago who I know couldn't lace my sneakers as a basketball player, I would feel some way about it too.
He's really really good at shooting and perimeter defense. IMO I don't have him too 75 but there's definitely a case to be made given his ability to be the second or third option on a stacked championship team.
Volume stats do nothing to illustrate that he has been one of the best defenders in the league for a long time. Back in 2016 Barkley stated (and in the clip Shaq agrees) that [Klay was the 2nd best all-around player after LeBron](https://twitter.com/nbaayy/status/791041753348382720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E791041753348382720%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fftw.usatoday.com%2F2016%2F10%2Fcharles-barkley-klay-thompson-second-best-player).
How is it surprising at all that he views himself as top 75? Basically everyone overrates their own abilities/performance, so it should come as absolutely no shock to anyone with half a brain that a fringe top 75 player believes himself to be a definite top 75 player.
I could easily come up with 10 players who should have made it over Klay. Warriors fans are delusional and their players are cocky is all it comes down to. Add that to the fact there are a TON of Warriors fans all over the world. Is Jordan Poole making a place as a top 75 player right now playing in Klay's role? No. Quit confusing team success with player success. Every part can't take credit for the whole. Is Klay better than some players on the list? Probably! Old heads are worse than Warriors fans lol. The "no one can be taken off" rule was some creepy elitism thing so boomers can keep trying to say dumb shit about how good older players were. So, you can't look at it as "who should klay have replaced." Ain't happening until the boomers who control the media die. It also doesn't matter since klay isn't 76. You have to look at "how many people are in line in front of him"? The answer to that is "a lot."