Who would take if they were still playing? i think niq was probably a better scorer but clyde had a better all around game.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Brasco:</div><div class="quote_post">Who would take if they were still playing? i think niq was probably a better scorer but clyde had a better all around game.</div> I would agree with that. It's hard to choose who the greater individual player is. I think most might say Wilkins because of all the highlights, though Clyde wasn't too shabby in that regard either. Clyde was definitely a better passer. Both were about the same as rebounders. Defensively, I'd give Clyde an edge. Wilkins was a more prolific scorer, but then he also took way more shots and wasn't quite as efficient. A couple ways to guage how good they were statistically is PER and Win Shares, which are both provided at basketball-reference.com. PER estimates productivity per possession. Win Shares estimates the number of wins a player is responsible for (actually, you'd look at WS/3, if I understand it correctly). Clyde's weighted average PER over his career was 21.1, while Dominique's was 21.6. Pretty close. As for win shares, Clyde collected 389 (27.4 average) to Nique's 343 (25.2 average). Below are some graphs, comparing them season by season (they both played 15 seasons).
I was a big fan of Clyde "The Glide" Drexler in his days in Portland. Niq was cool, but I remember him more for his dunks than his game performace.
Clyde....Nique was great and both were human highlight films, but Drexler had the all around better game.....I think it's a disgrace that Nique didn't make the 50 greatest player list