PDA

View Full Version : Are Steph Curry and Klay Thompson the best back court in NBA history?



Kaner
04-04-2015, 03:36 AM
What would convince you this season? They're both elite offensively and are top defenders at their positions which in itself might be a first. Statistically they have been the most dominant backcourt ever, comfortably. If not then what do you think they need to do before they get there? I know for many its too early but I'd probably anoint them if they made it too the finals and both played well in the playoffs.

basch152
04-04-2015, 03:53 AM
Uh...mj and pippen? At least if you count him as a pg.

Also magic and scott.

Isiah and dumars

ewing
04-04-2015, 04:12 AM
no they have to do a lot more before you can start saying that. They are the best shooting backcourt i have ever seen. The only two impact shooters on one team I can think of that rival them are Reggie Miller and the chuck person. Stockton and Horneseck were a lethal shooting backcourt as well. These two are just better shooter though,

Ariza's Better
04-04-2015, 04:36 AM
Can we see what they do in the playoffs before we start claiming them the best anything.

IKnowHoops
04-04-2015, 05:34 AM
What would convince you this season? They're both elite offensively and are top defenders at their positions which in itself might be a first. Statistically they have been the most dominant backcourt ever, comfortably. If not then what do you think they need to do before they get there? I know for many its too early but I'd probably anoint them if they made it too the finals and both played well in the playoffs.

There are a few lumped in with them who have an argument, so I just make it plain in simple.
I will give them title of best backcourt ever if they...

are 1,2 in PER during the regular season or playoffs. They do either and I will give them unquestioned best backcourt of all-time.

PurpleLynch
04-04-2015, 05:34 AM
Right now no. They are probably the best shooting backcourt that ever graced a Nba court. But best? Still early.
In no order:

Frazier/Monroe
West/Goodrich(another good shooting pair)
Magic/Scott
Thomas/Dumars
Jordan/Pippen(probably the most versatile one,they could both play PG,SG and SF.)

Also Stockton/Hornacek and Price/Harper deserve a mention.

slashsnake
04-04-2015, 05:49 AM
Uh...mj and pippen? At least if you count him as a pg.

Also magic and scott.

Isiah and dumars

Pippens definitely a Forward. Would be MJ and Paxson or BJ or Ron Harper. But Jordan and the guy beside Jordan would be a formidable backcourt.


Hmmm, Isiah and Dumars had a great D, but these guys have the better offense thus far.

I know the era is different but Bob Cousy and Bill Sharman. Two guys who made the HOF, and played in like 8 straight all star games together and won 4 championships together.

Jerry West and Gail Goodrich were quite awesome together as well. West is one of the best basketball players ever, and Goodrich was a HOFer good enough to lead those Wilt and West Laker teams in scoring.

Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe was another HOF combo in the backcourt that made all star games together and won a championship together. Both were 20 PPG guys together.

Maybe one of the best playing together for a year sure. But there were some pretty good flash in the pan backcourts too. I loved Jason Kidd and Vince Carter in NJ. Carter getting 25 a game, Kidd putting in the nearly triple double season. Young Tim Hardaway and Sprewell was awesome. And that year or two with young Tim and Mitch Richmond. I guess Golden State has had some really good backcourts.

What about Westbrook and Harden? Parker and Ginobili? Not sure if they count because of the starting bit.

FlashBolt
04-04-2015, 05:50 AM
Can we see what they do in the playoffs before we start claiming them the best anything.

So James Harden isn't the best SG?

basch152
04-04-2015, 06:26 AM
Chauncey/ rip was another great one

Made multiple all defensive teams and were great offensively.

FlashBolt
04-04-2015, 06:56 AM
Chauncey/ rip was another great one

Made multiple all defensive teams and were great offensively.

Curry/Klay are on another level offensively, though.

basch152
04-04-2015, 07:38 AM
Curry/Klay are on another level offensively, though.

Not necessarily.

Chauncey was an all time great floor general. Most of the shitf he did offensively didnt show up in stat sheets.

JasonJohnHorn
04-04-2015, 09:17 AM
My pick is Thomas/Dumars until another back court leads their team to three straight finals appearances, two straight championships, and manages to beat a team as good as the Celtics, the Lakers and the Bulls to do it.

Just saying ;-)

Full disclosure: Pistons homer.

mightybosstone
04-04-2015, 09:21 AM
Statistically, they've got to be damn close, but longevity and team success has to account for something. I came in here specifically to bring up West and Goodrich, Frazier and Monroe, Magic and Scott and Thomas and Dumars, but I clearly got beaten to it. As for all the people bringing up MJ and Pippen, obviously they shouldn't count unless you're counting Pippen as the point guard. And if that's the case, then Lebron and Wade obviously deserve some consideration.

Anyways, here are a few more duos worth considering:
- Bob Cousy and Sam Jones
- Terry Porter and Clyde Drexler
- John Stockton and Jeff Hornacek
- Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili

However, this is probably the single greatest season by a backcourt duo in NBA history. And should the two guys stick together a few seasons, have some postseason success and stay healthy, there's no reason why they won't be the undisputed greatest backcourt in NBA history in a few seasons. (Unless the Rockets add a star PG ;))

Ariza's Better
04-04-2015, 09:29 AM
So James Harden isn't the best SG?
Right now? Yes. All time? Of course not.

Chrisclover
04-04-2015, 09:29 AM
You are raving about them. They haven't proved anything other than an impressive regular season record. Entertain your idea when they get at least a ring.

Chrisclover
04-04-2015, 09:34 AM
So James Harden isn't the best SG?
Your analogy isn't appropriate. Harden is no question the best SG right now. Splash Brothers is an impressive combo but don't anoint them any title before they earn a title. Anything less than a championship for the best team in the regular season is a lost.

mightybosstone
04-04-2015, 09:35 AM
You are raving about them. They haven't proved anything other than an impressive regular season record. Entertain your idea when they get at least a ring.

Mmmm... I don't know that titles alone prove anything. Sure, you could make a case for West/Goodrich, Frazier/Monroe and Magic/Scott, but you know what those guys had that Curry/Thompson don't? Hall of Fame, top 50-all-time big men on their rosters. Curry and Thompson are unique in that, not only are they the two best players on a historically great basketball team, but they're both guards and they don't have an elite big man on the roster.

basch152
04-04-2015, 10:03 AM
Statistically, they've got to be damn close, but longevity and team success has to account for something. I came in here specifically to bring up West and Goodrich, Frazier and Monroe, Magic and Scott and Thomas and Dumars, but I clearly got beaten to it. As for all the people bringing up MJ and Pippen, obviously they shouldn't count unless you're counting Pippen as the point guard. And if that's the case, then Lebron and Wade obviously deserve some consideration.

Anyways, here are a few more duos worth considering:
- Bob Cousy and Sam Jones
- Terry Porter and Clyde Drexler
- John Stockton and Jeff Hornacek
- Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili

However, this is probably the single greatest season by a backcourt duo in NBA history. And should the two guys stick together a few seasons, have some postseason success and stay healthy, there's no reason why they won't be the undisputed greatest backcourt in NBA history in a few seasons. (Unless the Rockets add a star PG ;))

Best single season backcourt has to be the 86-87 or 87-88 Lakers season.

For team success they won 65 games and won a championship in 86-87, and in 87-88 they won 62 games and won a championship

And for individual success -

Magic averaged 23.9 PPG, 12.2 APG, 6.3 RBG, 1.7 Steals per game, won MVP and finals MVP in 86-87, in 87-88 he averaged 19.6 PPG, 11.9 APG, 6.2 RPG, and 1.6 Steals per game.

Scott averaged 17 PPG, 3.4 APG, and 3.5 RPG, 1.5 Steals per game in 86-87
And he averaged 21.7 PPG, 4.1 APG, 4.1 RPG, 1.9 Steals per game in 87-88

I think the only agument you could really make for Curry/Thompson is that the Lakers were more stacked overall, at least IMO.

mightybosstone
04-04-2015, 10:29 AM
Best single season backcourt has to be the 86-87 or 87-88 Lakers season.

For team success they won 65 games and won a championship in 86-87, and in 87-88 they won 62 games and won a championship

And for individual success -

Magic averaged 23.9 PPG, 12.2 APG, 6.3 RBG, 1.7 Steals per game, won MVP and finals MVP in 86-87, in 87-88 he averaged 19.6 PPG, 11.9 APG, 6.2 RPG, and 1.6 Steals per game.

Scott averaged 17 PPG, 3.4 APG, and 3.5 RPG, 1.5 Steals per game in 86-87
And he averaged 21.7 PPG, 4.1 APG, 4.1 RPG, 1.9 Steals per game in 87-88

I think the only agument you could really make for Curry/Thompson is that the Lakers were more stacked overall, at least IMO.

Statistically, Curry and Thompson's numbers this year are superior to Magic and Scott's numbers in 86-87 and 87-88. Magic was roughly on par with Curry in 86-87, but Curry's numbers dwarf Magic's in 87-88 and Thompson is superior this season to pretty much any season Scott ever had.

blahblahyoutoo
04-04-2015, 11:18 AM
klay still hasn't shown me he is deserving of a superstar label. all star yes. franshise super star, not there yet.

sjbirds
04-04-2015, 11:19 AM
Offensively possibly but still too early to say

curtcocaine
04-04-2015, 11:23 AM
No.

HeatFan
04-04-2015, 11:23 AM
Right now they are certainly the best but I think its too early to say all time best. They do have an argument for all-time most entertaining. A Warriors game is almost must see tv right now.

Also, what defines the best? Longevity? Stats? winning? etc... For example, you could say that Nash/Bryant on paper is probably one of the best all time but they didn't do anything together.

Corey
04-04-2015, 11:30 AM
For example, you could say that Nash/Bryant on paper is probably one of the best all time but they didn't do anything together.

No, you cant. They weren't in their prime together.

mightybosstone
04-04-2015, 11:55 AM
klay still hasn't shown me he is deserving of a superstar label. all star yes. franshise super star, not there yet.

But in the history of the NBA, how many back courts have had two superstars in the same back court for an extended period of time?

blahblahyoutoo
04-04-2015, 11:59 AM
Statistically, Curry and Thompson's numbers this year are superior to Magic and Scott's numbers in 86-87 and 87-88. Magic was roughly on par with Curry in 86-87, but Curry's numbers dwarf Magic's in 87-88 and Thompson is superior this season to pretty much any season Scott ever had.

yeah, byron ain't ****. he was solid, but nowhere near a great.

blahblahyoutoo
04-04-2015, 12:01 PM
But in the history of the NBA, how many back courts have had two superstars in the same back court for an extended period of time?

my history/memory doesn't go that far back, but klay/curry have only been great this season (with curry being much more great than klay).

LakersEaglesLA
04-04-2015, 12:08 PM
yeah, byron ain't ****. he was solid, but nowhere near a great.

I see you done lost your mind... Byron made big shot after big shot in the playoffs and Championship series.. he also was a great defender against Ainge and Dumars.. If you ever say a starter on the Showtime Lakers (greatest team ever) ain't $ you don't know anything abt basketball

mightybosstone
04-04-2015, 12:11 PM
my history/memory doesn't go that far back, but klay/curry have only been great this season (with curry being much more great than klay).

I definitely agree with that. My point was just that you stated that Thompson wasn't really a superstar player, but there really have been very, very few cases where two superstar guards have started in the same back court for multiple seasons. Monroe was a borderline superstar in Baltimore before he came to New York to play with Frazier, but he was never as productive as a Knick as he was in Baltimore. Dumars really only became an All-NBA caliber player after Thomas was already on the decline and Goodrich and West were in a similar scenario.

This might be the first case where two All-NBA caliber players played in the same back court and were peaking at the same time. And I think Thompson still has some room to grow as a player. These two guys could feasibly dominate together for a decade.

HeatFan
04-04-2015, 12:11 PM
No, you cant. They weren't in their prime together.

Well then add playing in their prime as another factor to defining "best"!! not as easy as it seems.

Tony_Starks
04-04-2015, 12:18 PM
Need to at least make a Finals before I can them in the Magic/Scott Zeek/Dumars convo.

The Warriors lead the league in like 10 different categories. With home court in the playoffs Stephen and Klay need to get them to the dance if they want to be compared to legends...

LakersIn5
04-04-2015, 12:33 PM
Wait for them to win a playoff series first

ewing
04-04-2015, 01:04 PM
Mmmm... I don't know that titles alone prove anything. Sure, you could make a case for West/Goodrich, Frazier/Monroe and Magic/Scott, but you know what those guys had that Curry/Thompson don't? Hall of Fame, top 50-all-time big men on their rosters. Curry and Thompson are unique in that, not only are they the two best players on a historically great basketball team, but they're both guards and they don't have an elite big man on the roster.

this is a historical great team?

Scoots
04-04-2015, 01:12 PM
this is a historical great team?

Historically statistically yes.

I too am in the group saying they have to win at least 1 title to be in the discussion.

Best shooting backcourt is already theirs.

KnicksorBust
04-04-2015, 01:21 PM
This thread is a joke. Klay 1-time Allstar is part of the greatest back court in history?? Give me a break. Learn your history.

Kaner
04-04-2015, 02:21 PM
This thread is a joke. Klay 1-time Allstar is part of the greatest back court in history?? Give me a break. Learn your history.

It was with history in mind that I made this thread. Am not sure a backcourt has ever played as well as Curry and Klay this season. Which would make them the best imo if they have a good playoff run. Not the greatest or most acclaimed obviously but the best duo we've seen.

1.)Frazier-Monroe
2.)West-Goodrich
3.)Cousy-Sharman
4.)Thomas-Dumars
5.)Johnson-Scott
honorable mention Drexler-Porter; Jordan-Harper

Is my order for the 5 greatest back-courts ever but in a game tomorrow each duo in their best year together who's better than Curry-Thompson?

krazylegz
04-04-2015, 02:23 PM
answer to thread: no.....also,are most posters on here with silly questions over the age of 20?

Scoots
04-04-2015, 02:42 PM
answer to thread: no.....also,are most posters on here with silly questions over the age of 20?

answer to thread: no ... for now. Can they be? Yes.

kdspurman
04-04-2015, 02:54 PM
It was with history in mind that I made this thread. Am not sure a backcourt has ever played as well as Curry and Klay this season. Which would make them the best imo if they have a good playoff run. Not the greatest or most acclaimed obviously but the best duo we've seen.

1.)Frazier-Monroe
2.)West-Goodrich
3.)Cousy-Sharman
4.)Thomas-Dumars
5.)Johnson-Scott
honorable mention Drexler-Porter; Jordan-Harper

Is my order for the 5 greatest back-courts ever but in a game tomorrow each duo in their best year together who's better than Curry-Thompson?

Where do you have Parker/Ginobili?

ewing
04-04-2015, 02:59 PM
Historically statistically yes.

I too am in the group saying they have to win at least 1 title to be in the discussion.

Best shooting backcourt is already theirs.

i'm going to take as a no

tredigs
04-04-2015, 03:04 PM
"Is this the best regular season by a backcourt in NBA history" is a much less off-putting and relevant question in my opinion.

As is you'll just get the, ''we'll see how they do when it matters'', ''what r yew a teenager??'' etc etc.

To answer my own question... I'm not sure? Most likely top 5, though.

ewing
04-04-2015, 03:21 PM
Statistically, Curry and Thompson's numbers this year are superior to Magic and Scott's numbers in 86-87 and 87-88. Magic was roughly on par with Curry in 86-87, but Curry's numbers dwarf Magic's in 87-88 and Thompson is superior this season to pretty much any season Scott ever had.

so? these guys stats hight light incredible skills sets and performance if you think you can compare the impact of a Magic Johnson or a Steph Curry solely on stats your way off base.

ewing
04-04-2015, 03:39 PM
"Is this the best regular season by a backcourt in NBA history" is a much less off-putting and relevant question in my opinion.

As is you'll just get the, ''we'll see how they do when it matters'', ''what r yew a teenager??'' etc etc.

To answer my own question... I'm not sure? Most likely top 5, though.


they are a great backcourt no doubt and the best jump shooting backcourt both off the catch and dribble which is mad impressive. I just find it silly when people start comparing Curry's #s to Magic's and stuff like that. They both have great numbers. you have to go deeper. If you want to find someone that clearly impacted the game more then Magic at his best based on #s you have to look at Wilt or someone, otherwise you are just looking at two guys that have great #s

Vinylman
04-04-2015, 03:40 PM
this is a historical great team?

of course it is just like the 06-07 Mavs... you know... the eventual NBA champs... oh wait... never mind

TrueFan420
04-04-2015, 03:53 PM
Wait for them to win a playoff series first

They already have won a playoff series against the Denver Nuggets two years ago

ewing
04-04-2015, 04:00 PM
of course it is just like the 06-07 Mavs... you know... the eventual NBA champs... oh wait... never mind

they might win a chip. they are great team. i just think we are jumping the gun a bit. I am not surprised that this is 60 plus win team. I thought they could be if healthy. They are very good. I have always been a huge Curry and Thompson fan (i love shooters and i think they have taken it to another level with there ability to shoot so consistently with range off the bounce as well as catch). That said what they are is a very good team IMO. I don't see them running through people like the 2000 lakers or the Bulls when the won 72 and were never really pushed,

PowerHouse
04-04-2015, 04:12 PM
Curry/Thompson arent even the greatest backcourt in their franchise history, let alone NBA history. Im shocked that I havent seen any body mention the Run TMC backcourt of Hardaway and Richmond. I would take them or West/Goodrich over Curry/Thompson all day everyday.

ewing
04-04-2015, 04:23 PM
Curry/Thompson arent even the greatest backcourt in their franchise history, let alone NBA history. Im shocked that I havent seen any body mention the Run TMC backcourt of Hardaway and Richmond. I would take them or West/Goodrich over Curry/Thompson all day everyday.

I think Curry is better significantly today then Timmy or Mitch ever were. I am also a Klay fan and would take this backcourt. Never once saw the other guys

alexander_37
04-04-2015, 04:44 PM
So James Harden isn't the best SG?

Seriously.... There is a small difference between best player at a position currently and best back court of all time...

HeatFan
04-04-2015, 04:52 PM
Curry/Thompson arent even the greatest backcourt in their franchise history, let alone NBA history. Im shocked that I havent seen any body mention the Run TMC backcourt of Hardaway and Richmond. I would take them or West/Goodrich over Curry/Thompson all day everyday.

Hardaway/Richmond do belong in this conversation. Forgot about them.

Vinylman
04-04-2015, 04:53 PM
they might win a chip. they are great team. i just think we are jumping the gun a bit. I am not surprised that this is 60 plus win team. I thought they could be if healthy. They are very good. I have always been a huge Curry and Thompson fan (i love shooters and i think they have taken it to another level with there ability to shoot so consistently with range off the bounce as well as catch). That said what they are is a very good team IMO. I don't see them running through people like the 2000 lakers or the Bulls when the won 72 and were never really pushed,

yeah... that was my point... they are jumping the gun... **** happens in the league that is unexpected... it is reasonable to think this team could win it all or be a second round exit... there are no guarantees in professional sports which is why i used the Mavs example....

It will be interesting to see what happens in the playoffs but to call them the greatest backcourt ever on anything other than maybe statistics is ridiculous... if you are a fan of statistics then they have an argument this year but if you are a fan of winning they aren't close

FlashBolt
04-04-2015, 05:08 PM
Seriously.... There is a small difference between best player at a position currently and best back court of all time...

Seriously.... He worded it completely wrong. He said that they should wait to the playoffs before being claimed anything but if that's the case, we should wait till Harden gets to the playoffs and PLAYS well before we claim him the best SG. Isn't that only fair?

ewing
04-04-2015, 05:08 PM
yeah... that was my point... they are jumping the gun... **** happens in the league that is unexpected... it is reasonable to think this team could win it all or be a second round exit... there are no guarantees in professional sports which is why i used the Mavs example....

It will be interesting to see what happens in the playoffs but to call them the greatest backcourt ever on anything other than maybe statistics is ridiculous... if you are a fan of statistics then they have an argument this year but if you are a fan of winning they aren't close

exactly i wouldn't be shocked if they lost. if the those Lakers lost it would have been a huge upset. Same with the Bulls. They were clear favorites against the field. I don't think the Warriors are. Maybe they prove of us wrong :shrug:

asandhu23
04-04-2015, 05:12 PM
Curry and Klay complement each others' skill sets really well. Only similar comparison is Goodrich, West.

ewing
04-04-2015, 05:43 PM
Curry and Klay complement each others' skill sets really well. Only similar comparison is Goodrich, West.

why do you think those two backcourts are comparable?

goingfor28
04-04-2015, 06:04 PM
So James Harden isn't the best SG?
Ever? No. Currently in the league? Yes

basch152
04-04-2015, 06:09 PM
Statistically, Curry and Thompson's numbers this year are superior to Magic and Scott's numbers in 86-87 and 87-88. Magic was roughly on par with Curry in 86-87, but Curry's numbers dwarf Magic's in 87-88 and Thompson is superior this season to pretty much any season Scott ever had.

Uh, no they aren't. Magic/Byron combined for around 7 more apg and 5 more RPG. That's pretty significant.

sf-fanatic
04-04-2015, 06:10 PM
they might win a chip. they are great team. i just think we are jumping the gun a bit. I am not surprised that this is 60 plus win team. I thought they could be if healthy. They are very good. I have always been a huge Curry and Thompson fan (i love shooters and i think they have taken it to another level with there ability to shoot so consistently with range off the bounce as well as catch). That said what they are is a very good team IMO. I don't see them running through people like the 2000 lakers or the Bulls when the won 72 and were never really pushed,

A double digit differential isn't running through people ? Most of the games are over by the 4th quarter and Curry hasn't played in a good amount of 4th quarter games.

giantspwn
04-04-2015, 06:48 PM
Statistically this year, yes.

GS winning a title(s) the next several years will only legitimize further. Though, that logic is kind of arbitrary, given that the best back-court doesn't always translate to a team going all the way.

IKnowHoops
04-04-2015, 07:10 PM
I think Curry is better significantly today then Timmy or Mitch ever were. I am also a Klay fan and would take this backcourt. Never once saw the other guys

If you were able to see Prime Timmy.....sigh.....he was sick.

Scoots
04-04-2015, 08:17 PM
of course it is just like the 06-07 Mavs... you know... the eventual NBA champs... oh wait... never mind

The Warriors point differential (the top indicator of success according to some stat hounds) is in double digits, the only team to do that and not win a title lost to another team that had a double digit differential (in fact the top point differential team of all time the 71-72 Lakers). The 06-07 Mavs had a differential of 7.2.

ewing
04-04-2015, 08:18 PM
If you were able to see Prime Timmy.....sigh.....he was sick.

i saw plenty of tim hardaway- curry is a better basketball player

Kaner
04-05-2015, 01:17 AM
Where do you have Parker/Ginobili?

Without thinking about it too much I'd probably round out my top 10 with

6.)Drexler-Porter
7.)Harper-Jordan
8.)Ginobili-Parker
9.)Billups-Hamilton
10.)Williams-Wade

numba1CHANGsta
04-05-2015, 02:44 AM
Kobe and Fisher were the best backcourt in NBA history, both won 5 championships together, Curry and Thompson have 0 championships together

Allphakenny1
04-05-2015, 04:40 AM
Kobe and Fisher were the best backcourt in NBA history, both won 5 championships together, Curry and Thompson have 0 championships together

I hope you are joking! Fisher was not even good enough to beat out Speedy Claxton on the Warriors roster when he was here. I'm sure having Shaq/Bynum, Gasol did nothing to aid those 5 championships.

PraiseJesus
04-05-2015, 06:20 AM
I think the question he meant to ask is "Are they the best shooting back court in NBA history"

That is something that might actually be true

tredigs
04-05-2015, 10:40 AM
I think the question he meant to ask is "Are they the best shooting back court in NBA history"

That is something that might actually be true

Might? That's not a question.

Vinylman
04-05-2015, 11:41 AM
The Warriors point differential (the top indicator of success according to some stat hounds) is in double digits, the only team to do that and not win a title lost to another team that had a double digit differential (in fact the top point differential team of all time the 71-72 Lakers). The 06-07 Mavs had a differential of 7.2.

you obviously missed the point... regular season success doesn't always translate to post season succes...

There is nothing "historic" about the GSW season at this point.

IndiansFan337
04-05-2015, 11:48 AM
Right now? Yes. All time? Of course not.

Agreed.

lol, please
04-05-2015, 12:25 PM
What would convince you this season? They're both elite offensively and are top defenders at their positions which in itself might be a first. Statistically they have been the most dominant backcourt ever, comfortably. If not then what do you think they need to do before they get there? I know for many its too early but I'd probably anoint them if they made it too the finals and both played well in the playoffs.

Not yet, but in a couple seasons, I believe so. Statistically they are, but it's not a large enough sample size to say it with certainty over other historically reliable pairs.


i saw plenty of tim hardaway- curry is a better basketball player
Dat crossover doe. :drool:


Kobe and Fisher were the best backcourt in NBA history, both won 5 championships together, Curry and Thompson have 0 championships together

:facepalm:

KnicksorBust
04-05-2015, 12:27 PM
The Warriors point differential (the top indicator of success according to some stat hounds) is in double digits, the only team to do that and not win a title lost to another team that had a double digit differential (in fact the top point differential team of all time the 71-72 Lakers). The 06-07 Mavs had a differential of 7.2.

you obviously missed the point... regular season success doesn't always translate to post season succes...

There is nothing "historic" about the GSW season at this point.

Exactly. If they go down in round 1 or 2 then ths season will be instantly forgettable. Talk to me in 2 months.

Mr.B
04-05-2015, 01:23 PM
What would convince you this season? They're both elite offensively and are top defenders at their positions which in itself might be a first. Statistically they have been the most dominant backcourt ever, comfortably. If not then what do you think they need to do before they get there? I know for many its too early but I'd probably anoint them if they made it too the finals and both played well in the playoffs.

Next to Dirk, Curry is now probably my favorite player to watch. With that said I would still take Jordan and BJ Armstrong over Curry and Klay.

Scoots
04-05-2015, 01:41 PM
you obviously missed the point... regular season success doesn't always translate to post season succes...

There is nothing "historic" about the GSW season at this point.

But there are "historic" things about the Warriors regular season which was the point being made.

The Warriors are one of the best teams all time in terms of regular season point differential, they are may set the record for 3s made by a player and by a starting back-court (don't know about as a team), they can be the only team in NBA history to be #1 in pace and defensive rating.

Their season is in the context of the greatest seasons ever.

The Bucks in 1971 had a historic season, one of the greatest ever ... then they lost the title. We still know about how great the 71 bucks were.

alexander_37
04-05-2015, 03:29 PM
I would take prime parker and gino over curry thompson right noe. But that could change. Gino is far superior to klay right now.

Ty Fast
04-05-2015, 03:38 PM
Id rather have mj and (fill in blank)

PowerHouse
04-06-2015, 01:59 AM
Without thinking about it too much I'd probably round out my top 10 with

6.)Drexler-Porter
7.)Harper-Jordan
8.)Ginobili-Parker
9.)Billups-Hamilton
10.)Williams-Wade

So Hardaway/Richmond cant even crack your list but by all means we must get Jason Williams in there right?

curtcocaine
04-06-2015, 03:33 AM
No Nash and Kobe shout out? Lol.

Scoots
04-06-2015, 01:08 PM
Id rather have mj and (fill in blank)

Okay, MJ and Rusty LaRue vs Curry and Thompson 2 on 2 ... I think Curry and Thompson win.

So that's a 34 year old Jordan with rookie LaRue vs Curry/Thompson entering their prime.

Kaner
04-06-2015, 02:44 PM
So Hardaway/Richmond cant even crack your list but by all means we must get Jason Williams in there right?

Prime Wade>Richmond+Hardaway.

But you're right that I wanted to give them a shout out in the thread by putting them at 10, since they did win a championship together and Jason Williams is a solid starter next too one of the 5 or so best guards ever. I'd put Hornacek and K.J. or stockton at 10 though before Richmond and Hardaway. So yeah no way Hardaway/Richmond is cracking my list

PowerHouse
04-06-2015, 03:04 PM
Prime Wade>Richmond+Hardaway.

*Edited because I saw you changed your comment.

If what you want to see is one supremely great player paired with a chump then why not go better than Wade/Jason? Why not 80s Jordan/Paxson? Robertson/Bockhorn?

I also havent seen any Allen/Rondo shout outs.

Hawkeye15
04-06-2015, 03:23 PM
Kobe and Fisher were the best backcourt in NBA history, both won 5 championships together, Curry and Thompson have 0 championships together

careful, that does not go well with Kobe fans trying to make his case haha. That is just adding another great player to his list of help....

And no, Fisher was a perfect role player in the triangle, but at no point was he an elite, or even all star caliber player.

dnl123
04-06-2015, 03:39 PM
Dumars and Thomas were the best I've seen as a tandem, can't comment on West and Goodrich and other classic pairings because that was before my time. I do appreciate the mention of Hardaway and Richmond because that's an underrated backcourt for sure.

But honestly are we really going to crown Curry and Thompson the best backcourt ever after a few seasons? Let them keep what they're doing up for at least a few more seasons before they get that designation.

Kaner
04-06-2015, 03:52 PM
*Edited because I saw you changed your comment.

If what you want to see is one supremely great player paired with a chump then why not go better than Wade/Jason? Why not 80s Jordan/Paxson? Robertson/Bockhorn?

I also havent seen any Allen/Rondo shout outs.

Considered going with Oscar and Adrian Smith but gave the edge to Wade-Williams and would do the same with Bockhorn. Jordan-Paxson would feel redundant since I have Jordan-harper on there. Again I started the post with "Without thinking about it too much" because I knew it wouldn't be perfect and I'd forget someone. So many duos could be argued for in the 9/10 spot I think.

FlashBolt
04-06-2015, 05:27 PM
We're talking about best backcourt so I just want to put it out there, MJ with ANY PG would still get my vote. That's how good MJ was.

Hawkeye15
04-06-2015, 05:45 PM
does this only pertain to starters, or the guard rotation as a whole?

mightybosstone
04-06-2015, 06:14 PM
Uh, no they aren't. Magic/Byron combined for around 7 more apg and 5 more RPG. That's pretty significant.

You're looking solely at box score numbers, but Curry/Thompsons' advanced stats are far superior.

mightybosstone
04-06-2015, 06:19 PM
this is a historical great team?

Yeah, dude. If the Warriors win four of their last five games, they'll have 67 wins. Only nine teams in the history of the NBA have accomplished that feat. If they finish with 68 wins, only five other teams have accomplished that feat. It's worth noting that seven of the nine 67-plus win teams won NBA titles and four of the five 68-plus win teams won titles.

ewing
04-06-2015, 06:26 PM
Yeah, dude. If the Warriors win four of their last five games, they'll have 67 wins. Only nine teams in the history of the NBA have accomplished that feat. If they finish with 68 wins, only five other teams have accomplished that feat. It's worth noting that seven of the nine 67-plus win teams won NBA titles and four of the five 68-plus win teams won titles.

What if they win 65- not great anymore? maybe they are a very good team in a conf where every top team but them has been wrecked by injuries this year. the things you are posting are trivia that would lead one to believe they are historically great but they don't actually make them great by themselves. I do they are very good and depending on the draw i think they might go rough shud over through the west but i don't think they are clear favorite against the field and I certainly don't think there are multiple historically great teams this year.

mightybosstone
04-06-2015, 06:34 PM
or they they were a very good team in a conf where every top team but them has been wrecked by injuries this year. the things you are posting are trivia that would lead one to believe they are historically great but they don't actually make them great. I do they are very good and depending on the draw i think they might go rough shud over through the west but i don't think they are clear favorite against the field.

Look, I don't like the Warriors. If anyone would be looking for an excuse to rip on them, it would be me. But even I can't. They're freaking amazing. And, yeah, they've been extremely lucky with their lack of injuries this season. But I don't think it's fair to rip them for staying healthy, when all of the other historically great teams in NBA history also were relatively healthy and when they were already playing in a ridiculously deep, ridiculously talented conference.

Give credit where credit is due. They have had one of the greatest regular seasons in NBA history. And while they still have to prove themselves in the postseason, they absolutely deserve a ton of credit for what they've achieved up to this point.

KingPosey
04-06-2015, 06:38 PM
So James Harden isn't the best SG?

In NBA HISTORY? no he isn't.

KingPosey
04-06-2015, 06:39 PM
Prime Wade>Richmond+Hardaway.

But you're right that I wanted to give them a shout out in the thread by putting them at 10, since they did win a championship together and Jason Williams is a solid starter next too one of the 5 or so best guards ever. I'd put Hornacek and K.J. or stockton at 10 though before Richmond and Hardaway. So yeah no way Hardaway/Richmond is cracking my listlol

Scoots
04-06-2015, 07:47 PM
We're talking about best backcourt so I just want to put it out there, MJ with ANY PG would still get my vote. That's how good MJ was.

Already answered this above:
Okay, MJ and Rusty LaRue vs Curry and Thompson 2 on 2 ... I think Curry and Thompson win.

So that's a 34 year old Jordan with rookie LaRue vs Curry/Thompson entering their prime.

If I get to pick any backcourt that included MJ then by picking Rusty Larue I can make it the 34 year old MJ and not the younger one. Or should I go to the even worse MJ from his 3rd comeback?

To be fair, MJ/Kerr is an interesting contender, but even that pairing would have trouble beating Curry/Thompson 2 on 2 with the current rules. Not saying MJ would lose (he probably wouldn't), but it's not a walk either.

MJ and anybody is a bad argument for best backcourt ever.

I also think talking about Curry/Thompson as the best ever is foolishly early ... however that's what sports forums are for :)

LakersEaglesLA
04-06-2015, 11:36 PM
careful, that does not go well with Kobe fans trying to make his case haha. That is just adding another great player to his list of help....

And no, Fisher was a perfect role player in the triangle, but at no point was he an elite, or even all star caliber player.

Because Jordan and LeBron played 1 against 5

ewing
04-07-2015, 08:44 AM
Look, I don't like the Warriors. If anyone would be looking for an excuse to rip on them, it would be me. But even I can't. They're freaking amazing. And, yeah, they've been extremely lucky with their lack of injuries this season. But I don't think it's fair to rip them for staying healthy, when all of the other historically great teams in NBA history also were relatively healthy and when they were already playing in a ridiculously deep, ridiculously talented conference.

Give credit where credit is due. They have had one of the greatest regular seasons in NBA history. And while they still have to prove themselves in the postseason, they absolutely deserve a ton of credit for what they've achieved up to this point.

i'm not ripping the warriors. you are giving them a title i don't think they deserve. Maybe you think there is a magic #s of wins somewhere b/t 62-67 where all of the sudden you are an all time great team, i don't. I am looking at what they have accomplished, the context in which they accomplished it, and comparing them to other "historically" great teams. The Warriors were very healthy, the rest of the West was very hit hard my injuries, and when i look at the team i do not see them a clear cut favorite against the field in the postseason. I see a very good team, i do not see a team i not see a team that makes you go holy ****, i like 96 Bulls, or the running rebs that beat Duke by 30, the 2000 Lakers, etc

mightybosstone
04-07-2015, 09:25 AM
i'm not ripping the warriors. you are giving them a title i don't think they deserve. Maybe you think there is a magic #s of wins somewhere b/t 62-67 where all of the sudden you are an all time great team, i don't. I am looking at what they have accomplished, the context in which they accomplished it, and comparing them to other "historically" great teams.
In terms of regular season success, they are great historically, and you can't really dispute that. They've posted like the fourth or fifth highest SRS in the history of the NBA and their double-digit point differential is absolutely ridiculous. I don't understand why you're having a hard time recognizing that. I'm not calling them great in terms of postseason success, obviously, because that would be stupid considering a single playoff game has yet to be played.

I'm saying that in terms of the REGULAR SEASON, they've been a historically great basketball team. Pretty simple logic to comprehend, dude.


The Warriors were very healthy, the rest of the West was very hit hard my injuries, and when i look at the team i do not see them a clear cut favorite against the field in the postseason. I see a very good team, i do not see a team i not see a team that makes you go holy ****, i like 96 Bulls, or the running rebs that beat Duke by 30, the 2000 Lakers, etc
That Lakers team didn't post a point differential or SRS remotely as high as this Warriors team did. In terms of the regular season, this Golden State team was absolutely better. Obviously the Lakers won the title, which gives them a significant edge in the postseason conversation, but you're the one bringing up playoff success. Not me. That is not remotely part of the point I was making.

HOWEVER, if you want to talk about teams that were historically great in the postseason, I don't believe I would bring up the 2000 Lakers. They were only 15-8 in the playoffs that year and got taken to a Game 5 by the 8th seeded Kings in the first round and to a Game 7 by the Blazers before winning a 6-game NBA Finals series to a so so Pacers team. That doesn't strike me as historically great. The 2001 Lakers team was far, far more dominant in the playoffs.

BKLYNpigeon
04-07-2015, 09:30 AM
Not the best in history, but the best right now.

#whocares

Mr.B
04-07-2015, 09:55 AM
Isaiah Thomas/Joe Dumars I think would be able to handle Curry/Klay defensively. I don't think Curry/Klay could handle Isaiah/Dumars though.

ewing
04-07-2015, 09:58 AM
In terms of regular season success, they are great historically, and you can't really dispute that. They've posted like the fourth or fifth highest SRS in the history of the NBA and their double-digit point differential is absolutely ridiculous. I don't understand why you're having a hard time recognizing that. I'm not calling them great in terms of postseason success, obviously, because that would be stupid considering a single playoff game has yet to be played.

I'm saying that in terms of the REGULAR SEASON, they've been a historically great basketball team. Pretty simple logic to comprehend, dude.


That Lakers team didn't post a point differential or SRS remotely as high as this Warriors team did. In terms of the regular season, this Golden State team was absolutely better. Obviously the Lakers won the title, which gives them a significant edge in the postseason conversation, but you're the one bringing up playoff success. Not me. That is not remotely part of the point I was making.

HOWEVER, if you want to talk about teams that were historically great in the postseason, I don't believe I would bring up the 2000 Lakers. They were only 15-8 in the playoffs that year and got taken to a Game 5 by the 8th seeded Kings in the first round and to a Game 7 by the Blazers before winning a 6-game NBA Finals series to a so so Pacers team. That doesn't strike me as historically great. The 2001 Lakers team was far, far more dominant in the playoffs.



2000-01 season- the year the Lakers lost one game in the post season- they were dominate. again, if you want to define historically great solely based on those #s fine but I am not going to share your perspective. If you think those #s by themselves make them important to NBA history or denote that they deserve some kind of legacy solely based on them, i disagree. Right now the GSW historically are insignificant IMO. Also and don't tell me i can't dispute your opinion. Of course i can. In fact i already have :nod:

mightybosstone
04-07-2015, 11:00 AM
2000-01 season- the year the Lakers lost one game in the post season- they were dominate. again, if you want to define historically great solely based on those #s fine but I am not going to share your perspective. If you think those #s by themselves make them important to NBA history or denote that they deserve some kind of legacy solely based on them, i disagree. Right now the GSW historically are insignificant IMO. Also and don't tell me i can't dispute your opinion. Of course i can. In fact i already have :nod:

:facepalm:

AGAIN, let me point out two things here that I thought I made pretty clear the last time around:

1. The 2001 Lakers were dominant in the postseason, but you said the 2000 Lakers, aka the team that was dominant in the regular season but struggled a bit in the playoffs. If you're going to make a point about a particular team, at least make sure you're referring to the correct team next time.

2. I'm saying the Warriors are a historically great REGULAR SEASON TEAM!!!!! I don't know how many times I have to say it, but it's fairly clear to me that I've said it enough for any reasonable human being to understand. And, no, you cannot dispute that they've had one of the greatest regular seasons in NBA history up to this point. It's not even a point up for debate. If a team wins 67+ games with a double digit point differential and a double digit SRS, then that team has had one of the greatest regular seasons in the history of the league. Period.

But I'm kind of done arguing on the subject at this point. I feel like I've made my case pretty clear, and I don't think I need to say the same thing five times... :shrug:

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 11:03 AM
Because Jordan and LeBron played 1 against 5

not really...you missed my point. A Kobe fan shouldn't be pumping up Fisher as this great PG if he doesn't want the case against Kobe to get stronger...

ewing
04-07-2015, 12:05 PM
:facepalm:

AGAIN, let me point out two things here that I thought I made pretty clear the last time around:

1. The 2001 Lakers were dominant in the postseason, but you said the 2000 Lakers, aka the team that was dominant in the regular season but struggled a bit in the playoffs. If you're going to make a point about a particular team, at least make sure you're referring to the correct team next time.

2. I'm saying the Warriors are a historically great REGULAR SEASON TEAM!!!!! I don't know how many times I have to say it, but it's fairly clear to me that I've said it enough for any reasonable human being to understand. And, no, you cannot dispute that they've had one of the greatest regular seasons in NBA history up to this point. It's not even a point up for debate. If a team wins 67+ games with a double digit point differential and a double digit SRS, then that team has had one of the greatest regular seasons in the history of the league. Period.

But I'm kind of done arguing on the subject at this point. I feel like I've made my case pretty clear, and I don't think I need to say the same thing five times... :shrug:

1. I made a mistake- go F yourself :)

2. The debated question was is this team "historically great"!!!!!

3. please don't say the same thing a 6th time. I told you the previous 5 that i do not think those things make the GSW historically great.

mightybosstone
04-07-2015, 12:18 PM
1. I made a mistake- go F yourself :)

2. The debated question was is this team "historically great"!!!!!

3. please don't say the same thing a 6th time. I told you the previous 5 that i do not think those things make the GSW historically great.

Never mind. Clearly you're too dense to separate regular season success from postseason success. I thought that was fairly self explanatory. Apparently not.

ewing
04-07-2015, 12:21 PM
Never mind. Clearly you're too dense to separate regular season success from postseason success. I thought that was fairly self explanatory. Apparently not.

:laugh2:

maybe you should copy and paste it again??

mightybosstone
04-07-2015, 12:45 PM
:laugh2:

maybe you should copy and paste it again??
I don't think it would help much. You clearly don't care and are unwilling to accept that we're arguing two completely different things. :shrug:

Mr.B
04-07-2015, 09:35 PM
I would probably also take Reggie Miller/Mark Jackson over Curry/Klay

lol, please
04-07-2015, 09:47 PM
I would probably also take Reggie Miller/Mark Jackson over Curry/Klay
Insanity.

Mr.B
04-07-2015, 09:52 PM
Insanity.

Miller was as good a clutch shooter as either Klay or Curry and both Jackson and Miller were better defenders. Jackson was also a better distributor than Curry.

lol, please
04-07-2015, 10:13 PM
Miller was as good a clutch shooter as either Klay or Curry and both Jackson and Miller were better defenders. Jackson was also a better distributor than Curry.
Jackson was a better distributor than curry, yes, but klay and curry both are better shooters than miller.

Mr.B
04-07-2015, 10:16 PM
Jackson was a better distributor than curry, yes, but klay and curry both are better shooters than miller.

By the end of Curry's career he likely will be but at this point I would prefer Miller in the clutch than Klay or Curry.

lol, please
04-07-2015, 10:18 PM
By the end of Curry's career he likely will be but at this point I would prefer Miller in the clutch than Klay or Curry.
You would put the ball in miller's hands over curry for a buzzer beater? :confused:

Mr.B
04-07-2015, 10:29 PM
You would put the ball in miller's hands over curry for a buzzer beater? :confused:

I would. As I stated though, at some point the choice may be clearly Curry (next to Dirk he's currently my favorite player) but based on their current bodies of work I would take Miller.

ewing
04-08-2015, 08:39 AM
You would put the ball in miller's hands over curry for a buzzer beater? :confused:

of course. what has Steph done in the clutch?

ewing
04-08-2015, 08:42 AM
Jackson was a better distributor than curry, yes, but klay and curry both are better shooters than miller.

Miller was definitely a better shooter then Klay. The guy was absolutely lights outs and with defensive totally stacked up against him

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2015, 09:34 AM
This is a silly conversation to have when all they've accomplished together so far is a division title and haven't played together in their prime until this year.

If the conversation was: "Do they have the potential to be the best back-court duo ever?" then I'd totally be on board, because it is a conversation about potential.

Are they the best back-court duo ever? Of course not. They've proven nothing together other than the fact that they are both immensely talented players with a high ceiling. Those are great tools to go into battle with, but we have to see them go into battle before we can evaluate such things.

valade16
04-08-2015, 09:44 AM
Does the answer change if it were phrased in these ways?

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single season for a backcourt ever?"

Or

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single regular season for a backcourt ever?"


I really detest over valuing current achievements or getting caught in the moment, but I honestly think yes to at least the 2nd one. I don't think any backcourt duo has had a regular season as good as Steph/Klay this season.

People do realize they are shooting a combined 43.3% from 3 on 15 attempts per night? That is absurdly good. I know 3's aren't the end all be all but damn, that is truly amazing.

ewing
04-08-2015, 09:59 AM
Does the answer change if it were phrased in these ways?

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single season for a backcourt ever?"

Or

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single regular season for a backcourt ever?"


I really detest over valuing current achievements or getting caught in the moment, but I honestly think yes to at least the 2nd one. I don't think any backcourt duo has had a regular season as good as Steph/Klay this season.

People do realize they are shooting a combined 43.3% from 3 on 15 attempts per night? That is absurdly good. I know 3's aren't the end all be all but damn, that is truly amazing.

those are much better questions and ones worth thought. I am honestly not sure

NYKalltheway
04-08-2015, 10:16 AM
Right now no. They are probably the best shooting backcourt that ever graced a Nba court. But best? Still early.
In no order:

Frazier/Monroe
West/Goodrich(another good shooting pair)
Magic/Scott
Thomas/Dumars
Jordan/Pippen(probably the most versatile one,they could both play PG,SG and SF.)

Also Stockton/Hornacek and Price/Harper deserve a mention.

Basically this but I wouldn't count Jordan & Pippen as a backcourt duo.

Spurhawk
04-09-2015, 12:23 PM
Ill place Jones and Havlicek over Curry and Thompson any time of the week pls :eyebrow:

NYKalltheway
04-09-2015, 08:25 PM
but klay and curry both are better shooters than miller.

So Curry and Klay are #1 and #2 best shooters in NBA history? (I can see Steph Curry becoming one of the best ever shooters though)

Chronz
04-09-2015, 08:37 PM
Ill place Jones and Havlicek over Curry and Thompson any time of the week pls :eyebrow:

I think Curry is a transcendent star that the public has yet to realize because hes so young and we havent seen his influence across multiple situations. Once he gets the reps in, we'll look at him in the same respect as those legends you listed. Props on the shoutout btw, but did Hondo and Jones play in the backcourt for long? Hondo could play 1-3 so I could see why you would list him but thats more of a swing combo to me than a backcourt combo.

tredigs
04-09-2015, 08:42 PM
So Curry and Klay are #1 and #2 best shooters in NBA history? (I can see Steph Curry becoming one of the best ever shooters though)

Curry's clearly a better shooter than Miller between his volume/degree of difficulty/efficiency. Klay is probably a better pure 3pt shooter, but you'd have to see him as a #1 before you brought him into Reggie's convo (despite better 3pt shooting on higher volume).

Reggie's the GOAT shooter to you I take it?

KnicksorBust
04-09-2015, 08:45 PM
Does the answer change if it were phrased in these ways?

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single season for a backcourt ever?"

Or

"Are Steph Curry/Klay Thompson having the best single regular season for a backcourt ever?"


I really detest over valuing current achievements or getting caught in the moment, but I honestly think yes to at least the 2nd one. I don't think any backcourt duo has had a regular season as good as Steph/Klay this season.

People do realize they are shooting a combined 43.3% from 3 on 15 attempts per night? That is absurdly good. I know 3's aren't the end all be all but damn, that is truly amazing.

I would have at least taken this thread seriously.

NYKalltheway
04-09-2015, 09:54 PM
Curry's clearly a better shooter than Miller between his volume/degree of difficulty/efficiency. Klay is probably a better pure 3pt shooter, but you'd have to see him as a #1 before you brought him into Reggie's convo (despite better 3pt shooting on higher volume).

Reggie's the GOAT shooter to you I take it?

Reggie is GOAT shooter, full stop.

FlashBolt
04-09-2015, 10:00 PM
Reggie is GOAT shooter, full stop.

I agree but only for now. I feel Reggie is a more clutch shooter. He has made some unbelievable shots in his career. He's certainly up there if we are judging the overall package. Curry is just still very young. He has about 6 more years at a high level and also, his shooting percentage packed with the amount of 3PA is truly staggering. I'd give it to Reggie for now but we need to see more of Curry before I can put him above an All-time great.

tredigs
04-09-2015, 10:02 PM
Reggie is GOAT shooter, full stop.

Why?

Seizabmc
04-09-2015, 11:31 PM
To answer the ?,
No they are not.

The answer is
Fire and ice
Clyde and black Jesus

Walt clyde Frazier & earl the pearl Monroe
For those of you who don't know

Know you know!!
Best back court in the history of the league

ewing
04-09-2015, 11:44 PM
To answer the ?,
No they are not.

The answer is
Fire and ice
Clyde and black Jesus

Walt clyde Frazier & earl the pearl Monroe
For those of you who don't know

Know you know!!
Best back court in the history of the league


chris corchiani and rodney monroe

Spurhawk
04-10-2015, 08:02 AM
I think Curry is a transcendent star that the public has yet to realize because hes so young and we havent seen his influence across multiple situations. Once he gets the reps in, we'll look at him in the same respect as those legends you listed. Props on the shoutout btw, but did Hondo and Jones play in the backcourt for long? Hondo could play 1-3 so I could see why you would list him but thats more of a swing combo to me than a backcourt combo.

While i greatly admired and rooted for The Celtics in my youth (mostly because of Bird and partly because i was so Anti-Lakers due to my growing up in a largely Laker fan-base {rebel in me :D})
i am ever the spurs fan. I lived in San Antonio for the better part of the my life. I compare the backcourt tandem of Parker/Ginobli to the Jones/Hondo era multiple C'ships etc. Its a reach, albeit not quite the reach as Mr. OP, but one with a little less exuberance and hubris.

Ginobli embodies Hondo in the work ethic, hustle and Jones' clutch shooting. Manu in any sense of the word, would probably be a swing guy as well, playing 1-3. Parker is the facilitator that any one of the Celtic legends had been and perhaps embody both clutch and all around ability.

Before it gets to tl;dr, i will say that Curry/Klay are great emerging stars and Curry might become in his own accord a concurrent all star for years to come, will it be enough to say they are the best tandem backcourt ever? For us to debate currently, even with near limitless data at our fingertips, about the future is absurd and wishful pipe dreams.

ewing
04-10-2015, 08:34 AM
[QUOTE=Chronz;2980708 I think Curry is a transcendent star

i agree

Scoots
04-10-2015, 01:26 PM
I think the original question, much like most such questions, should not be "are they the best back-court" but rather "Do they deserve to be in the discussion".

For instance ... there is never a final answer to who is the best player in NBA history, but the names on the list can generally be agreed upon. For me Jordan was the man, but I can't deny Russell was SPECTACULAR at the number one job of being a great NBA player ... winning. LeBron took analytics and the new efficiency to levels never seen before and he did it playing in a different way than anyone with his body style ever before.

Do Curry and Thompson deserve to be in the discussion for best back-court? I think they need to go a little further in their careers first. So I don't think they belong in the discussion yet let alone at the top of the list.

MonroeFAN
04-10-2015, 05:25 PM
Hmmm, Isiah and Dumars had a great D, but these guys have the better offense thus far.



wow

Bostonjorge
04-10-2015, 06:01 PM
Curry and klay are climbing the ladder that's for sure. Especially if they win the championship this year. That Warriors team is led by the splash brothers. Parker/ginobli where led by Duncan and Westbrook/harden where led by Durant.

Some shout outs to some fun combos.

Nash and joe Johnson
Kidd and Vince
Baron Davis and Ellis
Van exel and jones
Johnson and Majerle
Nash and Finley
Starberry and franchise - Knicks

LakerShow
04-10-2015, 06:01 PM
They haven't even made it to the finals. :laugh2:

Bostonjorge
04-10-2015, 06:22 PM
On 12/08/11 the greatess back court was formed. Easily the the best. Cris Paul and kobe Bryant. To bad they didn't last to long together.

valade16
04-10-2015, 06:30 PM
Curry's clearly a better shooter than Miller between his volume/degree of difficulty/efficiency. Klay is probably a better pure 3pt shooter, but you'd have to see him as a #1 before you brought him into Reggie's convo (despite better 3pt shooting on higher volume).

Reggie's the GOAT shooter to you I take it?

By pure do you mean set shooter? (or what do you mean exactly)

I think Klay Thompson probably has the 2nd most impressive start to his career in terms of 3PT shooting (behind Curry).

While I don't think that you can say Klay Thompson is better at this moment in time than Reggie Miller as a 3PT shooter I don't find it that unbelievable to look back on their careers and say Klay Thompson was better. He has yet to shoot worse than 40% from 3 in a season, which is all kinds of impressive.

PowerHouse
04-10-2015, 06:40 PM
On 12/08/11 the greatess back court was formed. Easily the the best. Cris Paul and kobe Bryant. To bad they didn't last to long together.

Oh man, not only did they not last they never even suited up together. That would have been an off the charts backcourt fosho even though it wouldve lasted only 2.5 years before Kobe's injuries started up. Would have CP3's presence meant that Kobe would not have ripped his achillis? Maybe but we'll never know.

Scoots
04-10-2015, 08:23 PM
Curry and Thompson have shot 1144 3 pointers and hit 43.6% of them. No duo has ever come close to that volume at that percentage. I think they have outside shooting locked up.

NYKalltheway
04-11-2015, 01:06 AM
Why?

If you have to ask such a question, I take it that you've never watched Reggie Miller play.

tredigs
04-11-2015, 03:52 AM
If you have to ask such a question, I take it that you've never watched Reggie Miller play.

Reggie's prime/career almost synchronized exactly of when I began to follow hoops. One of my favorites of all time. My question is that if you watched both him and Curry - as amazing as he was - I simply have to laugh at you if you think Reggie's the better shooter.

Do you have any actual argument as a starting point to argue otherwise?

NYKalltheway
04-11-2015, 03:25 PM
Reggie's prime/career almost synchronized exactly of when I began to follow hoops. One of my favorites of all time. My question is that if you watched both him and Curry - as amazing as he was - I simply have to laugh at you if you think Reggie's the better shooter.

Do you have any actual argument as a starting point to argue otherwise?

Of course I have an argument: Watch Reggie Miller. That's really the only argument I need.

Steph Curry is an amazing shooter, he'll definitely be a top 5 name of all time (Miller, Bird, Ray, Drazen Petrovic then there's a few other names that Curry could top)

But specifically, the way Reggie shot the ball, at any circumstance, over any defender, was remarkable. And most of his shots weren't really open 3s so this is why I "eliminate" Ray Allen from the GOAT shooter equation.
Curry is a different kind of shooter than Reggie. Curry is a guy you expect to advance through a screen and hit the open three. At that, he's the best ever probably. I'm pretty sure your argument will be presenting a spreadsheet with some numbers that "prove" that Curry > Reggie but that's something a person who doesn't remember who Reggie Miller was would say.

Reggie was the most unique shooter of all time and he was at least a 9/10 shooter at any possible situation. Curry excels at a couple of 3pt situations but he's not he player who can dominate at the same way. Also, he's usually the handler so you can't really compare a player who runs around to get into a free position (eg Reggie and Ray) to shoot an off balance three or a spot up three. Curry creates situations for himself. Of couse, he can play in that role too and he can be extremely good at it, but he's not on the same level. I can't argue that he's not the best of the last 20 years at that style of 3pt play and the only serious competition of all time would be Mark Price. He is one of the best shooters I've ever seen, no doubt about that. But he's no Reggie.

lol, please
04-11-2015, 03:27 PM
If you have to ask such a question, I take it that you've never watched Reggie Miller play.

You're out of your tree if you would give the ball to Miller over Curry for a clutch shot. Have you seen Curry play? That's a better question if we're going this route.

NYKalltheway
04-11-2015, 03:32 PM
You're out of your tree if you would give the ball to Miller over Curry for a clutch shot. Have you seen Curry play? That's a better question if we're going this route.

Reggie Miller is the best clutch player of the 90s. Ahead of a guy called Michael Jordan. I'd trust him over Curry, yes. And yes, I've seen much of Steph Curry and he reminds me of Mark Price - who I love - but with less teamwork ethic.
Stop acting as if I'm saying that Curry sucks, basically stop acting like a kid who's lost its candy. That's a general comment.

lol, please
04-11-2015, 03:44 PM
Reggie Miller is the best clutch player of the 90s. Ahead of a guy called Michael Jordan. I'd trust him over Curry, yes. And yes, I've seen much of Steph Curry and he reminds me of Mark Price - who I love - but with less teamwork ethic.
Stop acting as if I'm saying that Curry sucks, basically stop acting like a kid who's lost its candy. That's a general comment.

I'm not saying you said Curry sucked, but Curry is the better player. Anyone who has watched both players knows this. I also started watching in the 90's when I idolozed Mullin, Shaq, Bird, Barkley, Jordan, and Pippin, so I saw plenty of Reggie back in the day.

HeatFan
04-11-2015, 04:06 PM
Reggie Miller is the best clutch player of the 90s. Ahead of a guy called Michael Jordan. I'd trust him over Curry, yes. And yes, I've seen much of Steph Curry and he reminds me of Mark Price - who I love - but with less teamwork ethic.
Stop acting as if I'm saying that Curry sucks, basically stop acting like a kid who's lost its candy. That's a general comment.

Ahead of Jordan??? Not saying Reggie Miller isn't clutch, but over Jordan is just wrong. Nobody is and probably never will be as clutch as Jordan. Heck I'd even put Robert Horry over Miller in the clutch Department.

Scoots
04-11-2015, 04:26 PM
Bird was more clutch than Jordan.

I'd take Curry over Miller for the rest of his game, not just the shooting.

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 04:43 PM
I've said before that Curry is probably my second favorite active player but I need to see him be clutch in the playoffs over the next several years before I would put him ahead of Reggie.

As for the question I'll say again... I'd take a back court of Isaiah/Dumars, Reggie/Jackson, or Jordan/anyone else over a back court of Curry/Klay. I would take Curry/Klay over any back court playing today though.

Scoots
04-11-2015, 05:20 PM
As for the question I'll say again... Jordan/anyone else over a back court of Curry/Klay. I would take Curry/Klay over any back court playing today though.

Okay, I'll also say again, then I say you take Jordan/LaRue and I'll take Curry/Thompson and beat you every time.

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 05:24 PM
Okay, I'll also say again, then I say you take Jordan/LaRue and I'll take Curry/Thompson and beat you every time.

Jordan by himself could outscore Curry and Klay. Jordan was also a FAR superior defender and had a far superior intestinal fortitude over those two. We're also talking about back courts that played together in their prime. Jordan/BJ Armstrong in their prime would wax the floor with Curry/Klay.

Scoots
04-11-2015, 05:32 PM
Jordan by himself could outscore Curry and Klay. Jordan was also a FAR superior defender and had a far superior intestinal fortitude over those two. We're also talking about back courts that played together in their prime. Jordan/BJ Armstrong in their prime would wax the floor with Curry/Klay.

"Prime" never entered into it. You said Jordan and anyone so I picked a rookie Jordan played with in his last Bulls year. And even prime Jordan couldn't beat 2 all-star guards by himself. If Klay is under the basket and Curry is at the 3 point line who is he going to guard? Can't guard them both.

My point is that your "Jordan and anyone" argument is a bad argument. Jordan and BJ or Kerr or Paxton ... fine, we can talk, but Jordan and anyone includes the old Jordan and LaRue and it gets even worse if we look at who he played with 4 years later.

Something else to think about ... Jordan never played with the current "hands-off" rules ... I suspect that would hurt his D considerably, he also didn't play in the current zone defense rules that have made the mid-range game less valuable.

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 05:34 PM
"Prime" never entered into it. You said Jordan and anyone so I picked a rookie Jordan played with in his last Bulls year. And even prime Jordan couldn't beat 2 all-star guards by himself. If Klay is under the basket and Curry is at the 3 point line who is he going to guard? Can't guard them both.

My point is that your "Jordan and anyone" argument is a bad argument. Jordan and BJ or Kerr or Paxton ... fine, we can talk, but Jordan and anyone includes the old Jordan and LaRue and it gets even worse if we look at who he played with 4 years later.

Something else to think about ... Jordan never played with the current "hands-off" rules ... I suspect that would hurt his D considerably, he also didn't play in the current zone defense rules that have made the mid-range game less valuable.

Well if prime years don't matter I'll take a '95 Jordan/Armstrong over a '95 Curry/Klay any day of the week.

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 05:40 PM
"Prime" never entered into it. You said Jordan and anyone so I picked a rookie Jordan played with in his last Bulls year. And even prime Jordan couldn't beat 2 all-star guards by himself. If Klay is under the basket and Curry is at the 3 point line who is he going to guard? Can't guard them both.

My point is that your "Jordan and anyone" argument is a bad argument. Jordan and BJ or Kerr or Paxton ... fine, we can talk, but Jordan and anyone includes the old Jordan and LaRue and it gets even worse if we look at who he played with 4 years later.

Something else to think about ... Jordan never played with the current "hands-off" rules ... I suspect that would hurt his D considerably, he also didn't play in the current zone defense rules that have made the mid-range game less valuable.

Jordan was an all defensive 1st team player. He would easily shut Klay down. Neither Curry or Klay are anywhere close to an all defensive team (mush less 1st team). Armstrong was a good enough defensive player bother Curry. Jordan would have his way with Curry and Klay and could score on every possession. I wouldn't say the same for Curry/Klay. And who says they would play by today's rules? If they played by the rules from '95 it would be a blowout in favor of Jordan/Armstrong. Hell Curry/Klay may not even be able to finish the game. Those rules are also the reason I think Isaiah/Dumars would also wax the floor with Curry/Klay.

NYKalltheway
04-11-2015, 05:43 PM
Ahead of Jordan??? Not saying Reggie Miller isn't clutch, but over Jordan is just wrong. Nobody is and probably never will be as clutch as Jordan. Heck I'd even put Robert Horry over Miller in the clutch Department.

Other than the ridiculous statement in your last sentence, it seems you'd agree with this guy's list:
http://www.nba.com/rockets/fans/The_DB_Guy_Top_10_NBA_Clutch_-136612-822.html

I don't. But at least he acknowledges Reggie as a top 5 clutch player of all time.

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 06:36 PM
Other than the ridiculous statement in your last sentence, it seems you'd agree with this guy's list:
http://www.nba.com/rockets/fans/The_DB_Guy_Top_10_NBA_Clutch_-136612-822.html

I don't. But at least he acknowledges Reggie as a top 5 clutch player of all time.

Knicks fans of all people should agree that Reggie Miller is one of the greatest clutch players of all time. I guarantee you Spike Lee thinks so.

lol, please
04-11-2015, 08:29 PM
Bird was more clutch than Jordan.

I'd take Curry over Miller for the rest of his game, not just the shooting.
Well said. I agree about Bird, one thing we have in common scoots other than being die hard warriors fans is that we hold Bird to high regard.

ewing
04-11-2015, 08:40 PM
Jordan by himself could outscore Curry and Klay. Jordan was also a FAR superior defender and had a far superior intestinal fortitude over those two. We're also talking about back courts that played together in their prime. Jordan/BJ Armstrong in their prime would wax the floor with Curry/Klay.


really?

Mr.B
04-11-2015, 08:45 PM
really?

6 rings and dominated pretty much everyone he faced in the playoffs except the Pistons early in his career. So I'd say yea, superior intestinal fortitude compared to Curry and Klay combined.

ewing
04-11-2015, 08:49 PM
6 rings and dominated pretty much everyone he faced in the playoffs except the Pistons early in his career. So I'd say yea, superior intestinal fortitude compared to Curry and Klay combined.

do you have any analytic findings to support this?

Scoots
04-11-2015, 11:16 PM
Well if prime years don't matter I'll take a '95 Jordan/Armstrong over a '95 Curry/Klay any day of the week.

It's not about "prime" it's about backcourts that played together. Curry/Klay were not together in 95.

lol, please
04-12-2015, 12:17 AM
do you have any analytic findings to support this?
Obviously you are trolling here. of course intestinal fortitude is an immeasurable but you never write off intangibles because they matter and can make a big difference. You use advanced statistics when possible but the intangibles of players are always up for discussion.

Mr.B
04-12-2015, 01:27 AM
It's not about "prime" it's about backcourts that played together. Curry/Klay were not together in 95.

The topic itself says "in history". So "in history" I'll take a '95 or even '94 Jordan/Armstrong over a current (because this year is the best they have been) Curry/Klay any day of the week.

Mr.B
04-12-2015, 01:29 AM
do you have any analytic findings to support this?

6 rings (should have been 8 rings). How many rings do Curry/Klay have? How many times have they even been to the Finals?

Scoots
04-12-2015, 01:57 AM
The topic itself says "in history". So "in history" I'll take a '95 or even '94 Jordan/Armstrong over a current (because this year is the best they have been) Curry/Klay any day of the week.

Fine, but you said "Jordan and anybody" but when I said Jordan/Larue you started changing the point of the thread to suit you.

Jordan/Armstrong is at least worthy of debate. I've said several times in this thread that I don't think Curry/Thompson is the best all time. My point was only that Jordan/Anybody is silly.

Confusious
04-12-2015, 01:59 AM
Derrick Rose and Keith Bogans. Can't even say it with a straight face.

BornReady
04-13-2015, 01:01 AM
ever??? wtf. hell no. this season tho? yes

Vinylman
04-13-2015, 09:18 AM
I think it was hawkeye who asked if they had to be starters... if not... there is a definite case for

Harden/Westie

BKLYNpigeon
04-13-2015, 10:31 AM
You guys get too wrapped up in the past. we always hold the old legends to a higher standard. Jordan, Magic, and Bird have become folklore. I bet most of you guys were too young to watch all the the games other then on Sunday when they played on national TV. Greatness is measured far greater then Championships and rings, its a team game.

Who Cares who the best is, time will tell. Curry and Klay are probably the most exciting combo to watch, ever. just enjoy the show.

Spurhawk
04-13-2015, 11:00 AM
"You guys get too wrapped up in the past. we always hold the old legends to a higher standard. Jordan, Magic, and Bird have become folklore. I bet most of you guys were too young to watch all the the games other then on Sunday when they played on national TV. Greatness is measured far greater then Championships and rings, its a team game.

Who Cares who the best is, time will tell. Curry and Klay are probably the most exciting combo to watch, ever. just enjoy the show. "

Well, i was disappointed with the 'show' when they last played the spurs unfortunately. But i would say the best "show" to watch in the NBA last time i checked was the 80's Lakers according to most. if by 'show' meaning, regular TV, grats on you for being entertained regularly by your 'show'.

No salt intended.

:oldguy:

alexander_37
04-13-2015, 01:21 PM
You guys get too wrapped up in the past. we always hold the old legends to a higher standard. Jordan, Magic, and Bird have become folklore. I bet most of you guys were too young to watch all the the games other then on Sunday when they played on national TV. Greatness is measured far greater then Championships and rings, its a team game.

Who Cares who the best is, time will tell. Curry and Klay are probably the most exciting combo to watch, ever. just enjoy the show.

Magic did stuff Curry could only do in his dreams. He was such a dynamic offensive player even without a jumpshot. Put him in a modern day pick and roll offense he would average 20 assists a game while absolutely beating down point guards in the post. Curry would need a rest by the second quarter......

Mr.B
04-14-2015, 07:57 PM
How do you guys think the back court of Iverson/Stackhouse stacks up against Curry/Klay?

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 09:04 PM
Best shooting backcourt potentially


But before anyone is going to say the best ever, they will need to win a chip or two, and stay together for another 5+ years.

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 09:04 PM
6 rings (should have been 8 rings). How many rings do Curry/Klay have? How many times have they even been to the Finals?

So......no?

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 09:07 PM
How do you guys think the back court of Iverson/Stackhouse stacks up against Curry/Klay?
Oh....that's not even close.

Curry/Klay destroy them. Curry is way better than Iverson ever was, and Klay appears to be well on his way to being better than Iverson....and obviously Stack didn't touch Iverson himself.

Mr.B
04-15-2015, 10:04 PM
So......no?

You're not honestly trying to say that Curry is better than Jordan was are you?

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 10:05 PM
You're not honestly trying to say that Curry is better than Jordan was are you?

You didn't answer his question at all.

I'm not saying anything, you just didn't answer his question at all

Mr.B
04-15-2015, 10:16 PM
Oh....that's not even close.

Curry/Klay destroy them. Curry is way better than Iverson ever was, and Klay appears to be well on his way to being better than Iverson....and obviously Stack didn't touch Iverson himself.

I'm not certain that I would take Klay over Stackhouse in his prime. At best I might call that one a wash. Curry is definitely a better teammate than Iverson but I definitely wouldn't say that it's "not even close". He won an MVP in an era when Kobe, Shaq, Vince Carter, Duncan, and Paul Pierce were all in their prime. Curry is the better passer and shooter but Iverson was by far the better scorer.

Mr.B
04-15-2015, 10:16 PM
You didn't answer his question at all.

I'm not saying anything, you just didn't answer his question at all

Sure I did. You just didn't understand the answer.

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 10:17 PM
I'm not certain that I would take Klay over Stackhouse in his prime. At best I might call that one a wash. Curry is definitely a better teammate than Iverson but I definitely wouldn't say that it's "not even close". He won an MVP in an era when Kobe, Shaq, Vince Carter, Duncan, and Paul Pierce were all in their prime. Curry is the better passer and shooter but Iverson was by far the better scorer.

Iverson was the better scorer?

Curry is a much more efficient and better scorer. Iverson just shot more.

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 10:19 PM
Sure I did. You just didn't understand the answer.

The question


"do you have any analytic findings to support this?"

Your answer

"6 rings (should have been 8 rings). How many rings do Curry/Klay have? How many times have they even been to the Finals?"

At no point is there anything analytical in your answer

Mr.B
04-15-2015, 10:26 PM
The question


"do you have any analytic findings to support this?"

Your answer

"6 rings (should have been 8 rings). How many rings do Curry/Klay have? How many times have they even been to the Finals?"

At no point is there anything analytical in your answer

The only number you need to know is 6 rings. And if you need analytics to tell you Jordan had more intestinal fortitude than anyone in NBA history (much less just Curry) then you're either a troll, have never seen Jordan play, or a complete dumbass. I'll let you pick which one.

lol, please
04-15-2015, 10:42 PM
Holy smokes, Mr.B going in on jeffy25, it's about to get real in here.

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 10:44 PM
The only number you need to know is 6 rings. And if you need analytics to tell you Jordan had more intestinal fortitude than anyone in NBA history (much less just Curry) then you're either a troll, have never seen Jordan play, or a complete dumbass. I'll let you pick which one.

I didn't.....at all infer or imply anything of the sort.

He asked if you had anything anatlyical to support your argument, and then you didn't...so, you simply didn't answer his question.

I didn't disagree with any notion or side or idea. You simply didn't answer his question.

ewing
04-15-2015, 11:01 PM
I am not buying the intestinal fortitude argument, unless you get Mean Gene on here and he backs you

Mr.B
04-15-2015, 11:53 PM
I am not buying the intestinal fortitude argument, unless you get Mean Gene on here and he backs you

So you're saying Michael Jordan didn't have any intestinal fortitude?

Jeffy25
04-16-2015, 12:15 AM
So you're saying Michael Jordan didn't have any intestinal fortitude?

That isn't what he is saying, or asked.....

Mr.B
04-16-2015, 12:27 AM
That isn't what he is saying, or asked.....

Since you're speaking for him, what exactly is he saying?

Jeffy25
04-16-2015, 12:29 AM
Since you're speaking for him, what exactly is he saying?

He was asking for an analytical response.....like he asked for twice.

Mr.B
04-16-2015, 12:43 AM
He was asking for an analytical response.....like he asked for twice.

Actually he said he's not buying Jordan's intestinal fortitude. Again, since you're answering questions for him what did he mean by that?

Jeffy25
04-16-2015, 12:45 AM
Actually he said he's not buying Jordan's intestinal fortitude. Again, since you're answering questions for him what did he mean by that?

I don't know what he may have implied.

This is like 7 posts all saying the same thing. That you didn't answer his question, maybe give it a stab instead of going around it? Or whatever. It's up to you. But the number of rings a player has does not equate to their intestinal fortitude. And nobody has denied Jordan as the goat or something either.

He said he wasn't buying the intestinal fortitude argument and asked for an analytical response....

Mr.B
04-16-2015, 12:46 AM
I don't know what he may have implied.

This is like 7 posts all saying the same thing. That you didn't answer his question, maybe give it a stab instead of going around it? Or whatever. It's up to you. But the number of rings a player has does not equate to their intestinal fortitude. And nobody has denied Jordan as the goat or something either.

He said he wasn't buying the intestinal fortitude argument and asked for an analytical response....

So you're picking troll I see.

Jeffy25
04-16-2015, 12:48 AM
So you're picking troll I see.

No, I am saying either answer the question or ignore it.

FlashBolt
04-16-2015, 01:33 AM
Mr.B, you lost. He asked for analytics to back up your statement. You replied with 6 rings. That's not analytical in any sense; it's just a number. I'm not disagreeing but since the past two pages have been about this, just say you don't have any analytical sources.

BornReady
04-16-2015, 02:15 AM
Please don't tell me someone compared Curry to Jordan

lol, please
04-16-2015, 02:18 AM
Please don't tell me someone compared Curry to Jordan
That just happened

BornReady
04-16-2015, 02:22 AM
That just happened

lol, please

BornReady
04-16-2015, 02:23 AM
I don't even get why some would waste time to argue with someone who would compare a GOAT to some kid who hasn't proven anything and finally had a MVP like season

Mave1002
04-16-2015, 04:25 AM
Right now no. They are probably the best shooting backcourt that ever graced a Nba court. But best? Still early.
In no order:

Frazier/Monroe
West/Goodrich(another good shooting pair)
Magic/Scott
Thomas/Dumars
Jordan/Pippen(probably the most versatile one,they could both play PG,SG and SF.)

Also Stockton/Hornacek and Price/Harper deserve a mention.

It's kind of difficult to compare them to the old timers... especially at the level of defense played by teams nowadays. It's amazing how Steph and Klay could both shoot threes right on defenders faces

curtcocaine
04-16-2015, 05:07 AM
You are fools. How can you come up with any analytical evidence to verify intestinal fortitude. As I stated before if you need analytical proof that Michael Jordan had the most intestinal fortitude over any player in NBA history (much less Curry) you are either a troll, have never seen Jordan play, or are a complete dumbass. Just like the other troll I will let you decide which you are.
In to deep????? You, my friend get donkey of the day.

lol, please
04-16-2015, 02:17 PM
It's kind of difficult to compare them to the old timers... especially at the level of defense played by teams nowadays. It's amazing how Steph and Klay could both shoot threes right on defenders faces
What? Historically I would take several elite defenders of the 90s over any in the league today. The game was more physical in the past.

lol, please
04-16-2015, 02:18 PM
Also I love how jeffy25 insists on bringing a response out of mr.b when he knows full well that intestinal fortitude is an immeasurable, and that immeasurables actually exist and matter. Why are you all going in circles about it?

Scoots
04-16-2015, 04:32 PM
What? Historically I would take several elite defenders of the 90s over any in the league today. The game was more physical in the past.

Depends on the style of play you are going to play in. If you are playing in 90s rules then I'd take a 90s defender, today's rules I'd probably take a defender from today as the 90s guys would just foul out in the first quarter.