PDA

View Full Version : Steph Curry's end of year rankings, all-time advanced stats



valade16
04-19-2016, 12:47 PM
So when Curry started out the year his advanced stats were among the best we'd ever seen. Here is where they ended up on the all-time single season charts:

PER:
1. Wilt Chamberlain 31.82
2. Wilt Chamberlain 31.74
3. Michael Jordan 31.71
4. LeBron James 31.67
5. Michael Jordan 31.63
6. Wilt Chamberlain 31.63
7. LeBron James 31.59
8. Steph Curry 31.46

WS/48:
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3399
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3256
3. Wilt Chamberlain .3251
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3225
5. LeBron James .3220
6. Michael Jordan .3211
7. LeBron James .3183
8. Steph Curry .3183

Box Plus/Minus:
1. LeBron James 12.99
2. Michael Jordan 12.56
3. LeBron James 12.53
4. Steph Curry 12.43

Offensive Box Plus/Minus:
1. Steph Curry 12.35
2. Michael Jordan 9.82


Many were calling his year the greatest season they'd ever seen. My questions are:

Do you think this was the greatest year ever for an NBA player? If you did previously, has your mind changed? What do you think about these stats and where Curry's season ranks. Are you impressed? Does it give you a greater appreciation for players like MJ, KAJ, Wilt, LeBron, etc.

In short, discuss.

IndyRealist
04-19-2016, 12:59 PM
I'm too tired to go through it again, but suffice to say that none of these metrics are particularly advanced.

Gander13SM
04-19-2016, 01:15 PM
I don't think those metrics count as "advanced". Especially the plus/minus stuff. Also WS/48 is a terrible stay for comparing individuals imo.

Anyway. Personally I think him being the only player in history to average > 30ppg on 50-40-90 and being in the top 10 for PER all time plus the "eye test" is enough for me to consider this the greatest season I've ever seen from a player in regards to scoring.

I try not to get involved in "all time" chatter and I definitely won't be dragged into a debate about Wilt when I wasn't even alive to see him play (and there's so little footage of him) not to mention the way the game has changed and lack of recorded stats back then.

As I say, personally I think this is the greatest season any player has ever had in regards to scoring/offense in my life time (30ish years).

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:20 PM
More advanced than that barometer that overvalues rebounding ;)

Anyways, I always cringe when I look at Wilts PER standing. Those prolific years were usually when he was putting himself ahead of his teammates. I know much of that was by design to sell seats during the stone ages but there were some years where he did too much.
hes the perfect example of how a player deciding to do less opened up the game for his team.

His best years were those high win share seasons rather than the high PER ones. MJ has the true best PER seasons.

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:25 PM
Kareems win share seasons are similarly inflated. He was being spoonfed by the greatest PG to ever play (not Magic) during a time when the talent was spread out between 2 leagues. There's a reason he never approached those ws numbers again despite improving as a player.

Jeffy25
04-19-2016, 01:29 PM
Imagine if he played 40 minutes per game

IndyRealist
04-19-2016, 01:50 PM
I don't think those metrics count as "advanced". Especially the plus/minus stuff. Also WS/48 is a terrible stay for comparing individuals imo.

Anyway. Personally I think him being the only player in history to average > 30ppg on 50-40-90 and being in the top 10 for PER all time plus the "eye test" is enough for me to consider this the greatest season I've ever seen from a player in regards to scoring.

I try not to get involved in "all time" chatter and I definitely won't be dragged into a debate about Wilt when I wasn't even alive to see him play (and there's so little footage of him) not to mention the way the game has changed and lack of recorded stats back then.

As I say, personally I think this is the greatest season any player has ever had in regards to scoring/offense in my life time (30ish years).

Box PM isn't really a plus/minus metric, it's a boxscore metric that essentially uses a RAPM style regression on box data. It's called BPM because it's based on Statistical PM, which is itself a regression of PM on boxscore data.

valade16
04-19-2016, 01:54 PM
I'm too tired to go through it again, but suffice to say that none of these metrics are particularly advanced.

I'm not here to argue the merits of the stats I cited. Do you have a better metric to use and if so, where did Curry fall on that one?

ewing
04-19-2016, 02:03 PM
Boo on Vlade for not being advanced enough :)

Scoots
04-19-2016, 02:04 PM
It's way up there ... but I think I subconsciously devalue it a bit because it seemed so easy.

Ball_Out
04-19-2016, 02:12 PM
The greatest year for an NBA player because of his advanced stats? No.

Tony_Starks
04-19-2016, 02:12 PM
My advanced brain says it may very well be the best individual season I've seen.

valade16
04-19-2016, 02:15 PM
The greatest year for an NBA player because of his advanced stats? No.

Who said that is why someone thought it was the best year ever?

Do you think it was the best year ever and if so, why or why not?

valade16
04-19-2016, 02:17 PM
My advanced brain says it may very well be the best individual season I've seen.

For reference, how far back have you seen and when you say "may very well", what were some others that give you pause for declaring this the best ever?

Tony_Starks
04-19-2016, 02:47 PM
For reference, how far back have you seen and when you say "may very well", what were some others that give you pause for declaring this the best ever?

As far as really paying attention I probably go back to around '89 or so.

Off the top of my head Magics last mvp season it seemed like he was a walking triple double every night, Kobe the year he was putting up like 35 5 5 and was wreaking havoc on the entire league, and Lebrons first chip year with Miami were all pretty special.

This is up there with those.

IndyRealist
04-19-2016, 03:11 PM
The greatest year for an NBA player because of his advanced stats? No.


Who said that is why someone thought it was the best year ever?

Do you think it was the best year ever and if so, why or why not?

This is actually why I made the statement, as a disclaimer for the "LOL stats" crowd.

Chronz
04-19-2016, 03:31 PM
As far as really paying attention I probably go back to around '89 or so.

Off the top of my head Magics last mvp season it seemed like he was a walking triple double every night, Kobe the year he was putting up like 35 5 5 and was wreaking havoc on the entire league, and Lebrons first chip year with Miami were all pretty special.

This is up there with those.

Tmac best season crushes Kobes. You're overrating your heroes.

ewing
04-19-2016, 03:34 PM
LOL stats

Chronz
04-19-2016, 03:45 PM
Lol, Patrick Ewing

MygirlhatesCod
04-19-2016, 04:13 PM
like some have already said curry's season is the best I have ever seen. ive been watching since the early 90's. the most insane besides his crazy range is the 40-50-90 on 30 and his rebounding. what makes curry better to me is how he opens up the game for everyone else to succeed. what's also impressive is the following

TS%
1. Tyson Chandler .7081 2011-12 NYK
2. Artis Gilmore* .7024 1981-82 CHI
3. Artis Gilmore* .6995 1980-81 CHI
4. Kyle Korver .6987 2014-15 ATL
5. Tyson Chandler .6970 2014-15 DAL
6. Tyson Chandler .6967 2010-11 DAL
7. Wilt Chamberlain* .6894 1972-73 LAL
8. Dave Twardzik .6892 1976-77 POR
9. Tim Legler .6884 1995-96 WSB
10. Darryl Dawkins .6805 1985-86 NJN
11. Artis Gilmore* .6800 1984-85 SAS
12. Cedric Maxwell .6792 1979-80 BOS
13. James Donaldson .6788 1984-85 LAC
14. Cedric Maxwell .6758 1978-79 BOS
15. Artis Gilmore* .6748 1983-84 SAS
16. Tyson Chandler .6709 2012-13 NYK
17. Stephen Curry .6694 2015-16 GSW
18. Artis Gilmore* .6685 1982-83 SAS
19. Steve Johnson .6668 1985-86 SAS
20. Charles Barkley* .6653 1987-88 PHI

of players on this list curry is the only one that could create his own shot. whats more glaring is that the players everyone thinks should be considered goats are not present. that's because its very hard to be efficient when
you have to shoot more than 5 feet from the rim and especially when you are the focal point of your teams offense that has to create his own shot.

Monta is beast
04-19-2016, 04:17 PM
Clearly tyson chandler is the goat

Ball_Out
04-19-2016, 04:24 PM
Who said that is why someone thought it was the best year ever?

Do you think it was the best year ever and if so, why or why not?

Well who is the deciding factor of this? MY OPINION is no. And the reason for my opinion is that his team and system are a perfect fit for each other.

Ball_Out
04-19-2016, 04:28 PM
Tmac best season crushes Kobes. You're overrating your heroes.

Crushes? It "crushes" Kobes MVP season? "Crushes"

cmellofan15
04-19-2016, 04:29 PM
Clearly tyson chandler is the goat

context

ewing
04-19-2016, 04:32 PM
Lol, Patrick Ewing

LOL TMac

Tony_Starks
04-19-2016, 04:37 PM
Tmac best season crushes Kobes. You're overrating your heroes.

When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.

Ball_Out
04-19-2016, 04:39 PM
When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.

He wasn't better than Kobe at anything basketball related. This site hates Kobe with a passion.

Chronz
04-19-2016, 04:40 PM
Crushes? It "crushes" Kobes MVP season? "Crushes"
He doesn't consider Kobes mvp season to be his best. If you saw Kobe that year, you'd understand why it's not offensive.

Then you compare that to Tmac who had even less talent around him, lived through the era of zones+handchecks and performed better in the playoffs..... Yes he CRUSHES that season. Objectively , subjectively. Don't give a f

Chronz
04-19-2016, 04:41 PM
LOL TMacLOL DUDE
Patrick YOU-WING

ewing
04-19-2016, 04:45 PM
I have to go with Ewing during the Jackson-MaCloud era

Chronz
04-19-2016, 04:47 PM
When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.
Why you acting like i don't live in the same city as you?

He wasn't locking up ****. The team was better defensively without him, a trait tmac shared. Its basically impossible to carry the load they had to and play elite defense unless it's playoffs or a specific matchup. Kobe and Mac both had that thing where they would let scrubs go off on them but when a matchup piqued their interest, they put the clamps on. I still have the games where mac locked up vc and pp.

And please tell me you ain't one of those fans who cites all defensive teams when his own coach doesn't believe he deserved them. Popularity doesn't equal dominance. All my Lakers friends agree with Phil on that front and if you don't then we really need to have a beer. I want to see how many it takes before the png glasses fall off

Chronz
04-19-2016, 04:49 PM
He wasn't better than Kobe at anything basketball related. This site hates Kobe with a passion.

Better passer/playmaker, shooter, rebounder, more versatile defensively. But i guess that's not basketball

Chronz
04-19-2016, 04:53 PM
Tmac WAS Kobe, only taller, longer and younger. There's a reason Kobe named him his toughest matchup, as he admits, "he had all the skills", he gave him fits on BOTH ENDS. Name 1 player who compares in that regard? Melo could give him fits offensively cuz of his bulk, Tony allen had the talent defensively, only the Mac was able to receive compliments for his play on both ends against him. Only mac was CLEARLY more productive than even Kobe on the Shitiest team he's ever had.

RLundi
04-19-2016, 04:58 PM
When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.

McGrady was a good defensive player too, people always seem to forget that. Maybe because of his laid-back demeanor or his sleepy eyes, but T-Mac guarded the best perimeter player every night too and took pride in defense.

I'll concede that the following year after T-Mac's best season, while he still scored 30 a game, he mailed it in defensively. But I think Chronz is talking about T-Mac's ultimate best season in 2002. He was the best SG in the league that year, a great two-way player, and had one of the best seasons by a SG ever. Kobe was an amazing scorer and defender but the fact that T-Mac was still elite on both ends of the court makes his best season better than any regular season Kobe has ever had.

valade16
04-19-2016, 05:00 PM
like some have already said curry's season is the best I have ever seen. ive been watching since the early 90's. the most insane besides his crazy range is the 40-50-90 on 30 and his rebounding. what makes curry better to me is how he opens up the game for everyone else to succeed. what's also impressive is the following

Tony Starks makes a good point below (though not about Kobe). How does defense affect what you think is the best season?

How would you rate Steph's defense this season?


When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.

MygirlhatesCod
04-19-2016, 05:15 PM
Tony Starks makes a good point below (though not about Kobe). How does defense affect what you think is the best season?

How would you rate Steph's defense this season?

curry lead the league in steals and was top 10 in defensive w/s (number 1 amongst pg). I know that doesn't translate into him being a force defensively. but his abilities on d is above average easily. his staggering offensive production and ability to be in one way or another tied to the majority of his teams points scored while he is on the floor tilt those scales a lot more.

Hawkeye15
04-19-2016, 05:48 PM
curry lead the league in steals and was top 10 in defensive w/s (number 1 amongst pg). I know that doesn't translate into him being a force defensively. but his abilities on d is above average easily. his staggering offensive production and ability to be in one way or another tied to the majority of his teams points scored while he is on the floor tilt those scales a lot more.

Leading the league in steals doesn't mean a ton (great, good, and bad defenders have always littered the steals department), and defensive rating is very team oriented. A good defensive team will be littered with guys who have nice defensive ratings, because the team simply doesn't give up a lot of points per 100 possessions.

That being said, Curry is at least an average, to slightly above average defender. His size unfortunately will always hurt him some, he is so slight.

IndyRealist
04-19-2016, 05:57 PM
curry lead the league in steals and was top 10 in defensive w/s (number 1 amongst pg). I know that doesn't translate into him being a force defensively. but his abilities on d is above average easily. his staggering offensive production and ability to be in one way or another tied to the majority of his teams points scored while he is on the floor tilt those scales a lot more.

It could also mean his team is custom built to cover for his defensive deficiencies, allowing him to gamble for steals since he doesn't have to stay in front of his man. Guys who go for steals all the time get beat a LOT.

I really don't have a dog in this fight, just pointing out the argument that could be made.

MygirlhatesCod
04-19-2016, 06:08 PM
Leading the league in steals doesn't mean a ton (great, good, and bad defenders have always littered the steals department), and defensive rating is very team oriented. A good defensive team will be littered with guys who have nice defensive ratings, because the team simply doesn't give up a lot of points per 100 possessions.

That being said, Curry is at least an average, to slightly above average defender. His size unfortunately will always hurt him some, he is so slight.

I don't really agree with that. so check out what the top defensive w/s per position look like as a starting lineup
PG Curry
SG PG-13
SF Kawhi
PF Millsap
C Jordan
you cant truly say that those guys are a product of a good system. they are all tremendous defensively. I do get that Curry isn't the greatest on d but his production is within the top three at his position considering his offensive workload.


BTW that lineup is awesome!!

FraziersKnicks
04-19-2016, 07:13 PM
Offensively it's one of the best seasons ever, but it's not quite LeBron 2012-13, MJ 90-91 or Shaq 99-00.

nastynice
04-19-2016, 07:18 PM
I don't know, I've been paying attention to curry's d, it's actually really REALLY good. First off, the entire gs defense is amazing, but curry himself definitely holds it down. He stays in front of his player, knows when/how to switch, very good at playing the passing lanes. I wouldn't say he's as much an impact defender, meaning he's not gonna change how u play in the paint or perimeter, but it's very rare to see him slip up and allow a bucket cuz of that.

I think cuz of his small stature people end up underrating his defense. Like I'm reading these words like "deficiency" or "liability", I watch a lot of dubs game and I have never seen anything that would characterize curry as such. I have no clue where people are getting this stuff from. Forget about being a liability, either is or is close to league leader in steals, not because he takes chances (not sure where that came from), but because he is extremely cerebral on defense. Entire team is, system helps play a part for sure

Tony_Starks
04-19-2016, 07:42 PM
Why you acting like i don't live in the same city as you?

He wasn't locking up ****. The team was better defensively without him, a trait tmac shared. Its basically impossible to carry the load they had to and play elite defense unless it's playoffs or a specific matchup. Kobe and Mac both had that thing where they would let scrubs go off on them but when a matchup piqued their interest, they put the clamps on. I still have the games where mac locked up vc and pp.

And please tell me you ain't one of those fans who cites all defensive teams when his own coach doesn't believe he deserved them. Popularity doesn't equal dominance. All my Lakers friends agree with Phil on that front and if you don't then we really need to have a beer. I want to see how many it takes before the png glasses fall off


I never said all Kobes all defensive awards were merited, you notice I went out of my way to say his LEGIT all defensive years.

And I'm sorry if you take TMacs absolute best year and match it up against Kobes I can guarantee you Kobe played elite D that year more consistently.

I remember very frequently when someone got hot that Kobe wasn't guarding they would switch and put Kobe on him. In fact he demand to be put on them.

Not the case with TMac, as far as I know.

All the while, mind you, while putting up 50s 60s and 81 to TMacs 40s and 50s.

So better D and historic O? Yeah I'm good with Kobe, as is the rest of the civilized basketball world.

You sound like one of the barbers in Coming to America! Lol

MygirlhatesCod
04-19-2016, 08:25 PM
Offensively it's one of the best seasons ever, but it's not quite LeBron 2012-13, MJ 90-91 or Shaq 99-00.

how? its an honest question and im not trying to imply curry is better than those listed.

blahblahyoutoo
04-19-2016, 08:29 PM
Why you acting like i don't live in the same city as you?


because I love acting. i'd like to win an oscar one day.

Jamiecballer
04-19-2016, 08:56 PM
Better passer/playmaker, shooter, rebounder, more versatile defensively. But i guess that's not basketball
I agree. He should have been the best SG all-time not named Jordan if his body hadn't completely broken down. He was somewhere in between Jordan and Bryant.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

valade16
04-19-2016, 09:25 PM
It is interesting when people talk about McGrady on here nobody mentions his efficiency.

He has a career .519 TS%
AI has a career .518 TS%

He had 1 season with positive efficiency (56.4 TS%). If you're going to criticize AI on here for his efficiency I don't see how you can't do the same for T-Mac.

ewing
04-19-2016, 10:32 PM
It is interesting when people talk about McGrady on here nobody mentions his efficiency.

He has a career .519 TS%
AI has a career .518 TS%

He had 1 season with positive efficiency (56.4 TS%). If you're going to criticize AI on here for his efficiency I don't see how you can't do the same for T-Mac.

he's no Pat Ewing

Scoots
04-19-2016, 11:04 PM
he's no Pat Ewing

There is only one Pat Ewing.

Hey, you may know ... did they ever disclose how much weight he lost during a game from sweat?

FlashBolt
04-20-2016, 02:13 AM
I think Bron's 2012-2013 ranks as the greatest season ever. Should have won DPOY, won the Olympics, won the Finals, Finals MVP, and regular season MVP. Statistically, it was just beautiful. Curry has the greatest offensive season but in terms of overall best season (taking advanced stats away), not top five.

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-20-2016, 02:44 AM
It is interesting when people talk about McGrady on here nobody mentions his efficiency.

He has a career .519 TS%
AI has a career .518 TS%

He had 1 season with positive efficiency (56.4 TS%). If you're going to criticize AI on here for his efficiency I don't see how you can't do the same for T-Mac.

Because we're only supposed to talk about his best season. Don't worry about anything else. Don't you know a players best season dictates his place in history? That all his positive attributes from that season shall forth be stated when you describe the type of player he was?

So what Tmacs best TS% season was what Kobe averaged for a 20 year career. (Including ages 18, 19, and post Achilles tear ages of 35, 36, and 37) He was obviously somewhere between Jordan and Kobe somewhere. So what his off rating was pretty pedestrian for his entire career save 2 or 3 years. He was a force!

Never mind that Kobe has 13 very good to great seasons and Tmac had 6 in his 13 year career. His best season was better, so he's obviously the better player.

prodigy
04-20-2016, 02:53 AM
Curry is by far the best shooter in NBA history no question in my eyes. Greatest season? no, best player in the NBA no. I'm sure ill get hate for saying that but there's players who can dominate almost every aspect of the game. LeBron for example. scoring, rebounding, passing, defense etc...

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-20-2016, 03:20 AM
Curry is by far the best shooter in NBA history no question in my eyes. Greatest season? no, best player in the NBA no. I'm sure ill get hate for saying that but there's players who can dominate almost every aspect of the game. LeBron for example. scoring, rebounding, passing, defense etc...

Lebron may be the better overall player still. But I think it would be easier to build a team around a player like Curry. Lebron is a ball stopper. And in a sense he still plays hero ball. Usually people equate hero ball to shooting. But I think it pertains as well to holding the ball until you can get credited with an assist. Rondo is the master of hero ball for passing. You have to be very specific when building a team around Lebron because you cant have guys who clog the paint, you cant have a PG who wants to dominate the ball as well, you need shooters who can spread the floor for him. Lebron seems to have the most success individually with non stars who can just play a role.

With Curry, he spreads the floor for others. He swings the ball in the flow of the offense and if he gets an assist while doing so, great. But I don't think that's his objective. You could have a big man who post up and cant shoot a lick. He would get single covered if Curry was his side. You could have a big man who can shoot and run pick and role or pick and pop with Curry. Curry has no offensive weakness. Spreading the floor is one of the most important aspects a player can do on offense. That and being double teamed. Curry does both. Bron does one. Curry turns it over a little more than I would like but other than that, he's spectacular offensively.

nastynice
04-20-2016, 03:39 AM
Curry is by far the best shooter in NBA history no question in my eyes. Greatest season? no, best player in the NBA no. I'm sure ill get hate for saying that but there's players who can dominate almost every aspect of the game. LeBron for example. scoring, rebounding, passing, defense etc...

Lebrons 2nd yr in Miami was pretty crazy as far as individual seasons go. But I do think there is more to curry's game than ur crediting him for. Offensively he's elite at everything u could ask a pg to do, not just shooting

prodigy
04-20-2016, 05:16 AM
Lebron may be the better overall player still. But I think it would be easier to build a team around a player like Curry. Lebron is a ball stopper. And in a sense he still plays hero ball. Usually people equate hero ball to shooting. But I think it pertains as well to holding the ball until you can get credited with an assist. Rondo is the master of hero ball for passing. You have to be very specific when building a team around Lebron because you cant have guys who clog the paint, you cant have a PG who wants to dominate the ball as well, you need shooters who can spread the floor for him. Lebron seems to have the most success individually with non stars who can just play a role.

With Curry, he spreads the floor for others. He swings the ball in the flow of the offense and if he gets an assist while doing so, great. But I don't think that's his objective. You could have a big man who post up and cant shoot a lick. He would get single covered if Curry was his side. You could have a big man who can shoot and run pick and role or pick and pop with Curry. Curry has no offensive weakness. Spreading the floor is one of the most important aspects a player can do on offense. That and being double teamed. Curry does both. Bron does one. Curry turns it over a little more than I would like but other than that, he's spectacular offensively.

LeBron can almost single handily take teams to the finals look at those cavs teams before he left for Miami. Would Curry have led those teams to the Finals? I don't see how. LeBron had to get triple doubles and still lost. I would much rather Build a team around LeBron then Curry that's easy. I will completely disagree with you on that sir in all do respect. LeBron is a straight freak.

Munkeysuit
04-20-2016, 05:16 AM
Steph Curry will go down as one of the all time greatest point guards ever.

IKnowHoops
04-20-2016, 05:19 AM
When you factor in Kobe was legit all defense locking up the other teams best wing at the time and T Mac was playing average to good defense it really doesn't.

TMac is one of my favorites but I don't think even his biggest fan will say he was ever the 2way player Kobe was, not night in night out.

I think Tmac played the best defense on Dirk that I have ever seen. He gave Dirk huge problems defensively...more than any other player. Kobe had no effect on dirk and could not guard him.

prodigy
04-20-2016, 05:19 AM
Lebrons 2nd yr in Miami was pretty crazy as far as individual seasons go. But I do think there is more to curry's game than ur crediting him for. Offensively he's elite at everything u could ask a pg to do, not just shooting

I give Curry a lot of credit for everything he does. I just think LeBron does most things outside of shooting better. LeBron FG % was over 50% this season to. So maybe he don't shot 3's as much as curry but he scores close to the same with only 2's. Green runs Warriors offense as PG more then Curry does.

nastynice
04-20-2016, 06:44 AM
LeBron can almost single handily take teams to the finals look at those cavs teams before he left for Miami. Would Curry have led those teams to the Finals? I don't see how. LeBron had to get triple doubles and still lost. I would much rather Build a team around LeBron then Curry that's easy. I will completely disagree with you on that sir in all do respect. LeBron is a straight freak.

I doubt curry woulda lead as many teams to finals, but on the ther side of that coin put lebron on the dubs and are they setting a wins record? Do they get that chip last year? It's a tough call.

I also think lebron is still the better player, but BUILDING around him is tough, just because we've never seen it before. Nobody knows what recipe to use with lebron. In Miami it wasn't as much building around him as it was stacking crazy talent.

nastynice
04-20-2016, 06:53 AM
I give Curry a lot of credit for everything he does. I just think LeBron does most things outside of shooting better. LeBron FG % was over 50% this season to. So maybe he don't shot 3's as much as curry but he scores close to the same with only 2's. Green runs Warriors offense as PG more then Curry does.

True, what I meant was he basically does everything elite on offense that u could ask. Obviously he's not a offensive glass monster, but that isn't to be expected from a guard, that's what I meant. His shooting, dribbling, vision, passing, finishing in the paint, off ball movement, and attention required by defenses are all elite. Top tier elite, and I say that very confidently.

Lebron is better at finishing at the rim. He's not too far behind in vision and passing. Everything else mentioned, I'd say there's a sizable gap between him and Curry. Lebron's defense is better too, SIGNIFICANTLY better if we zero in on his first 3 yrs in Miami. Rebounding's probably a wash, but given the nature of Lebron's position I guess he'd have an edge

KnicksorBust
04-20-2016, 08:02 AM
Clearly tyson chandler is the goat

Barkley didn't create his own shot?


I think Bron's 2012-2013 ranks as the greatest season ever. Should have won DPOY, won the Olympics, won the Finals, Finals MVP, and regular season MVP. Statistically, it was just beautiful. Curry has the greatest offensive season but in terms of overall best season (taking advanced stats away), not top five.

I believe Jordan and Hakeem are the only two players to win MVP and DPOY in the same season. Pretty remarkable. Especially when elite wings are usually allowed to rest on defense during the regular season.

KnicksorBust
04-20-2016, 08:03 AM
Clearly tyson chandler is the goat


I give Curry a lot of credit for everything he does. I just think LeBron does most things outside of shooting better. LeBron FG % was over 50% this season to. So maybe he don't shot 3's as much as curry but he scores close to the same with only 2's. Green runs Warriors offense as PG more then Curry does.

All credibility lost.

KnicksorBust
04-20-2016, 08:10 AM
Clearly tyson chandler is the goat


True, what I meant was he basically does everything elite on offense that u could ask. Obviously he's not a offensive glass monster, but that isn't to be expected from a guard, that's what I meant. His shooting, dribbling, vision, passing, finishing in the paint, off ball movement, and attention required by defenses are all elite. Top tier elite, and I say that very confidently.

Lebron is better at finishing at the rim. He's not too far behind in vision and passing. Everything else mentioned, I'd say there's a sizable gap between him and Curry. Lebron's defense is better too, SIGNIFICANTLY better if we zero in on his first 3 yrs in Miami. Rebounding's probably a wash, but given the nature of Lebron's position I guess he'd have an edge

This is going to sound like baiting but it's how I really feel. That post is hot garbage. It's the same hot garbage that homers use to spew about Melo as the best scorer in the NBA because he could post-up, shoot, drive when LeBron was a scoring machine who hadn't truly developed his all-around game yet. You don't get bonus points for checking more boxes. Curry's elite skills: shooting, ball handling, cutting, etc. have a far greater impact on the game than if he could also guard 5 positions. Who cares? It's not a skills competition it's about impacts and winning and no one in NBA History was better at that than Steph Curry this season.

Hawkeye15
04-20-2016, 09:35 AM
I don't really agree with that. so check out what the top defensive w/s per position look like as a starting lineup
PG Curry
SG PG-13
SF Kawhi
PF Millsap
C Jordan
you cant truly say that those guys are a product of a good system. they are all tremendous defensively. I do get that Curry isn't the greatest on d but his production is within the top three at his position considering his offensive workload.


BTW that lineup is awesome!!


They aren't a product of the system, they benefit from their team being a top defensive team. Meaning, you aren't going to have a starter on a top 5 defensive team with a defensive rating of 115 for instance, it would be basically impossible, outside some weird outlier that I can't remember seeing. However, if you are a good defender on a terrible defensive team, your rating will not look all that great, because even though you are a good defender, your team gives up a lot of points per possession.

Defensive rating is virtually useless rating individuals. For 5 man units, it can be used, but it's not a good tool for one guy.

Easiest example ever. Go back to the 2000-01' Sixers. Iverson had a defensive rating of 99. He was a below average defender, hidden on the weakest perimeter player at all times while Snow/McKie defended the threats. He had a lot of steals, because he gambled all night knowing his team could clean up a mess. His defensive rating suggests he was an elite defender. And he was very, very far from it.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 10:10 AM
Barkley didn't create his own shot?


nope. he lived around the rim. he never took the ball up court or started from the top of the key.he got fed down low.

ewing
04-20-2016, 10:12 AM
nope. he lived around the rim. he never took the ball up court or started from the top of the key.he got fed down low.

I think you are confusing him with Charles Oakley :)

valade16
04-20-2016, 10:13 AM
I often hear that Steph Curry is good at a few things centered around his incredible shooting ability whereas LeBron is better at more things therefore LeBron is better.

But the problem is we are assuming each person is better than that other by the same degree. I.e. LeBron's defense is better than Curry's to the degree that Curry's shooting is better than LeBron's defense; when that simply isn't true.

We can see this effect in the statistics.

Curry's TS% is 66.9%. LeBron's was 58.8%. That is a massive difference. Curry's Offensive Box Plus/Minus is 12.35, the highest ever and a whopping 2.53 higher than the 2nd best ever (Jordan at 9.82). The difference Between Curry at 1 and Jordan at 2 is the same difference between Jordan at 2 and Kobe Bryant at 40th all-time.

Steph Curry's offensive prowess was better by a greater margin over LeBron James' offensive prowess than James' defensive prowess was over Curry's offensive prowess.

LeBron James' overall ability had a case in 2013 when he was shooting the ball extremely efficiently (64 TS%), filling up the stat sheet (8 RPG and 7.3 APG) and playing elite defense (Runner up for DPOY). If LeBron James were duplicating his 2013 season then the argument about better overall player would have some merit, but his current season was a clear step below his 2013 one, and a clear step below Curry's.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 10:14 AM
They aren't a product of the system, they benefit from their team being a top defensive team. Meaning, you aren't going to have a starter on a top 5 defensive team with a defensive rating of 115 for instance, it would be basically impossible, outside some weird outlier that I can't remember seeing. However, if you are a good defender on a terrible defensive team, your rating will not look all that great, because even though you are a good defender, your team gives up a lot of points per possession.

Defensive rating is virtually useless rating individuals. For 5 man units, it can be used, but it's not a good tool for one guy.

Easiest example ever. Go back to the 2000-01' Sixers. Iverson had a defensive rating of 99. He was a below average defender, hidden on the weakest perimeter player at all times while Snow/McKie defended the threats. He had a lot of steals, because he gambled all night knowing his team could clean up a mess. His defensive rating suggests he was an elite defender. And he was very, very far from it.

i wasnt talking about their defensive rating i was talking about their defensive win shares.

ewing
04-20-2016, 10:15 AM
for those of you that never got to see Chuckster lead a fast break. I only watched the beginning of the vid but you get the idea


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 10:23 AM
for those of you that never got to see Chuckster lead a fast break. I only watched the beginning of the vid but you get the idea


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

nice vid! but i maintain that a handfull of video clips during a fast break doesnt make charles a player that created his own shot.

valade16
04-20-2016, 10:30 AM
nope. he lived around the rim. he never took the ball up court or started from the top of the key.he got fed down low.

Have you ever actually watched Charles Barkley play lol? "Never took the ball up the court"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

ewing
04-20-2016, 10:36 AM
nice vid! but i maintain that a handfull of video clips during a fast break doesnt make charles a player that created his own shot.


he was a one man fast break.

Hawkeye15
04-20-2016, 10:38 AM
i wasnt talking about their defensive rating i was talking about their defensive win shares.

still more team oriented.


IV. Crediting Defensive Win Shares to Players

A. 1973-74 to present NBA

Crediting Defensive Win Shares to players is based on Dean Oliver's Defensive Rating. Defensive Rating is an estimate of the player's points allowed per 100 defensive possessions (please see Oliver's book for further details). Here is a description of the process (once again using LeBron James in 2008-09 as an example):
1.Calculate the Defensive Rating for each player. James's Defensive Rating in 2008-09 was 99.1.
2.Calculate marginal defense for each player. Marginal defense is equal to (player minutes played / team minutes played) * (team defensive possessions) * (1.08 * (league points per possession) - ((Defensive Rating) / 100)). For James this is (3054 / 19780) * 7341 * ((1.08 * 1.083) - (99.1 / 100)) = 202.5. Note that this formula may produce a negative result for some players.
3.Calculate marginal points per win. Marginal points per win reduces to 0.32 * (league points per game) * ((team pace) / (league pace)). For the 2008-09 Cavaliers this is 0.32 * 100.0 * (88.7 / 91.7) = 30.95.
4.Credit Defensive Win Shares to the players. Defensive Win Shares are credited using the following formula: (marginal defense) / (marginal points per win). James gets credit for 202.5 / 30.95 = 6.54 Defensive Win Shares.


If you play a lot of minutes on a very good defensive team, you will in turn have a good defensive win share number

Hawkeye15
04-20-2016, 10:39 AM
for those of you that never got to see Chuckster lead a fast break. I only watched the beginning of the vid but you get the idea


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

I loved watching the Round Mound of Rebound grab a board, and go coast to coast with that dribble where he just throws it ahead of him, and dares someone to try and get in his way

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 11:27 AM
Have you ever actually watched Charles Barkley play lol? "Never took the ball up the court"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

I could get clips of anyone bringing the ball up court for a fast break but im stating that he normally didnt start a possession that wasn't a 2 or 3 on 1. I feel like im getting trolled a bit because you had to know what I meant by bringing the ball up court and creating a shot. even bogut has gone coast to coast a couple times just this year on a fast break. either way the whole point is of all the names on that highest TS% in a season ever is none of them have to create their own shot like curry does. also the fact that other superstars that everyone says are the greatest aren't on that list indicates how much of a better shooter and efficient player curry actually is.

ewing
04-20-2016, 11:30 AM
It OK to be wrong. you don't have to dig yourself out :shrug: :)

KnicksorBust
04-20-2016, 11:37 AM
nope. he lived around the rim. he never took the ball up court or started from the top of the key.he got fed down low.

:confused:


for those of you that never got to see Chuckster lead a fast break. I only watched the beginning of the vid but you get the idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

This.


Have you ever actually watched Charles Barkley play lol? "Never took the ball up the court"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

Also this.


he was a one man fast break.

And this.

KnicksorBust
04-20-2016, 11:50 AM
I could get clips of anyone bringing the ball up court for a fast break

Anyone? Please link to me these Tyson Chandler and Artis Gilmore fastbreak videos because I would love to watch them.


but im stating that he normally didnt start a possession that wasn't a 2 or 3 on 1.

In the 90s he did that as much as anyone in the league. Don't you think that counts as creating shots?


I feel like im getting trolled a bit because you had to know what I meant by bringing the ball up court and creating a shot.

Honestly I think multiple people are just calling you out on assuming Barkley was some limited low post scorer who needed someone to create shots for him. Especially if you go watch that Phoenix run to the finals he had the ball all over the floor and was a great creator for himself and teammates.


even bogut has gone coast to coast a couple times just this year on a fast break.

There is a difference between the quantity and quality of Andrew Bogut on the fast break vs. Charles Barkley on the fast break.



either way the whole point is of all the names on that highest TS% in a season ever is none of them have to create their own shot like curry does. also the fact that other superstars that everyone says are the greatest aren't on that list indicates how much of a better shooter and efficient player curry actually is.

None of them also needed as many illegal screens as Curry did though to get open... now that would have been trolling. :)

Chronz
04-20-2016, 02:30 PM
I agree. He should have been the best SG all-time not named Jordan if his body hadn't completely broken down. He was somewhere in between Jordan and Bryant.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

Its criminal that his trainers were so negligent with him. The dude was straight cursed, its one thing to be injury prone, thats bad in itself, but the injuries plagued his best players as well. I cant even think of a single relatively healthy year for his squads.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 02:30 PM
my original argument was barkley or anyone else on that list doesn't come close to what curry does as the originator of offense. its not even partially close. most of his shots, were dunks or very close to the rim. which is why his TS% is something that's not surprising for his skillset. I concede to the fact that yes barkley had the ability to run a fast break for a dunk or a layup. why you are stretching it and going way to the right when I said he doesn't bring the ball up court to saying he did it on a fast break isn't close to what I was meaning at all. he lived around the rim. that's not a knock on him in any way but he was a low post player, which means he was primarily fed there. that's just common sense, I mean at one point he averaged more FTA than harden on some seasons. and there is no way you could compare how either run an offense. for any players that have to create their own shots that are not layups or dunks on fast breaks most of the time its very rare (only one, Curry) to have a TS% as high. that alone makes what curry has done this season so special while also putting up 30 a game.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 02:38 PM
In the 90s he did that as much as anyone in the league. Don't you think that counts as creating shots?

if you understood what I wrote I said he normally wouldn't start a possession that wasn't a fast break.
meaning he wouldn't be inbounded the ball to start a normal possession.



None of them also needed as many illegal screens as Curry did though to get open... now that would have been trolling. :)

im pretty sure none of them get held as much while cutting either.

ewing
04-20-2016, 02:55 PM
if you understood what I wrote I said he normally wouldn't start a possession that wasn't a fast break.
meaning he wouldn't be inbounded the ball to start a normal possession.



im pretty sure none of them get held as much while cutting either.

actually a lot more holding was allowed back in the day.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 03:04 PM
actually a lot more holding was allowed back in the day.

just like moving screens are more tolerated now. it doesn't change the fact that it isn't allowed. holding to prevent a cut is just as much a window closer as a moving screen is to opening one up.

ewing
04-20-2016, 03:06 PM
just like moving screens are more tolerated now. it doesn't change the fact that it isn't allowed. holding to prevent a cut is just as much a window closer as a moving screen is to opening one up.

you're the one who said he was held more then anyone.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 03:32 PM
you're the one who said he was held more then anyone.

I know! and he is. as much as anyone wants to point out the moving screens how about pay attention to when either curry or klay rotate. 90% of the time they are being held. just watch a post game and you could see the claw marks on them. there is nobody that I have ever seen play get held more than curry. please let me know if you could think of a player in any era get held as much. and you said holds were more tolerated back then right. well its pretty rare for curry to get any of those calls in his favor so I guess in that department not much has changed.

ewing
04-20-2016, 03:45 PM
I know! and he is. as much as anyone wants to point out the moving screens how about pay attention to when either curry or klay rotate. 90% of the time they are being held. just watch a post game and you could see the claw marks on them. there is nobody that I have ever seen play get held more than curry. please let me know if you could think of a player in any era get held as much. and you said holds were more tolerated back then right. well its pretty rare for curry to get any of those calls in his favor so I guess in that department not much has changed.

follow me here. you hold to stop an offensive player from getting space or getting catches. Curry while the best shooter ever isn't the only player that one would would want to deny catches to or space too. They used to allow more holding. Players before Curry got held more then Curry.

Chronz
04-20-2016, 04:47 PM
It is interesting when people talk about McGrady on here nobody mentions his efficiency.

He has a career .519 TS%
AI has a career .518 TS%

He had 1 season with positive efficiency (56.4 TS%). If you're going to criticize AI on here for his efficiency I don't see how you can't do the same for T-Mac.
Interesting that in an "advanced stats" thread you ignore the very barometers you posted to begin with. Dont misconstrue TS% to be anything other than Scoring Efficiency, Offensive efficiency is a game of possessions. TS% ignores the value of ball protection (particularly given his playmaking load) and the fact that he did grab more offensive rebounds than the diminutive AI. You add it all up and their offensive efficiency was substantially different. Subjectively, Tmac was also more versatile and more of a team player on that end. Thats ignoring their defensive abilities.



I never said all Kobes all defensive awards were merited, you notice I went out of my way to say his LEGIT all defensive years.

And I'm sorry if you take TMacs absolute best year and match it up against Kobes I can guarantee you Kobe played elite D that year more consistently.

I remember very frequently when someone got hot that Kobe wasn't guarding they would switch and put Kobe on him. In fact he demand to be put on them.

Not the case with TMac, as far as I know.

All the while, mind you, while putting up 50s 60s and 81 to TMacs 40s and 50s.

So better D and historic O? Yeah I'm good with Kobe, as is the rest of the civilized basketball world.

You sound like one of the barbers in Coming to America! Lol
I like my version of history better than yours. Kobe stepped up to the challenge when he was interested. His TEAM D was horrendous those days tho, it seemed to me he would rather show up an opponent or hunt for highlight steals than play any sort of disciplined defense and his coaches (From Tex and Phil alike) have harped on this throughout his later career. Playoffs Kobe was a different beast but I recall him resting on that end during the Suns series the year we're talking about

As far as the stats go, you wont find a single barometer that ranks his better despite those point totals so Im not seeing this "historic" O in this comp. His D was abysmal



There is only one Pat Ewing.

Hey, you may know ... did they ever disclose how much weight he lost during a game from sweat?

Pretty sure theres been 2

ewing
04-20-2016, 04:50 PM
Pretty sure theres been 2[/QUOTE]


2 nostrils, 1 man

Hawkeye15
04-20-2016, 04:53 PM
2 nostrils, 1 man

I remember being at Trent Tucker camp when I was 17, and Ewing came in, I was sitting right in front of him, and I couldn't stop staring at those nostrils. I could have put my entire arm up one of them.

valade16
04-20-2016, 05:00 PM
Interesting that in an "advanced stats" thread you ignore the very barometers you posted to begin with. Dont misconstrue TS% to be anything other than Scoring Efficiency, Offensive efficiency is a game of possessions. TS% ignores the value of ball protection (particularly given his playmaking load) and the fact that he did grab more offensive rebounds than the diminutive AI. You add it all up and their offensive efficiency was substantially different. Subjectively, Tmac was also more versatile and more of a team player on that end. Thats ignoring their defensive abilities.

I will amend to say that Tracy McGrady was not a very efficient scorer absent one season. I think you misunderstand my point. It wasn't to say that AI was as efficient as McGrady, but that McGrady was hardly an efficient scorer and if we're going to criticize AI for not being efficient scoring-wise then we must do so for McGrady as well.

Outside his incredible 02-03 season, he was not a very efficient scorer. If you want to argue that his ability to grab offensive rebounds or his low turnover rate makes him efficient offensively compared to his contemporaries, such as Kobe Bryant, you can.

Although McGrady may be more efficient offensively than AI, he was not particularly efficient offensively compared to other superstars.

valade16
04-20-2016, 05:08 PM
As far as the stats go, you wont find a single barometer that ranks his better despite those point totals so Im not seeing this "historic" O in this comp. His D was abysmal

But you're using essentially one year of T-Mac. How much weight can we put on one season?

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 05:34 PM
follow me here. you hold to stop an offensive player from getting space or getting catches. Curry while the best shooter ever isn't the only player that one would would want to deny catches to or space too. They used to allow more holding. Players before Curry got held more then Curry.

really!? like who?

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 05:39 PM
I remember being at Trent Tucker camp when I was 17, and Ewing came in, I was sitting right in front of him, and I couldn't stop staring at those nostrils. I could have put my entire arm up one of them.

hahaha. he uses a whole roll of tp to plug a bloody nose, like straight out of the pack.

Chronz
04-20-2016, 05:57 PM
I will amend to say that Tracy McGrady was not a very efficient scorer absent one season. I think you misunderstand my point. It wasn't to say that AI was as efficient as McGrady, but that McGrady was hardly an efficient scorer and if we're going to criticize AI for not being efficient scoring-wise then we must do so for McGrady as well.

Outside his incredible 02-03 season, he was not a very efficient scorer. If you want to argue that his ability to grab offensive rebounds or his low turnover rate makes him efficient offensively compared to his contemporaries, such as Kobe Bryant, you can.

Although McGrady may be more efficient offensively than AI, he was not particularly efficient offensively compared to other superstars.
Here's the oldest post i can find but I've always agreed with your specific point on his scoring



Nah, Tmac is actually overrated as a scorer, its his floor game that made him truly special. Microscopic turnover rates despite his immense load is what made him more efficient.

Tmac has very distinct stages of his career thanks to the injuries. At his height, he was the most productive player in the league (top3or4 for several years there).

And tbf, you do commit turnovers when trying to score as well. Kobe had to expose the ball more often when slashing or running sets. Young buck tmac had this super low dribble stance and he had the ball on a string, easily the best ball handler ever for his size. The back injuries ended that fairly quickly but he adapted to remain a perennial all nba/ mvp candidate

IndyRealist
04-20-2016, 07:40 PM
I will amend to say that Tracy McGrady was not a very efficient scorer absent one season. I think you misunderstand my point. It wasn't to say that AI was as efficient as McGrady, but that McGrady was hardly an efficient scorer and if we're going to criticize AI for not being efficient scoring-wise then we must do so for McGrady as well.

Outside his incredible 02-03 season, he was not a very efficient scorer. If you want to argue that his ability to grab offensive rebounds or his low turnover rate makes him efficient offensively compared to his contemporaries, such as Kobe Bryant, you can.

Although McGrady may be more efficient offensively than AI, he was not particularly efficient offensively compared to other superstars.
The difference is that no one said "Tracy McGrady was great because he was a brilliant scorer." He was not. He was however a brilliant point forward with a 2:1 ast:to ratio, extremely good rebounder for his postion, and put up both steals and blocks. He was a triple double threat and was all over the floor.

Iverson, on the other hand, is solely attributed greatness because of his scoring. And, like McGrady, he wasn't a particularly effective scorer.

ewing
04-20-2016, 07:46 PM
really!? like who?

have you heard of the Jordan rules?

Jamiecballer
04-20-2016, 09:21 PM
Tracy McGrady was arguably the most physically gifted basketball player ever seen. The guy could sleep all day and show up at gametime and still dominate, in fact he quite frequently did. It's mind boggling to think of what he could have been with a Jordan or kobe type intensity.

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 10:49 PM
have you heard of the Jordan rules?

i do. but maybe you should look them up because they dont apply to holding. it was more trapping and hitting him off screens NOT specifically holding his jersey or him. not saying that sometimes didnt happen but it for sure wasnt designed that way or done to him all the time and not as often as curry gets it. cmon man at least try.

ewing
04-20-2016, 11:25 PM
i do. but maybe you should look them up because they dont apply to holding. it was more trapping and hitting him off screens NOT specifically holding his jersey or him. not saying that sometimes didnt happen but it for sure wasnt designed that way or done to him all the time and not as often as curry gets it. cmon man at least try.

they didn't hold Jordan like Barkley didn't bring the ball up the floor or create his own shots. They didn't hold Reggie Miller, or Larry Bird, or Dale Ellis, or chuck person, etc etc etc. there is something unique about Curry. He is the best shooter i have ever seen. he isn't held or defended in a unique way other then the fact that people are forced to respect his range at a distance normally not defended. thats not a knock on curry its just reality.

MygirlhatesCod
04-20-2016, 11:42 PM
they didn't hold Jordan like Barkley didn't bring the ball up the floor or create his own shots. They didn't hold Reggie Miller, or Larry Bird, or Dale Ellis, or chuck person, etc etc etc. there is something unique about Curry. He is the best shooter i have ever seen. he isn't held or defended in a unique way other then the fact that people are forced to respect his range at a distance normally not defended. thats not a knock on curry its just reality.

whatever man you know exactly what im asking and thats who has ever gotten held more than curry. if going off on random statements that doesnt answer the question i asked keeps you happy then by all means go ahead. btw saying curry doesnt get defended differently is insane. much like those jordan rules you unnecessarily pointed out, he gets that but at half court! and that sir is as unique as it gets.

nastynice
04-21-2016, 12:30 AM
they didn't hold Jordan like Barkley didn't bring the ball up the floor or create his own shots. They didn't hold Reggie Miller, or Larry Bird, or Dale Ellis, or chuck person, etc etc etc. there is something unique about Curry. He is the best shooter i have ever seen. he isn't held or defended in a unique way other then the fact that people are forced to respect his range at a distance normally not defended. thats not a knock on curry its just reality.

Hmm, so ur saying Jordan was held as much or more than curry ?

Quinnsanity
04-21-2016, 01:23 AM
Best offensive season ever by a comfortable margin. Best overall? It's certainly in that top group. In some order, the best five are probably '88 Jordan (35 PPG and DPOY), '86 Bird (28/9/7.5 with 50/40/90 splits on arguably the best team ever), '00 Shaq (30/14/4/3 on a 67-win team), '13 LeBron (27/8/7 with DPOY caliber defense and the first player to top 60% eFG% since Kareem) and Curry. Gun to my head, I'm probably taking '13 LeBron, since he's the best combination of all things everyone else brought to the table. Better defender than peak Jordan, 40% three-point shooter, Bird-level passer and even more efficient overall than Shaq. He's just the easiest one to build a roster around since at that point, you could put pretty much any four players around LeBron and he'd make it work. Stylistically he could play with anyone. But purely offensively? I'd take this Curry season and wouldn't even think about it.

naps
04-21-2016, 02:08 AM
Offensively it's one of the best seasons ever, but it's not quite LeBron 2012-13, MJ 90-91 or Shaq 99-00.

This. LeBron and Jordan had their legendary defensive primes to go along with their best and historic offensive productions. Curry is a revolution though.

More-Than-Most
04-21-2016, 02:33 AM
Just using him against a guy like James and his rediculous season... Again there was a season where James won the MVP and should have won the DPOY award.... He was insane on both ends of the floor... Curry was amazing but In my opinion Jordan/James had better seasons

prodigy
04-21-2016, 03:14 AM
I doubt curry woulda lead as many teams to finals, but on the ther side of that coin put lebron on the dubs and are they setting a wins record? Do they get that chip last year? It's a tough call.

Well last I checked Warriors dominate without curry lol. so the 73 wins are a team award not curry's. Lebron taking bad teams to finals though, that's kinda all mostly him.

nastynice
04-21-2016, 03:27 AM
Well last I checked Warriors dominate without curry lol. so the 73 wins are a team award not curry's. Lebron taking bad teams to finals though, that's kinda all mostly him.

Point being made that diff players fit diff situations. As a betting man I would say this warriors team would be worse with lebron than with curry. Tbh, I'd say they'd be worse with lebron and no curry than with no lebron and no curry. So if ur gonna say that lebron did more with his teams than curry could have is an argument against curry, than isn't me saying curry can do more with his team than lebron just as good an argument against lebron?

Yes, 73 is a team award, but curry is the main driving force behind it all

ewing
04-21-2016, 05:47 AM
Hmm, so ur saying Jordan was held as much or more than curry ?

yes. he was push more, held more, hacked more..... the only way to stop Michael was to stop him from getting the ball- how to do thing people tried to do that? They were allowed to touch people more back then. Of course, he got held more. It like asking if wide receivers got blindsided more going across the middle back in the day. yes

KnicksorBust
04-21-2016, 08:10 AM
Well last I checked Warriors dominate without curry lol. so the 73 wins are a team award not curry's. Lebron taking bad teams to finals though, that's kinda all mostly him.

Well that is factually inaccurate. http://www.82games.com/1516/1516GSW.HTM

They were +18 with him on the court and -5 off the court. That is absurd.


if you understood what I wrote I said he normally wouldn't start a possession that wasn't a fast break.
meaning he wouldn't be inbounded the ball to start a normal possession.

im pretty sure none of them get held as much while cutting either.

No offense but it's clear you didn't watch Barkley play. I like how you cherry picked my post. Also I'm saying Curry had the greatest regular season ever :laugh: in this thread I even commented on the greatness of his cutting so you can save that argument for other people.

FlashBolt
04-21-2016, 12:35 PM
Point being made that diff players fit diff situations. As a betting man I would say this warriors team would be worse with lebron than with curry. Tbh, I'd say they'd be worse with lebron and no curry than with no lebron and no curry. So if ur gonna say that lebron did more with his teams than curry could have is an argument against curry, than isn't me saying curry can do more with his team than lebron just as good an argument against lebron?

Yes, 73 is a team award, but curry is the main driving force behind it all

Well, people tend to forget that basketball is a team game and at the end of the day, the best player doesn't win a championship but the best team. Insert Curry into the 2012 Heat and they wouldn't have achieved the same dominance that LeBron led them to. The system was bred for Curry and his teammates to be in-sync. These guys have had many years together so let's not pretend as if this was just a random mashup of players. Even as great as CP3 was during his ultimate peak, he would not be able to lead that team to a 73 win season. (Though, that's a lovely team for CP3 to have. CP3 is one of the greatest defenders at the point and with Klay, Dray, and Iggy there as well if they play small, it would be a beauty). The indirect threat Curry can pose just by his presence and ability in knocking down threes from ANYWHERE is his greatest value.

Hawkeye15
04-21-2016, 12:57 PM
yes. he was push more, held more, hacked more..... the only way to stop Michael was to stop him from getting the ball- how to do thing people tried to do that? They were allowed to touch people more back then. Of course, he got held more. It like asking if wide receivers got blindsided more going across the middle back in the day. yes

oh you for sure were grabbed and pulled more back in the day. The only benefit back then was, once you got around your guy, the paint was more open. But the bumps out top, or during your cuts, was most physical when Jordan played.

ewing
04-21-2016, 01:12 PM
oh you for sure were grabbed and pulled more back in the day. The only benefit back then was, once you got around your guy, the paint was more open. But the bumps out top, or during your cuts, was most physical when Jordan played.


no agruments

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 02:22 PM
yes. he was push more, held more, hacked more..... the only way to stop Michael was to stop him from getting the ball- how to do thing people tried to do that? They were allowed to touch people more back then. Of course, he got held more. It like asking if wide receivers got blindsided more going across the middle back in the day. yes

yeah back in the good old days when you were allowed to throat punch and use brass knuckles. awe to have those days back. I mean comparable to now that whenever you breathe on someone you get called right? you are saying mj got held way more than curry which is odd if what you are saying(it was allowed more then) is true then why did opponents against the GSW this year average 19.8 personal fouls a game compared to lets say the 1992 Bulls which averaged 22?

FlashBolt
04-21-2016, 02:31 PM
yeah back in the good old days when you were allowed to throat punch and use brass knuckles. awe to have those days back. I mean comparable to now that whenever you breathe on someone you get called right? you are saying mj got held way more than curry which is odd if what you are saying(it was allowed more then) is true then why did opponents against the GSW this year average 19.8 personal fouls a game compared to lets say the 1992 Bulls which averaged 22?

Exactly. I'm tired of people thinking basketball is about who plays rougher. Really? Do you want to see Bad Boy Pistons running around attacking players? Because I can find a couple of WWE guys and I guarantee you, they would be able to win a few games by just sheer aggressiveness. We have a more pure basketball game now than before. The days of someone having no talent but being able to be labeled an "elite defender" because he knows how to elbow you when you're attacking the paint is GONE. If you want that type of basketball, you aren't watching basketball. Defense is way better today than ever. The three pointer opened an entire world of basketball that causes defenses to improve. The athleticism and physical feats of the past is a joke compared to present day. These all have to be accounted for and it means a lot.

ewing
04-21-2016, 02:47 PM
yeah back in the good old days when you were allowed to throat punch and use brass knuckles. awe to have those days back. I mean comparable to now that whenever you breathe on someone you get called right? you are saying mj got held way more than curry which is odd if what you are saying(it was allowed more then) is true then why did opponents against the GSW this year average 19.8 personal fouls a game compared to lets say the 1992 Bulls which averaged 22?


What are you talking about? All i said was Micheal got held more. He did. I never said it was better then or or anything about which team got more foul calls. The game was more physical then. This isn't arguable, hence the great scorer then got held more then the great scorer now. Like what i said with wide receivers going over the middle getting blind sided. Its just a fact. It doesn't make anyone from then better then anyone from now or anyone from now better then anyone from then. Its just a fact.

Chronz
04-21-2016, 03:03 PM
The game was rougher back when the logo was breaking his nose every season of his career. That much is true, I'd argue Pistol Pete was tagged just as much, maybe the reason he became such a marksman was because he was tired of guys holding onto him. Think about it, he escaped alot of the punishment West received playing the in between/mid range game by taking 3pt shots when there was no such thing. West had to develop a stop on the dime jumpshot to survive in that area of the court, Pistol just chucked from further and further away to escape the trenches.

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 03:14 PM
What are you talking about? All i said was Micheal got held more. He did. I never said it was better then or or anything about which team got more foul calls. The game was more physical then. This isn't arguable, hence the great scorer then got held more then the great scorer now. Like what i said with wide receivers going over the middle getting blind sided. Its just a fact. It doesn't make anyone from then better then anyone from now or anyone from now better then anyone from then. Its just a fact.

you said they were allowed to hold more then! which by default is you saying they don't allow it as much now. how is that possible if the calls on average were more in the past than the present??????? getting hit and being held is different. MJ got hit a lot more its a difference.

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 03:29 PM
another crazy stat: Of all the members of the 50-40-90 club, curry made 21 more 3's than Nash who was the previous leader even attempted (381).

ewing
04-21-2016, 04:52 PM
you said they were allowed to hold more then! which by default is you saying they don't allow it as much now. how is that possible if the calls on average were more in the past than the present??????? getting hit and being held is different. MJ got hit a lot more its a difference.


cause you could called it every time down. you aren't making sense. The comparing number of fouls calls is irrelevent b/c the game was officiated differently

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 09:51 PM
cause you could called it every time down. you aren't making sense. The comparing number of fouls calls is irrelevent b/c the game was officiated differently

whatever you just wrote is incoherent. its actually you who's not making sense. maybe that concept of the numbers went past you. ill try again, saying one era let many a foul go compared to now is not logical if less personal fouls are called now. so again curry is a monster that gets held more than anyone ever has because he without a doubt is the most efficient offensive player from anywhere on the court.

Chronz
04-21-2016, 10:01 PM
Dude you dont have to agree with him to understand his argument, hes saying what passes for a foul now wasn't a foul back then. Like today you dont have handchecks so teams dont put their hands on you as much (duh) whereas back then it happened on every play and it was completely legal, therefore the difference in fouls wouldn't tell you a thing about contact in that regard.

Thats without going into pace of play and transition opportunities with regards to foul rates.

ewing
04-21-2016, 10:02 PM
whatever you just wrote is incoherent. its actually you who's not making sense. maybe that concept of the numbers went past you. ill try again, saying one era let many a foul go compared to now is not logical if less personal fouls are called now. so again curry is a monster that gets held more than anyone ever has because he without a doubt is the most efficient offensive player from anywhere on the court.

i think Shaq was more efficient next to the basket.

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 10:37 PM
Dude you dont have to agree with him to understand his argument, hes saying what passes for a foul now wasn't a foul back then. Like today you dont have handchecks so teams dont put their hands on you as much (duh) whereas back then it happened on every play and it was completely legal, therefore the difference in fouls wouldn't tell you a thing about contact in that regard.

Thats without going into pace of play and transition opportunities with regards to foul rates.

Regardless of what a foul is, you cant say one era let them play unlike now if the numbers mismatch. am i saying that in a weird way or something?

MygirlhatesCod
04-21-2016, 10:40 PM
i think Shaq was more efficient next to the basket.

i stand corrected. while he is touching the basket yes shaq is more efficient

Chronz
04-21-2016, 11:01 PM
Regardless of what a foul is, you cant say one era let them play unlike now if the numbers mismatch. am i saying that in a weird way or something?

Yeah i mean regardless of where Pistol Pete shot from, you can't say he had 3 point range when he spent his peak playing without a 3pt line. How can you have 3pt range without a 3pt line, amirite?

#context

lol, please
04-22-2016, 12:54 AM
So when Curry started out the year his advanced stats were among the best we'd ever seen. Here is where they ended up on the all-time single season charts:

PER:
1. Wilt Chamberlain 31.82
2. Wilt Chamberlain 31.74
3. Michael Jordan 31.71
4. LeBron James 31.67
5. Michael Jordan 31.63
6. Wilt Chamberlain 31.63
7. LeBron James 31.59
8. Steph Curry 31.46

WS/48:
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3399
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3256
3. Wilt Chamberlain .3251
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar .3225
5. LeBron James .3220
6. Michael Jordan .3211
7. LeBron James .3183
8. Steph Curry .3183

Box Plus/Minus:
1. LeBron James 12.99
2. Michael Jordan 12.56
3. LeBron James 12.53
4. Steph Curry 12.43

Offensive Box Plus/Minus:
1. Steph Curry 12.35
2. Michael Jordan 9.82


Many were calling his year the greatest season they'd ever seen. My questions are:

Do you think this was the greatest year ever for an NBA player? If you did previously, has your mind changed? What do you think about these stats and where Curry's season ranks. Are you impressed? Does it give you a greater appreciation for players like MJ, KAJ, Wilt, LeBron, etc.

In short, discuss.

It's more or less where I considered it before examining PER and WS/48, top 10ish or so. I consider myself to be balanced between the facts, and memories/personal biases so I always appreciated guys like MJ, KAJ, Wilt, however I have no respect for Lebron. The intangibles don't show up in the metrics but he lacks the leadership and competitive spirit and despite his "return" I can't not have his ditching Cleveland as a knock on him, so I basically won't acknowledge his impact whatsoever.

I am surprised not to see SHAQ on the lists, and despite the fact I still consider SHAQ the more dominant player when compared to Curry, at least right now.

nastynice
04-22-2016, 02:22 AM
yes. he was push more, held more, hacked more..... the only way to stop Michael was to stop him from getting the ball- how to do thing people tried to do that? They were allowed to touch people more back then. Of course, he got held more. It like asking if wide receivers got blindsided more going across the middle back in the day. yes

hmm, not sure if I agree with that, but I don't really know, was like 20 yrs ago

More-Than-Most
04-22-2016, 04:53 AM
Fouls very well may have been different but you cant use that as evidence or an excuse and not realize players are also bigger/stronger/faster now then in the 90s when Jordan played... The sport itself because of this is far far different. The notion that Jordan or anyone if played in this era would be far more successful is ridiculous and moronic because again players from top to bottom are more like machines now...

To the notion Jordan got held more... There is truth but part of Jordans game and what made him such a special player was also his insane defense in his prime... If teams were allowed to defend Jordan by holding him was Jordan not allowed to defend players by doing the same thing?

ewing
04-22-2016, 05:26 AM
Fouls very well may have been different but you cant use that as evidence or an excuse and not realize players are also bigger/stronger/faster now then in the 90s when Jordan played... The sport itself because of this is far far different. The notion that Jordan or anyone if played in this era would be far more successful is ridiculous and moronic because again players from top to bottom are more like machines now...

To the notion Jordan got held more... There is truth but part of Jordans game and what made him such a special player was also his insane defense in his prime... If teams were allowed to defend Jordan by holding him was Jordan not allowed to defend players by doing the same thing?


yes he was allowed to hold more too. that wasn't the debate though. He said Curry is held more then any player ever. He is wrong. He said Chuck couldn't create his own shot. He is wrong. He said Curry is the most efficient scorer ever from any spot on the floor. Again he is wrong. What Curry is doing is historic and he is awesome. that doesn't if i say Curry is better at finger rolls then the Ice Man i'm right. He isn't.

More-Than-Most
04-22-2016, 06:04 AM
yes he was allowed to hold more too. that wasn't the debate though. He said Curry is held more then any player ever. He is wrong. He said Chuck couldn't create his own shot. He is wrong. He said Curry is the most efficient scorer ever from any spot on the floor. Again he is wrong. What Curry is doing is historic and he is awesome. that doesn't if i say Curry is better at finger rolls then the Ice Man i'm right. He isn't.

I agree with everything you disagreed with except curry being the most efficient scorer ever from any spot on the floor.... At least for this season... How isnt he?

ewing
04-22-2016, 08:46 AM
I agree with everything you disagreed with except curry being the most efficient scorer ever from any spot on the floor.... At least for this season... How isnt he?

he is the most efficient scorer ever i don't think he is the most efficient scorer from every spot on the floor. There are people who are better scorers in the paint. You get Hakeem the ball two feet from the hole he will get a shot off and score every time.

Wrigheyes4MVP
04-22-2016, 04:32 PM
Who cares about defense when Steph Curry is that good at offense. Can't keep up with that type of offense no matter how hard you try.

Monta is beast
04-23-2016, 06:56 AM
People dont realize that steph will provably make an all defensice team. His defense is underrated.

prodigy
04-24-2016, 04:12 AM
Point being made that diff players fit diff situations. As a betting man I would say this warriors team would be worse with lebron than with curry. Tbh, I'd say they'd be worse with lebron and no curry than with no lebron and no curry. So if ur gonna say that lebron did more with his teams than curry could have is an argument against curry, than isn't me saying curry can do more with his team than lebron just as good an argument against lebron?

Yes, 73 is a team award, but curry is the main driving force behind it all


So.... Livingston, Thompson, Barnes, Green, Bogut is better then Livingston, Thompson, LeBron, Green, bogut? that's dumb.

nastynice
04-24-2016, 04:41 AM
So.... Livingston, Thompson, Barnes, Green, Bogut is better then Livingston, Thompson, LeBron, Green, bogut? that's dumb.

Exactly. give me the ball movement and team play of the first five over the wait ur turn to iso of the second five. See what ur not taking into account is that while lebron may be the best player in the nba, the other 4 will be better players with Barnes on the floor than with lebron. Unless ur suggesting lebron would willingly play the same role that Barnes does in that lineup..

Not so dumb all of a sudden, huh. Funny how that works..

nastynice
04-24-2016, 04:46 AM
People dont realize that steph will provably make an all defensice team. His defense is underrated.

His defense is VERY underrated. I realized when I watched a warriors game high the other day, lol, somehow I see EVERYTHING when I watch sports lit. He's a very smart defender, the whole damn warriors squad is smart on defense. Them and the Spurs are truly in a class of their own when it comes to having 5 guys play as one unit. So in sync.

I don't know if I'd call him all defense material tho

valade16
04-24-2016, 08:40 AM
Exactly. give me the ball movement and team play of the first five over the wait ur turn to iso of the second five. See what ur not taking into account is that while lebron may be the best player in the nba, the other 4 will be better players with Barnes on the floor than with lebron. Unless ur suggesting lebron would willingly play the same role that Barnes does in that lineup..

Not so dumb all of a sudden, huh. Funny how that works..

This is taking ball movement too far. You make a LeBron centric offense seem like a bad thing in comparison when it's merely a different thing in comparison.

The Cavs' LeBron ISO offense was 3rd in the league this year.

The LeBron one would be both a better and more efficient offense than the other one, not to mention because the other lineup features two non-factors from deep (Livingston and Bogut) so ball movement would only work to a point (that point being getting the ball to livingston on the perimeter).

Yes Livinstgon is an excellent post up guard... But post up is the opposite of ball movement.

So no, the other 4 players would not be better with Barnes on the floor. LeBron actually makes a lot of role players better, it's the other ball dominant superstars that have trouble meshing.

FlashBolt
04-24-2016, 11:01 AM
Lol @ Curry will make an All-NBA defensive team. You don't know basketball if that is what you're saying.

Scoots
04-24-2016, 12:10 PM
Lol @ Curry will make an All-NBA defensive team. You don't know basketball if that is what you're saying.

I doubt Curry will make an all defensive team, but he's a better defender than Westbrook who is often cited as a good defender. CP3 is always brought up as a great defender, but his principle defensive skill seems to be grabbing and holding without getting caught.

nastynice
04-24-2016, 10:17 PM
This is taking ball movement too far. You make a LeBron centric offense seem like a bad thing in comparison when it's merely a different thing in comparison.

The Cavs' LeBron ISO offense was 3rd in the league this year.

The LeBron one would be both a better and more efficient offense than the other one, not to mention because the other lineup features two non-factors from deep (Livingston and Bogut) so ball movement would only work to a point (that point being getting the ball to livingston on the perimeter).

Yes Livinstgon is an excellent post up guard... But post up is the opposite of ball movement.

So no, the other 4 players would not be better with Barnes on the floor. LeBron actually makes a lot of role players better, it's the other ball dominant superstars that have trouble meshing.

I'm not saying a lebron centric offense is bad period, but in comparison to what the Warriors do, of course it is. There's a reason those players are so good on the dubs, they all get touches, they all get a chance to find their rhythm. I have no doubt lebron is as good as it gets at driving and collapsing the d, but standing around and looking at a player and waiting to catch and shoot is much different than constantly actively being a part of the offense. Doubt those dubs player shoot at the same clip in the former rather than the latter.

Chronz
04-24-2016, 10:23 PM
I'm not saying a lebron centric offense is bad period, but in comparison to what the Warriors do, of course it is. There's a reason those players are so good on the dubs, they all get touches, they all get a chance to find their rhythm. I have no doubt lebron is as good as it gets at driving and collapsing the d, but standing around and looking at a player and waiting to catch and shoot is much different than constantly actively being a part of the offense. Doubt those dubs player shoot at the same clip in the former rather than the latter.
Depends on the shooters, Ray Allen and JR Pipings seem to have had some of their best shooting seasons with him. It's hard to build a motion offense if guys are only catch and shoot because it's hard to find guys who can stop on a dime and simply get tons of shots off non stop pin downs

Bron has been part of offenses with more Motion in Miami tho.

nastynice
04-24-2016, 10:55 PM
Depends on the shooters, Ray Allen and JR Pipings seem to have had some of their best shooting seasons with him. It's hard to build a motion offense if guys are only catch and shoot because it's hard to find guys who can stop on a dime and simply get tons of shots off non stop pin downs

Bron has been part of offenses with more Motion in Miami tho.

Well yea, it depends on a lot of things, Allen is a great catch n shoot player. But just because u add a better player on a team doesn't mean that just makes them better, teams with good fo have a blueprint and plan of what they're trying to build. Putting lebron on gsw doesn't completely fall in line with what gsw was built to do

prodigy
04-25-2016, 02:26 AM
Exactly. give me the ball movement and team play of the first five over the wait ur turn to iso of the second five. See what ur not taking into account is that while lebron may be the best player in the nba, the other 4 will be better players with Barnes on the floor than with lebron. Unless ur suggesting lebron would willingly play the same role that Barnes does in that lineup..

Not so dumb all of a sudden, huh. Funny how that works..

Still very very dumb. warriors with no Curry or Lebron would NOT!! I repeat NOT win a title. You need that go to superstar that people cannot stop. That's a fact. or a legit all-star starting 5 like the pistons had. Bogut, Livington and Barnes are not All-stars.

More-Than-Most
04-25-2016, 02:59 AM
Still very very dumb. warriors with no Curry or Lebron would NOT!! I repeat NOT win a title. You need that go to superstar that people cannot stop. That's a fact. or a legit all-star starting 5 like the pistons had. Bogut, Livington and Barnes are not All-stars.

The warriors starting 5 would not be that exact lineup minus Curry.... I Doubt they keep some of their insane bench talent on the bench.. A team of Clay/Green/Iggy right off the top is insane.... Do I think they would win a championship? Not with the spurs in the league but minus curry their team is still the 2nd best team in basketball and that is just scary.... They have proven yet again that no one player on their team matters because they have an abundance of talent... This team without curry is still better than several teams championship/finals teams.... The Kobe/Gasol team/Mavs team and that thunder team from the finals. This years cavs team/clippers team and thunder team.

Monta is beast
04-25-2016, 04:39 AM
Lol @ Curry will make an All-NBA defensive team. You don't know basketball if that is what you're saying.

How you gonna say i dont know basketball..ive watched the game for 15 years..made varsity as a freshman..but i dont know basketball..makes sense. His defense is extremely underated and he's without a doubt a top 5 defensive pg has been for a while

prodigy
04-25-2016, 04:48 AM
So This warriors team minus Curry would still beat a healthy Cavs team when a love and irving-less Cavs team took them to 6 games last season and Curry going off a few times in that series? ya no... they don't beat the thunder. I think u really are over-rating the warriors team without curry. When teams can game plan knowing Thompsons the #1 guy it would be a different story. I can see then being a lot like the Hawks of last season. good team with good players good passing but not enough.

prodigy
04-25-2016, 04:52 AM
How you gonna say i dont know basketball..ive watched the game for 15 years..made varsity as a freshman..but i dont know basketball..makes sense. His defense is extremely underated and he's without a doubt a top 5 defensive pg has been for a while

He's great at playing the passing lanes and getting steals. But he's not all NBA defense sorry. he could be one day, but def not yet. But I know this forum has become full of warrior fans/ front runners so I'm sure he's best shot blocker in the world too. Like Kyrie Irving they both tend to be put on weaker offense guards when on floor.

Monta is beast
04-25-2016, 05:06 AM
He's great at playing the passing lanes and getting steals. But he's not all NBA defense sorry. he could be one day, but def not yet. But I know this forum has become full of warrior fans/ front runners so I'm sure he's best shot blocker in the world too. Like Kyrie Irving they both tend to be put on weaker offense guards when on floor.

Im sorry but your just wrong. And idk if your trying to insinuatethat im a bandwagon fan, but i was posting on this site when the warriors were winning under 30 games a year and have ppl on here who can vouch for that. Been watching since speedy Claxton adonly foyle patrick obryant marcus williams etc ive been through all the bad years with the warriors and have watched probably 95% of there games since back in the day (only 21). Idk why but the warriors have always had extremely loyal fans..it pisses me off how many bandwagon fans there are now so dont try and call me one/if you were. Anyways Curry is an iguodala type defender without being athletic like iggy. His hands are stupid quick, he digs down on big men and gets steals on the regular whether it be the big dribbling or passing out. He's always playing with his hands up, he gets a ton of deflections on passes. Hes just a very smart defender with active hands no doubt in my mind he's a top 5 defensive pg. And of course klay guards the best guard he's an elite defender who gives smaller guards issues. Theres a reason the warriors had the best defensive 3pt% in the league..good defensive guards

Monta is beast
04-25-2016, 05:09 AM
So This warriors team minus Curry would still beat a healthy Cavs team when a love and irving-less Cavs team took them to 6 games last season and Curry going off a few times in that series? ya no... they don't beat the thunder. I think u really are over-rating the warriors team without curry. When teams can game plan knowing Thompsons the #1 guy it would be a different story. I can see then being a lot like the Hawks of last season. good team with good players good passing but not enough.

Warriors would be similar to the blazers without curry. Klay struggles without curry as does draymond. Curry is the one that makes the warriors offense free and easy with spacing he provides without the ball and attention he draws with it.

More-Than-Most
04-25-2016, 07:10 AM
So This warriors team minus Curry would still beat a healthy Cavs team when a love and irving-less Cavs team took them to 6 games last season and Curry going off a few times in that series? ya no... they don't beat the thunder. I think u really are over-rating the warriors team without curry. When teams can game plan knowing Thompsons the #1 guy it would be a different story. I can see then being a lot like the Hawks of last season. good team with good players good passing but not enough.

The warriors are a bad matchup for the cavs with love because of his lack of defense and how slow he is.... Kyrie and James have issues being on the same page but a healthy kyrie would help to a point.... the reason the cavs took them to 6 games was because james attacked and played out of his mind and it dogged him.... he wont play like that with love/kyrie because he becomes passive and they demand the ball... I think with a healthy love and kyrie the cavs win 1 game against the warriors..

Yes I 100 percent think without curry the warriors are still a top 3 team and better then the cavs because of their depth and because of the lack of depth the cavs have outside of their big 3 and because love is a handicap against this warriors team.

nastynice
04-25-2016, 07:47 AM
Still very very dumb. warriors with no Curry or Lebron would NOT!! I repeat NOT win a title. You need that go to superstar that people cannot stop. That's a fact. or a legit all-star starting 5 like the pistons had. Bogut, Livington and Barnes are not All-stars.

I don't think u necessarily understand either my point, or how basketball players affect one another. Right now ur thinking of these 4 players in their current context and assuming that's exactly who they'll be if playing next to lebron. But that's not how it works. Great example of that is Bosh in Miami, a franchise player who was at worst a top 15 player in the league, but once alongside lebron he just wasn't playing at the same level because he wasn't in a situation which allowed him to be at his best. That's not a knock against lebron, that's just the reality of the situation.

There's a reason these guys outscored the rox by THIRTY points in a half without curry, because they all play in a way that allows each player to be at their best, or close to it.

Regardless, the exact example u gave really isn't what this is about, this all stems from me making the comment that diff players fit diff situations differently, just adding the better player doesn't always create the better team situation. IMO lebron is the best player in the league right now, but take kawhi off the Spurs and put lebron there, I think the Spurs are worse. Same w curry and the dubs. Lebron is GREAT at carrying teams, but not at being A PART of a loaded team.

Munkeysuit
04-25-2016, 08:20 AM
Steph will definitely go down as one of the greatest, so sad what happened to him and hopefully he recovers in full.

valade16
04-25-2016, 09:28 AM
I disagree vehemently with the idea that the Curry-less Warriors would be as good as people on here are claiming. Just not a chance. We may actually get to test this theory when the Dubs take on the Clippers next round.

ewing
04-25-2016, 09:32 AM
I disagree vehemently with the idea that the Curry-less Warriors would be as good as people on here are claiming. Just not a chance. We may actually get to test this theory when the Dubs take on the Clippers next round.


i think they can be pretty damn good short term. I think eventually they would come back to earth like the Pippen Bulls in year 2. I would not be shocked if they beat the Clips without Curry

valade16
04-25-2016, 09:45 AM
i think they can be pretty damn good short term. I think eventually they would come back to earth like the Pippen Bulls in year 2. I would not be shocked if they beat the Clips without Curry

Short term yes, but over a season do people think they would win 60+ games?

ewing
04-25-2016, 10:21 AM
Short term yes, but over a season do people think they would win 60+ games?

lets say they cruised to a second title this year and then Curry was lost in the off season. I'm not saying they would win 60 but i could see it happening. I think in year two they would experience a bigger drop off. they really don't have to change there system without Curry and are so used to playing this system at a high level. I think that they there confidence and cohesion would make them overachieve this post season or for a solid season if they knew he was gone going in.

Chronz
04-25-2016, 10:36 AM
i think they can be pretty damn good short term. I think eventually they would come back to earth like the Pippen Bulls in year 2. I would not be shocked if they beat the Clips without Curry

An entire season is short term for you? LOL, they didn't come back down to earth, they lost Horace Grant which was a huge ****ing deal in that shallow era. That single move propelled the Magic into the Finals so lets not act like he was some random piece here, he was Phils whipping boy and a legitimate all-star caliber producer on both ends.

As for the Dubs, I dont know who you guys are talking about but they've already proven how good they are without Curry to me, its only a question of whether I've underrated his cast at this point. Really depends if the team can do something I've rarely seen a team do without their best player, which is close out a playoff opponent. Im so used to teams collapsing without their best guy, especially when hes this productive and this vital to their shot creation. Like other teams usually have that guy who can up his load without the star but I dont really see that in GS, maybe we just havent seen it because they've been together so long. Its really easy to say everyone has maximized their potential when they've barely scratched the surface of it.

Should be an interesting few weeks but the Clips are coming for that ***, and I was feeling this way before Curry went down.

Chronz
04-25-2016, 10:43 AM
lets say they cruised to a second title this year and then Curry was lost in the off season. I'm not saying they would win 60 but i could see it happening. I think in year two they would experience a bigger drop off. they really don't have to change there system without Curry and are so used to playing this system at a high level. I think that they there confidence and cohesion would make them overachieve this post season or for a solid season if they knew he was gone going in.

They wouldn't win 60. They wouldn't even win 52. Anywhere between 44-48 would be my guess. Maybe short term bump (thats still something we only see from quality teams) but at max I would suggest 50 under your conditions, they are so young and have such a small load in terms of minutes, I guess we could up their responsibilities as a unit. It really depends on how Kerr would approach that. Would he ride out his players to win the most possible ala Antoni or would he sacrifice a few wins (though greater team efficiency) to rest his guys ALA Pop? Klay and Dray have never been asked to go full bore in their primes, what a luxury.

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 12:07 PM
How you gonna say i dont know basketball..ive watched the game for 15 years..made varsity as a freshman..but i dont know basketball..makes sense. His defense is extremely underated and he's without a doubt a top 5 defensive pg has been for a while

Okay just stop it please. I don't care what you watched and what you made. Steph Curry is not a top two NBA PG defender. You really don't know what you're talking about.

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 12:10 PM
Warriors aren't going to win 60 without Curry just like Curry wouldn't win 73 without the Warriors or any other roster. This is a special type of team that runs cohesively. You can't take out the main enforcer of the system (Curry) and expect to win 60 games with Klay as your offensive starter. Klay is great but he's no Steph Curry. He is not as potent offensively and lacks the playmaking skills. Not to mention teams are going to clamp down on this roster and have a totally different gameplan if Curry isn't playing. I'd say 50 games.

IndyRealist
04-25-2016, 01:42 PM
They wouldn't win 60. They wouldn't even win 52. Anywhere between 44-48 would be my guess. Maybe short term bump (thats still something we only see from quality teams) but at max I would suggest 50 under your conditions, they are so young and have such a small load in terms of minutes, I guess we could up their responsibilities as a unit. It really depends on how Kerr would approach that. Would he ride out his players to win the most possible ala Antoni or would he sacrifice a few wins (though greater team efficiency) to rest his guys ALA Pop? Klay and Dray have never been asked to go full bore in their primes, what a luxury.

-maybe- i could buy Curry being worth 29 wins, but 29 wins over the guy they replace him with? With their good players taking more minutes? They're not going to go out and get Beno Udrih and give him all of Curry's minutes.

ewing
04-25-2016, 01:49 PM
-maybe- i could buy Curry being worth 29 wins, but 29 wins over the guy they replace him with? With their good players taking more minutes? They're not going to go out and get Beno Udrih and give him all of Curry's minutes.

you don't like Beno Udrih?

valade16
04-25-2016, 01:54 PM
-maybe- i could buy Curry being worth 29 wins, but 29 wins over the guy they replace him with? With their good players taking more minutes? They're not going to go out and get Beno Udrih and give him all of Curry's minutes.

I think this started because the poster said Livingston - Klay - LeBron - Green - Bogut would not be as good as Livingston - Klay - Barnes - Green - Bogut because of ball movement.

So in this hypothetical Curry is replaced by Livingston. Obviously minute allocations will change slightly but we're not replacing Curry with another PG from another team so much as simply removing Curry from the current roster.

IndyRealist
04-25-2016, 02:13 PM
I think this started because the poster said Livingston - Klay - LeBron - Green - Bogut would not be as good as Livingston - Klay - Barnes - Green - Bogut because of ball movement.

So in this hypothetical Curry is replaced by Livingston. Obviously minute allocations will change slightly but we're not replacing Curry with another PG from another team so much as simply removing Curry from the current roster.

Livingston's a net positive player and knows the system, and if he takes Curry's minutes and someone takes Shaun's minutes, there's no way the Warriors are net -29.

Someone would have to come in, take all of Curry's minutes, and be a complete disaster to get -29 wins.

IndyRealist
04-25-2016, 02:16 PM
you don't like Beno Udrih?

I'm sure he's a very nice man.

valade16
04-25-2016, 02:32 PM
Livingston's a net positive player and knows the system, and if he takes Curry's minutes and someone takes Shaun's minutes, there's no way the Warriors are net -29.

Someone would have to come in, take all of Curry's minutes, and be a complete disaster to get -29 wins.

I agree with you that they wouldn't get 29 wins worse, but Livingston is only a net positive because of his role on the team. Livingston as a starter would not be a net positive.

I'd have the Warriors winning about 55-57 games without Curry. So what is that? 16-18 game drop?

IndyRealist
04-25-2016, 02:57 PM
I agree with you that they wouldn't get 29 wins worse, but Livingston is only a net positive because of his role on the team. Livingston as a starter would not be a net positive.

I'd have the Warriors winning about 55-57 games without Curry. So what is that? 16-18 game drop?

I'd say he'd still be a positive player simply because of all the attention everyone else on the court attracts. It's not like he'd ever be the 2nd option. All he has to do is set the offense, don't turn the ball over, and play D. -16 is probably on the outside imo. Maybe -13 or -14 seems appropriate for an average-ish replacement. So, over/under 60 or so..

KnicksorBust
04-25-2016, 02:59 PM
An entire season is short term for you? LOL, they didn't come back down to earth, they lost Horace Grant which was a huge ****ing deal in that shallow era. That single move propelled the Magic into the Finals so lets not act like he was some random piece here, he was Phils whipping boy and a legitimate all-star caliber producer on both ends.

As for the Dubs, I dont know who you guys are talking about but they've already proven how good they are without Curry to me, its only a question of whether I've underrated his cast at this point. Really depends if the team can do something I've rarely seen a team do without their best player, which is close out a playoff opponent. Im so used to teams collapsing without their best guy, especially when hes this productive and this vital to their shot creation. Like other teams usually have that guy who can up his load without the star but I dont really see that in GS, maybe we just havent seen it because they've been together so long. Its really easy to say everyone has maximized their potential when they've barely scratched the surface of it.

Should be an interesting few weeks but the Clips are coming for that ***, and I was feeling this way before Curry went down.

Chris Paul's legacy is going to be fugazi if he never sees a Finals.

ewing
04-25-2016, 03:01 PM
I'm sure he's a very nice man.


next your going to tell me you don't like greivis vasquez racist^^

IndyRealist
04-25-2016, 03:54 PM
lol i was actually gonna respond, too.

nastynice
04-25-2016, 04:28 PM
I disagree vehemently with the idea that the Curry-less Warriors would be as good as people on here are claiming. Just not a chance. We may actually get to test this theory when the Dubs take on the Clippers next round.

Yea, clippers would be a good test. I actually like our chances vs them, I think our defense is really gonna step up. I already been saying all year that Livingston is starter material, iggy and ezeli probably are too. It might hurt giving more min to rush, Clark, varejao, mcadoo, but I think that's something we should be able to work around w smart player management.

prodigy
04-26-2016, 04:19 AM
I think with a healthy love and kyrie the cavs win 1 game against the warriors..

We will never speak again... lose all respect. that's beyond nuts.

prodigy
04-26-2016, 04:30 AM
This is so nuts LMAO! all these front runner Warriors fans saying Livingston, Thompson, Barnes, Green and Bogut? are still 55+ win team. talk about overrating a team to the max. I like the Warriors a lot. I love the team ball and excitement they play with. but common now. Curry is a GREAT player who avg almost 30 a game. Livingston won't touch that clearly. They would most likely have to trade for a PG because Livington is not a freak in starter in this league lmao!

losing curing would mean everyone moves up a spot on that bench. they aren't so deep now. Thompson would now have to deal with being the main guy and he's not a big time play maker. He will also face the best defenders in the league from each team.

outta respect I say 44-48 wins and that's if the west is weak

IndyRealist
04-26-2016, 12:44 PM
This is so nuts LMAO! all these front runner Warriors fans saying Livingston, Thompson, Barnes, Green and Bogut? are still 55+ win team. talk about overrating a team to the max. I like the Warriors a lot. I love the team ball and excitement they play with. but common now. Curry is a GREAT player who avg almost 30 a game. Livingston won't touch that clearly. They would most likely have to trade for a PG because Livington is not a freak in starter in this league lmao!

losing curing would mean everyone moves up a spot on that bench. they aren't so deep now. Thompson would now have to deal with being the main guy and he's not a big time play maker. He will also face the best defenders in the league from each team.

outta respect I say 44-48 wins and that's if the west is weak

I think it's nuts people believe any one player is worth 29 wins.

Chronz
04-26-2016, 02:48 PM
I think it's nuts people believe any one player is worth 29 wins.

It sounds absurd but is it really that crazy when the guy had one of the most productive campaigns of all-time?

On the topic of wins, I like to think of a players win-total as sort of a sliding scale. The same player could be worth more or less wins based on how good his team already is. Some players might mean more to a ******** squad than they would to a better one and vice versa.


Theres also cap to the wins you can add, even the most perfectly constructed team wouldn't win 80 for example. So if a guy is a 10 win player, that might add 12 wins to a bad team but only 8 to a team thats already elite.

Also, what do you make of a team like the Sloan led Jazz squad that was hovering around .500 for most of the season until they added Korver and became an elite squad. Was Korver alone worth all those wins or did he just increase the efficiency of others around him to the point where they all became more valuable in terms of wins, or was it simply a fluke of small samples.

But your right about upping their minutes tho, they could easily ramp up Klays minutes but how many can you up Greens? The guy already plays all out, his defense could suffer with more of a load.

IndyRealist
04-26-2016, 03:39 PM
It sounds absurd but is it really that crazy when the guy had one of the most productive campaigns of all-time?

On the topic of wins, I like to think of a players win-total as sort of a sliding scale. The same player could be worth more or less wins based on how good his team already is. Some players might mean more to a ******** squad than they would to a better one and vice versa.


Theres also cap to the wins you can add, even the most perfectly constructed team wouldn't win 80 for example. So if a guy is a 10 win player, that might add 12 wins to a bad team but only 8 to a team thats already elite.

Also, what do you make of a team like the Sloan led Jazz squad that was hovering around .500 for most of the season until they added Korver and became an elite squad. Was Korver alone worth all those wins or did he just increase the efficiency of others around him to the point where they all became more valuable in terms of wins, or was it simply a fluke of small samples.

But your right about upping their minutes tho, they could easily ramp up Klays minutes but how many can you up Greens? The guy already plays all out, his defense could suffer with more of a load.

We know diminishing returns exist in basketball, so in effect to accomodate Curry's greatnesss other players had to sacrifice their own productivity to make room. In the short term there may be some lost games because they have to adjust their habits and strategies, but over a season the team will somewhat compensate for the loss. They will try to maximize wins and make adjustments to do so.

How that happens, whether by increasing everyone's minutes a bit or someone stepping into a new role or bringing someone in from the outside to soak up minutes, I can't really say. But if the best Kerr can get out of this team without Curry is 44 wins, he doesn't deserve consideration for COY.

prodigy
04-27-2016, 01:46 AM
I think it's nuts people believe any one player is worth 29 wins.

first off, even next season if everyone on the warriors including Curry come back and are healthy I highly doubt they win 70 games let alone 73. prob be in the 60's. this was a heck of a season prob not to be repeated for some time.

To be honest though I think most superstars are worth at least half their teams wins easy. Because the teams tend to be built around them. so its not crazy at all a superstar is worth 29 wins. that's prob not even the highest lol.