PDA

View Full Version : Who is the more EFFICIENT player, Kyrie Irving or Kyle Lowry



Vee-Rex
06-27-2016, 05:03 PM
Not who is the better player or PG (I say Irving but I'm okay with people that pick Lowry). Who is the more efficient player???

REGULAR SEASON

2011

PER: Lowry 18.8; Irving 21.4
TS%: Lowry .558; Irving .566
FG%: Lowry .409; Irving .469
3pt%: Lowry .374; Irving .399
2pt%: Lowry .434; Irving .491
eFG%: Lowry .486; Irving .517
FT%: Lowry .864; Irving .872
TOV%: Lowry 17.8; Irving 16.1

2012

PER: Lowry 17.5; Irving 21.4
TS%: Lowry .543; Irving .553
FG%: Lowry .401; Irving .452
3pt%: Lowry .362; Irving .391
2pt%: Lowry .433; Irving .474
eFG%: Lowry .482; Irving .503
FT%: Lowry .795; Irving .855
TOV%: Lowry 17.7; Irving 13.8

2013

PER: Lowry 20.1; Irving 20.1
TS%: Lowry .567; Irving .533
FG%: Lowry .423; Irving .430
3pt%: Lowry .380; Irving .358
2pt%: Lowry .460; Irving .458
eFG%: Lowry .511; Irving .480
FT%: Lowry .813; Irving .861
TOV%: Lowry 13.4; Irving 12.1

2014

PER: Lowry 19.3; Irving 21.5
TS%: Lowry .527; Irving .583
FG%: Lowry .412; Irving .468
3pt%: Lowry .338;Irving .415
2pt%: Lowry .457; Irving .491
eFG%: Lowry .476; Irving .532
FT%: Lowry .808; Irving .863
TOV%: Lowry 12.8; Irving 11.8

2015

PER: Lowry 22.2; Irving 19.9
TS%: Lowry .578; Irving .540
FG%: Lowry .427; Irving .448
3pt%: Lowry .388; Irving .321
2pt%: Lowry .461; Irving .502
eFG%: Lowry .516; Irving .496
FT%: Lowry .811; Irving .885
TOV% Lowry 13.7; Irving 11.4

PLAYOFFS

2014

PER: Lowry 8.1; Irving 20.9
TS%: Lowry .396; Irving .573
FG%: Lowry .316; Irving .438
3pt%: Lowry .217; Irving .450
2pt%: Lowry .382; Irving .432
eFG%: Lowry .360; Irving .511
FT%: Lowry .727; Irving .841
TOV%: Lowry 16.3; Irving 8.5

2015

PER: Lowry 16.6; Irving 24.4
TS%: Lowry .508; Irving .574
FG%: Lowry .397; Irving .475
3pt%: Lowry .304; Irving .440
2pt%: Lowry .464; Irving .489
eFG%: Lowry .461; Irving .535
FT% Lowry .750; Irving .875
TOV% Lowry 14.4; Irving 9.4

IndyRealist
06-27-2016, 06:01 PM
Is there a reason why FT% and TO% isn't included?

RLundi
06-27-2016, 06:21 PM
Seriously? Lol why are you comparing an out-of-shape Lowry who wasn't a full-time starter to Kyrie 5 years ago and you ask who is the more efficient player today?

Vee-Rex
06-27-2016, 06:55 PM
Is there a reason why FT% and TO% isn't included?

I edited it to include those.

Vee-Rex
06-27-2016, 07:01 PM
Seriously? Lol why are you comparing an out-of-shape Lowry who wasn't a full-time starter to Kyrie 5 years ago and you ask who is the more efficient player today?

Your definition of "today" is omgtheregularseasonmattersbutignoretheplayoffs.

I think Kyrie IS the more efficient player and has been throughout his career, even if Lowry had 1 or 2 better regular seasons. You believe Lowry is the more efficient player because of 2 whole regular seasons and have yet to say anything about 2 consecutive playoffs (3 for Lowry but he sucked in all of 'em).

Argue Lowry is the better player, that's fine. I'll give you the thumbs up. But he is not the more efficient player. And truthfully I think if Kyrie didn't smash his knee in last year's finals he may have had a more efficient regular season this year.

zn23
06-30-2016, 12:44 AM
I don't know what happens to Lowry during the playoffs, but he doesn't play anywhere near his regular season level.

Regular season wise they are about the same, but Irving has a significant edge in the playoffs and I think it's because he enters the playoffs healthy and in shape whereas Lowry is asked to do so much for the Raptors that he gets worn down by the time the playoffs start and he just has nothing left.

FlashBolt
06-30-2016, 01:09 AM
I don't know what happens to Lowry during the playoffs, but he doesn't play anywhere near his regular season level.

Regular season wise they are about the same, but Irving has a significant edge in the playoffs and I think it's because he enters the playoffs healthy and in shape whereas Lowry is asked to do so much for the Raptors that he gets worn down by the time the playoffs start and he just has nothing left.

That's not an excuse, tbh.

ewing
06-30-2016, 01:47 AM
IDK but Kryie is better at basketball

More-Than-Most
06-30-2016, 01:56 AM
That's not an excuse, tbh.

One having Lebron James and the other not having Lebron James is 100 percent excusable in my opinion. Kyrie wouldnt be nearly as good if James wasnt there... He just wouldnt.... They are like 3-15 without james in the line up... I would love to know what kyries stats are when James isnt playing.

More-Than-Most
06-30-2016, 02:02 AM
IDK but Kryie is better at basketball

agreed

aman_13
06-30-2016, 02:17 AM
Well Lowry was more effecient than Irving last yr during the regular season. Irving out performed him in the playoffs.

Lowry had an odd playoffs, played really well at home but struggled on the road. He finished strong but his struggles in the first round and part of the second round really hurt his playoff numbers. No excuses though, he didn't play to his standards.

HandsOnTheWheel
06-30-2016, 02:53 AM
Why is this a thread?

IndyRealist
06-30-2016, 07:45 AM
Well Lowry was more effecient than Irving last yr during the regular season. Irving out performed him in the playoffs.

Lowry had an odd playoffs, played really well at home but struggled on the road. He finished strong but his struggles in the first round and part of the second round really hurt his playoff numbers. No excuses though, he didn't play to his standards.

George Hill absolutely destroyed him in the first round. Took Lowry out of everything he wanted to do. Hill didn't have to score a single point and was still invaluable that series.

Miltstar
06-30-2016, 07:52 AM
Kyrie is obviously the better player talent lol, there is a reason he was picked #1 overall. Lowry has more heart, determination, maturity and work ethic. Kyrie is also still a kid while Lowry is a man. Not sure what you're trying to prove here, but Kyrie could learn a lot from a guy like Kyle and if he matures his game he could be the best PG in the league. Lowry is just a bulldog who has worked hard to get where he is and deserves respect for it.

Hawkeye15
06-30-2016, 09:29 AM
depends which stats we look at. RPM, and VORP favor Lowry. Irving is the more efficient scorer, but Lowry is the better player.

JasonJohnHorn
06-30-2016, 09:51 AM
Touch call. In paper it look like Kyrie... but I feel like the Cavs would be a consistently better team with Lowry, and that he'd be a better fit.

However, he wouldn't be able to explore for huge games they way Kyrie can.


You want 50 every night, or 25 some nights and 75 others.

Chronz
06-30-2016, 10:13 AM
Both struggle with their health, one has to carry his team the other is on a team that can make the Finals without him. That this is even a debate with Kyrie so young is a testament to his talent but I have no doubt that Kyle is the better overall player when healthy. Its just, hes never healthy when it counts. What this comes down to is that Kyrie has only put together 1 dominant RS on par with Lowry, tho I believe Lowry grades higher overall. Seems like every year Kyle starts the year like gangbusters and then tails off as the injuries mount.


Its hard to grade Kyrie cuz of his failures pre-Bron but he was a youngster and not the player he is now. I think we need to see Kyrie maintain his past playoff level of play for a full season+playoffs in order to make this an open and shut case.

Kyries had the better career by default

Vee-Rex
06-30-2016, 10:30 AM
Kyrie could definitely learn a lot from Lowry. Lowry plays with a lot of tenacity that is nothing short of admirable.

akesh99
06-30-2016, 10:45 AM
George Hill absolutely destroyed him in the first round. Took Lowry out of everything he wanted to do. Hill didn't have to score a single point and was still invaluable that series.

Invaluable?? Is that why Hill was the first guy dealt this offseason? He's being replaced by a half injured Teague coming off a regressed season. But ya Hill was invaluable lol

Jamiecballer
06-30-2016, 11:18 AM
Not who is the better player or PG (I say Irving but I'm okay with people that pick Lowry). Who is the more efficient player???

REGULAR SEASON

2011

PER: Lowry 18.8; Irving 21.4
TS%: Lowry .558; Irving .566
FG%: Lowry .409; Irving .469
3pt%: Lowry .374; Irving .399
2pt%: Lowry .434; Irving .491
eFG%: Lowry .486; Irving .517
FT%: Lowry .864; Irving .872
TOV%: Lowry 17.8; Irving 16.1

2012

PER: Lowry 17.5; Irving 21.4
TS%: Lowry .543; Irving .553
FG%: Lowry .401; Irving .452
3pt%: Lowry .362; Irving .391
2pt%: Lowry .433; Irving .474
eFG%: Lowry .482; Irving .503
FT%: Lowry .795; Irving .855
TOV%: Lowry 17.7; Irving 13.8

2013

PER: Lowry 20.1; Irving 20.1
TS%: Lowry .567; Irving .533
FG%: Lowry .423; Irving .430
3pt%: Lowry .380; Irving .358
2pt%: Lowry .460; Irving .458
eFG%: Lowry .511; Irving .480
FT%: Lowry .813; Irving .861
TOV%: Lowry 13.4; Irving 12.1

2014

PER: Lowry 19.3; Irving 21.5
TS%: Lowry .527; Irving .583
FG%: Lowry .412; Irving .468
3pt%: Lowry .338;Irving .415
2pt%: Lowry .457; Irving .491
eFG%: Lowry .476; Irving .532
FT%: Lowry .808; Irving .863
TOV%: Lowry 12.8; Irving 11.8

2015

PER: Lowry 22.2; Irving 19.9
TS%: Lowry .578; Irving .540
FG%: Lowry .427; Irving .448
3pt%: Lowry .388; Irving .321
2pt%: Lowry .461; Irving .502
eFG%: Lowry .516; Irving .496
FT%: Lowry .811; Irving .885
TOV% Lowry 13.7; Irving 11.4

PLAYOFFS

2014

PER: Lowry 8.1; Irving 20.9
TS%: Lowry .396; Irving .573
FG%: Lowry .316; Irving .438
3pt%: Lowry .217; Irving .450
2pt%: Lowry .382; Irving .432
eFG%: Lowry .360; Irving .511
FT%: Lowry .727; Irving .841
TOV%: Lowry 16.3; Irving 8.5

2015

PER: Lowry 16.6; Irving 24.4
TS%: Lowry .508; Irving .574
FG%: Lowry .397; Irving .475
3pt%: Lowry .304; Irving .440
2pt%: Lowry .464; Irving .489
eFG%: Lowry .461; Irving .535
FT% Lowry .750; Irving .875
TOV% Lowry 14.4; Irving 9.4

what is the point of this thread? can't you just run this through a spreadsheet or something to get your answer? i feel like this thread has an agenda of some sort behind it. hmmm...

Jamiecballer
06-30-2016, 11:26 AM
Touch call. In paper it look like Kyrie... but I feel like the Cavs would be a consistently better team with Lowry, and that he'd be a better fit.

However, he wouldn't be able to explore for huge games they way Kyrie can.


You want 50 every night, or 25 some nights and 75 others.

i would hate to see Lowry go anywhere but putting him at the point with Lebron is would be incredible. for the very short term. i'm worried lowry is playing on borrowed time.

IndyRealist
06-30-2016, 11:54 AM
Invaluable?? Is that why Hill was the first guy dealt this offseason? He's being replaced by a half injured Teague coming off a regressed season. But ya Hill was invaluable lol
You know who said George Hill shut down Kyle Lowry? Kyle Lowry.

George Hill got traded for a lottery pick, and the team with the pick didn't want Teague, they wanted Hill. The reasons Hill got moved had nothing to do with his ability as a player, the team is switching to an up tempo offense and Hill is low mistake clock manager.

aman_13
06-30-2016, 12:03 PM
George Hill absolutely destroyed him in the first round. Took Lowry out of everything he wanted to do. Hill didn't have to score a single point and was still invaluable that series.

Lowry even acknowledged his defense after the series. He was great defensively.

aman_13
06-30-2016, 12:05 PM
depends which stats we look at. RPM, and VORP favor Lowry. Irving is the more efficient scorer, but Lowry is the better player.

Just curious, what stats are you looking at to come to that conclusion?

Chronz
06-30-2016, 04:00 PM
I can see why this thread was spawned, the question basically asks if we value usage or efficiency and how much we weigh injuries against these players.

Like no one wants to point to the much larger sample of games where Kyle VASTLY outplayed Kyrie this year, given that Kyrie had his knee cap broken, its understandable to see why he was forcing it and making his team worse on more occasions than Kyle ever did. So we toss out the RS and focus on his PS, only thats kind of unfair to Kyle because he HAD to carry his team all year and was afforded no such rest. If we look at the best RS each has had the last 2 years, Kyle stands out. Playoffs over their careers? Thats Kyrie, its just a matter of how much Bron helps him in that department.

In many ways they have sort of a mini-Kobe and mini-Shaq dynamic, with Shaq/Bron being the most productive overwhelming force come playoffs and Kyrie being the highly skilled scorer, only Kobe played lockdown D come playoffs. Like those 2, you always got the feeling that the team was only playoff/contention caliber so long as 1 man was around.

Also, PER should not be on here if OWS aren't on here. To me, they are the polar opposite ends of the spectrum and when both agree on the more efficient player, it tends to be because they are the superior player.

Well, unless you dont believe in the usage/efficiency tradeoff. In which case its almost a cut and dry situation depending on how many seasons you need to validate your standing, strictly in terms of raw offensive efficiency (PPP/ORTG), Kyle had the most efficient season of the 2 in 2014 when the coaches failed to name him an All-Star. He had a 118 O-RTG, only Kyrie was really close at 117 on significantly higher volume, he experienced his career high the minute Bron was traded to Cleveland.

If we look at the last 3 regular seasons the numbers come out like so:
Kyle: 20.6 PER/115 ORTG
Kyrie: 20.6PER/112 ORTG

Last 2 years its at
Kyle: 20.8 PER/113 ORTG
Kyrie: 20.9PER/113 ORTG

I mean thats really close, except for the fact that Kyle has always been a quality defender whereas Kyrie has always been a liability and thankfully the defensive measures we have back it but it still underscores his superiority on that end. There were years where Lowry was a downright scary defender, now hes more of an offensive stud that can get engaged defensively, like an older Kobe.


Subjectively, its easy to see how Kyle Lowry would thrive with the kind of openings Bron creates but there is no guarantee his body holds up any better than Kyries. I give Kyrie the slight edge overall but its in large part because hes proven more durable with his softer load. I just need to see Kyrie keep it up cuz this post season and last years RS are really all he has going for him, which is nothing to scoff at, Kyle has never had the post season run Kyrie just had, then again, neither have alot of vastly superior PG's

RLundi
06-30-2016, 04:13 PM
I can see why this thread was spawned, the question basically asks if we value usage or efficiency and how much we weigh injuries against these players.

Like no one wants to point to the much larger sample of games where Kyle VASTLY outplayed Kyrie this year, given that Kyrie had his knee cap broken, its understandable to see why he was forcing it and making his team worse on more occasions than Kyle ever did. So we toss out the RS and focus on his PS, only thats kind of unfair to Kyle because he HAD to carry his team all year and was afforded no such rest. If we look at the best RS each has had the last 2 years, Kyle stands out. Playoffs over their careers? Thats Kyrie, its just a matter of how much Bron helps him in that department.

In many ways they have sort of a mini-Kobe and mini-Shaq dynamic, with Shaq/Bron being the most productive overwhelming force come playoffs and Kyrie being the highly skilled scorer, only Kobe played lockdown D come playoffs.

Also, PER should not be on here if OWS aren't on here. To me, they are the polar opposite ends of the spectrum and when both agree on the more efficient player, it tends to be because they are the superior player.

Well, unless you dont believe in the usage/efficiency tradeoff. In which case its almost a cut and dry situation depending on how many seasons you need to validate your standing, strictly in terms of raw offensive efficiency (PPP/ORTG), Kyle had the most efficient season of the 2 in 2014 when the coaches failed to name him an All-Star. He had a 118 O-RTG, only Kyrie was really close at 117 on significantly higher volume, he experienced his career high the minute Bron was traded to Cleveland.

If we look at the last 3 regular seasons the numbers come out like so:
Kyle: 20.6 PER/115 ORTG
Kyrie: 20.6PER/112 ORTG

Last 2 years its at
Kyle: 20.8 PER/113 ORTG
Kyrie: 20.9PER/113 ORTG

I mean thats really close, except for the fact that Kyle has always been a quality defender whereas Kyrie has always been a liability and thankfully the defensive measures we have back it but it still underscores his superiority on that end. There were years where Lowry used to be a downright scary defender, now hes more of an offensive stud that can get engaged defensively, like an older Kobe.


Subjectively, its easy to see how Kyle Lowry would thrive with the kind of openings Bron creates but there is no guarantee his body holds up any better than Kyries. I give Kyrie the slight edge overall but its in large part because hes proven more durable with his softer load. I just need to see Kyrie keep it up cuz this post season and last years RS are really all he has going for him, which is nothing to scoff at, Kyle has never had the post season run Kyrie just had, then again, neither have alot of vastly superior PG's to him.

Many people cannot seem to understand in order to accurately judge these players today, the past 3 seasons have to be taken into account. Lowry was a much different player as soon as 4 seasons ago due to health and injuries, not being a full-time starter, and weight issues. It isn't a cop out to begin the comparison there; it's merely the most accurate.

What it boils down to is this: do you prefer and value defense more? Or the ability to be an elite scorer at any moment? Because Lowry is the far better defender while Kyrie is the far better pure scorer. As you've shown, the numbers the last couple seasons are immensely close, negligible even.

For my part, I value defense over elite scoring ability. Kyrie can score 40 points at any moment, but he may also give up 30 on the other end. Lowry may have a rough game and pull a 4-18 shooting night but I've seen him take over and hound the team's opposing player into an equally terrible night. To me, Lowry is a elite defensively more often than Kyrie is elite offensively.

So I can't fault someone for thinking Kyrie is a better player or more efficient. The numbers make cases for both players. I just think Lowry is both more efficient and a better player by a single hair. And I think his play this season, not to mention the advanced statistics, prove that for a certainty, at least with this season squarely in mind.

FlashBolt
06-30-2016, 04:42 PM
One having Lebron James and the other not having Lebron James is 100 percent excusable in my opinion. Kyrie wouldnt be nearly as good if James wasnt there... He just wouldnt.... They are like 3-15 without james in the line up... I would love to know what kyries stats are when James isnt playing.

So are we going to say every player who shows up in the playoffs and doesn't perform is simply just tired? There's no doubt that playing with James gives his teammates a luxury of doing less but Lowry did MUCH less and I don't think being tired is the reason. LeBron in last years NBA Finals was an indicator of how tired a player can get. Remember, Lowry's 1st playoff series was terrible and he has a proven record of having a lackluster playoff performance(s). That's a very telling sign that maybe he's easy to figure out. Either that or he puts up good numbers against bad teams.

RLundi
06-30-2016, 05:03 PM
So are we going to say every player who shows up in the playoffs and doesn't perform is simply just tired? There's no doubt that playing with James gives his teammates a luxury of doing less but Lowry did MUCH less and I don't think being tired is the reason. LeBron in last years NBA Finals was an indicator of how tired a player can get. Remember, Lowry's 1st playoff series was terrible and he has a proven record of having a lackluster playoff performance(s). That's a very telling sign that maybe he's easy to figure out. Either that or he puts up good numbers against bad teams.

Similarly, are you going to only consider playoff performance while practically ignoring regular season? Is a good season negated by poor postseason showing? Does a good playoff showing excuse a poor regular season? Does a player who had a good regular season get dinged for not making the playoffs? For example, would it have been better for Lowry to miss the playoffs instead of playing poorly in the playoffs?

I just think sample size is so important. That's why I'm so leery of judging players almost entirely on postseason success or lack thereof. I don't think postseason should be discounted entirely but you simply give it too much importance. Outside of the Finals, many players will just say the postseason games are like any other- just a game. Players can get hot for a series or they can turn cold in a series. I just don't think too much credence should be given to it. Yes, the pressure is on but these are professional athletes -- the pressure is always on to a degree.

In your case, I don't think it's about playoff performance. If the playoffs started at the beginning of the season, and the regular season at the end, I think you'd change your tune. It seems like you're suffering from recency bias as much, or probably more, than postseason success. "What have you done for me lately?" is a flawed but normal way to look at a bunch of situations, but it doesn't do much to strengthen an argument or take you seriously, not when you almost completely discount a grueling 82 game schedule over a 5 month span in favor of a single month of NBA play.

Sadds The Gr8
07-01-2016, 11:47 AM
Kyrie more dangerous offensive threat but Lowry better overall

kobe4thewinbang
07-01-2016, 11:58 AM
You stats guys crack me up.

Kyrie: hit *THE* shot in the Finals on *THE* MVP, also dropped 40+
Lowry: brick after brick after brick then a good game then brick after brick

Efficient? Lowry is as efficient as a snack when you're starving.

FlashBolt
07-01-2016, 01:32 PM
Similarly, are you going to only consider playoff performance while practically ignoring regular season? Is a good season negated by poor postseason showing? Does a good playoff showing excuse a poor regular season? Does a player who had a good regular season get dinged for not making the playoffs? For example, would it have been better for Lowry to miss the playoffs instead of playing poorly in the playoffs?

I just think sample size is so important. That's why I'm so leery of judging players almost entirely on postseason success or lack thereof. I don't think postseason should be discounted entirely but you simply give it too much importance. Outside of the Finals, many players will just say the postseason games are like any other- just a game. Players can get hot for a series or they can turn cold in a series. I just don't think too much credence should be given to it. Yes, the pressure is on but these are professional athletes -- the pressure is always on to a degree.

In your case, I don't think it's about playoff performance. If the playoffs started at the beginning of the season, and the regular season at the end, I think you'd change your tune. It seems like you're suffering from recency bias as much, or probably more, than postseason success. "What have you done for me lately?" is a flawed but normal way to look at a bunch of situations, but it doesn't do much to strengthen an argument or take you seriously, not when you almost completely discount a grueling 82 game schedule over a 5 month span in favor of a single month of NBA play.

Find where I said regular season didn't matter. Even in the regular season, their stats are about the same. You keep saying I'm ignoring the regular season but you have no evidence that Lowry's regular season was great enough to overcome what Kyrie did in the playoffs in a span of 21 games whereas Lowry disappeared. It's not "what have you done for me lately." It's, what has Lowry done when it matters.. and you saw that clear as day, he doesn't show up in the playoffs.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 01:59 PM
You stats guys crack me up.

Kyrie: hit *THE* shot in the Finals on *THE* MVP, also dropped 40+
Lowry: brick after brick after brick then a good game then brick after brick

Efficient? Lowry is as efficient as a snack when you're starving.

The ONLY reason Lowry's regular season offensive numbers are near Kyrie's are because of FTs. He gets to the line through legitimate pump-faking and drawing fouls, as well as through flopping. These skew his PER, WS/48, TS%, and all his advanced stats.

His playoff woes perfectly reflect that. The refs tend to let players play and so he's unable to get to the line as much, coupled by the fact that playoff defenses ramp up. Thus, his playoff statistics suffer. Not just this past playoffs but every single one of his playoffs are like that.

I'm not discounting the regular season here. I simply understand WHY and HOW Lowry's regular season stats are like that, and it's why I feel that Toronto won't ever win if they keep an inefficient, FT-dependent backcourt with Lowry + Derozan.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-01-2016, 02:02 PM
I'll take Kyrie over Lowry everyday and twice on Sunday

FlashBolt
07-01-2016, 02:05 PM
The ONLY reason Lowry's regular season offensive numbers are near Kyrie's are because of FTs. He gets to the line through legitimate pump-faking and drawing fouls, as well as through flopping. These skew his PER, WS/48, TS%, and all his advanced stats.

His playoff woes perfectly reflect that. The refs tend to let players play and so he's unable to get to the line as much, coupled by the fact that playoff defenses ramp up. Thus, his playoff statistics suffer. Not just this past playoffs but every single one of his playoffs are like that.

I'm not discounting the regular season here. I simply understand WHY and HOW Lowry's regular season stats are like that, and it's why I feel that Toronto won't ever win if they keep an inefficient, FT-dependent backcourt with Lowry + Derozan.

Don't forget, the playoffs is a seven series matchup. The best players (D.Rozan and Lowry for the Raptors) are going to be the guys they look to stop. So isn't it obvious that if Lowry suffers such a terrible drop-off from the regular season to the post season, then it's probably because in reality, you can take a lot from his game to turn him inefficient? And I'm not sure where this narrative that Lowry is an all-around beast is coming from.. His PER36 averages are the same as Kyrie's first two seasons. How he is a better player is news to me, tbh. At this point, it's probably Kyrie/Lillard>Lowry.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 02:07 PM
what is the point of this thread? can't you just run this through a spreadsheet or something to get your answer? i feel like this thread has an agenda of some sort behind it. hmmm...

I made this thread because I was certain that Kyrie is the more efficient player and viewed as the more efficient player.

Apparently people look at efficiency in completely different ways, and it all seems to boil down to what EFFICIENT means to an individual.

I'm a huge proponent of on-court efficiency, which is the player's ability to put the ball in the basket during play. I'm not a high proponent of situational/off-court efficiency (which is what TS%, WS/48, and many other advanced stats are based on) because they heavily depend on stuff like FTs. IMO, FTs are rather abitrary and not on-court:

1. They depend solely on how whistle-happy a ref intends to be
2. They depend on a lack of focus on a defender

The playoffs tend to mitigate both the ^^above scenarios since refs let the players play more, and defenders are generally better + more focused in the playoffs.

Thus, when I ask the question: Who is the more efficient player? I'm banking on people to have a specific kind of judgment (which is unfair of me, I see). Lowry's playstyle puts him in the conversation but I feel I can see through it and will always believe that Irving is the more efficient player.

Guys like Chris Paul and Steph Curry are the true epitomes of efficient @ the point guard position.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 02:14 PM
To Chronz:

Kyrie played 75 games in the 2014-15 season and still had by far a more efficient playoffs than Lowry has ever had. AND he was hurt since the 1st round (and visibly wobbling around in the semis, conf, and finals).

So I'm not sure the whole 'he was rested up this year' thing flies. Kyrie is just incredibly talented at getting buckets efficiently, regular season or playoffs.

And at this point I'd call Kyrie the best clutch player in the NBA (assuming clutch means last second shot in this case).

Sadds The Gr8
07-01-2016, 02:28 PM
Just curious, what stats are you looking at to come to that conclusion?

Kyrie's a better shooter and finisher at the rim. He's a more efficient scorer but Lowry is a way better playmaker

Chronz
07-01-2016, 04:10 PM
You stats guys crack me up.

Kyrie: hit *THE* shot in the Finals on *THE* MVP, also dropped 40+
Lowry: brick after brick after brick then a good game then brick after brick

Efficient? Lowry is as efficient as a snack when you're starving.

And Love got *THE* stop against *THE* MVP, while having a great game G7. Doesn't mean we ignore his year long struggles defensively and his lackluster production all series.

Lowry bricked alot, yes but are we certain he wouldn't perform in a friendlier environment like Kyries? Or are we suppose to believe Kyrie's explosion in efficiency had nothing to do with Bron?

FlashBolt
07-01-2016, 04:15 PM
And Love got *THE* stop against *THE* MVP, while having a great game G7. Doesn't mean we ignore his year long struggles defensively and his lackluster production all series.

Lowry bricked alot, yes but are we certain he wouldn't perform in a friendlier environment like Kyries? Or are we suppose to believe Kyrie's explosion in efficiency had nothing to do with Bron?

So you're telling me Lowry would have played better than Kyrie in the Finals or playoffs all season if with LeBron? Unless you are making that argument, then say that. But what I see is Lowry having issues every postseason being a comfortable player like he was in the regular season. Kyrie held his own the entire playoffs. LeBron benefited a bunch off Kyrie's dominance as well. Does Kyrie not get credit for that? You think LeBron going from below 40% shooting to 50% shooting in the Finals is because of who exactly?

Chronz
07-01-2016, 04:34 PM
Kyrie's a better shooter and finisher at the rim. He's a more efficient scorer but Lowry is a way better playmaker

How differently would Kyle's shooting/slashing appear if he got the kind of sets Kyrie gets alongside Bron. Its possible Kyrie outperforms in Kyles role but in terms of playing off doubles, Kyle has actually been the more effective shooter/scorer in outlet sets last I checked.

Chronz
07-01-2016, 04:36 PM
So you're telling me Lowry would have played better than Kyrie in the Finals or playoffs all season if with LeBron? Unless you are making that argument, then say that. But what I see is Lowry having issues every postseason being a comfortable player like he was in the regular season. Kyrie held his own the entire playoffs. LeBron benefited a bunch off Kyrie's dominance as well. Does Kyrie not get credit for that? You think LeBron going from below 40% shooting to 50% shooting in the Finals is because of who exactly?

How would I know? Are you making the claim that Lowry being on a team that needs him to get the 2 seed whilst Kyrie's team can make the Finals without him has no tangible effect on their workload/efficiency?

Im only posing questions, I dont know how I feel which is why Im shaky on either being ranked ahead without hesitation.

If you're making the claim that Kyrie benefits Brons game more than vice versa then I wont agree. I would never contest a lightened load helps Bron, thats pretty much what Im saying is happening for Kyrie..... Lowry would provide many of the same benefits to Bron, only with the addition of superior defensive effort and possibly better off the ball play based on what I've seen.

Sadds The Gr8
07-01-2016, 04:37 PM
How differently would Kyle's shooting/slashing appear if he got the kind of sets Kyrie gets alongside Bron. Its possible Kyrie outperforms in Kyles role but in terms of playing off doubles, Kyle has actually been the more effective shooter/scorer in outlet sets last I checked.
That's true. On mid-range tho it feels like a lot of kyries are contested but still shoots a better percentage. Lowry would probably be over 40% 3s tho if he played with LeBron.

RLundi
07-01-2016, 04:42 PM
I made this thread because I was certain that Kyrie is the more efficient player and viewed as the more efficient player.

Apparently people look at efficiency in completely different ways, and it all seems to boil down to what EFFICIENT means to an individual.

I'm a huge proponent of on-court efficiency, which is the player's ability to put the ball in the basket during play. I'm not a high proponent of situational/off-court efficiency (which is what TS%, WS/48, and many other advanced stats are based on) because they heavily depend on stuff like FTs. IMO, FTs are rather abitrary and not on-court:

1. They depend solely on how whistle-happy a ref intends to be
2. They depend on a lack of focus on a defender

The playoffs tend to mitigate both the ^^above scenarios since refs let the players play more, and defenders are generally better + more focused in the playoffs.

Thus, when I ask the question: Who is the more efficient player? I'm banking on people to have a specific kind of judgment (which is unfair of me, I see). Lowry's playstyle puts him in the conversation but I feel I can see through it and will always believe that Irving is the more efficient player.

Guys like Chris Paul and Steph Curry are the true epitomes of efficient @ the point guard position.

I'm not trying to start anything again but what the hell are you talking about? Are you just making up your own definitions of efficiency? On-court or off-court efficiency doesn't exist man. If people have different definitions of efficiency, then that means they themselves don't know what the term relates to. There's no way for efficiency to be open to interpretation, unless the individual simply doesn't know what it means.

Efficiency, put frankly, measures how effective a player is using all statistics weighed by how many minutes and possessions he plays versus waste. So if Player A scores 20 points on 10 shots and Player B scores the same on 30 shots, Player A will more than likely have a higher TS% and thereby be more efficient. Because Player B essentially wastes 20 extra shots that could have been allotted to a better-shooting teammate or a better possession in general, his efficiency will take a hit. So TS% is NOT situational or off-court, whatever that means. Side note: this very basic example completely eschews everything else that does indeed factor into efficiency, like rebounding or assists or usage or steaks or blocks, etc. Efficiency uses everything, not just whatever the arguer feels like.

Free throws also aren't off-court and neither are win shares. If you're making stuff up or judging player efficiency by your own standards, then fine, but just know, you're not in line with accepted practice and understanding of the term. Win shares, PER, TS%, RAPM, VORP, even lesser ones like box score +\-, EFF, and to an even lesser extent IMO, defensive and offensive ratings, together all help tell the story of efficiency.

If you don't want to use advanced stats and rely on counting stats, that's totally fine. But you can't call it efficiency if you're ignoring advanced stats that are DESIGNED to reveal efficiency. It just doesn't make any sense.

europagnpilgrim
07-01-2016, 04:51 PM
Lowry is the better 2 way player
Irving is the more dynamic offensive player, 55 on the Spurs settles that

if Lowry had Lebron to lean on then he would have the ring, Lowry impacts the game more since he is the better 2 way player

Irving would sell more jersey/tickets at the gate if both had to be the main headliner

Irving may be more efficient but that didn't lead to any playoff trips pre Lebron and I know he was injured some but it wasn't even like they were fighting for a spot, they just sucked pretty bad and had he shot 15/20 each game they still would have lost the majority of games

Chronz
07-01-2016, 04:55 PM
That's true. On mid-range tho it feels like a lot of kyries are contested but still shoots a better percentage. Lowry would probably be over 40% 3s tho if he played with LeBron.

Its true, Kyle has all but abandoned the midrange game, thats kind of my underlying point here. He basically developed this habit in Houston where IIRC, he was among the best at attacking scrambled defenses on set action. Basically, the kind of defenses that Bron is best at providing, only with Kyrie, he basically takes advantage of this with his lethal jumper and if you take that away, he wont attack the defense as consistently as Lowry, instead he will go to his secondary action, which is breaking you off the dribble to hit a mid range J off the dribble. Kyle doesn't waste possessions, hes been in the league too long, he will only settle for midrange shots if everything else has been taken away, my argument is he could theoretically find less situations where those shots are necessary.

Personally, if we were to swap the 2, I think Cleveland runs away with the #1 seed and is without a doubt a better defensive unit. I think Bron averages more assists and less turnovers with someone who can better run a unit and take advantage of the sets he provides. The other argument is that Bron gets less rest because hes still the one whos dictating the shots when what Kyrie offers is the advantage of sitting back knowing the possession wont call for your number, instead its a play for Kyrie to create his own against a cramped defense (cuz Bron cant shoot anymore) and he does the best job since Kobe/Tmac vs the dreaded "Clogged Toilet"

Chronz
07-01-2016, 04:59 PM
Lowry is the better 2 way player
Irving is the more dynamic offensive player, 55 on the Spurs settles that

if Lowry had Lebron to lean on then he would have the ring, Lowry impacts the game more since he is the better 2 way player

Irving would sell more jersey/tickets at the gate if both had to be the main headliner

Irving may be more efficient but that didn't lead to any playoff trips pre Lebron and I know he was injured some but it wasn't even like they were fighting for a spot, they just sucked pretty bad and had he shot 15/20 each game they still would have lost the majority of games

Kyrie was never more efficient than Kyle before Bron. I would attribute alot of that to Bron if not for the fact that Kyrie was a teen when he first entered the league and should be expected to improve regardless of teammates.

Chronz
07-01-2016, 05:04 PM
To Chronz:

Kyrie played 75 games in the 2014-15 season and still had by far a more efficient playoffs than Lowry has ever had. AND he was hurt since the 1st round (and visibly wobbling around in the semis, conf, and finals).

So I'm not sure the whole 'he was rested up this year' thing flies. Kyrie is just incredibly talented at getting buckets efficiently, regular season or playoffs.

And at this point I'd call Kyrie the best clutch player in the NBA (assuming clutch means last second shot in this case).

As always, a very good point its just he did that WITH Bron. Lowry is prolly always more likely to get hurt. Its just less likely with Bron, freak occurrences can happen tho, like Wade had his healthiest playoffs+RS this year without Bron, it was due to his new regimen and some decline production wise.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 05:18 PM
I'm not trying to start anything again but what the hell are you talking about? Are you just making up your own definitions of efficiency? On-court or off-court efficiency doesn't exist man. If people have different definitions of efficiency, then that means they themselves don't know what the term relates to. There's no way for efficiency to be open to interpretation, unless the individual simply doesn't know what it means.

Efficiency, put frankly, measures how effective a player is using all statistics weighed by how many minutes and possessions he plays versus waste. So if Player A scores 20 points on 10 shots and Player B scores the same on 30 shots, Player A will more than likely have a higher TS% and thereby be more efficient. Because Player B essentially wastes 20 extra shots that could have been allotted to a better-shooting teammate or a better possession in general, his efficiency will take a hit. So TS% is NOT situational or off-court, whatever that means. Side note: this very basic example completely eschews everything else that does indeed factor into efficiency, like rebounding or assists or usage or steaks or blocks, etc. Efficiency uses everything, not just whatever the arguer feels like.

Free throws also aren't off-court and neither are win shares. If you're making stuff up or judging player efficiency by your own standards, then fine, but just know, you're not in line with accepted practice and understanding of the term. Win shares, PER, TS%, RAPM, VORP, even lesser ones like box score +\-, EFF, and to an even lesser extent IMO, defensive and offensive ratings, together all help tell the story of efficiency.

If you don't want to use advanced stats and rely on counting stats, that's totally fine. But you can't call it efficiency if you're ignoring advanced stats that are DESIGNED to reveal efficiency. It just doesn't make any sense.

I get your argument, and no worries, I don't think you're trying to start up anything (but you're getting overly-worked up again, it seems).

I'm trying to look at this from a 3-D perspective. As you have pointed out, there are many, many factors/values that weigh into "efficiency" and a great number of players excel at one or more of these values which impacts their overall efficiency. I like to isolate these factors and analyze why or how a player reaches their TS% or PER or whatever. Why?

Because I believe there has been a precedent set for players that dominate the regular season with advanced statistics but regularly do terrible in the playoffs. There is a common theme with these players and I'm not gonna shy away from pointing them out just because their TS% in the regular season is good.

The playoffs is a different ball-game from the regular season. You once said that the playoffs/regular season is the same, and I'm saying you're wrong. I already listed 2 reasons why the playoffs are different (ref whistles, more intense defense) and hopefully you can put together why a 7-game series is completely different from the regular season. So when I examine a player's efficiency, I believe that there is potential for a truer, more accurate representation of their ability to score efficiently. I apologize if that sounds weird, and feel free to disagree, but that's where I stand.

Judging by your post, you seem completely and utterly satisfied by how efficiency is measured and what it means, and I am not. However, I can 100% declaratively say that TS% is not perfect, and that I believe we will come up with an even better way to measure efficiency one day. So call me ignorant or whatever you want to do, but IMO you're the ignorant one for declaring 'efficiency' to have a universal understanding that should not be open to interpretation.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 05:25 PM
Levels - 1-100 with 100 being best.

Player A - plays at level 90 when defenses aren't locked-in/engaged and playing their hearts out

Player B - plays at level 85 when defenses aren't locked-in/engaged and playing their hearts out

Player A - plays at level 65 when defenses ARE engaged

Player B - plays at level 95 when defenses ARE engaged

There's your Irving/Lowry efficiency debate in a nutshell, folks. Chronz brings up factors (like playing with LeBron) that may be heavy or minimal factors. However, once we open up that can of worms, then I feel like I'd have to start bringing up theories about how I believe Kyrie coasts and is ENCOURAGED to coast (because of his injury history) through the regular season.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 05:33 PM
Again, just to reiterate my point:

There is a reason why LeBron's regular season numbers don't match his playoff numbers. There is a reason why Jordan's regular season numbers don't match his playoff numbers.

I believe the playoffs are a truer (maybe not perfect) representation of a player's ability, whether that be offense, defense, etc... When player A always and consistently underperforms in the playoffs where everyone and their grandmas are performing to their truer selves, I think it says something.

When we examine player A and see that the specific factors/values (I used these terms before) that raise their TS% to wonderful levels in the regular season are generally compromised in the playoffs, then it paints a better picture on their ability and particularly what they rely on to attain those TS% levels.

Think with me on that, guys. Think about it.

RLundi
07-01-2016, 05:56 PM
I get your argument, and no worries, I don't think you're trying to start up anything (but you're getting overly-worked up again, it seems).

I'm trying to look at this from a 3-D perspective. As you have pointed out, there are many, many factors/values that weigh into "efficiency" and a great number of players excel at one or more of these values which impacts their overall efficiency. I like to isolate these factors and analyze why or how a player reaches their TS% or PER or whatever. Why?

Because I believe there has been a precedent set for players that dominate the regular season with advanced statistics but regularly do terrible in the playoffs. There is a common theme with these players and I'm not gonna shy away from pointing them out just because their TS% in the regular season is good.

The playoffs is a different ball-game from the regular season. You once said that the playoffs/regular season is the same, and I'm saying you're wrong. I already listed 2 reasons why the playoffs are different (ref whistles, more intense defense) and hopefully you can put together why a 7-game series is completely different from the regular season. So when I examine a player's efficiency, I believe that there is potential for a truer, more accurate representation of their ability to score efficiently. I apologize if that sounds weird, and feel free to disagree, but that's where I stand.

Judging by your post, you seem completely and utterly satisfied by how efficiency is measured and what it means, and I am not. However, I can 100% declaratively say that TS% is not perfect, and that I believe we will come up with an even better way to measure efficiency one day. So call me ignorant or whatever you want to do, but IMO you're the ignorant one for declaring 'efficiency' to have a universal understanding that should not be open to interpretation.

You ever hear the saying, it's hard to win an argument against a smart person, but it's impossible to win an argument against a stupid person? I am categorically not calling you stupid, but I think the principle applies. If you're misinformed, well then I can't tell you anything that you'll agree with. The fact is, you need to educate yourself.

The idea of efficiency is accepted and agreed upon in the basketball community. That doesn't mean it won't change or that it can't change later. I'm positive more elements will be added to it. But until someone comes up with another answer to 2 + 2 = 4, you just have to accept that 2 + 2 = 4. In the same vein, efficiency in basketball is what I explained in my previous post. It just is. My point is, efficiency has one meaning. You can arrive at efficiency using a variety of methods, but it's definition is unchanged. So the meaning of efficiency can't mean something to an individual and mean another to someone else. What can change is the statistics they use to arrive at what efficiency is. But you can't just make up statistics like on-court efficiency and go by that. Do you get what I'm saying? There has to be a barometer that is generally agreed upon, because that's what binds us and allows us to argue on evidence. Otherwise, I can make up my own stat and call it whatever I want and say, I define efficiency based on LUNDISTATS.

As of now, efficiency uses accepted advanced statistics that I mentioned earlier, like PER and win shares, yadda yadda. Until something else or something better comes out, that's what we use: a combination of the most accepted advanced metrics that together form a conclusion on efficiency.

I'm finished.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 06:01 PM
One more thing to add on about Chronz's point:

He's definitely got an ironclad point. I mean, imagine if Lowry was 2nd banana to Bron. Who knows, he could turn it up into the superstar notch. It's very possible.

As for Kyrie, just the manner in how he gets his points and how efficiently he gets them during live-play (he's not just shooting wide open shots at all, he's scoring in the same way we all criticize him for - ISO) just makes me think it's more likely that he has grown from his rookie year than simply being a product of LeBron's presence.

So, even though I believe Kyrie would still be Kyrie (and thus be more 'efficient' than Lowry), I can certainly conclude that Chronz's point is really irrefutable, at least until we all have more data to go by.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 06:03 PM
You ever hear the saying, it's hard to win an argument against a smart person, but it's impossible to win an argument against a stupid person? I am categorically not calling you stupid, but I think the principle applies. If you're misinformed, well then I can't tell you anything that you'll agree with. The fact is, you need to educate yourself.

The idea of efficiency is accepted and agreed upon in the basketball community. That doesn't mean it won't change or that it can't change later. I'm positive more elements will be added to it. But until someone comes up with another answer to 2 + 2 = 4, you just have to accept that 2 + 2 = 4. In the same vein, efficiency in basketball is what I explained in my previous post. It just is. My point is, efficiency has one meaning. You can arrive at efficiency using a variety of methods, but it's definition is unchanged. So the meaning of efficiency can't mean something to an individual and mean another to someone else. What can change is the statistics they use to arrive at what efficiency is. But you can't just make up statistics like on-court efficiency and go by that. Do you get what I'm saying? There has to be a barometer that is generally agreed upon, because that's what binds us and allows us to argue on evidence. Otherwise, I can make up my own stat and call it whatever I want and say, I define efficiency based on LUNDISTATS.

As of now, efficiency uses accepted advanced statistics that I mentioned earlier, like PER and win shares, yadda yadda. Until something else or something better comes out, that's what we use: a combination of the most accepted advanced metrics that together form a conclusion on efficiency.

I'm finished.

You're fine to think I'm misinformed.

I'll just continue to process and discuss these things on a level you simply seem to be unable to comprehend. Toodles to you if you're finished.

RLundi
07-01-2016, 06:07 PM
Final salvo: efficiency doesn't necessarily equate to a better player. Efficiency is nothing more than a metric designed to help us compare players equally across the board. There are SO many different factors that help us determine how effective players are: Healthy and injury, environment, temperament, nerves, ability under pressure, efficiency, counting stats, what we call "clutch"; the list truly goes on and on.

The all-time list of greatest players is not solely based on efficiency or advanced statistics. So just remember that when you're comparing players' performances to each other and to against regular season numbers.

Vee-Rex
07-01-2016, 06:52 PM
Final salvo: efficiency doesn't necessarily equate to a better player. Efficiency is nothing more than a metric designed to help us compare players equally across the board. There are SO many different factors that help us determine how effective players are: Healthy and injury, environment, temperament, nerves, ability under pressure, efficiency, counting stats, what we call "clutch"; the list truly goes on and on.

The all-time list of greatest players is not solely based on efficiency or advanced statistics. So just remember that when you're comparing players' performances to each other and to against regular season numbers.

Great point and I agree 100%.

FlashBolt
07-01-2016, 06:55 PM
Well we can't play this game of "Where would Kyrie be without LeBron" when Kyrie allowed LeBron to take breathers in the Finals. With how Lowry played in the postseason, it's tough to say but he's not the offensive player Kyrie is and would have a tougher time adjusting. The reality is, Lowry isn't a great playoffs player and if you're willing to say he's a top 5 PG, then he needs to play like one. Take Kyrie out of this equation and then tell me he doesn't have to perform better.

Chronz
07-01-2016, 07:59 PM
Well we can't play this game of "Where would Kyrie be without LeBron" when Kyrie allowed LeBron to take breathers in the Finals. With how Lowry played in the postseason, it's tough to say but he's not the offensive player Kyrie is and would have a tougher time adjusting. The reality is, Lowry isn't a great playoffs player and if you're willing to say he's a top 5 PG, then he needs to play like one. Take Kyrie out of this equation and then tell me he doesn't have to perform better.

Thats absurd and essentially asking us to ignore the chasm of a difference in their day to day workload for their franchises. Im not seeing why we couldn't play the game when your reasoning isn't much of a distinguishing factor IMO (Thats the beauty of these subjective thoughts, we simply have to agree neither knows for sure). Its tough to say anything when both guys are so often injured and have had such different work loads throughout.


Kyrie is the better talent because of how good hes been while being MUCH younger, but I cant envision Cleveland being any worse off with Lowry. If he gets hurt then yeah, thats why measuring legacies is different than talent.


Lowry DOES have to perform better, its also true that Kyrie has never performed at his level pre-LeBron, both in terms of individual efficiency and how they led their teams. One thing we know for certain is that Lowry has been the FAR better defender throughout his career.

FlashBolt
07-01-2016, 08:04 PM
Thats absurd and essentially asking us to ignore the chasm of a difference in their day to day workload for their franchises. Im not seeing why we couldn't play the game when your reasoning isn't much of a distinguishing factor IMO (Thats the beauty of these subjective thoughts, we simply have to agree neither knows for sure). Its tough to say anything when both guys are so often injured and have had such different work loads throughout.


Kyrie is the better talent because of how good hes been while being MUCH younger, but I cant envision Cleveland being any worse off with Lowry. If he gets hurt then yeah, thats why measuring legacies is different than talent.


Lowry DOES have to perform better, its also true that Kyrie has never performed at his level pre-LeBron, both in terms of individual efficiency and how they led their teams. One thing we know for certain is that Lowry has been the FAR better defender throughout his career.

That's fine. I agree with most of what you said. But until Lowry steps it up in the playoffs, it's always going to be in my mind that he will disappear when it matters most. That's not a good feeling.

Chronz
07-01-2016, 08:33 PM
That's fine. I agree with most of what you said. But until Lowry steps it up in the playoffs, it's always going to be in my mind that he will disappear when it matters most. That's not a good feeling.
Yeah but we need more data to know conclusively if its a habit or just happenstance. Like I've seen Jason Richardson in an environment so friendly that he "outplays" a guy like VC in his prime.
How did you feel about Vince Carter and KG for most of their careers? Just curious, not trying to highlight any real point here, I do think Kyrie has had the greater career, but he would've had that win or lose.