PDA

View Full Version : 26th Best Player in the NBA



Shammyguy3
09-03-2016, 01:59 PM
Remember, this is based on RIGHT NOW, not necessarily who was the best this past season, or who will be the best. It's a tricky debate, how much do you factor in the playoffs? Injuries? Team-fit? Etc. Here's what we have so far:


1. Lebron James
2. Stephen Curry
3. Kevin Durant
4. Russell Westbrook
5. Kawhi Leonard
6. Chris Paul
7. Anthony Davis
8. Paul George
9. James Harden
10. Draymond Green
11. DeMarcus Cousins
12. Blake Griffin
13. Jimmy Butler
14. Klay Thompson
15. Damian Lillard
16. LaMarcus Aldridge
17. Kyrie Irving
18. Carmelo Anthony
19. Kyle Lowry
20. John Wall
21. Karl-Anthony Towns
22. Paul Millsap
23. Marc Gasol
24. Al Horford
25. Dwyane Wade
26. ??

mngopher35
09-03-2016, 08:18 PM
Klove again for me. Basically I think his talent level is higher than this spot but his current role is holding him back (works for the team so can't complain) leading to him being slightly underrated here.

Shammyguy3
09-03-2016, 10:25 PM
Yeah I'm sorta feeling bad that Love fell this far, I think there are a lot of guys that can claim this spot but it feels weird that Love hasn't been getting a lot of, love

FlashBolt
09-03-2016, 11:44 PM
Yeah I'm sorta feeling bad that Love fell this far, I think there are a lot of guys that can claim this spot but it feels weird that Love hasn't been getting a lot of, love

If he had his own team as a 1st option player, he'd probably be somewhere in the top 15 area. It's unfortunate but that's basketball for ya. Same reason we have Draymond Green this high. Stick him in a team as a first option and he probably won't crack top 30. Love's role now and as long as he is in this current Cavs lineup will be 16/10. I'd take Giannis over him. He'll be much better. His euro-step is like Wade on steroids. He plays exceptional defense and his coverage is amazing. It'll be beautiful to watch him beef up and guard guys like LeBron/KD. Best part about Giannis is he's not afraid of a challenge. Just this year, he outplayed KD twice in a row with him covering KD most of the game.

Dade County
09-04-2016, 12:22 AM
Going with Whiteside, his epic on the game when he's on the court is special.

FlashBolt
09-04-2016, 01:27 AM
Going with Whiteside, his epic on the game when he's on the court is special.

Heat almost beat the Raptors without him so I have to say no to that one. Needs to work on his immaturity tbh. Only thing holding him back and since he just cashed out, I'm not sure you'll see him develop into a better player. Good rebounder/shotblocker.. what else? Still doesn't know how to score and they'll need him to do a bunch of that with Wade and Deng gone (possibly Bosh being sidelined as well). Interesting case with all these centers.. All rebounders with minimal scoring ability.

tredigs
09-04-2016, 10:06 AM
If he had his own team as a 1st option player, he'd probably be somewhere in the top 15 area. It's unfortunate but that's basketball for ya. Same reason we have Draymond Green this high. Stick him in a team as a first option and he probably won't crack top 30. Love's role now and as long as he is in this current Cavs lineup will be 16/10. I'd take Giannis over him. He'll be much better. His euro-step is like Wade on steroids. He plays exceptional defense and his coverage is amazing. It'll be beautiful to watch him beef up and guard guys like LeBron/KD. Best part about Giannis is he's not afraid of a challenge. Just this year, he outplayed KD twice in a row with him covering KD most of the game.

Why would any team stick Draymond as a "first option". His game is about being an incredible swiss army knife on both sides of the ball, and especially so defensively. He's the guy who can take zero shots in a game and still have massive impact. It's why he's always at the top of RPM/VORP leaderboards. I can't think of a team you could put him on that he would not tremendously improve. Frankly 10 is probably too low for Draymond, but since he isn't a scorer and also people just don't like him, it make sense for a public poll.

Shammyguy3
09-04-2016, 10:10 AM
Why would any team stick Draymond as a "first option". His game is about being an incredible swiss army knife on both sides of the ball, and especially so defensively. He's the guy who can take zero shots in a game and still have massive impact. It's why he's always at the top of RPM/VORP leaderboards. I can't think of a team you could put him on that he would not tremendously improve. Frankly 10 is probably too low for Draymond, but since he isn't a scorer and also people just don't like him, it make sense for a public poll.
I ranked him sixth in my personal top ten in the Bulls forum

ewing
09-04-2016, 10:22 AM
if i am starting a team and want to win games, i take both IT and the Greek before Love

tredigs
09-04-2016, 10:25 AM
Besides Love (who is still a very good player but whose defense is so bad against certain teams like Golden State that his presence is sometimes a negative), I might lean DJ here. He's probably the most dominant paint player in the game when both sides of the ball are taken into consideration, and he's the key piece that can make the Clippers an X-Factor in a series against Golden State imo.

Giannis is probably still a year away from putting it all together (he can score at the rim at will with his length and athleticism, but , but if he does he'll skyrocket up to top 10 status).

tredigs
09-04-2016, 10:29 AM
I ranked him sixth in my personal top ten in the Bulls forum

Yeah, I think I ranked him 7th or 8th earlier this year, but anywhere from 6-10 makes the most sense to me. It's actually remarkable how many times I watched him dominate a game while going 10 minutes straight while shooting the ball maybe once or twice (not that he's bad at it. His 3pt range is part of what distinguishes him and makes the GS offense so tough to counter). But, yeah, he's as unique a player as this league has ever seen with how versatile he is on both sides of the floor. The only thing he truly lacks (takeover ability offensively), just so happens to be the focus of most fans.

nycericanguy
09-04-2016, 10:38 AM
ive been all over the place but i went Giannis here, Hayward and Love would be my other choices.

Anyone else have no idea where to rank Derozan? His per game numbers look good and he plays a key cog on a winning team. I think he should go somewhere around here.

nycericanguy
09-04-2016, 10:41 AM
Dray is such a great role player in a great situation... but you have to wonder how he'd do on a more... normal team?...lol.

Curry just opens up so much for everyone, and then no one can leave Klay either... and now you add Durant... Dray is in such an amazing situation... but you wonder if you swapped him with other guys from the top 10 list how that would go.

ewing
09-04-2016, 10:43 AM
You guys actually think that Brad Stevens puts the ball in the basket for celtics don't you?

tredigs
09-04-2016, 10:59 AM
Dray is such a great role player in a great situation... but you have to wonder how he'd do on a more... normal team?...lol.

Curry just opens up so much for everyone, and then no one can leave Klay either... and now you add Durant... Dray is in such an amazing situation... but you wonder if you swapped him with other guys from the top 10 list how that would go.

What you and most people are leaving out of this diagnosis in saying how much better Curry/Klay make him, is the flip-side of the coin of just how much better he makes them. Both offensively and defensively, the Warriors team grinds to very mediocre levels without Draymond on the floor. The eye test shows this, the on/off and RPM stats DEFINITELY show this, and if you watch them daily you understand why. His versatility on both ends from a 4 can't be mirrored. On another team? He'd be their best, most versatile defender and give them a 4 who can run the floor, pass at an elite level, dribble-drive/dish, and extend opposing bigs out to the 3pt line. Crucial especially when he's guarding another teams center. He'd also likely be their vocal leader and give them a never-relent attitude and a new level of will. In most cases he would come in and simply be the most important player to their team + drastically improve their chances at success.

tredigs
09-04-2016, 11:03 AM
You guys actually think that Brad Stevens puts the ball in the basket for celtics don't you?

IT is a legit option here for his scoring ability, but that team is built on its defense. I actually think we'd see K Love in a whole new light again if that was his coach and those were his teammates. Assuming Stevens could manage to get him to understand how to play somewhat smart D at least. But stats wise he'd be back around 25/12 as one of the better scorers in the game and they'd be winning still with how good the rest of the defenders are.

nycericanguy
09-04-2016, 11:28 AM
What you and most people are leaving out of this diagnosis in saying how much better Curry/Klay make him, is the flip-side of the coin of just how much better he makes them. Both offensively and defensively, the Warriors team grinds to very mediocre levels without Draymond on the floor. The eye test shows this, the on/off and RPM stats DEFINITELY show this, and if you watch them daily you understand why. His versatility on both ends from a 4 can't be mirrored. On another team? He'd be their best, most versatile defender and give them a 4 who can run the floor, pass at an elite level, dribble-drive/dish, and extend opposing bigs out to the 3pt line. Crucial especially when he's guarding another teams center. He'd also likely be their vocal leader and give them a never-relent attitude and a new level of will. In most cases he would come in and simply be the most important player to their team + drastically improve their chances at success.

he's a really good player, I just don't think he's a top 10 player in the world...heck im seeing some people say he's a top 6 player in the world. i think that ranking is more situation than talent and greatness.

I think if you replaced Dray with say... prime Wilson Chandler or prime Boris Diaw, they'd still be title contenders... but you can't replace Curry or Klay IMO, not unless you are replacing them with other superstar players.

tredigs
09-04-2016, 12:11 PM
he's a really good player, I just don't think he's a top 10 player in the world...heck im seeing some people say he's a top 6 player in the world. i think that ranking is more situation than talent and greatness.

I think if you replaced Dray with say... prime Wilson Chandler or prime Boris Diaw, they'd still be title contenders... but you can't replace Curry or Klay IMO, not unless you are replacing them with other superstar players.

Curry is a different level, but Kay is definitely more replaceable than Draymond. Give me Reddick instead of Klay and we're in a hell of a lot better spot than K Love instead of Draymond. He's incredibly good dude. He just doesn't score at a high level.

ewing
09-04-2016, 02:09 PM
IT is a legit option here for his scoring ability, but that team is built on its defense. I actually think we'd see K Love in a whole new light again if that was his coach and those were his teammates. Assuming Stevens could manage to get him to understand how to play somewhat smart D at least. But stats wise he'd be back around 25/12 as one of the better scorers in the game and they'd be winning still with how good the rest of the defenders are.


I don't think think so. I think they would be worse. IT changes the game. He is the fastest point in the league. He dictates pace at will and has a gear others don't. Love would have great numbers but much less impact. Like i said you guys seem to think Stevens plays for these guys.

tredigs
09-04-2016, 02:23 PM
I don't think think so. I think they would be worse. IT changes the game. He is the fastest point in the league. He dictates pace at will and has a gear others don't. Love would have great numbers but much less impact. Like i said you guys seem to think Stevens plays for these guys.

I mean he's a good offensive player dude, but their identity and true force (as a 48 win team) is predicated on their top-5 D. And IT is not helping that Top-5 D. It's telling that he doesn't rank in the top-10 PG's in RPM (though 7th offensively). He's a 42% shooting 5'9" PG with average range (great finisher though). There's nothing about his game or impact that demands he goes in this slot over some of the other names on the board.

ewing
09-04-2016, 07:15 PM
I mean he's a good offensive player dude, but their identity and true force (as a 48 win team) is predicated on their top-5 D. And IT is not helping that Top-5 D. It's telling that he doesn't rank in the top-10 PG's in RPM (though 7th offensively). He's a 42% shooting 5'9" PG with average range (great finisher though). There's nothing about his game or impact that demands he goes in this slot over some of the other names on the board.


Having a point that is capable of controlling the game and dictating tempo absolutely helps your defense. Defensive and offensive are connected. This is not baseball. Also, the Celtic are trash on offensive without him. The Celtics became a good basketball team when they traded for IT. He is by far the most impactful player on a 48 win team.

hugepatsfan
09-05-2016, 10:02 AM
IT's offense is absolutely crucial for Boston. Everything goes to crap on that end without him. He's a terrible defender but he makes a good enough effort and they have the talent around him to hide him on that end. BOS is built on defense overall but you need at least a somewhat effective offense to be a good team overall and IT really single-handedly has brought that to BOS.

That's what team basketball is though. Individually IT is behind a few more guys on the list but that doesn't mean he can't be a huge part of a winning team because he covers for what other guys do poorly and they cover his weakness. And not only is he a great lead guard but he plays well off the ball (BOS's adjustment to play him with Evan Turner got them back in the ATL series this year) so he isn't someone who is just effective as a lead guy on a bad team. As long as he can be covered for on D (with guys like Smart, Bradley, Crowder, Rozier he will be) then he's going to be an effective player.

6man
09-05-2016, 10:33 AM
IT is not the fastest player in the league.

Also did I see someone say Draymond is the 6th best player in the league? Lol

tredigs
09-05-2016, 11:24 AM
IT is not the fastest player in the league.

Also did I see someone say Draymond is the 6th best player in the league? Lol

Right? If you told me 5 years ago someone would think an All NBA 2nd teamer who put up 14/10/7.5 on 59% TS (39% 3pt) as a power forward who was the runner-up DPOY b2b seasons (due to his ability to defend all areas/players at an elite level... including centers and guards) as a leader for arguably the best team in the NBA could be considered top 6-10 in the NBA I would call you CRA...... wait it a second. No, I'd actually probably say "well yeah no ****, but good luck finding that guy, because that player does not exist".

Shammyguy3
09-05-2016, 11:38 AM
Literally, this player below was 2nd in MVP voting

14.7ppg 7.3rpg 9.9apg 2.1spg 3.5tov while being the best defender at his position
19.1 PER 103 ORtg 48.4ts% 0.140 WS/48 5.1 BPM 5.4 VORP

Draymond Green
14.0ppg 9.5rpg 7.4apg 1.5spg 1.4bpg 3.2tov while being arguably the best defender in the league, not just his position
19.3 PER 115 ORtg 58.7ts% 0.190 WS/48 5.8 BPM 5.5 VORP

Damn near identical, with swaps in assists/rebounds because the top player was a point guard and the bottom is a PF/C; not only that. The top player was Jason Kidd in the 2001/02 season

da ThRONe
09-05-2016, 12:22 PM
Literally, this player below was 2nd in MVP voting

14.7ppg 7.3rpg 9.9apg 2.1spg 3.5tov while being the best defender at his position
19.1 PER 103 ORtg 48.4ts% 0.140 WS/48 5.1 BPM 5.4 VORP

Draymond Green
14.0ppg 9.5rpg 7.4apg 1.5spg 1.4bpg 3.2tov while being arguably the best defender in the league, not just his position
19.3 PER 115 ORtg 58.7ts% 0.190 WS/48 5.8 BPM 5.5 VORP

Damn near identical, with swaps in assists/rebounds because the top player was a point guard and the bottom is a PF/C; not only that. The top player was Jason Kidd in the 2001/02 season

Firm example why stats doesn't tell the whole story.

Shammyguy3
09-05-2016, 12:29 PM
Firm example why stats doesn't tell the whole story.

Sure they don't tell the whole story, but you can look at those numbers and see how phenomenal they are, can't you? Yes, you must admit those are damn good numbers. Factor in that any fan can tell you scoring more points on less shots is a GOOD thing, you can say his efficiency is very good too. Then, every fan knows how good of a defender he is and ta'da! you have an elite player...

then, when you look at those numbers and compare to another elite player of the past in Jason Kidd, it makes sense how one can say Draymond Green is an elite player.



Tell me where that reasoning goes wrong

nycericanguy
09-05-2016, 01:48 PM
Literally, this player below was 2nd in MVP voting

14.7ppg 7.3rpg 9.9apg 2.1spg 3.5tov while being the best defender at his position
19.1 PER 103 ORtg 48.4ts% 0.140 WS/48 5.1 BPM 5.4 VORP

Draymond Green
14.0ppg 9.5rpg 7.4apg 1.5spg 1.4bpg 3.2tov while being arguably the best defender in the league, not just his position
19.3 PER 115 ORtg 58.7ts% 0.190 WS/48 5.8 BPM 5.5 VORP

Damn near identical, with swaps in assists/rebounds because the top player was a point guard and the bottom is a PF/C; not only that. The top player was Jason Kidd in the 2001/02 season

in fairness, Kidd didn't have anywhere near the supporting cast that Dray has. He was "the man" on that Nets team. and he was 2nd in MVP voting because he was able to turn that Nets team around and lead them to 50 wins and the finals. seemingly out of nowhere. Not because of his numbers.

But even then, I don't think Kidd was considered a top 10 player back then.

tredigs
09-05-2016, 02:05 PM
in fairness, Kidd didn't have anywhere near the supporting cast that Dray has. He was "the man" on that Nets team. and he was 2nd in MVP voting because he was able to turn that Nets team around and lead them to 50 wins and the finals. seemingly out of nowhere. Not because of his numbers.

But even then, I don't think Kidd was considered a top 10 player back then.

Hahah what?? This is a unanimous top-50 player All-Time (in ESPN's big All-Time list they had him 35th which feels about right). That #2 in MVP voting was his 5th straight All-NBA 1st Team. Not top-10 in the league? He was the best guard in basketball.

Concerning Draymond, also consider he was top-10 in both VORP and RPM last season and this season. #2 in RPM this past season. His impact confuses people who don't watch him play all the time and just assume he's some product of GS's success (bear in mind that the irony here is that he is the catalyst of much of what they are able to do on both ends). I firmly believe that if he was a 22 PPG scorer (even if it was a decent bit lower efficiency. Say 55% TS instead of 59%) but half the defender he is (so 22/10/7.5 guy but with say Blake level defense), there is not a person here who would question his dominance. He's not like most dominant players of the past, and that confuses people, I get it.

nycericanguy
09-05-2016, 02:12 PM
Hahah what?? This is a unanimous top-50 player All-Time (in ESPN's big All-Time list they had him 35th which feels about right). That #2 in MVP voting was his 5th straight All-NBA 1st Team. Not top-10 in the league? He was the best guard in basketball.

Concerning Draymond, also consider he was top-10 in both VORP and RPM last season and this season. #2 in RPM this past season. His impact confuses people who don't watch him play all the time and just assume he's some product of GS's success (bear in mind that the irony here is that he is the catalyst of much of what they are able to do on both ends). I firmly believe that if he was a 22 PPG scorer (even if it was a decent bit lower efficiency. Say 55% TS instead of 59%) but half the defender he is (so 22/10/7.5 guy but with say Blake level defense), there is not a person here who would question his dominance. He's not like most dominant players of the past, and that confuses people, I get it.

key words being "back then"... Kidd went on to have an amazing career and 2001 season was really a catapult. I may be wrong, but i dont recall him being considered a top 10 guy at that time by the masses.

tredigs
09-05-2016, 02:20 PM
key words being "back then"... Kidd went on to have an amazing career and 2001 season was really a catapult. I may be wrong, but i dont recall him being considered a top 10 guy at that time by the masses.

Dude he was the most hyped guard in the nation coming out of Cal, won Rookie Of The Year, and was on his 3rd team and like I mentioned 5 straight All-NBA 1st Teams and was considered the best defensive guard in the game/best floor general in the game by that point of his career. I followed him closer than most because Cal was my team and I grew up watching Kidd, but if in '02 you said "you know I don't think J Kidd is top-10 in the game", you probably wouldn't even be mocked. People would just act like you weren't in the room.

I will say that I don't hold Draymond to J Kidd's standards despite that awesome #'s/defensive impact comparison, but that's not exactly a hit given J Kidd's status as an All-Time Great.

nycericanguy
09-05-2016, 02:41 PM
Dude he was the most hyped guard in the nation coming out of Cal, won Rookie Of The Year, and was on his 3rd team and like I mentioned 5 straight All-NBA 1st Teams and was considered the best defensive guard in the game/best floor general in the game by that point of his career. I followed him closer than most because Cal was my team and I grew up watching Kidd, but if in '02 you said "you know I don't think J Kidd is top-10 in the game", you probably wouldn't even be mocked. People would just act like you weren't in the room.

I will say that I don't hold Draymond to J Kidd's standards despite that awesome #'s/defensive impact comparison, but that's not exactly a hit given J Kidd's status as an All-Time Great.

you're prob right, that was a long time ago, i honestly dont remember.

but just for fun I was looking at the league that year, there were some great players.

Shaq
Duncan
KG
Kobe
Prime AI led the league in scoring
prime T-Mac
Dirk
Karl Malone
prime Webber who averaged 25/10/5/1.7/1.4 that year
prime Payton 22/9/5 on 47%

and others that are borderline, so its not a given that he was top 10 at the time...

but to me the big difference was/is that Kidd was unquestionably the best player on his team, you cant say the same for Dray, and I dont know if he'd have the same success as the best player on a team.

tredigs
09-05-2016, 03:20 PM
you're prob right, that was a long time ago, i honestly dont remember.

but just for fun I was looking at the league that year, there were some great players.

Shaq
Duncan
KG
Kobe
Prime AI led the league in scoring
prime T-Mac
Dirk
Karl Malone
prime Webber who averaged 25/10/5/1.7/1.4 that year
prime Payton 22/9/5 on 47%

and others that are borderline, so its not a given that he was top 10 at the time...

but to me the big difference was/is that Kidd was unquestionably the best player on his team, you cant say the same for Dray, and I dont know if he'd have the same success as the best player on a team.

The NBA was super top-heavy at the time for sure, but Kidd's standing was as the Alpha floor general at the time. It's why Payton and AI would trade off 1st Teams while Kidd was the mainstay at that time. Then Kobe and T-Mac came on with him and soon after he was past his prime. In '01/'02 though I think Kidd had as much clout as anybody in the game outside of Shaq and Timmy D.

I do think Draymond would have a similar impact on any team simply because he's so versatile, how could he not? Since we have a recent playoff sample size of Draymond games without Curry on the court (which drops the Warriors standing from favorites to just another solid playoff team), let's take a look his impact. In those 8 games he started that Curry was out, Draymond averaged 19.0/10.5/7.5 +1.5 stl & 2.3 blk on 46.3/45.0/72.3 (5.0 threes attempted per game) and 2..4 TOV's. I don't know the PER for that stretch but it's north of 30 for sure. Warriors went 6-2 (5-2 if you don't count the game Curry came in off the bench against Portland and won for them). Those #'s are a small sample size and the percentages would not hold up to that level of course, but they're playoff games and it was enough minutes of sample that doubters (I thought) would fully understand what we're dealing with here in the absence of the MVP (who is credited with much of his 3pt shooting ability due to space and his assist #'s), and it's clearly a top-10 player in the NBA. It's why I argued him over Anthony Davis in this thread, who he was not only definitely better than over the season, but Draymond can be trusted to stay on the court. AD has proven to be a lock to miss 20% of an NBA season, and that's the worst trait possible for a young big.

ewing
09-05-2016, 08:08 PM
IT's offense is absolutely crucial for Boston. Everything goes to crap on that end without him. He's a terrible defender but he makes a good enough effort and they have the talent around him to hide him on that end. BOS is built on defense overall but you need at least a somewhat effective offense to be a good team overall and IT really single-handedly has brought that to BOS.

That's what team basketball is though. Individually IT is behind a few more guys on the list but that doesn't mean he can't be a huge part of a winning team because he covers for what other guys do poorly and they cover his weakness. And not only is he a great lead guard but he plays well off the ball (BOS's adjustment to play him with Evan Turner got them back in the ATL series this year) so he isn't someone who is just effective as a lead guy on a bad team. As long as he can be covered for on D (with guys like Smart, Bradley, Crowder, Rozier he will be) then he's going to be an effective player.


Fit matters for all players and it is all players job to make themselves fit. IT is certainly a good fit on Boston and might not have the same impact elsewhere however, Boston is where he is and i think it pretty silly to vote for a guy like Love over him b/c if the poor guy has to play with Bron and he would have big #s

6man
09-05-2016, 09:18 PM
Green couldn't even get clock on team USA and when he did it was terrible. He's not a top 6 player. He fits his teams system well but put him on a team where he's the first option and he'll struggle.

tredigs
09-05-2016, 09:33 PM
Green couldn't even get clock on team USA and when he did it was terrible. He's not a top 6 player. He fits his teams system well but put him on a team where he's the first option and he'll struggle.
Lol - was waiting for this mention. Team USA is politics, period. Melo had no business on the court, but he's an elder statesmen and obviously Coach K had to placate him. Just overall that team was ran terribly. And again with the ridiculous mention of him as a "first option". Neither was Bill Russell.

I think I proved in droves why he is obviously a top-10 player, which nobody seems to be able to rebuttal with anything but vague/irrelevant hypotheticals (or simply ignore all together ie my last comment highlighting his dominance with Curry out of the lineup for 2.5 weeks in the playoffs).

Shammyguy3
09-05-2016, 09:44 PM
Completely agree with you tredigs, i love Green and hope he stays with GSW and keeps being a monster defensively like Rodman but with infinitely times the offensive game

Shammyguy3
09-05-2016, 09:46 PM
btw 27th thread is up!

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?913934-27th-Best-Player-in-the-NBA

6man
09-05-2016, 09:59 PM
Lol - was waiting for this mention. Team USA is politics, period. Melo had no business on the court, but he's an elder statesmen and obviously Coach K had to placate him. Just overall that team was ran terribly. And again with the ridiculous mention of him as a "first option". Neither was Bill Russell.

I think I proved in droves why he is obviously a top-10 player, which nobody seems to be able to rebuttal with anything but vague/irrelevant hypotheticals (or simply ignore all together ie my last comment highlighting his dominance with Curry out of the lineup for 2.5 weeks in the playoffs).

The 6th best player in the league is getting clock on team USA, politics or not. Especially when you factor in the legit superstars not playing this summer. The team isn't ran terribly Green just looked terrible every time he stepped on the court. I guess Barnes didn't get clock because of politics too.

FlashBolt
09-11-2016, 11:30 PM
Why would any team stick Draymond as a "first option". His game is about being an incredible swiss army knife on both sides of the ball, and especially so defensively. He's the guy who can take zero shots in a game and still have massive impact. It's why he's always at the top of RPM/VORP leaderboards. I can't think of a team you could put him on that he would not tremendously improve. Frankly 10 is probably too low for Draymond, but since he isn't a scorer and also people just don't like him, it make sense for a public poll.

It's hypothetical, bud. Never said he should or a team would. Draymond's game is of a supportive role. Nothing wrong with that but his productivity and effectiveness plummets if you are relying on him to carry your team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shammyguy3
09-12-2016, 12:13 AM
It's hypothetical, bud. Never said he should or a team would. Draymond's game is of a supportive role. Nothing wrong with that but his productivity and effectiveness plummets if you are relying on him to carry your team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

but Green does carry the team, just not in scoring.

I feel that everyone assumes leading a team, simply means scoring the most points. That's not true. Ben Wallace was arguably the leader of the Pistons because of his defense and rebounding.

Now, Draymond Green is not the leader of the Warriors. Curry is just a much better player. However, that doesn't mean that Green couldn't carry other teams. He would simply do it by not having to take 20 shots a game.

FlashBolt
09-12-2016, 11:16 AM
but Green does carry the team, just not in scoring.

I feel that everyone assumes leading a team, simply means scoring the most points. That's not true. Ben Wallace was arguably the leader of the Pistons because of his defense and rebounding.

Now, Draymond Green is not the leader of the Warriors. Curry is just a much better player. However, that doesn't mean that Green couldn't carry other teams. He would simply do it by not having to take 20 shots a game.

He was rather MIA for the Finals outside one or two games, though. So I don't think you can rely on him to carry a team. Curry is a much better option but he also didn't do well -- which is why despite Warriors having a better roster and being favorites, they lost.

tredigs
09-12-2016, 02:17 PM
He was rather MIA for the Finals outside one or two games, though. So I don't think you can rely on him to carry a team. Curry is a much better option but he also didn't do well -- which is why despite Warriors having a better roster and being favorites, they lost.

Lol "rather MIA" but he averaged 17/10/6 on a 62% TS with >1 steals/blocks. Not exactly the line you'd expect to see from a comment like yours I'd say. His biggest problem is his ability to reel himself in, and had he had more composure and not been ejected for G5, the Warriors very likely have another ring on their fingers.

And I've already outlined his dominance without Curry on the court in the playoffs (19/10/8 on a 65% TS with 1.5stl 2.3 blk.). #8 in RPM 2 years ago. #2 in RPM last season. OK production I'd say?

FlashBolt
09-12-2016, 03:18 PM
Lol "rather MIA" but he averaged 17/10/6 on a 62% TS with >1 steals/blocks. Not exactly the line you'd expect to see from a comment like yours I'd say. His biggest problem is his ability to reel himself in, and had he had more composure and not been ejected for G5, the Warriors very likely have another ring on their fingers.

And I've already outlined his dominance without Curry on the court in the playoffs (19/10/8 on a 65% TS with 1.5stl 2.3 blk.). #8 in RPM 2 years ago. #2 in RPM last season. OK production I'd say?

You're right. That's good enough to carry a team as a 1st option. Proves my case that the Warriors just choked more than I believe since Green being as great as you say still couldn't take out LeBron+Kyrie with the help of the Splash Bros.

tredigs
09-12-2016, 03:32 PM
You're right. That's good enough to carry a team as a 1st option. Proves my case that the Warriors just choked more than I believe since Green being as great as you say still couldn't take out LeBron+Kyrie with the help of the Splash Bros.

Lol they played a championship-level team and lost dude. So did everyone else in the NBA.

You and many others still fail to grasp the concept of being a teams best player and being a teams first option. He would not be the first option on virtually any team in the NBA, but he would most definitely be the best player and leader of MANY teams in the NBA. His stats and accolades back that up in droves.