PDA

View Full Version : Does Curry Make players better?



JasonJohnHorn
12-04-2016, 10:30 PM
The best measure of true greatness is being able to make players around you better.

CP3 does this.

Nash and Duncan did this.

Stockton, Magic, Bird, and Jordan did this.

And one of the knocks on Kobe and LBJ is that they don't/didn't do this, or at least not to the degree that others have.

With Curry, it has been hard to gauge this largely because the players who have gotten better around him, Barnes, Klay, and Dray, have done some as Curry also got better and their career arc simply follow the kind of improvement you would see in burgeoning all-stars their age.

This season, though, has given us an opportunity to see whether playing with Curry can improve a player.


KD, who has already posted several of the best seasons I've seen in 25-years of watching basketball, is currently posting career highs in FG% and 3pt%, and and his assists are hovering around his and career high but with a career low in turnovers. He's also got career highs in rebounds, steals, and blocks, but that has little to do with what other players on the court are doing.


Iggy, in his first three seasons with Curry, helped to raise his career average in FG% and 3PT% and has also seen his lowest turnover rates with Curry. This year he has dipped a bit, but that is to be expected with age.

Bogut posted his two best FG% with Curry (both over .600, and the only times he's posted over .600 in his career), and he posted his best assist numbers (nearly double his per36 rate with the Bucks) and and nearly doubled his assist-to-turnover ratio with the Bucks, and this after two years of decline and a battle with an injury, when most players would begin to regress. This season, his FG% has dropped by nearly 15%! His assists per36 are down, and his turnovers per36 are up!


Barnes, on the other hand, who has left Curry's side, has seen a career low in 3pt percentages. His 2pt% is his lowest in three seasons and second lowest of his career. His assists are down despite an increase in minutes and opportunities with the ball, his rebounds are at their second lowest per36 rate in his career. Turnovers, though only slightly higher (per36) than the last two seasons are also higher while assists are lower.


This sounds like a strong case, but the wrench in the argument is that this might very well be the 'system', or the improvement might be the result of a team effort, or even more specifically as a result of Draymond Green's ability to make plays (he has been leading the team in assists the last two seasons).

So... does Curry make players better? Is it the system? The coaching? Dray? Or all of these above?

europagnpilgrim
12-04-2016, 11:22 PM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

Scoots
12-05-2016, 01:00 AM
Curry's gravity makes things easier on his teammates and his unselfishness certainly has an effect on Kerr's ability to install and make that offense go. So yeah, Curry helps his teammates games ... but it's Draymond that makes the engine go.

aman_13
12-05-2016, 01:29 AM
The best measure of true greatness is being able to make players around you better.

CP3 does this.

Nash and Duncan did this.

Stockton, Magic, Bird, and Jordan did this.

And one of the knocks on Kobe and LBJ is that they don't/didn't do this, or at least not to the degree that others have.

With Curry, it has been hard to gauge this largely because the players who have gotten better around him, Barnes, Klay, and Dray, have done some as Curry also got better and their career arc simply follow the kind of improvement you would see in burgeoning all-stars their age.

This season, though, has given us an opportunity to see whether playing with Curry can improve a player.


KD, who has already posted several of the best seasons I've seen in 25-years of watching basketball, is currently posting career highs in FG% and 3pt%, and and his assists are hovering around his and career high but with a career low in turnovers. He's also got career highs in rebounds, steals, and blocks, but that has little to do with what other players on the court are doing.


Iggy, in his first three seasons with Curry, helped to raise his career average in FG% and 3PT% and has also seen his lowest turnover rates with Curry. This year he has dipped a bit, but that is to be expected with age.

Bogut posted his two best FG% with Curry (both over .600, and the only times he's posted over .600 in his career), and he posted his best assist numbers (nearly double his per36 rate with the Bucks) and and nearly doubled his assist-to-turnover ratio with the Bucks, and this after two years of decline and a battle with an injury, when most players would begin to regress. This season, his FG% has dropped by nearly 15%! His assists per36 are down, and his turnovers per36 are up!


Barnes, on the other hand, who has left Curry's side, has seen a career low in 3pt percentages. His 2pt% is his lowest in three seasons and second lowest of his career. His assists are down despite an increase in minutes and opportunities with the ball, his rebounds are at their second lowest per36 rate in his career. Turnovers, though only slightly higher (per36) than the last two seasons are also higher while assists are lower.


This sounds like a strong case, but the wrench in the argument is that this might very well be the 'system', or the improvement might be the result of a team effort, or even more specifically as a result of Draymond Green's ability to make plays (he has been leading the team in assists the last two seasons).

So... does Curry make players better? Is it the system? The coaching? Dray? Or all of these above?

Yes, Curry makes his teammates better. It's quiet obvious.

Jeffy25
12-05-2016, 02:01 AM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

This

Scoots
12-05-2016, 08:25 AM
I guess you could say that "better" is a measure of results, and "easier" is a measure of effort. By results, yes, Curry makes his teammates better because their results are better than without him.

warfelg
12-05-2016, 08:58 AM
Curry's gravity makes things easier on his teammates and his unselfishness certainly has an effect on Kerr's ability to install and make that offense go. So yeah, Curry helps his teammates games ... but it's Draymond that makes the engine go.


I guess you could say that "better" is a measure of results, and "easier" is a measure of effort. By results, yes, Curry makes his teammates better because their results are better than without him.

Yes to both of these.

The thing with Curry IMO that makes him so good and helps his teammates so much is all 5 players have to 100% be aware of where he is at all times. Such a good handle, so good at passing, can shoot from anywhere, can pull up shoot, shoot off dribble, catch and shoot, dribble drive, pick and roll....I mean, you have to be ready for all of that and even when he doesn't have the ball you have to be ready for him. So when you are so focused on that singular thing, you tend to lose track of other guys on the court.

He's not a make players around him better like CP3 (because of his passing). I akin Curry's way of making players around him 'better' to the same way that LeBron does. Because I think with CP3, if you did the ole "Nash Drill" to him (basically take away all the passing lanes and let him light you up) I'm not 100% sure the Clippers can win. But if you tried something like that with Curry....the Dubs can 100% still in that game.

The one place I slightly disagree with you...Draymond being the engine that makes it go. I think Draymond is the guy that gives you the flexibility to make things interesting. The times I think the Dubs are the most dangerous is when Livingston and or Iggy are on the court and playing the primary ball handler role. Takes Curry off ball, Klay/Durant 2nd off. So now you focus on Igyy/Livingston because they have the ball, you focus on Curry, next thing you know....Klay or Durant is standing WIDE ****ING OPEN. And there's nothing you can do about it.

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 11:37 AM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

bingo.

The fact is, playing alongside Curry, makes anyone's life easier, because they will have more freedom. I have literally seen defenses leave Klay WIDE OPEN, one of the greatest shooters in the game, on the weak side, to chase Curry the other direction 28 feet from the rim. That doesn't make Klay better, it makes him open..

last I checked, wide open shots tend to go in more than contested shots.

KnicksorBust
12-05-2016, 12:20 PM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

This post is basically winning the thread. I actually would make a distinction with the Bulls example and say Jordan made Pippen better but other than that I completely agree.

KnicksorBust
12-05-2016, 12:22 PM
Curry has helped Draymond Green more than the other way around.

koreancabbage
12-05-2016, 12:30 PM
the post from europagnpilgrim is basically end all.

gets players open but their skill and talent are already there. Even Jordan didn't make his players better. Or Lebron. They are just open, and their skills and talent already exist. Making it easier for other players is probably the best way to describe these superstar players.

koreancabbage
12-05-2016, 12:31 PM
Curry has helped Draymond Green more than the other way around.

Draymond is super talented. lets just begin with that. Just gets more wide open because of Curry and others.

Chronz
12-05-2016, 12:36 PM
Yes he does, prolly better than anyone since Shaq IMO.

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 12:36 PM
Curry has helped Draymond Green more than the other way around.

Draymond, to me, is not a player that you could feature as a #1 option, and expect to win a lot of games. So yes, his freedom offensively, and freedom to not worry about offense for long stretches of time and primarily be a defender, enhances his game a ton.

PowerHouse
12-05-2016, 12:39 PM
I actually would make a distinction with the Bulls example and say Jordan made Pippen better but other than that I completely agree.

Except for the fact that Pippen's PER and VORP went up during MJs absence, then took a drop again once he returned.

KnicksorBust
12-05-2016, 12:45 PM
Draymond is super talented. lets just begin with that. Just gets more wide open because of Curry and others.

No doubt. Defensively he is special and offensively he is versatile. I think he found the perfect situation though. He would not be the same player offensively on another team. His production reminds me a little bit of Boris Diaw. Good unselfish passers. Can shoot a little bit.

Curry was going to dominate the league no matter where he went. Green is showing his potential because he plays with Curry. I also think that's why he's taking longer to adjust to Durant.

Scoots
12-05-2016, 12:53 PM
Don't have time right now to look ... but in the last 3 years what is the Warriors record with Draymond and without Curry vs the other way around.

Curry is driven to win games ... but his drive is quiet and internal. He doesn't tell people how to play or where they should be on the floor. He doesn't change other people's attitudes when things are going wrong other than by hitting baskets. Draymond is the vocal, emotional, defensive, AND offensive leader on the Warriors despite being the least capable scorer on the team. Dray isn't ANYWHERE near as good as Curry is, and there is no way I'd choose Dray over Steph if it came to that ... but Dray is absolutely critical to the Warriors beyond "the system".

KnicksorBust
12-05-2016, 12:53 PM
Except for the fact that Pippen's PER and VORP went up during MJs absence, then took a drop again once he returned.

I agree with your argument but I'm looking at it from a different perspective. Pippen never would have become the player that almost won an MVP and almost led a team to the Finals if he hadn't played his career with Michael Jordan as his teammate.

koreancabbage
12-05-2016, 01:46 PM
I agree with your argument but I'm looking at it from a different perspective. Pippen never would have become the player that almost won an MVP and almost led a team to the Finals if he hadn't played his career with Michael Jordan as his teammate.

maybe. we'll never know TBH. Pippen was still a very great player in his own right. I don't think Jordan helped him become one of better players in the history of the NBA but i think it helped Pippen accelerate his confidence because he had Jordan to fall back on in the Jordan-Pippen days. it did however get him rings. lol

imho Pippen was always going to be one of the best players (in his days) in the league with or without Jordan.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 02:25 PM
bingo.

The fact is, playing alongside Curry, makes anyone's life easier, because they will have more freedom. I have literally seen defenses leave Klay WIDE OPEN, one of the greatest shooters in the game, on the weak side, to chase Curry the other direction 28 feet from the rim. That doesn't make Klay better, it makes him open..

last I checked, wide open shots tend to go in more than contested shots.

its more of a factor playing with Curry since his mvp winning, it wasn't like that prior or maybe he was just injured too much to show it for long stretches

of course it makes him open so he could hit a easy/wide open bucket, making the game easier not making Klay a better shooter because he is a five star sniper off top, same as KD and same as Curry but its always ignorance in the media spewing the phrase 'he makes his teammates better' and I am like that's poppycock, Nash didn't make Amare/Marion/Johnson better, the system maximized the strengths of those players but they could play ball, point blank period but Nash was the qb of the system and we all know just like the nfl the qb gets the glory

last I checked it is also because its a reason why Kerr has like the highest 3pt pct in a season since he was being spoon fed by Jordan/Bulls system and knocking down wide open shots, basketball is pretty basic and simple until the other jibberish starts to infiltrate and become a fad or trendy

ManRam
12-05-2016, 02:43 PM
I don't really get how this is a question....unless you think the only way to "make players better" is to rack up 12 assists a game.

I think the first response here was great.

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 02:52 PM
its more of a factor playing with Curry since his mvp winning, it wasn't like that prior or maybe he was just injured too much to show it for long stretches

of course it makes him open so he could hit a easy/wide open bucket, making the game easier not making Klay a better shooter because he is a five star sniper off top, same as KD and same as Curry but its always ignorance in the media spewing the phrase 'he makes his teammates better' and I am like that's poppycock, Nash didn't make Amare/Marion/Johnson better, the system maximized the strengths of those players but they could play ball, point blank period but Nash was the qb of the system and we all know just like the nfl the qb gets the glory

last I checked it is also because its a reason why Kerr has like the highest 3pt pct in a season since he was being spoon fed by Jordan/Bulls system and knocking down wide open shots, basketball is pretty basic and simple until the other jibberish starts to infiltrate and become a fad or trendy

I actually think Nash did make Amare better, because of his absolute elite control of the PnR. Give Amare a PG who can't pass/shoot like that, and he isn't as good, impact wise. Same could be said of Amare making Nash better, any PG would love to have a finisher who can catch tough pocket passes, dunk in traffic, or hit the midrange jumper all night.

There are certain players that are so good at scoring/passing/controlling offense, they do make players better contributors than they are under normal circumstances. Curry just being an all world shooter helps his teammates, but he isn't directly as responsible as someone feeding them the rock at the exact right time numerous times a game.

tredigs
12-05-2016, 03:06 PM
I actually think Nash did make Amare better, because of his absolute elite control of the PnR. Give Amare a PG who can't pass/shoot like that, and he isn't as good, impact wise. Same could be said of Amare making Nash better, any PG would love to have a finisher who can catch tough pocket passes, dunk in traffic, or hit the midrange jumper all night.

There are certain players that are so good at scoring/passing/controlling offense, they do make players better contributors than they are under normal circumstances. Curry just being an all world shooter helps his teammates, but he isn't directly as responsible as someone feeding them the rock at the exact right time numerous times a game.
Agree with you on the Nash take.

The difference between Curry and another all world shooter like say Korver or even Thompson, is that Curry has the sub skill-sets that carry over to his teammates benefit; ball handling, vision, passing ability and unselfishness. That's why Curry can get Klay so absurdly open time and time again despite that being the last thing a team would ever want to do, while Klay is really not willing and/or capable of doing the same for his teammates.

So while I agree with the poster saying that it's more about making the game "easier" on your teammates, I think that is mostly a semantics argument. If the game is easier for you and you are producing a higher value for your team, then you are 'better' than how you would perform in an alternative situation. Sometimes this could be due mainly to a coach giving you the confidence and system to perform at your highest level (Nick Young in LA this year comes to mind), and sometimes it can just be that one special player who makes life better for you (and the rest of the team) on the court.

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 03:09 PM
The difference between Curry and another all world shooter like say Korver or even Thompson, is that Curry has the sub skill-sets that carry over to his teammates benefit; ball handling, vision, passing ability and unselfishness. That's why Curry can get Klay so absurdly open time and time again despite that being the last thing a team would ever want to do, while Klay is really not willing and/or capable of doing the same for his teammates.

So while I agree with the poster saying that it's more about making the game "easier" on your teammates, I think that is mostly a semantics argument. If the game is easier for you and you are producing a higher value for your team, then you are 'better' than how you would perform in an alternative situation. Sometimes this could be due mainly to a coach giving you the confidence and system to perform at your highest level (Nick Young in LA this year comes to mind), and sometimes it can just be that one special player who makes life better for you (and the rest of the team) on the court.

if you look at my first post, I kind of said that. Curry just garners SO much attention, it makes any teammate he has, have an easiler life on offense. So in that respect, he isn't making them better per say (even though they are better haha), but he is giving them better opportunities than they would have under normal circumstances. Like, I have never seen a defense chase a guy around a pick so hard, 29 feet from the rim, and ignore one of the top 5 shooters in the game on the other side because they are so scared of a player that far from the rim, off the dribble.

So yes, in that respect, Curry, by accident, makes his teammates better, because he just takes so much pressure off of them.

But by that rational, simply having better teammates, typically makes a player "better", right?

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 03:12 PM
I think "makes better" needs context. Like, CP3 turned Doug West from a whatever player into an all star. Then we have players who just command so much attention, they free up teammates just by being there. Those are 2 different types..

Vee-Rex
12-05-2016, 03:44 PM
Curry's gravity is simply incredible. To answer the OP: I'd say definitely yes.

I do wonder, though... how much of it could be negated if the defense was more disciplined and/or smarter? Is it better to have a late-contested Curry 3 or a wide open Klay? The defense kills itself sometimes by over-extending too much. I feel like sometimes defenses could do better.

And I don't mean that with just Curry either. I see it with LeBron all the time - they over-collapse. Man, I can't begin to count how much I've seen Frye or Love or JR light it up with open 3-point shots and the defense STILL collapses on LeBron and he KEEPS feeding the open man. Sometimes he's clearly not even looking to shoot and dishes it out anyway.

I'd like to think that the defenses just struggle to gauge when that pass is coming and how fast it's coming, rather than just being stupid and not adjusting to it.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:06 PM
I actually think Nash did make Amare better, because of his absolute elite control of the PnR. Give Amare a PG who can't pass/shoot like that, and he isn't as good, impact wise. Same could be said of Amare making Nash better, any PG would love to have a finisher who can catch tough pocket passes, dunk in traffic, or hit the midrange jumper all night.

There are certain players that are so good at scoring/passing/controlling offense, they do make players better contributors than they are under normal circumstances. Curry just being an all world shooter helps his teammates, but he isn't directly as responsible as someone feeding them the rock at the exact right time numerous times a game.

They were a dynamic tandem that went well with that run n gun/PnR structure, but Nash was in a similar talent pool with Dallas and did his thing it was just Mike D system is fun and pretty much every true baller would love to be in and excel in for most part

when I say he didn't make him better is because Amare went to NYC and when healthy was a mvp candidate no Nash and regardless of the sample size he was legit as Nash showed with no Amare he was mvp worthy as well, and Nash was Nash in Dallas with Dirk and post- Amare, they just made for a dynamic duo but could do what they did without the other

a system or certain few players can make others look better as contributors by what you stated(scoring/passing/controlling O) but it doesn't make them actually better nba players because it would be clear as day as to why those players are doing what they do based on who they are playing with if they are just role specialist type players, all star/nba caliber are in the same boat its just they are on a diff. level and make the team as a whole better w-l wise, not each other on solo level

Shaq made the game easier for D Scott/Anderson/Fisher/Horry by opening up the 3's that they were already capable of hitting spot up wise but it wasn't in them to hit 3's they had to create with ball in their hands, while Penny/Kobe/Wade were capable of creating shots and breaking down a defense to compliment interior force that Shaq was and it was easier for those guys because you had to pay attention to Shaq but also to them which in turn helped Shaq, making it easier for all parties involved, team work make the dream work

Curry is a all world 3pt shooter indeed, half or more of his fg attempts are 3's each game for the most part

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 04:12 PM
They were a dynamic tandem that went well with that run n gun/PnR structure, but Nash was in a similar talent pool with Dallas and did his thing it was just Mike D system is fun and pretty much every true baller would love to be in and excel in for most part

when I say he didn't make him better is because Amare went to NYC and when healthy was a mvp candidate no Nash and regardless of the sample size he was legit as Nash showed with no Amare he was mvp worthy as well, and Nash was Nash in Dallas with Dirk and post- Amare, they just made for a dynamic duo but could do what they did without the other

a system or certain few players can make others look better as contributors by what you stated(scoring/passing/controlling O) but it doesn't make them actually better nba players because it would be clear as day as to why those players are doing what they do based on who they are playing with if they are just role specialist type players, all star/nba caliber are in the same boat its just they are on a diff. level and make the team as a whole better w-l wise, not each other on solo level

Shaq made the game easier for D Scott/Anderson/Fisher/Horry by opening up the 3's that they were already capable of hitting spot up wise but it wasn't in them to hit 3's they had to create with ball in their hands, while Penny/Kobe/Wade were capable of creating shots and breaking down a defense to compliment interior force that Shaq was and it was easier for those guys because you had to pay attention to Shaq but also to them which in turn helped Shaq, making it easier for all parties involved, team work make the dream work

Curry is a all world 3pt shooter indeed, half or more of his fg attempts are 3's each game for the most part

I am not disagreeing with you per say, I am more or less saying circumstances can be different. Amare was much more devastating with Nash that at any other time of his career, and vice versa.

Shaq has a Curry effect, in that just being on the court creates such an impact, that others benefit. That isn't the same as a Nash, who while absolutely drew the respect as a shooter, was much more of a shot creator for his teammates. LeBron is the ultimate version of that. He turns role players into huge contributors, with his ability to cave the defense in with the dribble.

aman_13
12-05-2016, 04:13 PM
This is becoming a matter of semantics. If a player is contributing at elite effeciency as a result of unique passing and spacing, he's a better player. Less energy, shot attempts, and ball handling to produce the same level of output makes you better.

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 04:15 PM
This is becoming a matter of semantics. Imo if a player is contributing at elite effeciency as a result of unique passing and spacing, he's a better player. Less energy, shot attempts, and ball handling to produce the same level of output makes you better.

Yep. Which is why I said you need to use context. Is the player better because of better players surrounding them, ie, giving them less pressure? Or are they better because there is now a teammate that can set up his players perfectly?

Just a lot of different ways for one individual to benefit others.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:16 PM
I think "makes better" needs context. Like, CP3 turned Doug West from a whatever player into an all star. Then we have players who just command so much attention, they free up teammates just by being there. Those are 2 different types..

It makes sense if West never ever sniffed or came close again to being a all star post-CP3 but he was a major factor on those Pacer squads

The Answer got Snow/Mckie a combined 80mill in contract money and they were the same avg. players before and after, and Mckie got a 6th man of the year trophy out of it prior to that at 11.7ppg

I think Mckie/West made the most out of the opportunity of playing with a talent like CP3/The Answer, its like somebody had to do something and they just stepped up to the plate the most since those players commanded attention and could pass though The Answer was known more scoring and CP3 for passing

did you mean David West? if not then disregard my comment because I don't remember a Doug West

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 04:17 PM
It makes sense if West never ever sniffed or came close again to being a all star post-CP3 but he was a major factor on those Pacer squads

The Answer got Snow/Mckie a combined 80mill in contract money and they were the same avg. players before and after, and Mckie got a 6th man of the year trophy out of it prior to that at 11.7ppg

I think Mckie/West made the most out of the opportunity of playing with a talent like CP3/The Answer, its like somebody had to do something and they just stepped up to the plate the most since those players commanded attention and could pass though The Answer was known more scoring and CP3 for passing

did you mean David West? if not then disregard my comment because I don't remember a Doug West

David West, yes. It's the Wolves fan in me haha. Doug West was our best player back in the early 90s

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:22 PM
This is becoming a matter of semantics. If a player is contributing at elite effeciency as a result of unique passing and spacing, he's a better player. Less energy, shot attempts, and ball handling to produce the same level of output makes you better.

it keeps you fresher not better

KD is the same damn player he was in OKC as he is now, he never could shoot 7-9fg attempts in OKC and they be even close in the game to win, he can do that now with Dubs but it doesn't make him better player, fresher indeed since he is not exerting himself, same with Lebron moving to Miami, same with CP3 going to Clippers, and so on and on

efficiency and passing and spacing all determines the overall talent on your team, Lebron had way better spacing/efficiency playing with Miami because of the overall talent and team structure top to bottom, Cavs he had Gibson and then Mo Will

Lebron contributed regardless and was one of the top players in the nba soon as he entered and finished his rookie campaign

FlashBolt
12-05-2016, 04:22 PM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

Yes, a player can make someone better. Stephen Curry's presence alone can make his team want to work harder and become a better player. Whereas if you're stuck on some lame team, you probably wouldn't care as much.

As for the question, it's obvious... If you're not making your teammates better, you probably aren't great enough. That's an issue I have with Cousins. I think he's a very good player but he's not great enough to elevate those around him. That's not a knock on Cousins but certain players just don't have the capabilities of doing so.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:24 PM
David West, yes. It's the Wolves fan in me haha. Doug West was our best player back in the early 90s

No problem

IKnowHoops
12-05-2016, 04:27 PM
Agree with you on the Nash take.

The difference between Curry and another all world shooter like say Korver or even Thompson, is that Curry has the sub skill-sets that carry over to his teammates benefit; ball handling, vision, passing ability and unselfishness. That's why Curry can get Klay so absurdly open time and time again despite that being the last thing a team would ever want to do, while Klay is really not willing and/or capable of doing the same for his teammates.

So while I agree with the poster saying that it's more about making the game "easier" on your teammates, I think that is mostly a semantics argument. If the game is easier for you and you are producing a higher value for your team, then you are 'better' than how you would perform in an alternative situation. Sometimes this could be due mainly to a coach giving you the confidence and system to perform at your highest level (Nick Young in LA this year comes to mind), and sometimes it can just be that one special player who makes life better for you (and the rest of the team) on the court.

100% semantics

IKnowHoops
12-05-2016, 04:28 PM
This is becoming a matter of semantics. If a player is contributing at elite effeciency as a result of unique passing and spacing, he's a better player. Less energy, shot attempts, and ball handling to produce the same level of output makes you better.

Exactly

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:32 PM
Yes, a player can make someone better. Stephen Curry's presence alone can make his team want to work harder and become a better player. Whereas if you're stuck on some lame team, you probably wouldn't care as much.

As for the question, it's obvious... If you're not making your teammates better, you probably aren't great enough. That's an issue I have with Cousins. I think he's a very good player but he's not great enough to elevate those around him. That's not a knock on Cousins but certain players just don't have the capabilities of doing so.

Its so many players who can work harder at what they do and still just be what they are, that's the thing about making average players slightly above average

that's the thing Cousins cant elevate Gay past to what he already is or a Collison or any of the young players drafted but if he went to a team with 2 other all star/nba then you would think Cousins was being held back in Sac town

no body has ever made a player better, they could open up some things on the court for a player but you are who you are, by year 3 you are totally who you are regardless if your team is lame or a legit contender

working hard or having a good work ethic is just that and you can improve on a weakness slightly, something you are born with is a whole diff dynamic and that gift is something hard work cant help or hurt

if you need to make your teammates better then you are probably on a lottery/bottom feed type of squad and need to request a trade, like Cousins should be doing

FlashBolt
12-05-2016, 04:34 PM
Better player =/= more efficient player. On paper, Durant is having the best season of his career. But there isn't a single thing he's doing right now that makes him better than he was three years ago. Just look at the Olympics. Carmelo's performance in the Olympics does not make him a better player. Roles in basketball matter. Korver does not knock down 48% of his threes if he was a first option player. NO WAY IN HELL. This isn't the same as "who's the best scorer" and then we look at PPG vs scoring capabilities. LeBron James in 2009 had a better season than last year statistically but he was a much better player last year than in 2009.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:36 PM
Looking good is not the same as that player being better

Kerr looked good shooting wide open 3's with the Bulls and Spurs, had Kerr been a better player then he would have been able to take the ball and get his own shot or run off screens to catch and shoot

so no the Bulls/Spurs didn't make Kerr a better player they just used him correctly for what he was, a spot up 3pt sniper

Scoots
12-05-2016, 04:37 PM
Curry's gravity is simply incredible. To answer the OP: I'd say definitely yes.

I do wonder, though... how much of it could be negated if the defense was more disciplined and/or smarter? Is it better to have a late-contested Curry 3 or a wide open Klay? The defense kills itself sometimes by over-extending too much. I feel like sometimes defenses could do better.

And I don't mean that with just Curry either. I see it with LeBron all the time - they over-collapse. Man, I can't begin to count how much I've seen Frye or Love or JR light it up with open 3-point shots and the defense STILL collapses on LeBron and he KEEPS feeding the open man. Sometimes he's clearly not even looking to shoot and dishes it out anyway.

I'd like to think that the defenses just struggle to gauge when that pass is coming and how fast it's coming, rather than just being stupid and not adjusting to it.

By the time a player has made it to being a starter in the NBA they have probably been playing organized ball in some form or another for a decade at least ... and all that time they are taught to cover for a teammate on D. That being one step away is close enough. To watch the ball but don't lose your man. Then along comes Curry who starts breaking down the simple rules, then add Klay and then KD, then build an entire offense and team around maximizing that effect ... and just by moving the ball they can use a players carefully honed defensive instincts against them. Very few defensive players are able to fully supress their natural desires and in-grained training. And even the greatest defenders get caught out of position trying to help frequently.

Scoots
12-05-2016, 04:39 PM
This is becoming a matter of semantics. If a player is contributing at elite effeciency as a result of unique passing and spacing, he's a better player. Less energy, shot attempts, and ball handling to produce the same level of output makes you better.

All such discussions are invariably at least part about semantics. But the problem there is that people don't agree on the definitions in the first place ... and will probably never agree in the end.

FlashBolt
12-05-2016, 04:39 PM
Looking good is not the same as that player being better

Kerr looked good shooting wide open 3's with the Bulls and Spurs, had Kerr been a better player then he would have been able to take the ball and get his own shot or run off screens to catch and shoot

so no the Bulls/Spurs didn't make Kerr a better player they just used him correctly for what he was, a spot up 3pt sniper

Don't you think Curry can indirectly make his teammates better by boosting their confidence, though? I don't think Draymond goes through the same level of intensity that has progressed without Curry. Stick him on some team that never utilized him in a winning culture and Draymond might've been eating Cheetos the past three years.

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:41 PM
Better player =/= more efficient player. On paper, Durant is having the best season of his career. But there isn't a single thing he's doing right now that makes him better than he was three years ago. Just look at the Olympics. Carmelo's performance in the Olympics does not make him a better player. Roles in basketball matter. Korver does not knock down 48% of his threes if he was a first option player. NO WAY IN HELL. This isn't the same as "who's the best scorer" and then we look at PPG vs scoring capabilities. LeBron James in 2009 had a better season than last year statistically but he was a much better player last year than in 2009.

on the court KD looks the same but just has a diff. support cast, more better suited for what he does and that's pretty much it

just like when Russ went down and missed that one playoffs KD had to be only option his efficiency went to **** but he was still that damn good so efficiency doesn't equate to a better player, especially if you are the only offensive option on the team that is legit

of course roles in any sport matter, that's why you separate the best and then decipher the rest, KD and Lebron all have roles, it just they carry a bigger usage of the role, they have the star/co-star roles, and the rest are the supporting cast, and its always good to have a super support cast to contend for many titles

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 04:47 PM
Don't you think Curry can indirectly make his teammates better by boosting their confidence, though? I don't think Draymond goes through the same level of intensity that has progressed without Curry. Stick him on some team that never utilized him in a winning culture and Draymond might've been eating Cheetos the past three years.

Confidence is tricky, it comes and goes based on how mentally tough or individually good a player is or thinks he can be and the situations a player is in

self confidence is the key, why get it from another when all should be confident within, its a reason why you are in the nba in the first place, not because of Curry boosting somebody confidence

Draymond played with that same fire/intensity in college without Curry probably while eating Cheetos

Scoots
12-05-2016, 04:53 PM
Looking good is not the same as that player being better

Kerr looked good shooting wide open 3's with the Bulls and Spurs, had Kerr been a better player then he would have been able to take the ball and get his own shot or run off screens to catch and shoot

so no the Bulls/Spurs didn't make Kerr a better player they just used him correctly for what he was, a spot up 3pt sniper

I think it's all things. Average players play better when they are playing for great coaches, in great organizations, with great teammates. Good players sometimes touch on great when they are surrounded by greatness. The difference in great players effects on each other is MUCH harder to judge. I remember people debating if Magic would be as good with Kareem ... but Magic got to answer some of that question in one game in the finals as a rookie. The same question still exists for Pippen.

aman_13
12-05-2016, 04:58 PM
it keeps you fresher not better

KD is the same damn player he was in OKC as he is now, he never could shoot 7-9fg attempts in OKC and they be even close in the game to win, he can do that now with Dubs but it doesn't make him better player, fresher indeed since he is not exerting himself, same with Lebron moving to Miami, same with CP3 going to Clippers, and so on and on

efficiency and passing and spacing all determines the overall talent on your team, Lebron had way better spacing/efficiency playing with Miami because of the overall talent and team structure top to bottom, Cavs he had Gibson and then Mo Will

Lebron contributed regardless and was one of the top players in the nba soon as he entered and finished his rookie campaign

So as Hawkeye has been saying, it depends on context. I can't disagree with anything you are saying but there are different ways of defining "better player".

aman_13
12-05-2016, 05:00 PM
All such discussions are invariably at least part about semantics. But the problem there is that people don't agree on the definitions in the first place ... and will probably never agree in the end.

A great topic for linguists.

tredigs
12-05-2016, 06:29 PM
Think of it more as, "are players 1,2,3-10 producing for their team at a higher level from an efficiency standpoint with or without X player in the game?". If the answer by and large gets a "yes", then it's safe to assume that he's making other players better (or "life on them easier", if you're still stuck on the way the question is posed).

If you've ever played the game this sort of comes intrinsically to you. You know that when you're playing with a great/unselfish point guard, life is easier and you're going to be able to contribute at a higher level because the looks you're seeing are just more open and/or more on point. Whether your box-score numbers go up or down is dependent on a lot of factors and less important to the debate to me. It's really about is the team as a whole playing at a higher level when X player is on the court (and I mean that to say, outside of that player himself simply taking over. IE their efficiency).

Hawkeye15
12-05-2016, 06:44 PM
Think of it more as, "are players 1,2,3-10 producing for their team at a higher level from an efficiency standpoint with or without X player in the game?". If the answer by and large gets a "yes", then it's safe to assume that he's making other players better (or "life on them easier", if you're still stuck on the way the question is posed).

If you've ever played the game this sort of comes intrinsically to you. You know that when you're playing with a great/unselfish point guard, life is easier and you're going to be able to contribute at a higher level because the looks you're seeing are just more open and/or more on point. Whether your box-score numbers go up or down is dependent on a lot of factors and less important to the debate to me. It's really about is the team as a whole playing at a higher level when X player is on the court (and I mean that to say, outside of that player himself simply taking over. IE their efficiency).

Pretty much. To build on this, there are various ways you get "better" because of others. Sometimes it's because you have an amazing offensive minded PG who gets you in the right spots, and finds you at the right time, sometimes it's because you have a dominant big man who collapses the defense just being there, sometimes it's the fact you have the greatest shooter ever on your team, and the defense follows him around in panic at all times, making your life easier.

There are just a lot of ways a guy can make everyone else's life easier. Sometimes, it's just being there...

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 07:03 PM
I think it's all things. Average players play better when they are playing for great coaches, in great organizations, with great teammates. Good players sometimes touch on great when they are surrounded by greatness. The difference in great players effects on each other is MUCH harder to judge. I remember people debating if Magic would be as good with Kareem ... but Magic got to answer some of that question in one game in the finals as a rookie. The same question still exists for Pippen.

Of course its all things but you know a super star/all star/franchise player from others

Average players look better if playing for great teams with coaches who know how to maximize what they do best as a specialist/hustle player but they will still be ZaZa no matter what, Zaza did or looked more active with Dallas but he has to do less with Dubs this year but he is still that average player but he will grab a rebound and get active down low which he always was, Dubs situation is not making him better or really look better unless you count the w-l column which he really has no impact to, they could plug McGee in there and still be the same or slightly better since he is more athletic and can challenge a shot in the paint more effective

Magic answered that question for you because he wanted no parts of Chicago if they had won the coin toss to see who drafted first, he said out his mouth he wanted Kareem/Lakers because he knew he could win immediately as he did, that one game doesn't justify it much because he did have Kareem for the duration of that playoff run if I am not mistaken

Pippen got to Bulls and they were pushing Pistons to 7 games, prior to that Jordan was struggling getting out of the 1st round, Pippen is justified also, he was a tremendous all around player who did what the team needed, they all took a back seat to Jordan scoring wise, Jordan was the better scorer but he let it be known to his mates that he was getting his shots/pts so like true smart teammates they all took a back seat and did other things to help that team succeed plus Pipp would get his 18-20ppg which helped Jordan mightily

Klay said he wasn't sacrificing nothing when KD arrived and I really couldn't blame him because he was to some the best SG in the league(or Harden) and he has self confidence to do what he does no matter the situation and its showing as he hasn't changed much besides knowing he has to force a little bit because he may not get the ball back as he did last season

the effect great players have is not hard to judge if playing with teams who are not even really contenders but they lift that team to that level(impact wise), its just been so far and few because most of the title winners carry a big 3 who are all capable of dominating at what they do, like Jordan was the dominant scorer-defender/defense planned for him, Pippen was the all around fill up the stat sheet/top notch defender and Grant/Cartwright were the interior tough defender and they had the snipers around with top flight coach, then the second 3peat had Rodman who took over the Grant/Cartwright role and Kukoc added a new bench scorer/spot starter dimension and was claimed by many to be the best Europe player at that time and Harper brought defense and a finisher, even though he wasn't what he used to be he was once upon a time a damn good athlete/scorer

Lebron/The Answer/Dream are a few examples of great players effect on a cast that wasn't really built to make a deep playoff push but Dream actually won a title while the other two just got to the ship round but were over matched by teams who had a big 3(Shaq was a big two in one player back then)

europagnpilgrim
12-05-2016, 07:20 PM
Pretty much. To build on this, there are various ways you get "better" because of others. Sometimes it's because you have an amazing offensive minded PG who gets you in the right spots, and finds you at the right time, sometimes it's because you have a dominant big man who collapses the defense just being there, sometimes it's the fact you have the greatest shooter ever on your team, and the defense follows him around in panic at all times, making your life easier.

There are just a lot of ways a guy can make everyone else's life easier. Sometimes, it's just being there...

Lets say the PG gets players in the right spots but those players couldn't hit a 15ft jumper and only were lay up dunk type players, is that making them better? like Nash/CP3 would never make a B Wallace better on offense but they could give him a few more lob dunks a game to push his average to 10ppg, so would that make Wallace better? I don't think so but he would have benefited from playing with Nash/CP3/The Answer since those players can get in the lane and break a defense down

those amazing PG's have to have the personnel also or they will end up jacking shots just to stay in the game or just go home 1st round or don't make the playoffs at all

its all about making it easier, that's what all true title contenders or players who want to make deep postseason runs know its about

Lebron aint no dummy, its a reason why he took his talents to South Beach, same as KD taking his to the Bay Area, same as CP3 getting shipped to L.A.

Its hard to be a solo act/high usage player, Russ is getting his triple double game on like crazy but nobody picked OKC to be a contender to win the West before the season started but when KD was there they always had a punchers chance and prior to Dubs winning the title they were always 1a/2nd to the Spurs to come out the West, Russ has it harder now and it will show in his fg pct/deep playoff runs, regress mode that is

KD has it easier and it shows itself in spades

Scoots
12-05-2016, 08:16 PM
Of course its all things but you know a super star/all star/franchise player from others

Average players look better if playing for great teams with coaches who know how to maximize what they do best as a specialist/hustle player but they will still be ZaZa no matter what, Zaza did or looked more active with Dallas but he has to do less with Dubs this year but he is still that average player but he will grab a rebound and get active down low which he always was, Dubs situation is not making him better or really look better unless you count the w-l column which he really has no impact to, they could plug McGee in there and still be the same or slightly better since he is more athletic and can challenge a shot in the paint more effective

Magic answered that question for you because he wanted no parts of Chicago if they had won the coin toss to see who drafted first, he said out his mouth he wanted Kareem/Lakers because he knew he could win immediately as he did, that one game doesn't justify it much because he did have Kareem for the duration of that playoff run if I am not mistaken

Pippen got to Bulls and they were pushing Pistons to 7 games, prior to that Jordan was struggling getting out of the 1st round, Pippen is justified also, he was a tremendous all around player who did what the team needed, they all took a back seat to Jordan scoring wise, Jordan was the better scorer but he let it be known to his mates that he was getting his shots/pts so like true smart teammates they all took a back seat and did other things to help that team succeed plus Pipp would get his 18-20ppg which helped Jordan mightily

Klay said he wasn't sacrificing nothing when KD arrived and I really couldn't blame him because he was to some the best SG in the league(or Harden) and he has self confidence to do what he does no matter the situation and its showing as he hasn't changed much besides knowing he has to force a little bit because he may not get the ball back as he did last season

the effect great players have is not hard to judge if playing with teams who are not even really contenders but they lift that team to that level(impact wise), its just been so far and few because most of the title winners carry a big 3 who are all capable of dominating at what they do, like Jordan was the dominant scorer-defender/defense planned for him, Pippen was the all around fill up the stat sheet/top notch defender and Grant/Cartwright were the interior tough defender and they had the snipers around with top flight coach, then the second 3peat had Rodman who took over the Grant/Cartwright role and Kukoc added a new bench scorer/spot starter dimension and was claimed by many to be the best Europe player at that time and Harper brought defense and a finisher, even though he wasn't what he used to be he was once upon a time a damn good athlete/scorer

Lebron/The Answer/Dream are a few examples of great players effect on a cast that wasn't really built to make a deep playoff push but Dream actually won a title while the other two just got to the ship round but were over matched by teams who had a big 3(Shaq was a big two in one player back then)

I'm not going to parse all that up ...

Average players CAN look better when playing on a great team ... but sometimes they don't fit the team structure and thus can't rise to the occasion. It's never EVERY play who is "made better" when the talk is about making teammates better.

"Magic answered that question for you because he wanted no parts of Chicago" ... uh, no. As I said Magic answered SOME of the question with a superstar performance without Kareem as a rookie.

I don't question Pippen, but a lot still do (certainly a lot of Pistons fans do :) ).

Klay usually starts slow, we don't know ... we don't know what his game will look like at the end of the year yet, just like we don't know what KD and Curry will look like at the end of the year. This year Klay is playing different in that he's handling more, moving the ball more, shooting better in the mid-range. Klay's changed some ... but he's still changing.

How can you tell the effect of great players other than by speculating. "He's doing more because the guys he's playing with are worse" is hardly scientific ... but there are certainly anecdotes to support pretty much every position you'd care to support.

europagnpilgrim
12-06-2016, 12:25 AM
So as Hawkeye has been saying, it depends on context. I can't disagree with anything you are saying but there are different ways of defining "better player".


Its what I have been saying, everything depends on situations/rosters/coaching/ownership committed to winning big and what those players are capable of doing on a individual level

I am not trying to be right or wrong or get people to agree or not its just playing the game on any level requires the same, its like how Duke and Kentucky and UCLA and a few others get the cream of the crop top talent so they are more likely to be in the mix for Final Four/titles and you also get a Cinderella here and there which makes college ball more fascinating than the NBA, it goes for the best/top HS teams and also along with the best nba teams, they usually carry the best players at what they do to be a collective force/contender

its like there is no way The Answer can wait until 12yrs into his career to be his most efficient in his career unless you look at who was his mate was in Melo who happen to be the best individual player he ever played with, now imagine if he had Melo in his first few years in the league

T Parker and Ginobili weren't better players because of Duncan nor did they make Duncan better, Parker improved his mid range game but he had that speed/quickness/attack the paint ability off top, as did Ginobili who was a creator/playmaker/bulldog competitor, Bowen improved his corner 3pt shot but he was always a bulldog/hustle type player on defense, not because Duncan made him better but they all benefited from playing with arguably the best PF to ever do it and Duncan benefited from having stability coach/ownership wise/team players and they won 5 titles in like 18-20years and were in contention for pretty much all those years outside a couple seasons

of course its diff. ways to define a better player because the so called experts think of ways to make up a whole bunch of analytical stuff to dismiss certain players while raising up others but the play on the court/ game film never lies, and also playing the game yourself helps a lot also, which I have done and would know who can truly carry a team and those who look better than they actually are by playing with dominant players and then getting over paid and not truly being worth what they are, like how J Johnson got paid playing in Mike D system but he wasn't a max player, Nash wasn't a true mvp to me because it wouldn't have taken him 9 to 10yrs to win one if he was that guy and he wasn't in the mix earlier in his career for that award, but he won back to back because of that fun n gun system and it is what it is and I have upmost respect for Nash for handling his business, even Q Richardson looked damn good in that fun n gun style, look at Harden who is truly mvp worthy and he is putting up crazy numbers and its not because the style made him better but it is playing to his strengths and letting him be him to maximize what he is capable of doing

europagnpilgrim
12-06-2016, 12:41 AM
I'm not going to parse all that up ...

Average players CAN look better when playing on a great team ... but sometimes they don't fit the team structure and thus can't rise to the occasion. It's never EVERY play who is "made better" when the talk is about making teammates better.

"Magic answered that question for you because he wanted no parts of Chicago" ... uh, no. As I said Magic answered SOME of the question with a superstar performance without Kareem as a rookie.

I don't question Pippen, but a lot still do (certainly a lot of Pistons fans do :) ).

Klay usually starts slow, we don't know ... we don't know what his game will look like at the end of the year yet, just like we don't know what KD and Curry will look like at the end of the year. This year Klay is playing different in that he's handling more, moving the ball more, shooting better in the mid-range. Klay's changed some ... but he's still changing.

How can you tell the effect of great players other than by speculating. "He's doing more because the guys he's playing with are worse" is hardly scientific ... but there are certainly anecdotes to support pretty much every position you'd care to support.

Magic did say he would go back to college if Bulls won the coin toss because they sucked and he would have to carry a significant load, so uh, yeah

Magic having a superstar performance is not that big of a deal since he came into the league with that written all over him

well of course Pistons fans do since they started to get pushed to 7 games when Pippen got there and eventually taken over with Jordan/Pippen duo

I know you keep up with the Dubs so I will let you have the Klay debate, I was just stating he said he wasn't sacrificing jack and I don't blame him because I wouldn't either if I feel I am the best SG in the nba

how can I tell? by playing with really good players and playing with so called scrubs, the nba for years have been full of really good players and scrubs

that is basic to notice when players have to do more, rather they win or lose or make a deep playoff run depends on how much of a superstar that player is, it doesn't happen but every blue moon because the better team usually wins out over a 7 game series

if Curry and KD left and Klay/Draymond remain there do you think they would have to do more scoring? or do you think Klay would average the same 20ppg? I think he would go up around 25-28ppg because of the burden he would have to carry and Green would go to around 18-20ppg?

Does Russ have to do more or less with KD departure? that is not speculating at all it is factual

do you think Lebron needed to score 30 straight points vs Pistons(or any team) when he took his talents to South Beach to form that big 3? or do you think he left a worse support unit for a better one? It aint hard to tell at all since its right here in our face

europagnpilgrim
12-06-2016, 12:51 AM
Magic was a frontrunner to the maximum, I call a spade a spade


And in the case of Magic Johnson, Mike has done his homework. He found a Mike Downey L.A. Times article from 1991:
Magic Johnson would have returned to Michigan State rather than play for the Chicago Bulls.

"I'd have stayed in school," he said here Tuesday, standing alone outside Gate 3 1/2 of Chicago Stadium, the house that could have been his. "A coin toss changed the course of my whole life." Chicago called heads in a 1979 coin flip with Los Angeles for the No. 1 pick in the NBA college draft. It came up tails.

Johnson signed with the Lakers after his sophomore year of college and proceeded to win five championships. The Bulls picked second, took UCLA's David Greenwood and have won no championships.

"I wouldn't have played here," Johnson said on the eve of Game 2 of the NBA finals between his team and the team that could have been his. "The only reason I came out was to play with Kareem and the Lakers."

Scoots
12-06-2016, 01:36 AM
Magic did say he would go back to college if Bulls won the coin toss because they sucked and he would have to carry a significant load, so uh, yeah

You said that my opinion of Magic changed because of that and I'm saying it didn't. So uh, no.


how can I tell? by playing with really good players and playing with so called scrubs, the nba for years have been full of really good players and scrubs

And all I said was that it was speculation to what players would have done or would not have done in various situations.

lol, please
12-06-2016, 02:02 AM
The best measure of true greatness is being able to make players around you better.

CP3 does this.

Nash and Duncan did this.

Stockton, Magic, Bird, and Jordan did this.

And one of the knocks on Kobe and LBJ is that they don't/didn't do this, or at least not to the degree that others have.

With Curry, it has been hard to gauge this largely because the players who have gotten better around him, Barnes, Klay, and Dray, have done some as Curry also got better and their career arc simply follow the kind of improvement you would see in burgeoning all-stars their age.

This season, though, has given us an opportunity to see whether playing with Curry can improve a player.


KD, who has already posted several of the best seasons I've seen in 25-years of watching basketball, is currently posting career highs in FG% and 3pt%, and and his assists are hovering around his and career high but with a career low in turnovers. He's also got career highs in rebounds, steals, and blocks, but that has little to do with what other players on the court are doing.


Iggy, in his first three seasons with Curry, helped to raise his career average in FG% and 3PT% and has also seen his lowest turnover rates with Curry. This year he has dipped a bit, but that is to be expected with age.

Bogut posted his two best FG% with Curry (both over .600, and the only times he's posted over .600 in his career), and he posted his best assist numbers (nearly double his per36 rate with the Bucks) and and nearly doubled his assist-to-turnover ratio with the Bucks, and this after two years of decline and a battle with an injury, when most players would begin to regress. This season, his FG% has dropped by nearly 15%! His assists per36 are down, and his turnovers per36 are up!


Barnes, on the other hand, who has left Curry's side, has seen a career low in 3pt percentages. His 2pt% is his lowest in three seasons and second lowest of his career. His assists are down despite an increase in minutes and opportunities with the ball, his rebounds are at their second lowest per36 rate in his career. Turnovers, though only slightly higher (per36) than the last two seasons are also higher while assists are lower.


This sounds like a strong case, but the wrench in the argument is that this might very well be the 'system', or the improvement might be the result of a team effort, or even more specifically as a result of Draymond Green's ability to make plays (he has been leading the team in assists the last two seasons).

So... does Curry make players better? Is it the system? The coaching? Dray? Or all of these above?

No doubt dude.

Is it even really a question? Curry is a true floor general and makes players around him elevate themselves.

JasonJohnHorn
12-06-2016, 12:44 PM
First off nobody makes player 'better'

they can make it 'easier' for each other and its the reason why Bogut and Iggy posted higher whatever you said because the team was better as a whole which takes the burden off as you can see where they played prior or were first drafted by Bucks/Sixers, those teams were no where near as good and they both were drafted by lottery teams going 1st and 9th overall

Jordan didn't make Pippen or Grant or Cartwright better, Cartwright avg 20 and 9 before joining the Bulls so in essence Jordan made him worse, Armstrong and Hodges and Paxson and others were snipers with or without Jordan, they just won more being on contending title teams with Jordan after Jordan finally broke through, Pippen was a top 5 pick

Magic didn't make Kareem/Worthy better, Kareem was at least a 3x league MVP before Magic came to league and Worthy was a major player at UNC going for ncaa titles, now Magic showed how special he was by getting to that 91' Finals but he wasn't equipped in past years to win the title but I think it had more to do with Portland choking that 91' series away and they should have went to 3 straight Finals from 90-92'

CP3 didn't have the team talent to do too much damage in N.O. but he has had the talent to do big things with Clipps but the injury bug has bite them in the *** over his tenure there and they choked that 3-1 series which probably was the shot they missed to reach a Finals trip, he hasn't made Griffin or Jordan better because they do what they do rather he was there or not, if that was the case then Jordan would be a better free throw shooter first day CP3 arrived there not this year where he has some what improved(40 to a 50pct ft shooter) after being mates for like 5 seasons

if you play the game you would know nobody makes players better, Lebron didn't make Boobie Gibson better, he just got Gibson wide open looks that Gibson knocked down, just like Lebron didn't make Wade/Bosh better but when they teamed up they went to 4 straight Finals but Lebron proved he could carry a lesser team to a Finals trip which proves his value on a solo level, but he didn't make Jamison or old man Shaq or Hughes better, they were who they were at that stage/age of career, Lebron use to have to shoot 20x or more to carry his Cavs team then went to Miami and could shoot 16x per game because he had better players around him not because they made him better but easier so he didn't have to do it all(which makes it easier) but still do him at max level

KD should have career highs in whatever percentage you posted about, he is playing with 2 other guys in the starting lineup who are capable of dropping 30 in a game with him and they can shoot just as well as him, they all make it easier for each other, they don't make each other better

that's a media cliché that is over used for the wrong reason in my bball world

I think when the term is used, it is meant to suggest that the player is helping others reach their full potential and opening things up for them.

But this is a semantic argument you are making. I can say I agree with it, but I think this is ignoring the spirit of the question put before you.

People who help others reach their potential help make them better. Sam Cassell was great for this. He motivated guys to put in extra hours at practice. That made them better, and that was Cassell.

Curry not only spreads the floor to make things 'easier' as you say, but he is a willing passer and encourages other guys to share who, in other situations, would be looking for their own shot. In that sense, his influence on them has made them better.

But whether it is 'easier' or 'better' is semantic.

Their stats are better, so they are playing better. If making things easier for them is part of what helps them play better, sure, but this is splitting semantic hairs.

I appreciate the spirit of what you are saying, but if you can appreciate the spirit of the term 'better' in this sense, I think you will see they are one in the same with what you are talking about.

Scoots
12-06-2016, 03:29 PM
Their stats are better, so they are playing better. If making things easier for them is part of what helps them play better, sure, but this is splitting semantic hairs.

Of course being on a worse team makes some players stats go up but they are playing selfish and thus not better right?

It's all semantics and the responsibility of the original poster to make the definitions.

europagnpilgrim
12-07-2016, 10:31 AM
You said that my opinion of Magic changed because of that and I'm saying it didn't. So uh, no.



And all I said was that it was speculation to what players would have done or would not have done in various situations.

I wasn't trying to change your opinion/views or whatever I was simply stating that had Magic went to Chicago he probably wouldn't have 5 rings and that making his mates better non sense would have been put to rest, Magic would of got his no doubt but not to the effect of 9 finals in 12yrs with the Bulls, he probably wouldn't have sniffed even 1 or 2 trips let alone 9, so uh, yeah

but you know what the best can do and you know what mid level to the avg. to the scrubs bring to the table unless you just start watching hoops then I give you a pass, but if you have been watching the game for 10yrs then you would know what players are capable of doing and nobody makes them better because they have to be capable of doing what they do not because a player made them do it, its why they make a category called 'role' players but superstars have a role also, just a bigger one than the lesser roles which makes them more important to success, regardless if they are on a contender or pretender

Hawkeye15
12-07-2016, 10:45 AM
No doubt dude.

Is it even really a question? Curry is a true floor general and makes players around him elevate themselves.

No, Curry makes the game much more open and easier for his teammates by existing. That is way different than what CP3, or Nash did for example. Defenses are so busy following Curry around, his teammates get much easier looks when their opportunity to make a play arises.

By that measure alone, sure, Curry makes them better. But it's not because he is a "floor general". He doesn't create the elevation with anything outside just being there.

europagnpilgrim
12-07-2016, 10:52 AM
I think when the term is used, it is meant to suggest that the player is helping others reach their full potential and opening things up for them.

But this is a semantic argument you are making. I can say I agree with it, but I think this is ignoring the spirit of the question put before you.

People who help others reach their potential help make them better. Sam Cassell was great for this. He motivated guys to put in extra hours at practice. That made them better, and that was Cassell.

Curry not only spreads the floor to make things 'easier' as you say, but he is a willing passer and encourages other guys to share who, in other situations, would be looking for their own shot. In that sense, his influence on them has made them better.

But whether it is 'easier' or 'better' is semantic.

Their stats are better, so they are playing better. If making things easier for them is part of what helps them play better, sure, but this is splitting semantic hairs.

I appreciate the spirit of what you are saying, but if you can appreciate the spirit of the term 'better' in this sense, I think you will see they are one in the same with what you are talking about.

that doesn't make you better on a solo level though, Jordan helped Kerr/Paxson reach full potential at what they already did which were being snipers on the court, making it easier as I have said since the beginning of time

listen I could go for 30pts in a game but if i had a stacked team I would settle for the 4-8 threes I could hit playing off the other talented players and basically play a Kidd style, or I could go Zeke/The Answer mode if the talent wasn't there and the team needed it, true factual story

Sam Cassell can give advice on training but he doesn't make players better because the player would have to be capable of doing something first, then work on a weakness to better himself but its obvious that even how much Duncan improved on his FT shot it didn't make him better because he was already a two way beast/mvp caliber prior to his FT struggles

its like If the best singers in the world gave classes on how to sing it wouldn't really help at all because you would have to have a natural talented voice and be self driven to succeed, not because you did 8hr sessions with tremendous singers but they could elevate your confidence and make it easier for you by coaching you how to hit certain notes since they have been there and done that

Curry is making it easier as I stated, and he is playing with other un selfish players like Iggy/Livingston/Green and now KD who are all quasi type PG players especially the first 3, nothing special about that at all when you truly think about it and also add in the his coach played/gm for teams that were always about ball movement with the Bulls/Spurs/Suns which makes it easier to sell to a team coming from such success as Kerr did

I just appreciate a good convo about sports and how people view stuff, good dialogue makes a healthy debate

they are not one in the same because easy is not the same as better, but they are one in the same topic since we are discussing it as of now

Russell wasn't better than Dipper but he had it easier being that he had the best coach/better overall talent to work with back in the day, it hasn't changed much since


Same with Magic he wouldn't have been a better(nor made others better) player on the Bulls since he was capable of doing what he did regardless since his college days, it was just the support cast of Lakers made it easier to reach the pinnacle of getting multiple titles but had the coin toss went the Bulls favor then he runs back to Mich St. because it wouldn't have been a easy road for him to get to those Finals

KnicksorBust
12-07-2016, 12:51 PM
I don't know the numbers off-hand but isn't Curry always one of the best in the league at secondary assists? Those passes that lead to an assist. I think that's a good indication of how he bends a defense every single second he is on the floor.

KnicksorBust
12-07-2016, 12:56 PM
Didn't notice you had responded to me. Sorry.


maybe. we'll never know TBH. Pippen was still a very great player in his own right. I don't think Jordan helped him become one of better players in the history of the NBA but i think it helped Pippen accelerate his confidence because he had Jordan to fall back on in the Jordan-Pippen days. it did however get him rings. lol

imho Pippen was always going to be one of the best players (in his days) in the league with or without Jordan.

I don't know if I agree with that. It's similar to my feelings on Draymond. I don't think either reaches their full potential without Curry/Jordan. For Pippen specifically he spent his entire career practicing with the best player of all-time. Can you imagine all the times Pippen worked on his defense by guarding Jordan in practice? I'm not saying Pippen wouldn't be a hall of famer but in the majority of situations, the more great players that surround you will inevitably raise the level of your game at a faster pace then if you were stuck on a talentless roster.

tredigs
12-07-2016, 03:29 PM
I don't know the numbers off-hand but isn't Curry always one of the best in the league at secondary assists? Those passes that lead to an assist. I think that's a good indication of how he bends a defense every single second he is on the floor.

He had the most last year and is leading this year as well. That gravity is one of the main reasons you see Draymond's APG #1 on the team and sliding in the overall leaderboard in between CP3 and Kyle Lowry this year.

JasonJohnHorn
12-12-2016, 10:15 AM
that doesn't make you better on a solo

Are we talking about a solo sport? Or a team sport? If percentages/efficiency go up, that means you are playing better for the team.


listen I could go for 30pts in a game but if i had a stacked team I would settle for the 4-8 threes I could hit playing off the other talented players and basically play a Kidd style, or I could go Zeke/The Answer mode if the talent wasn't there and the team needed it, true factual story

The fact you are suggesting that it is easy for any elite point guard (or you apparently) to shift from Kidd's style to AI's style demonstrates that you don't understand the nuances of the game and the years it takes to develop a skill set tailored to a certain style of play. If AI, for instance, could have done that, then why didn't the Nuggets and Pistons improve with him on board? "True factual story."



Sam Cassell can give advice on training but he doesn't make players better because the player would have to be capable of doing something first, then work on a weakness to better himself but its obvious that even how much Duncan improved on his FT shot it didn't make him better because he was already a two way beast/mvp caliber prior to his FT struggles

When you work ethic encourages players to put in more practice time, like Cassell did, especially during his time with the Clippers, and that practice makes them better, then yes, his leadership makes them better. There is a big difference between having potential, and playing to that level of potential.


its like If the best singers in the world gave classes on how to sing it wouldn't really help at all because you would have to have a natural talented voice and be self driven to succeed, not because you did 8hr sessions with tremendous singers but they could elevate your confidence and make it easier for you by coaching you how to hit certain notes since they have been there and done that

Flawed analogy, but actually, teaching and guiding somebody and showing them how to reach their potential does in fact make them better. Again, potential is not a reality, it is what could be. If somebody helps somebody reach their potential, that help them become better, then that person has made them better.



Curry is making it easier as I stated, and he is playing with other un selfish players like Iggy/Livingston/Green and now KD who are all quasi type PG players especially the first 3, nothing special about that at all when you truly think about it and also add in the his coach played/gm for teams that were always about ball movement with the Bulls/Spurs/Suns which makes it easier to sell to a team coming from such success as Kerr did

By leading by example and encouraging people to pass when he, as the historically greatest shooter in the NBA, he is teaching people to share and facilitate team success through that. KD even said during pre-season that he thought he knew how to play basketball before, but that he learned so much playing with GSW.

Promoting a certain style and getting others to buy into is, and then seeing their level of play improve as a result means they are playing better.




easy is not the same as better, but they are one in the same topic since we are discussing it as of now

But it is not just a matter of being 'easier', it is a matter of taking part in building a culture that encourages team mates and sharing the ball, and by being the alpha dog and still deferring, you encourages others to make the extra pass and forgo their ego. That is not just getting guys an open look. Moreover, his passing plays a big role in this as well. To suggest that Curry's only influence on his teammates is the fact he spreads the floor is willfully misleading.




Same with Magic he wouldn't have been a better(nor made others better) player on the Bulls since he was capable of doing what he did regardless since his college days, it was just the support cast of Lakers made it easier to reach the pinnacle of getting multiple titles but had the coin toss went the Bulls favor then he runs back to Mich St. because it wouldn't have been a easy road for him to get to those Finals

You can't really make that conclusion. He could have easily made players in Chicago better, and though he likely wouldn't have won nearly as many titles, if he stole a couple from Boston, and he and Bird still have a rivalry where they played every season, he could easily still have the reputation he has now.


If you want to get into the semantics and imply that potential is equal to a person's skill and not consider that other factors can help a person to reach and even increase their potential, that's fine. If you want to pretend that all Curry does is spread the floor, that's fine too. But the facts suggest that certain players have historically helped other players to play at a higher level than they did without those same players, even when they moved from playoff-calibre teams to other playoff-calibre teams. As an example, you can look at LBJ and Wade and Bosh. Though Wade and Bosh's scoring averages went down, their percentages went up. That is one of many examples.

europagnpilgrim
12-12-2016, 02:08 PM
Are we talking about a solo sport? Or a team sport? If percentages/efficiency go up, that means you are playing better for the team.



The fact you are suggesting that it is easy for any elite point guard (or you apparently) to shift from Kidd's style to AI's style demonstrates that you don't understand the nuances of the game and the years it takes to develop a skill set tailored to a certain style of play. If AI, for instance, could have done that, then why didn't the Nuggets and Pistons improve with him on board? "True factual story."




When you work ethic encourages players to put in more practice time, like Cassell did, especially during his time with the Clippers, and that practice makes them better, then yes, his leadership makes them better. There is a big difference between having potential, and playing to that level of potential.



Flawed analogy, but actually, teaching and guiding somebody and showing them how to reach their potential does in fact make them better. Again, potential is not a reality, it is what could be. If somebody helps somebody reach their potential, that help them become better, then that person has made them better.




By leading by example and encouraging people to pass when he, as the historically greatest shooter in the NBA, he is teaching people to share and facilitate team success through that. KD even said during pre-season that he thought he knew how to play basketball before, but that he learned so much playing with GSW.

Promoting a certain style and getting others to buy into is, and then seeing their level of play improve as a result means they are playing better.





But it is not just a matter of being 'easier', it is a matter of taking part in building a culture that encourages team mates and sharing the ball, and by being the alpha dog and still deferring, you encourages others to make the extra pass and forgo their ego. That is not just getting guys an open look. Moreover, his passing plays a big role in this as well. To suggest that Curry's only influence on his teammates is the fact he spreads the floor is willfully misleading.





You can't really make that conclusion. He could have easily made players in Chicago better, and though he likely wouldn't have won nearly as many titles, if he stole a couple from Boston, and he and Bird still have a rivalry where they played every season, he could easily still have the reputation he has now.


If you want to get into the semantics and imply that potential is equal to a person's skill and not consider that other factors can help a person to reach and even increase their potential, that's fine. If you want to pretend that all Curry does is spread the floor, that's fine too. But the facts suggest that certain players have historically helped other players to play at a higher level than they did without those same players, even when they moved from playoff-calibre teams to other playoff-calibre teams. As an example, you can look at LBJ and Wade and Bosh. Though Wade and Bosh's scoring averages went down, their percentages went up. That is one of many examples.

1. if you make a player better then why when such player goes on to so called greener pastures that player reverts back to who he was? it's because he had it easier and it didn't make him a better player , which again is just ignorant to say when a player is who he is, if such and such made this player look good while playing with him it doesn't make him better, efficient means you are taking and making easier looks since the team would be better all around, just like how Gordon is shooting with the Rockets in that system, he always could shoot like that but now its maximizing him more and he is healthy, he avg 22ppg for Clippers prior so it was always in him, Harden/Mike D didn't make him better but since its a team sport why do they draft player's'(solo) with individual picks? we are talking about players being drafted solo with teams having draft picks based on what that player can do on a individual scale on the court then add in all the other box office appeal to go along


go back and look at Lebron numbers when he had no Irving/Love against Warriors in 15' Finals then go and look at his efficiency when he had those two in the past Finals, do you think he had it easier with those two or without? do you think he was more efficient with those two or without? this is abc not algebra


2. It is easy based on the talent you play with if you actually can play ball at some high level, I had stacked talent when I shot open 3's that's why I could hit 4-8 per game because I was like the 4th option just being wide open and knocking down open 3's, so the adjustment I made was based off my team talent as a whole, and I have been in situations where we just were garbage and they told me to shoot basically every time, I wasn't as efficient as playing with a stacked team but I damn sure didn't get better or worse in either situation because I was capable of doing what I do on the court, The Answer went from taking 23+ shots per game to 18per game in Denver with a 50 win 8th seed because of better overall talent, and then went to Detroit and avg 14shots per game because of that system, he played to the system since Denver was a run and gun fun style and Detroit was a half court run a thousand diff. sets type styel, and when Detroit basically benched him and Rip for Stuckey they had the 4th seed then fell to 8th after so he must have had some impact early, it comes down to talent and system/style and he The Answer played in both run and gun fun with G'Town/Nuggets and grind it out old school style with Larry Brown/Sixers and Detroit pistons, seems like he could adjust just fine and with the talent he had because if he couldn't have he would have jacked up 23 shots per game forever, The Answer had to take those shots in philly but not so much in Denver or Detroit so he played according to his personnel/coach liking, he doesn't have to play like Kidd because he wasn't a triple double machine nor was Kidd a 40-50pt scoring machine but I feel he could have been more Kidd than Kidd could be The Answer as far as what they do best, he could rack up assists with the right personnel but Kidd couldn't get 40-50 on that same level, I could do both because my first instincts is to share with others and get them involved, had The Answer been 6'4'-6'6'' then he would have been a triple double machine but he was E Bledsoe height masquerading as a SG, which hurts him more than helps and he still succeeded at it

I overstand whatever nuances being I was relied upon to deliver rather it be hitting wide open 3's/playing defense or shooting to keep us in contention, if you haven't played or did play and wasn't much of a factor on a solo level that could help elevate your team then I see why you needed other better players to play off of and make you feel like they made you a better player, kudos to you

3. having potential and playing to potential is a fine line because people say Shaq could have done more but still played to his potential, Cassell could have told and motivated Shaq to stay in shape just like I am sure others have done but it comes down to Shaq doing it him-self, nothing beats self motivation at all, nothing is more powerful than self, so a player reaches his full potential when he realizes how dominant/or average they are

4. Teaching and guiding means you have been through it and you realize someone has special gift/talent to even want to teach them, it doesn't make them better just makes it easier coming from someone with experience, now if you want to say it makes it easier to make better decisions then fine, but its far from a flawed analogy or whatever you feel, its in the ballpark/on point when I speak on something

5. it means they are playing the way the other teams with success had, they were already contenders before Kerr just not on this level and he comes with his ball movement style of his past success and they go to back to back Finals, they already had the pieces but the ball movement made it easier for the team max out the strengths it had going for them already, Curry was one of the best snipers ever at Davidson before he entered the league so why didn't he make the players better when they lost against Clippers in 14' playoffs? what happened?

6. sharing the ball means you have players who are capable of doing something with it, its a reason why you hear such and such didn't pass the ball because he didn't have no one capable of doing something with it, Lebron passed the ball with Cavs first go around but not as much as he really liked because he had to do more of the scoring load from lack of having another all nba caliber player, the gm/owner have to build the right culture around the superstars they have, I told you Curry is also benefiting from having a coach who came from the same culture you keep spewing which helps him even more and the team as a whole way more, Curry is basically just opening the court since they fear him when he crosses a step over half court because of his range, that range opens the court up mightily

7. sure I can, go back and look at the rosters of Bulls/Lakers and you tell me how in the world is Magic going to 9 finals in 12 yrs as a Bulls player, that Bird/Celtics team would have done him worse/same as they did Jordan early on with sweeps, Jordan made it close because he was capable of dropping 50 each game but Magic would have gotten swept out easier because the talent just wasn't there and he wouldn't have made Oakley or Orlando Wooldridge or whoever better, would he have gotten them a few easier baskets on transition/half court? sure would but it wouldn't have made them any better as a player, which was the initial question at hand 'Does Curry make players better', and nobody does in the history of the sport it has never happened

you need to re do the title and say ''do dominant superstar players make lesser role players more efficient'', then you would be on point and know what you are talking about

Bosh/Wade percentage went up and Lebron didn't make them any better at all, they were a collective force though as all 3 went to four straight Finals and then the most dominant one leaves and continues to go to Finals as he was the most dominant of the 3 prior to them teaming up in the first place

being efficient does not make you a better player, its like if a player goes 4-6fg every game, that doesn't make him a better player, it just means he made 4 out of 6 attempts, woopty doo

would you like to give him more shot attempts? well that depends on what he can actually showcase on the court, is he a spot up shooter/spoon fed finisher or does he have the skill set/ability to get more fg attempts? see how simple the game is

to me Russ had it easier with KD, KD didn't make Russ better because he was capable of doing it with or without and vice versa, KD isn't a better player for the Dubs, he is just doing what he was capable of doing for the past 8yrs prior in OKC, to me Russ has it more harder now but he wont be a better or worse player since he has shown what he is capable of doing, the team is worse since many didn't pick them to come out of the West like some have done in the past when both were there giving OKC a punchers chance especially after that 12' finals trip, same with Harden he was dropping 30pt games with Russ/KD and he didn't become a better player over there with the Rockets, he just got more minutes/usage than he did as a 6th man in OKC

europagnpilgrim
12-12-2016, 09:00 PM
if Curry/M Price/Bird/Miller(Mike&Reggie)/D Ellis/Klay/Ray Allen took Roberson(OKC)&Rondo to the gym and told them to exclusively work on the 3pt shot it would not make them a better player and probably just a slightly slim of a better deep shooter, Rondo would still overpass the ball and push the pace and play decent defense and Roberson would still be a ballhawk/damn good man on man defender/cutter to the basket

could Rondo&Roberson hit a 3pt shot every now and then in games wide open, sure they could but they are who they are no matter how many cheerleaders are on deck giving them praise and advice and the defender guarding them would still roam around daring them to shoot

Jeffy25
12-13-2016, 02:26 AM
I don't know the numbers off-hand but isn't Curry always one of the best in the league at secondary assists? Those passes that lead to an assist. I think that's a good indication of how he bends a defense every single second he is on the floor.

I have looked before, but where can you find those numbers? I think that's an under-rated stat

KnicksorBust
12-13-2016, 12:37 PM
I have looked before, but where can you find those numbers? I think that's an under-rated stat

http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/player/passing/?sort=SECONDARY_AST&dir=1

Curry is leading the league with 2.1 secondary assists per game. Apparently they track "FT AST" now too which tracks when your pass leads to free throws on a miss. That's pretty cool. Westbrook leads in that category.