PDA

View Full Version : Winner takes all game, which PG are you taking?



Pages : [1] 2

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 12:47 PM
If you were going in to a winner takes all game or for instance game 7 of the finals or any playoff series, which player are you taking......Kyrie or Steph?

Bless you all and have a great day! Remember to try and better yourself today in one way or another and continue to build for your bright future! Love you all and look forward to your answers!

FlashBolt
08-23-2018, 01:56 PM
this scenario already took place clown.


in all honesty you are my favorite troll!

The scenario you refer to would mean you would take Kyrie, then?

Rivera
08-23-2018, 01:58 PM
this scenario already took place clown.


in all honesty you are my favorite troll!

so your taking Kyrie?

Jamiecballer
08-23-2018, 01:59 PM
I'm only taking a PG because the question specifically states that I must. In that case I will take Kyrie.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

GREATNESS ONE
08-23-2018, 01:59 PM
Kyrie pretty easily

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 02:03 PM
this scenario already took place clown.


in all honesty you are my favorite troll!

Iím sorry you feel so negatively towards me and I hope youíre able to get through this one day. I still love you and hope you have a great day as previously stated.

We saw the scenario already but one had the GOAT and the other had a 73-9 team so I was curious as to who youball would rely on with an equal playing field. My vote is Kyrie as Iíve seen him step up and play at a much higher level than Curry in those moments.

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:08 PM
Why won't you just answer the question? Take your personal vendetta out the way. I don't remember you nor care enough to. Answer the question - it's simple. Both players have five letters in their name. Hit those keys and tell us.

I would take russ......to watch curry.

FlashBolt
08-23-2018, 02:11 PM
I would take russ......to watch curry.

Okay. I will assume that not everyone knows how to read.

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:11 PM
so your taking Kyrie?

*you're

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:14 PM
Okay. I will assume that not everyone knows how to read.

you know what they say about assumptions right?

they give you HPV.

FlashBolt
08-23-2018, 02:17 PM
you know what they say about assumptions right?

they give you HPV.
"we've seen this scenario before"

Yes, we saw Kyrie outplay Curry. So I asked you if you are essentially implying you would take Kyrie.

you reply with:

"I'll take Russ so I can take Curry."

Wtf are you saying, lol? I mean, is reading and English no longer a requirement here?

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:23 PM
"we've seen this scenario before"

Yes, we saw Kyrie outplay Curry. So I asked you if you are essentially implying you would take Kyrie.

you reply with:

"I'll take Russ so I can take Curry."

Wtf are you saying, lol? I mean, is reading and English no longer a requirement here?

"ill take russ.....to watch curry" is the correct quote.

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:24 PM
"we've seen this scenario before"

Yes, we saw Kyrie outplay Curry. So I asked you if you are essentially implying you would take Kyrie.

you reply with:

"I'll take Russ so I can take Curry."

Wtf are you saying, lol? I mean, is reading and English no longer a requirement here?

you missed an interaction there.

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 02:25 PM
"we've seen this scenario before"

Yes, we saw Kyrie outplay Curry. So I asked you if you are essentially implying you would take Kyrie.

you reply with:

"I'll take Russ so I can take Curry."

Wtf are you saying, lol? I mean, is reading and English no longer a requirement here?

quelle?

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 02:46 PM
Any Curry voters care to bless us with their reasoning? From what Iíve seen, and please pardon my foul language, Curry poops the bed in those games when heís relied on to be the top guy.

FlashBolt
08-23-2018, 02:50 PM
Any Curry voters care to bless us with their reasoning? From what Iíve seen, and please pardon my foul language, Curry poops the bed in those games when heís relied on to be the top guy.

He's only been in four seven game series and he's played bad in one (2016). My reasoning for taking Kyrie is he's an absolute dog and he just takes his game to another level in a way that I haven't seen many NBA players do. Not just in a seven game series but you just have a feeling that Kyrie will show up when the lights dim brighter.

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 02:59 PM
He's only been in four seven game series and he's played bad in one (2016). My reasoning for taking Kyrie is he's an absolute dog and he just takes his game to another level in a way that I haven't seen many NBA players do. Not just in a seven game series but you just have a feeling that Kyrie will show up when the lights dim brighter.

I agree with your great post and hope we see more of them. Imo Curry underperformed in 2015 (losing MVP to a role player) and 2016 obviously. I just like Kyrie more in those bigger games and he dominated him in game 7 of 2016.

GREATNESS ONE
08-23-2018, 03:06 PM
lmfao I like this new positive Wade03

Rush
08-23-2018, 03:19 PM
Guys, please stay on topic. Cod, there's no reason to immediately take the thread off topic and bait and insult.

MygirlhatesCod
08-23-2018, 03:26 PM
Guys, please stay on topic. Cod, there's no reason to immediately take the thread off topic and bait and insult.

i accept full responsibility for this troll thread and i will ensure proper etiquette going forward.

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 04:04 PM
i accept full responsibility for this troll thread and i will ensure proper etiquette going forward.

No trolling going on here brother, I hope youíre able to get through this and I promise you, you will be in my prayers tonight! Everyoneís opinion is welcomed and just because someoneís opinion differs from yours it doesnít mean theyíre trolling. You are just grumpy now but hereís a little bit of advice....it takes more effort to frown than it does to smile so thereís no reason for you not to keep that smile on your face!!!!!

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 04:05 PM
lmfao I like this new positive Wade03

Thank you neighbor, when I sss these posts I know Iím doing something right. I promise you I wonít let you or the PSD community down, itís time to bring nothing but positivity to this place!!!!

WaDe03
08-23-2018, 04:08 PM
Thank you to the 8 who have voted so far, it means so much to see such activity! Please keep it up!

This has me thinking of another question now fellas......wouldnít the better player be the one who steps up with it all on the line? I feel everyone would say Curry is the better player and yet I feel majority would take Kyrie in this scenario. What does this mean and does this effect their ranking at all?

Thank you and any response is welcome!

WaDe03
08-24-2018, 09:32 AM
1032815432737214464

Wow! Just found this, what do you guys think? Bad look for Curry and good look for Kyrie. God bless!

mightybosstone
08-24-2018, 09:51 AM
This strikes me as an obvious troll threadóand clearly it's worked based on the number of deleted posts so faróbut there's actually a pretty decent debate to be made here. Curry is unquestionably the better player overall and unequivocally superior in the regular season. But when you compare their postseason numbers, Kyrie's actually spike and Steph's drop so far that Curry has only a slight edge there.

Kyrie just has that killer instinct in big games and in the postseason that you like to see from star players. He gets better the bigger the moment gets. That being said, even with Curry having kind of a subpar postseason performance history, I'd still rather have Curry. Curry is still the better player and has a much higher basketball IQ. Kyrie can shoot you out of a game very quickly, and we've seen that in the playoffs before.

WaDe03
08-24-2018, 10:43 AM
This strikes me as an obvious troll threadóand clearly it's worked based on the number of deleted posts so faróbut there's actually a pretty decent debate to be made here. Curry is unquestionably the better player overall and unequivocally superior in the regular season. But when you compare their postseason numbers, Kyrie's actually spike and Steph's drop so far that Curry has only a slight edge there.

Kyrie just has that killer instinct in big games and in the postseason that you like to see from star players. He gets better the bigger the moment gets. That being said, even with Curry having kind of a subpar postseason performance history, I'd still rather have Curry. Curry is still the better player and has a much higher basketball IQ. Kyrie can shoot you out of a game very quickly, and we've seen that in the playoffs before.

Wasnít a troll thread but a warriors fan was very offended and I apologize for that. Not everything on this site is trolling so lets all dry our tears and join in on making PSD great! I look forward to the discussion on the board today!

WaDe03
08-24-2018, 10:45 AM
The thread is serious friends, I feel Kyrie steps up in big games and Curry regresses. Thatís why I go with Kyrie in this situation. Heís got that dog in him that curry doesnít, Curry has some cat in him.

ewing
08-24-2018, 11:12 AM
This strikes me as an obvious troll threadóand clearly it's worked based on the number of deleted posts so faróbut there's actually a pretty decent debate to be made here. Curry is unquestionably the better player overall and unequivocally superior in the regular season. But when you compare their postseason numbers, Kyrie's actually spike and Steph's drop so far that Curry has only a slight edge there.

Kyrie just has that killer instinct in big games and in the postseason that you like to see from star players. He gets better the bigger the moment gets. That being said, even with Curry having kind of a subpar postseason performance history, I'd still rather have Curry. Curry is still the better player and has a much higher basketball IQ. Kyrie can shoot you out of a game very quickly, and we've seen that in the playoffs before.

Curry has offensive weapons all over the floor, the team often depends on Green's play making, Curry can be very sloppy with the ball, and takes some bad shots himself. I don't know if I agree that he has a MUCH higher IQ on the floor

WaDe03
08-24-2018, 11:15 AM
Curry has offensive weapons all over the floor, the team often depends on Green's play making, Curry can be very sloppy with the ball, and takes some bad shots himself. I don't know if I agree that he has a MUCH higher IQ on the floor

Good post, ewing! I agree with you! I donít see how weíre so sure Curry has the higher IQ.

mightybosstone
08-24-2018, 11:35 AM
Curry has offensive weapons all over the floor, the team often depends on Green's play making, Curry can be very sloppy with the ball, and takes some bad shots himself. I don't know if I agree that he has a MUCH higher IQ on the floor

Curry won't do the whole "isolate for 20 seconds and jack up a contested 22-footer" thing that Kyrie likes to do late in games. Or if he does do it, he doesn't do it nearly as often. And by the sheer nature of Steph's ability to hit 3-pointers from 30 feet with ease and his quick release, there simply aren't a lot of "bad shots" for him.

I definitely would give Kyrie the edge in terms of being able to hit a shot in traffic and finish around the rim. But I'd much rather have the guy who doesn't have to score in traffic or hit contested shots, and that's Curry. Even with his dropoff in production, he's still the much more efficient scorer.

You might have a point about Curry being more sloppy with the ball, though. Having watched a lot of Curry's play in the postseason, I can attest to some sloppy passing and ball security. His postseason TO% (14.3) is much higher than Kyrie's (9.7) despite their USG% being roughly the same. But I just don't think the extra turnover here or there makes up for the significant edge in scoring efficiency or Curry's ridiculous floor spacing that he provides the Warriors in the playoffs.

ewing
08-24-2018, 12:55 PM
Curry won't do the whole "isolate for 20 seconds and jack up a contested 22-footer" thing that Kyrie likes to do late in games. Or if he does do it, he doesn't do it nearly as often. And by the sheer nature of Steph's ability to hit 3-pointers from 30 feet with ease and his quick release, there simply aren't a lot of "bad shots" for him.

I definitely would give Kyrie the edge in terms of being able to hit a shot in traffic and finish around the rim. But I'd much rather have the guy who doesn't have to score in traffic or hit contested shots, and that's Curry. Even with his dropoff in production, he's still the much more efficient scorer.

You might have a point about Curry being more sloppy with the ball, though. Having watched a lot of Curry's play in the postseason, I can attest to some sloppy passing and ball security. His postseason TO% (14.3) is much higher than Kyrie's (9.7) despite their USG% being roughly the same. But I just don't think the extra turnover here or there makes up for the significant edge in scoring efficiency or Curry's ridiculous floor spacing that he provides the Warriors in the playoffs.


Sounds like you like Curry's "bad shots" more then Kyrie's. There maybe something to that since they both make some of them and 3 is worth more then 2. I really don't buy into this whole iso and jack thing though and I'm pretty sure the Cavs were an elite offensive team with him as a main cog and Boston did fine as well. Kryie seems to create when asked to. I don't think he is limiting other players like a Cousins or Mello can by iso-ing. I'll concede your later points and I think its a reasonable opinion I just don't think it reflects BB IQ. Irving is a hell of an offensive player. Like Curry he isn't a great play maker but unlike Curry he has this label of being a low a IQ player on offensive- I don't buy it and I think Curry is the sloppier decision maker of the two.

mightybosstone
08-24-2018, 01:07 PM
Sounds like you like Curry's "bad shots" more then Kyrie's. There maybe something to that since they both make some of them and 3 is worth more then 2. I really don't buy into this whole iso and jack thing though and I'm pretty sure the Cavs were an elite offensive team with him as a main cog and Boston did fine as well. Kryie seems to create when asked to. I don't think he is limiting other players like a Cousins or Mello can by iso-ing. I'll concede your later points and I think its a reasonable opinion I just don't think it reflects BB IQ. Irving is a hell of an offensive player. Like Curry he isn't a great play maker but unlike Curry he has this label of being a low a IQ player on offensive- I don't buy it and I think Curry is sloppier decision maker of the two.

I wouldn't necessarily say Kyrie is a low IQ guy. I would just say Curry's is a little higher, primarily because his shot selection is a little better. And part of that is just where they're shooting the ball from. It's a heck of a lot easier to contest a shot from 18-20 feet than it is to contest a 28-30 foot shot coming off a screen like Curry thrives on. Now, you could argue that a contested 18-footer is a better shot than an uncontested 30-footer, and for 99 percent of the league, you might be right. But not for Steph Curry.

IKnowHoops
08-24-2018, 01:09 PM
Steph all day. Steph next to Bron though...lol

ewing
08-24-2018, 01:18 PM
I wouldn't necessarily say Kyrie is a low IQ guy. I would just say Curry's is a little higher, primarily because his shot selection is a little better. And part of that is just where they're shooting the ball from. It's a heck of a lot easier to contest a shot from 18-20 feet than it is to contest a 28-30 foot shot coming off a screen like Curry thrives on. Now, you could argue that a contested 18-footer is a better shot than an uncontested 30-footer, and for 99 percent of the league, you might be right. But not for Steph Curry.

that's fair

voyager77
09-06-2018, 02:10 PM
Kyrie is more clutch

Scoots
09-06-2018, 08:22 PM
Kyrie is more clutch

Not really based on last year using the NBA.com clutch stats

https://stats.nba.com/players/clutch-advanced/?sort=OFF_RATING&dir=-1

ewing
09-07-2018, 02:47 PM
Not really based on last year using the NBA.com clutch stats

https://stats.nba.com/players/clutch-advanced/?sort=OFF_RATING&dir=-1

Itís cute how you think the regular season matters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WhiteShadow42
09-07-2018, 03:15 PM
you know what they say about assumptions right?

they give you HPV.

you guys blow me off for this guy. LOL. If you guys want, I'll put a puppy as my avatar.

Kyrie the edge. Curry is not even the best finisher on his team. Also Kyrie can break down double teams late in games better than Curry.

GREATNESS ONE
09-07-2018, 03:51 PM
you guys blow me off for this guy. LOL. If you guys want, I'll put a puppy as my avatar.

Kyrie the edge. Curry is not even the best finisher on his team. Also Kyrie can break down double teams late in games better than Curry.

good points WS ;)

WhiteShadow42
09-07-2018, 03:59 PM
good points WS ;)

:hi5:

valade16
09-07-2018, 04:02 PM
Itís cute how you think the regular season matters

Well Kyrie wasn't very clutch in last year's playoffs...

Hawkeye15
09-07-2018, 04:22 PM
I am shocked this is even a question honestly.

GREATNESS ONE
09-07-2018, 04:39 PM
I am shocked this is even a question honestly.

Me too, itís easily Kyrie

WaDe03
09-07-2018, 04:49 PM
I am shocked this is even a question honestly.

Weíve seen it once and Curry was demolished.

valade16
09-07-2018, 05:59 PM
Weíve seen it once and Curry was demolished.

once. I've seen MJ get outplayed by John Starks... once, does that mean John Starks could do it again?

GREATNESS ONE
09-07-2018, 06:14 PM
once. I've seen MJ get outplayed by John Starks... once, does that mean John Starks could do it again?

Lmfao címon V..... stop

ewing
09-07-2018, 06:20 PM
Well Kyrie wasn't very clutch in last year's playoffs...

Injuries a concern for him, no doubt but when plays he is a beast


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
09-07-2018, 06:22 PM
once. I've seen MJ get outplayed by John Starks... once, does that mean John Starks could do it again?

John never outplayed MJ in a series. Kyrie outplay Curry in the series and the ultimate game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

valade16
09-07-2018, 06:33 PM
John never outplayed MJ in a series. Kyrie outplay Curry in the series and the ultimate game

Do you really think it'd be hard for me to find an example of a player who outplayed a superior one for a single series?

Heck, Curry outplayed Kyrie in the very next Finals lol.

Scoots
09-07-2018, 08:24 PM
Itís cute how you think the regular season matters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well if we compare Curry's post season to Kyrie's it get MUCH worse for Kyrie.

cmellofan15
09-07-2018, 08:34 PM
You take the better player who is steph curry.

sure kyrie bested him one year, and then curry bested him the very next year in an incredibly quick series. out-shot him, out-passed him, out-rebounded him, and just generally outclassed him. in the very small head 2 head they're tied, with Curry winning more recently and in a much more dominant fashion. if we take into account the series elimination games outside of this (where Curry has had to face superior talent) it's not really a competition.

we can look at elimination games for curry this year and last (although there's a bunch of sweeps in there). in the last playoffs kyrie played in curry's stats looked like this

Blazers elimination game: 37 / 8 / 7 in less than 30min
Jazz elimination game: 30 / 7 / 5
Spurs elimination game: 36 / 6 / 5
Cavs elimination game: 34 / 10 / 6 against the other guy here

the following years his elimination games looked like this

Pels: 28 / 8 / 7
Rox: 27 / 10 / 9 in a game 7
Cavs: 37 / 6 / 4 / 3 / 3


in kyrie's case he consistently scored less points, shot less efficiently, is a worse passer and rebounder, and a worse defender in these playoff elimination games with the exception of one game.

Vee-Rex
09-07-2018, 09:12 PM
KD clearly altered the way the Cavs could defend Curry. In the playoffs when the defenses get more ferocious and develop strategies to counter players, Curry has definitely benefited from having KD on the court, something no one seems to think about.

KD gets his money in any kind of coverage, tight, loose, 0-30 feet. Hand in the face, big defender, small/aggressive defender - he is literally a weapon that wholeheartedly cannot be stopped. Best scoring weapon (in terms of versatility) in the league and has been for awhile now.

Curry is a more DOMINANT scorer than KD, because it's mostly at the 3-point line. Obviously he's very good at dribbling and driving, but his money is behind the arc. Thus - he's a tad bit easier to defensively scheme against than KD is. Unfortunately, the type of defense you need to impact Curry results in KD simply abusing you. It's not a coincidence that Curry's best playoff runs came after KD joined the Warriors.

Again, this is speaking solely about the playoffs. There's advanced stat evidence to support the fact that Curry is benefiting a lot more from KD in the playoffs than we like to acknowledge. The physical nature combined with the scheming combined with the tougher contested looks is just something KD is naturally more gifted to handle. Kyrie as an example has the skillset to score in ways that only KD can duplicate - that's why both Kyrie and Durant are so unstoppably unstoppable.

With all that said - Curry is still the engine, and I think he's the better player than Durant (though it's a fair debate).

The only reason I went on a tangent about Durant is because he's absolutely a huge factor in how we view Curry. Are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry with Durant on the floor? Or are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry and both teams being relatively equal?

All else being equal, I think a smart defensive team in the playoffs can slow Curry down in a consistent, game-to-game manner, ESPECIALLY if Durant isn't there to help out. Whereas I find that a lot harder to accomplish against players like Kyrie and Kevin Durant.

So that's why I voted Kyrie in a winner takes all game.

cmellofan15
09-07-2018, 10:01 PM
Yeah....so what about that Lebron guy on the Cavs? Heís a FAR superior playmaker than Durant and better than anyone the Warriors can throw out there. Kyrie benefitted tremendously from that.

ewing
09-07-2018, 10:51 PM
KD clearly altered the way the Cavs could defend Curry. In the playoffs when the defenses get more ferocious and develop strategies to counter players, Curry has definitely benefited from having KD on the court, something no one seems to think about.

KD gets his money in any kind of coverage, tight, loose, 0-30 feet. Hand in the face, big defender, small/aggressive defender - he is literally a weapon that wholeheartedly cannot be stopped. Best scoring weapon (in terms of versatility) in the league and has been for awhile now.

Curry is a more DOMINANT scorer than KD, because it's mostly at the 3-point line. Obviously he's very good at dribbling and driving, but his money is behind the arc. Thus - he's a tad bit easier to defensively scheme against than KD is. Unfortunately, the type of defense you need to impact Curry results in KD simply abusing you. It's not a coincidence that Curry's best playoff runs came after KD joined the Warriors.

Again, this is speaking solely about the playoffs. There's advanced stat evidence to support the fact that Curry is benefiting a lot more from KD in the playoffs than we like to acknowledge. The physical nature combined with the scheming combined with the tougher contested looks is just something KD is naturally more gifted to handle. Kyrie as an example has the skillset to score in ways that only KD can duplicate - that's why both Kyrie and Durant are so unstoppably unstoppable.

With all that said - Curry is still the engine, and I think he's the better player than Durant (though it's a fair debate).

The only reason I went on a tangent about Durant is because he's absolutely a huge factor in how we view Curry. Are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry with Durant on the floor? Or are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry and both teams being relatively equal?

All else being equal, I think a smart defensive team in the playoffs can slow Curry down in a consistent, game-to-game manner, ESPECIALLY if Durant isn't there to help out. Whereas I find that a lot harder to accomplish against players like Kyrie and Kevin Durant.

So that's why I voted Kyrie in a winner takes all game.

I agree, solid post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Allphakenny1
09-07-2018, 11:47 PM
KD clearly altered the way the Cavs could defend Curry. In the playoffs when the defenses get more ferocious and develop strategies to counter players, Curry has definitely benefited from having KD on the court, something no one seems to think about.

KD gets his money in any kind of coverage, tight, loose, 0-30 feet. Hand in the face, big defender, small/aggressive defender - he is literally a weapon that wholeheartedly cannot be stopped. Best scoring weapon (in terms of versatility) in the league and has been for awhile now.

Curry is a more DOMINANT scorer than KD, because it's mostly at the 3-point line. Obviously he's very good at dribbling and driving, but his money is behind the arc. Thus - he's a tad bit easier to defensively scheme against than KD is. Unfortunately, the type of defense you need to impact Curry results in KD simply abusing you. It's not a coincidence that Curry's best playoff runs came after KD joined the Warriors.

Again, this is speaking solely about the playoffs. There's advanced stat evidence to support the fact that Curry is benefiting a lot more from KD in the playoffs than we like to acknowledge. The physical nature combined with the scheming combined with the tougher contested looks is just something KD is naturally more gifted to handle. Kyrie as an example has the skillset to score in ways that only KD can duplicate - that's why both Kyrie and Durant are so unstoppably unstoppable.

With all that said - Curry is still the engine, and I think he's the better player than Durant (though it's a fair debate).

The only reason I went on a tangent about Durant is because he's absolutely a huge factor in how we view Curry. Are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry with Durant on the floor? Or are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry and both teams being relatively equal?

All else being equal, I think a smart defensive team in the playoffs can slow Curry down in a consistent, game-to-game manner, ESPECIALLY if Durant isn't there to help out. Whereas I find that a lot harder to accomplish against players like Kyrie and Kevin Durant.

So that's why I voted Kyrie in a winner takes all game.

The problem I have with your post is it seems you are talking about Durant taking away defensive attention from Curry. If I am correct in your take I have two main problems:

1. As already stated, Irving had an even greater player taking defensive attention away from him in LeBron. Irving has never even seen close to the defensive attention Curry has in any game of note, so how are we to know if he could handle it anywhere near as well as Curry has.

2. Even with Durant, Curry is the main focus of defenses. We have seen in back to back years that the Cavs have clearly focused on Curry and allowed Durant to go one on one. We even saw them run at Curry at the three point line and give Durant the wide open dunk. We even saw the Rockets do the same and guard Durant one on one with a small defender at that. Hell, Chris Paul was on him much of the series alone. Durant struggled that series and Curry had to step up or the Warriors would have lost.

I just feel like that argument that Curry is getting less defensive attention is a weak one as Irving has never even seen close to the defensive attention Curry has seen even with Durant. Plus, it was even worse without Durant.

tredigs
09-08-2018, 12:11 AM
I'll take the clearly better scorer, playmaker and defender with countless monster performances in closeout games. Curry versus -insert PG here- and it's always Curry.

GREATNESS ONE
09-08-2018, 12:25 AM
lmao "better defender" Curry :laugh2: Curry couldn't guard me and neither can TreDigs

tredigs
09-08-2018, 05:54 AM
lmao "better defender" Curry :laugh2: Curry couldn't guard me and neither can TreDigs

If Curry being a better defender than Kyrie (and it's not close) is something that confounds you, you gotta find a new sport to dissect my guy.

ewing
09-08-2018, 08:34 AM
Do you want the guy that always hits a home run when you are already up 5 runs or the guy that might actually put you over the top in a close game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hawkeye15
09-08-2018, 09:42 AM
Curry benefits from KD. Ok. So....Kyrie didn't benefit drom having the best in the game handling most the reponsibilities?

This question is ridiculous. Kyrie had an awesome game when it mattered most. Great. He isn't consistently near Curry as a player. On top of that the dude gets hurt all the time. He also does nothing for his teamates, while Currys mere existenece helps his.

It's Curry. Easy

ewing
09-08-2018, 09:49 AM
Curry benefits from KD. Ok. So....Kyrie didn't benefit drom having the best in the game handling most the reponsibilities?

This question is ridiculous. Kyrie had an awesome game when it mattered most. Great. He isn't consistently near Curry as a player. On top of that the dude gets hurt all the time. He also does nothing for his teamates, while Currys mere existenece helps his.

It's Curry. Easy

God you are a hating. Irving does nothing for his teammates? Really?

ewing
09-08-2018, 11:08 AM
Curry benefits from KD. Ok. So....Kyrie didn't benefit drom having the best in the game handling most the reponsibilities?

This question is ridiculous. Kyrie had an awesome game when it mattered most. Great. He isn't consistently near Curry as a player. On top of that the dude gets hurt all the time. He also does nothing for his teamates, while Currys mere existenece helps his.

It's Curry. Easy

I also don't think Kyrie gets much of a bump from playing with Bron. The team does b/c LeBron is great and does the things that Kyrie doesn't but Kyrie's individual stats aren't really affected much IMO.

Vee-Rex
09-08-2018, 11:16 AM
LeBrons presence had absolutely NOTHING to do with Kyries ability to score on tough defense. About 90% of Kyries points in the 2016 finals (all 7 games) came from isolation. He consistently torched an elite defender (Klay) and any help defense they brought.

Lebron being left open isn't nearly as big of a threat as KD being left open for two reasons: KD is a much better shooter, and Steph was far more likely to pass the ball to the open man than Kyrie was.

Vee-Rex
09-08-2018, 11:17 AM
I also don't think Kyrie gets much of a bump from playing with Bron. The team does b/c LeBron is great and does the things that Kyrie doesn't but Kyrie's individual stats aren't really affected much IMO.

This.

It's why people criticized the Cavs for 4 years about their 'take-turn' offense with LeBron and kyrie.

Vee-Rex
09-08-2018, 11:39 AM
The problem I have with your post is it seems you are talking about Durant taking away defensive attention from Curry. If I am correct in your take I have two main problems:

1. As already stated, Irving had an even greater player taking defensive attention away from him in LeBron. Irving has never even seen close to the defensive attention Curry has in any game of note, so how are we to know if he could handle it anywhere near as well as Curry has.

2. Even with Durant, Curry is the main focus of defenses. We have seen in back to back years that the Cavs have clearly focused on Curry and allowed Durant to go one on one. We even saw them run at Curry at the three point line and give Durant the wide open dunk. We even saw the Rockets do the same and guard Durant one on one with a small defender at that. Hell, Chris Paul was on him much of the series alone. Durant struggled that series and Curry had to step up or the Warriors would have lost.

I just feel like that argument that Curry is getting less defensive attention is a weak one as Irving has never even seen close to the defensive attention Curry has seen even with Durant. Plus, it was even worse without Durant.

I think Irving has seen just as much defensive attention as Curry. He has been double/triple teamed, trapped, hounded/abused physically, grabbed and bumped off-ball, etc...

His style of game is just harder to stop, much like KD's style of game is harder to stop.

Curry is the main focus of defenses because you have a better chance of slowing him down than KD. Lue basically said as much. Both KD and Curry are elite scoring players - you choose to slow down the one that you think you have a better chance of slowing down, not the one who is 'better'. It's a strategy used against LeBron all the time - take away his teammates. If he puts up 50 one-on-one then so be it, you live with it. Because you can't really hope to stop him. KD (and to a lesser extent Kyrie) is kind of like that - you just gotta hope they miss.

Also, I don't like the 'go with the better player' position. It's not black-n-white like that. Sure, Curry is better than Kyrie - hands down. No question about it. But I think everyone (outside of LA) would agree that 2011 LeBron James was better than 2011 Kobe Bryant. Yet, in a winner takes all game 7 in 2011, who would you take? I'd probably take Kobe over LeBron.

Vee-Rex
09-08-2018, 11:48 AM
And lastly - we've seen Stephen Curry go 3-16 and 1-10 from 3-point range in a game of the finals (game 3 this year). Horrid performance on the court. Without KD going 15-23 and 43 points on TOUGH CONTESTED shots from all over the court, Warriors lose that game.

I can't remember Kyrie doing that badly in a playoff game. So even if you disagree (I certainly understand those picking Steph and can't blame you for it at all), don't act like it's not a legitimate question/topic.

Chronz
09-08-2018, 12:23 PM
God you are a hating. Irving does nothing for his teammates? Really?
Remember when the coaching staff wanted him to push the pace to get easy shots for his teammates? Lol, dude scoffed and said that was brons job

Raps18-19 Champ
09-08-2018, 02:38 PM
Curry easily.

ewing
09-08-2018, 05:12 PM
Remember when the coaching staff wanted him to push the pace to get easy shots for his teammates? Lol, dude scoffed and said that was brons job

You are always behind the scenes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chronz
09-08-2018, 06:00 PM
You are always behind the scenes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You flatter me, not always tho. This is a tale even a layperson like you could be privy to

ewing
09-10-2018, 08:12 AM
I like that this sad, dumb take still exists.

when the playoffs start i'll make sure the whole band gets back together :hi5:

ewing
09-10-2018, 09:45 AM
A great team can cover for a flawed star. It must be nice to blessed with such a great team. Maybe you can count your blessings instead of rubbing it in.

tredigs
09-10-2018, 09:59 AM
A great team and cover for a flawed star. It must be nice to blessed with such a great team. Maybe you can count your blessings instead of rubbing it in.

Dumb comment. The team does not exist in any incarnation close to this without Curry.

He's flawed if you're comparing him to the GOAT tier, beyond that you're just being petty.

Edit: And I sports-suffered my entire childhood for the right to this **** talk. Don't tread on me. There will be no mittens worn for your ilk during this reign, specifically when you feebily attempt to shade : )

tredigs
09-10-2018, 10:29 AM
I think Irving has seen just as much defensive attention as Curry. He has been double/triple teamed, trapped, hounded/abused physically, grabbed and bumped off-ball, etc...

His style of game is just harder to stop, much like KD's style of game is harder to stop.

Curry is the main focus of defenses because you have a better chance of slowing him down than KD. Lue basically said as much. Both KD and Curry are elite scoring players - you choose to slow down the one that you think you have a better chance of slowing down, not the one who is 'better'. It's a strategy used against LeBron all the time - take away his teammates. If he puts up 50 one-on-one then so be it, you live with it. Because you can't really hope to stop him. KD (and to a lesser extent Kyrie) is kind of like that - you just gotta hope they miss.

Also, I don't like the 'go with the better player' position. It's not black-n-white like that. Sure, Curry is better than Kyrie - hands down. No question about it. But I think everyone (outside of LA) would agree that 2011 LeBron James was better than 2011 Kobe Bryant. Yet, in a winner takes all game 7 in 2011, who would you take? I'd probably take Kobe over LeBron.
Irving has seen nothing close to the defensive attention as Curry. The term "gravity" is not just a phrase, it was based on the (now private, but sometimes tweeted) tracking data stat that Curry dominated and still dominates even with an MVP sharpshooter next to him. And yes, it is a foolish question. You take the better player at virtually all facets of basketball if given the opportunity, and that is Curry.

valade16
09-10-2018, 12:14 PM
KD clearly altered the way the Cavs could defend Curry. In the playoffs when the defenses get more ferocious and develop strategies to counter players, Curry has definitely benefited from having KD on the court, something no one seems to think about.

KD gets his money in any kind of coverage, tight, loose, 0-30 feet. Hand in the face, big defender, small/aggressive defender - he is literally a weapon that wholeheartedly cannot be stopped. Best scoring weapon (in terms of versatility) in the league and has been for awhile now.

Curry is a more DOMINANT scorer than KD, because it's mostly at the 3-point line. Obviously he's very good at dribbling and driving, but his money is behind the arc. Thus - he's a tad bit easier to defensively scheme against than KD is. Unfortunately, the type of defense you need to impact Curry results in KD simply abusing you. It's not a coincidence that Curry's best playoff runs came after KD joined the Warriors.

Again, this is speaking solely about the playoffs. There's advanced stat evidence to support the fact that Curry is benefiting a lot more from KD in the playoffs than we like to acknowledge. The physical nature combined with the scheming combined with the tougher contested looks is just something KD is naturally more gifted to handle. Kyrie as an example has the skillset to score in ways that only KD can duplicate - that's why both Kyrie and Durant are so unstoppably unstoppable.

With all that said - Curry is still the engine, and I think he's the better player than Durant (though it's a fair debate).

The only reason I went on a tangent about Durant is because he's absolutely a huge factor in how we view Curry. Are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry with Durant on the floor? Or are we talking a game 7 with Kyrie vs. Curry and both teams being relatively equal?

All else being equal, I think a smart defensive team in the playoffs can slow Curry down in a consistent, game-to-game manner, ESPECIALLY if Durant isn't there to help out. Whereas I find that a lot harder to accomplish against players like Kyrie and Kevin Durant.

So that's why I voted Kyrie in a winner takes all game.

Here are his playoff stats:

2 seasons before KD:
26.8 PPG | 5.2 RPG | 5.8 APG | 41.4% 3PT | 23.6 PER | .605 TS% | .196 WS/48 | 7.7 BPM

2 seasons with KD:
26.9 PPG | 6.2 RPG | 6.1 APG | 40.7% 3PT | 24.8 PER | .626 TS% | .229 WS/48 | 9.0 BPM


There is very little difference, the statistical increase of Curry with KD in the playoffs can best be described as "negligible".

Curry with or without KD is still scoring right around 27 PPG on 40+ from 3 (on 10+ attempts), scoring at a highly efficient .600+ TS%.

valade16
09-10-2018, 12:25 PM
I think Irving has seen just as much defensive attention as Curry. He has been double/triple teamed, trapped, hounded/abused physically, grabbed and bumped off-ball, etc...

His style of game is just harder to stop, much like KD's style of game is harder to stop.

Curry is the main focus of defenses because you have a better chance of slowing him down than KD. Lue basically said as much. Both KD and Curry are elite scoring players - you choose to slow down the one that you think you have a better chance of slowing down, not the one who is 'better'. It's a strategy used against LeBron all the time - take away his teammates. If he puts up 50 one-on-one then so be it, you live with it. Because you can't really hope to stop him. KD (and to a lesser extent Kyrie) is kind of like that - you just gotta hope they miss.

Also, I don't like the 'go with the better player' position. It's not black-n-white like that. Sure, Curry is better than Kyrie - hands down. No question about it. But I think everyone (outside of LA) would agree that 2011 LeBron James was better than 2011 Kobe Bryant. Yet, in a winner takes all game 7 in 2011, who would you take? I'd probably take Kobe over LeBron.

I think that's a laughable take. And pretty much any statistical measurement of defensive attention shows that Curry regularly receives more than Kyrie. I think you're already aware of gravity stats and what they say, but here is an article just in case:

http://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/news/stephen-curry-gravitational-pull-warriors-3-point-draymond-green/1n0am7aqkge7v1u6xjd8e2kw9r

valade16
09-10-2018, 12:26 PM
And lastly - we've seen Stephen Curry go 3-16 and 1-10 from 3-point range in a game of the finals (game 3 this year). Horrid performance on the court. Without KD going 15-23 and 43 points on TOUGH CONTESTED shots from all over the court, Warriors lose that game.

I can't remember Kyrie doing that badly in a playoff game. So even if you disagree (I certainly understand those picking Steph and can't blame you for it at all), don't act like it's not a legitimate question/topic.

You mean you can't remember Kyrie shooting that badly in a single playoff game. Because when it comes to his actual overall performance, well, he still managed to greatly contribute:

https://sports.abs-cbn.com/nba/news/2018/06/09/finals-film-study-misfiring-curry-still-draws-defense-42695

tredigs
09-10-2018, 12:45 PM
A silent moderator deletes 30% of the days NBA forum posts (see: 3) because I shaded the Knicks (fun **** talk will NOT be tolerated) in response to Ewing. Amazing. And we wonder why nobody comes to this site :laugh: Maybe throw in some more pop-up video ads that turn off whatever we're listening to, I hear that crushes. Admin team is killing it here.

Credit to Valade above for doing the dirty work on a point that is plain as day to anybody that does not watch the game with a visceral disdain for GS.

ewing
09-10-2018, 01:12 PM
A silent moderator deletes 30% of the days NBA forum posts (see: 3) because I shaded the Knicks (fun **** talk will NOT be tolerated) in response to Ewing. Amazing. And we wonder why nobody comes to this site :laugh: Maybe throw in some more pop-up video ads that turn off whatever we're listening to, I hear that crushes. Admin team is killing it here.

Credit to Valade above for doing the dirty work on a point that is plain as day to anybody that does not watch the game with a visceral disdain for GS.

Well, Thou shalt not take the Knick's name in vain is clearly in the rules :)

WaDe03
09-10-2018, 01:20 PM
God bless this thread!

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:01 PM
God you are a hating. Irving does nothing for his teammates? Really?

he doesn't create for his teammates, so no, outside the defense shading his way when he starts his dribble display, he doesn't do anything for his teammates.

This is a laughable question to me. The guy gets hotter than hell now and then, and can score, yes. But he offers nothing like Curry does, who sends defenses into pure panic just being on the floor with his range and ability to bend.

To your next point, while we will never have a lot of intel on what Curry can do without stars next to him, it's obvious that Irving isn't lifting a bad team to wins. He is as individual a player as it gets, hence why I hate his style. As a defender he puts stress on your team, and I seriously don't get the infatuation with him. He can score, and score well. There will always be a place for that, but lumping him in with a first ballot HOF'er is just ridiculous to me.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:02 PM
LeBrons presence had absolutely NOTHING to do with Kyries ability to score on tough defense. About 90% of Kyries points in the 2016 finals (all 7 games) came from isolation. He consistently torched an elite defender (Klay) and any help defense they brought.

Lebron being left open isn't nearly as big of a threat as KD being left open for two reasons: KD is a much better shooter, and Steph was far more likely to pass the ball to the open man than Kyrie was.

Irving's biggest (and dare I say only) strength is he can score the ball extremely well.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:04 PM
I think that's a laughable take. And pretty much any statistical measurement of defensive attention shows that Curry regularly receives more than Kyrie. I think you're already aware of gravity stats and what they say, but here is an article just in case:

http://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/news/stephen-curry-gravitational-pull-warriors-3-point-draymond-green/1n0am7aqkge7v1u6xjd8e2kw9r

I am not sure I have ever seen a guard bend defenses the way Curry does. The mere mention that Irving has seen the defensive attention Curry does is laughable. Curry has nearly a Shaq effect on defenses, barring the whole, teams signing big men by the droves to go foul him haha

tredigs
09-10-2018, 03:27 PM
To your next point, while we will never have a lot of intel on what Curry can do without stars next to him, it's obvious that Irving isn't lifting a bad team to wins. He is as individual a player as it gets, hence why I hate his style. As a defender he puts stress on your team, and I seriously don't get the infatuation with him. He can score, and score well. There will always be a place for that, but lumping him in with a first ballot HOF'er is just ridiculous to me.

To address this, we actually do have massive intel on what Curry does without star players. We saw him lead the NCAA in scoring while breaking 3pt records and upsetting top seeds on deep tournament runs at Davidson, we saw him post 22/7/5 on 47/45/88 his last 55 games (after not being benched early for shot selection) as a rookie, and we have thousands of minutes of on-court data with no Klay or KD where his numbers are literally no different. Couple that with the fact that he is literally (by tracking data) THE most heavily guarded player on record, and this theory can very safely be put to bed.

ewing
09-10-2018, 03:36 PM
he doesn't create for his teammates, so no, outside the defense shading his way when he starts his dribble display, he doesn't do anything for his teammates.

This is a laughable question to me. The guy gets hotter than hell now and then, and can score, yes. But he offers nothing like Curry does, who sends defenses into pure panic just being on the floor with his range and ability to bend.

To your next point, while we will never have a lot of intel on what Curry can do without stars next to him, it's obvious that Irving isn't lifting a bad team to wins. He is as individual a player as it gets, hence why I hate his style. As a defender he puts stress on your team, and I seriously don't get the infatuation with him. He can score, and score well. There will always be a place for that, but lumping him in with a first ballot HOF'er is just ridiculous to me.


He might be the best finisher off the drive in the league, hell yeah guys shade to him. he is also 40% shooter from down town. I know Curry is the best at it but he isn't the only guy in the league that spreads the floor you know. Plus guys do more then shade they have double on those drives, and the dude can push the ball. Irving is a heck of an offensive weapon. you can hate b/c it makes LeBron look good, and you can think Curry is the clear answer here but saying he doesn't do anything for his teammates is the laughable opinion.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:38 PM
To address this, we actually do have massive intel on what Curry does without star players. We saw him lead the NCAA in scoring while breaking 3pt records and upsetting top seeds on deep tournament runs at Davidson, we saw him post 22/7/5 on 47/45/88 his last 55 games (after not being benched early for shot selection) as a rookie, and we have thousands of minutes of on-court data with no Klay or KD where his numbers are literally no different. Couple that with the fact that he is literally (by tracking data) THE most heavily guarded player on record, and this theory can very safely be put to bed.

don't care about college

I mean in the playoffs man. I am not saying he wouldn't be awesome, just saying we haven't seen him try and carry a team that has zero consistent help, like we did early with Irving (terrible results).

Trust me, I am on your side with this one. Irving is arguably the most overrated player in the NBA. Even though I concede he has incredible value as a scorer, his value stops right there. He doesn't make his teammates better, and anyone who dribbles the air out of the ball nightly will not bend defenses, they actually play into defenses. Again, his scoring, especially his timely scoring, has held a lot of value. But he aint no HOF'er in the making dude. Sorry.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:38 PM
He might be the best finisher off the drive in the league, hell yeah guys shade to him. he is also 40% shooter from down town. I know Curry is the best at it but he isn't the only guy in the league that spreads the floor you know. Plus guys do more then shade they have double on those drives, and the dude can push the ball. Irving is a heck of an offensive weapon. you can hate b/c it makes LeBron look good, and you can think Curry is the clear answer here but saying he doesn't help a do anything for his teammates is the laughable opinion.

I have already spelled out what he is great at-scoring on his own. What you consider shading is my retort to what some think his value is. I could care less about the Bron angle. Bron actually did benefit from Irving, a LOT. He needed another creator to help take away some of the responsibility he had. And Irving did a great job of that at times, especially when it mattered most. But this question, between these 2, is beyond simple to answer.

He isn't in Curry's class as a player. Not even close.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 03:41 PM
Curry is a lot better at the one thing Irving does at an elite level. That alone ends this.

tredigs
09-10-2018, 03:50 PM
don't care about college

I mean in the playoffs man. I am not saying he wouldn't be awesome, just saying we haven't seen him try and carry a team that has zero consistent help, like we did early with Irving (terrible results).

Trust me, I am on your side with this one. Irving is arguably the most overrated player in the NBA. Even though I concede he has incredible value as a scorer, his value stops right there. He doesn't make his teammates better, and anyone who dribbles the air out of the ball nightly will not bend defenses, they actually play into defenses. Again, his scoring, especially his timely scoring, has held a lot of value. But he aint no HOF'er in the making dude. Sorry.

I know you are, I'm just saying that the underlying point here is essentially "how good can he be when the defense is dialed in on him", and yet we're talking about the player who defenses have been THE most dialed in on. Always been a very confusing topic surrounding Curry, even though I get it on a surface level.

valade16
09-10-2018, 04:07 PM
I know you are, I'm just saying that the underlying point here is essentially "how good can he be when the defense is dialed in on him", and yet we're talking about the player who defenses have been THE most dialed in on. Always been a very confusing topic surrounding Curry, even though I get it on a surface level.

What's even more bizarre is people who say KD helped Curry immensely and yet freely admit that the Cavs completely game planned to stop Curry. So KD made things exponentially easier for the team and made it easier for them to win, but he didn't really make things much easier on Curry specifically from a defensive standpoint in the Finals considering the Cavs were guarding Curry as they always have. The main way he made it easier for the Warriors is that Curry could simply give him the ball and he'd score because of all the attention given to Curry, which again, isn't really personally helping Curry so much as it is generally helping the Warriors.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 04:08 PM
I know you are, I'm just saying that the underlying point here is essentially "how good can he be when the defense is dialed in on him", and yet we're talking about the player who defenses have been THE most dialed in on. Always been a very confusing topic surrounding Curry, even though I get it on a surface level.

absolutely dude. As I said, I have never seen a guard bend defenses like Curry does. That includes MJ. You didn't have to worry about MJ until he was 20-22 feet from the rim. Curry gets attention at halfcourt. I have also never seen defenders go into sheer panic when a player is open from 27 feet haha.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 04:10 PM
What's even more bizarre is people who say KD helped Curry immensely and yet freely admit that the Cavs completely game planned to stop Curry. So KD made things exponentially easier for the team and made it easier for them to win, but he didn't really make things much easier on Curry specifically from a defensive standpoint in the Finals considering the Cavs were guarding Curry as they always have. The main way he made it easier for the Warriors is that Curry could simply give him the ball and he'd score because of all the attention given to Curry, which again, isn't really personally helping Curry so much as it is generally helping the Warriors.

I had to read this 3 times to get it...

but yes, you are correct. And saying KD helped Curry is like saying exercise helped a fat person lose weight. Duh

valade16
09-10-2018, 04:18 PM
I had to read this 3 times to get it...

but yes, you are correct. And saying KD helped Curry is like saying exercise helped a fat person lose weight. Duh

Lol, I may not have said it in a very clear way. My point is that KD certainly didn't help Curry see less defensive attention in the Cavs finals. He saw just as much as he always has. KD helped Curry in the Cavs finals by being so freaking good Curry could simply give him the ball because he was facing triple teams 30 ft from the basket and be confident the Warriors were going to win because KD would annihilate single coverage. But KD didn't help Curry not have to face a loaded defense, in those finals.

Vee-Rex
09-10-2018, 04:41 PM
Again, in an all or nothing game, I take 2011 Kobe over 2011 LeBron. This 'take the best player no matter what the scenario is' is hilariously obtuse. Some of you seem to be unable to comprehend how the topic changes things.

And I'll piece up valade and his cherry-picked stats a little later this week when I have time.

valade16
09-10-2018, 04:46 PM
Again, in an all or nothing game, I take 2011 Kobe over 2011 LeBron. This 'take the best player no matter what the scenario is' is hilariously obtuse. Some of you seem to be unable to comprehend how the topic changes things.

And I'll piece up valade and his cherry-picked stats a little later this week when I have time.


cherry-picked stats? lol. I think not.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 05:25 PM
Again, in an all or nothing game, I take 2011 Kobe over 2011 LeBron. This 'take the best player no matter what the scenario is' is hilariously obtuse. Some of you seem to be unable to comprehend how the topic changes things.

And I'll piece up valade and his cherry-picked stats a little later this week when I have time.

why? In an all or nothing game, you want the guy who gives you the better chance the majority of the time. If you want to cherrypick a single game/series here or there, a case can be made for nearly anyone over anyone. Like sure, take Kobe's best over LeBron's worst. Got it. But are you really going into a series taking Kobe over LeBron, like ever? Of course not.

If Curry and Irving were both given 20 playoff games, we would see Curry play better than Irving. We can easily assume this, going off all past results. So Curry is the answer. We also know Curry draws the defense every moment he is on the floor, which helps his teammates. Irving on the other hand, is not getting a defense to shift to him when he is 27 feet from the rim without the ball.

Hawkeye15
09-10-2018, 05:27 PM
Lol, I may not have said it in a very clear way. My point is that KD certainly didn't help Curry see less defensive attention in the Cavs finals. He saw just as much as he always has. KD helped Curry in the Cavs finals by being so freaking good Curry could simply give him the ball because he was facing triple teams 30 ft from the basket and be confident the Warriors were going to win because KD would annihilate single coverage. But KD didn't help Curry not have to face a loaded defense, in those finals.

correct. KD was the biggest benefactor of his move to GS, not the other way around. KD played with more freedom than any "superstar" should ever get.

Chronz
09-10-2018, 07:22 PM
Again, in an all or nothing game, I take 2011 Kobe over 2011 LeBron. This 'take the best player no matter what the scenario is' is hilariously obtuse. Some of you seem to be unable to comprehend how the topic changes things.

And I'll piece up valade and his cherry-picked stats a little later this week when I have time.

Why? Kobe looked pedestrian that year

Chronz
09-10-2018, 08:31 PM
Totally different subject and sort of a game of semantics here, but yall do know gravity is bs right

ewing
09-10-2018, 09:33 PM
Will anyones opinion change when Kyrie wins the finals MVP next year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Scoots
09-10-2018, 10:28 PM
Totally different subject and sort of a game of semantics here, but yall do know gravity is bs right

Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJUHKIxj51A

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 12:43 AM
KD did save Curry's "legacy" somewhat, though. Are we sure Warriors walk away convincingly with two titles the past two years had KD not joined? I'm not so sure about that. That would definitely bring up debates about whether or not Curry has the "it" factor. It's worked out great for them both but in a way, I felt the consensus during those years were whether or not Curry could surpass LeBron and not KD. KD actually fell out of the discussion for a short period in Curry's MVP years.

ewing
09-11-2018, 08:08 AM
Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJUHKIxj51A

you can hear the Cavs coaching staff yelling "great D JR"

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 09:10 AM
KD did save Curry's "legacy" somewhat, though. Are we sure Warriors walk away convincingly with two titles the past two years had KD not joined? I'm not so sure about that. That would definitely bring up debates about whether or not Curry has the "it" factor. It's worked out great for them both but in a way, I felt the consensus during those years were whether or not Curry could surpass LeBron and not KD. KD actually fell out of the discussion for a short period in Curry's MVP years.

we know for a fact Irving never sees the finals, conference finals, or maybe even playoffs, without LeBron.

So what is your point?

ewing
09-11-2018, 09:11 AM
we know for a fact Irving never sees the finals, conference finals, or maybe even playoffs, without LeBron.

So what is your point?

I think he will do all those things this year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 09:32 AM
I think he will do all those things this year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sure, he has mega help. Why wouldn't he make the playoffs with a high seed with his team? Hopefully he stays upright, he has a knack for getting hurt at pretty bad times.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 09:34 AM
I just realized, Irving reminds me of Steve Francis with a sick long ball.

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 10:13 AM
Totally different subject and sort of a game of semantics here, but yall do know gravity is bs right

Just something they can use to try and boost curry

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 10:14 AM
Interesting answers here after seeing the results of the 2016 finals series between the two. Maybe itís just a bias for Curry because everyone loves his shooting? Who knows but the proof is in the pudding fellas.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 10:49 AM
Interesting answers here after seeing the results of the 2016 finals series between the two. Maybe itís just a bias for Curry because everyone loves his shooting? Who knows but the proof is in the pudding fellas.

I mean, which of these 2 you taking?

A
2 time MVP
5 time all NBA
best shooter in history
great playoff runs

or

B
1 time all NBA
great finals series but not considered by anyone the best player on his own team

Look, Irving is a gamer when he wants to be, and when he is healthy. But his strongest asset, his scoring, he isn't even as good as Curry at it.

I honestly have no idea how this is a debate. Curry is on tier 1 of PG's, today, and all time. Irving isn't even a top tier PG today. And we haven't even brought up injury concerns...

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 10:55 AM
we know for a fact Irving never sees the finals, conference finals, or maybe even playoffs, without LeBron.

So what is your point?

I'm not sure what your post is in response to at all. Curry was at one point being compared to Jordan, LeBron, etc., as being a "GOAT" performer because of his regular season dominance particularly in his MVP years. I don't think his career would have gained any traction had it not been KD going to the Warriors as well. KD had already fallen off as the "next in line" because Curry was dominating the league. It was a mutual benefit. KD benefitted from having a superstacked team while Curry managed to win without being pressured to perform against LeBron. Not sure where the Kyrie thing comes from but your dislike for him doesn't change the fact that he was a great fit alongside LeBron and he showed up when needed. Not many could have showed up vs the Warriors the way he did and does.

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 11:02 AM
I mean, which of these 2 you taking?

A
2 time MVP
5 time all NBA
best shooter in history
great playoff runs

or

B
1 time all NBA
great finals series but not considered by anyone the best player on his own team

Look, Irving is a gamer when he wants to be, and when he is healthy. But his strongest asset, his scoring, he isn't even as good as Curry at it.

I honestly have no idea how this is a debate. Curry is on tier 1 of PG's, today, and all time. Irving isn't even a top tier PG today. And we haven't even brought up injury concerns...

Have you taken a look at the question? I don't think anyone sane would take Kyrie over Curry today for a season but it specifically states for one game and I just gotta go with Kyrie because I feel he has more dog in his game to pull out a special performance. Now, does that mean Curry isn't capable of that? 100% he from what I've seen thus far, in tight games, I've always felt Kyrie was one of those special players of all time at showing up when needed. Also, Kyrie has done very well in Boston despite him being regarded as a "me" player. Also, what are we talking about when we say tier 1? Harden, Curry, Westbrook, and maybe CP3?

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 11:12 AM
I mean, which of these 2 you taking?

A
2 time MVP
5 time all NBA
best shooter in history
great playoff runs

or

B
1 time all NBA
great finals series but not considered by anyone the best player on his own team

Look, Irving is a gamer when he wants to be, and when he is healthy. But his strongest asset, his scoring, he isn't even as good as Curry at it.

I honestly have no idea how this is a debate. Curry is on tier 1 of PG's, today, and all time. Irving isn't even a top tier PG today. And we haven't even brought up injury concerns...

See Flashbolts post. This isnít for a whole season, I have Curry as the 3rd best player in the league and best PG but Kyrie is a better big game player when theyíre matched up against each other. Thatís with Klay guarding Kyrie much more than Curry too from what I remember watching. Kyrie has the killer instinct in him and it shows in big games, Curry tucks his tail majority of the time.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 11:13 AM
Have you taken a look at the question? I don't think anyone sane would take Kyrie over Curry today for a season but it specifically states for one game and I just gotta go with Kyrie because I feel he has more dog in his game to pull out a special performance. Now, does that mean Curry isn't capable of that? 100% he from what I've seen thus far, in tight games, I've always felt Kyrie was one of those special players of all time at showing up when needed. Also, Kyrie has done very well in Boston despite him being regarded as a "me" player. Also, what are we talking about when we say tier 1? Harden, Curry, Westbrook, and maybe CP3?

I addressed the question. It's all a game of statistics. In general, Curry will outplay Irving. Because he literally does that already. So going into an unknown, I will take the guy with the numbers and results on his side.

I get people want to get a gigantic boner over Kyrie having an excellent 2016 finals (in which he was nowhere near his own teams best player), but anyone who picks Irving over Curry is hoping for his best case scenario, not his consistent output.

Besides the numbers on my side, my taste won't allow me to pick a player who shows up when he feels like it. I ****ing hated Rondo for this reason, Irving isn't a lot different. I truly feel he plays for he name on the back of his jersey before the front, all day long.

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 11:24 AM
I addressed the question. It's all a game of statistics. In general, Curry will outplay Irving. Because he literally does that already. So going into an unknown, I will take the guy with the numbers and results on his side.

I get people want to get a gigantic boner over Kyrie having an excellent 2016 finals (in which he was nowhere near his own teams best player), but anyone who picks Irving over Curry is hoping for his best case scenario, not his consistent output.

Besides the numbers on my side, my taste won't allow me to pick a player who shows up when he feels like it. I ****ing hated Rondo for this reason, Irving isn't a lot different. I truly feel he plays for he name on the back of his jersey before the front, all day long.

I'm not judging it just by the Finals. Kyrie has more dog in him and his skillset is more difficult to defend than Curry in a way where he can throw up a variety of shots that defenders simply can't guard. Curry can too but to a lesser extent because he relies so much more on his shooting ability. So I'll take Kyrie because I feel his game is built more for these situations. Your opinion that he only plays for the name on his back, well, I don't see it. He was great for the Cavs and did well for the Celtics as well. Not sure why he gets so much flack. He's a top five PG in the league.

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 11:36 AM
I mean he completely embarrassed Curry in that finals imo. He didnít just outplay him, he embarrassed him, especially towards the end.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 11:50 AM
I'm not judging it just by the Finals. Kyrie has more dog in him and his skillset is more difficult to defend than Curry in a way where he can throw up a variety of shots that defenders simply can't guard. Curry can too but to a lesser extent because he relies so much more on his shooting ability. So I'll take Kyrie because I feel his game is built more for these situations. Your opinion that he only plays for the name on his back, well, I don't see it. He was great for the Cavs and did well for the Celtics as well. Not sure why he gets so much flack. He's a top five PG in the league.

then you take Irving. Cool. I wouldn't.

Curry
CP3
Westbrook
Harden

Lowry
Lillard
Irving (if healthy)
Wall

pretty easy

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 11:51 AM
I mean he completely embarrassed Curry in that finals imo. He didnít just outplay him, he embarrassed him, especially towards the end.

I'm not here to convince you to take the clearly better player player. That is up to y'all

Chronz
09-11-2018, 11:56 AM
Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJUHKIxj51A
That's the only version of gravity I believe in

Chronz
09-11-2018, 11:58 AM
sure, he has mega help. Why wouldn't he make the playoffs with a high seed with his team? Hopefully he stays upright, he has a knack for getting hurt at pretty bad times.

Lol they almost did it without him and the superior player in Hayward

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 11:59 AM
Lol they almost did it without him and the superior player in Hayward

well I am not touching that currently (the fact Irving still won't be his teams best player). But, his 25/game on efficiency, despite being meh to below meh in basically every other aspect of basketball except dribbling, will get mucho credit yet again.

valade16
09-11-2018, 12:09 PM
I'm not sure what your post is in response to at all. Curry was at one point being compared to Jordan, LeBron, etc., as being a "GOAT" performer because of his regular season dominance particularly in his MVP years. I don't think his career would have gained any traction had it not been KD going to the Warriors as well. KD had already fallen off as the "next in line" because Curry was dominating the league. It was a mutual benefit. KD benefitted from having a superstacked team while Curry managed to win without being pressured to perform against LeBron. Not sure where the Kyrie thing comes from but your dislike for him doesn't change the fact that he was a great fit alongside LeBron and he showed up when needed. Not many could have showed up vs the Warriors the way he did and does.

What does this mean? If anything, Curry's personal legacy has suffered because of KD at the expense of the legacy of the Warriors. This idea that Curry was "finally" able to win because of KD seems to somehow completely erase the fact the Warriors had already won the title before KD. Curry's team was already so stacked prior to KD he didn't have to go toe to toe with Bron and win. The Warriors likely still walk away with more titles even if KD doesn't come over (even if it's only 1 or 2 more).

The Warriors and Curry didn't need KD to be a great team and go down historically. All one needs to do is answer the question of whether it was possible Curry will go down as one of the 10 greatest players ever. Before KD joined the Warriors, many people said yes, now almost everyone says no. That should tell you all you need to know on the effect KD has had on Curry's legacy. It boosted his floor at the expense of his ceiling.

tredigs
09-11-2018, 01:20 PM
I mean he completely embarrassed Curry in that finals imo. He didnít just outplay him, he embarrassed him, especially towards the end.

Curry was clearly not playing close to the same level post injury as he was pre injury (arguably GOAT offensive season), but I still give Kyrie that one. He was awesome. Still scored less efficiently than Curry under less defensive pressure, but he was better than any of the Warriors in that series. Luckily for us that was not the only sample though, as he did go against a healthy Curry the following season, and Curry turned him inside out with 27/8/9 on a 62% TS (outplaying Kyrie in absolutely every facet of basketball). And again, we have seen Curry in countless close out games. He murders. Watch the games or go look back at the stats, this isn't a mystery.

This question is entirely rooted in the 2016 Finals (specifically Kyrie's 3), but Curry has a resume that far exceeds one game/series. Again, this question is not close. You take the player who is better than Irving at basketball in every way. @Flashbolt, bear in mind, Curry is still very much in MVP form. That hasn't swayed for nearly half a decade now.

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 01:27 PM
Curry was clearly not playing close to the same level post injury as he was pre injury (arguably GOAT offensive season), but instill give Kyrie that one. He was awesome. Still scored less efficiently than Curry, but he was better than any of the Warriors in that series. He did go against a healthy Curry the following season though, and Curry turned him inside out with 27/8/9 on a 62% TS (outplaying Kyrie in absolutely every facet of basketball). And again, we have seen Curry in countless close out games. He murders.

This question is rooted in the 2016 Finals (specifically Kyrie's 3), but Curry has a resume that far exceeds one game/series. Again, this question is not close. You take the player who is better than Irving at basketball in every way. @Flashbolt, bear in mind, Curry is still very much in MVP form. That hasn't swayed for nearly half a decade now.

But that following year they added KD and you couldnít guard any of them the same way after that so Iím sorry but I donít use anything KD or Curry does now to debate anything but theyíre seeing benefits no one has ever seen before. Even worse this year once cousins returns.

I will say though depending on how fast Tatum and Brown progress I could change my stance on that because theyíll be ridiculously stacked as well.

valade16
09-11-2018, 01:35 PM
But that following year they added KD and you couldnít guard any of them the same way after that so Iím sorry but I donít use anything KD or Curry does now to debate anything but theyíre seeing benefits no one has ever seen before. Even worse this year once cousins returns.

I will say though depending on how fast Tatum and Brown progress I could change my stance on that because theyíll be ridiculously stacked as well.

Except we know that is what Cleveland did to Curry. They continued to double Curry and focus on him at the expense of KD going one on one (which was a big mistake).

tredigs
09-11-2018, 01:44 PM
But that following year they added KD and you couldnít guard any of them the same way after that so Iím sorry but I donít use anything KD or Curry does now to debate anything but theyíre seeing benefits no one has ever seen before. Even worse this year once cousins returns.

I will say though depending on how fast Tatum and Brown progress I could change my stance on that because theyíll be ridiculously stacked as well.

It's like you guys did not watch the Finals. The Cavs made no secret of the fact that Curry was the key of their defensive scheme and that KD would be getting the single coverage. Hence KD murdering in ISO all series. Bear in mind Kyrie is over there playing with mutliple offensive All Stars including LeBron ****ing James (a team that was posting the highest Offensive rating in playoff history entering that Finals btw). He is STILL more heavily focused on than Kyrie, make no mistake about that. Face it man, he is better than Kyrie at all aspects of the game, and that is the player you take.

And yes, the Celtics are beyond stacked with the emergence of Brown and Tatum on an ECF team to go with the multiple All Stars they'll be adding. They are also a matchup issue for GS. I expect that to be the Finals and I expect it to be epic.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 01:54 PM
Curry was clearly not playing close to the same level post injury as he was pre injury (arguably GOAT offensive season), but I still give Kyrie that one. He was awesome. Still scored less efficiently than Curry under less defensive pressure, but he was better than any of the Warriors in that series. Luckily for us that was not the only sample though, as he did go against a healthy Curry the following season, and Curry turned him inside out with 27/8/9 on a 62% TS (outplaying Kyrie in absolutely every facet of basketball). And again, we have seen Curry in countless close out games. He murders. Watch the games or go look back at the stats, this isn't a mystery.

This question is entirely rooted in the 2016 Finals (specifically Kyrie's 3), but Curry has a resume that far exceeds one game/series. Again, this question is not close. You take the player who is better than Irving at basketball in every way. @Flashbolt, bear in mind, Curry is still very much in MVP form. That hasn't swayed for nearly half a decade now.


exactly. ****ing goldfish memory, yet again

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 01:55 PM
Except we know that is what Cleveland did to Curry. They continued to double Curry and focus on him at the expense of KD going one on one (which was a big mistake).

when a team is as loaded as GS, you make tough choices. It's maddening that people here don't recognize that Curry was THE defensive gameplan. Get the ball out of his hands and hope to god Durant and Klay don't kill their one on one matchups. It didn't work, shocking..

Hawkeye15
09-11-2018, 01:56 PM
It's like you guys did not watch the Finals. The Cavs made no secret of the fact that Curry was the key of their defensive scheme and that KD would be getting the single coverage. Hence KD murdering in ISO all series. Bear in mind Kyrie is over there playing with mutliple offensive All Stars including LeBron ****ing James (a team that was posting the highest Offensive rating in playoff history entering that Finals btw). He is STILL more heavily focused on than Kyrie, make no mistake about that. Face it man, he is better than Kyrie at all aspects of the game, and that is the player you take.

And yes, the Celtics are beyond stacked with the emergence of Brown and Tatum on an ECF team to go with the multiple All Stars they'll be adding. They are also a matchup issue for GS. I expect that to be the Finals and I expect it to be epic.

that is my entire point. Kyrie offers elite scoring. That is literally it. And Curry is better at it haha

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 06:10 PM
why? In an all or nothing game, you want the guy who gives you the better chance the majority of the time. If you want to cherrypick a single game/series here or there, a case can be made for nearly anyone over anyone. Like sure, take Kobe's best over LeBron's worst. Got it. But are you really going into a series taking Kobe over LeBron, like ever? Of course not.

If Curry and Irving were both given 20 playoff games, we would see Curry play better than Irving. We can easily assume this, going off all past results. So Curry is the answer. We also know Curry draws the defense every moment he is on the floor, which helps his teammates. Irving on the other hand, is not getting a defense to shift to him when he is 27 feet from the rim without the ball.

No - in an all or nothing game, you want the guy who is likely to overcome the weight and pressure of an all or nothing game and shine. You can't just math your way through this. There are many known 'chokers' in the history of the NBA. Stephen Curry still has a question mark there (I'm not calling him a choker, but I can't enthusiastically say that he's a big-time torch-the-defense performer when it matters on the biggest stage), whereas Kyrie almost always EXCEED his normal output in crucial, all-or-nothing type moments.

When it comes to an all-or-nothing game, previous games get thrown out of the window. I don't care if someone is outstanding 82 games in the row - if I have doubts about their mentality and performance in an all-out game because of many previous blunders and bad performances in those exact same scenarios, then I will hesitate to take them.

That's not just in sports - high-pressure situations exist everywhere. You can be the most flawless driver ever but underperform during the state driving test because of the pressure. You can be the best speaker and conversationist ever but underperform during a job interview. I will take the flawless driver in every situation, but I WILL hesitate to take them during the driving test if I have doubts on whether they can maintain that same standard I'm used to.

Hawkeye, you're applying factors that simply don't matter much in this type of discussion, and it's weighted by your crushingly personal and self-proclaimed bias against Kyrie. Whereas I like both Kyrie and Steph (though I do LIKE Kyrie more), I have praised and criticized them both.

You can't say, "ALL HE DOES IS SCORE." when scoring is LITERALLY THE BEST POSSIBLE PLAY IN THE GAME. Yes, we want players to be able to get others involved and play defense, but you can't sit there and weigh scoring evenly with getting a hand in someone's face. You just can't. And yes, Curry is an elite scorer and easily better than Kyrie, but their STYLE of scoring is important in an all-out live or die game. I've said all I can say regarding this matter with you because of your bias, though.

Feel free to argue 'til your face is blue, though.

valade16
09-11-2018, 06:23 PM
No - in an all or nothing game, you want the guy who is likely to overcome the weight and pressure of an all or nothing game and shine. You can't just math your way through this. There are many known 'chokers' in the history of the NBA. Stephen Curry still has a question mark there (I'm not calling him a choker, but I can't enthusiastically say that he's a big-time torch-the-defense performer when it matters on the biggest stage), whereas Kyrie almost always EXCEED his normal output in crucial, all-or-nothing type moments.

When it comes to an all-or-nothing game, previous games get thrown out of the window. I don't care if someone is outstanding 82 games in the row - if I have doubts about their mentality and performance in an all-out game because of many previous blunders and bad performances in those exact same scenarios, then I will hesitate to take them.

That's not just in sports - high-pressure situations exist everywhere. You can be the most flawless driver ever but underperform during the state driving test because of the pressure. You can be the best speaker and conversationist ever but underperform during a job interview. I will take the flawless driver in every situation, but I WILL hesitate to take them during the driving test if I have doubts on whether they can maintain that same standard I'm used to.

Hawkeye, you're applying factors that simply don't matter much in this type of discussion, and it's weighted by your crushingly personal and self-proclaimed bias against Kyrie. Whereas I like both Kyrie and Steph (though I do LIKE Kyrie more), I have praised and criticized them both.

You can't say, "ALL HE DOES IS SCORE." when scoring is LITERALLY THE BEST POSSIBLE PLAY IN THE GAME. Yes, we want players to be able to get others involved and play defense, but you can't sit there and weigh scoring evenly with getting a hand in someone's face. You just can't. And yes, Curry is an elite scorer and easily better than Kyrie, but their STYLE of scoring is important in an all-out live or die game. I've said all I can say regarding this matter with you because of your bias, though.

Feel free to argue 'til your face is blue, though.

Are you saying this because of the single Game 7? Or are there other examples?

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 06:30 PM
Here are his playoff stats:

2 seasons before KD:
26.8 PPG | 5.2 RPG | 5.8 APG | 41.4% 3PT | 23.6 PER | .605 TS% | .196 WS/48 | 7.7 BPM

2 seasons with KD:
26.9 PPG | 6.2 RPG | 6.1 APG | 40.7% 3PT | 24.8 PER | .626 TS% | .229 WS/48 | 9.0 BPM


There is very little difference, the statistical increase of Curry with KD in the playoffs can best be described as "negligible".

Curry with or without KD is still scoring right around 27 PPG on 40+ from 3 (on 10+ attempts), scoring at a highly efficient .600+ TS%.

1. I think it's hilarious that, despite the 'minimal' difference, your playoff stats show that his two seasons with KD are in fact more beneficial for him. The WS/48, TS%, and BPM are not negligible at all. The advanced stats show a pretty noticeable difference.

Not to mention that, for whatever reason, Curry was not getting to the free throw line at all in the 2018 playoffs which warped his TS%. If he had maintained a similar FTr his TS% with KD would be even higher.

2. As for the traditional stats, you conveniently left out that he played 1440 total minutes in the 2 seasons before KD, whereas he only played 1156 minutes in the 2 playoff seasons with KD. Add nearly 300 minutes to his latter 2 seasons and I guarantee the PPG, RPG, and APG would be noticeably higher and much more than a 'negligible' difference.

3. How conveniently you also ignore the TOV% which is possibly the biggest flaw with Curry's game. His TOV% with KD is 12.8, but his TOV% the 2 seasons prior to KD is 15.5. 31.5 USG 2 seasons before KD, 29.8 USG with KD. So even accounting for the slight change there, it's still a pretty big difference in TOV%.

4. EFG%: 58.8 without KD, 60.6% with KD.

5. 2PT%: 53.7% without KD, 59.6% with KD. Pretty sizable difference there.

And while this might not seem like such a big deal (lolol who cares about 2pt% amirite amirite???), if you dig a little deeper you'll see that Curry has a greater percentage of open/wide-open shots WITH KD in the playoffs than the 2 prior years without. This shows that defenses, while still pulled in by his gravity, aren't committing the same kind attention and help as they did when he was without KD.

And ****, if we drill down EVEN MORE and look at the 2015 and 2016 finals compared to the 2017 and 2018 (all against the Cavs) finals, you'll see that the same holds true - Curry gets a greater percentage of open looks with KD than without. And if post-KD Curry got the same amount of minutes, I imagine his 3PT% would've been closer to pre-KD Curry's, which would've resulted in even better numbers for post-KD Curry.

His catch-n-shoot stats are the same way. Waaaaaay bigger percentage of pull-up shots (the type that he shoots least accurately with btw) in the 2015 and 2016 playoffs than the 2017 and 2018 playoffs.

Curry is CLEARLY benefitting from having KD there in the playoffs and just a black-n-white look at some cherry-picked stats doesn't tell the entire story.

There's also some circumstances likely involved that we can't even begin to measure statistically. How much better offensively does Kyrie play on a team loaded with playmakers and offensive talent and defense to help his energy exertion (he's only really had LeBron in Cleveland). Give him Green and KD and Klay to defend at elite levels to help him keep him from expending energy on defense. Green and KD to handle the rock and put pressure on the defense in fast breaks. KD and Klay to spread that floor.

We've seen Kyrie annihilate opposing teams while on star-studded rosters (Olympics, all-star). Who's to say Kyrie's numbers wouldn't be better on Golden State compared to Kyrie's numbers on Cleveland in the playoffs? Every year he has reached the playoffs, his numbers have improved compared to his regular season numbers.

Anyway, the above two paragraphs of circumstances are just speculation and aren't solid whatsoever. I would love if we had some kind of real life simulator and could swap NBA players just to see how it goes.

With alllllllllllllll of that said... you pick Steph in this situation? Fine by me. I don't see anything wrong with it - in fact, it's probably the 'safest' choice. Steph is clearly a better player than Kyrie.

My only contention in this thread is that it's still a legitimate question because of the nova levels we've seen Kyrie reach in the big games, and the abysmal 2/32408423 with 2234908234 turnover performances we've seen from Steph in some big games. You can scream gravity all you want but those kind of **** performances lose games if you don't have KD there to go nova and carry you to a win.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 06:38 PM
Are you saying this because of the single Game 7? Or are there other examples?

Game 5 of that very same finals comes to mind. Game 6 he had some really big moments later in the game. And I'm pretty sure he had a big performance in one of the early games as well.

That's not counting a **** ton of big moments in the EC (check out the 2016 1st round Detroit series and how insanely huge/clutch Kyrie was in the biggest moments of the series), or the ones in the 2017 finals. He's not gonna go 3/16 from the field in one of those big games - I've never seen it happen. If my life is on the line I'd be ******** bricks picking a guy that could possibly throw up some numbers like that.

valade16
09-11-2018, 06:41 PM
1. I think it's hilarious that, despite the 'minimal' difference, your playoff stats show that his two seasons with KD are in fact more beneficial for him. The WS/48, TS%, and BPM are not negligible at all. The advanced stats show a pretty noticeable difference.

Not to mention that, for whatever reason, Curry was not getting to the free throw line at all in the 2018 playoffs which warped his TS%. If he had maintained a similar FTr his TS% with KD would be even higher.

2. As for the traditional stats, you conveniently left out that he played 1440 total minutes in the 2 seasons before KD, whereas he only played 1156 minutes in the 2 playoff seasons with KD. Add nearly 300 minutes to his latter 2 seasons and I guarantee the PPG, RPG, and APG would be noticeably higher and much more than a 'negligible' difference.

3. How conveniently you also ignore the TOV% which is possibly the biggest flaw with Curry's game. His TOV% with KD is 12.8, but his TOV% the 2 seasons prior to KD is 15.5. 31.5 USG 2 seasons before KD, 29.8 USG with KD. So even accounting for the slight change there, it's still a pretty big difference in TOV%.

4. EFG%: 58.8 without KD, 60.6% with KD.

5. 2PT%: 53.7% without KD, 59.6% with KD. Pretty sizable difference there.

And while this might not seem like such a big deal (lolol who cares about 2pt% amirite amirite???), if you dig a little deeper you'll see that Curry has a greater percentage of open/wide-open shots WITH KD in the playoffs than the 2 prior years without. This shows that defenses, while still pulled in by his gravity, aren't committing the same kind attention and help as they did when he was without KD.

And ****, if we drill down EVEN MORE and look at the 2015 and 2016 finals compared to the 2017 and 2018 (all against the Cavs) finals, you'll see that the same holds true - Curry gets a greater percentage of open looks with KD than without. And if post-KD Curry got the same amount of minutes, I imagine his 3PT% would've been closer to pre-KD Curry's, which would've resulted in even better numbers for post-KD Curry.

His catch-n-shoot stats are the same way. Waaaaaay bigger percentage of pull-up shots (the type that he shoots least accurately with btw) in the 2015 and 2016 playoffs than the 2017 and 2018 playoffs.

Curry is CLEARLY benefitting from having KD there in the playoffs and just a black-n-white look at some cherry-picked stats doesn't tell the entire story.

There's also some circumstances likely involved that we can't even begin to measure statistically. How much better offensively does Kyrie play on a team loaded with playmakers and offensive talent and defense to help his energy exertion (he's only really had LeBron in Cleveland). Give him Green and KD and Klay to defend at elite levels to help him keep him from expending energy on defense. Green and KD to handle the rock and put pressure on the defense in fast breaks. KD and Klay to spread that floor.

We've seen Kyrie annihilate opposing teams while on star-studded rosters (Olympics, all-star). Who's to say Kyrie's numbers wouldn't be better on Golden State compared to Kyrie's numbers on Cleveland in the playoffs? Every year he has reached the playoffs, his numbers have improved compared to his regular season numbers.

Anyway, the above two paragraphs of circumstances are just speculation and aren't solid whatsoever. I would love if we had some kind of real life simulator and could swap NBA players just to see how it goes.

With alllllllllllllll of that said... you pick Steph in this situation? Fine by me. I don't see anything wrong with it - in fact, it's probably the 'safest' choice. Steph is clearly a better player than Kyrie.

My only contention in this thread is that it's still a legitimate question because of the nova levels we've seen Kyrie reach in the big games, and the abysmal 2/32408423 with 2234908234 turnover performances we've seen from Steph in some big games. You can scream gravity all you want but those kind of **** performances lose games if you don't have KD there to go nova and carry you to a win.

1. I think you are overstating how big a difference the advanced stats show.

2. Yes he played more minutes... because he played more games (39 to 32). His MPG were 36.9 pre KD and 36.1 with KD. So basically the exact same. So if you added the .8 minutes per game more he played pre-KD, no I don't think his RPG and APG numbers go up appreciably.

4-5. All of that context essentially said Curry gets more open looks with KD. Cool. We all knew that. But it hasn't really helped him as much as you're saying other than his efficiency went up as a result of being able to shoot more open shots. But his efficiency was already elite. He doesn't need KD to be ultra efficient.

I think it's more of a comparison because you are focusing on really that one crazy game from Kyrie. Have you even looked at objective stats to determine how often Kyrie has these great games you are talking about? Is it more than Steph does (in the playoffs, or in the finals?) Do you even know or are you basing this on your perception of how often he plays well?

valade16
09-11-2018, 06:59 PM
Game 5 of that very same finals comes to mind. Game 6 he had some really big moments later in the game. And I'm pretty sure he had a big performance in one of the early games as well.

That's not counting a **** ton of big moments in the EC (check out the 2016 1st round Detroit series and how insanely huge/clutch Kyrie was in the biggest moments of the series), or the ones in the 2017 finals. He's not gonna go 3/16 from the field in one of those big games - I've never seen it happen. If my life is on the line I'd be ******** bricks picking a guy that could possibly throw up some numbers like that.

After going down 2-1 vs the Cavs, Steph had 22 pts (.615 TS%) G4, 37 pts (.747 TS%) G5, and 25 pts (.555 TS%) G6 to win the series.

After going down 3-1 vs the Thunder, Steph had 31 pts (.635 TS%) G5, 31 pts (.597 TS%) G6, and 36 pts (.711 TS%) G7 to win the series.

After going down 3-2 vs the Rockets, Steph had 29 pts (.630 TS%) G6 and 27 pts (.614 TS%) G7 to win the series.



So it seems the only real time he struggled was in the one Finals, because in every other elimination instance in the playoffs since then Steph has performed exceptionally. He's averaging 29.8 PPG in those games and I'm sure his TS% would be through the roof. So this is starting to sound a lot like the Kobe is clutch argument where because of high profile moments and perception Steph is not seen as stepping his game up in big moments when in fact he appears to have done so in literally every instance except one.

In fact, it seems at this point the one thing we can definitively say about the 2016 Finals and his performances is that they appear to be the aberration and not the norm.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 07:02 PM
1. I think you are overstating how big a difference the advanced stats show.

2. Yes he played more minutes... because he played more games (39 to 32). His MPG were 36.9 pre KD and 36.1 with KD. So basically the exact same. So if you added the .8 minutes per game more he played pre-KD, no I don't think his RPG and APG numbers go up appreciably.

4-5. All of that context essentially said Curry gets more open looks with KD. Cool. We all knew that. But it hasn't really helped him as much as you're saying other than his efficiency went up as a result of being able to shoot more open shots. But his efficiency was already elite. He doesn't need KD to be ultra efficient.

I think it's more of a comparison because you are focusing on really that one crazy game from Kyrie. Have you even looked at objective stats to determine how often Kyrie has these great games you are talking about? Is it more than Steph does (in the playoffs, or in the finals?) Do you even know or are you basing this on your perception of how often he plays well?

1. No, 62%TS with abysmal FTr vs. 60%TS with normal/average FTr is not a negligible difference.

2. It's STILL better, but I'll concede that it's negligible in that case.

4-5. His efficiency went up for sure, which does matter. It might not be a big deal to you, but when you're a JR Smith bonehead play away from a win, that kind of stuff is not negligible.

Again, we're talking about ONE GAME here for this topic. A single game. So yes, even the smallest of differences are worth consideration.

The immeasurables do have an impact on the game, and last I checked this was a philosophical topic/thread, not a 100% statistics-based one. Thus, is it not reasonable to consider the immeasurables?

As for Kyrie - I've seen more than just one big moment in one big game to believe he'd exceed his normal production there. Game 4 of the 2017 finals brought an INCREDIBLE performance from him. In a series, I'd take Steph 100% of the time. In a single game? I don't know, man.

Do you think that Steph is more likely to have a wider variance game to game than Kyrie, and do you think he's more clutch and likely to excel in the biggest moments? Those are the sort of questions this thread generate, because those are huge factors involved when answering the topic question.

valade16
09-11-2018, 07:06 PM
For the record, I went to do the same thing for Kyrie and analyze all of his elimination games in the playoffs to see how he has performed, but it's literally just that and the 2017 Finals.

In the 2017 Finals, after going down 0-3, Kyrie put up 40 pts (.695 TS%) G4, then 26 pts (.518 TS%) G5.

The next closest he ever came was in 2015 when the Cavs went down 1-2 vs the Bulls, Kyrie put up 12 pts (.444 TS%) G4, 25 pts (.687 TS%) G5, and only played 12 minutes in G7.

So external that Finals, Kyrie is literally 50/50 in terms of good and bad performances in elimination games or when down in the series. Obviously he looks better including the 2016 Finals, but my point is, where is this idea that Kyrie is money in those moments come from outside the 2016 Finals? Because I'm looking at his resume and I'm just not seeing it.

tredigs
09-11-2018, 07:07 PM
No - in an all or nothing game, you want the guy who is likely to overcome the weight and pressure of an all or nothing game and shine. You can't just math your way through this. There are many known 'chokers' in the history of the NBA. Stephen Curry still has a question mark there (I'm not calling him a choker, but I can't enthusiastically say that he's a big-time torch-the-defense performer when it matters on the biggest stage), whereas Kyrie almost always EXCEED his normal output in crucial, all-or-nothing type moments.

When it comes to an all-or-nothing game, previous games get thrown out of the window. I don't care if someone is outstanding 82 games in the row - if I have doubts about their mentality and performance in an all-out game because of many previous blunders and bad performances in those exact same scenarios, then I will hesitate to take them.

That's not just in sports - high-pressure situations exist everywhere. You can be the most flawless driver ever but underperform during the state driving test because of the pressure. You can be the best speaker and conversationist ever but underperform during a job interview. I will take the flawless driver in every situation, but I WILL hesitate to take them during the driving test if I have doubts on whether they can maintain that same standard I'm used to.

Hawkeye, you're applying factors that simply don't matter much in this type of discussion, and it's weighted by your crushingly personal and self-proclaimed bias against Kyrie. Whereas I like both Kyrie and Steph (though I do LIKE Kyrie more), I have praised and criticized them both.

You can't say, "ALL HE DOES IS SCORE." when scoring is LITERALLY THE BEST POSSIBLE PLAY IN THE GAME. Yes, we want players to be able to get others involved and play defense, but you can't sit there and weigh scoring evenly with getting a hand in someone's face. You just can't. And yes, Curry is an elite scorer and easily better than Kyrie, but their STYLE of scoring is important in an all-out live or die game. I've said all I can say regarding this matter with you because of your bias, though.

Feel free to argue 'til your face is blue, though.

Scoring is the best possible play, yes, but these other factors - playmaking, defense, how much attention they are drawing - are all directly responsible for points on the board. If Curry exceeds him in all of these other facets, it's just more evidence in his corner as to why he is the only answer here. Kyrie was slightly more efficient as a scorer than 'Bron in the 2016 Finals, but nobody is confusing him for having more impact. And in 2017 despite putting up 29 ppg on a .558 TS, his O-rating was a pedestrian 111 (with a 125 D rating dear lord) and he was gutted in every other aspect of the game. He was bad by any star standards.

Concerning your thought that he is a more dynamic scorer, I don't know that this has any leg to stand on either. Curry is one of the best finishers around the rim in the game (not just PG's, period), draws defenses out to 30+ feet for his 3 ball (best in the game), has arguably the most efficient mid-range shot in the game when he chooses to take it, and when he gets fouled is the best FT shooter in the game.

Let's look at their shooting breakdown at all levels from 2014 on:

Curry reg season: 0-3 feet (67%). 3-10 feet (43%). 10-16 feet (49%). 16 feet to 3pt (46%). 3pt (43%). FT (91%)

Kyrie reg season: 0-3 feet (61%). 3-10 feet (39%). 10-16 feet (46%). 16 feet to 3pt (49%). 3pt (39%). FT (88%)

75% of Curry's shots are being taken at the rim or from 3 in comparison to 57% for Kyrie (the most efficient shot for both players, IE the one they should seek the most), where he has an effective FG% of 66%. The rest is mid-range and FT's, where he is the most efficient in the NBA at both shots respectively.

Curry playoffs: 0-3 feet (62%). 3-10 feet (38%). 10-16 feet (33%). 16 feet to 3pt (46%). 3pt (42%). FT (90%).
Kyrie playoffs: 0-3 feet (56%). 3-10 feet (35%). 10-16 feet (48%). 16 feet to 3pt (42%). 3pt (44%). FT (88%).

73% of Curry's playoff shots are coming from 3 or at the rim (again, the most efficient and sought after shot for both players), in comparison to 53% of Kyrie's shots coming from these locations. This is not counting free throws, which is also in Curry's favor at 5.1 attempts to Kyrie's 4.6 attempts in the playoffs.

There is no zone or area where Kyrie has a clear leg up on Curry as a scorer (other than some of the least efficient and lowest volume mid-range shots in the playoffs), and Kyrie also has the leg up % wise on 3pt shooting in the playoffs with a crazy impressive 44%, but when you look closer you see that it's a decline in volume from his reg-season 3pt shooting, and literally half of Curry's 3pt volume per game (IE he's taking only the easier looks despite it being his most efficient shot). Curry simply focuses on the most efficient shots he can, and it has worked better than Kyrie in the reg season and playoffs alike for their entire career. THAT is the player you take. #done

WaDe03
09-11-2018, 07:13 PM
Vee-Rex didnít come in here to play games, well said!

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 07:16 PM
After going down 2-1 vs the Cavs, Steph had 22 pts (.615 TS%) G4, 37 pts (.747 TS%) G5, and 25 pts (.555 TS%) G6 to win the series.

After going down 3-1 vs the Thunder, Steph had 31 pts (.635 TS%) G5, 31 pts (.597 TS%) G6, and 36 pts (.711 TS%) G7 to win the series.

After going down 3-2 vs the Rockets, Steph had 29 pts (.630 TS%) G6 and 27 pts (.614 TS%) G7 to win the series.



So it seems the only real time he struggled was in the one Finals, because in every other elimination instance in the playoffs since then Steph has performed exceptionally. He's averaging 29.8 PPG in those games and I'm sure his TS% would be through the roof. So this is starting to sound a lot like the Kobe is clutch argument where because of high profile moments and perception Steph is not seen as stepping his game up in big moments when in fact he appears to have done so in literally every instance except one.

In fact, it seems at this point the one thing we can definitively say about the 2016 Finals and his performances is that they appear to be the aberration and not the norm.

In the 2015 finals, only G5 was really impressive for me. Sure, .615TS% in G4 is good but it's only 22 points on 17 FGA. 4 turnovers there too... I mean, it's not an above-expectations kind of performance. Same with G6 but his TS% isn't good in that one.

I mean, the 2015 finals wasn't overly-impressive for Steph and you know that.

The 2016 finals wasn't good at all. I feel like you're very numb to it just because it has become a dead horse at this point... but it was REALLY BAD. You can't simply weigh it the same as Kyrie's not-so-stellar finals performances.

2017 and beyond included KD.

The 3-1 comeback against the Thunder was indeed impressive for sure. I could nitpick a couple things about those games but I won't do that.

If anything is an aberration, it would be those 3 games.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 07:23 PM
For the record, I went to do the same thing for Kyrie and analyze all of his elimination games in the playoffs to see how he has performed, but it's literally just that and the 2017 Finals.

In the 2017 Finals, after going down 0-3, Kyrie put up 40 pts (.695 TS%) G4, then 26 pts (.518 TS%) G5.

The next closest he ever came was in 2015 when the Cavs went down 1-2 vs the Bulls, Kyrie put up 12 pts (.444 TS%) G4, 25 pts (.687 TS%) G5, and only played 12 minutes in G7.

So external that Finals, Kyrie is literally 50/50 in terms of good and bad performances in elimination games or when down in the series. Obviously he looks better including the 2016 Finals, but my point is, where is this idea that Kyrie is money in those moments come from outside the 2016 Finals? Because I'm looking at his resume and I'm just not seeing it.

Kyrie was extremely hobbled in that series, as you can see with the minutes reduction and total of 40 minutes played in the following 4-game series vs. the Atlanta Hawks. During the Bulls series he was limping the entire time and was taken out for long periods because he couldn't even jog. The Bulls series is clearly an aberration.

As for the 2nd bolded, you can't just gloss over it just because. Games 5-7 of the biggest stage an NBA game could ever have, he showed up very well. For me, games 5-7 of an NBA finals are bigger than games 5-7 of a conference finals.

valade16
09-11-2018, 07:24 PM
In the 2015 finals, only G5 was really impressive for me. Sure, .615TS% in G4 is good but it's only 22 points on 17 FGA. 4 turnovers there too... I mean, it's not an above-expectations kind of performance. Same with G6 but his TS% isn't good in that one.

I mean, the 2015 finals wasn't overly-impressive for Steph and you know that.

The 2016 finals wasn't good at all. I feel like you're very numb to it just because it has become a dead horse at this point... but it was REALLY BAD. You can't simply weigh it the same as Kyrie's not-so-stellar finals performances.

2017 and beyond included KD.

The 3-1 comeback against the Thunder was indeed impressive for sure. I could nitpick a couple things about those games but I won't do that.

If anything is an aberration, it would be those 3 games.

No, they were not REALLY BAD. They were bad for Steph. He averaged 22.6 PPG on 40% from 3 and a .580 TS%. Those numbers are good in a vacuum. But we hold Steph to a higher standard. In that series he scored 11 pts GM 1 on 4/15 shooting, which was bad. But G2 he played 24 minutes and scored 18 pts on a whopping .818 TS%. 19 pts G3 on good efficiency but the Warriors were blown out. 38 pts G4.

Now in the 3 straight the Cavs won Curry put up:

25 pts .549 TS% G5
30 pts .626 TS% G6
17 pts .437 TS% G7


Literally the only truly bad games he had were G1 and G7 and G1 the Warriors won fairly easily. So you're claim that he had a terrible finals rests on a very bad single game (G7). I agree, for Steph it was a bad Finals even beyond G7, but the very fact we have a different standard of what is considered good play because it's Steph should show how good he is.


Even if you want to say those 3 games were an aberration, at worst you could say he had 4 great games and 3 average games. But outside 2016 where are the actual bad games?

valade16
09-11-2018, 07:27 PM
Kyrie was extremely hobbled in that series, as you can see with the minutes reduction and total of 40 minutes played in the following 4-game series vs. the Atlanta Hawks. During the Bulls series he was limping the entire time and was taken out for long periods because he couldn't even jog. The Bulls series is clearly an aberration.

As for the 2nd bolded, you can't just gloss over it just because. Games 5-7 of the biggest stage an NBA game could ever have, he showed up very well. For me, games 5-7 of an NBA finals are bigger than games 5-7 of a conference finals.

If we're going to weigh injuries into this, then shouldn't we apply some context to Curry's injury in 2016 as well? Is it any coincidence that when looking at close out games from 4 separate seasons the only ones in which he played bad happened to come the only postseason he was hurt?

I'm not glossing over it. He did extremely well and was incredibly clutch in that series. But people are claiming they'd take him because he does that in those moments consistently. I'm asking where else has he done it? I showed all the elimination games he's ever faced in the playoffs. He simply hasn't done it because he hasn't ever been in that position besides that one time.

So if you're taking Kyrie in that moment, it's because you think that 1 series is indicative of how he will do in that moment every time. At what point does sample size come into play there?

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 07:44 PM
No, they were not REALLY BAD. They were bad for Steph. He averaged 22.6 PPG on 40% from 3 and a .580 TS%. Those numbers are good in a vacuum. But we hold Steph to a higher standard. In that series he scored 11 pts GM 1 on 4/15 shooting, which was bad. But G2 he played 24 minutes and scored 18 pts on a whopping .818 TS%. 19 pts G3 on good efficiency but the Warriors were blown out. 38 pts G4.

Now in the 3 straight the Cavs won Curry put up:

25 pts .549 TS% G5
30 pts .626 TS% G6
17 pts .437 TS% G7


Literally the only truly bad games he had were G1 and G7 and G1 the Warriors won fairly easily. So you're claim that he had a terrible finals rests on a very bad single game (G7). I agree, for Steph it was a bad Finals even beyond G7, but the very fact we have a different standard of what is considered good play because it's Steph should show how good he is.


I know you think those 3 games were an aberration, but the statistics say otherwise, so I'll trust those.

Yes, they WERE REALLY BAD for him. But you're still cherry-picking stats. You're completely ignoring his turnovers on top of it all.

Since you already provided the points and TS%, I'll provide some other stats:

Game 1: 4/15 FG, 3/8 3PT, 6assists, 5 rb, 5 turnovers.

His only really good games were 2 and 4.

Game 3: 6/13 FG, 3/9 3Pt, 3 assists, 6 turnovers (this is NOT a good game)

Game 5: 8/21 FG 5/15 3Pt, 4 assists, 7 rebounds, 4 turnovers

Game 6: 8/20 FG 6/13 3Pt, 1 assist, 2 rebounds, 4 turnovers (good shooting from beyond the arc, but terrible turnovers yet again)

game 7: 6/19 FG 4/14 3Pt, 2 assists, 5 rebounds, 4 turnovers

8.4TOV% (Kyrie) vs. 15.6TOV% (Steph)

Does that not matter at all, in the context of the thread topic?

valade16
09-11-2018, 07:48 PM
Yes, they WERE REALLY BAD for him. But you're still cherry-picking stats. You're completely ignoring his turnovers on top of it all.

Since you already provided the points and TS%, I'll provide some other stats:

Game 1: 4/15 FG, 3/8 3PT, 6assists, 5 rb, 5 turnovers.

His only really good games were 2 and 4.

Game 3: 6/13 FG, 3/9 3Pt, 3 assists, 6 turnovers (this is NOT a good game)

Game 5: 8/21 FG 5/15 3Pt, 4 assists, 7 rebounds, 4 turnovers

Game 6: 8/20 FG 6/13 3Pt, 1 assist, 2 rebounds, 4 turnovers (good shooting from beyond the arc, but terrible turnovers yet again)

game 7: 6/19 FG 4/14 3Pt, 2 assists, 5 rebounds, 4 turnovers

8.4TOV% (Kyrie) vs. 15.6TOV% (Steph)

Does that not matter at all, in the context of the thread topic?

Sure it matters, but you freely admit he was very good in games 2 and 4 (guess you didn't want to post his stats there as it ruins your intended effect). So that's 2 games he was great. And how many games was he abjectly terrible? 2. So even in his worst possible performance he was 50/50 great/terrible games.

And then you add in all the other elimination games and general playoff performances and it's pretty clear that Steph is great far more than he's terrible, both in the playoffs in general and in elimination games. So we have a documented history with Steph. We don't with Kyrie. We have one great series and a complete lack of information on whether, under those circumstances, he could duplicate it (since apparently we are tossing his 2017 Finals entirely).

If you think based on that one series, Kyrie would outplay Steph in those moments, fine. But you are doing it because of that one series incredibly small sample size and a belief that he could duplicate it.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 07:50 PM
If we're going to weigh injuries into this, then shouldn't we apply some context to Curry's injury in 2016 as well? Is it any coincidence that when looking at close out games from 4 separate seasons the only ones in which he played bad happened to come the only postseason he was hurt?

I'm not glossing over it. He did extremely well and was incredibly clutch in that series. But people are claiming they'd take him because he does that in those moments consistently. I'm asking where else has he done it? I showed all the elimination games he's ever faced in the playoffs. He simply hasn't done it because he hasn't ever been in that position besides that one time.

So if you're taking Kyrie in that moment, it's because you think that 1 series is indicative of how he will do in that moment every time. At what point does sample size come into play there?

One is a clear, bonafide, recorded and visibly evident injury that literally impacted his minutes and expectation. We weren't even sure if Kyrie would be able to play in the 2015 finals. The NBA pretty much extended the break between the conference finals and the finals and if it weren't for that, he probably would've missed the first couple games (which ultimately didn't matter anyway since he broke his knee in OT of game 1).

You seriously just can't compare the two.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 08:04 PM
Sure it matters, but you freely admit he was very good in games 2 and 4 (guess you didn't want to post his stats there as it ruins your intended effect). So that's 2 games he was great. And how many games was he abjectly terrible? 2. So even in his worst possible performance he was 50/50 great/terrible games.

And then you add in all the other elimination games and general playoff performances and it's pretty clear that Steph is great far more than he's terrible, both in the playoffs in general and in elimination games. So we have a documented history with Steph. We don't with Kyrie. We have one great series and a complete lack of information on whether, under those circumstances, he could duplicate it (since apparently we are tossing his 2017 Finals entirely).

If you think based on that one series, Kyrie would outplay Steph in those moments, fine. But you are doing it because of that one series incredibly small sample size and a belief that he could duplicate it.

Hey, you're the one that's hiding specific stats here. I'm at least willing to acknowledge when he played well. I doubt you have used the word 'turnover' in this entire thread.

He was great games 2 and 4, terrible games 1 and 7, bad game 3, meh/not good games 5 and 6.

That overall is pretty bad, especially considering that game 7 was the most important game and he shat the bed.

So we disagree on the whole 50/50 thing.

What it comes down to is the bolded for me. It's probably unfair of me to pick based on a small sample size and throw the post-KD stuff out the window (unfair, but hey KD joining does make a difference). So it's unfair for me to contextualize it in that manner, but when Steph is bad he's pretty bad. The variance scares me in a single game all or nothing.

Sure, Kyrie will throw out some bad performances here and there but 3/16? 4/15 with high turnovers? I don't want to take that chance. And Kyrie is an incredible clutch performer as well. Steph is too, but the variance is bigger there I think.

Vee-Rex
09-11-2018, 08:24 PM
I think it's also important to understand where the goal posts regarding my position in this thread.

Me: I'd choose Kyrie, but I completely understand others choosing Steph

Them: There is no argument whatsoever in even THINKING of choosing Kyrie.

So it's on YOU guys to indisputably provide reasonable arguments and evidence to show why it's ridiculous to even question if Kyrie should be chosen in the topic thread scenario.

And so far, you're failures.

Steph's 2015 finals wasn't overwhelming great, and his 2016 finals weren't good at all.

Convince ME, as well as plenty of others, who aren't willing to throw away the 2016 finals performance due to an injury that didn't force him to sit, and who isn't willing to slurp on the post-KD stats.

Because that's where the goalposts are, boyos. Agree?

Legitimate
09-11-2018, 09:11 PM
I didn't chose but i think its a tie to be honest, curry always had more help so you gotta put that into perspective. its a toin cost with me

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 09:49 PM
Sure it matters, but you freely admit he was very good in games 2 and 4 (guess you didn't want to post his stats there as it ruins your intended effect). So that's 2 games he was great. And how many games was he abjectly terrible? 2. So even in his worst possible performance he was 50/50 great/terrible games.

And then you add in all the other elimination games and general playoff performances and it's pretty clear that Steph is great far more than he's terrible, both in the playoffs in general and in elimination games. So we have a documented history with Steph. We don't with Kyrie. We have one great series and a complete lack of information on whether, under those circumstances, he could duplicate it (since apparently we are tossing his 2017 Finals entirely).

If you think based on that one series, Kyrie would outplay Steph in those moments, fine. But you are doing it because of that one series incredibly small sample size and a belief that he could duplicate it.

Sorry bud but you just don't know when to let it go.

1) When we talk about them having a bad game, it's already implied based on their status in the league and not the average player. Trying to make the case that Steph didn't play bad because any other player would have loved averaging those numbers is quite a losing case.

2) You mention Curry's poor shooting numbers (that only helps our case) but chose to selectively ignore Curry's turnovers in which he averaged more turnovers than assists. Does your PG, who has the ball the most, averaging more turnovers than assists not come into play here? And did you forget that Cavs wanted to exploit Curry's defense so much that they wanted the switch so Kyrie can take him one-on-one (refer to game 7 Kyrie's three over Curry). And did you also ignore that Kyrie was being guarded by Klay while Curry was being guarded by the likes of J.R. and Shumpert? Two good defenders but we can all agree Klay is much better.

3) You pointing out Kyrie's play against the Bulls really tells me you forgot what happened that season.. Kyrie's management and father were upset with the Cavs for urging Kyrie to play heavy minutes because they knew Kyrie had an injury. In fact, as Vee-Rex stated, had it not been for the lengthy 9 days rest, it would be doubtful that Kyrie played game 1. Not to mention that Kyrie still played it through and in game 1, had an amazing game as well. Are you comparing a player who had a legitimate injury and it had been going on for weeks to someone who managed to play all seven games and jacked 20+ shots while not needing surgery after the season ended? What are we really talking about here?

You haven't argued as to why you would take Curry over Kyrie if you had a winner-takes-all game. Kyrie has proven, that in the biggest stage of NBA in their respective career, Kyrie was the one who knocked the shot down over Curry to put the Cavs ahead by three when no one else could make a shot (I believe there was a four minute span in which not a single team made a shot). Kyrie was the one who dropped 26 points on 44% shooting (40% from three) when outside of Draymond, everyone had a below average performance. Curry? Well, he dropped 17 points on 32% shooting (29% from three) and had a AST/TO ratio of .5. Small scale? Sure. But it's better than any example you've given us.

FlashBolt
09-11-2018, 09:57 PM
Hey, you're the one that's hiding specific stats here. I'm at least willing to acknowledge when he played well. I doubt you have used the word 'turnover' in this entire thread.

He was great games 2 and 4, terrible games 1 and 7, bad game 3, meh/not good games 5 and 6.

That overall is pretty bad, especially considering that game 7 was the most important game and he shat the bed.

So we disagree on the whole 50/50 thing.

What it comes down to is the bolded for me. It's probably unfair of me to pick based on a small sample size and throw the post-KD stuff out the window (unfair, but hey KD joining does make a difference). So it's unfair for me to contextualize it in that manner, but when Steph is bad he's pretty bad. The variance scares me in a single game all or nothing.

Sure, Kyrie will throw out some bad performances here and there but 3/16? 4/15 with high turnovers? I don't want to take that chance. And Kyrie is an incredible clutch performer as well. Steph is too, but the variance is bigger there I think.

Well, I don't think he realized that the Cavs were huge underdogs. When you put it into perspective, Cavs needed Kyrie and LeBron to be greater than they were in the regular season while Warriors just needed Curry to not wet the bed. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that if Curry played to his regular season standard, Warriors wouldn't win? When LeBron puts up a historic performance and Kyrie elevates his game into a top five player, that's why Cavs won. So many excuses as to why Warriors lost but not enough credit to those two for being down 3-1 and taking their game above their norm. Down 3-1, there is no question that Kyrie proved he can take over a game just as much, if not more, than Curry had ever done. I'm not sure what providing Curry's stats after Durant came into the picture proves other than that Durant made Curry's life a lot easier.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 09:12 AM
No - in an all or nothing game, you want the guy who is likely to overcome the weight and pressure of an all or nothing game and shine. You can't just math your way through this. There are many known 'chokers' in the history of the NBA. Stephen Curry still has a question mark there (I'm not calling him a choker, but I can't enthusiastically say that he's a big-time torch-the-defense performer when it matters on the biggest stage), whereas Kyrie almost always EXCEED his normal output in crucial, all-or-nothing type moments.

When it comes to an all-or-nothing game, previous games get thrown out of the window. I don't care if someone is outstanding 82 games in the row - if I have doubts about their mentality and performance in an all-out game because of many previous blunders and bad performances in those exact same scenarios, then I will hesitate to take them.

That's not just in sports - high-pressure situations exist everywhere. You can be the most flawless driver ever but underperform during the state driving test because of the pressure. You can be the best speaker and conversationist ever but underperform during a job interview. I will take the flawless driver in every situation, but I WILL hesitate to take them during the driving test if I have doubts on whether they can maintain that same standard I'm used to.

Hawkeye, you're applying factors that simply don't matter much in this type of discussion, and it's weighted by your crushingly personal and self-proclaimed bias against Kyrie. Whereas I like both Kyrie and Steph (though I do LIKE Kyrie more), I have praised and criticized them both.

You can't say, "ALL HE DOES IS SCORE." when scoring is LITERALLY THE BEST POSSIBLE PLAY IN THE GAME. Yes, we want players to be able to get others involved and play defense, but you can't sit there and weigh scoring evenly with getting a hand in someone's face. You just can't. And yes, Curry is an elite scorer and easily better than Kyrie, but their STYLE of scoring is important in an all-out live or die game. I've said all I can say regarding this matter with you because of your bias, though.

Feel free to argue 'til your face is blue, though.

like I said above, I am not going to spend more time trying to convince someone to take the much better player. If you want Kyrie because of his 2016 finals, especially game 7, then take him. Stats are on my side is all.

Anyone taking Kyrie is hoping for best case scenario, not expected outcome.

ewing
09-12-2018, 09:39 AM
Interesting debate. I'll dig into tV-Rex and Vlade's data later. Thanks. That said, I look forward to these guys meeting in the NBA finals next year. If everyone can stay healthy I think it will be a great match up and we will get to see to great scoring guards put on a show. I think Irving is an underrated player around here and while we all know Curry is great I think some get carried away propping him up with narratives that aren't totally true but aren't even necessary b/c he really is a truly guard.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 09:43 AM
Interesting debate. I'll dig into tV-Rex and Vlade's data later. Thanks. That said, I look forward to these guys meeting in the NBA finals next year. If everyone can stay healthy I think it will be a great match up and we will get to see to great scoring guards put on a show. I think Irving is an underrated player around here and while we all know Curry is great I think some get carried away propping him up with narratives that aren't totally true but aren't even necessary b/c he really is a truly guard.

Thank you for encouraging other posters, we need more of this and this is a good start.

I agree with you and tredigs that this will be a fun finals. This Celtics team is much better well rounded and on both sides of the ball than last years Cavs so they may actually put up a challenge.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 09:58 AM
if a motivated, healthy Leonard plays, I am not sure Boston even represents the east in the finals...

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 09:59 AM
Interesting debate. I'll dig into tV-Rex and Vlade's data later. Thanks. That said, I look forward to these guys meeting in the NBA finals next year. If everyone can stay healthy I think it will be a great match up and we will get to see to great scoring guards put on a show. I think Irving is an underrated player around here and while we all know Curry is great I think some get carried away propping him up with narratives that aren't totally true but aren't even necessary b/c he really is a truly guard.

I think he is overrated here. By most anyways. There is a very large divide on him as a player, which should really tell us all he is not that great, and not that bad. Clearly not an elite, day by day player, but clearly not a dread like I at times paint him out to be either.

Vee-Rex
09-12-2018, 11:10 AM
Anyone taking Kyrie is hoping for best case scenario, not expected outcome.

Well, Kyrie's best final performances are, arguably, better than Steph's best finals performances. They're very close.

Also, his worst finals performances are not as bad as Steph's worst finals performances.

And that's it in a nutshell. We don't know what to expect from Steph in the finals, at least pre-KD. The variance is pretty wild. For a single all or nothing game, the variance is too spooky for me and others.

And looking at the numbers INDIVIDUALLY in the 2017 finals... I'm not even overly impressed with Steph's 2017 finals WITH KD. They're decent, don't get me wrong... but if not for some 2006 Wade-esque free throw attempts in some of those games (he was not crashing the rim like Flash was), I don't think his 2017 finals numbers would look all that good either. Certainly not if he didn't have KD to relieve some pressure and burden.

I'm heavily weighing possibilities in individual games because that's what the thread topic is about - one game. And pre-KD Steph seems very likely to throw up an abysmal finals game every other game or so.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 11:13 AM
Well, Kyrie's best final performances are, arguably, better than Steph's best finals performances. They're very close.

Also, his worst finals performances are not as bad as Steph's worst finals performances.

And that's it in a nutshell. We don't know what to expect from Steph in the finals, at least pre-KD. The variance is pretty wild. For a single all or nothing game, the variance is too spooky for me and others.

And looking at the numbers INDIVIDUALLY in the 2017 finals... I'm not even overly impressed with Steph's 2017 finals WITH KD. They're decent, don't get me wrong... but if not for some 2006 Wade-esque free throw attempts in some of those games (he was not crashing the rim like Flash was), I don't think his 2017 finals numbers would look all that good either. Certainly not if he didn't have KD to relieve some pressure and burden.

I'm heavily weighing possibilities in individual games because that's what the thread topic is about - one game.

well, the Cavs clearly walled up on Curry and let the others beat them. Whether you agree with that gameplan or not, idk. But that is what they did. So Steph let Durant destroy the Cavs. If that isn't factored in, you are missing all the factors.

As I stated above, when a player is elite for some, and borderline crap for others, the truth lies in the middle. Irving is yet another in the long list of polarizing players, because when he is engaged, he can be scary good. He also brings out the archaic fan in all of us, that one who wants to see a guy go 1-5 and break people down, ie, electrifying scorer. But he also goes through way too many lulls, and honestly doesn't provide enough consistently to be considered with the elites. So I say it again, you are hoping for best case Kyrie. I will settle with expected Curry.

Vee-Rex
09-12-2018, 11:22 AM
well, the Cavs clearly walled up on Curry and let the others beat them. Whether you agree with that gameplan or not, idk. But that is what they did. So Steph let Durant destroy the Cavs. If that isn't factored in, you are missing all the factors.

As I stated above, when a player is elite for some, and borderline crap for others, the truth lies in the middle. Irving is yet another in the long list of polarizing players, because when he is engaged, he can be scary good. He also brings out the archaic fan in all of us, that one who wants to see a guy go 1-5 and break people down, ie, electrifying scorer. But he also goes through way too many lulls, and honestly doesn't provide enough consistently to be considered with the elites. So I say it again, you are hoping for best case Kyrie. I will settle with expected Curry.

Which expected Curry? Which iteration? The regular season god, the playoffs demi-god, or the finals human Curry?

There's a clear distinction there and it does matter.

valade16
09-12-2018, 12:12 PM
Sorry bud but you just don't know when to let it go.

1) When we talk about them having a bad game, it's already implied based on their status in the league and not the average player. Trying to make the case that Steph didn't play bad because any other player would have loved averaging those numbers is quite a losing case.

2) You mention Curry's poor shooting numbers (that only helps our case) but chose to selectively ignore Curry's turnovers in which he averaged more turnovers than assists. Does your PG, who has the ball the most, averaging more turnovers than assists not come into play here? And did you forget that Cavs wanted to exploit Curry's defense so much that they wanted the switch so Kyrie can take him one-on-one (refer to game 7 Kyrie's three over Curry). And did you also ignore that Kyrie was being guarded by Klay while Curry was being guarded by the likes of J.R. and Shumpert? Two good defenders but we can all agree Klay is much better.

3) You pointing out Kyrie's play against the Bulls really tells me you forgot what happened that season.. Kyrie's management and father were upset with the Cavs for urging Kyrie to play heavy minutes because they knew Kyrie had an injury. In fact, as Vee-Rex stated, had it not been for the lengthy 9 days rest, it would be doubtful that Kyrie played game 1. Not to mention that Kyrie still played it through and in game 1, had an amazing game as well. Are you comparing a player who had a legitimate injury and it had been going on for weeks to someone who managed to play all seven games and jacked 20+ shots while not needing surgery after the season ended? What are we really talking about here?

You haven't argued as to why you would take Curry over Kyrie if you had a winner-takes-all game. Kyrie has proven, that in the biggest stage of NBA in their respective career, Kyrie was the one who knocked the shot down over Curry to put the Cavs ahead by three when no one else could make a shot (I believe there was a four minute span in which not a single team made a shot). Kyrie was the one who dropped 26 points on 44% shooting (40% from three) when outside of Draymond, everyone had a below average performance. Curry? Well, he dropped 17 points on 32% shooting (29% from three) and had a AST/TO ratio of .5. Small scale? Sure. But it's better than any example you've given us.


Which expected Curry? Which iteration? The regular season god, the playoffs demi-god, or the finals human Curry?

There's a clear distinction there and it does matter.

1). I'm not saying it's only good relative to a league average player, I'm saying if Kyrie averaged 22.6 PPG on .580 T% you would certainly not say he had a bad series. So Curry is being held to a higher standard than Kyrie in this very argument, which pretty much says who is the better player.

2). I didn't ignore Turnovers, but let's see if you will. In 2016 Kyrie had 4 Ast, 3 TO G1, 1 Ast, 3 TO G2, 3 Ast, 3 TO G6 and 1 Ast, 2 TO G7. That is 3 of 7 games where he had a flat negative AST/TO ratio. Does this mean he had a bad game 7 because he had more TOs than assists? Of course not, he had a great game. a negative AST/TO ratio doesn't automatically mean you had a bad game.

Vee-Rex said G6 was terrible turnovers because he had 4... he scored 30 points on 6/13 from beyond the arc. If you want to call that a bad game because of TO's, I think you're holding Steph to a higher standard than you would Kyrie (which again, proves who the better player is).

3). I'm not comparing the seriousness of their injuries, I'm saying if you're going to mitigate Kyrie's bad performance because of injury (a legitimate context), you must also analyze if Steph's injury affected him and if so, to what extent. Considering it's the worst series he's ever played in the playoffs and certainly the worst he's performed in clutch moments in the playoffs, I think it's safe to assume there may be some correlation there.


And I have said why I'd take Curry, he's the flat out better player who has performed very well in similar clutch moments frequently. Kyrie has proven... once in his entire career. That's awesome, and you can certainly take him over Curry. But saying he's proven because of one game is silly, and you would rightly jump down anyone else's throat for sample size if someone presented evidence of a player's ability based on a single game or series. So by all means, take Kyrie because of something you've seen him do once.

valade16
09-12-2018, 12:38 PM
One is a clear, bonafide, recorded and visibly evident injury that literally impacted his minutes and expectation. We weren't even sure if Kyrie would be able to play in the 2015 finals. The NBA pretty much extended the break between the conference finals and the finals and if it weren't for that, he probably would've missed the first couple games (which ultimately didn't matter anyway since he broke his knee in OT of game 1).

You seriously just can't compare the two.

Nor am I trying to compare the seriousness of the two. But if you can say that an injury had an effect on performance for Kyrie, you must apply the same analysis to Steph. Was Steph's injury as severe? No. Did it still effect him? Yes (or it could have if you're not willing to say so with such definitiveness). But again, considering that series was Steph's worst ever, and he performed very badly in moments where he previously had performed well in the playoffs consistently, I'm inclined to believe it had some effect. Maybe you believe it's just coincidence.


I think it's also important to understand where the goal posts regarding my position in this thread.

Me: I'd choose Kyrie, but I completely understand others choosing Steph

Them: There is no argument whatsoever in even THINKING of choosing Kyrie.

So it's on YOU guys to indisputably provide reasonable arguments and evidence to show why it's ridiculous to even question if Kyrie should be chosen in the topic thread scenario.

And so far, you're failures.

Steph's 2015 finals wasn't overwhelming great, and his 2016 finals weren't good at all.

Convince ME, as well as plenty of others, who aren't willing to throw away the 2016 finals performance due to an injury that didn't force him to sit, and who isn't willing to slurp on the post-KD stats.

Because that's where the goalposts are, boyos. Agree?

But that just isn't true. I'm not saying there's no reason to consider Kyrie. I said, very clearly, that if you choose Kyrie you are doing so based off his performance in literally one series. Because outside of that, there is really no evidence he has duplicated that performance in the playoffs.

If you want to take measure:

Steph's 2015 WCF vs the Rockets was outstanding.
Steph's 2016 WCF vs the Thunder was outstanding.

Add those in. But more importantly, here are Steph's 2015 #'s compared to Irving's 2016 #'s:

Steph 2015:
26.0 PPG, 6.3 APG, 5.2 RPG, 1.8 SPG, .585 TS%, 38 AST / 28 TO

Irving 2016:
27.1 PPG, 3.9 APG, 3.9 RPG, 2.1 SPG, .564 TS%, 27 AST / 18 TO


Steph's 2015 Finals was statistically as good as Irving's 2016 Finals. Yet Steph's 2015 Finals was average and Kyrie's was amazing. That alone tells me you hold Steph to a higher standard than Kyrie. And yes, Kyrie was insanely clutch, but Curry certainly was clutch in 2015 as well (though certainly not as clutch as Kyrie's G7).

After being down 1-2, Curry put up:

G5: 22 pts, 4/7 3PT, 7 Ast, 4 TO, +18
G6: 37 pts, 7/13 3PT, 4 Ast, 5 TO, +24
G7: 25 pts, 3/11 3PT, 8 Ast, 3 TO, +14

So after being down in the series, Steph averages 28 PPG on 45% from 3 (while having a positive AST/TO ratio) the final 3 games to come back and win the series. Yeah sure, say Steph had a mediocre series all you want, but that's more narrative of Andre winning FMVP and Steph not living up to his Godlike regular season standards for that season. Or put another way, his series was underwhelming for Steph, but it would not have been underwhelming for Kyrie.

Vee-Rex
09-12-2018, 12:49 PM
Vee-Rex said G6 was terrible turnovers because he had 4... he scored 30 points on 6/13 from beyond the arc. If you want to call that a bad game because of TO's, I think you're holding Steph to a higher standard than you would Kyrie (which again, proves who the better player is).


I said it was a 'meh' game, not a bad one. The ONLY thing Steph did well was shoot from beyond the arc.

See, I remember that game like it was yesterday. Steph was abused on defense, made terrible decisions with the ball even if it didn't result in a turnover, committed a ton of STUPID fouls, and was mentally thrown off his game, and was ejected for throwing a mouthpiece at a fan.

Stat boys like you just look at TS% and ignore everything else. I look at both. Which is why I would not call it a bad game... but it CERTAINLY was not good at all. G6 was hell for Steph.



3). I'm not comparing the seriousness of their injuries, I'm saying if you're going to mitigate Kyrie's bad performance because of injury (a legitimate context), you must also analyze if Steph's injury affected him and if so, to what extent. Considering it's the worst series he's ever played in the playoffs and certainly the worst he's performed in clutch moments in the playoffs, I think it's safe to assume there may be some correlation there.


Who says we didn't analyze Steph's injury? Conclusion: it was nowhere near bad enough to justify the **** performance he had, whereas Kyrie's WAS that bad.



And I have said why I'd take Curry, he's the flat out better player who has performed very well in similar clutch moments frequently. Kyrie has proven... once in his entire career. That's awesome, and you can certainly take him over Curry. But saying he's proven because of one game is silly, and you would rightly jump down anyone else's throat for sample size if someone presented evidence of a player's ability based on a single game or series. So by all means, take Kyrie because of something you've seen him do once.

That's fine, take him all you want. I and others think it's a legitimate question and no one in this thread has proven otherwise.

Maybe the future will help clear up some of these different views.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 12:54 PM
Itís a lot more to it than just stats, well said vee-rex!

tredigs
09-12-2018, 01:13 PM
We've likely all seen every game of these conference finals and finals (multiple times if you're like me), so let's bring some objectivity to the debate. These are Curry and Kyrie's Conference Finals + Finals numbers over the past 4 seasons (that's all of them). I'm including Conference Finals because frankly that's normally the toughest series for the Warriors, and all games because they're all at peak intensity and it's a better sample. I won't include Kyrie's 2015 because his poor performance/games played can be attributed to injury.

Kyrie 2016 ECF (6 games - Raptors): 24/3/6 + 3.0 TO on 56% TS
Kyrie 2016 Finals (7 games - Warriors): 27/4/3 + 2.8 TO on 56% TS
Kyrie 2017 ECF (5 games - Boston): 26/2/5 + 3.0 TO on 76% TS
Kyrie 2017 Finals (5 games - Warriors): 29/4/4 + 3.5 TO on 56% TS

Curry 2015 WCF (5 games - Houston): 31/5/6 + 2.8 TO on 68% TS
Curry 2015 Finals (6 games - Cavs): 26/5/6 + 4.8 TO on 59% TS
Curry 2016 WCF (7 games - OKC): 27/6/6 + 4.0 TO on 61% TS
Curry 2016 Finals (7 games - Cavs): 23/5/4 + 4.1 TO on 58% TS
Curry 2017 WCF (4 games - Spurs): 32/6/5 + 4.0 TO on 73% TS
Curry 2017 Finals (5 games - Cavs): 27/8/9 + 3.8 TO on 62% TS
Curry 2018 WCF (7 games - Rockets): 25/7/6 + 2.5 TO on 58% TS
Curry 2018 Finals (5 games - Cavs): 28/6/7 + 2.8 TO on 56% TS

Those are the numbers, do with them what you will. Credit to Kyrie because in his smaller sample size of his biggest games he has exceeded expectations (yet still shoots less efficiently on a lower volume in this scenario than Curry), but I see a far more balanced, efficient, dominant player on the 2nd list. There's also the distinction that Curry has always been the most heavily guarded player on his team, while Kyrie never has (not in the playoffs at least, as he's never led a team there); a point that nobody can refute yet seems to need to be heavily driven home with the addition of KD. And for the record, Curry's average of 27.5/6/6.1 on 61% TS fall pretty well in line with his reg season numbers in that span (all MVP or MVP caliber seasons) of 26.4/4.8/6.9 on 65% TS.

valade16
09-12-2018, 01:16 PM
I said it was a 'meh' game, not a bad one. The ONLY thing Steph did well was shoot from beyond the arc.

See, I remember that game like it was yesterday. Steph was abused on defense, made terrible decisions with the ball even if it didn't result in a turnover, committed a ton of STUPID fouls, and was mentally thrown off his game, and was ejected for throwing a mouthpiece at a fan.

Stat boys like you just look at TS% and ignore everything else. I look at both. Which is why I would not call it a bad game... but it CERTAINLY was not good at all. G6 was hell for Steph.

Who says we didn't analyze Steph's injury? Conclusion: it was nowhere near bad enough to justify the **** performance he had, whereas Kyrie's WAS that bad.

That's fine, take him all you want. I and others think it's a legitimate question and no one in this thread has proven otherwise.

Maybe the future will help clear up some of these different views.

First Bolded: I meant actual analysis, this isn't that.

Second Bolded: I'm not trying to prove it's not a legitimate question, I'm trying to show you your decision is based on a single instance and lacks any semblance of sample size.

The future will have to help clear up some of these different views, because without it we literally have no idea if Kyrie could repeat what he did. You think he can, cool. It's a belief. Just promise me that you will hold Kyrie up to the same standard you will Steph, because right now Steph is held to a higher one, which again, makes it painfully obvious who the better player is.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 01:55 PM
First Bolded: I meant actual analysis, this isn't that.

Second Bolded: I'm not trying to prove it's not a legitimate question, I'm trying to show you your decision is based on a single instance and lacks any semblance of sample size.

The future will have to help clear up some of these different views, because without it we literally have no idea if Kyrie could repeat what he did. You think he can, cool. It's a belief. Just promise me that you will hold Kyrie up to the same standard you will Steph, because right now Steph is held to a higher one, which again, makes it painfully obvious who the better player is.

I will only repeat this one last time- anyone picking Irving is hoping he can replicate his 2016 finals again. otherwise, there is no basis for choosing him. Even a "human" Curry is extremely elite. The same can't be said of a "human" Irving.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 02:04 PM
I will only repeat this one last time- anyone picking Irving is hoping he can replicate his 2016 finals again. otherwise, there is no basis for choosing him. Even a "human" Curry is extremely elite. The same can't be said of a "human" Irving.

I like how youíre dismissing it as itís a no brainer though. If you wouldíve bet everything had before game 7 of the 2016 finals that Curry would outplay Kyrie and win the championship because heís clearly the better player you wouldnít have much right now.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 02:08 PM
I like how youíre dismissing it as itís a no brainer though. If you wouldíve bet everything had before game 7 of the 2016 finals that Curry would outplay Kyrie and win the championship because heís clearly the better player you wouldnít have much right now.

It's borderline no brainer for me personally. Curry is consistently the better player, and has played excellent in the deep playoff runs.

Everyone is hinging this on one game/series. Seriously. All while ignoring what the other team did in the series to defend the other. The Cavs loaded up on Curry, and he still hurt them, while his teammates were roaming free with one on one matchups that destroyed the Cavs.

Anyone ever ask why the Cavs sent so much help at Curry? Could part of it be, because their PG at the time can't defend anything? Eh

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 02:15 PM
It's borderline no brainer for me personally. Curry is consistently the better player, and has played excellent in the deep playoff runs.

Everyone is hinging this on one game/series. Seriously. All while ignoring what the other team did in the series to defend the other. The Cavs loaded up on Curry, and he still hurt them, while his teammates were roaming free with one on one matchups that destroyed the Cavs.

Anyone ever ask why the Cavs sent so much help at Curry? Could part of it be, because their PG at the time can't defend anything? Eh

Kyrie did a better job defending curry then Curry did guarding Kyrie from what I saw which is why Klay was guarding Kyrie majority of the time.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 02:17 PM
I just think itís silly to call it a no brainer when weíve already seen it once and one guy outplayed the other by a wide margin.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 02:27 PM
Wrong thread

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 02:44 PM
Kyrie did a better job defending curry then Curry did guarding Kyrie from what I saw which is why Klay was guarding Kyrie majority of the time.

The Cavs doubled Curry a large portion of the time.


I just think itís silly to call it a no brainer when weíve already seen it once and one guy outplayed the other by a wide margin.

and 2017, when Curry outplayed Irving?

This is only a question because of the 2016 finals/game 7. It appears all the other evidence (a ton of it) is being ignored.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 02:52 PM
The Cavs doubled Curry a large portion of the time.



and 2017, when Curry outplayed Irving?

This is only a question because of the 2016 finals/game 7. It appears all the other evidence (a ton of it) is being ignored.

Kyrie was double too.

2017 they added KD and it takes a ton of pressure off curry.

ewing
09-12-2018, 03:01 PM
Kyrie was double too.

2017 they added KD and it takes a ton of pressure off curry.


It seems like being doubled doesn't count anymore only drawing your primary defender further away from the basket having them not help off you

tredigs
09-12-2018, 03:03 PM
Kyrie was double too.

2017 they added KD and it takes a ton of pressure off curry.

So now he only has a good deal of more pressure on him than Kyrie has ever had, instead of a demonstrative amount. Got it. Take a peek at the numbers I broke down for WC Finals and Finals for Curry pre/post KD. There is no discernible difference. He crushes it and is the better player than Kyrie in either scenario. When you cut through the BS narratives, the only answer here is Curry.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 03:06 PM
Kyrie was double too.

2017 they added KD and it takes a ton of pressure off curry.

no, he really wasn't as a gameplan, it happened on collapses, but not as a derived gameplan.

KD was given the pressure relief, not Curry. You are still not understanding what the Cavs goal was-to get the ball out of Curry's hands and hope for the best with the other guys.

valade16
09-12-2018, 03:20 PM
It's fairly obvious that the Cavs gameplan in all Finals series was to stop Curry and to game plan against him. Are people seriously expecting me to believe that the Warriors game plan was to stop Kyrie?

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 03:57 PM
1). I'm not saying it's only good relative to a league average player, I'm saying if Kyrie averaged 22.6 PPG on .580 T% you would certainly not say he had a bad series. So Curry is being held to a higher standard than Kyrie in this very argument, which pretty much says who is the better player.

2). I didn't ignore Turnovers, but let's see if you will. In 2016 Kyrie had 4 Ast, 3 TO G1, 1 Ast, 3 TO G2, 3 Ast, 3 TO G6 and 1 Ast, 2 TO G7. That is 3 of 7 games where he had a flat negative AST/TO ratio. Does this mean he had a bad game 7 because he had more TOs than assists? Of course not, he had a great game. a negative AST/TO ratio doesn't automatically mean you had a bad game.

Vee-Rex said G6 was terrible turnovers because he had 4... he scored 30 points on 6/13 from beyond the arc. If you want to call that a bad game because of TO's, I think you're holding Steph to a higher standard than you would Kyrie (which again, proves who the better player is).

3). I'm not comparing the seriousness of their injuries, I'm saying if you're going to mitigate Kyrie's bad performance because of injury (a legitimate context), you must also analyze if Steph's injury affected him and if so, to what extent. Considering it's the worst series he's ever played in the playoffs and certainly the worst he's performed in clutch moments in the playoffs, I think it's safe to assume there may be some correlation there.


And I have said why I'd take Curry, he's the flat out better player who has performed very well in similar clutch moments frequently. Kyrie has proven... once in his entire career. That's awesome, and you can certainly take him over Curry. But saying he's proven because of one game is silly, and you would rightly jump down anyone else's throat for sample size if someone presented evidence of a player's ability based on a single game or series. So by all means, take Kyrie because of something you've seen him do once.

Your points are horrible and ineffective, dude.

1) Kyrie is judged by a high standard as well. Maybe not as high as Curry but you can thank Curry for setting his own bar and you can penalize Curry for not performing to the higher bar that he set while acknowledging that Kyrie elevated his game to perform better than Curry did. That's called "showing up." Kyrie did, Curry didn't when it mattered most. I don't see how that is even a debate. 2016 was supposed to be the year Curry took over the league and throne from LeBron. But he didn't. Why? Because the two best players of the series were on the Cavs.

2) Okay, if you didn't ignore it, you sure as hell didn't see a reason to bring it up and it's quite obvious why: Because there was nothing to bring up. Curry's overall game was terrible. His rebounding, assists, turnovers, and defense were all poor. I knew you were going to bring up Kyrie's AST/TO ratio but Curry had nearly double the turnovers while shooting ineffectively while Kyrie was more efficient. There simply is no comparison here. Curry was the one who was supposed to dictate the offense on his team and he didn't do a great job at all. Just take a look at how many behind the back passes he attempted for no particular reason. That's on Curry. That was a bad game for Curry's standard... and it would have been a bad game for Kyrie as well. I simply expect more from both players. Did I expect Kyrie to perform better than Curry? No. But I expected Curry to perform better than Kyrie and he didn't. You keep talking about Curry being held to a higher standard. Those are the standards Curry set for himself. He was the one who became the unanimous, back-to-back MVP. Yet, he was outplayed by Kyrie Irving - someone who probably wasn't even ranked top five in PG's and in the 15-20th best player in the league. Don't talk about standards if you're not willing to hold Curry to the standard he set for himself. LeBron set the bar really high. Much higher than any player in the league today. Yet, he gets criticized for playing above that bar at times. Imagine if he played slightly below his standard.

3) No correlation at all. You brought up an empty argument vs the Bulls in which it was clearly an injury that should have had him sidelined. He forced himself to play despite his father and management warning that he shouldn't have been playing heavy minutes. He shouldn't have played game 1 but did and played very well. Curry was not hobbled by a season-ending injury nor did he require a surgery at any point. I'm guessing you likely just forgot that Kyrie was injured in that Bulls series but even if you didn't, it's not even a fair comparison at all. Kyrie shouldn't have been playing, period.

I'm not taking Kyrie because of something he did once. I'm taking Kyrie because he doesn't get visibly intimidated by LeBron the way LeBron mean-mugged Curry and Curry seemingly trying to look away. I'm taking Kyrie because he was a huge component in coming back from a 3-1 deficit and playing above his regular season capability to beat a team that had won 73 games and were expected to blow the Cavs out. I'm taking Kyrie because he's an absolute dog who likes the challenge. He's someone who accepted a challenge to take Kobe on 1-on-1 back when he was only 20 years old and Kobe was still an elite level player. For reference, I don't have a problem with you choosing Curry. I just find your reasoning in defending Curry while trying to paint Kyrie as a lesser were poor and ineffective.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 04:05 PM
It's fairly obvious that the Cavs gameplan in all Finals series was to stop Curry and to game plan against him. Are people seriously expecting me to believe that the Warriors game plan was to stop Kyrie?

It's easier to stop Curry than it is to stop Durant. Cavs had no one capable of defending Durant so they never bothered. It's just impossible for them to rely on LeBron to defend Durant while also expecting the same offensive output. On the other hand, Cavs had success guarding Curry and making it more difficult for him. Warriors didn't have to stop Kyrie. They were just flat-out the better team and focused on outscoring/making sure the rest of the Cavs didn't produce. Your explanation as to why the Cavs wanted to stop Curry is correct but your reasoning is incorrect. They chose to stop Curry because they had major success in doing so in the previous Finals. It's the same strategy other teams have used vs LeBron. They couldn't stop him so they never bothered. Instead, they focused on making it difficult for LeBron's teammates and forcing LeBron to beat them instead.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 04:19 PM
You guys are right, this scenario hasnít literally already happened and Kyrie didnít completely dominate Curry.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 04:23 PM
People saying itís easily Curry would be like me starting a thread like ďwho would win an nba finals matchup, the 2011 Mavs or 2011 Heat?Ē And me saying the 2011 Heat easily.

Hawkeye15
09-12-2018, 04:43 PM
People saying itís easily Curry would be like me starting a thread like ďwho would win an nba finals matchup, the 2011 Mavs or 2011 Heat?Ē And me saying the 2011 Heat easily.

if that series was played again, I would bet on the Heat.

Get how that works yet? You ALWAYS take the statistical odds that favor the better player/team. You don't just run with the exception and pretend it's the norm.

I am going to go out on a limb here, and say if we replayed that 2011 series 100 times, Jason Terry isn't giving you the same gamescore as LeBron James more than the one time he actually did it.

valade16
09-12-2018, 04:46 PM
Your points are horrible and ineffective, dude.

1) Kyrie is judged by a high standard as well. Maybe not as high as Curry but you can thank Curry for setting his own bar and you can penalize Curry for not performing to the higher bar that he set while acknowledging that Kyrie elevated his game to perform better than Curry did. That's called "showing up." Kyrie did, Curry didn't when it mattered most. I don't see how that is even a debate. 2016 was supposed to be the year Curry took over the league and throne from LeBron. But he didn't. Why? Because the two best players of the series were on the Cavs.

2) Okay, if you didn't ignore it, you sure as hell didn't see a reason to bring it up and it's quite obvious why: Because there was nothing to bring up. Curry's overall game was terrible. His rebounding, assists, turnovers, and defense were all poor. I knew you were going to bring up Kyrie's AST/TO ratio but Curry had nearly double the turnovers while shooting ineffectively while Kyrie was more efficient. There simply is no comparison here. Curry was the one who was supposed to dictate the offense on his team and he didn't do a great job at all. Just take a look at how many behind the back passes he attempted for no particular reason. That's on Curry. That was a bad game for Curry's standard... and it would have been a bad game for Kyrie as well. I simply expect more from both players. Did I expect Kyrie to perform better than Curry? No. But I expected Curry to perform better than Kyrie and he didn't. You keep talking about Curry being held to a higher standard. Those are the standards Curry set for himself. He was the one who became the unanimous, back-to-back MVP. Yet, he was outplayed by Kyrie Irving - someone who probably wasn't even ranked top five in PG's and in the 15-20th best player in the league. Don't talk about standards if you're not willing to hold Curry to the standard he set for himself. LeBron set the bar really high. Much higher than any player in the league today. Yet, he gets criticized for playing above that bar at times. Imagine if he played slightly below his standard.

3) No correlation at all. You brought up an empty argument vs the Bulls in which it was clearly an injury that should have had him sidelined. He forced himself to play despite his father and management warning that he shouldn't have been playing heavy minutes. He shouldn't have played game 1 but did and played very well. Curry was not hobbled by a season-ending injury nor did he require a surgery at any point. I'm guessing you likely just forgot that Kyrie was injured in that Bulls series but even if you didn't, it's not even a fair comparison at all. Kyrie shouldn't have been playing, period.

I'm not taking Kyrie because of something he did once. I'm taking Kyrie because he doesn't get visibly intimidated by LeBron the way LeBron mean-mugged Curry and Curry seemingly trying to look away. I'm taking Kyrie because he was a huge component in coming back from a 3-1 deficit and playing above his regular season capability to beat a team that had won 73 games and were expected to blow the Cavs out. I'm taking Kyrie because he's an absolute dog who likes the challenge. He's someone who accepted a challenge to take Kobe on 1-on-1 back when he was only 20 years old and Kobe was still an elite level player. For reference, I don't have a problem with you choosing Curry. I just find your reasoning in defending Curry while trying to paint Kyrie as a lesser were poor and ineffective.

First Bolded: So you agree, Curry is held to a higher standard than Kyrie because he is a better player.

Second Bolded: Because it's not. Nowhere have I ever said Curry outplayed Kyrie in 2016. Perhaps try arguing the points I'm making?

Third Bolded: 28 Turnovers is not nearly double the turnovers of 18. It's 2/3 more.

Fourth Bolded: And superior players get outplayed by inferior ones in a playoff series (or a game) all the time. It's why series and games are too small a sample size to make any sort of definitive statement, yet here we are.

Fifth Bolded: Again, I'm not comparing the severity of their injuries. I'm saying if you're going to say an injury can affect a players performance, you must actually analyze how much Curry's injury effected his performance and take that into account. Again, is it any coincidence that the only series that Curry played poorly in was the one where he was hurt?

Sixth and Seventh Bolded: You're not taking Kyrie because of something he did once but then go on to list only one actual thing of substance he did lol. The rest are the same things I hear from Kobe fans about why he's better than LeBron. "he doesn't get intimidated like LeBron" "He's an absolute dog who likes the challenge" "He said he could beat MJ 1-on-1 back when he was only 20 years old" Those are literally all statements I've heard verbatim from people saying Kobe is better or more clutch than LeBron. Do you buy those arguments for Kobe over Bron or just Kyrie over Curry?


For reference, they can't be that poor and ineffective, you agree Kyrie is a lesser player. lol. So what exactly are you arguing? For reference, I've got no problem with someone saying Kyrie. I just think people are lying to themselves if they're claiming it's based on any sort of sample size of his performance in those moments. It's based on a single series.

valade16
09-12-2018, 04:47 PM
People saying itís easily Curry would be like me starting a thread like ďwho would win an nba finals matchup, the 2011 Mavs or 2011 Heat?Ē And me saying the 2011 Heat easily.

Close, but the question isn't if Kyrie would outplay Curry in that specific Finals, but in future similar performances. So the real question would be "if they played in the Finals again, who would win 2011 Mavs or 2011 Heat" and to answer that, a lot of people would take the 2011 Heat.

In fact, I think I'll make a thread on it and see what people think.

tredigs
09-12-2018, 04:57 PM
You guys are right, this scenario hasnít literally already happened and Kyrie didnít completely dominate Curry.

Again back to a 1 game sample (where were not sure how close to healthy Curry was, but we know for sure he was slowed down). Curry has played in MANY of these games (including in the Finals against each other the very next season where Curry eviscerated him... but that's ignored by some because he only received a good deal more pressure than Kyrie ever has, not a monumental amount of more pressure like in previous series). He has shown that by and large he's the same player he always is, and guess what, that player is very clearly better than Kyrie Irving. Dear Lawwwd Reverend Wade, pull it together.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 04:58 PM
Again back to a 1 game sample (where were not sure how close to healthy Curry was, but we know for sure he was slowed down). Curry has played in MANY of these games. He has shown that by and large he's the same player he always is, and guess what, that player is very clearly better than Kyrie Irving. Dear Lawwwd Reverend Wade, pull it together.

Im sorry :(!!! May the good lord bless me!

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 04:59 PM
Close, but the question isn't if Kyrie would outplay Curry in that specific Finals, but in future similar performances. So the real question would be "if they played in the Finals again, who would win 2011 Mavs or 2011 Heat" and to answer that, a lot of people would take the 2011 Heat.

In fact, I think I'll make a thread on it and see what people think.

Make a thread so I can vote Miami out of bias like Hawkeye did in here :)

valade16
09-12-2018, 04:59 PM
When rephrased as "Who would you take? The clearly superior player or the clearly inferior player who outplayed the superior player in one series?" it starts to come into stark realization.

valade16
09-12-2018, 05:01 PM
Make a thread so I can vote Miami out of bias like Hawkeye did in here :)

LOL, I'm not nearly as low on Kyrie as Hawkeye is, I think he's a very good player. And I agree with Vee-Rex that he has that ability to create scoring for himself.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 05:03 PM
I mean Iím not saying you all are wrong for taking Curry I just donít think itís the landslide itís made out to be and Iíve already seen Kyrie dominate Curry for an entire series before the Warriors formed the most talented team in NBA history so thatís why Iím leaning Kyrie. I just think he has that dog in him that Curry loses when he goes cold at times and Iíve seen him make some of the biggest plays in NBA history while Curry was folding on the other end. I donít think itís crszy to say that could happen again.

Chronz
09-12-2018, 05:04 PM
I just think itís silly to call it a no brainer when weíve already seen it once and one guy outplayed the other by a wide margin.
Ive seen RIP outplay kobe. We've never seen kyrie lead a team

tredigs
09-12-2018, 05:06 PM
I'm not low on Kyrie in the least either. In fact I think as a scorer there are only 3-4 players in the world you'd rather have than him in a high leverage game (Conference/NBA Finals). Curry just happens to be one of those scorers (and has proved that he's more efficient on higher volume and on a bigger sample than Kyrie in these situations). Also happens that like every other player you'd take over Kyrie in a Finals (Bron and KD without question, AD, Kawhi, Harden, Giannis, etc), every single one of them shares the trait that they do more than just score. Kyrie does nothing better than average (and most below average) than just score. A much more interesting debate to me would be something like him versus Westbrook, where Kyrie DOES have the leg up in scoring, but Westbrook is just such a more dynamic playmaker and by and large will have the greater influence on a game. In this case I do actually think Kyrie's scoring prowess over Westbrook gives him a strong argument. And hell maybe even against Harden he has a case in a Conference Finals/Finals series despite Harden bringing so much more to the table as a playmaker. He's had enough big game full on collapses that it's a more legitimate debate.

valade16
09-12-2018, 05:12 PM
I mean Iím not saying you all are wrong for taking Curry I just donít think itís the landslide itís made out to be and Iíve already seen Kyrie dominate Curry for an entire series before the Warriors formed the most talented team in NBA history so thatís why Iím leaning Kyrie. I just think he has that dog in him that Curry loses when he goes cold at times and Iíve seen him make some of the biggest plays in NBA history while Curry was folding on the other end. I donít think itís crszy to say that could happen again.

It's definitely not crazy to say that could happen again. It is crazy to say it will definitely happen again.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 05:18 PM
It's definitely not crazy to say that could happen again. It is crazy to say it will definitely happen again.

So letís say the exact same thing happened in 2017 that happened in 2016 or that it happens this year on a more level playing field in terms of the teams talent on both sides, Kyrie has now dominated Curry twice. Youíre still taking Curry? I just think this is bigger than the numbers themselves.

valade16
09-12-2018, 05:31 PM
So letís say the exact same thing happened in 2017 that happened in 2016 or that it happens this year on a more level playing field in terms of the teams talent on both sides, Kyrie has now dominated Curry twice. Youíre still taking Curry? I just think this is bigger than the numbers themselves.

If it happened in 2017 or next season, I'd probably take Kyrie depending on other factors. But that's because Kyrie will have proven both that he can outplay Curry more than once and that he can raise his game in the Finals more than once. Essentially, the more times Kyrie outplays Curry the more likely I am to vote for Kyrie yes, because the more certain we can be of him doing just that. But it's a little unfair to Curry at the moment because no matter how badly Curry outplays Kyrie in any future Finals performances, they won't count because of KD; whereas if Kyrie outplays Curry, it will most certainly count.


I do have a question similar to this one: In 1996 Gary Payton shut down MJ (or at least held him to terrible efficiency when guarding him) in the Finals. Do you think that he would have done that had they faced in the 97 Finals? The 98 Finals?

Essentially, because Payton shut down MJ once in the Finals, who are you taking in that matchup? MJ or GP for next time?

ewing
09-12-2018, 05:44 PM
You guys are right, this scenario hasnít literally already happened and Kyrie didnít completely dominate Curry.

Kudos on this post Wade


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 05:46 PM
If it happened in 2017 or next season, I'd probably take Kyrie depending on other factors. But that's because Kyrie will have proven both that he can outplay Curry more than once and that he can raise his game in the Finals more than once. Essentially, the more times Kyrie outplays Curry the more likely I am to vote for Kyrie yes, because the more certain we can be of him doing just that. But it's a little unfair to Curry at the moment because no matter how badly Curry outplays Kyrie in any future Finals performances, they won't count because of KD; whereas if Kyrie outplays Curry, it will most certainly count.


I do have a question similar to this one: In 1996 Gary Payton shut down MJ (or at least held him to terrible efficiency when guarding him) in the Finals. Do you think that he would have done that had they faced in the 97 Finals? The 98 Finals?

Essentially, because Payton shut down MJ once in the Finals, who are you taking in that matchup? MJ or GP for next time?

The gap between MJ and Payton is much greater than Curry and Kyrie imo and the Bulls still won the series so I would go MJ but I wouldnít be surprised if he shut him down again because heís already done it before and asking ďcan Payton shut down MJĒ wouldnít be a crazy question.

valade16
09-12-2018, 05:46 PM
Kudos on this post Wade

Well Curry outplayed Kyrie in 2017, but apparently that doesn't count.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 05:47 PM
Kudos on this post Wade


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you and god bless you, ewing.

valade16
09-12-2018, 05:49 PM
The gap between MJ and Payton is much greater than Curry and Kyrie imo and the Bulls still won the series so I would go MJ but I wouldnít be surprised if he shut him down again because heís already done it before and asking ďcan Payton shut down MJĒ wouldnít be a crazy question.

I like how you couched your answer lol, but at least you understand my point. Just because someone did it once doesn't mean you think they would do it again in the exact same scenario. In the same way you'd take MJ there, people could take Curry here even knowing Curry was outplayed once in a series by Kyrie.

WaDe03
09-12-2018, 05:52 PM
I like how you couched your answer lol, but at least you understand my point. Just because someone did it once doesn't mean you think they would do it again in the exact same scenario. In the same way you'd take MJ there, people could take Curry here even knowing Curry was outplayed once in a series by Kyrie.

Yea which is why I said I donít have a problem with anyone picking Curry here, what Iím debating is people acting like itís a no brainer to pick Curry when itís already happened before

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:10 PM
First Bolded: So you agree, Curry is held to a higher standard than Kyrie because he is a better player.

Second Bolded: Because it's not. Nowhere have I ever said Curry outplayed Kyrie in 2016. Perhaps try arguing the points I'm making?

Third Bolded: 28 Turnovers is not nearly double the turnovers of 18. It's 2/3 more.

Fourth Bolded: And superior players get outplayed by inferior ones in a playoff series (or a game) all the time. It's why series and games are too small a sample size to make any sort of definitive statement, yet here we are.

Fifth Bolded: Again, I'm not comparing the severity of their injuries. I'm saying if you're going to say an injury can affect a players performance, you must actually analyze how much Curry's injury effected his performance and take that into account. Again, is it any coincidence that the only series that Curry played poorly in was the one where he was hurt?

Sixth and Seventh Bolded: You're not taking Kyrie because of something he did once but then go on to list only one actual thing of substance he did lol. The rest are the same things I hear from Kobe fans about why he's better than LeBron. "he doesn't get intimidated like LeBron" "He's an absolute dog who likes the challenge" "He said he could beat MJ 1-on-1 back when he was only 20 years old" Those are literally all statements I've heard verbatim from people saying Kobe is better or more clutch than LeBron. Do you buy those arguments for Kobe over Bron or just Kyrie over Curry?


For reference, they can't be that poor and ineffective, you agree Kyrie is a lesser player. lol. So what exactly are you arguing? For reference, I've got no problem with someone saying Kyrie. I just think people are lying to themselves if they're claiming it's based on any sort of sample size of his performance in those moments. It's based on a single series.

1) Yes, he's held to a higher standard to perform and yet, he underperformed below Kyrie when it mattered most. This Curry was being put up along the names of surpassing LeBron as the best player and in some Jordan vs Curry debates on PSD. Sorry, he set the standards and he didn't live up to them in the Finals.

2) Biggest stage of both their career and Curry underperformed. The thread is about a winner-takes-all-game in which we have evidence Kyrie outperformed Curry before. Sorry if you haven't caught on but me saying Kyrie outplayed Curry is the best argument, yet. One you can't and won't be able to refute.

3) If you're going to try and correct me about the turnovers, where did you get 28 from? He had 30 turnovers. I said nearly double so trying to correct me there when it's just 6 turnovers isn't a good "GOT YOU" attempt by you.

4) Except, that's not the only thing I'm basing it off of. Kyrie simply has more dog in him. I don't see how that is debatable.

5) Your initial stance was you tried to pinpoint Kyrie's underperformance in a Chicago series in which he was clearly injured and shouldn't have been playing. He was out for the majority of the Hawks series to try and rest up for the Warriors and even with a 9 days rest and being two games out against the Hawks, he still wasn't able to recover close to being himself. Still showed up in game 1 and performed just as well as Curry did. You then tried to make it seem as if evaluating both their injuries is fair but I'm already past that point. Curry's "injuries" seemed to be ones that players go through all the time. It's not a legitimate one in which he should or had to sit out. He should play, period. Kyrie shouldn't have been playing, period. There is nothing in between here.

6) How did I know you were going to bring Kobe up? It's predictable. The narrative LeBron doesn't have that "dog" in him is false and has been for much of his career. It's being mistaken as him being passive rather than more offensive in approach and that simply is part of LeBron's game. Curry was legitimately getting victimized by LeBron and Curry wanted no part of that. That verbatim you speak of is rhetoric and not true so let's disregard that. Kyrie plays well and has that "it" factor in him when the game shines brighter. It's not something you have to dig up to realize that. You can see it in his game.

7) We've seen better players underperform when the light shines brightest and we've seen lesser players step up as well. You're right, it's more than a sample size of one or two games. 2016 NBA Finals: LeBron was the best player of the series and Kyrie was the second best. Curry was the third but Draymond likely wins the Finals MVP had the Warriors won game 7. So what are we talking about here? What piece of evidence on the contrary do you have that in their biggest game of their career, Kyrie outperformed Curry? One that in which Cavs wanted a switch on Curry and one in which Love was able to successfully lock down Curry despite a reputation of being a poor defender?

I mean, in another post of yours you talk about Cavs gameplanning for Curry. Yes, because they were successful in mitigating Curry in previous years. Why wouldn't they try and stop him if it works? You make it seem as if they wanted to stop Curry because he was the primary reason they were losing. That was incorrect. The primary reason Warriors were beating the Cavs is because Durant could somewhat neutralize LeBron in impact.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:12 PM
When rephrased as "Who would you take? The clearly superior player or the clearly inferior player who outplayed the superior player in one series?" it starts to come into stark realization.

No, I would not take DeRozan in a winner-takes-all game. You can, I won't. Other SG's I would rather have, thank you very much.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:15 PM
Well Curry outplayed Kyrie in 2017, but apparently that doesn't count.

Right. Let's just ignore the fact that one team was clearly outmatched. That definitely had nothing to do with why Curry saw a huge spike in performance. It's like putting Lillard on the 2017 Warriors instead of Curry and then saying, "Look how much better Lillard is."

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:26 PM
1) Yes, he's held to a higher standard to perform and yet, he underperformed below Kyrie when it mattered most. This Curry was being put up along the names of surpassing LeBron as the best player and in some Jordan vs Curry debates on PSD. Sorry, he set the standards and he didn't live up to them in the Finals.

2) Biggest stage of both their career and Curry underperformed. The thread is about a winner-takes-all-game in which we have evidence Kyrie outperformed Curry before. Sorry if you haven't caught on but me saying Kyrie outplayed Curry is the best argument, yet. One you can't and won't be able to refute.

3) If you're going to try and correct me about the turnovers, where did you get 28 from? He had 30 turnovers. I said nearly double so trying to correct me there when it's just 6 turnovers isn't a good "GOT YOU" attempt by you.

4) Except, that's not the only thing I'm basing it off of. Kyrie simply has more dog in him. I don't see how that is debatable.

5) Your initial stance was you tried to pinpoint Kyrie's underperformance in a Chicago series in which he was clearly injured and shouldn't have been playing. He was out for the majority of the Hawks series to try and rest up for the Warriors and even with a 9 days rest and being two games out against the Hawks, he still wasn't able to recover close to being himself. Still showed up in game 1 and performed just as well as Curry did. You then tried to make it seem as if evaluating both their injuries is fair but I'm already past that point. Curry's "injuries" seemed to be ones that players go through all the time. It's not a legitimate one in which he should or had to sit out. He should play, period. Kyrie shouldn't have been playing, period. There is nothing in between here.

6) How did I know you were going to bring Kobe up? It's predictable. The narrative LeBron doesn't have that "dog" in him is false and has been for much of his career. It's being mistaken as him being passive rather than more offensive in approach and that simply is part of LeBron's game. Curry was legitimately getting victimized by LeBron and Curry wanted no part of that. That verbatim you speak of is rhetoric and not true so let's disregard that. Kyrie plays well and has that "it" factor in him when the game shines brighter. It's not something you have to dig up to realize that. You can see it in his game.

7) We've seen better players underperform when the light shines brightest and we've seen lesser players step up as well. You're right, it's more than a sample size of one or two games. 2016 NBA Finals: LeBron was the best player of the series and Kyrie was the second best. Curry was the third but Draymond likely wins the Finals MVP had the Warriors won game 7. So what are we talking about here? What piece of evidence on the contrary do you have that in their biggest game of their career, Kyrie outperformed Curry? One that in which Cavs wanted a switch on Curry and one in which Love was able to successfully lock down Curry despite a reputation of being a poor defender?

I mean, in another post of yours you talk about Cavs gameplanning for Curry. Yes, because they were successful in mitigating Curry in previous years. Why wouldn't they try and stop him if it works? You make it seem as if they wanted to stop Curry because he was the primary reason they were losing. That was incorrect. The primary reason Warriors were beating the Cavs is because Durant could somewhat neutralize LeBron in impact.

1). Once again, you agree Curry is the superior player.

2). Nor am I going to refute that he did that... once in 2016. Your argument seems to be that because he did that once... in 2016... it's a certainty he will do that every time in similar circumstances from now on. I don't know if it's your ability to comprehend your argument suffers from a lack of sample size or your inability to acknowledge that fact. Either way, you can't and won't refute that.

3). I thought we were referring to Curry's 2015, not his 2016.

4). I meant basing it off something objective or measurable. It's just the one time. To wit: do you want to answer whether you agree with such statements in regard to the Kobe/LeBron debate or not?

5). Nowhere have I said otherwise. I don't know if you're arguing nonexistent points because you can't understand the actual ones or because those are the only ones you can win. OK, Curry should have played. That doesn't say anything about his effectiveness while playing. Was he 100%, yes or no? If not, did him being less than 100% affect his performance, yes or no. Do you want to answer those questions?

6). Again, literally all platitudes I hear about the Kobe vs Bron debate and the Kyrie vs Curry debate. As for the end part about Kyrie clearly having the 'it' factor when the game shines brightest, I will reiterate you're basing that off of a single Finals series. There is no other data to support your assertion. Which is fine, it's just bizarre you won't admit that.

7). Once again, I have no evidence to the contrary that Kyrie outperformed Curry in 2016, nor have I ever argued that. Once again, your insistence on arguing nonexistent points is baffling. You have again gone back to the single 2016 Finals performance. It's the entirety of your argument.


I can summarize your entire post and your entire point: Kyrie outperformed Curry in the 2016 Finals!!!!

I agree. If you can't understand there's more to this question than that, then it's not worth my time to keep engaging you. Please let me know.

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:27 PM
No, I would not take DeRozan in a winner-takes-all game. You can, I won't. Other SG's I would rather have, thank you very much.

To clarify, who are you saying is the inferior player that you would take over DeRozan in a winner takes all game and when did they outplay DeRozan in a series?

It was an amusing attempt, but your "gotcha" analogy sucks.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:31 PM
To clarify, who are you saying is the inferior player that you would take over DeRozan in a winner takes all game and when did they outplay DeRozan in a series?

It was an amusing attempt, but your "gotcha" analogy sucks.

It's a generic response to detail that DeRozan may be superior to many SG's and is one of the best but I would not even think about selecting him over other SG's. Do you want me to make a list? Or do you think DeRozan being a superior regular season player should excuse his ridiculously poor playoff blunders?

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:36 PM
It's a generic response to detail that DeRozan may be superior to many SG's and is one of the best but I would not even think about selecting him over other SG's. Do you want me to make a list? Or do you think DeRozan being a superior regular season player should excuse his ridiculously poor playoff blunders?

Well it's a flawed comparison from the start if your argument is about regular season vs playoffs; because Curry actually has better playoff numbers than Kyrie:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Stephen+Curry&player_id1_select=Stephen+Curry&player_id1=curryst01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Kyrie+Irving&player_id2_select=Kyrie+Irving&player_id2=irvinky01&idx=players

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:38 PM
1). Once again, you agree Curry is the superior player.

2). Nor am I going to refute that he did that... once in 2016. Your argument seems to be that because he did that once... in 2016... it's a certainty he will do that every time in similar circumstances from now on. I don't know if it's your ability to comprehend your argument suffers from a lack of sample size or your inability to acknowledge that fact. Either way, you can't and won't refute that.

3). I thought we were referring to Curry's 2015, not his 2016.

4). I meant basing it off something objective or measurable. It's just the one time. To wit: do you want to answer whether you agree with such statements in regard to the Kobe/LeBron debate or not?

5). Nowhere have I said otherwise. I don't know if you're arguing nonexistent points because you can't understand the actual ones or because those are the only ones you can win. OK, Curry should have played. That doesn't say anything about his effectiveness while playing. Was he 100%, yes or no? If not, did him being less than 100% affect his performance, yes or no. Do you want to answer those questions?

6). Again, literally all platitudes I hear about the Kobe vs Bron debate and the Kyrie vs Curry debate. As for the end part about Kyrie clearly having the 'it' factor when the game shines brightest, I will reiterate you're basing that off of a single Finals series. There is no other data to support your assertion. Which is fine, it's just bizarre you won't admit that.

7). Once again, I have no evidence to the contrary that Kyrie outperformed Curry in 2016, nor have I ever argued that. Once again, your insistence on arguing nonexistent points is baffling. You have again gone back to the single 2016 Finals performance. It's the entirety of your argument.


I can summarize your entire post and your entire point: Kyrie outperformed Curry in the 2016 Finals!!!!

I agree. If you can't understand there's more to this question than that, then it's not worth my time to keep engaging you. Please let me know.

This goes nowhere, as usual, because you're much too stubborn my man. I hate to always drag these out but you just seem to can't admit when you are wrong.

Just reading #3, it literally made zero sense to compare Curry's 2015 turnovers when Kyrie played only one game in the 2015 series and you yourself began quoting Curry's/Kyrie's 2016 game logs. For Christ's sake, you literally said Kyrie had 18 turnovers.. why would you be comparing 2015 to 2016? Just admit it, you had your webpage on 2015 and made a mistake. But instead of admitting it, you tried to make it about a miscommunication. You're too predictable, my man. And you know what I am saying is true but I know you will try to deny that and "counter" what I said by saying the same to me.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:40 PM
Well it's a flawed comparison from the start if your argument is about regular season vs playoffs; because Curry actually has better playoff numbers than Kyrie:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Stephen+Curry&player_id1_select=Stephen+Curry&player_id1=curryst01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Kyrie+Irving&player_id2_select=Kyrie+Irving&player_id2=irvinky01&idx=players

I'm not responding to that but this:

When rephrased as "Who would you take? The clearly superior player or the clearly inferior player who outplayed the superior player in one series?" it starts to come into stark realization.

You're the one who made this argument so I am responding that it's not true that the "clearly superior player" is always the best choice when it comes to the playoffs. We've seen players underperform for many reasons.

tredigs
09-12-2018, 06:40 PM
It's a generic response to detail that DeRozan may be superior to many SG's and is one of the best but I would not even think about selecting him over other SG's. Do you want me to make a list? Or do you think DeRozan being a superior regular season player should excuse his ridiculously poor playoff blunders?

Complete strawman argument considering Curry is better in every situation than Kyrie including the Conference Finals and Finals.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:42 PM
Complete strawman argument considering Curry is better in every situation than Kyrie including the Conference Finals and Finals.

Would be a strawman on your end. Find where I said Curry was a poor playoff performer or that Kyrie has had a better playoff career than Curry. I haven't. But Curry hasn't been better than Kyrie in their own playoffs matchups and that's something I stand by.

tredigs
09-12-2018, 06:44 PM
Would be a strawman on your end. Find where I said Curry was a poor playoff performer or that Kyrie has had a better playoff career than Curry. I haven't. But Curry hasn't been better than Kyrie in their own playoffs matchups and that's something I stand by.

It's not the question of this thread, but they've matched up twice and Curry **** on him in the most recent matchup. If that's what you want to stand on, have at it. But it's squishy and smelly at best.

Heediot
09-12-2018, 06:45 PM
Eye test and gut feeling. I'm going with Kyrie. I think he also has more of that killer instinct and mettle just from my subjective perception and observation. Sure Kyrie can miss or have a stinker, but I've never seen him rattled, I'll take that in a do or die game considering both guys have the potential to win a game by himself on a random night.

I also feel Kyrie can create space for his shot better and play through contact better in the playoffs in tight defensive situations. So in a do or die game when people are throwing the kitchen sink at you I think he has more counters. Curry is the better pure shooter. When Kyrie tries I think he is juts as good possibly better on defense when truly dialed in. Curry gets credit and is more consistent throughout the season on that end.

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:50 PM
This goes nowhere, as usual, because you're much too stubborn my man. I hate to always drag these out but you just seem to can't admit when you are wrong.

Just reading #3, it literally made zero sense to compare Curry's 2015 turnovers when Kyrie played only one game in the 2015 series and you yourself began quoting Curry's/Kyrie's 2016 game logs. For Christ's sake, you literally said Kyrie had 18 turnovers.. why would you be comparing 2015 to 2016? Just admit it, you had your webpage on 2015 and made a mistake. But instead of admitting it, you tried to make it about a miscommunication. You're too predictable, my man. And you know what I am saying is true but I know you will try to deny that and "counter" what I said by saying the same to me.

I genuinely was comparing Curry's 2015 to Kyrie's 2016, I got confused by what we were arguing at that point and though we were arguing Curry's 2015 stats to Kyrie's 2016, since I would never attempt to argue Curry's 2016 stats are somehow comparable to Kyrie's 2016 stats (something I've said repeatedly here: that Kyrie outplayed Curry in 2016). It would make no sense to compare Curry and Kyrie's 2016 turnovers because I'd never try to argue Curry outplayed Kyrie that series. But believe what you want.

I agree, this has gone nowhere because despite the volume of your posts, they can be condensed down to "Kyrie outplayed Curry in the 2016 Finals!!" and you are much too stubborn to admit that's your only real point.

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:54 PM
Would be a strawman on your end. Find where I said Curry was a poor playoff performer or that Kyrie has had a better playoff career than Curry. I haven't. But Curry hasn't been better than Kyrie in their own playoffs matchups and that's something I stand by.

Maybe it was the OPs intent, but that isn't even the question:

If you were going in to a winner takes all game or for instance game 7 of the finals or any playoff series, which player are you taking......Kyrie or Steph?

The wording isn't which would you take if they were playing each other, but just which would you take in a Game 7 of the Finals or any playoff series. So Steph may not even be facing Kyrie. So I think the fact that Curry has been better in the playoffs than Kyrie (and Game 7's or elimination games of the playoffs with the exception of 2016 Finals) should carry some weight, no?

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:55 PM
I genuinely was comparing Curry's 2015 to Kyrie's 2016, I got confused by what we were arguing at that point and though we were arguing Curry's 2015 stats to Kyrie's 2016, since I would never attempt to argue Curry's 2016 stats are somehow comparable to Kyrie's 2016 stats (something I've said repeatedly here: that Kyrie outplayed Curry in 2016). It would make no sense to compare Curry and Kyrie's 2016 turnovers because I'd never try to argue Curry outplayed Kyrie that series. But believe what you want.

I agree, this has gone nowhere because despite the volume of your posts, they can be condensed down to "Kyrie outplayed Curry in the 2016 Finals!!" and you are much too stubborn to admit that's your only real point.

No, I've said numerous times that I have no problem with anyone picking Curry and also saying Curry is the superior player but I've stated that Kyrie has that "dog" in him that I believe puts him above Curry in a winnter-takes-all game. If all you got was me saying, "Kyrie outplayed Curry in the 2016 Finals", it's because you're more interested on responding than to understand ones post. Go back to many of my posts and you'll find it. But hey, choose to ignore that as well if it helps your case. Am I stubborn? Yup. I can admit that. And that's the difference between you and I; you won't.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 06:57 PM
It's not the question of this thread, but they've matched up twice and Curry **** on him in the most recent matchup. If that's what you want to stand on, have at it. But it's squishy and smelly at best.

On paper, sure. But contextually, the addition of Durant definitely helped Curry become more efficient. If we add Durant to the Cavs instead, would we even want to ask who looks better?

valade16
09-12-2018, 06:58 PM
No, I've said numerous times that I have no problem with anyone picking Curry and also saying Curry is the superior player but I've stated that Kyrie has that "dog" in him that I believe puts him above Curry in a winnter-takes-all game. If all you got was me saying, "Kyrie outplayed Curry in the 2016 Finals", it's because you're more interested on responding than to understand ones post. Go back to many of my posts and you'll find it. But hey, choose to ignore that as well if it helps your case. Am I stubborn? Yup. I can admit that. And that's the difference between you and I; you won't.

First, I will freely admit I'm stubborn. So you're wrong there.

Second, I said it previously twice now, but I mean your only objective point is the 2016 Finals. If you're seriously saying that you have 2 points because you believe that Kyrie has that "dog" in him, sorry I don't buy that anymore than I buy "Kobe is better than LeBron because he has that killer instinct". But if you want the satisfaction of being right, yes, technically you have 2 points this whole thread. But honestly, that's not much better than having just the one point...

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 07:00 PM
Eye test and gut feeling. I'm going with Kyrie. I think he also has more of that killer instinct and mettle just from my subjective perception and observation. Sure Kyrie can miss or have a stinker, but I've never seen him rattled, I'll take that in a do or die game considering both guys have the potential to win a game by himself on a random night.

I also feel Kyrie can create space for his shot better and play through contact better in the playoffs in tight defensive situations. So in a do or die game when people are throwing the kitchen sink at you I think he has more counters. Curry is the better pure shooter. When Kyrie tries I think he is juts as good possibly better on defense when truly dialed in. Curry gets credit and is more consistent throughout the season on that end.

I said as much in one of my post. Kyrie's got a wider selection of shots he's capable of hitting. It's not a knock on Curry at all but just the fact Curry relies more on his three point shooting while Kyrie's wide array of getting shots is unlike anything I've seen from a point guard. He's just too damn good at getting his own shots. Dude has that playground style of basketball in him so it's understandable how he developed that part of his game. Like when people say, "how do you stop Curry", the answer is you can't. Just play tough, somewhat dirty, and force him to turn the ball over. When you talk about stopping Kyrie, I don't see one thing you can do that Kyrie can't overcome.

valade16
09-12-2018, 07:06 PM
I said as much in one of my post. Kyrie's got a wider selection of shots he's capable of hitting. It's not a knock on Curry at all but just the fact Curry relies more on his three point shooting while Kyrie's wide array of getting shots is unlike anything I've seen from a point guard. He's just too damn good at getting his own shots. Dude has that playground style of basketball in him so it's understandable how he developed that part of his game. Like when people say, "how do you stop Curry", the answer is you can't. Just play tough, somewhat dirty, and force him to turn the ball over. When you talk about stopping Kyrie, I don't see one thing you can do that Kyrie can't overcome.

I agree with this. Kyrie has one of the best abilities to get his own shot.

I am interested to see how you'd answer my question to Wade given your avatar.

Do you think Gary Payton shuts down MJ in a 1997 Finals matchup the way he shut him down in 96 (when he ended up guarding him)?

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 07:08 PM
First, I will freely admit I'm stubborn. So you're wrong there.

Second, I said it previously twice now, but I mean your only objective point is the 2016 Finals. If you're seriously saying that you have 2 points because you believe that Kyrie has that "dog" in him, sorry I don't buy that anymore than I buy "Kobe is better than LeBron because he has that killer instinct". But if you want the satisfaction of being right, yes, technically you have 2 points this whole thread. But honestly, that's not much better than having just the one point...

1) Good for you, I'm wrong.

2) Vastly outplayed Curry in the only example of a "winner-takes-all game" between those two, has more dog in him, a wider array of shot selection. Yeah, those are three reasons I would take Kyrie over Curry in again, a winner-take-all game. For a series? No question I'm taking Curry. I don't buy the Kobe has more of a killer instinct than LeBron does either because it's not true. Kyrie having more dog than Curry is however, true.

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 07:14 PM
I agree with this. Kyrie has one of the best abilities to get his own shot.

I am interested to see how you'd answer my question to Wade given your avatar.

Do you think Gary Payton shuts down MJ in a 1997 Finals matchup the way he shut him down in 96 (when he ended up guarding him)?

I wouldn't bet on it. What's funny about that series is that GP wasn't even 100% and George Karl didn't want GP to initially guard Jordan because of that. It'd be interesting to see if a healthy GP could do it for an entire series but we're talking about MJ here so it's tough to ever bet against MJ.

tredigs
09-12-2018, 09:14 PM
On paper, sure. But contextually, the addition of Durant definitely helped Curry become more efficient. If we add Durant to the Cavs instead, would we even want to ask who looks better?

You're just writing words at this point, there's really nothing behind them. It's a fact that adding KD did not make Curry more efficient to any discernible degree. In the playoffs or otherwise. 66% TS in the reg season in the 2 seasons prior to KD joining (27 PPG). 64% TS in the 2 regular seasons with KD on the team (26 PPG). 61% TS in the post-season in the 2 seasons prior to KD joining (27 PPG). 63% TS in the post-season in the 2 seasons with KD on the team (27 PPG). That's an effective change of zero as far as Curry was concerned.

I don't understand your last comment. He played with Lebron and another All Star (an All Star solely for his offense). He's never been a #1 option or the focal point of a defense in the playoffs. Curry has been the primary focus of the opposition in every series he's ever played, with or without KD. What are we talking about here?

FlashBolt
09-12-2018, 09:20 PM
You're just writing words at this point, there's really nothing behind them. It's a fact that adding KD did not make Curry more efficient to any discernible degree. In the playoffs or otherwise. 66% TS in the reg season in the 2 seasons prior to KD joining (27 PPG). 64% TS in the 2 regular seasons with KD on the team (26 PPG). 61% TS in the post-season in the 2 seasons prior to KD joining (27 PPG). 63% TS in the post-season in the 2 seasons with KD on the team (27 PPG). That's an effective change of zero as far as Curry was concerned.

I don't understand your last comment. He played with Lebron and another All Star (an All Star solely for his offense). He's never been a #1 option or the focal point of a defense in the playoffs. What are we talking about here?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2016-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2017-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html

In the Finals, yes it did. And that's what we are comparing.

Even when he did play with LeBron, they weren't the favorites to beat the Warriors. You don't understand because you refuse to accept that Durant has been largely the reason you guys are overwhelming favorites even moreso than two years ago. Add Durant to the Cavs the past two seasons. Then tell me Kyrie's game wouldn't see a spike in efficiency in the Finals. How else did you think Curry's AST/TO ratio somehow skyrocketed? Let me guess: He somehow became a much better passer within a span of one season. Totally doesn't have to do with the fact that KD causes a total breakdown in the Cavs defense.

tredigs
09-12-2018, 09:31 PM
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2016-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2017-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html

In the Finals, yes it did. And that's what we are comparing.

Even when he did play with LeBron, they weren't the favorites to beat the Warriors. You don't understand because you refuse to accept that Durant has been largely the reason you guys are overwhelming favorites even moreso than two years ago. Add Durant to the Cavs the past two seasons. Then tell me Kyrie's game wouldn't see a spike in efficiency in the Finals. How else did you think Curry's AST/TO ratio somehow skyrocketed? Let me guess: He somehow became a much better passer within a span of one season. Totally doesn't have to do with the fact that KD causes a total breakdown in the Cavs defense.

The smaller the sample, the more the noise man. The Cavs team they played in the past Finals was severely over-matched, and that's far from KD being on the team. They would have VERY easily smashed last years Finals team with or without KD (ditto the Rockets, and I actually think the Pels and Jazz could have beat them as well). There was also the fact that Curry clearly looked slowed in the '16 Finals. Concerning the 17 and 16 Cavs team, bear in mind the '16 team was a borderline top 10 D (10th I think), and the '17 a bottom 10 D. That's why you look at broader samples (luckily the West is brutal and there are series that are often even tougher than the Finals, so it gives great indicators), and that's when you see more and more that nothing really changed as far as Curry's efficiency and impact was concerned. Makes sense as again, he was the focus of all oppositions. Concerning your AST/TO ratio comment (saying that KD is aiding him here), just more inaccurate comments from you. It was better in his first 4 playoff runs pre-KD (it was best in his first two playoff runs actually). It also does not account for secondary assists, of which Curry always leads the league in, and though I haven't seen the stats would imagine that is only more significant in the playoffs.

I'll leave it at that, you guys can continue on. This debate is not close.

FlashBolt
09-13-2018, 03:10 AM
The smaller the sample, the more the noise man. The Cavs team they played in the past Finals was severely over-matched, and that's far from KD being on the team. They would have VERY easily smashed last years Finals team with or without KD (ditto the Rockets, and I actually think the Pels and Jazz could have beat them as well). There was also the fact that Curry clearly looked slowed in the '16 Finals. Concerning the 17 and 16 Cavs team, bear in mind the '16 team was a borderline top 10 D (10th I think), and the '17 a bottom 10 D. That's why you look at broader samples (luckily the West is brutal and there are series that are often even tougher than the Finals, so it gives great indicators), and that's when you see more and more that nothing really changed as far as Curry's efficiency and impact was concerned. Makes sense as again, he was the focus of all oppositions. Concerning your AST/TO ratio comment (saying that KD is aiding him here), just more inaccurate comments from you. It was better in his first 4 playoff runs pre-KD (it was best in his first two playoff runs actually). It also does not account for secondary assists, of which Curry always leads the league in, and though I haven't seen the stats would imagine that is only more significant in the playoffs.

I'll leave it at that, you guys can continue on. This debate is not close.

I'm specifically referring to the Finals. You keep dragging it on as if I'm talking about their playoff history. It's 100% factual that Curry was more efficient in the Finals when KD came along. No debate needed. You keep saying I'm wrong when you're misinterpreting the entire thing. Happens when you skip through pages and simply quote the last reply.

berksemikohen
09-13-2018, 04:14 AM
Definitely Curry with his shooting thread

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 09:24 AM
The gap between MJ and Payton is much greater than Curry and Kyrie imo and the Bulls still won the series so I would go MJ but I wouldnít be surprised if he shut him down again because heís already done it before and asking ďcan Payton shut down MJĒ wouldnít be a crazy question.

I don't think the gap between MJ and Payton is bigger than the gap between Curry and Irving. Curry is a first ballot HOF'er, he will end up a top 20 player ever. Irving won't sniff top 70 to ever play. MJ is the GOAT, Payton a top 40 player ever. The gap is similar.

valade is exactly right. As am I. If you take Irving, you are taking the lesser player, in hopes of him playing his absolute best case scenario again. Because we have a single series/game to cling onto that hope, I get it. But if the series is played 100 times, Curry outplays Irving a lost more than the other way around. The only factor that plays into that, is if the defending team yet again loads up on Curry and lets Durant put up epic numbers.

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 09:27 AM
the killer instinct many of you crave so badly works both ways, you understand that right? A guy is just as likely, or even more likely, to hurt his team with that mentality than he is going to help it.

Kobe in close games....perfect example. His team falls off a cliff in the last 5 minutes of close games offensively. Luckily, the Lakers had large enough leads most the time.

ewing
09-13-2018, 09:34 AM
the killer instinct many of you crave so badly works both ways, you understand that right? A guy is just as likely, or even more likely, to hurt his team with that mentality than he is going to help it.

Kobe in close games....perfect example. His team falls off a cliff in the last 5 minutes of close games offensively. Luckily, the Lakers had large enough leads most the time.

i don't think Curry gets rattled and I don't it is about mentality. I think Irving is just better at shot creation. Curry is a better overall scorer but if you say go get me a bucket right now Kryie is my guy b/c of how good he is in tight spaces. In close intense games timely hooping is important and Irving has a better skill set to provide it. I do think Curry shot creation is actually underrated sometimes b/c of just how good a shooter he is but Kyrie is better at the aspect of scoring IMO

ewing
09-13-2018, 09:38 AM
I don't think the gap between MJ and Payton is bigger than the gap between Curry and Irving. Curry is a first ballot HOF'er, he will end up a top 20 player ever. Irving won't sniff top 70 to ever play. MJ is the GOAT, Payton a top 40 player ever. The gap is similar.

valade is exactly right. As am I. If you take Irving, you are taking the lesser player, in hopes of him playing his absolute best case scenario again. Because we have a single series/game to cling onto that hope, I get it. But if the series is played 100 times, Curry outplays Irving a lost more than the other way around. The only factor that plays into that, is if the defending team yet again loads up on Curry and lets Durant put up epic numbers.

Of course you don't in reality though the gap b/t prime MJ and the second best guy in the league was bigger and that guy was never GP

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 09:41 AM
i don't think Curry gets rattled and I don't it is about mentality. I think Irving is just better at shot creation. Curry is a better overall scorer but if you say go get me a bucket right now Kryie is my guy b/c of how good he is in tight spaces. In close intense games timely hooping is important and Irving has a better skill set to provide it.

I agree irving can get his own shot better. But basketball is not 1 on 1. Curry still offers far more offensively. Dude, teams panic if he sees daylight 30 feet from the rim. I mean that alone, even if he never shot, is such a benefit to the offense. Getting teams on the run just by being on the court is something we have only seen in MJ and Shaq. Curry does that as well.

I brought this up earlier, but there are fans (you are one of them), who simply love to see old school, "I am going to go until you stop me" mentality, and guys who just live to break defenses down and score, even if its at the expense of their team. I get that, its awesome to watch that, but on a playground, not at the pro level when going iso is just so stupid in most crucial situations, unless you are Michael Jordan, or have a big matchup advantage.

At the end of the day, none of its about mentality to me. Its about results. Its why I don't care if Melo has every tool in the book, he still isn't as good a scorer as Lebron was before the jumper. Why? Because results are literally all that matter. And Curry's results crap on Irving's.

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 09:45 AM
Of course you don't in reality though the gap b/t prime MJ and the second best guy in the league was bigger and that guy was never GP

The gap between prime LeBron and the next guy was just as big.

Look, 20 years from now, Irving will be talked about as a nice player. Curry a legend/HOF'er who changed the game. But, here we are in the heat of the moment, arguing over this because of short term memory.

To me, this is an easy question, because I am not willing to be Irving plays the way he did in game 7 of the 16' finals consistently. I am willing to bet Curry plays at his elite level though. Hell we don't even know if Irving would play at all, the dude seems to get hurt at the worst times.

ewing
09-13-2018, 10:26 AM
I agree irving can get his own shot better. But basketball is not 1 on 1. Curry still offers far more offensively. Dude, teams panic if he sees daylight 30 feet from the rim. I mean that alone, even if he never shot, is such a benefit to the offense. Getting teams on the run just by being on the court is something we have only seen in MJ and Shaq. Curry does that as well.

I brought this up earlier, but there are fans (you are one of them), who simply love to see old school, "I am going to go until you stop me" mentality, and guys who just live to break defenses down and score, even if its at the expense of their team. I get that, its awesome to watch that, but on a playground, not at the pro level when going iso is just so stupid in most crucial situations, unless you are Michael Jordan, or have a big matchup advantage.

At the end of the day, none of its about mentality to me. Its about results. Its why I don't care if Melo has every tool in the book, he still isn't as good a scorer as Lebron was before the jumper. Why? Because results are literally all that matter. And Curry's results crap on Irving's.

No they don't. Both guys are elite level scorers by every matrix. Curry is more efficient but no he doesn't crap on Irving. He is the more efficient of two efficient scorers. Btw basketball isn't one on one until it is. In the playoffs at the end of games it often is. This isn't true just for the guys you don't like. Its true when GS gives the ball to KD and gets **** out of the way, or when Houston goes to Harden or CP3. Its true when the Jazz depend on Donovan Mitchell to create. It true just as much then as it is when Irvings team does it. Lastly I think you are totally enamored by a new stat. Yes Curry has gravity and pulls guys away from the bucket. Yes guys have to stay attached GS does a good job creating back door opportunities b/c of this. Yes it gives guys room to operate and creates passing lanes. So does the other 4 guys shading to the paint b/c they know Irving can take his guy off the bounce, so does people having to defend Kyrie out to 25. Even if its not 30 he is spreading the floor to and stretching the D in other ways. Both guys put a lot of pressure on the D. Curry is a more efficient scorer and neither of them are great at anything other then scoring the basketball.

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 10:34 AM
No they don't. Both guys are elite level scorers by every matrix. Curry is more efficient but no he doesn't crap on Irving. He is the more efficient of two efficient scorers. Btw basketball isn't one on one until it is. In the playoffs at the end of games it often is. This isn't true just for the guys you don't like. Its true when GS gives the ball to KD and gets **** out of the way, or when Houston goes to Harden or CP3. Its true when the Jazz depend on Donovan Mitchell to create. It true just as much then as it is when Irvings team does it. Lastly I think you are totally enamored by a new stat. Yes Curry has gravity and pulls guys away from the bucket. Yes guys have to stay attached GS does a good job creating back door opportunities b/c of this. Yes it gives guys room to operate and creates passing lanes. So does the other 4 guys shading to the paint b/c they know Irving can take his guy off the bounce, so does people having to defend Kyrie out to 25. Even if its not 30 he is spreading the floor to and stretching the D in other ways. Both guys put a lot of pressure on the D. Curry is a more efficient scorer and neither of them are great at anything other then scoring the basketball.

Irving isn't Durant, a matchup the NBA hasn't seen before. I prefer staying away from iso for the most part.

Curry is far better as a player than Irving. You don't need to agree with my take. I don't agree with your pick this question. I do know I have spent far too much time debating this stupid subject.

Take who you want. I will take Curry. Odds are in my favor.

tredigs
09-13-2018, 10:36 AM
I'm specifically referring to the Finals. You keep dragging it on as if I'm talking about their playoff history. It's 100% factual that Curry was more efficient in the Finals when KD came along. No debate needed. You keep saying I'm wrong when you're misinterpreting the entire thing. Happens when you skip through pages and simply quote the last reply.

Nice try, but I've already gone over this. The smaller the sample, the more the noise. Your premise that he increases his efficiency, assist/to etc is proven false the more you draw out the sample, even of it's specific to just the playoffs, and confirmed by the ~150 reg season games. It's also a completely moot point in regards to this debate as he STILL has always had it tougher than Kyrie in any scenario you want to fabricate. Now please stop responding with half-baked truths or entirely false statements to me so i can go ahead andet this nonsense go. I regret informing you in the first place.

ewing
09-13-2018, 10:37 AM
Irving isn't Durant, a matchup the NBA hasn't seen before. I prefer staying away from iso for the most part.

Curry is far better as a player than Irving. You don't need to agree with my take. I don't agree with your pick this question. I do know I have spent far too much time debating this stupid subject.

Take who you want. I will take Curry. Odds are in my favor.

Curry is a good pick. as I said in a prior post I think Curry is a good pick I just disagree with your narrative

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 10:54 AM
Curry is a good pick. as I said in a prior post I think Curry is a good pick I just disagree with your narrative

if Irving were to do it over, and over again, he would enter the Dirk/KG similar argument.

Can he do it more than once? Seriously. Before we take him ahead of the clearly better player who has also been great in the playoffs?

People are acting like Curry falls off a cliff, ala Joe Johnson or something, while Kyrie morphs into a 6'1" MJ. God

ewing
09-13-2018, 11:13 AM
if Irving were to do it over, and over again, he would enter the Dirk/KG similar argument.

Can he do it more than once? Seriously. Before we take him ahead of the clearly better player who has also been great in the playoffs?

People are acting like Curry falls off a cliff, ala Joe Johnson or something, while Kyrie morphs into a 6'1" MJ. God


I never said Irving was clearly the better player and only homers from Minn or guys act a certain way b/c they think it makes them look like the smartest guy in the room would take him first. I actually think Curry brings more. I also think Kyrie bring a lot to and in certain circumstances- like if I need a bucket in the half court with under 5 mins to go in a playoff game- I'd take him first. I think you are getting it backwards almost everyone who has spoken up for Irving here has said also praised Curry. I joke that Curry is great in a blow out. Its true but it also true that he creates blowouts.

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 11:27 AM
I never said Irving was clearly the better player and only homers from Minn or guys act a certain way b/c they think it makes them look like the smartest guy in the room would take him first. I actually think Curry brings more. I also think Kyrie bring a lot to and in certain circumstances- like if I need a bucket in the half court with under 5 mins to go in a playoff game- I'd take him first. I think you are getting it backwards almost everyone who has spoken up for Irving here has said also praised Curry. I joke that Curry is great in a blow out. Its true but it also true that he creates blowouts.

situational scenario, I can see an argument for Irving. But not for an entire game. That is just me personally. While even I am quick to jump down Irving's weaknesses, he was what LeBron needed at the time. Unfortunately he just couldn't stay healthy for much of the tenure.

Vee-Rex
09-13-2018, 12:05 PM
We've likely all seen every game of these conference finals and finals (multiple times if you're like me), so let's bring some objectivity to the debate. These are Curry and Kyrie's Conference Finals + Finals numbers over the past 4 seasons (that's all of them). I'm including Conference Finals because frankly that's normally the toughest series for the Warriors, and all games because they're all at peak intensity and it's a better sample. I won't include Kyrie's 2015 because his poor performance/games played can be attributed to injury.

Kyrie 2016 ECF (6 games - Raptors): 24/3/6 + 3.0 TO on 56% TS
Kyrie 2016 Finals (7 games - Warriors): 27/4/3 + 2.8 TO on 56% TS
Kyrie 2017 ECF (5 games - Boston): 26/2/5 + 3.0 TO on 76% TS
Kyrie 2017 Finals (5 games - Warriors): 29/4/4 + 3.5 TO on 56% TS

Curry 2015 WCF (5 games - Houston): 31/5/6 + 2.8 TO on 68% TS
Curry 2015 Finals (6 games - Cavs): 26/5/6 + 4.8 TO on 59% TS
Curry 2016 WCF (7 games - OKC): 27/6/6 + 4.0 TO on 61% TS
Curry 2016 Finals (7 games - Cavs): 23/5/4 + 4.1 TO on 58% TS
Curry 2017 WCF (4 games - Spurs): 32/6/5 + 4.0 TO on 73% TS
Curry 2017 Finals (5 games - Cavs): 27/8/9 + 3.8 TO on 62% TS
Curry 2018 WCF (7 games - Rockets): 25/7/6 + 2.5 TO on 58% TS
Curry 2018 Finals (5 games - Cavs): 28/6/7 + 2.8 TO on 56% TS

Those are the numbers, do with them what you will. Credit to Kyrie because in his smaller sample size of his biggest games he has exceeded expectations (yet still shoots less efficiently on a lower volume in this scenario than Curry), but I see a far more balanced, efficient, dominant player on the 2nd list. There's also the distinction that Curry has always been the most heavily guarded player on his team, while Kyrie never has (not in the playoffs at least, as he's never led a team there); a point that nobody can refute yet seems to need to be heavily driven home with the addition of KD. And for the record, Curry's average of 27.5/6/6.1 on 61% TS fall pretty well in line with his reg season numbers in that span (all MVP or MVP caliber seasons) of 26.4/4.8/6.9 on 65% TS.

This post is a fair way to hit the 'reset button' on our overly convoluted discussions.

What's unfair of me is disregarding post-KD Curry, but the thread topic asks who I would take in a single all or nothing game, so my criteria is not going to include parameters that make it harder to judge Curry, which would be 2017 and beyond.

It's kind of like Fanduel or Draftkings for fantasy football - because it's a single game, I'm gonna micro-analyze every single variable I can think of when making my selections.

With the above in place, we have a 23-game sample size with Kyrie (2016/17 ECF/FINALS) and a 25 game sample size for Steph (2015/16 WCF/FINALS).

Looking at THOSE numbers... where is the big, monumental gap? Curry looks to be more efficient shooting-wise, but not by a large amount. His turnovers are definitely higher.

Consider also that, Kyrie went through tougher defenders in his sample. Lowry, Avery Bradley in the ECF, and 12 finals games of Klay Thompson trying to smother him. GS refused to put Steph on Kyrie (nothing wrong with that - it's smart).

Whereas with Steph's sample, who was guarding him on Houston? Beverly was injured in 2015. Some Shumpert and Delly that finals. Some Westbrook and Roberson in 2016 and Kyrie + JR + Shumpert in those finals.

Not the same if you ask me. Roberson is like the only really good defender out of those.

Last I checked 8 voted Kyrie (with another guy picking Kyrie but not voting) and 13 voting Steph. People can say it's not a legitimate topic/question all they want, but Steph clearly hasn't blown Kyrie away in conference finals and finals performances to support that notion (given the above slashing of the post-KD parameters).

ewing
09-13-2018, 12:53 PM
This post is a fair way to hit the 'reset button' on our overly convoluted discussions.

What's unfair of me is disregarding post-KD Curry, but the thread topic asks who I would take in a single all or nothing game, so my criteria is not going to include parameters that make it harder to judge Curry, which would be 2017 and beyond.

It's kind of like Fanduel or Draftkings for fantasy football - because it's a single game, I'm gonna micro-analyze every single variable I can think of when making my selections.

With the above in place, we have a 23-game sample size with Kyrie (2016/17 ECF/FINALS) and a 25 game sample size for Steph (2015/16 WCF/FINALS).

Looking at THOSE numbers... where is the big, monumental gap? Curry looks to be more efficient shooting-wise, but not by a large amount. His turnovers are definitely higher.

Consider also that, Kyrie went through tougher defenders in his sample. Lowry, Avery Bradley in the ECF, and 12 finals games of Klay Thompson trying to smother him. GS refused to put Steph on Kyrie (nothing wrong with that - it's smart).

Whereas with Steph's sample, who was guarding him on Houston? Beverly was injured in 2015. Some Shumpert and Delly that finals. Some Westbrook and Roberson in 2016 and Kyrie + JR + Shumpert in those finals.

Not the same if you ask me. Roberson is like the only really good defender out of those.

Last I checked 8 voted Kyrie (with another guy picking Kyrie but not voting) and 13 voting Steph. People can say it's not a legitimate topic/question all they want, but Steph clearly hasn't blown Kyrie away in conference finals and finals performances to support that notion (given the above slashing of the post-KD parameters).

The thing everyone who says its a huge blow out seems to me missing is that Irving has been really good. Sorry guys its true.

valade16
09-13-2018, 01:00 PM
the killer instinct many of you crave so badly works both ways, you understand that right? A guy is just as likely, or even more likely, to hurt his team with that mentality than he is going to help it.

Kobe in close games....perfect example. His team falls off a cliff in the last 5 minutes of close games offensively. Luckily, the Lakers had large enough leads most the time.

Good point. Like everyone is praising Kyrie's killer instinct, but I bet if you asked them about Russell Westbrook's killer instinct they'd say it's a detriment.

valade16
09-13-2018, 01:04 PM
This post is a fair way to hit the 'reset button' on our overly convoluted discussions.

What's unfair of me is disregarding post-KD Curry, but the thread topic asks who I would take in a single all or nothing game, so my criteria is not going to include parameters that make it harder to judge Curry, which would be 2017 and beyond.

It's kind of like Fanduel or Draftkings for fantasy football - because it's a single game, I'm gonna micro-analyze every single variable I can think of when making my selections.

With the above in place, we have a 23-game sample size with Kyrie (2016/17 ECF/FINALS) and a 25 game sample size for Steph (2015/16 WCF/FINALS).

Looking at THOSE numbers... where is the big, monumental gap? Curry looks to be more efficient shooting-wise, but not by a large amount. His turnovers are definitely higher.

Consider also that, Kyrie went through tougher defenders in his sample. Lowry, Avery Bradley in the ECF, and 12 finals games of Klay Thompson trying to smother him. GS refused to put Steph on Kyrie (nothing wrong with that - it's smart).

Whereas with Steph's sample, who was guarding him on Houston? Beverly was injured in 2015. Some Shumpert and Delly that finals. Some Westbrook and Roberson in 2016 and Kyrie + JR + Shumpert in those finals.

Not the same if you ask me. Roberson is like the only really good defender out of those.

Last I checked 8 voted Kyrie (with another guy picking Kyrie but not voting) and 13 voting Steph. People can say it's not a legitimate topic/question all they want, but Steph clearly hasn't blown Kyrie away in conference finals and finals performances to support that notion (given the above slashing of the post-KD parameters).

Your analysis of defense in this instance is wrong because it's under some delusional assumption that Curry was being guarded 1-on-1 by Roberson, or Shumpert, or Smith. Curry undoubtedly faced tougher defenses in those runs in that he faced the entirety of the defensive attention trying to stop him, while Kyrie never did.

From a fundamental perspective, it is harder to overcome an entire defensive strategy aimed at stopping you (including near constant doubles) than it is to beat 1-on-1 single coverage from even a good defender like Klay (especially in today's NBA).

ewing
09-13-2018, 01:43 PM
Your analysis of defense in this instance is wrong because it's under some delusional assumption that Curry was being guarded 1-on-1 by Roberson, or Shumpert, or Smith. Curry undoubtedly faced tougher defenses in those runs in that he faced the entirety of the defensive attention trying to stop him, while Kyrie never did.

From a fundamental perspective, it is harder to overcome an entire defensive strategy aimed at stopping you (including near constant doubles) than it is to beat 1-on-1 single coverage from even a good defender like Klay (especially in today's NBA).

I donít think itís him that is delusional. The fact that guys pick up Curry sooner and canít leave him doesnít mean that the he faced the entirety of defensive attention. Iím sorry this narrative you guys are building that Curry can go 1 for 18 from 3 and be the most impactful player on the floor is what is delusional


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vee-Rex
09-13-2018, 01:43 PM
Your analysis of defense in this instance is wrong because it's under some delusional assumption that Curry was being guarded 1-on-1 by Roberson, or Shumpert, or Smith. Curry undoubtedly faced tougher defenses in those runs in that he faced the entirety of the defensive attention trying to stop him, while Kyrie never did.

From a fundamental perspective, it is harder to overcome an entire defensive strategy aimed at stopping you (including near constant doubles) than it is to beat 1-on-1 single coverage from even a good defender like Klay (especially in today's NBA).

You've reeeeally gone above and beyond to exaggerate the defensive attention Curry got during THOSE times. He wasn't even defended the same way in the 2014-2015 season and playoffs as he was in 2016.

In 2015 the Cavs mostly used one defender, Delly or Shump. Delly bothered Steph games 1-3.

In 2016 the Cavs actually defended him with Kyrie one on one A LOT. The only time 'help' came was in the form of a trap when Steph ran PnR. But that's typical defense.

Heediot
09-13-2018, 01:54 PM
Good point. Like everyone is praising Kyrie's killer instinct, but I bet if you asked them about Russell Westbrook's killer instinct they'd say it's a detriment.

I like RW's killer instinct too, even with all of his explosiveness, there is a recipe to defend the guy easier vs. Kyrie IMO. If he had Kyrie's stroke, he'd be sick as ****. With RW you clog the lane and force him to take a long jumper. I can see how guys who press the issue too much which can lead to bad results and some people don't like that. I think Kyrie has more trust issues vs. RW. I think both KD and Rw had trust issues with their mates in OKC. But Kyrie in Boston has shown a lot of trust and willingness to delegate.

Kobe ans RW tend to be guys who have trust issues.

MJ was a killer but he trusted others to make big shots too.

Hawkeye15
09-13-2018, 01:57 PM
Good point. Like everyone is praising Kyrie's killer instinct, but I bet if you asked them about Russell Westbrook's killer instinct they'd say it's a detriment.

Kobe as well. Most praise it, as they should. But it ended up hurting his team many times. Luckily for Kyrie's team, he hasn't been the best player for any portion of his successful stint in the NBA on his own team, and he couldn't be in a more ideal situation to cover up his negatives with Boston.

Vee-Rex
09-13-2018, 01:58 PM
I donít think itís him that is delusional. The fact that guys pick up Curry sooner and canít leave him doesnít mean that the he faced the entirety of defensive attention. Iím sorry this narrative you guys are building that Curry can go 1 for 18 from 3 and be the most impactful player on the floor is what is delusional


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, this herd-like mentality that Curry is facing constant doubles and triples and dads, uncles, fans, and aliens are swarming to stop him on every play is downright ludicrous.

He faces a hard trap off a PnR and some off-ball shading when he's flying around screens. More than others, but within reason.

I'd also argue that teams also switch a lot and live with the mismatch.

Point is - the exaggeration needs to stop.