Where do you have Steph ranked all time?

For me Steph is easily top 15 and there's no debating it either. Man has revolutionized the game or may as well have changed the game from the 3 point stripe. Best pure shooter I've ever seen. Man can launch it from virtually anywhere and it goes in. He has 3 titles in 5 appearances with the Warriors. How many regular season MVPs? At least 2 of them and 1 of them was unanimous. Yeah he has never won a Finals MVP but he's like the second best 3 point shooter of all time right now. Him and Ray Allen are neck and neck. He could literally surpass Allen.

How many career points and assists is he at now?

If Steph wins another title and or another MVP title to go with that, he easily slides into top 10 greatest players to ever play the game.

I think he's in that 14-16 range. I have ahead of him:

MJ
LeBron
Kareem
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Duncan
Bird
Wilt
KG
D Rob
West
Kobe
Oscar

After this season I'd probably put him ahead of Oscar, maybe Kobe, maybe West. If he tacks on 2 or 3 more MVP level seasons like he's having this year then I could see him as high as 9 or 10

Ahead of Steph on my list

MJ
Kareem
LeBron
Kobe
Mailman Malone
Magic
Hakeem
Bird
Duncan
Wilt
Shaq
David Robinson
KG
West

And then it is Curry right there

Curry is ahead of David Robinson, Karl Malone, Garnett and Jerry West at this point. He has more championships (team accolades)and MVPs (individual awards) than any of those guys. It’s not even close that Curry is a top 11 player maybe even top 10 at this point.

In terms of dominance and accolades

MJ
Kareem
Russel (everybody who saw this man says he’s the real deal and he’s got the hardware to back it up)
LeBron
Magic
Hakeem
Shaq
Duncan
Bird
Curry
Kobe
Wilt (I’ve never seen him personally and can’t find any true film/video to rank him higher)

Off the top of my head, probably somewhere in the 15-20 range. I'll make a list if I get time this afternoon.

I think Steph not having any Finals MVP's hurts his ranking, for sure.

He's def top 20. Not sure if he gets into the Top 10 though even with another championship. The guys in the Top 10 are elite players on both ends with the standard multiple championships, MVPs, perennial allstars, etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBA all the way

I think Steph not having any Finals MVP's hurts his ranking, for sure.

---

If the question is purely in terms of how much does he help improve his team's odds of winning at his peak/prime/career then this isn't a relevant factor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBA all the way

I think Steph not having any Finals MVP's hurts his ranking, for sure.

---

Can the same be said for Kawhi and regular season MVPs? I was pondering this the other day. With load management Kawhi will likely never get a season mvp but if he wins another ring he will likely be a 3time finals mvp winner. Which is more important to legacy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

Can the same be said for Kawhi and regular season MVPs? I was pondering this the other day. With load management Kawhi will likely never get a season mvp but if he wins another ring he will likely be a 3time finals mvp winner. Which is more important to legacy?

---

For me personally, the finals MVP holds more weight. Because it is on the biggest stage.

We see guys all the time who are awesome regular season players then choke in the playoffs. Not saying this is Curry, just trying to show my line of thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBA all the way

For me personally, the finals MVP holds more weight. Because it is on the biggest stage.

We see guys all the time who are awesome regular season players then choke in the playoffs. Not saying this is Curry, just trying to show my line of thinking.

---

I’m with I think the finals MVP holds more weight, because they’re showing up when it counts. But the argument can be made that a player can get hot over a 7 game series where as a regular season mvp has to sustain it over a full season.

I think Kawhi could have easily won a couple of regular season mvps if he didn’t sit out games. I’m not sure how much that hurts his legacy but it certainly doesn’t help. It’s just interesting because Curry and Leonard are like polar opposites in that respect

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBA all the way

For me personally, the finals MVP holds more weight. Because it is on the biggest stage.

We see guys all the time who are awesome regular season players then choke in the playoffs. Not saying this is Curry, just trying to show my line of thinking.

---

Are Iggy, Cedric Maxwell, Jo Jo White and Chauncey Billups better all-time players than Barkley, Malone, Nash, Giannis, Harden and Curry? Finals MVP requires you to play on a great team and to play great for a single series. MVP requires you to be the best player in the league for an entire 82-game season.

I definitely think the Finals MVP holds weight, but not nearly as much as a regular season MVP. Overall postseason performance should be a greater factor. Some guys perform well in the playoffs and still don't win titles or Finals MVPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightybosstone

Are Iggy, Cedric Maxwell, Jo Jo White and Chauncey Billups better all-time players than Barkley, Malone, Nash, Giannis, Harden and Curry? Finals MVP requires you to play on a great team and to play great for a single series. MVP requires you to be the best player in the league for an entire 82-game season.

I definitely think the Finals MVP holds weight, but not nearly as much as a regular season MVP. Overall postseason performance should be a greater factor. Some guys perform well in the playoffs and still don't win titles or Finals MVPs.

---

I mean that was never the argument though.

The better argument is Kawhi, which is what we were discussing.

And to your second point, there's currently no award(s) to really set guys apart for post season performance.

Regular season MVPs are cool but it also has a lot of beating up on bottom feeders involved. If said player goes on to shrink on the biggest stage (playoffs/finals) then what someone did in the regular season is useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBA all the way

I mean that was never the argument though.


And to your second point, there's currently no award(s) to really set guys apart for post season performance.

---

Jeez it's almost as if you'll have to watch and analyze the games yourself instead of relying on media awards and narratives to decide for you

Kawhi is so overrated imo.

He was the third leading scorer when he won his first finals mvp, and his second was pure luck with KD and Klay going down.


He shouldnt sniff the top 15 or so without getting a single regular season MVP

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Regular season Curry is easily one of the best players ever and I'll go TO WAR with anyone here who suggests otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blams

Kawhi is so overrated imo.

He was the third leading scorer when he won his first finals mvp, and his second was pure luck with KD and Klay going down.


He shouldnt sniff the top 15 or so without getting a single regular season MVP

---

This for me thinking, who is the highest ranked player of all-time who doesn’t have a regular season MVP?

Is it Jerry West? Who is next highest? Seems like you have to go a ways to find one.

Tier 1:
MJ / Bron / KAJ

Tier 2:
Kobe / Duncan / Magic / Bird / Russell

Tier 3:
Wilt / Shaq / Curry / Hakeem / Oscar

I feel comfortable putting him around 11-12.


My Tier 4:
KG / Barkley / Malone / Durant / Dirk / D-Rob / Elgin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blams

Kawhi is so overrated imo.

He was the third leading scorer when he won his first finals mvp, and his second was pure luck with KD and Klay going down.


He shouldnt sniff the top 15 or so without getting a single regular season MVP

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

---

Injuries are part of the game. If you’re going to discredit that ship then you would have to discredit a bunch of teams who have won historically.

Did you watch the 76ers series or the Bucks in that ship run? Kawhi was in beast mode.

Also remember when ZaZa intentionally injured Kawhi when the Spurs were handling the Warriors? Golden State wasn’t getting passed the Spurs that year if Kawhi wasn’t taken out.

I’m just saying that argument can be made for so many teams in so many different ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnicksorBust

Tier 1:
MJ / Bron / KAJ

Tier 2:
Kobe / Duncan / Magic / Bird / Russell

Tier 3:
Wilt / Shaq / Curry / Hakeem / Oscar

I feel comfortable putting him around 11-12.


My Tier 4:
KG / Barkley / Malone / Durant / Dirk / D-Rob / Elgin

---

ooof. One of the cringiest tiering I've seen in a while. What are you parameters for this? What's the measuring stick - career accolades + team success? Or is this in terms of how much better a player makes their team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

Jeez it's almost as if you'll have to watch and analyze the games yourself instead of relying on media awards and narratives to decide for you

---

Lulz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

ooof. One of the cringiest tiering I've seen in a while. What are you parameters for this? What's the measuring stick - career accolades + team success? Or is this in terms of how much better a player makes their team?

---

That.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

Jeez it's almost as if you'll have to watch and analyze the games yourself instead of relying on media awards and narratives to decide for you

---

after we had our little discussion about this, I tend to agree with you. I dont even think Nash was the best player in his two mvp seasons. I dont think Curry was deserving of his first MVP either. There were other players I personally would have took over those two in at least one of their mvp seasons. Just using them as an example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

Jeez it's almost as if you'll have to watch and analyze the games yourself instead of relying on media awards and narratives to decide for you

---

Yeah let me just go watch 5 decades of basketball, lol very realistic.

No one on this forum has did that, and I can say that with confidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightybosstone

Are Iggy, Cedric Maxwell, Jo Jo White and Chauncey Billups better all-time players than Barkley, Malone, Nash, Giannis, Harden and Curry? Finals MVP requires you to play on a great team and to play great for a single series. MVP requires you to be the best player in the league for an entire 82-game season.

I definitely think the Finals MVP holds weight, but not nearly as much as a regular season MVP. Overall postseason performance should be a greater factor. Some guys perform well in the playoffs and still don't win titles or Finals MVPs.

---

By the way, nice job cherry picking names and coincidentally excluding Kawhi, Wade, Paul Pierce, and Tony Parker lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

after we had our little discussion about this, I tend to agree with you. I dont even think Nash was the best player in his two mvp seasons. I dont think Curry was deserving of his first MVP either. There were other players I personally would have took over those two in at least one of their mvp seasons. Just using them as an example.

---

Curry wrecked the league during both MVPs. You can make a case Nash should only have 1 but Curry earned both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnicksorBust

Tier 1:
MJ / Bron / KAJ

Tier 2:
Kobe / Duncan / Magic / Bird / Russell

Tier 3:
Wilt / Shaq / Curry / Hakeem / Oscar

I feel comfortable putting him around 11-12.

My Tier 4:
KG / Barkley / Malone / Durant / Dirk / D-Rob / Elgin

---

You and I have disagreed about Kobe for years, but never more so than in this post. Kobe Bryant is a tier above Shaq and Wilt? On what planet is that true? C'mon, KOB...

My take on a similar tier structure for the top 25ish guys (in no particular order):

Tier 1:
MJ / Lebron

Tier 2:
Kareem / Shaq / Wilt / Duncan / Hakeem / Magic / Bird / Russell

Tier 3:
Kobe / Moses / Oscar / Durant / Curry / Dr. J / West

Tier 4:
Robinson / Wade / KG / Dirk / Barkley / Malone / CP3 / Harden / Stockton / Pippen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnicksorBust

Curry wrecked the league during both MVPs. You can make a case Nash should only have 1 but Curry earned both.

---

I dunno if 23-7-4 is considered wrecking the league tbh

if we're doing tiering based on how much a player elevated their team during their prime (relative to era) it should realistically look like:

Tier 1:
MJ/LeBron/Kareem/Russell

Tier 2:
Shaq/Hakeem/Magic/Duncan/Bird/Wilt/KG

Tier 3:
West/Oscar/D Rob/Steph (after this season)

Tier 4:
Kobe/Nash/Dirk/Wade/CP3/Barkley/K. Malone/KD/Moses/Erving

Could honestly make a decent argument for Rick Barry as a tier 4 guy as well but I'll leave it be.

If you disagree with the Kobe placement please break down in detail your valuation of his defense after 2003. Citing All Defense awards isn't a valuation fyi

05-06 mvp belonged to Kobe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

if we're doing tiering based on how much a player elevated their team during their prime (relative to era) it should realistically look like:

Tier 1:
MJ/LeBron/Kareem/Russell

Tier 2:
Shaq/Hakeem/Magic/Duncan/Bird/Wilt/KG

Tier 3:
West/Oscar/D Rob/Steph (after this season)

Tier 4:
Kobe/Nash/Dirk/Wade/CP3/Barkley/K. Malone/KD/Moses/Erving

Could honestly make a decent argument for Rick Barry as a tier 4 guy as well but I'll leave it be.

If you disagree with the Kobe placement please break down in detail your valuation of his defense after 2003. Citing All Defense awards isn't a valuation fyi

---

I mean what about defense though Curry and Nash couldn't guard their own shadows.

The awards may not be an evaluation, but you cant discredit them either. A poor defender would never be on an all defensive team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

I mean what about defense though Curry and Nash couldn't guard their own shadows.

---

the offensive value they bring far outweighs the value Kobe brings. Also Steph isn't even a bad off ball defender lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

the offensive value they bring far outweighs the value Kobe brings. Also Steph isn't even a bad off ball defender lol

---

yeah but youre comparing them to one player. Isn't this your tiered all time list, shouldn't they be compared to all their peers all around games instead of just kobe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

yeah but youre comparing them to one player. Isnt this your tiered all time list shouldnt they be compared to all their peers all around games instead of just kobe

---

it's about net impact. If a player makes their team 6 points better per 100 possessions on offense, but their defense causes their team to lose a point per 100 possessions, netting them out at +5, is this not better than someone who makes their team 3 points better per possession on offense and saves them one point on defense (+4)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

it's about net impact. If a player makes their team 6 points better per 100 possessions on offense, but their defense causes their team to lose a point per 100 possessions, netting them out at +5, is this not better than someone who makes their team 3 points better per possession on offense and saves them one point on defense (+4)?

---

On one hand you say you have to watch them in order to give a proper evaluation, but on the other you are relying on statistical analyses. Kobe was a much better defender than Nash was I dont know how that can ever be debated in any context. He was also carrying a trash team on his back in 06 while Nashs team was stacked. Did Nash ever lead his team to a ship. Impact can be measured in so many ways. you're just picking what supports your narrative.

And again why are we only comparing Nash and Curry to Kobe, when its an all time list. Im guessing you're putting KG on that list for his defensive impact. so you're solely focusing on one side of the game when putting guys like KG, Nash, and Curry on that list while leaving out someone like Tim Duncan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

I mean what about defense though Curry and Nash couldn't guard their own shadows.

The awards may not be an evaluation, but you cant discredit them either. A poor defender would never be on an all defensive team.

---

Yeah but they can vote in a middling defender sometimes based on rep(pretty sure this happened with West, Hondo, MJ..) And I would argue that at least one of those years Kobe coasted enough to be below average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smith&wesson

On one hand you say you have to watch them in order to give a proper evaluation, but on the other you are relying on statistical analyses. Kobe was a much better defender than Nash was I dont know how that can ever be debated in any context. He was also carrying a trash team on his back in 06 while Nashs team was stacked. Did Nash ever lead his team to a ship. Impact can be measured in so many ways. you're just picking what supports your narrative.

And again why are we only comparing Nash and Curry to Kobe, when its an all time list. Im guessing you're putting KG on that list for his defensive impact. so you're solely focusing on one side of the game when putting guys like KG, Nash, and Curry on that list while leaving out someone like Tim Duncan.

---

nah you're just not understanding. You can disagree with my conclusions by my methodology is sound.

1.Where did I say you can ONLY either make valuations based on film or based on stats? Why would anyone ever do that? The reality is a healthy dose of both is the best approach. Look at how a player affects their team offense and defense on paper, and then reference film to help contextualize the numbers. If you understand what you're reading instead of taking numbers at face value, and you understand how to watch film, you can make a ton of inferences.

2. I don't disagree that Kobe was a better defender, even after his defensive drop off in '03. However the difference is marginal enough to where the difference of their offensive impact nets them out the same overall in terms of impact. But since you made a claim about Kobe's defense, please by all means break down how you have valuated his defense. How much better does his defense improve his team's defense?

3. It's funny you mention 06 considering that Amar'e played 3 games that year and Nash still put out a top offense and was 2 wins away from a finals appearance. If you want I can truly break down Nash's impact over the course of his prime and how ultimately we have a mountain of evidence that shows that regardless of who was out there on the court with him, or who his coach was, he was still going to put out a top tier offense.

4. I'm gonna tell you something that will blow your mind - Some title winning teams are worse than other teams that didn't win a title. And also - there a multiple teams every year that play at an NBA championship level. Crazy concept I know. It's funny how literally every postseason Nash was at the helm in Phoenix the Suns offense actually IMPROVED in the postseason. It was their piss poor defensive rotation in the front court that did them in.

But that's truly besides the point. If you're still under the impression that winning a title is some ultimate arbiter of truth, or that winning a title is anything but circumstantial I have some bad news for you.

5. I compare all players against each other because we can ultimately draw conclusions about a player's net impact vs the era they played in when taking the time to dive deep into things.

6. I put KG on that list because of his 2 way impact. Yes, he's an all time great defender but he probably has the most portable offense for a big man in NBA history. KG is a transcendent passer for a big man, and doesn't need the ball in his hands on offense to add value.

I assure you I'm focusing on everything, and ultimately how it sums up a players net impact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chronz

Yeah but they can vote in a middling defender sometimes based on rep(pretty sure this happened with West, Hondo, MJ..) And I would argue that at least one of those years Kobe coasted enough to be below average.

---

Agreed on this front. Along with MJ and Kobe I'd throw Payton's name in there as well. Especially after like 96. West is interesting because by all accounts and reports he defended at an All NBA level. For how long who's to say. But I generally operate with an assumed positive impact on defense when evaluating West, as he's always looked really good on that end when watching film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chronz

Yeah but they can vote in a middling defender sometimes based on rep(pretty sure this happened with West, Hondo, MJ..) And I would argue that at least one of those years Kobe coasted enough to be below average.

---

ok but you have to put up some strong seasons as a defender to gain that rep. where as guys like Curry and Nash have the exact opposite rep. Nash was like the door man in your hotel lobby greeting you as you walked passed him. He was atrocious on that end of the floor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

nah you're just not understanding. You can disagree with my conclusions by my methodology is sound.

1.Where did I say you can ONLY either make valuations based on film or based on stats? Why would anyone ever do that? The reality is a healthy dose of both is the best approach. Look at how a player affects their team offense and defense on paper, and then reference film to help contextualize the numbers. If you understand what you're reading instead of taking numbers at face value, and you understand how to watch film, you can make a ton of inferences.

2. I don't disagree that Kobe was a better defender, even after his defensive drop off in '03. However the difference is marginal enough to where the difference of their offensive impact nets them out the same overall in terms of impact. But since you made a claim about Kobe's defense, please by all means break down how you have valuated his defense. How much better does his defense improve his team's defense?

3. It's funny you mention 06 considering that Amar'e played 3 games that year and Nash still put out a top offense and was 2 wins away from a finals appearance. If you want I can truly break down Nash's impact over the course of his prime and how ultimately we have a mountain of evidence that shows that regardless of who was out there on the court with him, or who his coach was, he was still going to put out a top tier offense.

4. I'm gonna tell you something that will blow your mind - Some title winning teams are worse than other teams that didn't win a title. And also - there a multiple teams every year that play at an NBA championship level. Crazy concept I know. It's funny how literally every postseason Nash was at the helm in Phoenix the Suns offense actually IMPROVED in the postseason. It was their piss poor defensive rotation in the front court that did them in.

But that's truly besides the point. If you're still under the impression that winning a title is some ultimate arbiter of truth, or that winning a title is anything but circumstantial I have some bad news for you.

5. I compare all players against each other because we can ultimately draw conclusions about a player's net impact vs the era they played in when taking the time to dive deep into things.

6. I put KG on that list because of his 2 way impact. Yes, he's an all time great defender but he probably has the most portable offense for a big man in NBA history. KG is a transcendent passer for a big man, and doesn't need the ball in his hands on offense to add value.

I assure you I'm focusing on everything, and ultimately how it sums up a players net impact.

---

Don't get me wrong Im not questioning your logic Im simply trying to understand. I agreed with you with respect to how these awards sometimes mean very little. But I was pointing out the fact that a player who makes an all defensive team, weather it be based on the individuals performance for that year or based on reputation gained from having strong seasons as a defender prior, is still going to far out weigh someone who doesn't play defense at all. Like Steve Nash. And while we glorify his impact, what prevented him from winning a title then is my question. It certainly wasn't the lack of talent around him because he had a very talented and deep squad.

Also the reason I ask why compare these guys to Kobe is because its a hard comparison to make. Were talking about a floor general who was pass first compared to a gun slinging sg. That PHX team was lost with out Nash, so his importance was vital as a play maker. And yes you're right Amare missed that season, but the Suns still had a potent team with Marion, Bell, Diaw, Barbosa etc. Look at Kobe's team in that year to compare. He literally only had Odom. The rest of his team was straight garbage. Bynum was a rookie, and beyond that you'd have a hard time even naming another player on his team worth mentioning. Kobe carried that team to 45 wins and had 13 roster spots that could have been replaced with you or I, unless Smush Parker is a lot better than you, I dunno lol.

When Kobe had a good team around him he was leading them to ships. Even after Shaq left he won two more when he was given a good team to run with. We can say that he played selfishly, or that his defense was over rated in certain seasons but I don't think we can doubt the impact he had on his teams. Nash fell short and it wasn't because he didn't have the talent around him so when we talk impact we do have to consider that as well.