Possible Trade Partners for Isaiah?

[truth18]

He's not really being completely illogical here.

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

Curry isn't twice as good as IT?

That's an absurd statement to me but maybe I've been missing something as we normally agree on most basketball takes.

I hate Steph but the dude is **** INCREDIBLE.

[sam_I_am]

He's not really being completely illogical here.

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

EDIT: and this isn't even me saying IT is as good or I wouldn't trade for him. I'm actually one of the bigger Curry fanboys and have been one since he was drafted, but that is simply an exaggeration.

Thank you adding common sense.

[DarkAzcura]

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

Curry isn't twice as good as IT?

That's an absurd statement to me but maybe I've been missing something as we normally agree on most basketball takes.

I hate Steph but the dude is **** INCREDIBLE.

This is where my own failings at expressing myself typically fails me and I get into word vomit, but this is more of a long term beef I have with player rankings. I do think the elite get overrated compared to their peers to a large extent.

I don't value defense a ton for point guards who are elite offensively so I usually just take a look at their offensive production unless the guy is completely missing defensive rotations (which IT generally does not). For me to view Curry to be twice as good I would expect to see a OBPM that is off the charts greater than IT's, but he isn't. I would expect to see scoring production on a per possession basis to be much higher, but it really isn't. I would want to see proof that it takes IT a heck of a lot more usage to get his production than it does for Curry, but it's not signicantly different. There is RPM obviously which does have Curry on multiple levels above IT so I would grant you that one, but I really do not see impact on a level of 100% higher than IT this season. Last season? Most definitely, yes, Curry was twice as good in 15-16, but not in 16-17. IT has improved a lot this season. If I wanted to put a ratio on it, I'd say Curry was ~20% better this season.

[Fencer reregistered]

So beyond Curry being a better offensive player than IT, he's a much better defender. Anyone who wouldn't trade IT and a lot more for Curry in a heartbeat is crazy, he's a top 5 player in the league.

IT is likely to match Curry on the All-NBA team voting and place ahead of him for MVP this year. They aren't all THAT far apart.

That said, and if we leave contracts out of it -- of course you're right that one would add a lot to IT in a trade package if Curry was what came back.

[SmartWentCrazy]

He's not really being completely illogical here.

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

EDIT: and this isn't even me saying IT is as good or I wouldn't trade for him. I'm actually one of the bigger Curry fanboys and have been one since he was drafted, but that is simply an exaggeration.

He's probably more than twice as good. There's a reason he's a two time MVP and top 30 player ever-- the marginal difference between a top 15 player and a top 3 player is enormous. It's why not many players take that next leap.

[Fencer reregistered]

For what it is worth.... people always wanted to run Pierce out of town for Nick Van Exels too. It was dumb then and it's dumb now.

Those people mistakenly thought that Nick the Quick was as good as IT.

[truth18]

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I understand saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

[cellar-door]

So beyond Curry being a better offensive player than IT, he's a much better defender. Anyone who wouldn't trade IT and a lot more for Curry in a heartbeat is crazy, he's a top 5 player in the league.

IT is likely to match Curry on the All-NBA team voting and place ahead of him for MVP this year. They aren't all THAT far apart.

That said, and if we leave contracts out of it -- of course you're right that one would add a lot to IT in a trade package if Curry was what came back.

Probably, but that's really a factor of situation, same reason Durant may not end up top 5 in MVP, it isn't a skill issue, it's that they are playing on a completely stacked team. If either guy was THE solo guy on his team like Westbrook/Harden/IT he'd have absurd numbers and likely be an MVP candidate. IT had an amazing year, but on talent he's well behind Curry on both ends.

[SmartWentCrazy]

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

Curry isn't twice as good as IT?

That's an absurd statement to me but maybe I've been missing something as we normally agree on most basketball takes.

I hate Steph but the dude is **** INCREDIBLE.

This is where my own failings at expressing myself typically fails me and I get into word vomit, but this is more of a long term beef I have with player rankings. I do think the elite get overrated compared to their peers to a large extent.

I don't value defense a ton for point guards who are elite offensively so I usually just take a look at their offensive production unless the guy is completely missing defensive rotations (which IT generally does not). For me to view Curry to be twice as good I would expect to see a OBPM that is off the charts greater than IT's, but he isn't. I would expect to see scoring production on a per possession basis to be much higher, but it really isn't. I would want to see proof that it takes IT a heck of a lot more usage to get his production than it does for Curry, but it's not signicantly different. There is RPM obviously which does have Curry on multiple levels above IT so I would grant you that one, but I really do not see impact on a level of 100% higher than IT this season. Last season? Most definitely, yes, Curry was twice as good in 15-16, but not in 16-17. IT has improved a lot this season. If I wanted to put a ratio on it, I'd say Curry was ~20% better this season.

Curry is still the same player as last year, man. He just shares the ball with another top 30 all time guy. If he was on the Celtics with a system built entirely around him, he would put up some absolutely ridiculous numbers.

[DarkAzcura]

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I underrated saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

Nah the numbers actually do paint Lebron as being 2-3x greater (even larger in Lebron's prime) than Hayward. Same can't really be said for Curry vs IT except for Curry's absolutely ridiculous historic season in 15-16.

[FakeScreenName123]

He's not really being completely illogical here.

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

EDIT: and this isn't even me saying IT is as good or I wouldn't trade for him. I'm actually one of the bigger Curry fanboys and have been one since he was drafted, but that is simply an exaggeration.

Talent is exponential, bro. Gap between top players to all-star is same relative gap in talent from all-star to role player.

[Stadium5]

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I underrated saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

Nah the numbers actually do paint Lebron as being 2-3x greater (even larger in Lebron's prime) than Hayward. Same can't really be said for Curry vs IT except for Curry's absolutely ridiculous historic season in 15-16.

Rather than the 2x "greater" argument. I think better wording would be "valuable". Curry is like quadruple the value of IT. Nobody would be surprised to see IT traded...where as it would rock the NBA if we saw someone trade for Curry. Not to mention the difference in the trade packages that would be offered for Curry vs Isaiah.

Which is really the whole point of this thread. It's not questioning his skill as a player....its whether or not his value @ $25+ million per year is going to be worth it when compared to other players getting paid that money at the same position

[FakeScreenName123]

Are we really going to sit here and say Curry isn't at least twice as good as IT?

You know, Steph Curry, the best shooter the NBA has ever seen?

Smh. I get propping up our dudes but it becomes absurd at a certain point.

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

EDIT: and this isn't even me saying IT is as good or I wouldn't trade for him. I'm actually one of the bigger Curry fanboys and have been one since he was drafted, but that is simply an exaggeration.

Talent is exponential, bro. Gap between top players to all-star is same relative gap in talent from all-star to role player.

Note: to the future poster who doesn't get this and doesn't get what I'm saying by this:

: Sorry

[Stadium5]

No. He is not twice as good. That is a severe exaggeration. It has nothing to do with propping our guys up, and if anyone knew about how I rank 'all time' players I almost always note that people completely overrate some of these guys.

EDIT: and this isn't even me saying IT is as good or I wouldn't trade for him. I'm actually one of the bigger Curry fanboys and have been one since he was drafted, but that is simply an exaggeration.

Talent is exponential, bro. Gap between top players to all-star is same relative gap in talent from all-star to role player.

Note: to the future poster who doesn't get this and doesn't get what I'm saying by this:

: Sorry

But but but 29PPG! 29PPG is the same across the board right? Just like Kevin Love's 20/10 is the same as Duncan's 20/10. Right??

[FakeScreenName123]

[cellar-door]

So since BPM is aparently the stat people want to use....

3 year average BPM- Steph Curry- 9.93 Isaiah Thomas- 3.6. He's been closer to 3 times as good as twice.

If we really want to cherry pick out IT's best year this year (not a great idea since things are volatile and multi-year samples are more predictive) it's still 7.4 to 5.3 so even in IT's BY FAR career year and with Curry passing a lot of the load to Durant he was still around 50% better than IT.

He's a much better player, it isn't particularly close.

[truth18]

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I underrated saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

Nah the numbers actually do paint Lebron as being 2-3x greater (even larger in Lebron's prime) than Hayward. Same can't really be said for Curry vs IT except for Curry's absolutely ridiculous historic season in 15-16.

Yeah let's discount a whole season

[DarkAzcura]

Curry isn't twice as good as IT?

That's an absurd statement to me but maybe I've been missing something as we normally agree on most basketball takes.

I hate Steph but the dude is **** INCREDIBLE.

This is where my own failings at expressing myself typically fails me and I get into word vomit, but this is more of a long term beef I have with player rankings. I do think the elite get overrated compared to their peers to a large extent.

I don't value defense a ton for point guards who are elite offensively so I usually just take a look at their offensive production unless the guy is completely missing defensive rotations (which IT generally does not). For me to view Curry to be twice as good I would expect to see a OBPM that is off the charts greater than IT's, but he isn't. I would expect to see scoring production on a per possession basis to be much higher, but it really isn't. I would want to see proof that it takes IT a heck of a lot more usage to get his production than it does for Curry, but it's not signicantly different. There is RPM obviously which does have Curry on multiple levels above IT so I would grant you that one, but I really do not see impact on a level of 100% higher than IT this season. Last season? Most definitely, yes, Curry was twice as good in 15-16, but not in 16-17. IT has improved a lot this season. If I wanted to put a ratio on it, I'd say Curry was ~20% better this season.

Curry is still the same player as last year, man. He just shares the ball with another top 30 all time guy. If he was on the Celtics with a system built entirely around him, he would put up some absolutely ridiculous numbers.

The thing that made Curry's last season absolutely historic was that he was able to continue to up his 3PA and maintain the same efficiency. This season he dropped to ~41% on similar volumes to 15-16, and it only got worse when Durant sat out. This season he actually shot the 3PT% that one would expect if you upped your attempts from 8 to 11. The fact that his percentages remained the same in 15-16 is what was truly amazing about it.

It can't really be ignored that it would be objectively harder to play with Bradley and Crowder than it would be Klay also. While I do think Curry is the greatest shooter ever, I also think Klay is the second or third greatest shooter ever. It's hard not to take that into account.

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I underrated saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

Nah the numbers actually do paint Lebron as being 2-3x greater (even larger in Lebron's prime) than Hayward. Same can't really be said for Curry vs IT except for Curry's absolutely ridiculous historic season in 15-16.

Yeah let's discount a whole season

I mean that's what a lot of us are potentially doing with IT, no? Curry had a historic season last year, but it's not his career norm, and he hasn't followed up the season with being anywhere as remotely as good (but he's still elite obviously). At this point we have enough data to say his last season was more of a one off amazing anomaly, like we would with IT if he understandably drops off and becomes more of a 22-24 PPG guy next season.

So what? Lebron is only 1.5x as good as Hayward too?

Like, I underrated saying he was twice as good was a colloquial statement but it's not an absurd one at all.

Nah the numbers actually do paint Lebron as being 2-3x greater (even larger in Lebron's prime) than Hayward. Same can't really be said for Curry vs IT except for Curry's absolutely ridiculous historic season in 15-16.

Rather than the 2x "greater" argument. I think better wording would be "valuable". Curry is like quadruple the value of IT. Nobody would be surprised to see IT traded...where as it would rock the NBA if we saw someone trade for Curry. Not to mention the difference in the trade packages that would be offered for Curry vs Isaiah.

Which is really the whole point of this thread. It's not questioning his skill as a player....its whether or not his value @ $25+ million per year is going to be worth it when compared to other players getting paid that money at the same position

I think IT would be worth 25 million a year. Where I start to get uneasy is if its around ~35 million with the designated veteran contract thing or whatever it is called for making the All NBA team. Even then, if cap situation has the Celtics locked up for the next 4-5 years regardless with little to no flexibility anyway, I don't see the harm in considering that much money either. Unless the Celtics just trade everyone into cap space and just drop everyone (Horford, Bradley, Smart, IT), our cap space is going to be locked up through 2020ish regardless of whether we pay IT or not.

We've also seen for the last couple years people compare IT to Jason Terry and Jamal Crawford, and the same posters say Curry is twice as good as IT. If you guys think I am crazy for saying Curry is 20-30% better than IT instead of saying he is 100% using BPM, RPM, etc as building blocks for your argument, why have I not been allowed to do similar things when IT is compared to Terry and Crawford?

[Infinite Llamas]

For the record, I think Curry is better than Isaiah by a good margin, but I just oppose the take that swapping Isaiah with Curry would make us an instant contender. Unless AB would turn into Klay overnight, Curry would still be seeing double teams every play and he'd have to pray those deep deep 3's were dropping. Anybody discounting the roles of Klay, Draymond and Bogut in Curry's ascent is being irrational. Being a great shooter is futile if you get weak screens and no open looks.

[DarkAzcura]

For the record, I think Curry is better than Isaiah by a good margin, but I just oppose the take that swapping Isaiah with Curry would make us an instant contender. Unless AB would turn into Klay overnight, Curry would still be seeing double teams every play and he'd have to pray those deep deep 3's were dropping. Anybody discounting the roles of Klay, Draymond and Bogut in Curry's ascent is being irrational. Being a great shooter is futile if you get weak screens and no open looks.

Pretty much this. That's really the main point of what sam was saying and what I attempted to back up with some rough numbers.