ESPN NBA top 100 for 2022

[WarriorGM]

2015- pre-Curry
2017: Curry should be top 3 no argument
2018: Superteam tax
2019: Superteam tax
2020: Superteam tax
2021: Injured
2022: Players with similar or worst casts than Curry

I don’t see that Curry has been rated wrongly by ESPN especially with his injury history and teammates. Especially when you got a guy like Harden who’s been treated unfairly by the media due to his style of play.

A superteam tax with LeBron and Anthony Davis 1 and 2 in 2020?

[dhsilv2]

Is VORP associated with winning? Giannis right now is about where Curry was at the end of his 2016 season. Both with 2 MVPs and a ring. Giannis with more media awards but Curry with more impressive team wins records. I guess at the end of their careers we'll have a better idea of what predicts future championships.

Yes VORP correlates with winning. And no, we don't need to see the rest of their careers. ESPN clearly was right with their selections of Giannis. If you'd picked a player that shouldn't be in the discussion each and every year listed for best player, you'd have some leg to stand on. But Giannis was in the debate for best player so you have zero leg to stand on.

Now some actual facts.

Curry's games played

2018 - 51
2019 - 69
2020 - 5
2021 - 63

So if you're forecasting Curry there's plenty of reason to have some level of trepidation on his health.

It would be wrong to not lower your ranking on Curry due to the uncertainty of his health. Lets say I think Curry is the 3rd best player in the world. I'd want to rank him 5-7 range due to health. Winning the playoffs last year all the more drives up the risk he'll get hurt this coming year.

Factoring in assumed health prematurely without a clear reason such as a chronic injury seems presumptuous for such a list. Shouldn't they just rank according to who is the best player assuming health? Why would Embiid rank ahead of Curry with his history of injuries? Looks to me like a smokescreen rationalization.

As it happened the prediction based on the above rationale returned an inferior result if going by the fact that Curry has been in more finals than Antetokounmpo or anyone else in the discussion in that time frame.

Someone used Giannis as a way to show some kind bias for Curry which was stupid because ESPN was right to rank Giannis extremely highly each year in scope 2019-2022.

But to your questions.

1. Yes, you would take health into account.
2. You used the term "is" as in "is the best player". This is about who WILL be the best player in the coming season, that's a massive difference.
3. Yes, you need to account for age, decline, improvements, and health history. Just to combine 1 and 2 and hammer it home.
4. Why would embiid rank higher? He's played more games than Curry the last 4 years if you want to go there. He's also younger, curry is going to turn 35 if he isn't already. Turning 35 is a mega deal here!
5. Going to the finals isn't a metric of any value here. As noted by any metric or method we use, Giannis has in all 4 years been good enough for this to look very very good if only looking at Giannis.

Also we should note, these lists are made for stupid people to argue over. Unless someone is more than 20 spot off, there's nothing to discuss here.

[Ron Swanson]

I mean, Curry probably has a better argument over Lebron from 2015-2018 than he does over Giannis from 2019-2022. Like, picking non-peak Curry over peak/prime Giannis isn't even an argument at this point.

[TheLand13]

Giannis finished 1st, 1st, 4th, 3rd in MVP voting those 4 years. Seems they got him right. Being lower on an aging Curry who's had health issues doesn't seem to be a crazy thing either when forecasting.

MVP is determined by media voters. The ESPN list is determined by media voters. Media's highest priority is to sell their product not to provide an accurate historical record.

This makes no sense.

You can say that about pretty much all of his arguments.

[Rainwater]

ESPN TOP100 year by year

2015 Lebron Davis Durant
2016 Lebron Curry Durant
2017 Lebron Durant Kawhi
2018 Lebron Curry Harden
2019 Giannis Kawhi Lebron
2020 Lebron Davis Giannis
2021 Durant Giannis Lebron
2022 Giannis Jokic Doncic

I could only laugh at these ESPN clowns. Curry won 4 champs in 8 years and they still don't get it.

15-22

Curry 4 titles 6 finals 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Lebron 2 titles 5 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Durant 2 titles 3 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Kawhi 1 titles 1 final 0 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Giannis 1 titles 1 final 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.

Kobe went to the the finals 3 straight years with Shaq then the Lakers became one of the worse teams in the league post Shaq does that make kobe less of a player? Curry and the Warriors won 3 titles before becoming one of the worse teams in the league does that makes Curry less of a player? There are so many statical values that can better determine the worth a of a single player, finals appearances are so flawed for too many reasons it can't be used as the sole or major determinate for how good a player is.

From 08 to 2019 LeBron was arguably the best player in the game I don't know how you can blame ESPN or anyone for placing him #1 during that time period. Yes, there are times where you can argue that Durant or Curry are better but I will never blame anyone who thinks LeBron is better.

[WarriorGM]

Yes VORP correlates with winning. And no, we don't need to see the rest of their careers. ESPN clearly was right with their selections of Giannis. If you'd picked a player that shouldn't be in the discussion each and every year listed for best player, you'd have some leg to stand on. But Giannis was in the debate for best player so you have zero leg to stand on.

Now some actual facts.

Curry's games played

2018 - 51
2019 - 69
2020 - 5
2021 - 63

So if you're forecasting Curry there's plenty of reason to have some level of trepidation on his health.

It would be wrong to not lower your ranking on Curry due to the uncertainty of his health. Lets say I think Curry is the 3rd best player in the world. I'd want to rank him 5-7 range due to health. Winning the playoffs last year all the more drives up the risk he'll get hurt this coming year.

Factoring in assumed health prematurely without a clear reason such as a chronic injury seems presumptuous for such a list. Shouldn't they just rank according to who is the best player assuming health? Why would Embiid rank ahead of Curry with his history of injuries? Looks to me like a smokescreen rationalization.

As it happened the prediction based on the above rationale returned an inferior result if going by the fact that Curry has been in more finals than Antetokounmpo or anyone else in the discussion in that time frame.

Someone used Giannis as a way to show some kind bias for Curry which was stupid because ESPN was right to rank Giannis extremely highly each year in scope 2019-2022.

But to your questions.

1. Yes, you would take health into account.
2. You used the term "is" as in "is the best player". This is about who WILL be the best player in the coming season, that's a massive difference.
3. Yes, you need to account for age, decline, improvements, and health history. Just to combine 1 and 2 and hammer it home.
4. Why would embiid rank higher? He's played more games than Curry the last 4 years if you want to go there. He's also younger, curry is going to turn 35 if he isn't already. Turning 35 is a mega deal here!
5. Going to the finals isn't a metric of any value here. As noted by any metric or method we use, Giannis has in all 4 years been good enough for this to look very very good if only looking at Giannis.

Also we should note, these lists are made for stupid people to argue over. Unless someone is more than 20 spot off, there's nothing to discuss here.

Saying this is a forward looking list that is projecting future results is already a cop-out especially when factoring in presumed health difficulties and age decline. That is already substituting subjective opinion for actual objective results.

One could basically just say Steph is small and scrawny in comparison to these other guys so he's going to be less healthy being knocked about and voila.

One also wonders if these lists are about how a player will perform individually or about how their team will perform. Curry being ranked under Lillard after how atrocious the Warriors looked in 2020 without Steph seemed to value team prospects not the players—and that's the generous interpretation.

Why would going to the finals not be a metric of value? Shouldn't it be a metric of even more value especially after the Warriors were being written off by these same guys before he made those finals? One would think that a conscientious list that has been repeatedly shown to be wrong on something would acknowledge their error and try to factor in improvements. There is no evidence of that here.

Giannis has been very good. He has performed at a best-in-the-year level. The thing is Curry has previously performed at a best in the decade and best in NBA history level. The accommodations that have been given to LeBron in cognizance of that for example are not being granted to Curry.

These lists are just as likely made to push an agenda.

I mean, Curry probably has a better argument over Lebron from 2015-2018 than he does over Giannis from 2019-2022. Like, picking non-peak Curry over peak/prime Giannis isn't even an argument at this point.

Not clear what you are trying to say here but when Curry has played he's had a higher RPM than Giannis. Total RAPTOR is split in those years. On what basis is there no argument? I keep hearing that suggested but given no real reason.

[WarriorGM]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.

Kobe went to the the finals 3 straight years with Shaq then the Lakers became one of the worse teams in the league post Shaq does that make kobe less of a player? Curry and the Warriors won 3 titles before becoming one of the worse teams in the league does that makes Curry less of a player? There are so many statical values that can better determine the worth a of a single player, finals appearances are so flawed for too many reasons it can't be used as the sole or major determinate for how good a player is.

From 08 to 2019 LeBron was arguably the best player in the game I don't know how you can blame ESPN or anyone for placing him #1 during that time period. Yes, there are times where you can argue that Durant or Curry are better but I will never blame anyone who thinks LeBron is better.

As stated previously you are dealing with an extreme outlier who continues to defy ordinary expectations. Assuming it's just the team is dumb at this point. Also as just stated above Curry's stats are comparable to the others.

[dhsilv2]

Factoring in assumed health prematurely without a clear reason such as a chronic injury seems presumptuous for such a list. Shouldn't they just rank according to who is the best player assuming health? Why would Embiid rank ahead of Curry with his history of injuries? Looks to me like a smokescreen rationalization.

As it happened the prediction based on the above rationale returned an inferior result if going by the fact that Curry has been in more finals than Antetokounmpo or anyone else in the discussion in that time frame.

Someone used Giannis as a way to show some kind bias for Curry which was stupid because ESPN was right to rank Giannis extremely highly each year in scope 2019-2022.

But to your questions.

1. Yes, you would take health into account.
2. You used the term "is" as in "is the best player". This is about who WILL be the best player in the coming season, that's a massive difference.
3. Yes, you need to account for age, decline, improvements, and health history. Just to combine 1 and 2 and hammer it home.
4. Why would embiid rank higher? He's played more games than Curry the last 4 years if you want to go there. He's also younger, curry is going to turn 35 if he isn't already. Turning 35 is a mega deal here!
5. Going to the finals isn't a metric of any value here. As noted by any metric or method we use, Giannis has in all 4 years been good enough for this to look very very good if only looking at Giannis.

Also we should note, these lists are made for stupid people to argue over. Unless someone is more than 20 spot off, there's nothing to discuss here.

Saying this is a forward looking list that is projecting future results is already a cop-out especially when factoring in presumed health difficulties and age decline. That is already substituting subjective opinion for actual objective results.

One could basically just say Steph is small and scrawny in comparison to these other guys so he's going to be less healthy being knocked about and voila.

One also wonders if these lists are about how a player will perform individually or about how their team will perform. Curry being ranked under Lillard after how atrocious the Warriors looked in 2020 without Steph seemed to value team prospects not the players—and that's the generous interpretation.

Why would going to the finals not be a metric of value? Shouldn't it be a metric of even more value especially after the Warriors were being written off by these same guys before he made those finals? One would think that a conscientious list that has been repeatedly shown to be wrong on something would acknowledge their error and try to factor in improvements. There is no evidence of that here.

Giannis has been very good. He has performed at a best-in-the-year level. The thing is Curry has previously performed at a best in the decade and best in NBA history level. The accommodations that have been given to LeBron in cognizance of that for example are not being granted to Curry.

These lists are just as likely made to push an agenda.

I mean, Curry probably has a better argument over Lebron from 2015-2018 than he does over Giannis from 2019-2022. Like, picking non-peak Curry over peak/prime Giannis isn't even an argument at this point.

Not clear what you are trying to say here but when Curry has played he's had a higher RPM than Giannis. Total RAPTOR is split in those years. On what basis is there no argument? I keep hearing that suggested but given no real reason.

Jesus....i haven't even read all this but I know I have a book to write.

Ok - it IS as a FACT a projection. That isn't up for debate. If you don't know what the ranking is, maybe don't speak on it? But yes, this list is FULL of subjective opinions, that's the entire point of the list. Welcome to reality!

yes, someone doing this list could look at Curry's build and think he'll age poorly and next year he'll have a drop off as a result. That's exactly why it's OK that Curry keeps beating expectations, because in REALITY, Curry does keep beating expectations for a guy of his size. It's why REAL Curry fans, love the guy so much, it's amazing watching him beat our expectations year after year. And those of us who don't debate ESPN lists, are self aware of how much this factors into our love of Curry. Trust me no smart Curry fan has an issue with ESPN's rankings. As no smart person has EVER had an issue with a top 10 player ranking on these lists.

The list is about the individual player, thus being a PLAYER list! Not a team list! There is ZERO team thought in this one.

Why would going to the finals not matter? Because it's about the PLAYERS? And we already discussed this, we are ONLY talking about Giannis and he keeps getting ranked well. That's all we are talking about, giannis! He's top 5 4 years straight, nailed it all times!

I have no idea what best in the year level is. Giannis is at his age and his level a guy we have to talk about as a future top 20 if not top 10 guy. He's otherworldly great. No clue why you mentioned curry or lebron here. Giannis is amazing as the person. We don't need to drop in comps. Will he get there? Who knows, but man is he on the path to all time stupid greatness.

No the lists are 100% for stupid people to get upset and debate them and thus get clicks. No smart person cares where curry finished in 2020 or 2019. You can't be smart and care about this list! I assure you ESPN knew that like 80% of people are stupid and figured out the best way to get clicks from dumb people was to let their writers guess who will have better or worse seasons the coming year. Nobody solving string theory will ever care about Curry being 3rd or 33rd... Curry was ranked like 5th this year, that's the same thing as being 1st or 10th. Either way they think he's going to have an MVP level kind of season. And a lot of people thought Curry might slip after that injury, so ranking him lower that year is just common sense.

[michaelm]

ESPN TOP100 year by year

2015 Lebron Davis Durant
2016 Lebron Curry Durant
2017 Lebron Durant Kawhi
2018 Lebron Curry Harden
2019 Giannis Kawhi Lebron
2020 Lebron Davis Giannis
2021 Durant Giannis Lebron
2022 Giannis Jokic Doncic

I could only laugh at these ESPN clowns. Curry won 4 champs in 8 years and they still don't get it.

15-22

Curry 4 titles 6 finals 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Lebron 2 titles 5 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Durant 2 titles 3 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Kawhi 1 titles 1 final 0 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Giannis 1 titles 1 final 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.
.

Giannis disagrees with you.

[AussieBuck]

ESPN TOP100 year by year

2015 Lebron Davis Durant
2016 Lebron Curry Durant
2017 Lebron Durant Kawhi
2018 Lebron Curry Harden
2019 Giannis Kawhi Lebron
2020 Lebron Davis Giannis
2021 Durant Giannis Lebron
2022 Giannis Jokic Doncic

I could only laugh at these ESPN clowns. Curry won 4 champs in 8 years and they still don't get it.

15-22

Curry 4 titles 6 finals 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Lebron 2 titles 5 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Durant 2 titles 3 finals 0 MVP's 2 FMVP's
Kawhi 1 titles 1 final 0 MVP's 1 FMVP's
Giannis 1 titles 1 final 2 MVP's 1 FMVP's

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.
.

Giannis disagrees with you.

Giannis called pretty much every top 5ish player (other than Harden) over the last 5 years either the best player in the world or otherwise better than him. It remains hilarious that people try to use this stuff to make a point. It's to do with Giannis staying hungry and nothing more. He doesn't actually think Curry, Lebron, Durant, Kawhi, Jokic, Doncic, whoever are better than him and he's probably aware that there can't be multiple guys simultaneously best player in the league.

[michaelm]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.
.

Giannis disagrees with you.

Giannis called pretty much every top 5ish player (other than Harden) over the last 5 years either the best player in the world or otherwise better than him. It remains hilarious that people try to use this stuff to make a point. It's to do with Giannis staying hungry and nothing more. He doesn't actually think Curry, Lebron, Durant, Kawhi, Jokic, Doncic, whoever are better than him and he's probably aware that there can't be multiple guys simultaneously best player in the league.

I don’t know about Warrior GM, but there is universal appreciation for Giannis on the GSW board (EDIT actually on another GSW forum) on a current thread concerning his recent statement about Curry as the last man standing this year being the best player, in response to which Curry called Giannis that man in the 2020-21 season. I don’t believe most GSW fans including me have any problem with Giannis being rated as he is.

What I am disagreeing with is an apparent contention that individual stats in the regular season are what count in NBA basketball. Sure players with some franchises have no chance to win titles, which might well have included Giannis if he wasn’t quite as exceptional as he is. However Imo there are players who are outstanding in the regular season but have a game style not suited to play-off basketball or don’t perform under the pressure of the play-offs and this definitely does count towards their overall rating imo given the object of the game is to win the title.

I don’t know whether you are personally acquainted with Giannis or Curry, I certainly am not, but from all appearances they do have a strong mutual regard which you may be underestimating.

[Raonak]

Basketball is a team sport.

The player that elevates his team to a win is the greatest player. Giannis is right. Lebron was the best player, Curry was the best player, KD was the best player, Kawhi was the best player, Giannis was the best player, and now curry is the best player again.

[AussieBuck]

Giannis disagrees with you.

Giannis called pretty much every top 5ish player (other than Harden) over the last 5 years either the best player in the world or otherwise better than him. It remains hilarious that people try to use this stuff to make a point. It's to do with Giannis staying hungry and nothing more. He doesn't actually think Curry, Lebron, Durant, Kawhi, Jokic, Doncic, whoever are better than him and he's probably aware that there can't be multiple guys simultaneously best player in the league.

I don’t know about Warrior GM, but there is universal appreciation for Giannis on the GSW board for Giannis on a current thread concerning his recent statement about Curry as the last man standing this year being the best player, in response to which Curry called Giannis that man in the 2020-21 season. I don’t believe most GSW fans including me have any problem with Giannis being rated as he is.

What I am disagreeing with is an apparent contention that individual stats in the regular season are what counts in NBA basketball. Sure players with some franchises have no chance to win titles, which might well have included Giannis if he wasn’t quite as exceptional as he is. However Imo there are players who are outstanding in the regular season but have a game style not suited to play-off basketball or don’t perform under the pressure of the play-offs and this definitely does count towards their overall rating imo given the object of the game is to win the title.

I don’t know whether you are personally acquainted with Giannis or Curry, I certainly am not, but from all appearances they do have a strong mutual regard which you may be underestimating.

Yes they have a lot of mutual respect, I'm just pointing out that Giannis says a lot of meaningless stuff on the topic as well and does so frequently and people outside of Bucks fans don't appear to be aware of it and take it seriously. For example there are a bunch of Nets fans obsessed with Giannis saying Durant is the best player in the world a year or so ago. He'll say it about anyone plausible other than Harden due to their mutual hatred.

[Rainwater]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.
.

Giannis disagrees with you.

Giannis called pretty much every top 5ish player (other than Harden) over the last 5 years either the best player in the world or otherwise better than him. It remains hilarious that people try to use this stuff to make a point. It's to do with Giannis staying hungry and nothing more. He doesn't actually think Curry, Lebron, Durant, Kawhi, Jokic, Doncic, whoever are better than him and he's probably aware that there can't be multiple guys simultaneously best player in the league.

Yeah, Giannis is clearly being modest.

[Rainwater]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.

Kobe went to the the finals 3 straight years with Shaq then the Lakers became one of the worse teams in the league post Shaq does that make kobe less of a player? Curry and the Warriors won 3 titles before becoming one of the worse teams in the league does that makes Curry less of a player? There are so many statical values that can better determine the worth a of a single player, finals appearances are so flawed for too many reasons it can't be used as the sole or major determinate for how good a player is.

From 08 to 2019 LeBron was arguably the best player in the game I don't know how you can blame ESPN or anyone for placing him #1 during that time period. Yes, there are times where you can argue that Durant or Curry are better but I will never blame anyone who thinks LeBron is better.

As stated previously you are dealing with an extreme outlier who continues to defy ordinary expectations. Assuming it's just the team is dumb at this point. Also as just stated above Curry's stats are comparable to the others.

We have seen what happens when Curry has no help, the GSWs are one of the worst teams in the league. As I stated earlier, if Curry never had the teammates he had (Durant, Klay, Green, Iggy, Wiggins, Poole); therefore, not allowing him to win the championships he did but still did the things that makes him Curry (like make the craziest shots known to man) is he still not one of the best players to ever play the game? What I am trying to say is Curry is still Curry regardless if he wins a title or not, to say he isn't would be ridiculous. And this goes for every great player. Why should your rank as an individual player or talent be solely based, rather than partially, on if you win a title when so much of that depends on how good the other guys are on your team and if a stupid GM can put legitimate team together. There has never been a player to win a title with a lousy supporting cast. Before MJ got Pippen and started winning titles was he not always MJ?!?! If MJ never got Pippen and never won a title is he now a scrub?!?!? This whole idea that titles means you are the best player in world is beyond ridiculous to me.

And you just don't have to solely look at stats to say one is greatest of all time, it's a combination of a lot things: What you see visually, if you have changed the game, all star appearances, MVPs, FMVPs, etc. There is so much to look at but to solely base it on finals wins when that accomplishment is mostly a team win is just beyond ridiculous.

[WarriorGM]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.

Kobe went to the the finals 3 straight years with Shaq then the Lakers became one of the worse teams in the league post Shaq does that make kobe less of a player? Curry and the Warriors won 3 titles before becoming one of the worse teams in the league does that makes Curry less of a player? There are so many statical values that can better determine the worth a of a single player, finals appearances are so flawed for too many reasons it can't be used as the sole or major determinate for how good a player is.

From 08 to 2019 LeBron was arguably the best player in the game I don't know how you can blame ESPN or anyone for placing him #1 during that time period. Yes, there are times where you can argue that Durant or Curry are better but I will never blame anyone who thinks LeBron is better.

As stated previously you are dealing with an extreme outlier who continues to defy ordinary expectations. Assuming it's just the team is dumb at this point. Also as just stated above Curry's stats are comparable to the others.

We have seen what happens when Curry has no help, the GSWs are one of the worst teams in the league. As I stated earlier, if Curry never had the teammates he had (Durant, Klay, Green, Iggy, Wiggins, Poole); therefore, not allowing him to win the championships he did but still did the things that makes him Curry (like make the craziest shots known to man) is he still not one of the best players to ever play the game? What I am trying to say is Curry is still Curry regardless if he wins a title or not, to say he isn't would be ridiculous. And this goes for every great player. Why should your rank as an individual player or talent be solely based, rather than partially, on if you win a title when so much of that depends on how good the other guys are on your team and if a stupid GM can put legitimate team together. There has never been a player to win a title with a lousy supporting cast.

And You just don't have to look at stats to say one is greatest of all time, it's a combination of a lot things: What you see visually, if you have changed the game, all star appearances, MVPs, FMVPs, etc. There is so much to look at but to solely base it on finals wins when that accomplishment is mostly a team win is just beyond ridiculous.

I am not solely basing on finals wins, but it is the ultimate objective evidence. It is the point. Despite the noise of teammates and other factors it is what is being sought. An analogy: 2 treatments are developed by a medical company. Randomized controlled trials shows that one lowers cholesterol a lot, the other only a little. Both are released into the market. Follow up observation studies show that while the treatment that reduces cholesterol a lot does that it doesn't lead to better mortality outcomes while the one that reduces cholesterol only a little leads to significant improvement in mortality outcomes. Which treatment is better?

If a player is great, it will out. One would have to have truly dire background circumstances to stop a great player with enough time. I find the teammates argument especially ridiculous when it comes to Curry. None of his teammates have been a starter on another championship team as of yet and aside from KD the reputations of his primary teammates prior to joining him are among the lowest of such players of championship teams. An 11th pick and 2nd rounder? A player deemed by many as having the worst contract in the league? Another 2nd rounder who for a time was shooting the worst percentage in the league? These are guys you say Curry was lucky to have as teammates? Only in hindsight is that not laughable. Curry was saddled with literally the worst team in the league the prior year and in two years went from that to a championship. Of all players in NBA history Curry is possibly the worst player to use as an example of a player winning championships only because of his lucky situation with teammates.

How do you know a player has never won with a lousy supporting cast? Because winning proves a cast wasn't lousy?

[michaelm]

A FINALS WIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE YOU THE BEST PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE. ITS A FREAKIN TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT. I AM SO TIRED OF THIS NARRATIVE.

Kobe went to the the finals 3 straight years with Shaq then the Lakers became one of the worse teams in the league post Shaq does that make kobe less of a player? Curry and the Warriors won 3 titles before becoming one of the worse teams in the league does that makes Curry less of a player? There are so many statical values that can better determine the worth a of a single player, finals appearances are so flawed for too many reasons it can't be used as the sole or major determinate for how good a player is.

From 08 to 2019 LeBron was arguably the best player in the game I don't know how you can blame ESPN or anyone for placing him #1 during that time period. Yes, there are times where you can argue that Durant or Curry are better but I will never blame anyone who thinks LeBron is better.

As stated previously you are dealing with an extreme outlier who continues to defy ordinary expectations. Assuming it's just the team is dumb at this point. Also as just stated above Curry's stats are comparable to the others.

We have seen what happens when Curry has no help, the GSWs are one of the worst teams in the league. As I stated earlier, if Curry never had the teammates he had (Durant, Klay, Green, Iggy, Wiggins, Poole); therefore, not allowing him to win the championships he did but still did the things that makes him Curry (like make the craziest shots known to man) is he still not one of the best players to ever play the game? What I am trying to say is Curry is still Curry regardless if he wins a title or not, to say he isn't would be ridiculous. And this goes for every great player. Why should your rank as an individual player or talent be solely based, rather than partially, on if you win a title when so much of that depends on how good the other guys are on your team and if a stupid GM can put legitimate team together. There has never been a player to win a title with a lousy supporting cast. Before MJ got Pippen and started winning titles was he not always MJ?!?! If MJ never got Pippen and never won a title is he now a scrub?!?!? This whole idea that titles means you are the best player in world is beyond ridiculous to me.

And you just don't have to solely look at stats to say one is greatest of all time, it's a combination of a lot things: What you see visually, if you have changed the game, all star appearances, MVPs, FMVPs, etc. There is so much to look at but to solely base it on finals wins when that accomplishment is mostly a team win is just beyond ridiculous.

On the contrary, I do not base my assessment only on title wins, I am simply of the view that they and play-off performances in general which you seem to want to discount almost totally are important, which also seems to be a close to universal view among the players themselves including Giannis; his recent statement was more about the importance of performance in the finals rather than self assessment, modest or otherwise, of him vs Curry specifically btw.

Again I say while Giannis can and has delivered and I have no problem with him being rated the number one player in the game, Embiid hasn’t delivered in the play-offs imo, I have some doubts Doncic’s heliocentric game will translate to ultimate playoff success, and while Jokic could definitely have more help than he has had I do wonder along with others whether his perimeter defense being liable to being targeted will be problematic even with a stronger supporting cast.

The year GSW were the worst team in the NBA was the year Curry played 4 or 5 games btw. No one is saying he can do it on his own, even the likes of MJ or LeBron couldn’t, but he is a player around whom good to great teams can be built and actually have been built.