What will it take for you to take Curry over LeBron all-time?

[tonyreyes123]

It’s closer than you think tbh. If Curry gets this year and repeats it’ll be seen as his league the last decade not LeBrons

[falcolombardi]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

is tehcnically possible but fairly unlikely unless we go by a team succes anfle anf warriors end with like 6 or 7 rings (itself fairly unlikely considering warriors age, but not impossible)

if not for a "ring count" approach curry has such a longevity gap that he would need unprecedented aging curve (for example mantaining super star impact into his late 30's to make up the longevity gap) or be considered a significatively more impactful player than lebron, both of which are fairly unlikely

which is why a more "achievement based" approach (example, giving credit for thinghs like loyalty, culture building or chsnging the game, or just ring counting if he ends ahead of lebron there) would be the best angle to argue curry over lebron imo

as other posters have said, the difference between a 26 years old lebron and a 34 years old curry makes this a very different conversation

somethingh else to mention: lebron by 2011 actually was the same age as 89 jordan, he actually had 2 finals runs before jordan first and a significativrly longer career

so is not like he was trailing jordan in "career value" in 2011

[Doctor MJ]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

is tehcnically possible but fairly unlikely unless we go by a team succes anfle anf warriors end with like 6 or 7 rings (itself fairly unlikely considering warriors age, but not impossible)

if not for a "ring count" approach curry has such a longevity gap that he would need unprecedented aging curve (for example mantaining super star impact into his late 30's to make up the longevity gap) or be considered a significatively more impactful player than lebron, both of which are fairly unlikely

which is why a more "achievement based" approach (example, giving credit for thinghs like loyalty, culture building or chsnging the game, or just ring counting if he ends ahead of lebron there) would be the best angle to argue curry over lebron imo

as other posters have said, the difference between a 26 years old lebron and a 34 years old curry makes this a very different conversation

Indeed, the fact that Curry's already arguably been more valuable to the Warriors than LeBron's been to any franchise is no small thing. Curry has a Duncan-like franchise longevity with greater success well after LeBron ceases to be relevant, that's going to change how posters of the future see the two players.

[falcolombardi]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

is tehcnically possible but fairly unlikely unless we go by a team succes anfle anf warriors end with like 6 or 7 rings (itself fairly unlikely considering warriors age, but not impossible)

if not for a "ring count" approach curry has such a longevity gap that he would need unprecedented aging curve (for example mantaining super star impact into his late 30's to make up the longevity gap) or be considered a significatively more impactful player than lebron, both of which are fairly unlikely

which is why a more "achievement based" approach (example, giving credit for thinghs like loyalty, culture building or chsnging the game, or just ring counting if he ends ahead of lebron there) would be the best angle to argue curry over lebron imo

as other posters have said, the difference between a 26 years old lebron and a 34 years old curry makes this a very different conversation

Indeed, the fact that Curry's already arguably been more valuable to the Warriors than LeBron's been to any franchise is no small thing. Curry has a Duncan-like franchise longevity with greater success well after LeBron ceases to be relevant, that's going to change how posters of the future see the two players.

i respect that evaluation philosophy but i dont particularly share it which is why i mention it is the best angle for curry (even if i dont share it)

same thingh witj other arguments based around thinghs like off court impact

[NyKnicks1714]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

Big difference though: LeBron was 26 at the time, Curry is 34. A 26-year-old still has ample time to show you new things, do things he hasn't done before. A 34-year old doesn't.

Curry can, and likely will, add to his resume, but he's not going to show you something on the floor that you haven't seen from him before. He is who he is at this point. He shouldn't rise or fall according to anything he does from this point on in his career.

So you believe that whether Curry puts in years more of effort allowing the Warriors to win more championships, or he goes out there and physically assaults his own teammates to undermine them for the rest of his career, it doesn't matter.

For the record, I think it does matter.

I think there's a difference between how good a player is and how good his accolades are. The former isn't going to change one way or the other. Now there's something to be said for longevity and how that factors into rankings of ability, but it's unlikely Curry will do anything surprising in that regard. He's not going to be averaging an efficient 25 when he's 42 and he's not going to be averaging 11 points a game in two years.

[Doctor MJ]

Big difference though: LeBron was 26 at the time, Curry is 34. A 26-year-old still has ample time to show you new things, do things he hasn't done before. A 34-year old doesn't.

Curry can, and likely will, add to his resume, but he's not going to show you something on the floor that you haven't seen from him before. He is who he is at this point. He shouldn't rise or fall according to anything he does from this point on in his career.

So you believe that whether Curry puts in years more of effort allowing the Warriors to win more championships, or he goes out there and physically assaults his own teammates to undermine them for the rest of his career, it doesn't matter.

For the record, I think it does matter.

I think there's a difference between how good a player is and how good his accolades are. The former isn't going to change one way or the other. Now there's something to be said for longevity and how that factors into rankings of ability, but it's unlikely Curry will do anything surprising in that regard. He's not going to be averaging an efficient 25 when he's 42 and he's not going to be averaging 11 points a game in two years.

Accolades are blue ribbons other people place on the player, I'm talking about the value to his team of continuing to go out there and sacrifice his body over the years to come.

Re: unlikely Curry will do anything surprising. So, I'm coming in here having had people by and large tell me decisively for the past few years that Curry and the Warriors are done, so let me ask you?

Did you predict that they'd get back where they are now? If not, then you should already be very surprised.

[NyKnicks1714]

So you believe that whether Curry puts in years more of effort allowing the Warriors to win more championships, or he goes out there and physically assaults his own teammates to undermine them for the rest of his career, it doesn't matter.

For the record, I think it does matter.

I think there's a difference between how good a player is and how good his accolades are. The former isn't going to change one way or the other. Now there's something to be said for longevity and how that factors into rankings of ability, but it's unlikely Curry will do anything surprising in that regard. He's not going to be averaging an efficient 25 when he's 42 and he's not going to be averaging 11 points a game in two years.

Accolades are blue ribbons other people place on the player, I'm talking about the value to his team of continuing to go out there and sacrifice his body over the years to come.

Re: unlikely Curry will do anything surprising. So, I'm coming in here having had people by and large tell me decisively for the past few years that Curry and the Warriors are done, so let me ask you?

Did you predict that they'd get back where they are now? If not, then you should already be very surprised.

I absolutely thought they'd be contenders, yes. I am not surprised.

You're missing the point though. Let's use Kobe as an example because that's closer and a more reasonable discussion than Curry vs. LeBron. If you think Kobe is the better player, what can Curry do from here on out to make you think that he's a better player than Kobe?

[Doctor MJ]

I think there's a difference between how good a player is and how good his accolades are. The former isn't going to change one way or the other. Now there's something to be said for longevity and how that factors into rankings of ability, but it's unlikely Curry will do anything surprising in that regard. He's not going to be averaging an efficient 25 when he's 42 and he's not going to be averaging 11 points a game in two years.

Accolades are blue ribbons other people place on the player, I'm talking about the value to his team of continuing to go out there and sacrifice his body over the years to come.

Re: unlikely Curry will do anything surprising. So, I'm coming in here having had people by and large tell me decisively for the past few years that Curry and the Warriors are done, so let me ask you?

Did you predict that they'd get back where they are now? If not, then you should already be very surprised.

I absolutely thought they'd be contenders, yes. I am not surprised.

You're missing the point though. Let's use Kobe as an example because that's closer and a more reasonable discussion than Curry vs. LeBron. If you think Kobe is the better player, what can Curry do from here on out to make you think that he's a better player than Kobe?

Okay so first let me emphasize that you are part of a very small minority who saw this coming, so there's no point in me explaining to you what it was like being yelled at by people for years who said the Warriors were done and who now act like this didn't happen.

Re: missing the point. I understand that you're saying that if you're just thinking about players as being better or worse at their best, and you think Player A is better and has amazing longevity, that things seem pretty open and shut.

Re: Kobe. I think the LeBron vs Curry debate of "who played the game more effectively" is pretty debatable. I don't think Kobe is in that same conversation.

[falcolombardi]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

is tehcnically possible but fairly unlikely unless we go by a team succes anfle anf warriors end with like 6 or 7 rings (itself fairly unlikely considering warriors age, but not impossible)

if not for a "ring count" approach curry has such a longevity gap that he would need unprecedented aging curve (for example mantaining super star impact into his late 30's to make up the longevity gap) or be considered a significatively more impactful player than lebron, both of which are fairly unlikely

which is why a more "achievement based" approach (example, giving credit for thinghs like loyalty, culture building or chsnging the game, or just ring counting if he ends ahead of lebron there) would be the best angle to argue curry over lebron imo

as other posters have said, the difference between a 26 years old lebron and a 34 years old curry makes this a very different conversation

Indeed, the fact that Curry's already arguably been more valuable to the Warriors than LeBron's been to any franchise is no small thing. Curry has a Duncan-like franchise longevity with greater success well after LeBron ceases to be relevant, that's going to change how posters of the future see the two players.

quoting you agains cause i forgot to make a different point

but here i would separate between "value" provided and rings won

curry helped warriors win 3, maybe 4 rings, lebron helped cavs win 1 rings

but from 2006 to 2018 (minus miami years*) lebron provided 9 superstar years to cleveland, the same ones as curry has given to warriors (2013-2022 minus 2020) with more games played and much less playoffs injuries

is the average impact curry had for warriors since 2013 really higher than lebron for cavs?, if lebron had got better luck in his cavs seasons (example no injuries in 2015, no durant joining warriors, a supporting cast in 2009 and 2010 om the same level as curry cast in 15 and 16) and had comparable talent across those nine years as curry in his own nine

would we still say curry did more for warrios than lebron? is honestly hard to me to say that curry provided more impact on the court for warriors than lebron did for the cavs

even if the warriors achieved more team succes thsn lebron cavs teams

if we follow this angle we would have to also rank kobe, and duncan and russel, and shaq (lakers) and bird and magic and hakeem all ahead on the basis than they provided more value to a single team than lebron to any single team

the reasoning essentially becomes "great players who played in 2 or more teams CANNOT be ranked ahead of players who played in more than 1 team"

and also a modified ring counting argument "if player A wins more rings than player B then by definition he provided more value" which i would disagree with

tldr: i would go as far as saying that lebron cavs career alone provided as much value on court as curry whole career if not more, but this may be a unpopular opinion

please note that i give credit for playing great basketball regardless of whether it ends with rings or not, since that has other variables (injuries, teammates, rivals quality)

[ty 4191]

If Lebron ends in the 40k / 10k / 10k club there's nothing remotely realistic Steph can do.

40k/10k/10k would be largely specious. Spurious.

LeBron James, as we all know, played ages 19-22, right out of high school. During those years, he racked up 8,439 points, 2,102 rebounds, and 2,033 assists.

Players were not able to be drafted out of high school until a 1971 Supreme Court Case changed that law (Haywood vs. NBA).

Wilt Chamberlain:
Being very, very conservative, let's say Wilt averaged 30/20/2 from ages 19-22. (Consider: he averaged 37/27/2.3 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~41,000 points, ~30,000 rebounds, and ~5,000 assists in his career. That's without scoring or shooting the second half of his career, also.

Kareem Abdul Jabaar:
Kareem came up during his age 22 season after playing 3 years in college. Give him his ages 19-21 seasons, very conservatively averaging 25 ppg, 12 rpg, and 3 apg. (He averaged 28.8/14.5/4.1 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~44,000 points, ~20,000 rebounds, and ~6,400 assists.

And that's just in the regular season. Forget about playoffs totals and all those records.

And- to wit- Lebron spends 1.5 million dollars per year just on his body. Even adjusted for inflation, Wilt never even made remotely close to that, total!!

https://medium.com/in-fitness-and-in-health/lebron-james-spends-1-5-million-on-his-body-every-year-1fdf83cbd8ba

[falcolombardi]

If Lebron ends in the 40k / 10k / 10k club there's nothing remotely realistic Steph can do.

40k/10k/10k would be largely specious. Spurious.

LeBron James, as we all know, played ages 19-22, right out of high school. During those years, he racked up 8,439 points, 2,102 rebounds, and 2,033 assists.

Players were not able to be drafted out of high school until a 1971 Supreme Court Case changed that law (Haywood vs. NBA).

Wilt Chamberlain:
Being very, very conservative, let's say Wilt averaged 30/20/2 from ages 19-22. (Consider: he averaged 37/27/2.3 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~41,000 points, ~30,000 rebounds, and ~5,000 assists in his career. That's without scoring or shooting the second half of his career, also.

Kareem Abdul Jabaar:
Kareem came up during his age 22 season after playing 3 years in college. Give him his ages 19-21 seasons, very conservatively averaging 25 ppg, 12 rpg, and 3 apg. (He averaged 28.8/14.5/4.1 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~44,000 points, ~20,000 rebounds, and ~6,400 assists.

And that's just in the regular season. Forget about playoffs totals and all those records.

And- to wit- Lebron spends 1.5 million dollars per year just on his body. Even adjusted for inflation, Wilt never even made remotely close to that, total!!


https://medium.com/in-fitness-and-in-health/lebron-james-spends-1-5-million-on-his-body-every-year-1fdf83cbd8ba

kareem and wilt also played in eras with more scoring and minutes played

[TroubleS0me]

The real question is did he pass Kobe All-time?

[thebigbird]

Quite literally nothing. The gap between them is enormous. LeBron has as many all-NBA team selections since turning 30 as Curry does in his entire career.

[lambchop]

If Lebron ends in the 40k / 10k / 10k club there's nothing remotely realistic Steph can do.

40k/10k/10k would be largely specious. Spurious.

LeBron James, as we all know, played ages 19-22, right out of high school. During those years, he racked up 8,439 points, 2,102 rebounds, and 2,033 assists.

Players were not able to be drafted out of high school until a 1971 Supreme Court Case changed that law (Haywood vs. NBA).

Wilt Chamberlain:
Being very, very conservative, let's say Wilt averaged 30/20/2 from ages 19-22. (Consider: he averaged 37/27/2.3 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~41,000 points, ~30,000 rebounds, and ~5,000 assists in his career. That's without scoring or shooting the second half of his career, also.

Kareem Abdul Jabaar:
Kareem came up during his age 22 season after playing 3 years in college. Give him his ages 19-21 seasons, very conservatively averaging 25 ppg, 12 rpg, and 3 apg. (He averaged 28.8/14.5/4.1 his Rookie Year).

--He'd have ~44,000 points, ~20,000 rebounds, and ~6,400 assists.

And that's just in the regular season. Forget about playoffs totals and all those records.

And- to wit- Lebron spends 1.5 million dollars per year just on his body. Even adjusted for inflation, Wilt never even made remotely close to that, total!!

https://medium.com/in-fitness-and-in-health/lebron-james-spends-1-5-million-on-his-body-every-year-1fdf83cbd8ba

Wilt slept with over 20 000 women. Even if he had had the money, it is pretty clear he wasn't going to prioritize rest and spending time in ice chambers, unless he had some kind of ice chamber S and M fetish.

[JujitsuFlip]

Incidentally, all the folks saying "It can't happen!" remind me of conversations around 2011 talking about how LeBron's GOAT candidacy was already over.

Steph needs 1 more ring, 2 more RS MVPs, 4 more Finals MVPs, 10 more ASG appearances, 9 more first team All-NBA, 1 more third team All-NBA, 5 more all defense first team, 1 more all defense second team and a ROY just to enter the conversation. Keep in mind, since LBJ is still active, these are moving targets

If you believe a 34 year old can achieve all that before retirement, then it can happen, otherwise...

So, sounds like your GOAT assessment is based almost entirely on the assessments of other people.
For the record, my GOAT assessment is about my own assessments.

I mean, that's cool but I'm not sure how much credibility it will have, outside of you.

[otwok]

Dude, it isn't about LeBron it's about all those in front of Curry. Lebron is legit the 2nd or 3rd greatest ever. At best Curry is a top ten. So that means what does Curry need to do to be top 2-3 ever. I don't think he can get there.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[Ritzo]

The gap between MJ and LeBron is closer than the gap between Kobe and Curry. Kobe ain't even top 5.

[G35]

It sounds like all time scoring point total is the primary metric to be the ATG......

Indeed, and I suppose that's why everyone agrees Kareem is the GOAT and they laugh off the notion that Jordan would be in the conversation.

I think the all time scoring is a nice plug but not necessary. Jordan isn't even close to Kareem in that respect. The all time scoring is not an equal measurement. We talk about how basketball has evolved and improved and not the advantages players have. Kareem would have easily been able to join the NBA as an 18 year old if it was allowed and that would give him four more years to add to his totals in points, reb's, blocks, assists, etc. He could have obliterated the record books...very similar to how Wilt did it. It is not an apples to apples comparison.

For Kareem I would say why I would rate him high are:
- Dominated in high school, college, and the NBA
- Won the NBA title as the best player in his 2nd year, turning around an expansion franchise. No one else has done it that fast
- 6 MVP's
- 6 titles
- Able to win titles as the #1 option and as an #2 or 3 option
- the most unstoppable and effective shot in history

[NyKnicks1714]

The real question is did he pass Kobe All-time?

It's at least a more interesting question.

[ty 4191]

kareem and wilt played in eras with more scoring and minutes played

Career MP Including Playoffs:

Wilt: 55,418 (through age 34)
Kareem: 66,297 (through age 41)
Lebron: 63,175 MP (through age 37)

If Wilt had come up at 18 like Lebron, 40k/10k/10k would be a joke. And, if he hadn't been told to stop scoring in 1966? Forget about it. He scored 23,194 points in 595 games before they told him to stop scoring and focus on defense and passing.

No contest. Wilt and Kareem >> Lebron.