Will Curry finish in the top 5 MVP voting?

[Michael Lucky]

Embiid, Jokic, and Giannis are above Steph. I would place Steph 4th. I finish my top 5 with Doncic. The rest of the big names like Durant, Harden, Lebron have all missed too many games for me to include them.

[michaelm]

Stop it. Blazers need playmaker. Curry is not that. He is all time scorer but not as good playmaker as Lillard what Blazers actually need.

What are you smoking? They have similar average 6.6apg and Curry peaked at 8.7 vs. Lillard's 8.0. Curry had three seasons per 100 poss >11 assists, but Lillard had none. The only reason Curry is not averaging more is because he is all time great in playing off the ball as well. Repeating 100 times does not make Lillard a better playmaker than Curry.

JN61 has become one of the most regular posting Curry haters around here. The others have pulled back because they want to preserve some semblance of credibility but, having and1'd Pharmcat's introductory post to the "Stephen Curry has been totally exposed" thread, he's decided there's not much more to lose on that front and to go all-in on the outrageousness.

The contention Lillard is a better playmaker is hysterical. Curry is not only a better playmaker than Lillard by far, Curry is arguably the greatest playmaker of all-time.

It is not hysterical because Lillard is also a great player. Not as good as Curry imo, and little evidence for him being so unless something which seems quite unlikely currently happens in the rest of this season. If he gets the Blazers to the play-offs and takes them some distance once there that will be fairly significant achievement.

[WarriorGM]

What are you smoking? They have similar average 6.6apg and Curry peaked at 8.7 vs. Lillard's 8.0. Curry had three seasons per 100 poss >11 assists, but Lillard had none. The only reason Curry is not averaging more is because he is all time great in playing off the ball as well. Repeating 100 times does not make Lillard a better playmaker than Curry.

JN61 has become one of the most regular posting Curry haters around here. The others have pulled back because they want to preserve some semblance of credibility but, having and1'd Pharmcat's introductory post to the "Stephen Curry has been totally exposed" thread, he's decided there's not much more to lose on that front and to go all-in on the outrageousness.

The contention Lillard is a better playmaker is hysterical. Curry is not only a better playmaker than Lillard by far, Curry is arguably the greatest playmaker of all-time.

It is not hysterical because Lillard is also a great player. Not as good as Curry imo, and little evidence for him being so unless something which seems quite unlikely currently happens in the rest of this season. If he gets the Blazers to the play-offs and takes them some distance once there that will be fairly significant achievement.

Not sure what point you're addressing here. Is Lillard a great player? Sure. But as great as he is, a comparison with Curry is a borderline affront to Curry. Would you say comparing DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry to LeBron James is a fair comparison? Because that's arguably the kind of gap we're talking about.

This is a favorite tactic of those who are trying to deny Curry's greatness. Curry deniers always attempt to compare him with players that while great, aren't quite as accomplished as he is in the hope of diminishing Curry by association. There's no reason to indulge them.

[Optms]

He's been top 5 all year. The fact that he's carrying a bottom 3 team to playoff contention in the loaded West is insane. No other player is more valuable to their team success.

[michaelm]

JN61 has become one of the most regular posting Curry haters around here. The others have pulled back because they want to preserve some semblance of credibility but, having and1'd Pharmcat's introductory post to the "Stephen Curry has been totally exposed" thread, he's decided there's not much more to lose on that front and to go all-in on the outrageousness.

The contention Lillard is a better playmaker is hysterical. Curry is not only a better playmaker than Lillard by far, Curry is arguably the greatest playmaker of all-time.

It is not hysterical because Lillard is also a great player. Not as good as Curry imo, and little evidence for him being so unless something which seems quite unlikely currently happens in the rest of this season. If he gets the Blazers to the play-offs and takes them some distance once there that will be fairly significant achievement.

Not sure what point you're addressing here. Is Lillard a great player? Sure. But as great as he is, a comparison with Curry is a borderline affront to Curry. Would you say comparing DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry to LeBron James is a fair comparison? Because that's arguably the kind of gap we're talking about.

I just don't like to rubbish other great players, you clearly do. Lillard has done a good carry job with an injury hit team this year, and is better than DeRozan or Lowry, again imo. Lebron is a red herring as you must know.

Sure, the argument about Curry not being a good playmaker because his off ball skills are such as to demand utilisation is specious, like the repeated argument by one particular poster that Curry should not be regarded as the all time best shooter because he does not take enough long 2 point shots, an inefficient shot compared to other options he usually has.

[WarriorGM]

It is not hysterical because Lillard is also a great player. Not as good as Curry imo, and little evidence for him being so unless something which seems quite unlikely currently happens in the rest of this season. If he gets the Blazers to the play-offs and takes them some distance once there that will be fairly significant achievement.

Not sure what point you're addressing here. Is Lillard a great player? Sure. But as great as he is, a comparison with Curry is a borderline affront to Curry. Would you say comparing DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry to LeBron James is a fair comparison? Because that's arguably the kind of gap we're talking about.

I just don't like to rubbish other great players, you clearly do. Lillard has done a good carry job with an injury hit team this year, and is better than DeRozan or Lowry, again imo. Lebron is a red herring as you must know.

Sure, the argument about Curry not being a good playmaker because his off ball skills are such as to demand utilisation is specious, like the repeated argument by one particular poster that Curry should not be regarded as the all time best shooter because he does not take enough long 2 point shots, an inefficient shot compared to other options he usually has.

Please explain how I am rubbishing Lillard. The record simply indicates that Curry is that good. Why that isn't obvious to you you'll have to explain especially given the parallel I am drawing.

If my comparison of DeRozan or Lowry to LeBron is a red herring then that would equally apply to a comparison of Lillard to Curry —which was my original point.

[michaelm]

Not sure what point you're addressing here. Is Lillard a great player? Sure. But as great as he is, a comparison with Curry is a borderline affront to Curry. Would you say comparing DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry to LeBron James is a fair comparison? Because that's arguably the kind of gap we're talking about.

I just don't like to rubbish other great players, you clearly do. Lillard has done a good carry job with an injury hit team this year, and is better than DeRozan or Lowry, again imo. Lebron is a red herring as you must know.

Sure, the argument about Curry not being a good playmaker because his off ball skills are such as to demand utilisation is specious, like the repeated argument by one particular poster that Curry should not be regarded as the all time best shooter because he does not take enough long 2 point shots, an inefficient shot compared to other options he usually has.

Please explain how I am rubbishing Lillard. The record simply indicates that Curry is that good. Why that isn't obvious to you you'll have to explain especially given the parallel I am drawing.

If my comparison of DeRozan or Lowry to LeBron is a red herring then that would equally apply to a comparison of Lillard to Curry —which was my original point.

I objected to the the word hysterical. Curry speaks for himself anyway, he doesn't need you all over every thread on this and the GSW board in your self appointed role as judge of the the fervor of other Curry fans.

[michaelm]

Not sure what point you're addressing here. Is Lillard a great player? Sure. But as great as he is, a comparison with Curry is a borderline affront to Curry. Would you say comparing DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry to LeBron James is a fair comparison? Because that's arguably the kind of gap we're talking about.

I just don't like to rubbish other great players, you clearly do. Lillard has done a good carry job with an injury hit team this year, and is better than DeRozan or Lowry, again imo. Lebron is a red herring as you must know.

Sure, the argument about Curry not being a good playmaker because his off ball skills are such as to demand utilisation is specious, like the repeated argument by one particular poster that Curry should not be regarded as the all time best shooter because he does not take enough long 2 point shots, an inefficient shot compared to other options he usually has.

Please explain how I am rubbishing Lillard. The record simply indicates that Curry is that good. Why that isn't obvious to you you'll have to explain especially given the parallel I am drawing.

If my comparison of DeRozan or Lowry to LeBron is a red herring then that would equally apply to a comparison of Lillard to Curry —which was my original point.

I objected to the the word hysterical. Curry speaks for himself anyway, he doesn't need you all over every thread on this and the GSW board in your self appointed role as judge of the fervor of other Curry fans.

[WarriorGM]

I just don't like to rubbish other great players, you clearly do. Lillard has done a good carry job with an injury hit team this year, and is better than DeRozan or Lowry, again imo. Lebron is a red herring as you must know.

Sure, the argument about Curry not being a good playmaker because his off ball skills are such as to demand utilisation is specious, like the repeated argument by one particular poster that Curry should not be regarded as the all time best shooter because he does not take enough long 2 point shots, an inefficient shot compared to other options he usually has.

Please explain how I am rubbishing Lillard. The record simply indicates that Curry is that good. Why that isn't obvious to you you'll have to explain especially given the parallel I am drawing.

If my comparison of DeRozan or Lowry to LeBron is a red herring then that would equally apply to a comparison of Lillard to Curry —which was my original point.

I objected to the the word hysterical. Curry speaks for himself anyway, he doesn't need you all over every thread on this and the GSW board in your self appointed role as judge of the fervor of other Curry fans.

I speak for myself. I do not pretend to speak for Curry. Nor do I pretend to speak for the other Warriors fans around here. If you think I'm trying to speak for you maybe it's because you are too silent even given all your words.

You have still not explained why my comparison is not apt.

[Marrrcuss]

This is the first year winning doesn't matter, huh

[Roger Murdock]

He should be second Embiid has been amazing but he’s played half his teams minutes and their win % with him is the same as without him. Incredible season and all that but he’s not added enough wins to get MVP IMO

There’s no question if you took the best player off each team and had them play which teams record drops the hardest. This is a 12-16 win team and the worst in the NBA without Steph and an average team with him. That’s basically the definition of value. Then you add in that he’s arguably been the best overall player this season. Top 5 is a no brainer.

[BFitzMoney]

Anyone with an above .500 record.

I bet Steph still haunts you with his game 6 decimation in Houston.

Oh yes because we should just hand out MVPs to players with sub .500 records... Where are standards today..

Absolutely nobody in this thread is saying Curry should come in first place for voting. But to disregard what the man is doing because his team is trash makes me think he hurt your feelings by thrashing your team in the past.

[AbeVigodaLive]

This is the first year winning doesn't matter, huh

Not exactly.

It's been since Barkley in 1988 on a 36 - 46 team that a top 5 finisher has been from a losing team. Kevin Love came the closest since... finishing 6th while on a 26 - 40 team in 2012.

Many players, however, have finished in the top 5 on 42 or 43 win teams, most recently when Wade came in 3rd on a 43-39 team and Bryant came in 3rd on a 42-40 team.

With just how crazy this season is... and with several key MVP candidates missing significant games due to injury and/or tanking while demanding a trade... I think Curry justifies his place in the top 5 if he and the Warriors can continue what they're doing and hover at .500 or above.

It helps that he's not just having a great season. He's having a historically great season.

[Bergmaniac]

He should, but a lot of the MVP voters aren't the sharpest tools in the drawer and are obsessed with team record while ignoring all the other factors so there is a good chance it won't happen.

[TTP]

He should be second Embiid has been amazing but he’s played half his teams minutes and their win % with him is the same as without him. Incredible season and all that but he’s not added enough wins to get MVP IMO

There’s no question if you took the best player off each team and had them play which teams record drops the hardest. This is a 12-16 win team and the worst in the NBA without Steph and an average team with him. That’s basically the definition of value. Then you add in that he’s arguably been the best overall player this season. Top 5 is a no brainer.

What at the bolded? The Sixers are 30-8 with Embiid and 9-9 without Embiid. They literally go from a 41 win pace without Embiid to a 65 win pace with Embiid.

[The_Hater]

He will be if they get back over .500, especially with all the superstar injuries, but I can’t remember the last time a player from a sub-500 team was top 5.

[The_Hater]

He should be second Embiid has been amazing but he’s played half his teams minutes and their win % with him is the same as without him. Incredible season and all that but he’s not added enough wins to get MVP IMO

There’s no question if you took the best player off each team and had them play which teams record drops the hardest. This is a 12-16 win team and the worst in the NBA without Steph and an average team with him. That’s basically the definition of value. Then you add in that he’s arguably been the best overall player this season. Top 5 is a no brainer.

What at the bolded? The Sixers are 30-8 with Embiid and 9-9 without Embiid. They literally go from a 41 win pace without Embiid to a 65 win pace with Embiid.

Lol. Doing 30 seconds of research would have helped him out on that one.....

[Roger Murdock]

He should be second Embiid has been amazing but he’s played half his teams minutes and their win % with him is the same as without him. Incredible season and all that but he’s not added enough wins to get MVP IMO

There’s no question if you took the best player off each team and had them play which teams record drops the hardest. This is a 12-16 win team and the worst in the NBA without Steph and an average team with him. That’s basically the definition of value. Then you add in that he’s arguably been the best overall player this season. Top 5 is a no brainer.

What at the bolded? The Sixers are 30-8 with Embiid and 9-9 without Embiid. They literally go from a 41 win pace without Embiid to a 65 win pace with Embiid.

Wow I was way wrong. I googled ‘sizers record without Embiid’ and found a post from a few weeks ago that said 7-3 and I didn’t dive in much deeper.

[lars_rosenberg]

Steph ORPM is at 10.53...2nd place in ORPM is Dame at 6.57...

to show how insane this is...the difference between Steph and Dame in ORPM is equal to the difference between Dame and the #37 player in ORPM (Ja)...this doesn't even make sense.

Absolutely amazing for a player that was "totally exposed".

[AntMo22]

better not

other than Jokic/Embiid who should be ahead of Steph?

LeBron, Lillard, Giannis, Harden, possibly Paul.

Lakers w/o bron: 7-9
Blazers w/o lillard: 3-0
Bucks w/o Giannis: 5-4
Nets w/o Harden : 5-3 (only after trade)
Suns w/o CP3: 1-0
Warriors w/o Steph: 1-7