Curry or wade all time

[OhayoKD]

Supporting casts are irrelevant all of a sudden?

2021/2022 put a dent in supporting casts as an explanation. Warriors were horrible without curry(20 win pace roughly) while playing 48 win ball with him in 2021 and 60 win ball with hm(and without klay) before he got injured.

Not sure how much you can put curry's greater success to teammates with that in mind.

i mean the 2022 warriors were 45-19 (70.3%) with steph and 34-12 (73.9%) with draymond so obviously draymond seems super important. and it's kind of weird curry has missed the playoffs 5 times in his career while also winning 4 championship if supporting casts aren't having a pretty huge impact. he wins when he is on the most talented team in the league. he tends to miss the playoffs entirely when he isn't.

can't curry and draymond both be super valuable? maybe i'm being harsh, but the warriors were crazy good without klay last season and i'm starting to wonder if it's 90% curry offense+dray defense and 10% everything else without kd

you say he "wins when he has the most talented cast in the league" but warriors were **** without curry even in 2022 and played 60 win soccer without klay before curry was hurt(while curry's percentages were bad).

The team that missed the playoffs played 20 win ball without curry from 20-22(so worst in the league) and won at nearly a 50 win pace with curry. If anything that was historically strong carry job ruined by injury(which is forgivable for a dude in his 30's i feel. All the other playoff missing seasons came before he entered his prime(which i'm generously defining as 2013). Otherwise he also made the playoffs with a meh cast in 2014.

I think when you get binary about "won title or didn't" or "made playoffs or didn't" you're needlessly making things less clear. Is 20 win to 45 win a great carry job? usually, yeah.

They were traling in game 4 by a margin when curry was brought on in 2016 and their opponent was a.500 team that made the second round due to their opponent being injured in round one.

2018 rockets series is bleh, but pretty mcuh every goat team candidate has something similar in the following year. Bulls taken to 7 by the knicks, Lakers taken to 7 by the kings, bucks lose in 7 to the lakers.

Feel like taking the 13 spurs in 6, beating the cavs(yes even without kyrie and love) in 6 is pretty good(they swept the 60 win hawks in the previous round without either), taking the 16 cavs to 7(absurdly high playoff srs despite not taking the playoffs too seriously until the finals), beating the thunder, and destroying thr 17 cavs are all really strong team results and most of them came without kd. The other piece is curry played with a serious injury in both 18 and 16.

In 17 the warriors actually played 70 win ball without durant so it's not like they weren't dominant without him. Basically the big wrench for them was the cavs who were an atg playoff team without going all-out.

take 17 as "curry has an unfair team", 15/16 as curry has a good team but typical for cntenders, and 20-22 as curry's team is bad to average and things check out. Arguably the warriors almost losing to the rockets when curry is hurt and playing poorly cements him being valuable even in the kd years.

[ccameron]

I have Curry ahead all time (I feel like he was a slightly better player) but I don't think taking Wade at his peak is entirely incredulous.

What's interesting to me is that there are people with Wade as a better player, but Curry being more productive due to Wade's poor longevity.

High level years from Curry - 2013-2019, 2021-22 (9 years)
High level years from Wade - 2005-2007, 2009-13 (8 years).

Yes, Wade has some issues with injury in this sample (2007, 2012-2013) but so does Curry (2016 playoffs, 2018 both regular season and playoffs, 2022 regular season, also missed 13 games in 2019 FWIW which is what Wade missed in 2013). I don't know how valuable we'd want to treat a season like 2008, or Wade's post-2013 seasons, but if we do think they have actual intrinsic value, then it's a lot closer than people are making it out to be IMO.

Framing it another way, 2005-2013 Wade played 604 games, and 2013-2022 Curry played 646 games. Both played in slightly shortened seasons (2012 for Wade, 2021 for Curry) but the main takeaway is that for all the talk of Wade being brittle, Curry is probably not that far ahead on this front. To frame it another way, Anthony Davis has been in the league for 10 years (oh how time flies), and he is one of the poster boys for being brittle, and he has played 604 games in the past 10 years. It's easy to think of a season like 2007 Wade as a write off, but he played 51 games at an incredibly high level. Steph played 51 games at an incredibly high level in 2018, and didn't play the first round of the playoffs. Are we writing that off too?

Again, I have Curry as the better player and I don't think there's any high-level longevity advantage for Wade, so I don't think too much about having Curry ahead. However, if we think that Wade is the better player, then I don't think there's that much of a longevity advantage for Curry either, especially if we view 2014-2017 Wade as fairly good seasons in their own right. I'm personally not that high on post 2013 Wade, but there are numerous people who are.

So yeah, that's just some food for thought.

A couple years ago, in the all-time project, Curry was voted higher than Wade, mostly because of longevity. I argued at the time that Curry didn't have much (if any) longevity edge over Wade at that point that people thought he did, and that Wade's longevity seemed worse than it was, while Curry's was not as great as people thought it was. The fact that Wade's 2007 season is never counted as a prime year, but Curry's 2018 season is always counted as a prime year, despite the fact that they played the exact same amount of games in those seasons, is a very good example of this. It's a great point that I think a lot of posters here are ignoring.

But I also agree with you that at this point, Curry's longevity is better. Although I argued that there wasn't an appreciable difference in longevity in the last all time project a couple years ago (and I still think I was right), things changed, so I have Curry comfortably ahead at this point. And winning another title certainly helped.

I see them as the same caliber player but Curry at this point has just lasted longer.