Peaks Project #14

[Dr Spaceman]

I'm sorry I'm still not seeing how Curry fits in here when his team is so amazing the regular season was a breeze and his postseason performance was so disappointing compared to some of the others left (it was great but not top 15 all time great). Again his team offensively featured:
Klay Thompson (22/3/3 on 59 TS)
Draymond Green (12/8/4 on 54 TS)
Harrison Barnes (10/5/1 on 57 TS)
Iguodala (8/3/3 in GS but 13/5/5 in Denver on 52 TS)
Andrew Bogut (10/12/4 per 36)
Shaun Livingston (6/2/3 and started for a PS team last year)
David Lee (8/5/2 - was 18/9/3 last year and has had a 19+ PER all but 3 seasons)
Mo Speights (24/10/2 per 36 on 54 TS)
Barbosa (17/3/4 per 36 - last time he was healthy put up 18/3/3 but was inefficient)

I'm sorry but Curry has a bench full of proven players and a perfect system for his skill set. I feel like Curry's perfect situation is getting him brownie points for his impact when his fit is so perfect (same way I felt about Nash who is a similar type of player).

Curry's playoff performance was freaking outstanding, and there were plenty of posters here losing their minds watching him in the Finals. We coined a new term, "resiliency" at first to describe how amazing it was what he was doing.

What you were seeing in the playoffs is that for a game or two defenses would throw something at him that flustered him for a game or two, and then after he figured it out his team didn't skip a beat. This was particularly dramatic in the Finals, where the Cavs decided to play him like he was Shaq from behind the arc. I have literally never seen a perimeter player command so much defensive attention from so far out. It was an absurd strategy, but it worked for a few games until Iggy started knocking down the wide open 3s the Cavs were putting at his feet. And despite Thompson and Dellevadova pulling him and hitting him and tracking his every step, Curry consistently broke free and set up great looks for himself and made the right passes.

You have to understand that despite the numbers you posted above, none of those guys are shot creators. It's all on Curry to drive the offense. Considering that, and how dog **** Klay was throughout the entire playoffs, what Curry pulled off this season was nothing short of incredible.

I had questions going into the playoffs: Will Curry's shot ever go cold? Will he still be able to create great looks for himself when the pressure is turned up? Does his unlimited range still apply against top defenses? Will be still be able to get to the rim in the half court against playoff D?

And the answer to every single one of those questions was so loud it broke my eardrums.

If you were expecting him to post 30/10 games or something then whatever. But if you were in the camp that saw him as a GOAT-level offensive performer during the regular season, the playoffs can only have raised your opinion of him substantially, because he did all the same things but did them way better, despite being defended like a Shaq/MJ hybrid robot. Box scores and narratives won't tell you this.

[Clyde Frazier]

ballot #1 - 76 Dr. J

ballot #2 - 64 Oscar

ballot #3 - 66 West

Explanations for all 3 here:

viewtopic.php?p=44697578#p44697578

Have more to say, but not sure I'll get it in before trex calls it.

[E-Balla]

Given the direction of discussion, how would everyone hash out the peak offense of the following wings/smalls (and what years would you pick)?

Durant
Paul
Curry
Wade
Kobe
McGrady
Oscar
West
Nash
Westbrook

1. 2015 Curry/2007 Nash (tie, maybe the slightest edge to Nash but Curry makes it up defensively)
2. Nowitzki 2011 (you didn't include him but for the sake of this discussion I have him here)
3. Jerry West 1969/Chris Paul 2015 (undecided on the order here, and I like current Paul more than 08)
4. Oscar Robertson
5. Dwayne Wade 2009
6. Kevin Durant 2014
7. Kobe Bryant 2006 (best offensive season, though I'd vote 08 or even 01 as his overall peak)
8. McGrady 2003
9. Westbrook 2015

I'd probably put 2015 James Harden right around Kobe's level, maybe a little above.

I'd say:
1. 06 Nash
2. 64 Oscar
3. 06 Kobster
4. 15 Curry
5. 08 Paul
7. 66 West
8. 09 Wade
9. 03 TMac
10. 14 Durant
11. 15 Westbrook (might be over KD as both seem to have the same lift on the OKC offense - KD with a 112.3 on court ORTG in 14 and WB with a 112.0. Comes down to how I feel about Sef, Lamb, and Fish vs Roberson, Morrow, and Dion)

[E-Balla]

Kd torched the Clippers because their perimeter defense was trash. Westbrook did the same thing. More credence should be put into the fact that KD underperformed against good defesnes like Memphis and the Spurs. This is despite having someone like a Westbrook to take pressure off. I think its alarming.

Yeah, that's the reason I put '03 T-Mac slightly over '14 KD. In terms of regular season, it's a wash (both absolutely phenomenal - well, maybe a slight edge to KD, because he played more games - 81 to 75), but in the playoffs, McGrady performed better against a really strong defense, than Durant did (not to mention KD had more favorable rules, and a way better supporting cast - hell, Westbrook was probably as valuable as the entire '03 Magic roster, except for McGrady...).

Why isn't the way Tmac ended the series a knock against him? The Magic were up 3-1 to the Pistons and Tmac wasn't as hot as he was in the first 3 games compared to his last 4(which ultimately cost them the series).

1st 3 games:

39ppg(67%, 119 Ortg), 6rpg, and 3apg(4TOpg)

Last 4 games:

26ppg(48% TS, 103 Ortg), 7rpg, 6apg(3.5TOpg)

That's a massive difference. I'm aware of how historically dominant the Pistons were defensively, but did they have a man defender on the level of Tony Allen to guard him for an entire series?

People refer to that series as if he kept up his level of play throughout the series, which is far from the truth.

I don't think you do understand how good the Pistons were. They had a 99.9 DRTG meaning even in the last 4 games he was above average (+3). Memphis had a 104.6 DRTG and without removing KD's best 3 games he had only a 106 ORTG (+1). KD also had WB on his team to help take the pressure off. I'd say Tracy's last 4 games are still better than what KD did against Memphis.

[E-Balla]

I'm sorry I'm still not seeing how Curry fits in here when his team is so amazing the regular season was a breeze and his postseason performance was so disappointing compared to some of the others left (it was great but not top 15 all time great). Again his team offensively featured:
Klay Thompson (22/3/3 on 59 TS)
Draymond Green (12/8/4 on 54 TS)
Harrison Barnes (10/5/1 on 57 TS)
Iguodala (8/3/3 in GS but 13/5/5 in Denver on 52 TS)
Andrew Bogut (10/12/4 per 36)
Shaun Livingston (6/2/3 and started for a PS team last year)
David Lee (8/5/2 - was 18/9/3 last year and has had a 19+ PER all but 3 seasons)
Mo Speights (24/10/2 per 36 on 54 TS)
Barbosa (17/3/4 per 36 - last time he was healthy put up 18/3/3 but was inefficient)

I'm sorry but Curry has a bench full of proven players and a perfect system for his skill set. I feel like Curry's perfect situation is getting him brownie points for his impact when his fit is so perfect (same way I felt about Nash who is a similar type of player).

Curry's playoff performance was freaking outstanding, and there were plenty of posters here losing their minds watching him in the Finals. We coined a new term, "resiliency" at first to describe how amazing it was what he was doing.

What you were seeing in the playoffs is that for a game or two defenses would throw something at him that flustered him for a game or two, and then after he figured it out his team didn't skip a beat. This was particularly dramatic in the Finals, where the Cavs decided to play him like he was Shaq from behind the arc. I have literally never seen a perimeter player command so much defensive attention from so far out. It was an absurd strategy, but it worked for a few games until Iggy started knocking down the wide open 3s the Cavs were putting at his feet. And despite Thompson and Dellevadova pulling him and hitting him and tracking his every step, Curry consistently broke free and set up great looks for himself and made the right passes.

That's not why it finally started working. Iguodala shot 39% in games 1-3 making 1.7 a game. The problem was Curry acted like he never saw a team double off a PNR and he couldn't make basic passes and he turned the ball over. If you think he made the right passes I have to question what you were watching there. 6.3 apg and 4.7 topg overall in the Finals. Out of all the Gs mentioned so far Curry is the worst passer by a distance. Also he should've broke open he was playing across from the worst player in any NBA rotation.

You have to understand that despite the numbers you posted above, none of those guys are shot creators. It's all on Curry to drive the offense. Considering that, and how dog **** Klay was throughout the entire playoffs, what Curry pulled off this season was nothing short of incredible.

Klay averaged 24.7/3.7/3.5 on 54.4 TS% (106 ORTG) with Curry of the floor in the regular season. I'll give you that his PS performance was terrible but he isn't only good because of Curry. Also there's a reason I put what these guys did before this year. David Lee's been a 20/10ish player for almost a decade now. Mo Speights is a career 18/9 guy per 36, Barbosa/Livingston usually didn't play with Curry at all and they were still good, and Iggy/Dray/Bogut have always been very good passers. He was amazing but Golden State isn't a bottom 25 offense with Curry and they probably aren't bottom 20.

I had questions going into the playoffs: Will Curry's shot ever go cold? Will he still be able to create great looks for himself when the pressure is turned up? Does his unlimited range still apply against top defenses? Will be still be able to get to the rim in the half court against playoff D?

And the answer to every single one of those questions was so loud it broke my eardrums.

If you were expecting him to post 30/10 games or something then whatever. But if you were in the camp that saw him as a GOAT-level offensive performer during the regular season, the playoffs can only have raised your opinion of him substantially, because he did all the same things but did them way better, despite being defended like a Shaq/MJ hybrid robot. Box scores and narratives won't tell you this.

He didn't do the same things but better. His scoring was amazing as usual but he couldn't make some of the most simple and wide open passes when he finally saw that Shaq/MJ attention. The most valuable skill of great on ball scorers is the ability to attract attention and get the ball out and Curry struggles at getting the ball out. I love his shooting but I don't really see how he's over Oscar at the PG position and IMO he's probably equal to Penny and Nash.

[The-Power]

I'm sorry I'm still not seeing how Curry fits in here when his team is so amazing the regular season was a breeze and his postseason performance was so disappointing compared to some of the others left (it was great but not top 15 all time great). Again his team offensively featured:
Klay Thompson (22/3/3 on 59 TS)
Draymond Green (12/8/4 on 54 TS)
Harrison Barnes (10/5/1 on 57 TS)
Iguodala (8/3/3 in GS but 13/5/5 in Denver on 52 TS)
Andrew Bogut (10/12/4 per 36)
Shaun Livingston (6/2/3 and started for a PS team last year)
David Lee (8/5/2 - was 18/9/3 last year and has had a 19+ PER all but 3 seasons)
Mo Speights (24/10/2 per 36 on 54 TS)
Barbosa (17/3/4 per 36 - last time he was healthy put up 18/3/3 but was inefficient)

I'm sorry but Curry has a bench full of proven players and a perfect system for his skill set. I feel like Curry's perfect situation is getting him brownie points for his impact when his fit is so perfect (same way I felt about Nash who is a similar type of player).

I believe you're interpreting the numbers in a fundamentally wrong way. Players like Curry, Nash, Paul etc. make their teammates better than they actually are and they are the creators of efficient offenses. The numbers actually show what hell of a job Curry is doing in this regard. Whenever a player helps the team around him to perform at a higher level you will see what you see here: solid numbers from other players. This has to be regarded as a huge positive impact by the best player who makes it possible in the first place and not, like you do, something we must hold against this player at all. Another player who performs exactly the same in terms of box-score production but doesn't elevate the level of his teammates is going to look more impressive relative to the rest of his team but said player is actually way, way worse in comparison.

Therefore we have to figure out: how much of the offensive performance by the rest of the team has to do with the offensive superstar and how much has to do with them being good or decent themselves? Looking at the raw numbers doesn't help in this case at all. And in Curry's case, most of his teammates have something in common: a) most are smart and fundamentally sound players and b) they are basically all heavily flawed or at least limited offensive players. In short I'd say: all of these players are capable of playing within a successful system, but this system can only work with someone who enables these players to focus on their strenghts. And this someone is Curry and there is literally no evidence to suggest otherwise. You can read (or re-read) my post about Curry and look how much of an impact he has when we're looking at on/off-numbers or player-tracking data.

Bottom line: what you pointed out is actually something we have to give Curry extra credit for (and not too little for that matter) and nothing we can reasonably hold against him.

[theonlyclutch]

2006 Heat: +2.5 ORTG
2009 Mavericks: +2.2 ORTG
2010 Mavericks: +1.6 ORTG

Compared to league average the Heat were actually better and they ranked 7th on offense while the 2009 Mavs were 8th and the 2010 Mavs 10th. Also Marion wasn't the second option in Dallas and their offense wasn't much better than the 09 Heat with Marion and Beasley as the next best offensive players instead of reigning 6MOY Jason Terry.

You have got to be kidding me..
2009 Heat: 107.8 (-0.5)
2010 Mavs: 109.2 (+1.6)

That's a pretty significant difference to me....

Marion was also taking significantly more offensive usage in his time on the Mavs than in the Heat...

This fascination with raw ORTG is funny.

Supporting casts are "equal" when they clearly were not.

RS on-court ORTGs are comparable but again it's about the PLAYOFFS when we would need more context to look at those specific series.

At their best both have reached high levels of ORTG but we can't give Wade credit for 2011 because he finally had two good offensive players around him.

2011 Wade on-court ORTG: 115.1 (+7.8)

Respectable, but what happens when Dirk had two good offensive players around him? (With the rather unrealistic implication that Mavs Nash + Finley=Lebron + Bosh on offense)

2001 Dirk on-court ORTG: 109.4 (+6.4)
2002 Dirk on-court ORTG: 114.6 (+10.1)
2003 Dirk on-court ORTG: 113.7 (+10.1)
2004 Dirk on-court ORTG: 113.9 (+11.0)

That's a pretty substantial difference right here...

You cherry picked a Wade that was not in his prime and that had to adjust to a new team with redundant skillsets that makes the team's talent level look overstated on paper rather than how it functions on the actual court. Giving Dirk a multi year representation where he was able to build upon team chemistry year after year where Wade only gets one year where he had to undergo major changes of roster is also extremely unfair.

Wade wasn't in his prime in 2011? In any other thread he get mentioned as a definite top 5 player that year and now he's not in his prime?

The point is, it's way easier to find a team with redundant skillsets by adding Wade to it than by adding Dirk to it, this isn't something that can just be waved away.

Wade had a higher PER in 2012 than in 2011, he had a year to adjust to his teammates, and yet, his oncourt ORTG is now:
110.7 (+6.1)

[E-Balla]

I'm sorry I'm still not seeing how Curry fits in here when his team is so amazing the regular season was a breeze and his postseason performance was so disappointing compared to some of the others left (it was great but not top 15 all time great). Again his team offensively featured:
Klay Thompson (22/3/3 on 59 TS)
Draymond Green (12/8/4 on 54 TS)
Harrison Barnes (10/5/1 on 57 TS)
Iguodala (8/3/3 in GS but 13/5/5 in Denver on 52 TS)
Andrew Bogut (10/12/4 per 36)
Shaun Livingston (6/2/3 and started for a PS team last year)
David Lee (8/5/2 - was 18/9/3 last year and has had a 19+ PER all but 3 seasons)
Mo Speights (24/10/2 per 36 on 54 TS)
Barbosa (17/3/4 per 36 - last time he was healthy put up 18/3/3 but was inefficient)

I'm sorry but Curry has a bench full of proven players and a perfect system for his skill set. I feel like Curry's perfect situation is getting him brownie points for his impact when his fit is so perfect (same way I felt about Nash who is a similar type of player).

I believe you're interpreting the numbers in a fundamentally wrong way. Players like Curry, Nash, Paul etc. make their teammates better than they actually are and they are the creators of efficient offenses. The numbers actually show what hell of a job Curry is doing in this regard. Whenever a player helps the team around him to perform at a higher level you will see what you see here: solid numbers from other players. This has to be regarded as a huge positive impact by the best player who makes it possible in the first place and not, like you do, something we must hold against this player at all. Another player who performs exactly the same in terms of box-score production but doesn't elevate the level of his teammates is going to look more impressive relative to the rest of his team but said player is actually way, way worse in comparison.

Therefore we have to figure out: how much of the offensive performance by the rest of the team has to do with the offensive superstar and how much has to do with them being good or decent themselves? Looking at the raw numbers doesn't help in this case at all. And in Curry's case, most of his teammates have something in common: a) most are smart and fundamentally sound players and b) they are basically all heavily flawed or at least limited offensive players. In short I'd say: all of these players are capable of playing within a successful system, but this system can only work with someone who enables these players to focus on their strenghts. And this someone is Curry and there is literally no evidence to suggest otherwise. You can read (or re-read) my post about Curry and look how much of an impact he has when we're looking at on/off-numbers or player-tracking data.

Bottom line: what you pointed out is actually something we have to give Curry extra credit for (and not too little for that matter) and nothing we can reasonably hold against him.

Here's some players and their TS% with Curry off the floor:
Klay Thompson - 54.4
Draymond Green - 61.7
Harrison Barnes - 54.6
Iguodala - 54.3
Shaun Livingston - 51.0
David Lee - 52.5
Mo Speights - 50.7

Now in many of the cases of players getting low TS% listed above we've seen them without Curry enough to know they are better than their TS% without Curry indicates. The big difference we have here I'm guessing is that you give Curry credit for the system and I give it to the coaching. Curry wasn't showing this ability to make his teammates better before these new coaches and I personally never saw him as a high IQ player as much as a high skill level player. He's similar to Kobe, Lebron, and Jordan in that with a good coach and with his skillset he can lead great offenses but not like Magic, Nash, Oscar, Kidd who could lead a great offense without a coach because they were genius PGs. Personally outside of the team makeup and a slight increase in his ball handling abilities Curry's biggest improvement last year was that he finally figured out how to finish at the rim at absurd percentages for his size. His passing was just as mediocre as ever (for a PG not overall of course) and his shot as crisp as always.

I can see why you guys are voting for him now though even if I disagree.

[The-Power]

Now in many of the cases of players getting low TS% listed above we've seen them without Curry enough to know they are better than their TS% without Curry indicates.

Do we? If we look at off-court TS% as a whole or in the case of many players, watch game-tape, look at their skill-set and limitations etc., I believe we can say for certain that Curry has a tremendous impact on his teammates' offense.

The big difference we have here I'm guessing is that you give Curry credit for the system and I give it to the coaching.

I wouldn't distinct it that way. I praised the coaching on many occasions as well as the new system but it's absolutely clear to me that the system only works this well because of Curry - something we have enough reliable data for. The implemented system and new coaching helped mightily but Curry still makes it doable in the first place. Without such a player even the best and most sophisticated system is limited.

Curry wasn't showing this ability to make his teammates better before these new coaches and I personally never saw him as a high IQ player as much as a high skill level player.

First I would like to emphasize that Curry wasn't used in the right way until last season. Can we fault him for it? I don't believe so, especially now that we have seen what he can do in a system predicated on ball-movement and off-ball-action (and the general approach isn't hard to replicate for what it's worth, so it's not like he needs a certain coach to thrive) But secondly, he did make his teammates better before. We can look at his 13/14 season, for instance, and see basically the same effect simply at a lower level - which has more to do with the poor coaching/system on offense.

I believe Curry's skill-set and on-court mentality makes his teammates significantly better because he makes their life easier and allows them to focus on their strengths. You might not want to call it high BBIQ but it absolutely does not mean that he doesn't make his teammates better regardless - or creates good opportunities for his teammates. I already said: he just gets it done in a different manner than Paul or Nash for instance.

I can see why you guys are voting for him now though even if I disagree.

Fair enough. I don't force anyone to believe something as long as they see the case and acknowledge the new way Curry has an - extremely high - impact. When some people value other aspects more and can explain the 'why?' sufficiently then I have no issue with that - even if I disagree.

[RebelWithACause]

...but not like Magic, Nash, Oscar, Kidd who could lead a great offense without a coach because they were genius PGs.

When has Kidd ever led a great offense?!...

Couldn't even lead average offensive teams in his prime...

[Clyde Frazier]

...but not like Magic, Nash, Oscar, Kidd who could lead a great offense without a coach because they were genius PGs.

When has Kidd ever led a great offense?!...

Kidd’s best team offense ranks in his career:

97 suns 6th
99 suns 4th
08 mavs 8th
09 mavs 5th
2010 mavs 10th
2011 mavs 8th

[Kidd was playing around 35 MPG on those mavs teams]

[Quotatious]

Kidd is far from an all-time great offensive PG. He's one of the best all-around PGs, that's what makes him a great player, but he's certainly not a dominant offensive player. Good, but nothing more than that. I think there's about 15 point guards in league history who were clearly better offensively than Kidd was (Magic, Oscar, West, Nash, Curry, Stockton, KJ, Isiah, Price, Tim Hardaway, Penny Hardaway, Westbrook, peak Rose, peak/prime Tiny, Deron, Billups, Porter, Tony Parker...so almost 20 players).

[Clyde Frazier]

A few thoughts…

I had no problem with walton getting voted in at 13. He was in my top 15, and certainly deserved it considering his overall career value isn’t very significant. It was also fitting seeing our first runoff end up being between him and Dr. J. That said, I felt like it ended up just being a “who was better in the 77 finals?” discussion, and a split of valuing skill sets. I was more of the mindset that it was a toss up. But hey, that’s just where the cards fell.

The hesitancy with Dr. J here for some people is really starting to just come out as pushback against the ABA. He had a dominant championship run in a league that clearly consisted of NBA level players. This wasn’t a minor league or something. Cross era comparisons are difficult, yet we still do them and seem to get past the fact that it isn’t an exact science. It seems that people just can’t do this with the ABA, even though it falls along the same lines. And specific to the championship run, let’s not pretend like one can’t come up with “asterisks” for plenty of NBA championship teams.

I’m not one to ever point to these “asterisks”, but it happened just this past season with curry in that he didn’t face the best competition in the west due to seeding, and then facing a depleted cavs team in the finals. So if you’re questioning Dr. J’s championship run in 76 that much, you should be doing the same with Curry. We could do the same with LeBron in 2013 with Allen’s 3 in game 6, or Hakeem winning titles when Jordan was out. But that’s not what this project is about as far as I’m concerned.

[RebelWithACause]

...but not like Magic, Nash, Oscar, Kidd who could lead a great offense without a coach because they were genius PGs.

When has Kidd ever led a great offense?!...

Kidd’s best team offense ranks in his career:

97 suns 6th
99 suns 4th
08 mavs 8th
09 mavs 5th
2010 mavs 10th
2011 mavs 8th

[Kidd was playing around 35 MPG on those mavs teams]

Sorry, but Kidd didn't lead anything on that Mavs team.
Dirk did!

Referencing Kidd as the player that led the Phoenix offense in 97 is laughable. He was traded mid season and played 30 games for them...

Same for 08.

So his best result comes in in a lockout season.
That isn't a great offense either, merely a good one...

00: 16th
01: 22nd
02: 17th
03: 18th
04: 25th
05: 26th
06: 25th
07: 16th

[trex_8063]

Thru post #132:

Julius Erving - 24
Stephen Curry - 22
Oscar Robertson - 20
Dwyane Wade - 19
Chris Paul - 5
Dirk Nowitzki - 5
Jerry West - 5
Kevin Durant - 4
Moses Malone - 2
Patrick Ewing - 2


Calling to for The Doctor. Will have #14 thread up shortly.

[Clyde Frazier]

When has Kidd ever led a great offense?!...

Kidd’s best team offense ranks in his career:

97 suns 6th
99 suns 4th
08 mavs 8th
09 mavs 5th
2010 mavs 10th
2011 mavs 8th

[Kidd was playing around 35 MPG on those mavs teams]

Sorry, but Kidd didn't lead anything on that Mavs team.
Dirk did!

Referencing Kidd as the player that led the Phoenix offense in 97 is laughable. He was traded mid season and played 30 games for them...

Same for 08.

So his best result comes in in a lockout season.
That isn't a great offense either, merely a good one...

00: 16th
01: 22nd
02: 17th
03: 18th
04: 25th
05: 26th
06: 25th
07: 16th

Heh, dirk’s my favorite player in the league. I’m aware of his elite offensive impact. Was just pointing out that kidd played a major role on those teams as their starting PG.

And I don't really see the point of listing the others considering that wasn't the question. As quotatious noted, kidd was relied on more as a do it all PG on most of his teams during his prime, and purely running an offense wasn’t his main objective.

[RebelWithACause]

Kidd’s best team offense ranks in his career:

97 suns 6th
99 suns 4th
08 mavs 8th
09 mavs 5th
2010 mavs 10th
2011 mavs 8th

[Kidd was playing around 35 MPG on those mavs teams]

Sorry, but Kidd didn't lead anything on that Mavs team.
Dirk did!

Referencing Kidd as the player that led the Phoenix offense in 97 is laughable. He was traded mid season and played 30 games for them...

Same for 08.

So his best result comes in in a lockout season.
That isn't a great offense either, merely a good one...

00: 16th
01: 22nd
02: 17th
03: 18th
04: 25th
05: 26th
06: 25th
07: 16th

Heh, dirk’s my favorite player in the league. I’m aware of his elite offensive impact. Was just pointing out that kidd played a major role on those teams as their starting PG.

And I don't really see the point of listing the others considering that wasn't the question. As quotatious noted, kidd was relied on more as a do it all PG on most of his teams during his prime, and purely running an offense wasn’t his main objective.

The original statement was, that Kidd can not only lead a GREAT offense, but also do so without a coach.

So I refuted it, because it's not true.
Everyone knows Kidd's value comes from All-Around play.

[RebelWithACause]

A few thoughts…

I had no problem with walton getting voted in at 13. He was in my top 15, and certainly deserved it considering his overall career value isn’t very significant. It was also fitting seeing our first runoff end up being between him and Dr. J. That said, I felt like it ended up just being a “who was better in the 77 finals?” discussion, and a split of valuing skill sets. I was more of the mindset that it was a toss up. But hey, that’s just where the cards fell.

The hesitancy with Dr. J here for some people is really starting to just come out as pushback against the ABA. He had a dominant championship run in a league that clearly consisted of NBA level players. This wasn’t a minor league or something. Cross era comparisons are difficult, yet we still do them and seem to get past the fact that it isn’t an exact science. It seems that people just can’t do this with the ABA, even though it falls along the same lines. And specific to the championship run, let’s not pretend like one can’t come up with “asterisks” for plenty of NBA championship teams.

I’m not one to ever point to these “asterisks”, but it happened just this past season with curry in that he didn’t face the best competition in the west due to seeding, and then facing a depleted cavs team in the finals. So if you’re questioning Dr. J’s championship run in 76 that much, you should be doing the same with Curry. We could do the same with LeBron in 2013 with Allen’s 3 in game 6, or Hakeem winning titles when Jordan was out. But that’s not what this project is about as far as I’m concerned.

No people became hesitant, because

-of his average defense
-lacking of some premier skills for a superstar wing
-and portability concerns

Anyway, glad he is in. Time to focus on others now, finally.

[Clyde Frazier]

A few thoughts…

I had no problem with walton getting voted in at 13. He was in my top 15, and certainly deserved it considering his overall career value isn’t very significant. It was also fitting seeing our first runoff end up being between him and Dr. J. That said, I felt like it ended up just being a “who was better in the 77 finals?” discussion, and a split of valuing skill sets. I was more of the mindset that it was a toss up. But hey, that’s just where the cards fell.

The hesitancy with Dr. J here for some people is really starting to just come out as pushback against the ABA. He had a dominant championship run in a league that clearly consisted of NBA level players. This wasn’t a minor league or something. Cross era comparisons are difficult, yet we still do them and seem to get past the fact that it isn’t an exact science. It seems that people just can’t do this with the ABA, even though it falls along the same lines. And specific to the championship run, let’s not pretend like one can’t come up with “asterisks” for plenty of NBA championship teams.

I’m not one to ever point to these “asterisks”, but it happened just this past season with curry in that he didn’t face the best competition in the west due to seeding, and then facing a depleted cavs team in the finals. So if you’re questioning Dr. J’s championship run in 76 that much, you should be doing the same with Curry. We could do the same with LeBron in 2013 with Allen’s 3 in game 6, or Hakeem winning titles when Jordan was out. But that’s not what this project is about as far as I’m concerned.

No people became hesitant, because

-of his average defense
-lacking of some premier skills for a superstar wing
-and portability concerns

Anyway, glad he is in. Time to focus on others now, finally.

I’m going to move on, but i’m fairly certain he’d already have been voted in if the nets won the 76 NBA championship as opposed to ABA. But he’s in, so i’m done worrying about it.

[E-Balla]

Do we? If we look at off-court TS% as a whole or in the case of many players, watch game-tape, look at their skill-set and limitations etc., I believe we can say for certain that Curry has a tremendous impact on his teammates' offense.

Well when Draymond shoots 58% from the field, Klay 54 TS%, Harrison 55 TS%, and all of the other players have long careers without playing with Curry where their TS% is about equal to what it was this past season I find that hard to believe. Obviously his shooting opens up their offense and his on court rating shows his impact a lot (116.6) but I don't think they're under a 105-107 ORTG without Curry (and they had a 111.6). They have a ton of great playmakers, some shooters, and two very good scorers on the roster (Klay who requires a G to set him up but can still get his own shots off ball, and David Lee who was hurt half the year). So I believe his impact is large but not GOAT level.

I wouldn't distinct it that way. I praised the coaching on many occasions as well as the new system but it's absolutely clear to me that the system only works this well because of Curry - something we have enough reliable data for. The implemented system and new coaching helped mightily but Curry still makes it doable in the first place. Without such a player even the best and most sophisticated system is limited.

I'll agree here. Curry's shooting makes the whole system possible. But in a comparison to TMac or Wade who weren't in great situations where their teams could get the most impact out of them and they just had to score themselves I think it bears to mention that the reason their offense was so great was that he had an offensive system to tell him how to best use his skills.

First I would like to emphasize that Curry wasn't used in the right way until last season. Can we fault him for it? I don't believe so, especially now that we have seen what he can do in a system predicated on ball-movement and off-ball-action (and the general approach isn't hard to replicate for what it's worth, so it's not like he needs a certain coach to thrive) But secondly, he did make his teammates better before. We can look at his 13/14 season, for instance, and see basically the same effect simply at a lower level - which has more to do with the poor coaching/system on offense.

I believe Curry's skill-set and on-court mentality makes his teammates significantly better because he makes their life easier and allows them to focus on their strengths. You might not want to call it high BBIQ but it absolutely does not mean that he doesn't make his teammates better regardless - or creates good opportunities for his teammates. I already said: he just gets it done in a different manner than Paul or Nash for instance.

There's a difference between saying Curry wasn't used in the right way and having total freedom. Curry WAS the offense under Mark. Being used the wrong way is something like Andre Drummond being forced to post up last year when that's not his game at all. Now if Curry with 100% control of the offense can't make the right decision like other great PGs that basically puts him in the lead guard category offensively which is great but not the best. I have no reason to believe he could outperform TMac in a perfect system for example especially when TMac is a way better passer and only a slightly worse scorer.