It sickens me that people actually think KD is >>>>

[mdonnelly1989]

I have this gut feeling that most of the world now thinks KD > Stephen Curry aside from RealGM it's pretty even which is at least respectable.

But NBA 2K has rated KD a 96 and Curry a 94!?? If you think KD is better fine, but 2 WHOLE points better. He should be at best no lower than 1 and more respectively the same rating. I personally feel like Curry is 1 point ahead or at least even.

Also to those who think KD is better than Lebron now......not realizing that he has a top 3 or 4 player in the league pending on your order of Curry/Kawhi/Westbrook.

A top 15 player in the league in Draymond and a Top 25 player in the league in Klay. The bottom line is this. If you switched Lebron James and KD. Warriors would go 80-2 and sweep through the playoffs and finals EASILY.

[RCM88x]

I can understand the 2K ratings just because it doesn't weigh offense and defense in a realistic manner, nor does it weight the value of 3pt shooting more than mid range shooting or whatever. Its not really a good player rating tool imo.

Though yes, I sort of feel the same way. KD has always been slightly overrated as a player in my eyes simply because of the combination of his skill set and size. People rave "ohhhhh he has handles and skill like a SG but is 7ft tall he must be super good", then they see him make a jump shot and claim he's one of the best offensive players ever.

If his production and impact were the exact same but he was only 6'8" I don't think people would rate him nearly as highly as they do.

[pelifan]

Everyone but Curry on that team is overrated. Draymond shouldn't even have HOF trajectory.

Curry though is all time. One of the 5 best offensive players ever and the only one other than Lebron to have an argument for best player in the league.

[CodeBreaker]

Simply because most people see KD scoring, rebounding, blocking, and all more than Curry on that team.

And when you separate them and place KD back to the Thunder, Curry whoops his arse

[Prez]

The general/casual basketball fanbase is always going to gravitate towards the freakish athletic/physical talent with a more "dominant" two-way skill set on paper. Curry's greatness and insane on-court impact will just never be fully appreciated. It sucks but that's just the way it is.

[Statlanta]

It's easier for the general public to say KD dominated and is better due to better stats than to analyze the context of why he dominated the stat-sheet almost like Shaq in the Finals.

I don't think 2K is particularly KD bias as Steph was appropriately higher by the end of 2K16

[thekdog34]

I argue with my friends about this, and they pay attention to analytics.

It's just weird.

People need to become aware that impact stats>box score stats. They are more predictive.

And KDs box score isn't even better!

[Winsome Gerbil]

I argue with my friends about this, and they pay attention to analytics.

It's just weird.

People need to become aware that impact stats>box score stats. They are more predictive.

And KDs box score isn't even better!

That's a LONG way from being true. Impact stats can be noisy as hell too. Moreso in fact.

Did you know the Spurs were only +1.6 better in ORTG/DRTG differential last year with Kawhi Leonard on the court vs. off? They were +4.6 with David Lee on/off.

Meanwhile Zaza Pachulia carried a 2.92 RAPM. Marc Gasol carried a 2.58. Karl Anthony-Towns carried a 2.13.

[Joey Wheeler]

Basically everyone I talk basketball to irl thinks Durant is the better of the two, to the point where the topic is never really debated because it's just accepted as a given. This even before Durant moved to GSW.

Durant defo isn't better than Lebron, but he's closer to Lebron than someone like Curry is to him. Durant can do most of what Curry does while being much bigger, stronger, more athletic...

Also, it's interesting that despite the fact Curry is mostly widely accepted as the GOAT shooter, Golden State was putting the ball in KD's hands every single time they needed a bucket to stop Cavs runs in the Finals. This happened because aside from his amazing shooting ability KD's size makes it almost impossible to effectively contest his shot, he'll get a good look regardless of what the defense does. That's what won GSW games 3 and 5 of the Finals, KD constantly hitting tough contest midrange (and some 3s) shots in key junctures, the kind of shot Curry struggles to create for himself. That's one of the big reasons KD is better, the other one of course being the big defensive gap.

[thekdog34]

I argue with my friends about this, and they pay attention to analytics.

It's just weird.

People need to become aware that impact stats>box score stats. They are more predictive.

And KDs box score isn't even better!

That's a LONG way from being true. Impact stats can be noisy as hell too. Moreso in fact.

Did you know the Spurs were only +1.6 better in ORTG/DRTG differential last year with Kawhi Leonard on the court vs. off? They were +4.6 with David Lee on/off.

Meanwhile Zaza Pachulia carried a 2.92 RAPM. Marc Gasol carried a 2.58. Karl Anthony-Towns carried a 2.13.

When it comes to predicting wins and losses, box score stats are terrible unless you blend with impact stats. 538 tried a box score only model last year and it sucked.

I believe the winner of the apbr contest won with a blend of player-tracking plus-minus and rapm two years in a row. And the winner last year was an impact stats model I believe.

Kawhi finished 5th in RPM.


Here's the article by 538:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whats-new-in-our-nba-player-projections-for-2017-18/


"as a predictive tool, BPM does not appear to be as accurate as RPM. Instead, BPM has trouble picking up on factors such as defense and team cohesion. That led CARMELO to overrate teams such as the Minnesota Timberwolves and underrate more defensive teams such as the San Antonio Spurs last year. If we’d run the numbers using RPM instead of BPM in 2016-17, our projections would have been above-average again

...


The upshot is that in the short run, we’re using a blend of two-thirds RPM and one-third BPM for this edition of the CARMELO projections. In the long run, we’re interested in developing our own plus-minus stat (but no promises about that quite yet)."

[Dupp]

My argument for KD is you could probably plug him into any situation and he'd have a bigger impact than curry. As it is now, on the warriors, curry is clearly the petter player to me.

[Clyde Frazier]

It sickens you? That seems like an extreme reaction.

[Volcano]

KD is being underrated here

[bondom34]

I don't know about "sickens" but it's an incorrect statement. I think a lot of it comes from the fact that Curry doesn't seem as physically imposing, nor is he as athletic in general. To add to it his box score numbers don't always fly off a page at you like Durant's but he's overall more impactful in a 5 on 5 setting than Durant is. I think a lot of people rate players off of 1 on 1 ability when that's not how the game is generally played.

[Dr Positivity]

I argue with my friends about this, and they pay attention to analytics.

It's just weird.

People need to become aware that impact stats>box score stats. They are more predictive.

And KDs box score isn't even better!

That's a LONG way from being true. Impact stats can be noisy as hell too. Moreso in fact.

Did you know the Spurs were only +1.6 better in ORTG/DRTG differential last year with Kawhi Leonard on the court vs. off? They were +4.6 with David Lee on/off.

Meanwhile Zaza Pachulia carried a 2.92 RAPM. Marc Gasol carried a 2.58. Karl Anthony-Towns carried a 2.13.

When it comes to predicting wins and losses, box score stats are terrible unless you blend with impact stats. 538 tried a box score only model last year and it sucked.

I believe the winner of the apbr contest won with a blend of player-tracking plus-minus and rapm two years in a row. And the winner last year was an impact stats model I believe.

Kawhi finished 5th in RPM.


Here's the article by 538:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whats-new-in-our-nba-player-projections-for-2017-18/


"as a predictive tool, BPM does not appear to be as accurate as RPM. Instead, BPM has trouble picking up on factors such as defense and team cohesion. That led CARMELO to overrate teams such as the Minnesota Timberwolves and underrate more defensive teams such as the San Antonio Spurs last year. If we’d run the numbers using RPM instead of BPM in 2016-17, our projections would have been above-average again

...


The upshot is that in the short run, we’re using a blend of two-thirds RPM and one-third BPM for this edition of the CARMELO projections. In the long run, we’re interested in developing our own plus-minus stat (but no promises about that quite yet)."

Does predicting better automatically mean it's the better stat? Or can a stat predict better simply by focusing on things that are more predictable?

[BigRedWarrior]

A point guard's impact traditionally has been more cast-dependent relative to bigs/wings.

For now, Curry is the better player because of what GS can surround him with; in a vacuum, the median outcome for a KD team would probably be better because of his versatility on both ends.
That's probably why Kerr and others say KD > Curry, but that's pure speculation and subjectivity coming into play.
Really seems to me that RealGm has a good understanding of this concept (evidenced by this thread).

[Winsome Gerbil]

I argue with my friends about this, and they pay attention to analytics.

It's just weird.

People need to become aware that impact stats>box score stats. They are more predictive.

And KDs box score isn't even better!

That's a LONG way from being true. Impact stats can be noisy as hell too. Moreso in fact.

Did you know the Spurs were only +1.6 better in ORTG/DRTG differential last year with Kawhi Leonard on the court vs. off? They were +4.6 with David Lee on/off.

Meanwhile Zaza Pachulia carried a 2.92 RAPM. Marc Gasol carried a 2.58. Karl Anthony-Towns carried a 2.13.

When it comes to predicting wins and losses, box score stats are terrible unless you blend with impact stats. 538 tried a box score only model last year and it sucked.

I believe the winner of the apbr contest won with a blend of player-tracking plus-minus and rapm two years in a row. And the winner last year was an impact stats model I believe.

Kawhi finished 5th in RPM.


Here's the article by 538:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whats-new-in-our-nba-player-projections-for-2017-18/


"as a predictive tool, BPM does not appear to be as accurate as RPM. Instead, BPM has trouble picking up on factors such as defense and team cohesion. That led CARMELO to overrate teams such as the Minnesota Timberwolves and underrate more defensive teams such as the San Antonio Spurs last year. If we’d run the numbers using RPM instead of BPM in 2016-17, our projections would have been above-average again

...


The upshot is that in the short run, we’re using a blend of two-thirds RPM and one-third BPM for this edition of the CARMELO projections. In the long run, we’re interested in developing our own plus-minus stat (but no promises about that quite yet)."

What you are unintentionally suggesting is that impact stats, along with many metrics, are slanted to favor TEAM factors ( especially wins) rather than to cleanly measure individual ability. It is, to be kind, muddy thinking. "Joe plays on a good team. Therefore Joe must be a good player."

[Timmaytime]

Everyone but Curry on that team is overrated. Draymond shouldn't even have HOF trajectory.

Curry though is all time. One of the 5 best offensive players ever and the only one other than Lebron to have an argument for best player in the league.

I would argue Magic as best in the league in at least '87

[Timmaytime]

KD gets points for strength, rebounding, defense, etc. that Curry doesn't while being close to Steph as a shooter. Curry's the better player as of now but the 2k rating makes sense

[penbeast0]

Does predicting better automatically mean it's the better stat? Or can a stat predict better simply by focusing on things that are more predictable?

Automatically? No, okay maybe if it's over the long term. But even used over the course of one year like this it's a pretty good starting point in looking at stats/systems.